Open Letter: Creed, Council, or Expression of Concern?

Posted on August 1st, 2000 in Florida College, Open Letter, Themes, Controversy, Creation, Subject Index by Osborne, Harry
This entry is part 21 of 38 in the series, Open Letter.

It is clear that an effort is underway to characterize the Open Letter as a “creed” written by a “council” of preachers who seek to direct churches. Though it is a diversionary matter, a refutation of the charge is in order. Before proceeding to consideration of the charge, however, I would like to make a few preliminary observations.

A good brother recently wrote to me saying such had been “brought to his attention.” Several discussion lists have been sent to me where such charges have been made. An anonymous post containing unclean language made the charge to the editor of Watchman Magazine. A co-editor of one paper has made this charge. In his response to the Open Letter, which was never sent to this writer, Shane Scott makes the same charge. Brother Ferrell Jenkins has readily allowed his website to be used in spreading this charge. Yet, my young brother’s post is the first time someone has made the charge to me. The fact that Dan King and I wrote the Open Letter is well known, having been pointed out in print several times. Why do the ones charging such not address those charged? Better yet, why not seek to discuss the situation to see if agreement could be reached before making such a charge? Is this an example of the higher ethical standard to which they are calling us? Or are they exempt from the standards they seek to impose on others?

Hill Robert’s Response To Our Open Letter (King)

Posted on August 1st, 2000 in Florida College, Open Letter, Themes, Controversy, Creation, Subject Index by King Sr., Dan
This entry is part 20 of 38 in the series, Open Letter.
(Editor’s Note: This article is a review of the response Hill Roberts gave to the Open Letter. You may, for context, wish to read Roberts’ article first.)

It is comforting to note that brother Hill Roberts has finally “come out of the closet” to respond to our Open Letter. Up until now his silence has been deafening, and this is especially noteworthy since his writings and teachings are the major reason for the present controversy. However, it is sad that he has come out of hiding only momentarily. He informs us that it is true that he will not debate the issues regarding his views on Genesis 1– “sort of.” He says that he will debate the issue with those “demonstrating a spirit in accord with 1 Peter 3:15,” but “brothers who introduce themselves to me with the verbal equivalent of ‘Put ‘em up’ will be disappointed.” We will let the reader decide for himself as to the spirit of the Open Letter and that of those who composed it. With respect to attitude, though, it is clear that brother Roberts has his own problems to deal with.

The Fools Who Wrote and Signed the Letter
As brother Roberts admits in his response, the two of us have never met, and I personally have no axe to grind with him nor reason to have any ill feelings toward him whatsoever. In spite of some of his very personal insults toward us, I still do not. I have known his parents for better than 30 years and love and admire them greatly. His brother Phil has been a colleague and friend for 25 years or more. He has obviously sprung from a wonderful Christian family. But that does not remove the taint which attaches to the doctrinal positions which he himself espouses. Those of us who signed the letter are sorry that he has not seen fit openly to discuss these matters. We have no desire to misrepresent or malign brother Roberts, but a man’s public writings and teachings are certainly subject to public review, and that is primarily what we had hoped that we could accomplish. We are sorry that he has seen fit to react by calling us all fools repeatedly in his response. Perhaps brother Roberts ought to pay some heed to the words of Christ on this subject, “Whosoever shall say, ‘Thou fool,’ shall be in danger of hell fire” (Matt. 5:22).

Response by Hill Roberts to the Open Letter

Posted on August 1st, 2000 in Florida College, Open Letter, Themes, Controversy, Creation, Subject Index by Roberts, Hill
This entry is part 19 of 38 in the series, Open Letter.

Response by Hill Roberts To The Open Letter of King, et al.

– Final Version –

(Editor’s Note: Brother Daniel H. King, Sr. reviews this article in his article entitled “A Review of Hill Roberts’ Response To Our Open Letter”. After reading this article, please read brother King’s response.)

“Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Lest you also be like him.” Proverbs 26:4
Heeding good advice, ordinarily I would not respond to such a letter. Such attacks bring me no harm. However, because I am being used as a means by which to attack and attempt to bring real harm on others, I must now respond. I offer these blunt comments in hopes of exposing and defeating this weak and ungodly attack on Florida College staff and other godly men who are busy preaching the Word.

“Answer a fool as his folly deserves, Lest he be wise in his own eyes.” Proverbs 26:5

A Public Letter to Ferrell Jenkins (Mayberry)

Posted on August 1st, 2000 in Florida College, Open Letter, Themes, Controversy, Creation, Subject Index by Mayberry, Mark
This entry is part 18 of 38 in the series, Open Letter.
Friday, August 4, 2000 Watchman Readers,On Wednesday, July 12, 2000, I mailed the following letter to brother Ferrell Jenkins. Thus far, I have received no answer. In his public response to the Open Letter, brother Jenkins said that the signatories of the same who have written privately to him should not expect any sort of personal reply. “Brethren, you know that we don’t have time to engage each of you in a personal correspondence,” he said. “Don’t expect it.”

Beyond his public response to the Open Letter, entitled, “The Creation Controversy and Florida College,” available for viewing at BIBLEWORLD.COM, it appears that no further dialog will be forthcoming. On a variety of levels, this response was extremely disappointing. Instead of addressing the genuine concerns of many faithful brethren regarding current compromises on the days of creation, brother Jenkins’ reaction was both combative and evasive. It raises more questions than answers.

Response to Ferrell Jenkins (Haile)

Posted on August 1st, 2000 in Florida College, Open Letter, Themes, Controversy, Creation, Subject Index by Haile, Tim
This entry is part 17 of 38 in the series, Open Letter.
(Editor’s Note: This article is reprinted from the Gospel Anchor web site, with permission. It is a response to the article written by Ferrell Jenkins, entitled: “Connie W. Adams, Shane Scott, Tim Haile, Miracles, Truth Magazine and the CD.” The reader is encouraged to read that article in connection with this one.)

Where Does Brother Jenkins Stand?
Brother Jenkins has had several great opportunities to clear the air and tell us exactly where he stands on this issue. Instead, he is continuously shifting the issue to something that it is not. I find the course of this controversy very interesting considering the fact that my original concerns were not over brother Jenkins’ views at all! I was concerned about those of Hill Roberts and Shane Scott. Whether he intended this or not, brother Jenkins’ actions have done nothing but shift attention away from the teachings of Roberts and Scott and focused it on other things. It appears as though Jenkins has thrown himself on the proverbial grenade in an effort to spare these men. This course of action may have succeeded in drawing fire away from Roberts and Scott, but it has also weakened brother Jenkins’ own position. It has caused him to use questionable methods and arguments. It only creates confusion.

Observations on the Article by Brother Ferrell Jenkins (Reeves)

Posted on August 1st, 2000 in Florida College, Open Letter, Themes, Controversy, Creation, Subject Index by Reeves, Bill
This entry is part 16 of 38 in the series, Open Letter.

Observations on the Article by Brother Ferrell Jenkins
entitled, “Connie W. Adams, Shane Scott, Tim Haile, Miracles, Truth Magazine, and the CD”

(Editor’s Note: This article is a review of Ferrell Jenkins’ article, noted in the title. You may, for context, wish to read Jenkins’ article first. In fact, brother Reeves specifically requests that you do so, and suggests that you print out the article for comparison as you read his review.)

Much of the article is directed to the ones named above, and, of course, they can (have or will) speak for themselves. I will direct my remarks to such matters as evasive attitude, and tactics, used by brother Jenkins. His article, he says, is “about some inconsistencies, even hypocritical conduct I have observed recently”. Well, “thou art the man” (2 Sam. 12:7).

  1. Complaining about what he calls “A New Criticism” in the Open Letter signed by 67 gospel preachers, he says, “If Hill Roberts taught evolution at Florida College in Feb., 1999, I said I disagreed with it in my speech (Feb., 2000). That should clear me. I had no idea that anyone would ever think I had ever entertained any idea of the truthfulness of the theory of evolution of either the animate or the inanimate universe. There is no teacher at Florida College who believes or advocates a naturalistic origin of the universe”.

Connie W. Adams, Shane Scott, Tim Haile… (Jenkins)

Posted on August 1st, 2000 in Florida College, Open Letter, Themes, Controversy, Creation, Subject Index by Jenkins, Ferrell
This entry is part 15 of 38 in the series, Open Letter.

Connie W. Adams, Shane Scott, Tim Haile, Miracles, Truth Magazine, and the CD

(Editor’s Note: Brother Bill H. Reeves reviews this article with his article entitled, “Observations on the Article by Ferrell Jenkins entitled, ‘Connie W. Adams, Shane Scott, Tim Haile, Miracles, Truth Magazine, and the CD’”, after reading this article, please read brother Reeve’s response. Also, brother Tim Haile, who is mentioned in the title of brother Jenkin’s article, has responded.  His article is titled, Response to Ferrell Jenkins.)

Connie W. Adams and I worked together with the Brown Street church in 1967-68. It was a busy, profitable and enjoyable work. He has visited in our home many times since we moved to Florida in December, 1968. It was with disappointment that I read his article on “The Days of Creation” in Truth Magazine (July 6, 2000). The article was mostly about Florida College and Shane Scott, a member of the Biblical Studies faculty at Florida College.

A New Criticism
Connie’s article was sent to Colly Caldwell by Mike Willis, editor of Truth Magazine, in early June. I first saw it on June 9. Both Caldwell and Scott prepared replies to the article within days and had hoped they would be run in the same issue of the paper. But they were not. After waiting until July 24, Caldwell and Scott have agreed for me to post their replies at http://bibleworld.com. I trust you will read that material.

A Rejoinder of Lamenation (Osborne)

Posted on August 1st, 2000 in Florida College, Open Letter, Themes, Controversy, Creation, Subject Index by Osborne, Harry
This entry is part 14 of 38 in the series, Open Letter.
(Editor’s Note: This article is a review of Ferrell Jenkins’ article, The Creation Controversy and Florida College. You may want to read the Jenkin’s article first.)

It is difficult for this writer to find the words to adequately express the wistful thoughts, heartfelt grief and sheer astonishment with which this rejoinder is undertaken. The recent statements of brethren Ferrell Jenkins and Colly Caldwell make me wonder what happened to the men I have known, loved and respected for 25 years. They were my teachers and mentors. They were men whom I sought to imitate in the proper sense (Heb. 13:7). When I read their statements and hear the arguments being made in defense of their recent actions, I am left in utter disbelief that these words are coming from the same men so loved and admired for their steady, studious, faithful and dignified lives. My love and thanksgiving for what these men have done for me remains, but my conscience will not allow me to be silent about their present teaching nor to adopt their tone in this discussion. This rejoinder is not intended to be a point-by-point analysis of responses made to the Open Letter. Rather, it hopes to deal with common principles in a variety of responses in a thematic way. Excellent point-by-point rejoinders have been done by Tim Haile, Dan King, Maurice Barnett, Bill Reeves and others. The reader would do well to read each response and rejoinder before this article. My purpose is to make an appeal to those still willing to study, discuss and fairly examine the principles at stake in this matter. May God help us all to examine our hearts to make sure that our desire is only for truth.

The Creation Controversy and Florida College (Jenkins)

Posted on August 1st, 2000 in Florida College, Open Letter, Themes, Controversy, Creation, Subject Index by Jenkins, Ferrell
This entry is part 13 of 38 in the series, Open Letter.
(Editor’s Note: Brother Harry Osborne reviews this article in his A Rejoinder of Lamentation. After reading this article, please read Harry’s response.)

It shall be my purpose in this article to provide an event-by-event chronology of the current controversy about the Florida College Biblical Studies faculty concerning creation and evolution. Attendance at the annual lectures has been growing steadily over the past decade. In order to alleviate crowding in Hutchinson Auditorium, where we can seat more about 600 persons, we began to have classes, taught primarily by our own faculty members, in Puckett Auditorium. This facility seats 220 but we often have more than 300 with standing room only.

In the fall of 1998 a wonderful new facility, equipped for multi-media presentations, became available at Florida College. The McCarty Multimedia Auditorium seats about 100. The Biblical Studies faculty thought it would be good to provide some additional classes in this facility for the 1999 lectures, especially those that would take advantage of the equipment there.

Editorial: Honor in Controversy

This entry is part 12 of 38 in the series, Open Letter.

Controversy exists among God’s people today. This is no different than in times past, and as always is an unfortunate circumstance. Sometimes controversy erupts because men with evil motives seek to foment strife. Sometimes controversy arises out of the inevitable conflict between truth and error. Invariably there is the cry of “foul” when criticism is levied against any teaching. Sometimes the cry is valid, and sometimes it is the feeble attempt of the digressive to obfuscate, and deflect criticism of his campaign against truth. Brother Tom Roberts referred to this ungodly tactic in an article in Watchman that appeared in April of 1998. He wrote:

Page 1 of 2