How did the writings of the NT come to be?

[John V]

What's strange about it?

You have one (alleged) second-hand account and the (alleged) first-hand one uses the other as its basis?
Then the third account incorporates some "research", which envolves much hearsay and (considering the extra-ordinary nature of the account, likely) made up stuff.

Repeating the scenario doesn't answer the question. What's strange about it?

Oh, just something different from what already existed. Extraordinary tales were everywhere "on this time period"... on this "place period".
Middle East/Greece... Mesopotamia... India...
Look at it, there were some ~500~1000 years of amazing claims from every corner of that general area [way precise mapping required]. Why would these people have a problem with some new super-natural claim?

As previously noted, there's no reason to expect people who didn't believe a claim to take the effort and expense (no keyboards back then) to record that claim and to copy it in sufficient number for it to survive today, so that requirement is unreasonable.

Where does that link indicate that "the texts seem to have been embellished at one point (Paul?) and sent out to the world, hence the (somewhat) consistency among them...."?

Oh, sorry, that was from what someone wrote on this thread... Drich, page 1.

Still don't see it. Can you quote the post you're referring to, and explain your point? This part of the discussion is about as clear as mud.