Hidden Identity

            Dirty, crude, misshapen, the rock lay discarded on the ground. Many had picked it up, studied it, and then discarded it. Finally, still bruised from the elements, the rock was chosen by one who knew what it was really worth. Carefully, and patiently he spent time reshaping and polishing. There were some painful times for the rock. These times called for cutting, chipping and abrasiveness. Gradually, it took shape into an item of great beauty. Another had pretended to see past the dirt and roughness, but had merely used the rock for a paperweight on his way to somewhere else. The rock had yearned to become an object of great value to someone and had thought the job of paperweight might possibly be it, not realizing that there are millions of paperweights in the world and when a new one struck its owner’s fancy they discard the old. Not many people choose to spend the time and energy required to look for the gem beneath the surface. How many rocks are really valuable gems never discovered?

            We can easily overlook diamonds in the rough. Diamonds don’t come out of the ground looking like those we know to be diamonds with sparkle and expertly cut facets.  I’m sure many are passed over because they look like a dirty old rock. Diamonds are really coal submitted to extreme pressure. We would not consider wearing a coal ring, yet many show off their diamond rings with pride.

            People can appear to be like the dirty, misshapen rock , until we get to really know them.  There are times that a person is treated as if they have no value and it takes a special individual to discover the diamond within.  How many people have we stereotyped that, if we had spent the time to get to know them would have enriched our lives? Remember people too, can turn into diamonds when extreme pressure is exerted upon them. We should never use people like paperweights, using and discarding them when someone else comes along.

           

If I Could Live My Life Over

If I could live my life over. . .
     I would laugh more,
         cry more,
             love more,
                 reach out more,
                     dream more.
I would follow my dreams and passions with intensity.
I would live life with fervor,
     savoring each happiness
         learning from each sadness and regret.
I cannot begin my life again, but I can. . .
     Start with the moment at hand
          to learn from the past
              to LIVE in the present.

The End of the World As We Know It

 

May 21, 2011, is Saturday. Some say it will be the end of the world. I suppose I should panic like so many are doing, but frankly, I am a bit tired of hearing about when the end of the world is going to happen. Besides, there are others who call for the end October 21, 2011 and December 21, 2012. I find it a bit interesting that all three dates are on the 21st of the said month. Who comes up with this stuff anyway? Last week Rome was in a panic because they thought they were going to have a mega earthquake. I've lost count of the number of times in my lifetime that someone said the world would end on such and such a day, or that the Rapture would happen. In the late 60s Hal Lindsay made a killing with his books, Late Great Planet Earth and Satan is Alive and Well on Planet Earth. There were those who stood on mountains awaiting the Rapture---that didn't happen, obviously. Remember recently, the Y2K fiasco. You would think we lived in the Dark Ages when they thought the world would end during an eclipse. The Mayans have impacted our age with ending their calendar December 21, 2012. No one seems to consider that they just got tired of writing and were waiting until it got closer until they further updated their calendar. No, those doomsday people automatically assumed that if the calendar ends, so does the world. That is akin to saying that the world will end the 31st of December this year because that is when the calendar ends.

Nostradamus is a big name bandied about when talking prophecy, the problem is that no one can really understand exactly what he is talking about in those prophecies. Symbolism is a great way to go if you are a prophet, that way if the prediction doesn't pan out, you can just say the symbols were misinterpreted. I wonder what will be said when Saturday comes and goes and the world doesn't end.

I think that with all the natural disasters in the news lately, it makes people concerned that it is the beginning of the end. What with volcanoes, earthquakes, floods, and tsunamis it certainly appears that something is up. The issue I have with this end of the world talk is that it seems like people are looking for something to be afraid of. We don't need terrorism, we scare ourselves. Who gives credence to the doomsday prophet who seems to suck the gullible into their vortex? Is it really about popularity, money, or power?

Okay, let's say the world is really going to end Saturday. What can you do about it? Nothing. Think about this: What timezone is the world going to end in? Guam is a day ahead of New York. If they can set the day, why not also tell us the hour?

TS Eliot In "The Hallow Men" keeps going through my mind. You know,

This is the way the world ends

This is the way the world ends

This is the way the world ends

Not with a bang but a whimper.

Dance in the Rain

**As LeeAnn Rimes sang, "I hope you'll never fear those mountains in the distance Never settle for the path of least resistance Living might mean taking chances but they're worth taking....when you get the choice to sit it out or dance. I hope you dance."

**Because it is raining our dance need not stop, but rather we should dance harder.

**After the rain stops, we can dance in the puddles it left and enjoy the rainbow and sunshine.

**When you see a storm approaching, prepare for the storm, but always remember--eventually the storm will pass and the sun will come out again. Yes, the sun sometimes makes us see the damage the storm caused more clearly, but it also helps us to gain perspective and to plan our next step.

**Tornadoes sometimes tear through our lives--perhaps in the form of illness, death, or divorce, requiring us to assess the damage and to begin re-building. Some tornadoes do minimal damage and getting our life back together is inconvenient, but relatively easy. Other tornadoes leave us with shards and the clean-up and re-building is a "start from scratch" adventure. Yes, it is tempting to give up and quit, but what then? Quiting doesn't make it better, neither does it make the situation go away. The longer we wait to face our situation the harder it will be to fix and most likely things will have gotten worse.

**No one is exempt from the storms of life and rain is needed to make the flowers and food grow. It is how one faces and deals with the storms of life that matters.

**I plan to dance.

The Feminine Mistake

Our first mistake as women is letting others tell us what will make us fulfilled or happy. We have the tendency to wait passively for our lives to become the wonderful things we imagine that life is supposed to be, relying on others to somehow make it happen. The frightening part is that it takes tremendous effort to break out of the mold that we have lived within since birth. It is easy to believe or say we believe that we need not always seek other people's elusive approval, but exceedingly difficult to act on what we belief. It often takes more than courage--it takes something akin to dynamite. We've been told what we like, and what makes us happy so long that when asked what we really feel we have no idea. It's like we are afraid that if we are happy with something different than we've always been told, that someone will attack us and make our ideas seem unimportant, stupid or insignificant. It is easier/safer to go with what others tell us than to take the risk of being and doing what we think.

We face one of two fears.
1) Fear of not being able to accomplish anything on our own.
2)Fear of becoming too dependent.
A healthy woman creates a balance between intimacy and independence.

Realize:
1. You are responsible for your own life.
2. You are not going to please everyone.
3. Rejection won't kill you.
4. The way you treat yourself is how others will treat you.
5. Some problems can't be solved.
When you are an adult ask for opinions not permissions.

Don't confuse rejection with disappointment. Rejection can bring your life to a standstill while looking at the same situation as a disappointment only slows things down for a while.

Feeling good or bad about yourself is reflected in the ways others treat you. Think about the days you felt wonderful about your life and how people seemed to react to you. Now, think about the days you were negative and grumpy. How did people treat you then? Sometimes we have to pretend ourselves into a good mood.

Attempting to empathize with the "hostile force" allows us to deal much more productively with conflict. Don't get hung up with the negative emotional vibes of others--try to understand them and react to the situation rather than the emotion. This will allow you to think clearly--not clouded by your own emotional response.

Sunset Love

We now face these sunset years kissed by changing colors as our sun makes its way off the horizon.

I see the ring I placed on your finger so many years ago and the promises it embraced. (”In sickness and in health,…’til death do we part.”)

Watching The Notebook made us cry, and we wondered if that would be us.

Yes, we forget things sometimes, however, the day we married, and the happiness of our life together becomes more evident even as our memory of the recent past grows blurred.

We are slow with the fatigue of years, holding hands, shaking with age,

But gazing into your eyes, I see the beauty of our love traced in the lines on your face.

The rough times fade into the distance and the wonderful times rise like oil on water.

I wish you to know that my love for you has grown as the years have passed, and you are more beautiful to me now than on our wedding day.

Now, we walk hand in hand watching our sun go down, facing the fading of our day.

Like a fairytale, I see our story ending, and like the fairytale, it can be said, “And they lived happily ever after”.

Jesus and John the Baptist

Book of Mark
Gospel of Action
Written to Gentiles about 64 AD
Written by Mark, nephew of Barnabus
Mark tells Peter's story
Includes no genealogy
Key Word "Immediately"
Key Verse: Mark 10:43-45 (Char. of Greatness)
Mar 10:43 But it will not be so among you*. _But_ whoever shall be desiring to become great among you*, he will be your* servant.
Mar 10:44 "And whoever of you* is desiring to become first, he will be slave of all.
Mar 10:45 "For even the Son of Humanity did not come to be served, _but_ to serve, and to give His life [as] a ransom [or, price of release] for [or, in the place of] many."


Mark 1:1-13

Starts out "The beginning of the gospel..." It starts with the story of John the Baptist---Jesus was about 30, as was John. They were cousins. Maybe the quote of Isaiah is actually where "the ball got started to roll"
Mar 1:2 As it has been written in the prophets, "Look! _I_ am sending My messenger before Your face , who will prepare Your way before You." [Mal 3:1]
Mar 1:3 "A voice of [one] shouting in the wilderness, 'Prepare the way of [the] LORD! Be making His paths straight!'" [Isaiah 40:3]
It appears that Mark is really starting with the explanation of how Jesus ministry began.

The Gospel of Mark was written for a Gentile audience yet he quotes Jewish scripture. (Mal. 3:1 and Isa. 40:3) Mark only quotes a portion of the text in Isaiah.(Isa 40:3-6)

Isa. is referencing the custom that when the king is coming to a town all the roads are levelled and made flat before him. Major road construction. (Mal 3:1)

This refers to the tradition that Elijah (because he didn't die) would come back and be the one to formally announce the Messiah. That is why the Pharisees asked John, (John 1:21) if he was Elijah, Moses or the Messiah. In the end times two witnesses are to come Rev 11 (possibly Moses and Elijah) The Jews believed that the Messiah would come as a conquering king so it was difficult to accept Jesus because he came as a suffering servant and will at the end of time come as king. The OT talks about the Messiah as both servant and king and alot of the Messianic references mix both in the passage, making it difficult to sift out which is which. To the Jews it would seem that there were two Messiahs, not that the same Messiah would come twice in two different roles.

John was baptizing--this seemed to be common among itinerant teachers of this time. Baptism symbolized dying to the old way of doing things and being born/resurrected into beginning a new way of life. The Jews believed only God could forgive sins so this may somehow be tied to Yom Kippur which was the time Jews spent searching their lives and preparing for the yearly day God erased their sins (Rosh Hashanna) There has been some speculation that Jesus actually was born around the Feast of Succoth (Tabernacles) especially since the feast focuses on the remembrance of God being with the Children of Israel in the Wilderness. One argument for Jesus being born about then is that it was still warm enough for the shepherds to still be keeping their sheep in the fields. Remember that Jesus' other name was "Emmanuel" (God with us). If indeed Jesus had been born about this time one might also note that Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanna also happened around the same time.

Why do you think it is significant of Mark to mention John's food and clothing? Perhaps because Elijah also wore similar clothing. (2Ki 1:7-8)

Mark says EVERYONE from Jerusalem and around came out to see John the Baptist preach. I'm sure not everyone, but it probably seemed like it because of the large number of those baptized. I wonder how John's preaching affected their "after baptism" life or if they just went on as usual. The reference to John eating locusts and wild honey probably was a way of saying that he came "in the spirit of Elijah", but since Mark was writing to Gentiles how would that diet be received by them? John (Lk 1:15-16)

The fact that John would not drink is an indication that he would take the nazarite vow (like Samson) which indicated that as long as he was under the vow he would be considered a prophet. "Nazirite" means "set apart as sacred, dedicated, vowed" (Nu 6:2-8)

The vow also meant he did not cut his hair---must have looked like a wild man. Interesting that Jesus was not a Nazirite (he drank wine) yet the purpose of taking the vow was to be consecrated/dedicated to God.
I wonder what the people thought about John saying the other one who comes will baptize with the Holy Spirit? John's was a baptism of repentance---what was the baptism of the Holy Spirit?

Jesus came all the way from Nazareth to be baptized by John. Nazareth in Galilee--(Galilee is Hebrew for heathen circle). Nazareth derives from a Hebrew word meaning "shoot or sprout". Which is interesting when you look at Isa 11:1.

Isa 11:1 And there shall come forth a rod (sometimes translated shoot) out of the stem, of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots.

Or perhaps Nazareth came from Nazir meaning a separated Jew who had taken an ascetic vow of holiness (nazirite vow). It was located about 16 miles from the Sea of Galilee and was an agricultural town with no trade route therefore considered inconsequential. Remember Nathanael asking, "Can anything good come from Nazareth?" (Jn 1:46).
John said he was not worthy to even untie the shoes of the One who he was announcing. It was the lowest servant who removed the superior's shoes and washed his feet (remember the foot washing story, when Peter threw a fit?) John is saying he is lower than the lowest servant in regards to the one he is announcing.
A dove landed on Jesus after coming up out of the water when baptized. Why a dove? We use the dove as a symbol of peace--Noah sent out a dove. The Jewish rabbinic interpretation of Gen
1:2 was that the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters "like a dove" therefore, the Jews would connect the dove descending on Jesus as being the Spirit of God and of the Isa 61:1-3 anointing of the Holy Spirit.

The voice came from heaven. There was more than one time that the voice came from heaven.
The voice and baptism were public and served to establish Jesus' identity.

Jesus was sent by the Spirit into the desert. He was there 40 days, being tempted by Satan. There was a couple of other times that the number 40 comes up.
40 days and nights of rain with Noah in the ark.
40 years the Israelites spent in the wilderness.
Moses on Mt. Sinai 40 days and nights
Spies searching out the land 40 days Nu 13:25
David reigned 40 years
Solomon reigned 40 years
40 lavers (baths) made for the Temple
Elijah ate what the angel gave him then journeyed 40 days and nights to Mt. Horeb, the mountain of God
After the resurrection, Jesus was on earth for 40 days.

Comparison between the different Gospel accounts

Luke gives the info to date when John was preaching.

John the Baptist began his ministry in the "fifteenth year" of Tiberius according to the Syro-Macedonian calendar, between October 20, 27AD and October 9, 28AD. Pontius Pilate arrived in Caesarea at about that time, by the fall of 27. John was thirty years of age from about July of 26AD to July of 27AD, and he would likely have begun his ministry by the autumn of 27.

It was the custom for a Levite to begin his official ministry for the Lord when he became thirty years old. John the Baptist was a Levite, as was his father, Zacharias. He was a Nazarite (Luke 1:15), and "he lived in the desert until the day of his public appearance to Israel." (Luke 1:80) His public appearance would have been soon after he reached thirty years of age, as, "from thirty years and upward even to fifty years old" the Levites were to enter the service of the Lord (Num. 4:35).8 Josephus (Ant. VII 14:7) confirmed that the Levites were numbered "from thirty years old to fifty." John would not have delayed much past his thirtieth birthday and would have begun his ministry by the fall of 27AD.

Based on Luke's use of the Syro-Macedonian calendar it was established that John the Baptist began his ministry between October 20, 27AD and October 9, 28AD. This was the "fifteenth year of Tiberius." John began his ministry after the arrival of Pontius Pilate, by the fall of 27AD. John baptized Jesus soon thereafter, and the traditional date of January 6 is here used. This date is supported by an understanding of Luke's usage of Jesus being "about thirty years" old at that time, and the thirty years are exact by the Jewish or Syro-Macedonian calendars. The chronology will proceed using January 6, 28AD as the probable date for the baptism of Jesus. This will place the first Passover of Jesus' ministry in 28AD.

According to Josephus (Antiquitates, XVIII, iv, 3), Caiphas was appointed High-Priest of the Jews by the Roman procurator Valerius Gratus, the predecessor of Pontius Pilate, about A.D. 18 (Ant., XVIII, ii, 2), and removed from that office by the procurator Vitellius, shortly after he took charge of affairs in Palestine, A.D. 36 (Ant., XVIII, iv, 3). During this period the famous Annas, father-in-law of Caiphas (John 18:13), who had been high-priest from A.D. 6 to 15, continued to exercise a controlling influence over Jewish affairs, as he did when his own sons held the position. This explains the rather puzzling expression of Luke 3:2, epi archiereos Anna kai Kaiapha (under the high-priest Annas and Caiphas; cf. Acts 4:6). Caiphas was certainly the only official high-priest at the time St. Luke refers to, at the beginning of the public life of Christ; but Annas still had his former title and a good deal of his former authority.

What was John preaching?
Mat 3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Mat 3:3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord,make his paths straight.

Mar 1:7 And preached, saying,There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose.

Luk 3:9 -18

Joh 1:15: John 1:29-31)

If John the Baptist were to be around today doing the same things and saying the same things, how would you react? What do you think the media would have to say? Would you be likely to follow someone who ate bugs and honey, didn't cut his hair and lived out in the desert? Would you have taken him seriously or would you be one of those who tried to commit him for insanity? How do you think his message of repentance would be received in our society? What do you think the current church leaders would try to do? (Anything different than the Scribes and Pharisees?) Okay, now Jesus shows up on the scene and John baptizes him. Some people say they heard a voice and saw a bird land on him. What do you think the news headlines would be that day? Was this a case of mass hypnosis? Would you have gone out to the desert to see John? How would you determine that he really was sent from God as opposed to just a person with issues? Do you think the government might consider placing him on the list as being a potential terrorist? Really look at what he is saying---could that be taken the wrong way? Why do you think the people flocked to see John? Why were the Jews upset with him? In today's words, what was John's message? John the Baptist "prepared the way" for Jesus. Has someone done that for you, or have you done that for someone? How might you "make the rough places plain..." for someone? How might the fact that John and Jesus were cousins affect how you might react to him today? Would you let John baptize you? Think about how the press would view someone like John.

Only Matthew, Mark and Luke mention the temptation. John goes immediately into Jesus choosing his disciples. Matthew and Luke detail the temptation, whereas, Mark and John merely mention it.

John the Baptist was put in prison and Jesus took up where John left off. Simon (Peter) and Andrew were fisherman in the Sea of Galilee and seeing them, Jesus asked them to become His disciples. Why would someone drop their career to follow a rabbi around? Fishermen are not easily convinced to do something so drastic, especially if they had a family. It appears that Peter and Andrew were originally disciples of John the Baptist

Joh 1:35 The next day again John had stood and two of his disciples.
Joh 1:36 And having looked attentively at Jesus walking about, he says, "Look! The Lamb of God!"
Joh 1:37 And the two disciples heard him speaking, and they followed Jesus.
Joh 1:38 But Jesus having been turned and having beheld them following, says to them, "What do you* seek?" But they said to Him, "Rabbi (which [is], being interpreted, Teacher), where are You staying?"
Joh 1:39 He says to them, "Be coming and see." They came and saw where He stayed, and they stayed with Him that day. It was about [the] tenth hour [i.e. 4:00 p.m. Jewish time or 10:00 a.m. Roman time].
Joh 1:40 Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, was one of the two having heard from John and having followed Him.
Joh 1:41 This one finds first his own brother Simon and says to him, "We have found the Messiah!" (which is, being translated, Christ).

Since John was in prison and Peter and Andrew evidentally went back to fishing after John was put there, when Jesus, whom John had pointed out earlier as the Messiah, asked them to follow Him. They had no problem dropping everything to change their discipleship. Galilee at that time was primed for revolution and wanting the Messiah to come so badly they were eager and willing to follow the one who had the most promise.

Peter was married, James and John's father owned a fishing company.

Capernaum----home of at least 5 disciples. Located in Galilee, as was Nazareth and Bethsaida."village of Nahum" when John the Baptist was put in prison Jesus went and LIVED in Capernaum (Mt 4:12-13) Peter, Andrew, James, John and Matthew lived there also.

Bethsaida----birthplace of Peter, Andrew and Philip Bethsaida means "house of the hunt" founded 10 BC

Sea of Galilee--had several names, Sea of Tiberus, Sea of Gennesaret, Lake Kinneret 13miles long by 7miles wide. Fresh water lake shaped like a harp

Migdal--town near Capernaum may be where Mary Magdalene was from.

Location: Capernaum
When: Sabbath
Who: Jesus and disciples (they)
What: Teaching in the Synagogue
Reaction: Amazement
Activity: Teaching and casting out demons

The leader of the Synagogue usually chose a distinguished guest to do the weekly teaching. The usual teachers quoted important Rabbi's when they taught. Example: the reading of Scripture happens and then the teacher says, Rabbi _____ feels that this means...... Jesus taught with authority, which is another way of saying, He did not quote other teachers and Rabbis, but spoke as if He completely understood the Scripture.

The disciples haven't been learning with Jesus for very long.What do you think they were thinking as Jesus taught and then cast out demons?

Why might the man with the evil spirit start yelling? What might the people who heard him think about what he was saying? Jesus didn't appear to be ready to announce who He really was, perhaps because, since the Jews thought of the Messiah as a king coming to conquer, there would have been the wrong focus on His ministry. The evil spirit perhaps could not keep silent in the presence of Jesus. I'm thinking that Jesus' deity may have caused the evil spirit to be forced basically to bow in subjection to the higher authority. Why might Jesus have told the spirit to be quiet? More than once are spirits told to be quiet before being cast out. I'm thinking that if the spirit was allowed to continue with it's verbal attack, that the center of attention would have been on it, and not on the fact that Jesus cast it out. Because of Jesus teaching and casting out the spirits news traveled quickly all over Galilee.

Okay, what would have happened if a street person showed up in our church service and started screaming at the guest speaker?
They left the synagogue, obviously it as a Sabbath especially since Mark made it a point to say that people from all around came with sick and demon possessed AFTER sunset. Jesus healed Peter's mother-in-law BEFORE sunset. Matthew doesn't put this story until after Jesus had already been around Galilee healing and after the Sermon on the Mount. Luke seems to place the story in about the same place as Mark. John doesn't seem to have the story at all. Of course, if Mark is, as suspected, telling Peter's story, it seems to reason that this story would be included. After healing her, and the people bringing those in need of healing you notice that Jesus refused to allow the demons to speak because they knew who he was?

How would the demons speaking impact Jesus mission?

Book Thoughts: A DISTANT MIRROR

A DISTANT MIRROR, by Barbara Tuchmann is a compelling look at the 14th Century. It takes you beyond the major players into the "people on the ground". Granted, the major players are a big part of the narrative, but for once you get a feel for the impact on the "ordinary folks". Reading a high school textbook, you miss so much of what really happened. I, for one, did not realize that the Black Death was not a one time occurrence. Yes, it wiped out a tremendous amount of people in one year, but it came back in smaller waves over and over again.

The rulers of that era played the game of Monopoly, using their children(usually the girls) as pieces of power brokering. Giving a 6 month old girl in marriage to a 28 year old king or prince has it's share of issues. War seemed to be more of a way to gain financially or to serve as a means to attain glory than anything else. The rulers would pillage their own people to gain financially, whether by taxes or actual pillaging.

What I found most aggravating was the role the Church played. They didn't seem to REALLY care about people, just about money and power. I found also that several of the tenets of both Protestant and Catholic Church today were devised during this time period. That is not a compliment and truth be told, the politics within both the Protestant and Catholic Churches today rival those of the 14th Century.

I came away from the book both enlightened and angry. Enlightened in the sense that I felt I understood a great deal more of history. Angry because I felt lied to by the textbooks and by the church. It certainly gave me a whole new way of seeing the present and future in relation to the past. I feel better for it, even though betrayed by those who randomly, it seems, have taken the title historian. If we whitewash the past, are we helping ourselves? How is it that we seldom hear about the advances they made, instead we are led to believe that the past is bad and the future/present is good? Being in Europe, their sense of history, reflected in the refusal to destroy past in order to "bring things up to date" is refreshing. The past gives us a sense of permanence in a changing and volatile world. We need that.

DANGEROUS GAMES: Book Thoughts

Margaret MacMillan, in her book, DANGEROUS GAMES says "out loud" what those who have spent time studying history have thought for a long time. Discussing the uses and abuses of history can be a volatile subject. What country wishes to be indicted for using history to manipulate their citizens. Too many times history is used as rationale for doing things that should never have occurred. On the other hand, history can be used to help understand other nations and cultures. One of the difficulties I deal with is seeing using history as reason to be arrogant to the rest of the world. Is it really the responsibility of the U.S. to arrogantly take the position of "world policeman" when so much is not under control within its own borders? How can we attempt to force other nations to "see it our way"? What would be our reaction if things were reversed? We arrogantly assume that everyone should have a democratic government without considering their unique circumstances. It has not really been all that long since Europe has left the feudal/clan type of governing and some of Europe still operates a great deal under that umbrella. If the clan approach has difficulty getting along with each other, how do we expect them to be able to agree as a whole on a national level? If we look at Afghanistan or a good share of the Middle East, we find the clan mentality. Why can't a war be won in these areas? Because you are fighting a feudal war not a war for national democracy. These people just want to be left alone and see our attempts a "making life better" as attempts to take away what they have and are used to. A good share of these people are the equivalent of serfs and peasants, with very little education and skills. The danger in messing with their culture is to create an economic imbalance and/or collapse. Do we really have the right to tell another nation how to live?

What happens when a nation says, "We owned a certain chunk of land in 1088 B.C. and we want it back since we had it before the current owners."? Do we take the land from one and give it to another? What if Spain wanted California back? Or the American Indians the U.S.? Haven't we done that in past cases? Why do you think Palestine is so uncomfortable with Israel? It seems that just like those who have no children, feel themselves expert at raising them, it is easier to tell someone else how to do things than to have someone else tell us those things.

I agree that history should serve the function of preventing repeats of negative outcomes, but if it isn't used judiciously, it serves to not just repeat, it is used to rationalize stupidity. I'm sure that it would not be "politically correct" to admit that the real reason we went to war is to stimulate our own economy,or because we have a vested interest, but it would sometimes be the truth. The United States brags that it has never started a war, but that is subject to interpretation, depending on the definition they used when beginning the engagement. Besides, sometimes "poking a sleeping snake" enough causes it to strike sooner or later. Granted, some of the governments of other nations are not "up to our standards", it is not our job to mess in their lives. We preach human rights and such to others, but have problems at home. Perhaps the best option would be to "take the log out of our eye", so we can see to" remove to speck of dust" in another nation's eye.