Reddit reviews Gospel Parallels: A Comparison of the Synoptic Gospels, New Revised Standard Version

Sorry that this will sound patronizing, but how educated are you about the Bible as a historical document? I majored in religious studies with a focus on Christian origins. I know a good bit about it.

> Jesus claiming to be God IS the whole point of the new testament

This is basically true. But that's not the same as what Jesus, the historical figure, said or believed.

The Bible is inarguably a hodge-podge of different stories and accounts, many of which conflict with each other. The book of John was written much later than Matthew, Mark, Luke, or "Q" and reflects an advanced notion of Christian theology. It's no coincidence that Jesus says things in John that are much different than in the other three. The author of John wasn't somehow aware of Jesus-sayings that the other authors weren't.

> Most everything in the Gospels is proof of the fulfillment of the OT prophecy about the messiah.

Most everything in the Gospels is certainly written to be proof. The authors definitely had that goal in mind. But it doesn't mean that the actual historical events were proof.

> I don't know where you got this nonsense about later sources being less accurate, but there is simply no basis for that.

Yes, there is. I got it from my bachelor's degree (and, ya know, from common sense). I invite you to start your research here and continue with books like this and this (or even this). If you've never performed comparative study of the gospels, this is a neat resource too. (Note that the latter book doesn't even mention John, which is just that far removed from the other gospels.)

> to say Jesus never reliably claimed to be God is just insane

As wrong as you are about the historical facts, I will back off a little here: there is sufficient evidence that Jesus believed himself to be the "Son of Man," and probably even the Messiah. However the more historically reliable documents suggest that he was extremely cagey about saying this himself (Matthew 16 is a perfect example of this), whereas the less reliable documents have him declaring it quite explicitly.

All that being said, I think we left the primary point a little bit. Jesus most certainly was a moral inspiration (whether he called himself that or not), and it's that example—not literal salvation—that my mother (and I, for that matter) are inspired by.

There are three Synoptics, not four, and the gold standard is this one.