Are the Gospels Historically Accurate?

The Gospels were written by eyewitnesses or near-eyewitnesses.

Matthew has been the known as the author of the Gospel of Matthew since the beginning of its circulation. Many Church Fathers such as Justin Martyr, Papias, and Ireanaeus said that Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew.

The Apostle John and Irenaeus testify that Mark wrote down many things that Peter, as one of the Apostles, told him.

The Book of Acts was written by the same author as the Gospel of Luke. In Acts, the author uses the word "we" when talking about himself traveling with Paul. The only two people that it could have been are Luke or Titus. Luke fits the requirements better, since Paul testified to Luke having traveled with him during the time that Acts takes place.

The Gospel of John was detailed on the life of Jesus, Jewish customs, and Israeli geography. Only someone with an abundance of knowledge about Jesus and Palestine could have written the book, and the evidence points to the Apostle John.

The Gospels have early dates.

Although many liberal New Testament scholars have tried to date the Gospels in the early to mid 2nd century, archaeological discoveries and new manuscripts have begun to topple their tower of lies. Now, when looking at the evidence, most Biblical scholars date all of the Gospels before the turn of the 1st century, some date them even earlier.

Mark was said to have written his Gospel while Peter was preaching in Rome, giving his Gospel a date of 55-65 A.D.

In their stubbornness, many "scholars" inaccurately date the Gospels. This discredits the Gospels, thus enabling the "scholars" to remain apprehensive about the Book of Life in order to keep their consciences clear.

The Gospels do not leave enough time for myths to develop.

Many scholars claim that the Jesus' Resurrection was a legend, symbolic for how he lived inside of his followers' hearts. The legend of Jesus was circulated and the Gospels were written based on the legend. There is one problem: many eyewitnesses were still alive. If the Gospels were based on legends, followers of the true Jesus would have immediately discredited them. Legends take generations to turn into "fact." It does not happen in 30-70 years.

Also, the Gospel of Luke has no hint of Nero or the destruction of the Temple, thus giving itself a date in the early 60's.

A fragment of the Gospel of John was found and dated at 125 A.D., meaning it was written by the late 1st century. Oddly enough, some theologians and archaeologists dated the Gospel of John at 180 A.D. Do you smell a lie, because I sure do...

Paul verifies the early doctrines of the Gospel.

Paul's writings in 1st Corinthians and Galatians coincide with the doctrines of the Gospels. The date of his writings would mean that a "myth" about the resurrection of Jesus had to be contrived within 23 years of Jesus' death. If they "myth" were false, then many would have disproved it.

If Paul received the Church creed from Peter and James several years after Jesus' death, the beliefs that led to the formation of the creed were directly connected to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.