>>19615849Yea except they're not and theirs just as much historical evidence backing up their authenticity as there is against it. And if you really wanna get into Jesus was described as a son of David who was know for his attractive appearance and who we still have numerous artistic depictions of that have survived to this day but your telling me SOMEHOW any evidence of Christ appearance would be to old to be verified. yea right, insult your own king more kike. I'm sure it's gonna work out for you.
>>19615861>I'm not a kike you're a kike>Literally has a cup of foreskins savedPal, you're seriously not helping yourself...
