How would I handle the difference between the inspired text that makes claims and a comic book that someone can use to make claims? I was told this: “For instance, I can claim the existence of Spider-Man because he is from Queens, NY, and that is a real place with real historical figures in the comic. However, citing real things in an imaginary comic doesn't make the storyline true. That's what an atheist sees.”
First, we need to start with a simple fact: a comic book does not claim to record the truth. That some use real-life settings does not change the fact that a comic book is a work of fiction. In contrast, the Bible claims to be the inspired words of God (II Timothy 3:16-17) and that it is the truth (John 17:17). Thus, its historical references would have to be accurate. The verification of the facts mentioned in the Bible supports its claim of being the truth, but it does not prove that it is true.
Second, since there are elements in a fictional work that are provably false, it supports the claim that it is a work of fiction. There have been many attempts to poke holes in the Bible's narrative but each has failed. Thus, the atheist's claim that the Bible is a work of fiction has not been proven.