"A lot of the 'other docs' about Christ from the last 50 years are not very reputable at all."
According to who? Some of these writings are earlier than the books in the new testament. I can't see how an intelligent Christian wouldn't want to look into these things so that he/she could make their own judgement. The fact is that the bible was compiled by humans (politicians and religious leaders) 100's of years after Jesus. Did Jesus make any promises about the integrity of the bible that was to be compiled after his cruxcifiction?
ACTUALLY,
THERE'S PLENTY OF QUALITY EVIDENCE
indicating that the Canon was essentially compiled and agreed upon within 30-50 years of the events they described. Certainly plenty of people who witnessed the events had access to the Canon documents.
The 300 years later thing essentially ratified what was mostly an already completed process within 30-50 years of the events.
The study of the veracity of the NT documents has changed many a scholarly but integrous atheist into a vigorous and faith-filled Believer. C.S. Lewis was but one.
Josh McDowell, another.
And there's another recent one who's name is slipping me at the moment.
I was looking for something I had saved regarding the Nicene Council. Couldn't find it, but came across the following. This is but one source of information exposing the politics behind the Nicene Creed. It is amazing to think that everyone blindly accepts something that an ancient group of men contrived for their own political agenda. And it's probably because the church had us repeat the creed over and over and over again. Nevermind a trinity isn't in the bible. Nevermind that Jesus was a Jew. Nevermind the importance of the Shema to every practicing Jew.
http://www.bibletopics.com/biblestudy/51d.htm