New Testament Reliability

Skeptics often dismiss the New Testament as late, heavily altered mythology. Yet when examined under the established methods of historical inquiry—from early manuscript distribution and variant analysis to undesigned coincidences and authentic local details—the New Testament documents prove remarkably well-attested.

Explore the historical, textual, and eyewitness evidence below:

Textual Transmission & Manuscript Reliability

The Textual and Historical Reliability of the New Testament

What Happened to the Original Bible?

400,000 Variants, Zero Broken Doctrines: What New Testament Manuscripts Actually Say

The New Testament is 99.5% textually accurate, and no doctrine is in question due to the text.

Misquoting Ehrman: What the Skeptics’ Favorite Scholar Actually Concedes

Why the Bible Was Never a Game of Telephone

The "Black Hole" Mirage: Why Ancient Manuscripts Refute New Testament Corruption

Dating & Canon Formation

The Early Dating of the New Testament

1st Corinthians Was Written in the 50s

How the Muratorian Fragment Shatters the Nicaea Council Myth

A Short Summary of the New Testament Canon

Eyewitnesses, Authorship & the Synoptic Problem

The Gospels - Anonymous or Not?

The Gospels: Real History, Real Witnesses

The Gospels Are Not Anonymous Accounts

Do Late Accounts, No Eyewitnesses Disprove the Gospels?

How Can the Gospels Be Reliable If They Are Interdependent

If Mathew was an eyewitness, why would he need to use Mark?

Beyond Literary Dependence: The Real Numbers Behind Synoptic Agreements

Internal Evidence & Historical Corroboration

Facts That Luke Gets Right, Which Show He Was a Careful Historian

Luke v Josephus on Census of Quirinius

Why Name Popularity is a Good Test of Historicity - a Summary

Undesigned Coincidences - Hidden Connections That Authenticate the Gospels