Christians, would you have saved Jesus, if you had he chance?

[Ignorant]

I'm suggesting that the birth and crucifixion dates aren't necessarily reliable, so the church may have had an earlier start than 33 CE.  Not that it need to have started earlier, 20 years is plenty of time for a religious movement to develop and gain speed.  But if the 33CE date isn't sacrosanct, it leaves the beginnings of the church open ended.

Oh I see, I misunderstood. Fair enough.

If the public execution story hadn't been invented until 30-40 years after the event, it's quite plausible that no one would object. [1] On what basis would they object?  That they don't remember an event that happened 30-40 years earlier. [2] I don't remember my high school days well enough to state unequivocally that our hockey team didn't win a state championship.  There's no reason to expect that anyone would have veridical recall that an event didn'thappen after that much time. [3] Moreover, the Jews of Jerusalem may have been dead or dispersed by the time of the first Gospel; who would there have been to remember?  [4] What other reason do you have for presuming the Pilate reference to be veridical? [5]

1) Maybe so, but Paul is the first to mention a crucifixion (Galatians), around 20 years after the event. He also claims that there people still living in the Christian community who claim to have witnessed the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15). If there are still Christians alive who claim to have been there themselves, it stands to reason that there would be Romans and Jews alive who could also claim to have been there.

2) On the basis of being alive and present at the time and place the narrative claims, they would object to the wild and radical historical claim that an obscure rabbi was executed on a Roman cross in Jerusalem at the beginning of the Passover with the tacit approval of Pilate due to the insistence of the Jewish crowd and authorities. Those are historically relevant claims. Instead, the only recorded objection we hear to the claims which the narrative respond to is "they stole his body", not "none of that happened".

3) Well sure. However, suppose one Christmas or Easter, the neighboring town's beloved high school janitor was arrested, tried, sentenced, marched through the streets and publicly executed by your town's governor because the local Christian pastors said he claimed he was God. Seems like it would be more memorable than a hockey  championship.

4) See #1. Paul's letters predate the destruction of Jerusalem, so the Jews of Jerusalem have yet to be dispersed. Some of those Jews who lived during the supposed events would be dead, and others living. See #2.

5) When I was studying this topic, I remember this to be well supported by the evidence. So my reasons would be based on the authority and large consensus of trained historians (which I am not). Even Bart Ehrman thinks that it is beyond doubt. If you want me to dig up a list of historians who conclude the same thing (and their reasons), I will, but it will take time.

[Pilate's confusion as to why the Jews brought Jesus to him] is entirely consistent with it being a fiction.  There is plenty of evidence that the birth narratives are fiction, that casts doubt on the whole chronology.

Consistent? Sure. Evidence of fiction? Hardly. And this is a clear shift from your claim to which I objected:

"That would explain why Pilate is involved in the sentencing of an obscure rabbi; simply put, he wasn't. Inserting Pilate into the story is just a false dating of events." -You HERE (emphasis mine)

How can consistency with fiction lead to the conclusion that it is, in fact, fictional?

Same objection as above.  Again these are references from the Gospels, which I'm pointing out may have a good deal more fiction in them than Christians are willing to accept.

I do accept that there is some fictional aspects of the gospels. Based on the evidence and its evaluation by historians, the crucifixion of Jesus under Pilate isn't one of those fictional aspects. this one about Pilate and the crucifixion of Jesus simply aren't those fictional aspects See #5 above.