In this session, we are looking at the reliability of the New Testament. Can we trust what the Gospel writers said? There are several tests we can do:

1. Intention to record history? Was it their intention to accurately record history?
2. Bias? Are the writers biased, or did they set out to be honest and objective?
3. Cover-up? Were they trying to cover up and falsify the account?
4. Timing? Were the writers close to the subject and time they are writing about?
5. Corroboration? Can any of the facts be corroborated?
6. Adverse witness test? Were there eyewitnesses around who could have contradicted and corrected history? If so, did they?
7. Oral History. They lived in a time of oral history. What does this mean, and were there errors passed down?
8. Consistency between different versions? Do they corroborate or contradict each other? Can these be resolved?

How do the Books of the New Testament Compare to Ancient Manuscripts?

• “Annals of Imperial Rome” by Tacitus (AD116). First six books in 1 manuscript from AD 850 (over 700 years later). Others from 11th Century.
• “The Jewish War” by Josephus (1st century) – 9 manuscripts from 10th, 11th and 12th centuries (Over 900 years later)
• “Homer’s Iliad” – the “Bible” of the Greeks – (800 BC) – 650 manuscripts from 2nd and 3rd century. (1000 years)
• “New Testament” – 24,000 manuscripts; Earliest fragment from between 100-150 AD. Earliest complete New Testament Codex Sinaiticus and near-complete Codex Vaticanus from around 350AD. (100 years earliest)

Historians are happy to accept the reliability of Tacitus, Josephus and Homer, all of whom have manuscripts dated from hundreds of years after they were written.

The New Testament has an almost embarrassing amount of manuscripts, all dated earlier than any other manuscripts from the ancient world.

Examining the New Testament

I am again indebted to J. Warner Wallace for his incredible research, and with
his permission, I am reproducing his notes and illustrations. David Bedford

The case for the reliability of the New Testament Gospel eyewitness
accounts is dependent on the reliability of the authors. Eyewitnesses are typically evaluated in criminal trials by asking four critical questions: Were the witnesses really present at the time of the crime? Can the witnesses’ accounts be corroborated in some way?
Have the witnesses changed their story over time? Do the witnesses have biases causing them to lie, exaggerate or misinterpret what was seen? We can examine the Gospels and their authors by asking similar questions. Is the Bible true?
The cumulative case for the trustworthy nature of the Gospels confirms their reliability:

(1) The Gospels Were Written Early – after Paul’s letters
The New Testament is not in chronological order.

It’s much harder to tell an elaborate lie in the same generation as those who
witnessed the truth. The Gospels were written early enough to have been
cross-checked by those who were still alive and would have known better:

(a) The missing information in the Book of Acts (i.e. the destruction of the Temple,
the siege of Jerusalem, the deaths of Peter, Paul and James) is
best explained by dating Acts prior to 61AD

(b) Luke wrote his Gospel prior to the Book of Acts

(c) Paul’s referencing of Luke 10:6-7 (1 Timothy 5:17-18, written in 63-64AD) and Luke 22:19-20 (1 Corinthians 11:23-26, written in 53-57AD) is best explained by dating the Gospel of Luke prior to 53-57AD

(d) Luke’s reference to his Gospel as “orderly” in Luke 1:3 (as compared to Bishop
Papias’ 1st Century description of Mark’s account as “not, indeed, in order”) and
Luke’s repeated references of Mark’s Gospels are best explained by dating Mark’s
Gospel prior to Luke’s from 45-50AD. Matthew will therefore be from around the 50s AD, with John being the latest,
possibly in the 90sAD.

(2) The Gospels Have Been Corroborated
The Gospel accounts of the first century are better corroborated than
any other ancient historical account:

(a) Archaeology corroborates many people, locations and events described in the
Gospels

(b) Ancient Jewish, Greek and Pagan accounts corroborate the outline of Jesus’
identity, life, death and resurrection

(c) The Gospel authors correctly identify minor, local geographic features and
cities in the region of the accounts

(d) The Gospel authors correctly cite the ancient proper names used by people
in the region of the accounts

(e) Mark’s repeated reference and familiarity with Peter corroborates
Papias’ description of Mark’s authorship of the account

(f) The authors of the Gospels support one another unintentionally with details
obscure details between the accounts

(3) The Gospels Have Been Accurately Delivered
The Gospels were cherished and treated as Scripture from the earliest of times.
We can test their content and accurate transmission:

(a) A New Testament “Chain of Custody” can be reconstructed from the Gospel
authors (through their subsequent students) to confirm the original content of the
documents

(b) Much of the Gospels (and all the critical features of Jesus) can be confirmed in
the writings of the Church Fathers

(c) The vast number of ancient copies of the Gospels can be compared to one
another to identify and
eliminate late additions and copyist variants within the text

(d) The earliest caretakers of the text considered it to be a precise, divinely
inspired document worthy of careful preservation

(4) The Gospels Authors Were Unbiased
The authors of the Gospels claimed to be eyewitnesses who were transformed by
what they observed in Jesus of Nazareth:

(a) The authors were convinced on the basis of observation afterward, rather
than biased beforehand

(b) The three motives driving bias were absent in the lives of the authors.
They were not driven by financial gain, sexual (or relational) lust or the pursuit
of power. They died without any of these advantages

(c) The testimony of the authors was attested by their willingness to die for what
they claimed. There is no evidence any of them ever recanted their testimony

The gospel authors were present during the life of Jesus and wrote their accounts early enough to be cross-checked by those who knew Jesus. 
The gospel authors were present during the life of Jesus and wrote their accounts early enough to be cross-checked by those who knew Jesus. Their accounts can be sufficiently corroborated
and have been accurately delivered to us through the centuries.

The authors lacked the motive to lie to us about their observations and died rather than recant their testimony. Who dies for a lie that they know for a fact is a lie? They were eyewitnesses.

Is the Bible true? The case for the reliability of the Gospels is strong and substantive.
We have good reason to trust what the eyewitnesses told us about Jesus of Nazareth.