[Serious] Literal and Not Literal

[Acrobat]

If they’re several explanations of the same available data, how do I decide which one fits better? What exactly does fit mean?

Let’s take Bart historicist explanations of Jesus vs Richard Carriers ahistoricist explanations, how do I decide which explanation fits the data better?

If there are several explanations that fit the data equally, then you can't rationally select one as being the best explanation.

I lean slightly towards historical Jesus, but I don't know. And if I agree with Ehrman's conclusion, it might be that I arrived at my inexpert conclusion by different reasoning. I'm okay with leaving it an open question pending new evidence.  
;

But what does it mean to "equally" fit? What does "equally" mean, because it doesn't mean an explanations that just incorporate them in some way or the other? 

We have XYZ evidence. Person A can use all three pieces of evidence in his explanation, person B takes all three pieces and uses them in his conspiracy based explanation. How I do tell one used XYZ in a more fitting way than person B? Both prosecution and defense, can offer explanations for each other's evidence. But how do I tell which explanation fits the evidence better?