WHAT “argument”?
All you have provided to date is three assertions – two of your own, and one attributed to Peter by Acts.
An argument generally requires premises and a conclusion.
The Bible says it. I believe it. That settles it.
… may be a bad argument, but at least it is an argument – 2 premises, one conclusion.
What you have presented so far is not even that.
Given we even have multiple photos of Lincoln, it beggars imagination how even a Creationist could make that claim.
Photographic evidence? Shmedivence!
I did wonder if he was pulling my leg, but he didn’t otherwise seem to have that sort of sense of humor and was generally prone to acts of spectacular stupidity. Being generous, I might imagine that he was making a more modest point, that we must rely on documentary evidence rather than things we can directly observe ourselves when evaluating historical claims. But I learned long ago never to underestimate creationist stupidity.
I would imagine he was just parroting some argument somebody told him, and he didn’t see anything wrong with it because the conclusion was attractive.