798068_justice.jpgOne of the hardest things about being on the conservative/traditional side of a Christian theological debate is dealing with statements like this:

Rather, I see the grand statements about Jesus – that he is the Son of God, the Light of the World, and so forth – as the testimony of the early Christian movement. These are neither objectively true statements about Jesus nor, for example in this season, about his conception and birth. To speak of him as the Son of God does not mean that he was conceived by God and had no biological human father. Rather, this is the post-Easter conviction of his followers.

In this paragraph Marcus Borg, of the Jesus Seminar, states these things as fact: Jesus did not say he was the Son of God or the Light of the World and the statements about Jesus’ divinity are not true. He states this as fact and it’s accepted as fact by many. The problem? It can’t be substantiated.

TMatt at GetReligion has posted a criticism of a recent interview with V. Gene Robinson called Who can argue with the gay bishop? Here’s the lede:

One of the greatest challenges that journalists face, in my humble opinion, is knowing how to handle a strong, newsworthy statement of fact by a person of authority that simply cannot be verified as accurate.

That’s the big question. When someone states as fact something and has little or no evidence to support it, they shouldn’t have a leg to stand on. But they often find one with those who already agree or who are eager to be convinced.

Related: The God Who’s Always Known Me, And Then There Were Three...