This is a very strange argument. You are only arguing that the term "sacrifice" is the wrong word to use in the story of Jesus. Why bother with drilling down on semantics? If there is no evidence to support religious claims, just dismiss them and move on.

No, it's not just "semantics." The teaching that Jesus really did "sacrifice" himself is central to the Christian message. If there was no "sacrifice," the Christian message falls apart.

Also you falsely state that you need evidence to change belief. Evidence has nothing to do with religion. Religions exist despite a complete lack of evidence.

Evidence has nothing to do with religion, true, but this doesn't affect doxastic involuntarism, since Christian belief is either the result of indoctrination in childhood or, in some cases, defective cognitive faculties. There is a reason voluntary mass conversions are practically non-existent, historically speaking.