>>was that the time between the ascension of Jesus and the writing of the first books of the NT was REALLY only a few decades or so and NOT 70 or 90 or 150 years later when all the eye-witnesses would have been long buried.<<
By all accounts credible scholars agree on when each of the books of the New Testament were written. The last, Revelation, was written sometime in or close to 96AD. That would put all of them written between 37AD, only 4 years after Jesus ascension, and 96AD. The insinuation on the original post was that the original Apostles were no longer around when scripture was written and it was the RCC that was responsible for giving us scripture. My contention was that it was the writings of the Apostles long before the RCC.
By all accounts credible scholars agree on when each of the books of the New Testament were written. The last, Revelation, was written sometime in or close to 96AD. That would put all of them written between 37AD, only 4 years after Jesus ascension, and 96AD. The insinuation on the original post was that the original Apostles were no longer around when scripture was written and it was the RCC that was responsible for giving us scripture. My contention was that it was the writings of the Apostles long before the RCC. And, I agree with you. It was another that chose to glom unto what a "generation" really was rather than amend the mistaken comment. I guess it didn't jibe with the party line to have to admit the truth.