Looking for proof of a 2,000 year old story

Here are the only categories I can think of for now:
1. Testimonies from 1st hand witnesses
2. Physical proof
3. Continuance of the same reality
4. Strength and duration of the story (Christians think this is proof so it is included here)
5. Appearances of the same main character of the myth

1)    Paul “the apostle” wrote 13 of the 26 books of the New Testament but he never knew Jesus personally. He first started writing them around 20 years after the death of Jesus. This makes his the earliest writings, and they never mention the virgin birth or resurrection of Jesus. The supposed first hand accounts of the life of Jesus are in the books Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. But the most agreed upon date for the earliest of these writings is 65AD (37 years after Jesus’ death). If Mark was 20 years old when Jesus died then he would have been 57 years old when he wrote his gospel. It was rare back then for people to live that long, but not impossible. But many bible scholars believe that the gospels were not written by the assumed authors. I personally think they contained some gospel Q writings (the original unamplified stories) and then were exaggerated and added to in order to give their developing religion more punch.  It is reasonable to assume that if the gospels had that early a date of writing (65AD) that they would have been mentioned in the writings of prominent leaders of the church but the first epistle of Clement of Rome, which is reasonably dated to 95 A.D., makes no mention of any of the Gospels. And the earliest allusion to any of the Gospels is from about 130 A.D. in the works of Bishop Papias, who refers to a collection of Jesus sayings/oracles in a Hebrew book whose author is said to be the disciple Matthew. This book of sayings may refer to the lost document Q, but it obviously does not refer to the Gospel of Matthew, as we know it. Papias also mentions recollections of the disciple Peter, recorded by his secretary Mark. Though neither of these references is to what we now know as the Gospels of Mark and of Matthew, they begin to suggest that some things resembling these Gospels were in circulation after 130 A.D. So the most reasonable assumption is that the gospels were written after the 12 apostles had all died so that they aren’t first hand accounts. There is much evidence that the bible copyists changed things and added to the scriptures so it is most reasonable to assume that the same thing happened with the gospels, and we have reason to doubt all the supposed miracles in them. So much for first hand accounts verifying the miraculous claims.
2)    There is no physical proof that Jesus was a miracle worker. For instance, there are no mountains in the Dead Sea or Mediterranean Sea which he moved there by his faith.  Christians claim the empty tomb is proof of his resurrection but there are no 2000 year old organizations to verify such a tomb, not even the church. Catholicism started around 300AD and all the denominations started even later than that, much later. Any way they aren’t a trustworthy impartial witness since they have something to gain by the story. And there is nothing in the journal of the Roman leader of Jesus’ time. If any one could verify or deny that story it would be the Romans and they were silent about any supposed resurrection. The shroud of Turin has the supposed image of Jesus on it but it can’t be considered as proof of a miraculous resurrection since it can only testify to his physical characteristics. It is still unknown how the image was imparted to the cloth. And there is no mention of it in any of  the gospels.
3)    Continuance of the Same; It is only logical to assume that if there was a miracle working god, and that he is eternal and unchanging, that he still lives today and still does miracles. Well, I was a Christian for 30 years and spent many of those years in churches that practiced the “laying on of hands” to heal the sick. But I never once saw a miracle! Not one. No amputated legs grew back, no blind people regained their sight, nothing of an obvious miraculous nature. Of course probably some people did feel better but that is proof of nothing other than the placebo effect. If we believe we are being healed then our glands and organs release natural chemicals and hormones to help heal the body. That is one strong aspect of the mind-body connection, nothing more.
4)    Christians tend to think that the strength and duration of the miraculous gospel stories is proof of their validity. No, that is just proof of the gullible and illogical nature of most people. Take into account the duration of Mohammedism , Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism. They are the most populous religions and are very old but that can’t be proof of their validity because it’s impossible that they are all true.
5)    Appearances of Jesus; If Jesus appeared to me and I didn’t think that was a combination of drugs and religious belief then that would have a strong influence on my beliefs. But Jesus has never appeared to me (because he is long dead and turned to dust) and as a logical person I can only doubt the validity of any such stories. People are way too prone to imagine things they believe. And these “returned from the dead” stories always reflect their previous mental programming by their cultures popular religion, whether it be Christian, Buddhist, or another. The resuscitated Buddhist comes back telling tales of his talk with the Buddha, and Christians with Jesus.

So in conclusion I can only say that there is no proof of the miraculous Christian story, only proof of mans self deception. The story can only be accepted in faith, which was defined by Mark Twain as “believing what you know ain’t true”.