Evolution has always been taught as a theory, at least in the classes I've taken. If some state it's a fact when teaching it, then they indeed deserve to be corrected. But if Dawinian evlotion is truley as flawed as you suggest, then other theories would be proposed in its place. Darwinian evolution is still taught because of the bulk on knowledge out there supports it (not to suggest Darwin hit it right on the nail; our views have changed and grown over the last 150 years, but his basic concept has thus far not been disproved).
Who claims Christ is not an historical personage? I've never seen that in any scientific literature. If you have a source or link which demonstates this claim, I'd be extemely intersted in reading it, although I suspect (at best) it would be pseudo-science, and thus of no concern to you or I.
No valid hypothesis which would prove the Bible true (or false, for that matter) would been dismissed--as you yourself have pointed out in other threads, archaeologists have discovered (and use as a research material) the Bible is a quite accurate geo-political-historical document, in terms of dynasties, terrtorial boundaries, etc. I'm merely pointing out that archaelologists who are attempting to prove something are not practicing science, even though they use scientifc methodology like stratigraphy, seriation, etc, when excavating a site. If they go in to 'prove' something, they've baised themselves, tainitng their results (which I admit would happen anyway in a scientific excavation) as well as hurt those who belive in the Bible, because a further polarization occurs. Thus, the gulf widens between those of relgious and sceintific backgrounds, but not because of the subject matter, ie, Judeo-Christian religion, but because the methodology of the excavation is inherently flawed.
A person can be both a scientists and a believer of a religion, and still do good scientific work. Two of the best archaeologists I know (how I define best would take an essay, so I won't go into here) are both religious men, and are both excellent scientists. They both agree (we were discussing Mormon excavations regarding diffusionism) that going out to prove something is the worst thing you can do. Unfortunately, I'm not as articulate as either of them, so I'm not sure if my meaning is coming across clear here.