 It's possible for there to be no contradictions and the story is still not true. It's possible that archaeology could support place names and the story is still not true. It's possible that the manuscripts could accurately reflect what the author said and the author is still not true. It is possible that the literary style could be misunderstood story-wise or accurate and the story is still not true. So the four criteria that you gave for determining the accuracy of a historical text are incapable of doing that on their own. You have a failed methodology. That was the point.