I can turn that right back around and have an equally compelling argument: what if you are wrong?
I have no frame of reference to entertain my experience with Christ as invalid, He is a separate agent with sentience who acted in my life, it would be like denying you exist after conversing with you, its ridiculous.
Buddhism isnt a religion, its more of a philosophy, Buddha died about 500 years before Christ, and he never wanted a religion started after his teachings, therefore, buddhism is invalid as a transcendental religion because he himself would contradict it, and does not offer what Christ does, nor could he, he is dead. Its kind of like how Christians accost homosexuals when Christ Himself never commanded us to do this, its just wrong, incoherent and goes against the core of Christs teachings. If you want to make an impact on a homosexual, do as Christ did, and love them where they are, as Christ did. This is one of the commandments, love your neighbor as yourself, something Christians oddly struggle with, even though its a direct command from Christ, who as I remember, ate and drank along side sinners, showing them love and compassion.
I think each individual is a better guide to whether they know that god exists than texts written long ago that insist everyone knows...
Unless they are deceived, which of course would render what they believe invalid. It is written, draw near to God, and He will draw near to you, but conversely, depart from God, and He will depart from you, meaning His presence isnt discernible, and there is room for deception. When someone tells me they dont know or believe God exists, I generally believe they think that, but I also know why they think that.
Yes as a matter of fact, I have read the NT cover to cover multiple times when I was a teenager (have only read parts of the OT but to me that is much less relevant), it's a big part of why I moved away from Christianity as a belief system. I was raised Christian and was into it for a good number of years though I always had my doubts. See, here is the crux of the problem with discussing religion with religious people. In order for scripture to be proof of anything, you have to believe it is the divine word of god. However I believe that it was written by mortals, each with their own agenda, and as such is nowhere near infalliable or perfect. The books of the NT were written 100 to 400 years after Jesus' death. That is plenty of time for the message to become distorted. Jesus didn't write any of that stuff himself. Additionally, around 300 years after his death, the Roman empire decided to appropriate Christianity as their own religion because they needed to maintain control of the populace, and created the Roman Catholic church. Being a form of social control, we cannot possibly be sure that the message wasn't changed. Plus, even IF the original texts were infalliable, they have been translated multiple times and it is impossible not to lose things in translation to very different languages.
If you were studied in Christianity and the NT, at what point did you miss the mountain of scripture, which I barely scratched the surface on, that denotes the deity of Christ? This seems to contrast with your earlier statement which eludes to the fact that you seem to think there is no reference to the deity of Christ, but someone studied in the NT would know that the deity of Christ is explicitly taught. The books of the NT actual dates are not known, but we do have good evidence for the gospel as early as 60ad, which falls in line with almost all historical accounts of anything, as most history is not written contemporaneously. Holding the bible to a standard that historians dont hold secular history to is a bit unfair, and seems kinda hypocritical, not that I can blame you entirely for that, you simply didnt know. We know Pontius Pilate existed, we have physical evidence, and Josephus wrote about him, but Josephus wasnt a contemporary of Pilate, but that doesnt mean his writings are invalid, in fact, they are very valid. Most historical accounts are in fact not written in until well after the fact, the bible is simply no different in this regard.
We also have the original greek manuscripts, which each translation is a 'one off' from. The bible is not the result of translating translations.. Every translation is from the greek to english, or the greek to german and so on and so forth, and while the vernacular of languages change over time, so do the translations, naturally, and they are very accurate. Besides, you can check for yourself if the translation is true to the greek, its really quite simple. I became familiar with your arguments because I used them at one point in time, not realizing I was in error, I simply wasnt working with all of the information, which I feel you arent either, but that is something you would have to invest time into, I cannot force your hand, nor would i try.
coupled with the inconsistencies I've noticed in the church's portrayal of Jesus
Jesus and the apostles foretold the Church would fail to represent Christ, not only that, but just because bad Christians are terrible at correctly portraying Christ, doesnt mean Christ is invalid, thats like not going to the gym and cheating yourself of the health benefits because there are people there who are out of shape, its just not a rational approach.
In contrast to what? What objective foundation for good do you contrast yourself with? Yourself? And doesnt that beg the question?
Dont take that as me saying you arent following some morally obligatory inherent set of values, non Christians are fully capable of Christian morality, but we are all guilty of immorality to some degree, Im sure you can agree on that, Ive never met someone who didnt say they havent ever done something immoral, I doubt you would be the first.
I am truly intrigued by your statement, "I am a good person" it denotes a concrete foundation for what is good, one that you believe you fit with perfectly, and id like to know what the foundation is that you abide in.
Thanks for the conversation, you really are a pleasure to talk to, I cant stress that enough.. if we truly do reach an impasse, or you feel like we shouldnt continue because you are being put in an uncomfortable situation, please let me know and we can part ways on the topic, i dont want to shut off potential future discourse because you felt pressured to continue.
I have also found my truth, and it works for me. I'm a good person, and I'm content and happy. I feel that I know my place in the world and the universe, I am not seeking anything. I am not threatened that you don't share my beliefs. It would be nice if you could be happy for me as well and not feel the need to convince me I'm wrong and you're right. 
