The Doctrine of the Bible:The Genuineness of the Bible. N.T.

In the previous study we looked at the Genuineness of the Old Testament. You will get more information from an Introduction to the New Testament than we have space for here. 

Here are some outstanding facts about the New Testament.

All the so called ‘higher-critics’ are returning to the traditional view of date and authorship of the New Testament books.

There is good reason to believe that the Synoptic Gospels [The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are referred to as the Synoptic Gospels because they include many of the same stories, often in a similar sequence and in similar wording. They stand in contrast to John, whose content is comparatively distinct. The term synoptic comes from the Greek syn, meaning "together", and optic, meaning "seen".[1]], were written in the order: Matthew, Luke, Mark. Origen frequently cites them in that order and Clement of Alexandria before him puts the Gospels that contain the genealogies of Christ first.

sherylstewart.tateauthor.com

It is thought  that Matthew wrote an Aramaic Gospel before he write our Gospel of Matthew in Greek according to Papias of Hieropolis 

Hieropolis Roman Theatre

It is also agreed that John Mark wrote the Second Gospel around A.D.67. Luke, the beloved physician, was the writer of the Third Gospel as agreed  by general consensus.

St Luke (Pordenone, (1535-37) Budapest)

Some rejected the Gospel of John saying that the emphasis on the deity  did not eventuate until the end of the first Century. This is not true because the Deity of Christ is clear in the Synoptics as in John. The Gospels give the true view of Christ of the writers and the Apostles.

Acts is, quite generally, ascribed to Luke, the same man who wrote the Third Gospel. 
Sir William Ramsay’s research into Asia Minor and Harnack concluded the same thing.

The ten Pauline Epistles are acknowledged as having been written by the Apostle to the Gentiles as are the Pastorals. Summary of Thiessen pps 96-97

The Epistle to the Hebrews

That this epistle was written very early appears from hence, that it was imitated by Clement of Rome, in his epistle to the Corinthians, who took whole sentences out of it; and therefore it could not be a new work, as Eusebius (a) observes: it has been denied to be authentic by some heretics, as the Marcionites and Arians, but has been generally received as such by the orthodox: some indeed doubted of it, because it was not received by the Roman church, as an epistle of the Apostle Paul (b); though others, who have thought it was not his, as Origen, yet looked upon it as genuine (c). It has been ascribed to different persons, as to Barnabas, to Apollos, to Luke the Evangelist, and to Clement of Rome, but without any just reason. Clement of Alexandria, a very ancient writer, asserts it to be the Apostle Paul's (d); and his name stands in the title of it, in all R. Stephens's exemplars, and in all Beza's copies, excepting one, and so it does in the Vulgate Latin and Arabic versions; and that it is his,  J. Gill

James and Jude were undoubtedly written by Jesus own brothers.

The Epistles of Peter and John were written by then as John wrote the Revelation.

Some of the New Testament  writers used an amanuensis which sometimes caused a change of style or grammar.