Visiting your post again, Tezzie, let me just add this. A Christian can take you to sites that claim without a doubt that the gospel writers are who they say they are and they have met Jesus. This site will offer lots of "proof" in the order that Christians normally accept. These same Christians will tell you about all the lies on the Internet.
Now visit some sites that have the real findings of biblical scholars and archaeologists and you find a different thing. The gospel writers, whoever they are, only borrowed the names to make their gospel appear more authentic. In fact, these sites will bring out the mistakes made by the writers and which book was written first along with copy errors.
Only from these last sites do you find that in Paul's time there were no gospels and they came later. This in itself shows us a lot about the "famous Paul." As to any of this information helping you to argue with Chrisitans, it probably will not matter. They believe what they want to believe anyway regardless of what else you might tell them. In fact, they treasure the fact that they "have all the answers" when most often an atheist has to admit that "we do not know" everything.
And there WAS NO town, village, hamlet called "Nazareth" during the supposed life of Yeshua the Nobody, NO crazy-ass census during the reign of Augustus ( Judea was not part of the Roman Empire at that time), and all accounts of the crucifiction and resurrection do NOT match up.
Most xians do not understand the concept of fiction ("They wouldn't print it if it weren't true!")
The other fact that makes a great difficulty for Christianity is that Paul, the author of much of the New Testament, never met Jesus except in a vision. Much of what is considered essential to Christianity—the redemption story for example—is due to Paul, not to Jesus.
The Gospel of Mark was originally known as "Memoirs of Peter". John Mark, who is sometimes thought to be Mark the Evangelist but only traditionally, may have met Jesus. Peter certainly did, of course.
It doesn't help that later interpolations to do with the Resurrection were added in the 2nd century.
Some of today's xians don't care whether the writers met their subject.
Several have insisted to me that their god dictated the bible to the writers.
Yes, that wonderful book written by 66 plus men who had no idea what the other guy was writing. That's why it is so smooth and has no flaws or errors. That's why it contradicts itself and believers have to cherry pick to get what they want.
If a god dictated this mess he was insane.
Did you ever ask them who made all the errors and contradictions, the ones taking dictation from God or God?
God tends to stutter a bit. It might have been a little difficult to understand.
I thought it was because of all the reverb he uses on his voice.
The reverb does give his voice an air of authority.
He complained that he doesn't want to sound like the wizard of Oz, Donald Trump, or Hillary Clinton.
Come to think of it, shouldn't the pronoun "he" being employed have been the first clue that it's complete bullshit? No, there's no evidence that it exists. There's even less evidence that it has a penis.
There's also no evidence that it has either penile or prostate orgasms, or that it belches or farts.
No personality at all.