A story claiming to have eye witnesses to events doesn’t mean there were any, the author can say anything that makes their work sound more believable,

If you apply this logic to everything, history falls apart. The New Testament being written by someone who was around at the time and lived close to the events is quite apparent.

and given that there were no other documents making those completely unbelievable claims, they remain unbelievable fictions.

What do you mean “no other documents”? Apart from what? The documents making the claims?

What I essentially believe you’re saying is “apart from the documents making those claims, there are no other documents making those claims”. That doesn’t make any sense at all.

It kind of sound like you are unaware of the council of nicaea…where they decided to make Jesus a divine figure, and not just a prophet, among other stories they twisted and chose to suit their needs. We may not know their exact names, but we know the group and the months they met to write this book.

I am fully aware of it, seemingly more than you since you’re regurgitating Tiktok nonsense.

1. The belief in Jesus’ divinity predates the Council of Nicæa. The Bible literally refers to Him as God several times. Even in the Old Testament at some points. And even in addition from that, it’s clear He is not just a prophet, but the Prophecied Messiah

2. We know who a lot of them were. Such as St Nicholas, St Athanasius and Arius (the reason the meeting was caused)

3. The council of Nicæa didn’t write any biblical book. They wrote the Nicene Creed which isn’t in the Bible and possibly the Athanasius creed. The New Testament was already completed by the early Second century at the latest