These are dogma and articles of faith, not history.

The historical Jesus is obscured behind the gospels. The gospel writers were heavily dependent on the Septuagint to structure their literary, theological narratives. The Church takes the gospels somewhat at face value, which requires quite a bit of cognitive dissonance. The furtive, apocalyptic exorcist of Mark is not the voluble, divine emissary of John. As Schweitzer famously remarked, when we go looking for the historical Jesus, we find only ourselves reflected in the quest.

<<Thus each successive epoch of theology found its own thoughts in Jesus; that was, indeed, the only way in which it could make Him live. But it was not only each epoch that found its reflection in Jesus; each individual created Him in accordance with his own character. There is no historical task which so reveals a man's true self as the writing of a Life of Jesus.>>

I await when all your pious prayer reaps the least little berry.