The 'Faithful'

[FallentoReason]

So take away any and all material refering to Christ and then point out there isn't any 'evidence' that even suggested He existed?

Seriously? This is your arguement? We can do this with anyone. If we take away all of the recorded evidence of George Washington then we can say there isn't any 'recorded proof' of him...

If I could sum up the OP in a few sentences, then it would be this:

You need Jesus to be human for your faith to be present. That makes you an evidentialist and not a person of faith because you're falling back on evidence which means your faith isn't true faith. True faith would come from understanding that reality and God should be one, which means that if in reality Jesus was only ever a spirit then that shouldn't bother you for a second. The fact is though, that it does, hence why we see theists defending the idea of a human Christ. This defence mechanism shouldn't be acting up if the believer had true faith and didn't hold on to evidence as the basis for their belief.