Tiresome as they might be, wizard, they are, in fact well respected by serious, sceptical scholars who spend their lives in study of this specific question. For example (in futile hope of absit iniuria verbis) Rudolf Karl Bultmann, author of many scholarly tomes, including his set-piece, New Testament and Mythology and Other Writings states "... By no means are we at the mercy of those who doubt or deny that Jesus ever lived." Michael Grant, an unquestioned expert on ancient documents states "... if we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned." (Source: Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels (New York: Macmillan, 1977), He further states critics "...have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." (ibid.).
Even author G. A. Wells, in a pointedly critical book titles Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Evidence for Jesus. has this to say "... the view that there was no historical Jesus, that his earthly existence is a fiction of earliest Christianity . . . is today almost universally rejected."
I could provide many more examples, not of pro-Christian (although thousands exist) writers, but of peer reviewed, sceptical, but well researched authors, many of which are on my desk.
Point, is, as I stated earlier on another thread, ones bias will often lead one only to supportive sources.
There remains a series of questions, though, that ought to be central to the discussion... I'll only adress two, due to space limitations:
Contd.