Dr. Bock,

In fact, even those who did not accept a human Jesus believed in a historical Jesus:

For e.g, Marcion (Golpel of the Lord)

"In the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar,
Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea,
Jesus descended [out of heaven] into Capernaum, a city in Galilee,
and was teaching [in the synagogue] on the Sabbath days;
And they were astonished at his doctrine",

and Basilides:

"He appeared, then, on earth as a man, to the nations of these powers, and wrought miracles. Wherefore he did not himself suffer death, but Simon, a certain man of Cyrene, being compelled, bore the cross in his stead, so that this latter being transfigured by him, that he might be thought to be Jesus, was crucified, through ignorance and error, while Jesus himself received the form of Simon, and, standing by, laughed at them."

Maurice Goguel (1926), has made some interesting observations about docetism, quoted by Christopher Price.

"If the Docetists had had the slightest reason to think that Christ was no more than an ideal person without historical reality, they would not have expended such treasures of ingenuity to give an interpretation of His story which cut Him off completely from too intimate contact with humanity. The Docetists thus appear as witnesses to Gospel tradition".

In my opinion, another good treatments of the Jesus Myth issues are:

" A History of Scholarly Refutations of the Jesus Myth" by Christopher Price
http://www.bede.org.uk/price8.htm#C

Earl Doherty, the Jesus Myth and Second Century Christian Writings by Gakusei Don
http://members.optusnet.com.au/gakuseidon/Doherty2ndC_Review.htm

Nehemias