Of all the evidence presented in a court of law, eyewitness accounts are the least reliable. People tend to see what they want to see, attempt to fill in the blanks of something they missed, or are somehow convinced they saw something they didn’t, or did not really see something they did.

One of the biggest critiques of the authority of the Bible is it’s based mostly on eye-witness accounts, some second-hand, because most people were illiterate and had to depend on scribes to write down their experiences.

It’s not an unfair criticism, at least on its face. After all, how can we know for certain if their accounts are real? Over two-thousand years later, there’s no way to verify what the first Christians experienced was true and factual.

Some might say, “We’ll have to take that on faith,” and to a certain extent, that is true.

But people often take accounts of historical events, religious or otherwise, they didn’t personally experience on a certain amount of faith, too.

Why?

Because we trust the source(s).

Trust is the key.

So the next question is, are the early Christian writers/witnesses trustworthy? If so, why? What can we look for to cement that trust, especially two thousand years later when all the witnesses have turned to dust?

It starts with a question: Why would they lie? Or an even better question, why would they willingly be imprisoned, tortured, stoned, and even crucified (including up-side down!) to perpetuate that lie even up to their last breath? What’s their incentive? They certainly didn’t gain anything by it–other than a certain notoriety.

Notoriety back then was most likely a death sentence, though, not like today when people get more attention and money by making exorbitant claims instead of facing a potential death sentence.

There are also those who had something to lose with Jesus’ resurrection, namely the Jews at the time and Rome. To make sure Jesus’ followers couldn’t steal his body and claim he was resurrected, The chief priests begged Pilate to send soldiers to guard the tomb. And a large stone was placed before the entrance and sealed.

Yet three days later, in spite of the sealed entrance and guards, Jesus’ body was gone. Even the guards testified that the body had disappeared, not only Jesus’ followers (although the chief priests did bribe some of the guards to lie and say the disciples stole the body after all; see Matthew 27-28).

But let’s go back to the other witnesses, including the original apostles. Why do we consider their testimonies true other than having so much to lose?

Because they had already proven their integrity with their words and actions by not, for instance, bearing false witness or prophesying things which didn’t come to pass.

As for the gospels and letters that make up the New Testament, about 5600 copies have been found. Some date as early as 45-50AD and with very little variations between any of them (https://www.thecollegechurch.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/HANDOUTS-Is-Scripture-Reliable.pdf).

All of that together both solidifies the manuscripts’ and witness’s authenticity, and the care the writers/scribes took to make sure they withstood the skeptics, critics, and the test of time.

Let’s also look at what a member of the Jewish Council named Gamaliel said to other members. He said they needed to be careful with the followers of Jesus, whom they had arrested and planned to kill: “So in the present case I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or this undertaking is of man, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them. You might even be found opposing God!” (Acts 5:38-39, ESV)

So here we are, over 2000 years later, and Christianity has not remotely come to nothing.

In the end, though, what I wrote above and what I may assert to other skeptics isn’t worth much. Why? Because those who already believe Jesus is the Son of God and rose from the dead need no further evidence, and for those who refuse to even consider the possibility, no amount of evidence will ever be enough.