There is a fair consensus among historians that Jesus existed, so you can put that away.  Among those who were living in his time and place, many came to believe on the basis of witnessed miracles.  You may say you don't believe these witnesses, but you cannot say that their accounts are not evidence.  It's like saying that a witness who testifies to an intersection accident does not bring forward "evidence" simply because to you don't believe him.  You use the fact that there are many contradictory faiths as proof of "overwhelming" evidence against a risen Jesus.  What you fail to see, however, is that the great numbers of people in Jesus time who saw Him and His miracles as proof of his divinity is itself evidence of His divinity.