As a historical document, the New Testament is unreliable

Thank you for your well-thought-out rebuttals. I am impressed with your arguments, though I feel as if you made a few mistakes.==Rebuttals==Before I begin, it should be noted my partner dropped the anachronism charge; therefore, I would like to extend that argument. I. Passion WeekA. Mark's geographical error My partner's reply is quite interesting, though I'm not sure that his reply works. In order to understand why, let's take a closer look at the image: Mark has Jesus riding into Jerusalem via Bethany and Jerusalm. However, when we take a look at the Gospel of Matthew, we see something interesting: Matthew leaves out the trip to Bethany: "And when they drew nigh unto Jerusalem, and were come to Bethphage, unto the mount of Olives, then sent Jesus two disciples..." [1] Likewise, the problem is that this does not always work. Mark 7:31 says, “And again he went out from the borders of Tyre, and came through Sidon unto the Sea of Galilee, through the midst of the borders of Decapolis.” There is a clear error here as we can plainly see Tyre and Sidon on the coast of the Mediterranean sea, northwest of the Sea of Galilee. It is simply impossible for Jesus (or anyone) to go through Sidon to get from Galilee from Tyre. It is the opposite direction . (sorry to my partner for adding this new argument). B. Pilate's characterMy partner's reply is rather strange as he attacks Josephus, my secondary source, rather than Philos, my primary source. In order to explain why Josephus may not be a reliable source is because Josephus places Herod's death in January of 1 BCE rather than the historical date of 6 BCE. The problem with this defense is that there would then be no possible way of reconciling the error in the Gospel of Matthew & Luke by having Herod and Qurinnius as contemporary rulers. [3] Likewise, my partner seems to have contradicted himself. In his debate with Patzer24, ReformedArsenal actually uses Josephus in order to reconcile a contradiction! [4] Likewise, if we want to reject Josephus based upon interpolations, we must throw out the New Testament. There are at least three interpolations within the New Testament:Interpolation 1: 1 John 5:7, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." We know that this is an interpolation because not a single Greek manuscript contain the phrases "these three are one." [5] Apparently, this was to re-affirm the doctrine of the trinity. How do you expect a beni Noach (Jewish-Gentile), to accept the doctrine of the trinity (or doctrine of the New Testament), if there are indeed purposeful forgeries within the New Testament? Interpolation 2: Enging of Mark The last few verses of Mark are clearly interpolations. Again, we know this because at least two of the most reliable manuscripts do not contain these verses. [6] C. Anachronisms My partner doesn't even attempt to address this point. Extend.==Partner's Case==I. OT Reliability? The Old Testament is irrelavent to this debate. Thank you. ==References==1. This is in Matthew chapter 21. I am using the King James Version. If my partner wishes me to use a different version, I request he has the right to say so and I will gladly change versions.2. Map credit: http://www.thenazareneway.com... Rejection of Pascal's Wager.3. For more on this error, see http://www.infidels.org... http://www.infidels.org...;4. http://www.debate.org...;5. KJV Ryrie Study Bible notes on 1 John 5:7. 6. Nelson KJV Study Notes on the Gospel of Mark.