August 22, 2017

Postscript In The 2002 Florida College Lecture Book

Donnie V. Rader

Colly Caldwell, President of Florida College, sent me a letter (12-18-01) stating that the following postscript would appear in the 2002 FC lecture book. It is followed by a letter I sent to brother Caldwell. The letter and the links below it serve as an adequate response to the postscript FC is publishing.

Postscript to the 2001 Lectures

In the 2001 Florida College Annual Lectures book entitled Jesus for a New Millennium, citations appeared on pages 181 and 186 which were employed to document convictions attributed to several individuals. Three of those men (Ed Harrell, Earl Kimbrough, and Bob Owen) have disavowed holding the views ascribed to them. Interested readers are encouraged to examine all written material on this matter and, if possible, to communicate with the persons involved before making final judgments. The college does not wish to publish any misrepresentation.

My Letter to Colly Caldwell

January 2, 2002
Mr. C. G. "Colly" Caldwell
Florida College
119 N. Glen Arven Avenue
Temple Terrace, FL 33617

Dear Colly,

I find it most interesting that you have added the postscript about my lecture in the 2002 lecture book. First, like the notification about Bob Owen's response in February, it comes quite late. I know enough about printing books and magazines to know that the book has already gone to press if it is to be ready by the lectures. Your notice is too late for me to have any suggestion or response in the lecture book. You also know that this notice comes too late for us to have anything in Truth Magazine by the time the lecture book is printed. I hardly think this decision was made this late. I'm sure you remember that Mike gave you space to respond to what we published in the Magazine. Also, you will remember that I offered you space on our web page (www.truthmagazine.com) in my letter to you of March 1, 2001.

Secondly, since you mention that this is in the "interest of fairness", I wonder why you didn't mention the web page or Truth Magazine where the documentation of my statements was thoroughly discussed. (By the way, to date, none of the three men have said a word about what we published on the web page or in the Magazine.) You publicly mentioned (following my lecture) that these three men had responses. Why not mention in the book that I have not only my comments but all three of their responses on our web site?

Too, since this is being published about my lecture and I didn't have a response in the book, will you let me hand out a response at the lectures and announce it for me as you did for those three men? This would be in the "interest of fairness"!

While we are talking about fairness, I remind you that the objection is to two paragraphs in my printed lecture. You have allowed (1) An oral response by Bob Owen, (2) Three printed responses to be announced and handed out by the assistance of FC personnel, and (3) now a postscript in the 2002 book. You did not allow me to respond to brother Owen. I have a hard time calling that "fair".

I'm puzzled as to why this situation demands all the responses and a postscript, when nothing else in the history of FC has demanded that. I find it hard to accept that my two paragraphs are more dangerous than anything else that has ever been said in a lecture or published in a lecture book. Charles Holt's lecture didn't get this kind of treatment. Hill Robert's CD (handed out at FC) that said that the Big Bang is "the Bible believer's friend" didn't get a rebuttal or postscript either - just to give two of several examples that could be given. Surely you would agree that both of these examples misrepresented the truth taught in God's word. Yet, no effort to respond or add a postscript. One of those was under your watch.

Why doesn't fairness demand some postscript to Melvin Curry's treatment of Dan King in the class at Puckett last year for those who will scrutinize the lecture classes in the future?

Third, the last sentence of your postscript leaves the impression that you think I misrepresented the three men named. Would you please tell me if you think I did misrepresent them? If so, would you help by setting the record straight? If you think I didn't misrepresent them, why not expose their error rather than publishing a postscript that leaves it hanging in limbo?

I will not lengthen this letter by citing all the documentation supporting what I said about Bob Owen, Ed Harrell and Earl Kimbrough in the lecture book last year. I answered their responses on Tuthmagazine.com and in Truth Magazine (June 7, 2001 issue). None of the men have attempted to answer what I have written. None have requested space to respond. If they are so concerned about being misrepresented, where are their efforts to show that we have misunderstood them? I have shown from their own words what they have said. If they have changed their views, that is a different matter. If that is the case, where is their retraction of what they have said before?

Fourth, you asked about the note (apology). I published it on our web site and it has been there since June 19, 2001.

I have enclosed four articles that are on www.truthmagazine.com that are my responses to the three men you mention in the postscript. I document in each of these that these men taught the very things I charged them with in the lecture book.

In the interest of truth,

Donnie V. Rader


Tom O'Neal's Letter To Colly Caldwell Concerning the 2002 Postscript

Should We Identify the Teacher? - Harry Osborne
(Article source could not be located at this time)

The Lecture And Responses To Owen, Harrell, and Kimbrough

Share