Objectivity and the Quests for the Historical Jesus
The 'results' of the quests for the historical Jesus was that the 'Jesus' each scholar ended up with did not seem to be objective, but rather reflected the beliefs and agendas of each respective scholar.
What support do you give to distinguish yourself from the rest of these scholars as uniquely objective, and untainted by your atheological predilections? Is it not a bit ironic that you--a person dedicated to the propagation of belief in the non-existence of God--assert the position that this "historical Jesus" never existed?
Ockham's Razor is only as sharp as you are.