[pinkpanther]

The reliability of the New Testament is a topic of debate among scholars, theologians, and historians. The views on its reliability vary significantly based on one's perspective—whether religious, secular, or academic.

1. **Conservative Scholars**: Many conservative or evangelical scholars defend the reliability of the New Testament. They argue that the texts are historically accurate, based on eyewitness testimony, and reflect the beliefs and practices of the early Christian community. Scholars like N.T. Wright, Craig Blomberg, and William Lane Craig often advocate for the authenticity and historical reliability of the New Testament writings.

2. **Moderate Scholars**: Some moderate scholars acknowledge a degree of historical reliability but may caution against viewing the texts as inerrant. They may recognize the theological motivations of the authors and consider how the context influenced the writings. Scholars like Bart Ehrman, who generally takes a more skeptical view, nonetheless acknowledges the historical value of certain New Testament texts.

3. **Secular Scholars**: Many secular or skeptical scholars question the historical accuracy of the New Testament, focusing on issues like the authorship of the texts, inconsistencies in the accounts, and the socio-political context in which they were written. While acknowledging the New Testament's impact on history and culture, they often argue that it reflects the beliefs and agendas of early Christians rather than objective historical events.

4. **Textual Criticism**: Some scholars focus on textual criticism, examining manuscripts and variations to assess the reliability of New Testament texts. This field recognizes that while the New Testament has been transmitted through various copies, many of which contain discrepancies, a significant portion of the text can be considered reliable and representative of the original writings.

In summary, the reliability of the New Testament is endorsed to varying degrees by conservative scholars, viewed cautiously by moderates, and often questioned by secular scholars. The discussion is complex and multifaceted, reflecting a wide range of perspectives within scholarship.