The interesting thing about atheism is how it's adherents dial up their skepticism when they don't want to believe something and then dial it down when need be. If we were to consistently live life or vet history through the very high standards of evidence the atheist demands when it comes to God and the gospel, life would be impossible to live and we can never prove any historical facts actually occurred. We cannot even prove our own existence if I go by the standard of proof an atheist demands on these matters.
Now if there is a God then your whole theory is blown out of water...and all the evidence (the design and fine-tuning of the universe, the intelligent message in DNA, the prophecies and fulfilment of the life of Christ etc) does point to a God, but of course the atheist dials down his skepticism to enable him believe the universe and life as we know it popped out from absolutely nothing and is a random accident. If God can cause a universe to come out of nothing, why would it be far fetched that He could perform miracles or rise from the dead if He came to earth as a man?
Again your comparison of the gospel to the gold rain of Zeus etc, is not sound in the least bit...and you seem to think the facts of the gospel had one witness. No...there were several of them (the apostles, the entirety of Israel, even non Christian historians writings confirm gospel accounts). Does Zeus have eye witnesses? Do Thailand myths have historical records (both within and outside Thailand) in their favour?
All I see is you just throwing out alternative theories (possibly it's a myth, possibly it's one very charismatic witness who lied about the gospel facts, possibly it's placebo meds) none of which are grounded in any form of objective evidence because you don't want to consider for a second that gospel claims may be true.
On this note, I honestly hope you would consider some things we have discussed.