I think you missed one of the more biting, which is to say accurate, criticisms of your position.
Given your stated position, you would then logically have to maintain that all other religious texts are accurate literal descriptions of events. Or at the very least you'd have to agree that any such adherents are just as correct as you are in maintaining they were very real.
How do you look at texts from the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, Scandinavians? Given that many "feats" Christ is said to have done come directly from other (earlier) pagan deity mythologies, why should one believe they all have to be real, and are not ascriptions to boost his "deityhood". Do you really feel it is logical to believe that Jesus just happened to do what those other deities had done and people found popular at the time?
And we can look at other religions that are still more active. How about Hinduism? Buddhism? Shintoism? Are their texts factual or metaphorical? And if factual then how do they coincide with Xian literal truth?
The key difference between a position like mrH's and yours is that his can remain consistent. In his belief system, he does not have to pick and choose which mythic events are true or not. He has a constant measuring stick and applies it consistently to all events.
While you call your position a belief, it does not seem logically possible that it remain a consistent one for long. That seems to be less a rational belief and more a hope or a "faith", which is a form of belief beyond logic and reason.
That does not put your belief system on par with mrH's. They may share a name, belief, but are not equivalent in quality.
holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
™ Version 4.2