The Truth

Are the gospels in the New Testament reliable?

"Is God true?"

"If He is, why is He allowing suffering, poverty, hardships, heartaches, evil in the world?"

"Is the Bible even true?"

"Did Jesus really live?"

"Isn't the Bible just made-up stories?"

"Isn't the Bible just legend and/or myths told by people from long, long time ago?"

The term "Bible", is the English translation of the Greek word ta biblia, when romanized. This word means "the books", it is an expression used by Jews to describe their sacred or holy books. The Bible that we know of today is the compilation of 66 books from both Old Testament and New Testament, written by about 40 different authors over many centuries. The Bible holds works of poetry, philosophical narratives, epistles, and more. According to Joshua J. Mark (2009), "The common thread in all these collected works is the existence of an all-powerful deity who is the creator of the universe and has an interest in the personal lives and final fate of human beings." in short, the existence of GOD.

Christians, believers of Jesus Christ, believe that even though God didn't literally write the books in the Bible, the authors of the books were inspired by God or moved by the Holy Spirit, that through reading and studying the Bible, people will get to know God, His existence and His nature, which will lead people to know one's self, one's nature, and one's need of salvation.

The writers of the gospels found in the New Testament claimed that their books are eye-witness accounts of Jesus' life in the ministry, his death, and his resurrection. But differences were found as people read and study these gospels, planting doubt if these books were really eye-witness account, planting doubt if Jesus really is God, planting doubt if Jesus really did exist. For people to believe in God, for people to follow Jesus, the question "Are the gospels reliable?" should be addressed first.

J. Warner Wallace is a cold-case homicide detective. He was featured in Dateline, and NBC newsmagazine. Author and apologist are some of the titles he holds now. Cold cases are unsolved investigations that remain open pending the discovery of new evidence, meaning these cases are unsolved cases that will remain unsolved until new evidence may be found, it may take 10 years, 20 years, or more.

In his article about biblical reliability entitled "Why the Ancient Christian Record About Jesus Is the Most Reliable", he claims to have applied a four-part temple employed to evaluate eyewitnesses in cold-case investigations. He explained that for eyewitnesses to be deemed as reliable they must be (1) present for them to be eyewitness, (2) if their accounts are supported externally, (3) if they have been honest and accurate in the past, and (4) their ulterior motive.

(Note: Italicized parts are from J. Warner Wallace's article " Why the Ancient Christian Record About Jesus Is the Most Reliable") 

1. Being present in the event/s

The more an eyewitness is able to observe, the more reliable his or her testimony. Those who have seen the most can describe the most. Those who have the most intimate knowledge of the event are clearly those who can best explain what really happened.

The earliest New Testament fragments date to within 25 to 50 years of the writing and our earliest complete manuscript of the New Testament dates to within 300 years of the writing.

This means that the earliest fragments of the New Testament, which Biblical scholars and critics believe that the gospel of Mark is the first one to be written, were written very close to Jesus' lifetime here on earth and can actually be eyewitness accounts. The closer something is written about an event is to the actual time the event took place,  it is more reliable.

2. If their accounts are supported externally

If the testimony of an eyewitness can be supported by something other than the witnesses, we can reasonably infer that the testimony to be much more reliable. In other words, the more people who say it's like this, then it most probably is like this.

When Biblical writers describe a city, it can be located on a map and in the archeological record. While this does not prove that the Biblical writers were telling the truth; it does lend support to their reliability.

This means that claims in the Bible specifically in the New Testament are supported by things other than the writers. Although some may actually contest that it might still only be made up inspired by real places done by a researched writer or so, as what J. Warner Wallace had said, although this does not prove that everything was true, it cannot be denied that this adds to the reliability to the writer's claim to be eyewitness accounts.

3. If they have been honest and accurate in the past

If a witness has lied about a recollection of an event in the past, juries are allowed to disregard the witness's testimony about any other event he or she is testifying about. We can look at ancient historical testimonies and see if the witnesses have been honest in other areas of their testimony.

Many of the gospel details related to the life of Jesus have been questioned by critics of the Bible. Archeological findings in the last two centuries proved that Biblical writers were correct about hundreds of details once questioned, like the existence of court called "the pavement" or "Gabbatha", the existence of Pontius Pilate, the details of Roman crucifixion, the existence of the city of Iconium, to name a few.

This means that details mention in the eyewitness accounts that were once questioned were proven to be true, thus this tells us that the writers of the eyewitness account were being honest and accurate.

4. Ulterior Motive

Sometimes, a witness can be critically evaluated based on the exposed bias. Do they have hidden motives driving them to lie? We need to look carefully at each eyewitness and uncover their hidden biases before we can determine if they are reliable or not.

Some would argue that the Biblical writers were not being truthful because they wanted to start a religious system and were willing to say anything to accomplish this goal. But, all of them (apostles and original eyewitnesses) died horrible deaths and never changed their stories about the man they knew as Jesus. Why would they be motivated to lie if they had nothing to gain from it? They gained nothing financially, they were not driven by sexual desire, nor the pursuit of power.

This means that the apostles did not only gain anything based on the three (3) motives that were mentioned that mostly drive people to lie, they were also put to death because they held on to their testimonies as eyewitnesses even if it costs them their lives. Thus we can infer that with their actions, their claims are reliable.

The Biblical eyewitnesses measure up under these standards. They clearly wrote their accounts early, their testimony is supported externally by the archeological events, they have a reliable track record and they are without ulterior motive. While many skeptics argue only non-biblical sources can be trusted for the information we have about Jesus, the ancient Christian record about Jesus is the most reliable.

This means that it is proven that the gospels in the New Testament are reliable as eyewitness accounts.