If the B-Theory of time is true, then Christianity is implausible

My opponent asserts that there are at least five propositions that both follow from a B-theory of time and are incompatible with Christianity. But what vexes me is that if this is true—and I very much doubt that it is—then Christianity would not just be implausible, it would be impossible! If these five facts follow necessarily from a B-theory of time and are truly incompatible with Christianity, then why would he assert implausibility when he is in fact arguing on the vanguard of a must stronger assertion?I suspect that this preempted backtracking either betrays his confidence in his actual argument or shows us that he surreptitiously believes that his 5 facts either are no truly incompatible with Christianity or do not actually follow necessarily from a B-theory of time. If this is true, I very much understand his reluctance to fully commit to his position, because it is false or inscrutable for at least 3 reasons, only 1 of which needs to be true in order for his resolution to fail. Thus the three arguments I’ll be affirming are as follows:(1) The five propositions are not truly incompatible with Christianity(2) The five propositions are not true or important(3) The probability of Christianity being true on a B-theory of time is inscrutable.The five propositions are not truly incompatible with Christianity(i) This has never been a central doctrine of Christianity. In fact, it really only trades one Christian doctrine for another, namely God’s timelessness. If the B-theory of time is true, then God can be timeless, if it is false and the A-theory of time is true, God is (or becomes) a temporal being who is himself bound by time. Both theories run afoul with ancient doctrines… but who cares? This is no more vital to Christianity than a rear view mirror is to the functioning soundness of a car’s engine.(ii) Of course this all depends upon some semantics. But even so, the creation narratives of Genesis have long been held by a majority of theologians to be creation epics that utilize a popular Mesopotamian 7-day motif (clearly seen in the epic that precedes it, The Epic of Gilgamesh). Moreover, all that is being said is that there is no finite time ago where God created the heavens and the earth, because, as it were, there was no finite time ago!(iii) You do realize that there are already huge swaths of Christians who believe this fundamentally? Think those of stricter Calvinism. If approximately 56 million Christians already believe this, how in the world could it truthfully be said that such an idea is vital to Christianity proper? [1](iv) Here my opponent is right, there would be no way for God to have a personal relationship with us unless he was part of time. The Trinity provides Christianity with the unique ability of being able to say that God participates in time and does not. In Revelation 13:8, it refers to Jesus as, “the Lamb who was slain from the creation of the world.” This indicates a B-theory like notion, wherein Jesus has ALWAYS been slain. This helps understand that God is personal inasmuch as he has always participated in time through the person Jesus the Christ and his Spirit.(v) This one is true, but needs more explanation. If the past and the future are as objectively real as the present, then evil is ALWAYS objectively overcome. We exist upon a yardstick where all its inches exist objectively. We traverse this yardstick and thus experience its objective points within the continuum known as “the present.” However, the first inches of this yardstick evil was overcome, and in the final inches, evil is overcome. Thus it is a practice of bias to say that evil is never objectively overcome when in reality it would both never and always be overcome. I’m sure God cares little about that and cares more about how his human creatures experience that reality. I’ll use my next round to expound upon my second and third arguments.1. Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion and Public Life (December 19, 2011)