One of the veteran crevo posters observed long ago that doubting Thomas should be the patron saint of scientists because he demanded physical evidence.
But, in my view, both extremes in the debate put a lot of weight on physical evidence.
We Christians know that Jesus Christ is God incarnated in the body of a virgin, that He died for our sins, resurrected on the third day – that while in the flesh, He raised the dead, healed the sick, made the blind see, walked on water and so forth.
Since we know all of this is Truth, I see no cause to be alarmed if we don’t yet understand the description of Creation week in Genesis – or how Jonas survived in the belly of a whale - the prophecies in the book of Revelation - and so on.
After all, there is only One Great Commandment - to love God surpassingly above all else.
Physical evidence is just that, physical.
But, in my view, both extremes in the debate put a lot of weight on physical evidence.
Faith does rest on evidence as well. For all that evos like to say that faith can only be faith without evidence, a cursory reading of the gospels does not bear that out. Jesus stated that the miracles He did bore witness to the fact that He was who He said He was. He never chided people for believing after seeing the evidence, Thomas being a case in point. He didn't tell him that he had no faith, but rather gave him the best proof there was to bolster his faith.