Conclusion and Final Thoughts
Conclusion and Final Thoughts
We have covered a lot of territory throughout this work and done so very quickly. We examined the New Testament from both zoomed-out and zoomed-in perspectives. This enabled us to consider the landscape of the New Testament from these different vantage points. We are also in a better position to understand why James Charlesworth is able to say, as noted above, that there are “too many international authorities to mention” who recognize that “in its broad outline” the Gospels’ portrayal of Jesus is “reliable and true.”
The cumulative case presented here is rather robust, and we should recall the various arguments covered. By way of summary, we considered:
1. New Testament textual evidence: We can reasonably believe the words in the New Testament are those that were originally written.
2. New Testament genres and audience expectations: The Gospels are Greco-Roman biographies and were not expected to freely invent materials (like novels would), while Paul’s writings were in-house discussions that were not considered to be forms of propaganda addressed to nonbelievers.
3. New Testament dating: The New Testament documents, particularly the Gospels and Pauline works, were written within the lifetimes of the disciples.
4. New Testament authorship: The four names associated with the four Gospels are the only four names ever to be associated with them, and even skeptics recognize seven “undisputed” Pauline writings.
5. New Testament creedal traditions: Creeds, early traditions that concisely summarize the beliefs of the earliest church, are often associated with the apostles and dated to the early 30s AD.
6. Historical criteria: These criteria evaluate the probability of the historicity of an event, and several key events in the New Testament meet a multitude of these criteria.
7. Undesigned coincidences: Undesigned coincidences are like puzzle pieces that come together to help illuminate a bigger picture.
8. Archaeology: Various archaeological findings contribute to the verisimilitude of the New Testament.
9. Non-Christian sources: These sources have no vested interest in Christianity or its beliefs and yet offer multiple points of confirmation of the New Testament.
10. Noncanonical Christian sources: These noncanonical sources offer additional insight and corroboration of New Testament texts.
11. New Testament canon and credibility: The early church recognized the authoritative nature of the New Testament writings, while accepting the best historical sources and rejecting disreputable sources.
12. Spiritual and life transformation: If the specific teachings of the New Testament are true, then it would be consistent for the lives of individuals throughout history to be changed as a result.
13. Minimal facts approach: The minimal facts approach uses historical events that are so highly evidenced that they have convinced a large majority of scholars from wide-ranging theological backgrounds, including skeptical ones.
Each of these topics has been covered in detail by various academic journal articles, dissertations, and/or book-length treatments. Accordingly, these chapters were necessarily meant to be a brief introduction to those who are unfamiliar with these aspects of the New Testament along with the different methods used in assessing its claims.
I have introduced a significant case for the reliability of the NT by systematically presenting each of these consideration and presenting a better understanding of what the NT landscape looks like. As Vishal Mangalwadi noted in 
There is not a single well-evidenced historical fact about Jesus that undermines the “orthodox” view of Jesus. Nearly two and a half centuries of assiduous study, research, and discovery by archaeologists, historians, textual critics, and other scholars searching for an alternative Jesus have failed to turn up a scrap of evidence that contravenes what Christians have traditionally said about him. . . . The lack of any well-supported facts that contradict the biblical portrayals of Jesus in the Gospels accepted by the church is no minor manner.
To those considerations, we might also add twelve data points discussed in great detail in Gary Habermas’s recent work on Jesus’ resurrection. These historical arguments become even more robust when combined with arguments for God’s existence as found in a 2018 publication by Oxford University Press titled Two Dozen (or So) Arguments for God.
Since we have looked at reasons why the New Testament is reliable, and are reflecting about what that means for us, it seems fitting to close the discussion with some words from the Gospel of John. In John 20:31, he writes that he has “written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that by believing you may have life in His name.” We may now read these words, along with the rest of the New Testament, with a new appreciation for their reliability. Indeed, they are trustworthy.