Christianity is true

Firstly, I apologize to my opponent for not responding to his early dating of the Gospel accounts. I do not know how they exactly can be debatable, nor do I see why they support your argument.My opponent has attempted to nullify my argument regarding Noah's Ark by saying that even though a "a worldwide flood seems improbable at the least, a more local flooding would be likely," explaining that the story of Noah's Ark is unclear on this. He suggests that the flood in Noah's Ark was a local one, rather than a world-wide flood. However, according to Genesis 5:32-10:1, the story of Noah's Ark in the Bible, "Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. So God said to Noah, 'I am going to put an end to all people...' ... The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits. Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; people and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds were wiped from the earth... The waters flooded the earth for a hundred and fifty days." The story of Noah's Ark claims that all living creatures and the entire Earth had been covered by water. It blatantly says that the flood covered the Earth for a hundred and fifty days.My opponent continues by saying "I therefore add another thing for you and spectators to think about, we know Jesus was a real Jew in Israel and Judea in the 1st century, and we know 4 historical facts about his death." He continues on to talk about how Jesus was a real person, had died, and he was never found in his supposed grave, and that his followers were devoted. My opponent, however, used baseless claims. He assumes that Jesus was real but fails to provide anything that can support these claims. Jesus has no birth records, his corpse was conveniently not in his grave, and there's little to no trace of him rather than an old Bible which possessed many tall-tales. In fact, it isn't much of a stretch to assume that he's another piece of mythology in this book.Some of the "prime examples" of Jesus's existence are things such as "the Shroud of Turin," which is believed to be the burial cloth of Jesus, the nails believed to havebeen the ones to bind Jesus to the wooden cross, and Christ's crown, have been debunked. The Shroud of Turin, a 14-by-14-foot linen blanket, has revealed that it does not date back to the time of Christ, but instead the 14th century. Two nails were allegedly discoved in a 2,000 year-old tomb in Jerusalem. However, this was dismissed as no more than a publicity stunt, with experts debunking the case. A crown housed in the Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris is believed to be the crown Jesus wore. It is referred to as "Christ's Crown." However, this crown is not old enough to have existed in 30 AD (as proven by carbon dating), and the crown is a circlet of brush and does not contain any thorns (S1).Sources:S1) http://www.livescience.com...