2001 Florida College Lectures

Several have expressed disap-
pointment and serious concern
about what happened at this year’s Florida College lecture program. I share these feelings. I speak specifically about the events that were associated with the lecture given by brother Donnie Rader on the subject What God Has Joined Together: Jesus on Marriage.

The facts as I saw them. Donnie Rader was asked by the Bible Department to write for the lecture book and present to the assembly his material on the above subject. His prepared manuscript was in the hands of the Bible faculty and college administration six months before the lecture program. They had ample time to read and evaluate it and work out something with Donnie if they believed he had misrepresented anyone. They printed the material and allowed him to deliver his lecture with the documentation that is in the book. Even though they had the manuscript all this time, ten minutes before the lecture, Donnie was told, for the first time, by brother Colly Caldwell, President of Florida College, that Bob Owen was going to respond to his lecture. Colly also told Donnie that he would not be given time for a rebuttal.

In his own calm, kind, and forthright way, Donnie presented Jesus’ teaching on marriage. He then asked and discussed the following questions: To whom does it apply? Can we understand it? What does it teach? What do we do with it? Under the heading, “Can we understand it?” he said that some think the subject “lacks clarity.” In the lecture book he cited Ed Harrell and Bob Owen as examples of men making this argument. He did not mention any name in his lecture. Under “What do we do about it?” Donnie said, “Most agree that we can’t fellowship the man who is in adultery. However, we are told we can fellowship the man who teaches him that it is scriptural.” In his manuscript he then said, “see Harrell; . . . Owen; Dawson; Kimbrough.” Again, these names were not mentioned in the oral presentation.  

When Donnie finished, Colly arose, commended the lecture, and stated that the truth had been taught. He said that, since Bob Owen’s name was in the written material, he had insisted on a response. Colly also announced that brethren Harrell and Kimbrough had requested a response, but since Bob would speak, they would respond in writing, which Colly announced would be handed out at the assembly exits.

Bob began his response by looking at Donnie and saying, “You have taught the truth.” However, he took strong exception to Donnie’s listing him as one who would fellowship a person who teaches an adulterer that he stands approved before God, and that he taught that the Bible lacks clarity on the subject of divorce and remarriage. (One can access this controverted material at www.cafes.net/drader/owen.)

Consider some comments and reactions to these facts. Another person who heard Bob’s response and read the printed ones by Harrell and Kimbrough, wrote the following: “Donnie made no personal attack upon anyone, but dealt objectively with the issues. Donnie cast no aspersion on the character of anyone, but carefully cited the facts and methodically proved his points on the issues under consideration. Such cannot be said for the statements by Bob Owen, Ed Harrell, and Earl Kimbrough as you can plainly see. In their responses, these three brethren freely used pejorative terms like ‘Phariseeism,’ ‘McCarthyesque efforts,’ ‘extremists,’ ‘the council of brotherhood correctness,’ ‘clumsy efforts to creed­alize,’ ‘evil,’ seeking to ‘direct the brotherhood’ and even go so far as charging Donnie with being among the ‘liars’ of Revelation 21:8. While claiming to have been attacked, it is actually brethren Owen, Harrell, and Kimbrough who have engaged in personal attacks and aspersions in a manner not befitting honorable controversy.” 

I agree with this assessment.  If the respondents were misrepresented, all they needed to do was present what they did say on the subject from the cited documents and contrast that with what Donnie reported they said.  They did not do this. There was no need to demean Donnie, say bad things about him, and try to put him in a bad light. After all, Colly and Bob said he taught the truth! I have read the statements made by Owen, Harrell and Kimbrough that Donnie gave as documentation, and forthrightly state that, as far as I can determine, they were not misrepresented. Bible clarity on the marriage subject was questioned. Effort was made to defend fellowship with those who teach false doctrine on marriage, divorce, and remarriage. Please, brethren, deal with the issues Donnie raised. Do not blame others for misrepresenting you when they quote your exact words as documentation. If you said something you do not now believe, say so. If you did not mean what your statements indicated, tell us in language we can easily understand so we can know exactly what you do believe about Bible clarity on divorce and remarriage and about fellowship with those who teach an adulterer that he stands approved before God while he remains in his unscriptural marriage. I do believe you can state your position so men can understand.

Consider Florida College’s role in this matter. A response to a scheduled lecture, as far as I can tell, is unprecedented in the history of Florida College lectures. Several years ago, the open forum was discontinued, seemingly, because of the disagreements and debates it contained. On this occasion response to a lecture was allowed with no rebuttal permitted. This action should have been in an open forum where there would be opportunity for a give and take discussion. It was out of place in a lecture series. Brother Caldwell told Donnie about the response ten minutes before the lecture, as though it had just come up. However, three respondents had material prepared, printed, and set to be distributed. They had copies of Donnie’s material in time for several friends to encourage them to respond. I do not know how long they had access to Donnie’s lecture before the book went on sale. The whole thing, however, gives the appearance of collusion in an effort to ambush Donnie Rader. There clearly was bias in the matter by Florida College. Even their Vice-President stood at the door to pass out some of the printed responses.

If Colly had given Donnie ample notice of the response, things could have been different. Donnie had in his briefcase clear-cut quotations from these men to show he did not misrepresent what they taught. He had chosen not to name them or read the statements in hopes of focusing on the issue instead of the men involved. Ten minutes did not give him time to rearrange his lecture so as to give the quotations. In this, Donnie was mistreated by Colly. The fact is, Colly owes him a public apology.

Where does Florida College stand on some vital issues? I have been asked this question about Florida College. The question usually relates to the creation issue, marriage, divorce, and remarriage, and the question of fellowship with false teachers, liberal brethren, and even denominational people. What I see them doing reminds me of the one who was asked where he stood on an issue. He responded, “I have friends on both sides, and I stand with my friends.” This seems to be the road Florida College wants to take. “We want and have many friends, and we stand with our friends.” This is the “unity in diversity” that has been advocated and practiced for many years. Teaching that relates to matters of authorized liberties such as eating or not eating meat, and observing or not observing days, is taken and applied to doctrinal and moral matters. The position is that we can be united with those who teach diverse doctrines and overlook diverse immoral practices. This has been defended by (a) charging that brethren are inconsistent, (b) saying Romans 14 authorizes fellowship with those teaching false doctrine or doctrinal error, (c) redefining “false teacher” as one who has bad character, (d) saying we all disagree on some things, etc.  For years, many have said by their practice, “We can stand with any who will not condemn what we do.” When I was a much younger preacher, this was the road taken by Lipscomb College, Harding College, Abilene College, and several others. I did not go down that road of “unity in diversity” with them, and if Florida College goes the way they went, I will not go with Florida College.

Florida College is alienating some of its friends. There are many former students, friends, and supporters of FC who no longer feel wanted or even welcome at the lectures or other events. This is not just guess work, some have told me so. These are people who forthrightly contend for the truth on the Bible subjects already mentioned, and just as firmly stand against the “unity-in-diversity’ teaching. They hear, among other things, applause when one says, “brethren, let’s quit picking on one another.” This is a great statement when applied to eating meat or observing days, but it is doubtful that these statements are made to apply to such. I believe that statements like this are made to apply to those who condemn false doctrines and false teachers on creation; marriage, divorce and remarriage; fellowship, and a number of other subjects wherein preachers go beyond the doctrine of Christ. Back handed slaps are frequently given to those of us who call for the “old paths” and condemn those not willing to walk therein.

It seems that Florida College does not want to be closely identified with brethren who write in papers that condemn false doctrines and false teachers and clearly present the truth on every Bible passage.  If this is the path they are going down, I will not go with them.

Consider the influence of the Donnie Rader incident. What does this action of FC and their Bible department tell the young preachers who may come from the school? It might tell them not to take on any issue where there could be influential people on the other side. It might tell them that if they do they stand to be ostracized and unkindly spoken of, even though they teach the truth. It might tell them that they dare not debate any issue. Brethren, I still like the statement I have heard many times. It is that our religious forefathers tested every doctrine in the “crucible of controversy.” The fad of our day is that nothing is tested. This seems to be especially applied to the teaching of some brethren. One recently stated that this is a passing fad. My response was, “I hope so!”

It is my hope and prayer that Florida College will not go the route of the schools before them. My four children attended Florida College. Two of my grandchildren, the only two old enough to attend college, graduated from Florida College. I have five more that I would like to attend a Florida College like the one in times past. But unless there is a changed mind-set at Florida College they may not attend. I do not say this because of my influence, but because of what I have heard their parents say. Many want a school where truth on doctrinal and moral issues is held in the highest esteem; where going beyond the doctrine of Christ is condemned; where those who teach false doctrines are condemned and those who expose their teaching are honored; and where unity in diversity is not tolerated. I ask the Board and Administration of Florida College to give us such a school.
Box 858, Athens, Alabama 35611

Home Page | Top of Page | Archives Home | © Guardian of Truth Foundation