Some here appear to view the Bible as imperfect and the work of men (I define imperfect here as not actually being completly inspired by God.) Others view it as perfectly inspired by God but he allowed for myth, fable, or the distortion of details over time as long as they remained what He wanted to teach. For me, the historicity of Jesus is important to my trusting in Him for salvation.
But these sentences don't relate to one another.
Perhaps the Bible is the work of imperfect men; perhaps the Bible was originally perfect but has been corrupted; but that wouldn't get rid of "the historicity of Jesus".
It is the Y.E.C. propaganda mill which has taught you that questioning the most literal interpretation of the Bible is the same as denying God and forsaking your Redeemer. But if you've read their websites, you must have noticed how a lot of the stuff they say isn't true.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2