The 'Faithful'

[Godscreated]

Something that I'm having a hard time understanding is why Christians have a problem with the possibility that Jesus wasn't a physical being. To me this screams evidentialist and NOT people of faith.

Let's forget about whether the NT is true or not for a second. What I observe is that all Christians fall back on the NT as proof of what has come to pass. This blows faith out of the water because what you're really claiming is that there's solid evidence for God through what Jesus Christ did. If this is so, then it makes perfect sense the reactions we see on here when we talk about the 'Jesus myth' if, and only if, you're an evidentialist. Why only if you're an evidentialist? Because the True Believer™ would have the faith that their god has everything under control, that if the evidence shows the Creator didn't come to earth and never intended to but instead showed himself to apostles through revelations, then that's how it is. What I see though is that you necessarily need Jesus to have been on earth for it to mean anything to you. Your 'faith' relies on evidence, which makes you an evidentialist.

EDIT: in a nutshell; pics or it didn't happen => I'm not putting my faith in that. Why do you need the evidence to have faith?

The knowing Christ lived as a physical man comes only after faith, you are trying to put the horse before the cart. Scripture tells us that Christ had to die for the atonement of our sin, a spirit could not die a physical death nor shed blood to cover our sin. A spiritual Christ could not have lived and been tempted to become the perfect Lamb for mankind. It seems to me you are the one who wants absolute evidence, I did not require it, it was given to me after I believed.

---

@ Chadwooters, good to have you back my brother, missed your concise arguments and your faithful stance.