Righto, to convince me that Christianity is fake, there has to, among other things but most significantly; be without a shadow of doubt, a total disapproval of the claim to Christ's resurrection. And no, not some silly "but it's like literally impossiblé". It's a challenge of philosophy and history, not science. I apologise in regards to those outspoken partisan creationist buffoons.
I don't apologise for believing in God who created the universe, the Christian/Jewish God, being the only true God, being a God; greater than the universe, outside of time (eternal), there being a special nature to mankind ->being made in God's image, -->not being animals thus not held to the same standard as animals, by a God that is all things good and just, that knows definitively the difference between good and evil, and that humanity through being given rulership over the Earth being granted free will and consequently choosing to do evil -by defying God, severed our connection with him and introduced all the suffering you see into our world, humanity afterward largely hated and turned their backs on God because we're all inherently arrogant -because evil was introduced, fallen demons, flood, covenant with God etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. -You just read a paraphrased form of Genesis -without the creationist hyper-literalism.
Briefly, on the historical legitimacy of the Bible, has anything been disproven?
There's absolutely 0 doubt as to whether Jesus was a real person who lived. What's contentious, what gives him his legitimacy to us is his resurrection from death on the cross. So either you find and dig up Jesus's own dead bones, prove that he didn't as we believe, ascend to heaven (won't happen) or at least, to weaken my faith (i.e "oh that's an amazing point, maybe Jesus was just a very special pious person and not God"), create a highly reasonable and historically backed explanation of the behaviour of his disciples after his death and claimed *resurrection,* specifically his hand-picked apostles -and St. Paul. And also an explanation to why Jesus's detailed prophesy of the Jewish temple being destroyed came true in 70AD. -the gospels containing the prophesy were written around 50-60AD. Jesus's time of ministry 32-35AD. Atheistically apologise away.
So if the enemies of Jesus took his body from its tomb, they'd have shown it to disprove the disciples' claim of resurrection, of seeing and speaking to him alive. The Jews assert and I guess it's same for non-believers that Jesus's disciples stole the body out of the tomb and the disciples fabricate the multiple testimonies of meeting him alive. What's stirring for Christians regarding the latter claim, that Jesus's disciples stole his body is why would his apostles go, convert unprecedented numbers of people in short time (i.e in one of St. Mark's letters he claims to have converted around 7000 in and around Alexandria), never use force in doing so (unlike that barbaric moon cult) and eventually all of them minus one without challenge get brutally and horrifically martyred -why would they do all that for what they should have first-hand known was a lie? How could they or anyone go from completely despondent and dejected after his crucifixion to having the conviction, energy, belief and joy, (-just read their letters to each other) to give their lives without protest? Why would so many people give up their lives for some weird religion of a bloke who claimed he was God and it's said performed miracles yet died a humiliating death? Why this religion and it's set of moral codes?
So that's the major jugular that any atheist/sceptic should try to sever. You find a way to explain in a way that makes total sense the claim of resurrection as false, by explaining without deifying Jesus the unprecedented actions of his disciples.
Basically, this is our claim to fame: it is the hardest religion to have faked. -You can try and put forth an argument that we're nothing special but good luck. And may you too feel the love of Jesus in your heart. Amen.