Rev. Max, you go from one extreme to the other.
You reject the claim of conservative Christians for the
inerrancy of scripture and reject things like the miracle
of the Flood, then you push an outlandish miracle like a
healing at Lourdes. I am mystified as to your purpose in
this.
Tom—

Well, Tom, my purpose is to provoke people to think.

Scripture is glorious. It is a window to God. But it is not inerrant.

The image of God in the Flood Story as a loser who goofs up, destroys his creation, and then regrets it is not consistent with the teachings of Jesus about the nature of God.

But the healing of a young girl, Marie Le Marchand, at Lourdes in 1882, is supported by considerable evidence.

The girl had advanced lupus, TB, and huge sores covering her legs.

She was “oozing blood.”

The great novelist (and atheist) Emil Zola, wanted to debunk Lourdes and healing.

Instead, he witnessed the healing of the young girl.

A doctor also stood by and followed the girl to the hospital. Her lungs were clear. The sores were gone.

She was still healthy 16 years later.

I told the story two weeks ago to push you to decide: To what extent will you accept evidence that challenges your own ideas about how life works?

Do you have to run from the evidence to maintain your theology?

My faith is rooted in evidence.

I don’t have to run.

I don’t have to pretend.

I am secure in the understanding that God works in our world. +++

Concert—tomorrow—Sat. the 14th —6:00 p.m.

And Rev. Beverly Tye preaches this Sunday.