Daughters Pt2

If anyone has ever suggested that my daughter(s) have turned out ok, I have always had to admit that I have no idea why. I have at times suggested that it's the luck of the draw (depending on the listener this sometimes doesn't go down too well). I have even wondered at times if my good fortune is related to God not trusting me with a difficult child, knowing I would screw it up.
Reading the article referred to in the previous post, maybe I have more of an inkling. If asked for advice nowadays I would probably suggest that the one important thing with daughters (I can't comment on sons due to lack of experience) is to love them.
Then love them some more.
If difficulties arise love them even more.
Love them for who they are, not what they can become.
Love who they become as they grow, and love that person more than the one they were before.
Tell them you love them, no, even better, show them you love them.
When you have an argument, stand up for your principles.
Then give in.
Show them that your relationship with them is more important than your principles.
Be yourself, not the person you think they want you to be.
Don't tell them what God is like.
Show them what God is like.
Take their advice.
Recognise their talents and let them use them in the home.
If it goes wrong, don't pretend it's all ok, but give them the space to tell you that it's gone wrong (they'll know!).
Then love them, hug them, rub their feet, pick them up from their outings at midnight, be their servant.
Don't expect anything back. Don't ever be resentful because you have expectations.
When you get something back, go over the top in appreciation because you are genuinely over the top appreciative.
Then love them - for ever.

Daughters

I have 3 daughters. I think every father or potential father should read this.

The Nature of the Church

OK, grand title, but what do I mean? I hope this will be a series of posts trying to develop thoughts that have been simmering a while.
This last weekend some friends (including members of my family) took a bunch of teenagers (mostly not church-goers) on a youth camp run by a national organisation for which I have great respect.  They were expected to attend meetings that were designed to present the gospel in a 'talk'. The talk was at the end of a one and a half hour meeting, including two sessions of 'worship', i.e. lots of singing Christian songs. Why ensure that boredom is entrenched before getting to the real point of the whole thing? This made me admit some of the following thoughts....
I begin to think that the church (as it now exists) is an alien sub-culture with a limited life. Where is the justification for owning buildings, arranging meeting after meeting, and concentrating on self-preservation? Some have recognised a social trend and are beginning to investigate others way of being church, leading to such phrases as 'emergent church', 'alt-worship', etc. I have tried to be a part of this but have neither seen nor demonstrated the commitment necessary to make it work. Mostly it leads to putting on a multi-media version of a church service, avoiding the more cringe-worthy singing and patronising lectures. An add-on, or alternative, is usually a discussion-based meeting often focussing on previously taboo subjects, or putting a new slant on traditional topics. This avoids some of the cultural problems with the traditional church but I still have to ask 'So what's the difference?'. In essence it's the same thing re-packaged, in much the same way that churches have tried 'seeker-friendly' services, but taking it a little further and meeting the cultural needs of the instigators.
I have to ask myself 'In what way am I making a real difference in this world?'. The answer is. sadly, none. In seeking a different form of church I suspect I am following a diversion. I found a tv programme outlining the story of William Booth challenging. Many others have made a difference, often with no-one noticing during their lifetime. Right now I am not. Is the answer to give up everything and go somewhere the need is acute, and any help is better than none? Should I sign up to some missionary/aid organisation? Should I get involved with some sort of community work? Maybe, but I suspect that this lies somewhere at the base of my dissatisfaction. I don't think any form of church, alternative or otherwise, will solve this one.
Maybe it's the emphasis that's wrong. Maybe we shouldn't be worrying about meetings, buildings, projects, styles of presentation, etc. Maybe Jesus had something to say about it when he spoke of sacrifice, losing one's life in order to find it, having nowhere to lay his head, not defending himself, not thinking where the next meal's coming from, preferring others, and just simply dying for love.
I've run out of steam; maybe all this is just for me, not for you or the church in general. Let's hope it goes somewhere.

Loneliness

I was struck by a comment from a friend that someone he knew was asked if he was lonely. His reply was that there was no possibility of loneliness as he knew Jesus.
Now, on the one hand, I'm very impressed by that as it speaks of a depth of faith and relationship rarely encountered these days. On the other hand I am slightly disturbed by it. I know that those imprisoned for their faith and kept in solitary confinement (Richard Wurmbrand being a classic example) often experience such a depth of relationship with God that sustains them through such trials. There is also the Biblical record of creation speaking of that relationship being inadequate in normal circumstances, hence the creation of both sexes and inevitable procreation.
Yes, I want that sort of relationship with Jesus - but I don't want to live in an isolationist society where the infirm, elderly or embarrassing are tucked away in effective solitary confinement. I also don't want to put myself out to create the sort of society I want, despite the fact that I have the feeling that I'll want that society more as the years roll on.

Titles

Just wondering if post titles help.

New template installed! I started looking at how to get e-mailed when someone left a comment and ended up changing the whole template. Easier on the eyes I think. I'll probably leave a comment just to see if the facility works properly.

Well, here we are again!
It's been very busy so no time to think, but here's a thought:
It's been repeated over the years that we sin because we're sinners, not the other way around, i.e. we sin because it's in our nature to sin. If that's the case then it's not really my fault, it's a case of an inherited fault.
Now I know this has been debated over the centuries by theologians and the like, but it's all too complicated. I want it to be simple like all the other things I've not understood until they become simple enough. I'm OK with accepting blame and the need for repentance, really I am! I know me and am quite willing to accept my tencency to sin and to accept that it's my fault. The thing that seems wrong is the thought that it might not be my fault, so is this whole original sin thing wrong? Is it possible to be in a position when I don't tend to sin (other than being dead)?
Nothing to get wound up about, doesn't affect the way I live, but sometimes I just wonder.....