Testimony: Are we being hypocritical?

[Neo-Scholastic]

With respect to the OP, the issue largely comes up with respect to NT reliability. The point generally made by believers is that skeptics have ruled out the supernatural in advance or at least raised the burden of proof to an unobtainable level. As such the very nature of the thing we are trying to prove serves as the reason given for not accepting evidence of it. It's a no win situation.

My personal position on this particular subject is that if god is penetrating the natural world with physical events such as floods, Jesus, and miracles, etc., there should be some physical evidence left behind.

That's fair. That's what biblical archeology is for. For example, we have a pretty good idea of where the pool of Bethesda was. At the same time, we do not require any physical proof of Socrates or Alexander the Great.