The more I read the gospels, and the New Testament, the more convinced I am of their authenticity. They make a scandalous claim that people reject without ever truly taking it seriously. Take 1 John 1:1-5 for example,

1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

2(For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

3That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

4And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full.

5This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you

Notice the claim. The author's intent is to tell you God came in the flesh in the Person of the Son the second member of the Trinity. He then says in verse 5 that God actually gave them a message which if you don't believe you are in deep doo-doo. It is dishonest to not take the author's intent at face value. When I read the gospels, I read the resurrection story in Luke yesterday,I see reliability and accurate history. It is amazing. Here is an article by Dr. Richard Bauckham dealing with this subject,

The Four Gospels as Authentic Testimony

Here is an excerpt,

Hence Luke's sense of urgency?
That's right. The argument of my book is that the eyewitnesses not only told their own stories at the beginning and created the oral tradition that then continued, but that the eyewitnesses were there right through that period, as long as they lived. I think they would have been regarded as the sources and, in a way, the guarantors of the tradition, those who were faithfully preserving the tradition. In terms of current New Testament scholarship, my book is putting the eyewitnesses back into the picture.