What are the Characteristics of a NT Christian?

[Pat Mustard]

Just because you're butt hurt over not having any good arguments for your position, don't commit ad homs on the rest of us.

We are rightly sceptical of Jesus claims for the simple fact that there is no evidence at all supporting them. There is the claim, and that's it.

I think it is interesting that you mention ad hominem's here.  My comment was based on observation, and I gave one reason (although I'm open to others) for why we see this incoherence.  This post however seems to be mostly about discrediting and poisoning the well; about the person.   I would also say that this is an apt example of an often occurring response when the deficiencies of a modernist philosophy are brought up in these conversations.   That is to attack the person and redirect attention.
Now to the second part.   I think this is fitting, what often follows is an example of the classic foundationalism that was brought up.  That an extreme and untenable position is taken, in order to keep even the consideration of the conclusion from being made.   I think that you will find yourself quite impoverished intellectually, if we followed it consistently.  Which is why this philosophy has fallen out of popularity for most thinkers.
This is mostly out of context to the OP, but I wanted to clarify my intentions with some comments.  I'm not meaning to disparage others, but hope to shine a light on what is bad thinking.   I don't really keep track of; nor hold this against people.  But perhaps bringing it up will help you to see when it is occurring.  And I have often found, that extreme examples of bad thinking help me to notice the more subtle versions within my own thinking. I may also find it more often than I realized that it was occurring.    It's not against the man, but against the idea and method.  I'm not assuming anyone motivation, and holding it against them and their arguments.  It's a tentative conclusion based on what is seen.

1) There is no incoherence in my position. I have been presented with no evidence for the exisence of any god. The logical position in that case is to conditionally reject all god claims.
2) You're accusing me of playing the man, not the ball when all your arguments (including this one) boil down to a version of "atheists know god exists they just don't want to admit it" (your "pseudoscepticism"one) or "atheists are crazy" (your "incoherent" one). Bit rich don't you think, especially when I wasn't attacking you but your falsehood.
3) Regarding bad thinking, I'd review your own posts before criticising others. When you are constantly posting PRATTs and ad homi.em attacks, you do not loom good accusing others of bad thinking. Now I'm attacking the man, but then again you inserted yourself as an argument into the debate.