Marriage?

Why aren't people getting married? Lots of reasons: of course our own flesh, our sin nature, is forefront - it always destroys when it is allowed to reign. When the flesh rules, Jesus is not glorified. So from that perspective - our own flesh prevents us from marrying.

But can we think about how another might be contributing and working tirelessy to prevent marriage?

Satan hates men, and he doesn't want them to be men.

Satan hates women, and he doesn't want them to be women.

If men and women, are, well, men and women, they are fulfilling their God-given destinies and being who Jesus created them to be - giving glory to God. This is a threat to Satan's kingdom.

Therefore his tactic is to spread lies and cause confusion and break down what we are called to be as respective men and women. This adds a lot of insecurity and confusion about who we're supposed to be, which just in turn makes the search for a spouse all the more complicated, as we hardly know which way is up, let alone how to love another.

We all have heard the complaint that men haven't been raised by fathers, that adolescence seems perpetual, that people too selfishly value the single life.

But, ultimately, I think it all points to this: Satan hates families. Not only is he in the business of trying to destroy them; he is in the business of making sure they aren't created in the first place. Establishing a family, when it is founded on a desire to glorify Jesus, is a part of establishing God's Kingdom. Do you think Satan would sit passively by and allow that? Do you think he would not try to stop it?

I think not.

A Thot That Changes What One Focuses on in Life

The important question, I'm seeing, is not so much

"Where am I supposed to be?"

but

"Who am I supposed to be?"


Wherever I am, I am supposed to be who Jesus calls me to be.

In Defence of Raw Milk - Part the First

The August 3rd raids at a whole food co-op in California and illegal arrest of its owner and a worker came to my attention today. That and the also illegal arrest of a woman who owns a goat farm. Their misdemeanors? Daring to supply people with raw milk.

The spokeswoman for the FDA, whom I would like to give a name but I will somehow restrain myself, makes this idiotic statement: “Our biggest concern is really with children, because pathogens that can be in raw milk can be extremely dangerous... we've seen people wind up as paraplegics.”

Reaaallly? Since you have no support for your illegal actions, pull the "it's all for the children's sake" card, to divert attention from the real issue at the heart, oh, and throw out unsourced scary claims too - I guess the first thing that came to her mind to use as a scary example was paraplygia. And notice her careful wording "pathogens CAN be in raw milk..." (While, ironically, she doesn't mention that pathogens are ALWAYS in commercially produced milk - that's why they have to pastuerize it, to kill the millions of pathogens swarming about in it, since it was produced improperly.)

All to cover the fact that this is all about government power.

And fear that the powerful dairy industry will lose support if too many people start taking charge of their own health. Oddly enough, another article in the LA Times (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-milk-raid-20110804,0,7791693.story) brought up this unholy alliance between the government and the dairy industry: "Raw milk, in particular, has drawn regulatory scrutiny, largely because the politically powerful dairy industry has pressed the government to act." Hmm - if even LA Times isn't hiding that fact, perhaps it's something worth looking further into, no?

"Government regulators contend such products can be dangerous; there is scientific evidence linking disease outbreaks to raw milk. The milk can transmit bacteria, which can result in diarrhea, dangerously high fevers and in some cases death."

Oooh, scary stuff. DEATH. That's why all the health nuts who've been dowsing this toxic raw milk have been dropping dead left and right. That's why people in this country are dying of heart attacks and cancer at alarming rates - probably somehow consumed some raw milk somewhere, forced on them.

I could turn this into a rant on the evils of a government that's far too big for anyone's benefit except its own, or a raillery against the FDA, which more closely resembles the Mob than anything else and shouldn't exist anyway. However, I hope that thinking people everywhere recognize that the government has no business and no right to dictate what consumers choose to consume, regardless what personal views on what is safe be. What food I eat is my personal choice - it's my body, and I take full responsibility for all consequences of my food. Terribly radical, isn't it?

Rather, I'd like to defend raw milk.