It seems to me Nietzsche made mincemeat of the Western Christian narrative on existential grounds. The idea that Jesus was the only literally divine human, and that his followers have to abase themselves by acknowledging their fallenness and insufficiency, and praise God for saving them by grace (i.e. even though they deserve Hell) makes for an elaborate scheme to enslave people to the church hierarchy and to false humility (to what Nietzsche called resentment of aristocratic self-confidence).

The existential narrative provided by the Gnostics and the Eastern Orthodox Christians is more respectable precisely because it’s more humanistic and implicitly secular (therapeutic).

The Western Christian narrative is also thoroughly un-American, so the distortions needed to make Christianity half-way compatible with can-do American pragmatism and consumerism (as in white Evangelical Christianity) are among the most loathsome of the Christian grotesqueries.

The appeal to faith here seems like a dodge. It’s not like having faith in your favourite sports team, for example. If you trust in your home team, you’re making an induction based on your memories of that team winning in the past. If your team almost always loses and you still have faith in them, that faith looks more like a mental illness.

Moreover, a person’s experience can always be interpreted as coming from God, regardless of what happens or doesn’t happen in that person’s life. That’s what the Book of Job implies, so faith in God based on an interpretation of how God has intervened in your life is perfectly unfalsifiable and empty. That’s to say the faith would be indistinguishable from a self-reinforcing delusion—unless it’s a rational, falsifiable induction. Indeed, that's the upshot of Hebrews 11 too.

Anyway, we'll all keep searching.