4-5 generations is a stretch, though it depends on what you mean by generation. Most New Testament Scholars including atheists agree that the New Testament was written while the some of the 12 apostles were still alive.
For example, agnostic atheist Dr. Bart Ehrman (Masters of Divinity and Ph.D. from Princeton Theological Seminary) states "Critical scholars are widely agreed that the earliest Gospel was Mark, written around 70 c.e.; that Matthew and Luke were written some years later, say, around 80–85 c.e.; and that John was the last Gospel, written around 90–95 c.e."
The historical record also has the disciples (St. Clement, St. Polycarp, St. Ignatius) of the apostles quoting the Gospels or referring to the letters of the apostles shortly after those dates ~90-108 AD depending on who you ask.
Regarding "faking history to suit their own ends", it is hard to imagine what gain the early Christians got by faking history. Some of these people were tortured, crucified, and fed to wild beasts by members of the Roman government because they were making these claims. Not exactly a racket.
Thank you for the detail. I had a more loose understanding of "about 100 years" after. If a generation is 20 years (at that point in history), that would be 5 generations. 25 years per, 4 generations.
The fact that many details of his actions are shared with other legends/traditions sure makes it look like he existed as a person and had lots of stories attributed to him.
The Councils of Nicea and Trent could not have been free of politics.
Those who were told falsehoods and believed them might well hold firm. Let's be real, evidence for the theology around the stories is lacking. This god does not show any influence of existence for a very long time. It's just people doing what people do.
You're welcome. The details shared with many other legends/traditions claim is also usually incorrect, particularly "god x was also crucified, rose from the dead, born of a virgin, had twelve dsiciples" etc. Usually these types of claims can be tied back to very specific films/books etc. For example the film 'Zeitgeist' makes wild assertions about Jesus & Horus sharing key details which have been debunked many times over. This is so common that there is a popular YouTube video that satirizes the concept called 'Horus Ruins Christmas' by LutheranSatire.
I agree, no Church council was free of politics. Not an issue for me though: the Church's stated mission is to teach the nations to obey all that God commanded. (Mat 28:19) That sort of mission is going to get political one way or another.
I don't find the evidence for the theology to be lacking at all: the eucharistic miracles in Tixla, Mexico and Legnica, Poland happened this century. There was also the miracle of the sun at Fatima. Daniel 2 was written hundred of years before Christianity and predicts that the Roman Empire would be absorbed by the kingdom of God. That same kingdom which would start small and slowly cover the earth: this fits basically exactly with the transformation of the Roman Empire into a Christian state and now Christianity covers the globe. That's just one of many fulfilled prophecies. I don't see how a naturalistic explanation is adequate for repeated knowledge of the future over the course of hundreds of years or the repeated eyewitness testimony of people seeing these miracles.
Daniel 2 is totally vague. Could be describing many situations.
Miracle in Poland: let's see the peer-reviewed results. Same for Mexico. Not surprising that the reported Mexican blood type would be the same as found on the shroud of Turin, which is clearly a fake from the image.
[https://www.richardhanania.com/p/fatima-and-the-sample-size-...]
Jesus said he would return before his disciples died. Did that prophecy come true?
If the book is full of verifiable falsehoods, how do you decide which things aren't false?