Are the four Gospels in our New Testament reliable, or were they invented at the Council of Nicea in A.D. 325?
The four Gospel accounts are considered to be accurate histories of Christ because they pass several tests:
1) We possess early portions of the Gospels, written mainly on papyrus, including some fragments dating back to almost the first century.
2) There are thousands of early copies of the Gospels-many even dating before the Council of Nicea - that come from various parts of the old Roman Empire. This indicates that they were widely circulated and accurately transmitted throughout the international Christian community.
3) The Gospels are extensively quoted by the numerous writings of church fathers in documents dating before the Council of Nicea.
4) The Gospels harmonized with the theology of the entire church and letters of the apostles and were widely accepted.
5) The Gospels contain specific names, dates, places, and details that are characteristic of accurate history and eyewitness testimony.

Scholar Robert Grant sums up the consensus of historians when he states that the New Testament “was not the product of official assemblies or even of the studies of a few theologians. It reflects and expresses the ideal self-understanding of a whole religious movement . . . united in accepting these 27 diverse documents as expressing the meaning of God's revelation.”

Aren't there “other gospels” about Jesus that were suppressed for political reasons?
The Da Vinci Code claims there were “at least 80” gospels that boast more evidence of authenticity than Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

In reality, there are about 50 other so-called gospels cited in ancient literature. None comes close to meeting the tests of authenticity previously mentioned. Most are filled with bizarre tales and wildly heretical theology such as Jesus claiming that women must “become male” to go to heaven.

Finally, there is no historical evidence of any widespread destruction of these false gospels. In fact, the emperor Constantine, who Brown alleges engineered the destruction, disagreed with the key affirmation of the Council of Nicea - the deity of Christ. It makes little sense that he would suppress a doctrine he believed in.

Did the early church believe Jesus was God, or instead was His status “upgraded” in A.D. 325, as The Da Vinci Code alleges?
Christ's deity is not only mentioned in the four Gospels and throughout the New Testament, but also in documents and citations by other writers dating before A.D. 325. Even pagan historians, also writing before 325, accuse Christians of worshipping Jesus as God.

Are the virgin birth and resurrection borrowed from pagan myths such as that of Mithras, as asserted in The Da Vinci Code?
Historians who have examined such myths have found that, in many cases, the myths were written after the advent of Christianity (thus, probably borrowed from Christianity) or that the similarities are exaggerated.

Content provided by: Oneplace.com