Re: One for Hugh Ross
Mon, 21 Sep 1998 05:26:21 EDT


In a message dated 9/19/98 you wrote:

<<Many know that I have been critical of Hugh Ross' views on anthropology.
I wanted to commend him for one thing. He wrote in his latest newsletter:

"A scientific misstatement in the science news article 'Earth Design
Update: Sulfur in the Core' (v 12:2, 1998, pp 4-5) must be corrected, and I
hope you will forgive me for the confusion and loss of credibility it
caused." ~ Hugh Ross, "Repairs," Facts & Faith, 12(1998):3, p. 7

The only problem with the above is that correcting mistakes does not cause
a loss of credibility but enhances it. If more Christians would realize
that getting the facts correct, even if it means altering one's views and
correcting what was written, we would be much further along in our efforts
to harmonize science and Christianity.

A small point. I think you have misread Hugh. He is not say that "correcting
mistakes" causes a loss of credibility. Rather he asks to be forgiven for
"the scientific misstatement in the science news article". That is what the
"it" refers to. That is what has caused the confusion and loss of

<<I applaud Hugh for his public retraction of erroneous data.>>

Agreed. Retraction of erroneous data enhances credibility.