There truly is an enormous body of irrefutable empirical evidence collaborating God's existence and the Christian worldview. That's a fact. Your ignorance of it in no way diminishes it. There also is a great body of Christians, past and present, whom assert that they have a living relationship with the one true living creator God as revealed in the bible some of whom assert to have also experienced supernatural miracles (I am one of them having had a healing miracle at a Christian event once). That's also a fact.
Now let's deal with your other false assertions. The presence of disagreement does not invalidate the possibility of truth. Truth exists anyways. Truth exists regardless. So your false assertion that because various theological perspectives exist this therefore equates to Christianity being false is itself a very elementary fallacious failure of logic on your part.
Your final false assertion is that "almost no historical scholars associated with research concerning Christ's general existence believe that there's any reliable evidence of his being entombed and resurrected." Obviously there are a great many historians, both past and present, that are Christians who do believe that Christ was entombed and resurrected. You're making an ignorant false assertion here.
Christian universities, for example, are staffed with them and there are a great many Christian universities. But Christian historians have also been involved in modern universities from the third century to the present. In fact, all of the most prestigious universities in the UK and U.S. began as Christian universities and they were staffed originally with Christian historians. Today, Christian historians permeate the field of history and as Christians they have and continue to argue for the proofs of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
I'm sorry that you're so ignorant of these observable and easily confirmable facts.
...What? There isn't an "enormous body" of "irrefutable empirical evidence" concerning God's existence, much less the general Christian conception of God -- or, for that matter, Christianity's various theological perspectives and applications. To assert that eyewitness testimony of Jesus is tantamount to "irrefutable evidence" of his divinity, or that such testimony validates Christian theology in general, for instance, is to defy the general historical consensus concerning aspects of his life. Almost no historical scholars associated with research concerning Christ's general existence believe that there's any reliable evidence of his being entombed and resurrected, as an example.
And those rulers like me make little castles for them and dress them in miniature renaissance clothing.
