3. How should we perceive Jesus Christ? As a mythical hero or a historical figure?

 

This post is a continuation of my previous two posts: the first one and the second one.

All of the canonical gospels include a person's name in their titles. It is only natural to assume that this name refers to the author of the text. This is exactly how the conviction that these texts were authored by individuals with those names developed and became established. However, this conviction reflects either a mundane or a religious perspective on the Gospel texts. It is not supported by any scientific evidence. The names may also be pen names used by one author to create a sense of historical authenticity for the events described in the texts—four witnesses recounting roughly the same story.

 It might seem that such an interpretation wouldn't make much of a difference. After all, they're just names that don't appear anywhere else in the texts! Yet the difference between such interpretations does exist, and it is a fundamental one.

 The assumption that the titles of the Gospels reflect the names of their actual authors leads to a significant issue in interpreting the Gospel texts, known as the synoptic problem. This problem arises because three of the four Gospels share many common passages, with some even matching verbatim. This indicates that the texts are interconnected, suggesting that one of the Gospels may be the original source. However, identifying such a relationship has proven to be impossible. In addition to the shared passages, the Gospels contain unique events absent from the others. Therefore, it is impossible to establish cause-and-effect relationships between the Gospels. Nevertheless, attempts have been made to solve this problem. They have continued for several centuries and continue even today. But they have not led to a solution.

 However, if the Gospels were written by a single author, the problem described above would be resolved. A single author could have quoted elements from some of his own books in others. He could also have added new scenes to each book. In this case, the discrepancies and repetitions found in the Gospels would simply reflect the literary techniques used by this unknown author. This perspective suggests that the repetitions and differences found in the Gospel texts do not pose a scientific challenge, thereby making this interpretation scientifically valid. And it immediately leads us to the crucial conclusion that all four Gospels were written not only by a single author but also at approximately the same time.

 What, then, could have been the purpose of this mysterious author?

The answer to this question must be found in the Gospels themselves. How, then, can we characterize the Gospels? Let’s try to identify the most obvious and fundamental points.

 1. The books were created as the foundation for a new religion.

2. The author incorporated a new and highly complex philosophical, ideological, and religious concept into the books.

3. The books describe supernatural events, which indicates that they are works of fiction rather than historical accounts.

4. The books describe events from the perspective of four witnesses, suggesting that the author intended to create the impression that these supernatural events were historical.

 All of the above lead us to the following conclusion:

The author aimed to create a new religion based on a new set of religious, ideological, and philosophical concepts. This religion was to be grounded in the historicity of God’s coming to earth.

 It is important to emphasize here that the aforementioned arguments are based on a secular worldview.

 The conclusion drawn is that the Gospels were originally conceived as literary and religious works, but not as historical ones. At the same time, they were crafted to create the complete illusion that religious events were historical. It is worth noting here that these works were intended for people for whom a religious worldview came naturally.

 Are there elements of historicity in the books? Yes, of course. The Gospel of Luke contains such episodes and describes historical figures. But this does not mean that the central figures of the Gospel are historical. The figure of the main character—Jesus Christ—is most likely a purely literary character and has no historical counterpart. The basis for this assertion is that there are only three events in the Gospel texts directly associated with Jesus Christ that could be interpreted as historical confirmation of the story of Jesus. These are the massacre of the infants at his birth, the trial before Pilate, and the execution of King Jesus Christ. However, history has preserved no evidence that such events actually took place.

 This analysis can be further expanded. The Gospel of Luke offers a specific chronological link that helps us identify the time period to which the gospel narrative refers. This confirms that the author aimed to create an illusion of historicity. However, considering that the author’s goal was to establish a new religion, we can draw another significant conclusion.

 The author of the Gospel texts lived long after the time period in which he set the events he described.

 This conclusion is supported by the fact that the author placed the events—intended to serve as the foundation for a religious belief—in the distant past. If these events had occurred in the author's present time, his contemporaries would likely have found it difficult to believe in their reality, and therefore, they would not have been able to accept the newly established religion.

 The considerations and conclusions presented above demonstrate the potential and power of the analytical approach described. Continuing this line of reasoning can lead to deeper and more precise conclusions about the author’s intent and the time period in which the author lived. It may even be possible to identify the author’s name. However, this requires a more in-depth analysis of the Gospel texts.

 I have undertaken such work, and the result is the recently published book "The Secret Code of the Gospel. The Earthly Story". The book reveals the author’s original design—the story whose religious reflections became the Gospel texts. As a result, I was able to identify the authentic historical figures who served as archetypes for reflection in the Gospel texts.

 Regarding the question of whether Jesus is a mythical or historical figure, the short answer is as follows:

 In Christianity, Jesus is a historical figure. However, from a nonreligious perspective, he is merely a literary character created by the author of the Gospels. He had no historical counterpart.