The enormous volume of manuscripts (copies) allows us to cross-check to ensure the accuracy of the content to the original source.

• ~5,700 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament (written between 2nd century (maybe 1st) to 15th); and, over 9,000 manuscripts in other languages, far more than any of book from this time period.1 By contrast, the Roman historian Tacitus only has 20 manuscripts, Caesar has 10 and Homer’s Illiad has 643.2

• Accuracy to the original source: Biblical scholar Bruce Metzger estimates the New Testament is 99.5% accurate.1

The period of time between the original writings and the manuscripts is early (compared to other books from antiquity).

• According to Sir Frederic Kenyan, "The interval then between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed.  Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.”3

• Perhaps the earliest fragment (John Ryland’s fragment) is dated at 117-138 AD.1

• Codex Sinaiticus – “…one of the earliest nearly complete copies of the Bible”; dated ~350 AD.4

• Codex Vaticanus – “…earliest, nearly complete Bible we have available today…”; dated ~325 AD.4

• Other books from antiquity, such as Plato, Tacitus and Caesar, have earliest manuscripts ~1,000 years after the original. Even the earliest copy of Homer’s Illiad is  ~500 years after the original.2

Numerous quotes from writings of the early church fathers.

• According to Christian apologists Norman Geisler and Frank Turek“…the early church fathers - men of the second and third centuries such as Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, and others - quoted the New Testament so much (36,289 times, to be exact) that all but eleven verses of the New Testament could be reconstructed just from their quotations.”2 (page 228)

Insufficient time for legendary development.

• According to historian Sherwin White, two generations is not sufficient time for legend to change the historical accounts recorded in the Bible. Apologist J.P. Moreland refers to White’s conclusion:

  • "In this regard, A.N. Sherwin-White, a scholar of ancient Roman and Greek history at Oxford, has studied the rate at which legend accumulated in the ancient world, using the writings of Herodotus as a test case. He argues that even a span of two generations is not sufficient for legend to wipe out a solid core of historical facts. The picture of Jesus in the New Testament was established well within that length of time.”5 (bold added)

Archaeological discoveries provide strong support for the Bible.

1. “Today, nearly 100 biblical figures, dozens of biblical cities, over 60 historical details in the Gospel of John, and 80 historical details in the book of Acts, among other things, have been confirmed as historical through archaeological and historical research.”6 (page 181)

2. Jewish archaeologist, Nelson Glueck: “It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference.”7

We can believe the NT authors told the truth based on embarrassing details included in their accounts – see evidence.