Proof of dangerous megalomaniac's divinity irrelevant

Bryan Patterson nails it:

There is no room in this story for regarding this Jesus as merely a good spiritual teacher. He was either a dangerous megalomaniac, a liar or what he said he was.
As Bertrand Russell points out, Jesus:
certainly thought that His second coming would occur in clouds of glory before the death of all the people who were living at that time… The early Christians did really believe it, and they did abstain from such things as planting trees in their gardens, because they did accept from Christ the belief that the second coming was imminent.
He also believed he could cast devils into a herd of pigs (Mark 5:13) and spent 40 days hallucinating in a desert ‘talking’ to Satan (Luke 4:2).

On this small collection of evidence, "liar" or “dangerous megalomaniac” look more likely. But Patterson being a Christian, believes Jesus is who he said he was. On what basis?
Jesus is a living and loving being involved in the rebirth of those who want it. In that sense, there is no need for historical proof.
Just as well there is no need for evidence. None exists.


CraigS said...

No evidence for JC as "Lord", or no evidence that he existed at all?

Australian Atheist said...

The former.

Jonathan Baker said...

Agreed that the early Christians assumed that Jesus would come again within their lifetime. But incorrect that Jesus thought this.

The temptations in the desert are much more profound that you make them out to be. They come down to the fundamental tempations we are all prone to: power, pleasure, prestige.

I think a fair minded reader would find more than "hallucination" in this fascinating encounter.