I knew I should have proofed this better. I meant to say JOB!! > If Lot had listened to the majority, he would have missed out on the tenfold blessings > from God.
----- Original Message ----- From: "D.J. Holland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 9:43 PM Subject: Re: [RR] New program question? > This is not intended to flame anybody, but I am expecting flames in return. > > A vote for everybody, let the majority rule? What happens if the majority > are not lined up with God? If Lot had listened to the majority, he would > have turned the messengers from God over to the men of the city. If Noah > had listened to the majority, he might never have built the ark. If Lot had > listened to the majority, he would have missed out on the tenfold blessings > from God. If David had listened to the majority, Absalom would have > overtaken the kingdom and Solomon would have never been king. The list goes > on and on and on. I'm not saying we in the field should be without say and > voice in the workings of the ministry. What I am saying is that God has > appointed leaders over us. In obedience to God, we submit to His > leadership. Not everybody agrees with that. That is not my issue, that is > between you and God. > > History is filled with examples of allowing the majority to rule and the > majority being wrong. Is that where we are to go? > > I guess "mob rules" is better than "male domination leadership"? > > I honestly don't remember the scripture chapter or verse that says to "vote > on whatthe God appointed leadership envisions and decide if it's what you > want to do and if not change the plan." Could someone please refresh my > memory on that one? > > Sorry, couldn't resist those last couple of paragraphs. I NEED SLEEP!! I > got none last night. > > Goodnight, > > DJ > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jose Rodriguez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 10:31 PM > Subject: Re: [RR] New program question? > > > > Then perhaps things need to change. Perhaps the Royal Ranger program > needs > > to be more Democratic than what we have now. This program is not the US > > Congress or Senate. STOP WITH ALL THE POLITICS! This is suppose to be a > > Christian ministry after all. A democratic vote would put to rest all of > > these controveries that have been popping up in RangerNet like the new > > program and the issue of women and girls in the Royal Ranger program. If > > all of these changes are done democratically as Marvelous suggested then > no > > one would/should complain because the "majority" has spoken. The nation > > would know that the MAJORIY of rangers agree or disagree on the subject at > > hand instead of what we have now. I think sending ballots using the > > leadership structure (National => Regional => District => Sectional => > Area > > => Outpost) would be a great idea. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Big Bear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2002 2:43 PM > > Subject: Re: [RR] New program question? > > > > > > > > > > --- Marvelous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > To all Ranger-Net Commanders, > > > > I have an idea that I want to run across you all & get all of your > > > > civil (nice) reponses as to why it wasn't tried before this new > program > > > > was instituted. > > > > > > *Here's mine.. > > > > > > The format or content of a National Program called Royal Rangers > > > was never intended to be Democratic. While a body meets yearly to > > > represent regional intrests (the NRRC), it's obvious that > > > the former Gold Track was the outcome of that "Team" effort and the > > > new program a reaction to challanges placed from outside the NRRC. > > > > > > While in the past, individuals influenced and were granted a hand > > > in developing program content, the final decision to alter the program > > > was the duty of the NRRC, National Staff reporting to: Rev.Thomas Trask. > > > > > > Seeking input was done by representation, without feeling the need to > > > fully take a Democratic vote of all participants. That said, there was > > > great effort to explain the need for change and to win your support. > > > > > > *I'm sure you may remembered an attempt to share the program development > > > with the regional roll outs by members of the National Staff with the > > > "evolveing Powerpoint" presentation. > > > > > > It's true that what resulted is a compromise position, to answer many > > > concerned "Outside" individuals over Traditional Royal Rangers > leadership, > > > and that might be seen as a turn away from Democratic RR values. > > > > > > Therefore No "formal" vote is needed. > > > > > > Your participation is desired, but if you find a hitch in your > get-a-long > > > you are free to vote with your feet. > > > > > > Hay-All Flavors,cheap! > > > -=A=- > > > > > > This might work for future ideas that anyone in > > > > Springfield comes up with that will affect all of USA Royal Rangers or > > > > nationally. Here it is: > > > > When they (whomever -pastor's comittee, national office, etc.) came > up > > > > with the idea for the new Ranger program. National Office should have > > > > presented voting ballots to each District Commander for voting for or > > > > against it the new ideas. Then each District Commander could have > sent > > > > out the ballots to each sectional Commander. Then the Sectional > > > > Commander could have sent them out to each Senior Commander in His > > > > section. Then each Senior Commander could have handed the ballots out > > > > to all of their Commanders in their outpost & they could vote. Then > all > > > > the votes could have been sent back up the chain as they came down or > > > > straight to their District Commander who would then send them into the > > > > national office. The national office could then tally the votes & go > by > > > > what the majority of the Commanders say. This way every Commander > could > > > > have their say by vote & we would all feel better as to how it was > > > > handled. We then could say we all voted & this was the results. This > > > > idea might even work with the discussion of adding girls in Rangers. > > > > Jonathan I even want to hear from you. > > > > Later, > > > > Commander Marvin > > > > Outpost 130 > > > > > > > > > > > > > ===== > > > *High MORALE is the Index of effective Leadership. > > > --------------********+********-------------------- > > > Morale raises belief of the Leader in the follower, > > > of the follower in the Leader, of each in themself, > > > and both in the .....cause! > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > Yahoo! News - Today's headlines > > > http://news.yahoo.com > > > _______ > > > > > > "Treat others the same way you want them to treat you." > > > -- Luke 6:31 (NASB95) > > > > > > "Do to others as you would have them do to you." > > > -- Luke 6:31 (NIV) > > > > > > List host: http://eBible.org/mpj/ List info: > http://RangerNet.org/faq.htm > > > > > > To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe rangernet" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > or visit http://rangernet.org/subscribe.htm > > > > _______ > > > > "Treat others the same way you want them to treat you." > > -- Luke 6:31 (NASB95) > > > > "Do to others as you would have them do to you." > > -- Luke 6:31 (NIV) > > > > List host: http://eBible.org/mpj/ List info: http://RangerNet.org/faq.htm > > > > To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe rangernet" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > or visit http://rangernet.org/subscribe.htm > > _______ > > "Treat others the same way you want them to treat you." > -- Luke 6:31 (NASB95) > > "Do to others as you would have them do to you." > -- Luke 6:31 (NIV) > > List host: http://eBible.org/mpj/ List info: http://RangerNet.org/faq.htm > > To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe rangernet" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > or visit http://rangernet.org/subscribe.htm _______ "Treat others the same way you want them to treat you." -- Luke 6:31 (NASB95) "Do to others as you would have them do to you." -- Luke 6:31 (NIV) List host: http://eBible.org/mpj/ List info: http://RangerNet.org/faq.htm To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe rangernet" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or visit http://rangernet.org/subscribe.htm
