Dr. Hugh Ross: Apologist or Heretic?
: Why Devote An Entire Page To A Man Revered Inside The Church? Why would I, as a Christian, devote; an entire web page to critiquing the teachings and statements of Dr. Hugh Ross? After all, we have other; "Christian" ministers, teaching utter nonsense and outright heresy and I haven't devoted; a page to them.; The "http://www.reasons.org/about/sof.html " Statement of Faith is orthodox although he does appear to; consider nature and Scripture as equal revelations which is somewhat troubling. He also claims to agree; with the statement on inerrancy by the "http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/inerrancy.html"; International Council on Biblical Inerrancy although his teachings about creation are incompatible with; such a pronouncement. It is not his day-age theory or anything associated with the age of the Earth debate; that has troubled me. So, why target the teachings of Dr. Ross and what exactly am I upset with?Unlike; the vast majority of people that are spewing nonsense and heresy in the name of Christianity Dr. Ross; appears to be getting a free ride. He seems impervious to the normal criticisms that would be levelled at; anyone making the outlandish statements that he has made concerning everything from the nature of God; to evidence for the Bible being God's word. Even Dr. William Lane Craig's recent Philosophia Christi; article which clearly documents that Ross is teaching doctrines contrary to the ESSENTIALS of the faith; calls him "EVANGELICALISM'S most important scientific apologist" (emphasis added). In Norman; Geisler's *Bakers Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics* he lists Ross along side Augustine and Aquinas; as great apologists. If he is teaching heresy (which I believe I have soundly documented) then how can; any Christian still refer to him as an apologist for the faith? For a variety of possible reasons Dr. Ross has; become widely recognized within the church with little critical review of his positions while making; increasingly absurd, false, heterodox and even heretical claims. Since these comments seem to be going; unchallenged and he continues to be embraced by most of Christianity as a spokesman for the faith I feel; that someone needed to stand firm for honesty and sound doctrine. The best outcome would be for his; repentance from these positions and statements and to use his popularity to promote truth and orthodoxy.; It is my reverent hope that such a repentance will take place but in the event that one is not forthcoming; then the body of believers needs to be forewarned about his theology, science and misleading statements; concerning a vast number of subjects. A number of years ago I first noticed some very disturbing statements; by Dr. Ross, but it seemed that I was the only person who was noticing. These statements appeared to i; nclude factual misrepresentations of events, scientific blunders, dangerous heterodox ideas and even outright; heresy.As I was trying to come to an understanding with Dr. Ross, I found a number of other people who; had gone before me. None of these people were raising all of the issues that I was, but they were raising; some of these as well as additional issues. As I followed the prescription of Scripture in resolving these; matters, I first approached Ross directly (through RTB). Unable to resolve these matters, I approached some; of the leaders within the church to approach Ross with me. I was generally dismissed by most of them, and; while some people considered my documentation of heretical statements interesting, almost no person of; notoriety within the church would stand with me and confront Ross. In frustration over the matter, I published; an open letter to Ross (after sending him a copy of that letter, without response) on my web page.Perhaps; completely independent of my protestations, some very notable Christian leaders have started taking notice of; both the heretical doctrines and absurd scientific pronouncements that Ross has been making for years. I am; hoping that by presenting this information to the public, we can put enough pressure on Ross to consider the; counsel of his peers and retract many of his outlandish statements.Please keep in mind, as you read the links; below, that some of the material is dated. In the letter from Dr. Humphreys to CRS he mentions that he and; Dr. Ross had not communicated in years. There was subsequently a number of letters exchanged with the first; Ross letter being sent in December 1997, AFTER I pointed out to the RTB staff that their 4th Qtr 1997; newsletter was claiming that Ross had had an ongoing discussion with Dr. Humphreys. The newsletter also; laimed that Ross had convened a panel of scientists who confronted Dr. Humphreys. This also was false. There; have been additional exchanges since 1997 notably the CENTJ articles in the Summer of 1998. While Ross; claims those articles (which he did not write) utterly destroyed the model of Dr. Humphreys, those Physicists; whom I know, that are sufficiently competent in Relativity Theory to evaluate the dialogue, have affirmed that; Dr. Humphreys acquitted himself and his model well.; Dr. Ross related pages. "http://homepages.msn.com/SpiritSt/billdonahue/Ross_Chart.htm" An easy to; understand chart: Some people have complained that they couldn't see the problem areas with Ross so I; created this chart. "http://homepages.msn.com/SpiritSt/billdonahue/Ross_educator.html" JUST ADDED; A; letter by a leading California Educator: Theophilus is the nom de plum for the author of this letter. "http://homepages.msn.com/SpiritSt/billdonahue/Hugh_Ross.html" My open letter to Dr. Ross: I only; published this letter after 2 years of trying to resolve these matters privately.; "http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4149.asp" CENT 13(2):52-60,1999: Other Christian scientists are; finally noticing the theological and scientific gaffs by Dr. Hugh Ross. See this article by Dr. Danny Faulkner. "http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/rossrev.htm" Review of "The Genesis Question": Glen Morton has reviewed; this book. While Glen and I would disagree on the age of the Earth some of his criticisms of Ross are exactly; the same ones that I found. "http://www.best.com/~dolphin/Ross.shtml" Another Open Letter to Ross: An; Open letter from Physicist Lambert Dolphin to Dr. Ross "http://www.bible.ca/dp-hugh-ross.htm" Speaking; Truth In Love: An article by Dr. Borton Davidheiser that discusses some of Ross' scientific gaffs; "http://www.serve.com/herrmann/ross.htm" Herrmann on Ross: Dr. Robert Herrmann discusses many of the; problems with Ross from his own unique perspective "http://www.christiananswers.net/paradise/ctb-alt.html"; A Review of "Creation And Time": A book that alleges the same type of dishonesty in scholarship that I believe; I have seen in Ross's public statements about Dr. D. Russell Humphreys "http://www.epsociety.org/journal.htm"; Philosophia Christi articles about Ross' theology: As of the creation of this page the on-line journal archives have; not posted the 1998 articles about Ross' theology but as they reach that date this link should take you to the; article. This journal includes articles by Dr. William Lane Craig, Dr. J.P. Moreland and Thomas Oden "http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/philchristi.html" Philosophia Christi: Until the Philosophia Christi; site archives are brought up to date this is an alternative site where all the related articles may be found.; "http://www.ldolphin.org/bolton.html" Bolton Davidheiser Ph.D. : A statement concerning the ministry of Dr.; Hugh Ross by Bolton Davidheiser Ph.D., Zoology "http://www.ldolphin.org/usami.html" Masami Usami: A reply; by Masami Usami to the presentation of the creation arguments by Hugh Ross; "http://members.iquest.net/~macihms/Christian/Creation/Humfresp.html" Responce From Dr. Humphreys: DR.; D. Russell Humphreys reply to my post describing Ross' statements on the Warren Duffy program on KKLA "http://www.best.com/~dolphin/russh.html" Humphreys' challenge to Ross: An early challenge from Humphreys; to Ross to debate the facts "http://homepages.msn.com/SpiritSt/billdonahue/index.html"