Actually, I did respond to that, but apparently not clearly enough, so I'll highlight it:
There's a number of different ways Jesus and the Bible could be extraordinary, but they fail to be. That's not a flaw in my argument, it's just the nature of the myth of the culture you grew up in. It is clear to everyone in every other culture that there's nothing special about the myths of yours.
Yes, I know of the excuses given for why things must be that way, but it is clear to 2/3 of the world that they are just that: excuses. If there was a way to know, the world would long ago have converged on the true religion.
I make the meta-argument that there is nothing to recommend the Bible as better than the Koran or the Vedas, or the hundreds of other earlier tales of demigods that die and come back to life. John Loftus calls the the "Outsider Test For Faith". I reject Christianity because it is not in fact remarkable enough to clearly show the world that it is in fact the one true way, and claims an eternal punishment for not believing that it is. The fact that I give multiple kinds of ways God could have communicated better and established clearly the truth of the Bible and hence of Jesus does not undermine that argument. There is no reason to choose one of the sub-arguments, as you claim.
Christianity is about a continuing relationship with God, and yes, the events within that relationship can possibly be explained by things like coincidence, selective memory and so forth. But there comes a point where that just does not make sense any more. Either I am incredibly "lucky", incredibly selective in my memory of experiences or I actually have a relationship with God. While I don't expect you to trust my judgment in this matter, I must trust my own because if I reject it, I how can I trust my judgment in say, accepting your judgment?
I recommend reading a book like "50 Reasons People Give For Believing In a God" or the anthropological chapters in The Christian Delusion: Why Faith Fails. Heck, read any modern anthropological textbook. Every major religion gives this kind of evidence for their God. If it was only Christianity that did, I admit it would be good evidence, and the world would have converged on that religion instead of 2/3s of the people rejecting it, and Christianity splintering into smaller and smaller sects. If the Holy Spirit enlightens us like the bible says, he does terrible job of it. Things like the 30 years war are god's fault if he does exist, because he clearly could have communicated the truth better, or even what parts were essential and what was debatable. He didn't.
I have given God many opportunities to show himself, but he only does so in a matter that is exactly the same as chance. In the OT, he is supposed to have sent fire from heaven, and a simple lack of the Baal to act was proof that he was not the true god, and in the tale his prophets were murdered. Elijah didn't say, "Oh, I understand, my god values divine hiddenness also." No, simple failure of a god to respond to a challenge was definitive proof of his non-existence in the test YHWH himself designed. Somehow, once modern science and good record-keeping came about, god no longer shows up in any measurable way, and the theological sausage grinder comes up with ideas like "divine hiddenness" and the soul making theodicy. Strange that. I have yet to meet a Christian who is willing to anticipate future consequences of God's existence. No,belief in belief is the belief of the day, and even Christians recognize it.
The reason I am an atheist is the Chrisitianity does not stand up to the "Outsider Test for Faith", which it must if god is good and universalism is not correct. Either Christianity is false, god is not good and not worthy of worship, or universalism is true. From my study of many books on both sides, it seems the first is most likely. Christianity seems to be trending towards the last, as the first 2 destroys the belief.
If you want to talk more, feel free to contact me at steve (dot) pinkham (at) geemale dought com (the domain is phonetic of course.). I'd be happy to talk more by email, google+(i'll send you an invite if you don't have one) or at reddit, but slashdot doesn't seem the best forum.