Vivian,
There are major proofs as Aineo has presented of the textual reliability of the scriptures. It's a wonderful reality, that in 66 Books of the Bible, there are only a very small number of passages that are in dispute, and the old manuscripts attest to the reliability of the current translations compared to the ancient ones.
The orthodox Christian position on the Bible is not difficult. The entire New Testament was written by Apostles and eyewitnesses in the first century, with the Gospels already circulating before the fall of Jerusalem - 70AD. Each book or letter was inspired by God, and therefore contains no error, and expresses no contradictions. There are slight variations in the text - the accuracy of the copy exceeds 99%[58] - and there is no single fact or doctrine called into question by the variations in the extant codices. Jesus has told us that "heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words will not pass away." - this is the infallible testimony of the Scriptures. Christians hold that the truth of this testimony is evidenced in the world, and key to this witness is the early dating of the Scriptures
Sir Frederick Kenyon (cited by Yusuf Ali as an authority on the Bible) deals masterfully with the internal dating of the Bible, dealing in depth with the Gospel of John which critics have attacked with greatest vehemence - for John witnesses to many of Christ's claim to be the only Way - and to be God incarnate. Commenting on an archaeological find, he concludes that:
The net result of this discovery -- by far the most important since the discovery of the Sinaiticus -- is, in fact, to reduce the gap between the earlier manuscripts and the traditional dates of the New Testament books so far that it becomes negligible in any discussion of their authenticity. No other ancient book has anything like such early and plentiful testimony to its text, and no unbiased scholar would deny that the text that has come down to us is substantially sound
As for the late dating and corruption of extant manuscripts, I can only provide a survey here, Norman Geisler and Kenyon declare
"There is more abundant and accurate manuscript evidence for the New Testament than for any other book from the ancient world. There are more manuscripts copied with greater accuracy and earlier dating than for any secular classic from antiquity. First, let us examine the number and nature of the New Testament manuscripts themselves....
The total count of Greek manuscripts of the New Testament is now around 5,000. The New Testament scholar Bruce Metzger counts 76 papyri, 250 uncials, 2,646 minuscules, and 1,997 lectionary manuscripts. This would total 4,969. No other book from antiquity possesses anything like this abundance in manuscripts".
Kenyon holds that we have portions of the New Testament dating back to the beginning of the second century. And a part of the Gospel of John was preserved for us in Egypt, having made it there already by 130-150 AD. He holds that in the third century the gospels and Acts circulated as a unit, and that the four gospels could have been circulating together in the second century. Church history supports this. The writings of the fathers have plenty to say about the Bible.
The testimonies of Ignatius, Irenaeus, Polycarp, Papias, Melito, Theophilus, Justin Martyr, Hegesippus, Tertullian, Clement of Rome and Clement of Alexandria all make reference to the New Testament - often as Scripture. In 140 AD when Marcion (a Gnostic) presented his New Testament Canon, he was opposed by Justin Martyr, Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Tertullian and Epiphanius. To posit that the New Testament Canon had just been written, when (1) the Bible was already widely spread, with (2) no controlling body existed for the dissemination of the Bible (as the slight variances in texts demonstrate) and with people already being labelled as heretics because of their positions on Scripture, is simply a display of one's lack of knowledge in Church history.
These testimonies are, loosely speaking, the 'Christian Hadith.' The church fathers were the people who lived with and were taught by the apostles - the inspired authors of the New Testament. The parallel is a weak one however, as the writings, unlike the Hadith, were written records, not verbal traditions recorded two centuries later.