The problem of dating the synoptic gospels and its influence on the reconstruction of the image of Jesus

The article is dedicated to a critical revision of the source research within the framework of the "historical Jesus". The authors question the established chronological framework of New Testament texts in academic biblical studies, arguing that the traditional dating of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) to the middle of the first century is unfounded. A key argument is presented regarding the priority of Marcion's "Gospel of the Lord" (circa 140 AD), which is considered the primary Synoptic text, while the canonical Synoptics are viewed as later (second half of the second century) and tendentiously edited compilations. Within the Christian tradition, the authors doubt the reliability of the Synoptic Gospels, pointing to the "silence" of the apostle Paul, apostolic fathers, and early Christian authors who do not exhibit familiarity with these texts in their canonical form until the end of the second century. The authors employ both an interdisciplinary approach and a classic historical-critical method. Based on the analysis of non-biblical testimonies (Josephus, Tacitus, Mandaean literature), the conclusion is drawn regarding their extremely limited value due to their late origin and dependence on established narratives. A cardinal chronological shift in the dating of the Synoptic Gospels allows for the proposal of a new hierarchy of sources, with the Gospel of John and, especially, the Gospel of Thomas coming to the forefront. According to the authors, the Gospel of Thomas contains the most ancient layer of sayings (logia) of Jesus and can be considered a candidate for the role of the hypothetical Q source. The Synoptics, in turn, are further examined as a secondary source of questionable reliability. This revision leads to a radical rethinking of the image of Jesus: he emerges not as a messiah within the framework of Second Temple Judaism, but as an antagonist of the biblical tradition, a preacher of a different God—the Heavenly Father. Thus, the research offers a complete revision of the scientific paradigm of the "search for the historical Jesus," calling into question the established consensus regarding his Jewish context and the centrality of the Synoptic tradition.