I am ignorant because I choose not to believe something without a shred of evidence for its support of existence?

lol

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus got written well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources derive from hearsay accounts.

So lets be sensible about this, evidence is not based upon hearsay, which is the only type of evidence one can provide in terms of the existence of jesus christ.

And im still waiting for the evidence that Jesus Christ existed

I accept that not everyone should or does believe in his divinity but they can't just out right deny his existance
And why not?

Why does the Jesus on the Cross for all our sins story hold so much weight that we all MUST believe it?

IT and HIS EXISTENCE holds as much weight as the earlier comparision to the great African Tinman.

So do you believe that nobody should deny the existence of the African Tinman?

Because i dont see the difference in terms of evidence for existence between the two Myths