As can be expected, the way people argue against the Christian faith is quite different today than it would have been when Christianity first started. Sufficient time has elapsed, and information technology has developed to such a degree, that much evidence has long since been destroyed, and any numpty with a wifi connection can distribute any random claim to a large, global audience in minutes.
One of the most obvious examples of this is Jesus Mythicism. Even in today's world, you'll be hard pressed to find a credible historian who will doubt Jesus actually existed. In fact, the denial that Jesus actually existed would be the whole reason such a scholar would lose credibility among his peers.
Nevertheless, while the evidence for His existence is sufficient to convince the scholarly community that Jesus existed, sufficient time has elapsed that the evidence we have can be brought into question. Everyone who ever met Jesus, or His contemporaries, is dead. Many documents, both official and unofficial, which speak of Him, have decayed; crumbled into dust and ashes, never to be retrieved again. We must rely on a very different set of evidence 2,000 years after Jesus ascended into Heaven than people living 1900 years ago had access to.
In the modern day, we can actually raise large numbers of questions no one living back then would have thought to ask. Our ignorance of standard cultural norms, language devices, historical/local laws, and other things, even allow us to spot "contradictions" in the Gospels that aren't contradictory at all.
Ultimately, we need to remember that not even the Bible was really written with the intention of convincing modern readers of its own historicity. Of course, God knew it would be around today, and wrote it for us as well, but Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Paul, none of these people had us in mind. They wrote for their time. They weren't trying to impress us. Rather, the Bible is written primarily by eyewitnesses to eyewitnesses.
This is why arguments from closer to the time of the New Testament differ wildly. Rather than "Jesus didn't exist", it's "He did His miracles with the help of Satan". Rather than "Jesus wouldn't have even been buried in a tomb", it was "you disciples stole His body". Rather than "you can't say it's true just because a book says so", it was "of course it's not true, a woman said so!" Enough time has elapsed since the Ascension of Christ that new arguments are now being made, but thankfully, we can easily identify that they are new.
What this shows us is they are also very weak. They're modern ad hoc rationalisations, designed to compete with the vast amounts of evidence we already have. Evidence which, 2,000 years ago, would not even be considered evidence, and may have even counted against the Bible in the eyes of the surrounding culture. If you want to debate some guy on social media today, you can say something silly like "we don't even have any of Jesus' own writings", but back then, many opponents of Christianity actually saw Jesus hanging on His cross!
While hostile worldviews, such as atheism, must rely on the fact that evidence decays, and times change, in order to "refute" the Christian faith, the Christian faith itself remains rock solid. Witnesses die. Documents dissolve. Entire cultures shift. But the word of God will remain steadfast until the world itself burns up in the fervent heat. The evidence for Christianity will always be sufficient, and it will not be ad hoc. Our case will never depend on the passage of time. Our arguments will never be pulled out of thin air. Our evidence will never be random stories spread by people with little to no knowledge of the first century. As Christians, we have the strongest possible case, simply because we have the whole truth, right from the horse's mouth, so to speak. We have witnesses both friend and foe. Because of this, we will never be swayed from our everlasting message: Christ is risen.