Yes, you and I both formed opinions on this.Not sure what you are talking about. Anything specific you had in mind?... but no, I did not just form an opinion, on this subject, if that's what you are asking.
The difference is that mine is based on such evidence as there is(including the lack of evidence, sometimes), put into historical context, then applying rational thought and reason to determine what is most likely to be objectively* true.
The likelihood that the Legend of the Christ, a rather shadowy figure in 1st century Judea, is a Hellenistic(pagan) story is vastly larger than the Legend being historically accurate.
And I specifically included "lack of evidence" as evidence". Many of the most dramatic points in the Gospels should have left evidence, even amongst people who didn't believe in the Legend. But they don't. I see that as evidence that they are fiction invented later rather than eyewitness accounts.
Tom
ETA *By objectively true, I mean true for everyone, regardless of what you prefer to believe.~