Christian Apologetics and Arguments are Futile

[Esquilax]

The comment came from the premise that He was a real person. If you don't agree with the premise to start then we can move no further.

Of course, Lemonvariable72 wiggled out of it by saying that there was no crucifixion, so . . . there you go.

I understand the premise well enough, but even then your two choices are limited; you might notice that all but my last alternative possibility required at least one living figure to base the stories upon too. This Liar, Lunatic or Legend argument pops up from time to time, and though I don't think it's very effective, it's also rife with incorrect assumptions. Jesus could very well have existed, but willful deception isn't the only alternative to being the literal messiah.