*Myles Young's Departure from the UPC* - Page 8

Jekyll · #1 11-03-2007, 01:09 PM

BOOM, Dan will never admit to painting himself in a box. He relies on everyone rolling their eyes and giving up when he throws a "snow isn't white, it's green," type of statement then slips out to jump into another discussion and turn that into a puke brown mess. Why this guy still has any credibility is beyond me.

But this thread isn't about Dan.

This is about uninformed bitter folks that begrudge a man's labor and him building something out of nothing, staying true to GOD's call in his life and doing what he thinks God has directed him to do. PastorG all you are doing here is showing you have sour grapes. If you have fact, state fact otherwise you are SPECULATING and judging another man and causing the rest of the mindless here to slap you on the back for really, nothing.

And Thad, wow, you know how to do it...BTW, THAD, what is your pastor, or your brother going to do... are THEY turning in their cards?? HMMM???

BoredOutOfMyMind · #2 11-03-2007, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jekyll

BOOM, Dan will never admit to painting himself in a box. He relies on everyone rolling their eyes and giving up when he throws a "snow isn't white, it's green," type of statement then slips out to jump into another discussion and turn that into a puke brown mess. Why this guy still has any credibility is beyond me.

But this thread isn't about Dan.

This is about uninformed bitter folks that begrudge a man's labor and him building something out of nothing, staying true to GOD's call in his life and doing what he thinks God has directed him to do. PastorG all you are doing here is showing you have sour grapes. If you have fact, state fact otherwise you are SPECULATING and judging another man and causing the rest of the mindless here to slap you on the back for really, nothing.

And Thad, wow, you know how to do it...BTW, THAD, what is your pastor, or your brother going to do... are THEY turning in their cards?? HMMM???

Monkeyface, I can only take Dan's posts for what they are saying loudly.

Gen 4:7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee [shall be] his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

I doubt he has ever been in the church in Sacramento, and surely understands LITTLE about Western District politics.

Side note, NW lost by two votes. My Pastor and I considered making the trip to go and vote. I cannot say for I was not there, but had we been there, the vote may have been different....... too far for us to drive was our decision. Interesting that the vote was TWO votes away from either side. I do believe the election was to fulfill the last year of term and will come up again this year. Which indeed will be an interesting vote to say the least with So California now fully underway for 2009. (joint events for 2008)

SoCaliUPC · #3 11-03-2007, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amos

It's ok for the winner to have wanted the office, but the losers get slammed.

I don't think the "winner" really wanted the office....but it is who the ministerial body voted in.

The DS job comes with a LOT of baggage. There might be some who really want the position for whatever reasons...but I would say the large majority would rather it not be them...but humbly take the job because the ministerial body thought it would be best.

I remember a conversation taking place forums ago...when Coonskinner was elected to be Youth President of the Kansas District. Not something that I think he wanted...but one in which the ministerial body of his district felt he would be the best man for the job.

lad · #4 11-03-2007, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCaliUPC

I don't think the "winner" really wanted the office....but it is who the ministerial body voted in.

I wasn't going to say anything but....... this one got a rise out of me!!....

The "winner" DEFINITELY wanted the office and openly campaigned for it! Which has never happened in the last 40+ years in the WD - due to the fact that when Bro. Price resigned at District Conference, it was a total surprise and there was no time to "campaign". This time the DS resigned ahead of time - which allowed for promises to be made if certain people were voted in. The splitting of the District was one such promise.

SoCaliUPC · #5 11-04-2007, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lad

I wasn't going to say anything but....... this one got a rise out of me!!....

The "winner" DEFINITELY wanted the office and openly campaigned for it! Which has never happened in the last 40+ years in the WD - due to the fact that when Bro. Price resigned at District Conference, it was a total surprise and there was no time to "campaign". This time the DS resigned ahead of time - which allowed for promises to be made if certain people were voted in. The splitting of the District was one such promise.

The Southern California guys were not going to vote for Wilson. Abbey said he would support the formation and not stand in their way. HOWEVER, Mullings and Haney already gave their blessing to the formation which made everything happen in the first place. It was a meeting a few months later where Mullings resigned. The stamp of approval, from the Western District DS was already there. Abbey just said he would not do anything to change it. I can't say the same for the other.

revrandy · #6 11-03-2007, 07:14 PM

Just a note...

I feel that NW has wanted a position within the UPC but has never got there....
it may be with this new org..he will get his due...

Jekyll · #7 11-03-2007, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by revrandy

Just a note...

I feel that NW has wanted a position within the UPC but has never got there....
it may be with this new org..he will get his due...

Doubt it...is he going to be number one?? Doubt it, it will look too much like what you stated above, taking his ball and going home.

Why do you all give him this image of seeking power for the sake of power? If anything, he may have wanted a position where he could guide part of the org. back to a closer walk with God. With this new org. he doesn't have that kind of a purpose...

Pastor G · #8 11-03-2007, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jekyll

Doubt it...is he going to be number one?? Doubt it, it will look too much like what you stated above, taking his ball and going home.

Why do you all give him this image of seeking power for the sake of power? If anything, he may have wanted a position where he could guide part of the org. back to a closer walk with God. With this new org. he doesn't have that kind of a purpose...

Could it be there is something to it?

Barb · #9 11-03-2007, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pastor G

Could it be there is something to it?

Okay...'fess up...what is your obvious axe you are grinding here?! Ya been at it since this morning...inquiring minds want to know...

Pastor G · #10 11-03-2007, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barb

Okay...'fess up...what is your obvious axe you are grinding here?! Ya been at it since this morning...inquiring minds want to know...

I just got back on... I have no axe to grind at all... In fact I have been on committees with him and I think he is great at what he does... Just making an observation... Did you have a good day, Barb?