“Why – indeed – does my back hurt so much?”  See my answer below…

*   *   *   *

Now about that “pain in the back.”  Unfortunately,  I’m not speaking metaphorically.

I actually did “throw out my back,” back on Thursday, March 2.  That was only three days after I did my last post, The “Overlooked Apostle,” Ruth and Mardi Gras.  (Which featured the image at left, of revelers in New Orleans “showing skin for beads;” of which I am speaking metaphorically.)  And the reason that that was the last post I did is because – ever since then – I’ve been unable to sit at my “laptop” desk at home for more than a few minutes at a time.

As noted in September 2016,* for next September – 2017 – “my brother and I plan to hike the Camino de Santiago, mostly in Spain.”  As part of my training for that upcoming event, I tried a type of “forced march.”  (Also known as a “loaded march.”)  Briefly, a forced march involves alternating periods of walking and running – or jogging for older folk – but with increased resistance provided by a heavy pack.

In my case, on the Camino itself I hope to maintain a pace of 20 minutes per mile, with about 20 pounds of pack weight.  So for training purposes, I started experimenting with cycles of one minute – 85 steps – of jogging, followed by a number of minutes walking.

All the while wearing a 22-pound weight vest.  (Like that at right.)

I started out with one minute of jogging followed by six minutes of walking.  But I also wanted to be time-efficient, so I kept increasing the pace, by decreasing the number of walking minutes.  Finally, on March 2, I tried a four-minute cycle:  One minute of jogging and three minutes of walking.  To make a long story short, I overextended.

The problem – I figured out later – was that the weight vest was a bit too loose, so that my back got a constant pounding.  (Much in the nature of a series of kidney punches, as I also figured out later.)  There were warning signs, including the fact that it hurt to breathe during those minutes I was jogging.  Unfortunately, I succumbed to the temptation to “Walk it off, Nancy!”

Bad move.

Which is another way of saying that I’ve been paying for it ever since.

Which is also a problem, because Lent started back on March 1, and Lent is a key time in the church calendar and for this blog.  (For reasons including that it leads to the climax of Easter.)  So for your consideration – and as I type these words through my pain – I offer up last year’s On Ash Wednesday and Lent – 2016.  Also, from 2015, Ash Wednesday and the Season of Lent:

According to the canonical gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke, Jesus Christ spent 40 days fasting in the desert, where he endured temptation by Satan.  Lent originated as a mirroring of this, fasting 40 days as preparation for Easter.

See also Wikipedia, which noted that Lent is “devoted to ‘prayer, penance, repentance of sins, almsgiving, atonement and self-denial.'”  And if you’re interested in even more history on Ash Wednesday see The History and Meaning of Ash Wednesday.

That site noted the “pouring of ashes on one’s body” as an “outer manifestation of inner repentance” is an ancient practice.  The earliest mention seems to have come at the end of the Book of Job, “older than any other book of the Bible.”  In Job 42:6, after he is rebuked by God, Job says, “I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes.”

And incidentally, there are actually 46 days between Ash Wednesday and Easter Sunday.  That’s because Sundays don’t count in the calculation.  Sundays in Lent are essentially “days off,” when you can still enjoy whatever it is that you’ve given up for Lent.  (A fact overlooked by the writer/producers of 40 Days and 40 Nights – as shown at left – a “2002 romantic comedy film” which showed the main character “during a period of abstinence from any sexual contact for the duration of Lent.”  As noted, the main character could have “taken Sundays off.”)

But we digress.

One important point is that for many people, the whole purpose of the Season of Lent is to “draw themselves near to God.”  For example, My Lenten meditation for last year involved trying to figure out “just when, where and how Moses came to write the first five books of the Bible. (The Torah.)”  And one thing I figured out from that Lenten meditation was that in writing the first five books of the Bible, Moses had to really dumb it down:

Moses was addressing an audience of the largely “unwashed.”  That is, illiterate men and women who had been trained since birth to be “mindless, docile slaves…”  Suppose Moses had mentioned dinosaurs in his writings.  Or how “we” revolve around that “big bright thing in the sky.”  The result would have been similar to what nearly happened [in] Exodus 17:4, “Moses cried out to the LORD, ‘What should I do with these people?  They are ready to stone me!’”  [For the full story see Exodus 17:1-7.]

See also On Moses getting stoned, which included the image below.  That post included this observation:  That in plain words, “Moses was forced by circumstance ‘to use language and concepts that his ‘relatively-pea-brained contemporary audience’ could understand.’”

Meanwhile I have my own thorn in the flesh, as part of this year’s Lenten discipline…

*   *   *   *

One time when Moses almost got stoned to death…

*   *   *   *

The upper image is courtesy of Back-Painemdocs.net.  Although the article concerned pediatric back pain – such pain suffered by “infants, children, and adolescents” – it did note that the “incidence of back pain increases with age.”  Also re:  “Threw out my back.”  See also Throw Out Your Back? 8 Tips to Help You Recover, which includes steps I wished I’d taken three weeks ago. 

“Note” also that an asterisk in the main text indicates a statement supported by a reference detailed further in this “notes” section.  Thus as to “As noted in September 2016,” the reference (*) is to the post “Starting back with a bang.”  It told of the “almost six weeks” – last summer – that my brother and I spent “hiking the Chilkoot Trail – ‘meanest 33 miles in history‘ – and canoeing 440 miles on the ‘mighty Yukon River.’”  I ended that post by noting I would “talk more about that [projected journey] – and pilgrimages in general – in St. James, Steinbeck, and sluts.”

The weight-vest image is courtesy of Amazon.com: weighted vest.

Re:  “Forced march.”  See Loaded march – Wikipedia, which noted that in the U.S. Army, a forced march for training purposes means covering 12 miles in three hours, while carrying 70 pounds including pack.  (Meaning four miles per hour, whereas I was considering an average of three miles per hour on the Camino, carrying no more than 20 pounds, or 10% of my body weight.)  Also, in the French Foreign Legion, a forced march meant covering five miles in 40 minutes, while carrying a 26-pound pack.  After describing other, longer types, Wikipedia noted:

Troublemakers are made to place extra rocks in their backpacks for the duration of the marches.  Further in the training of a “Caporal” there is a 100 km march which must be completed in 24 hours.

Re:  “Nanc[y].”  See also Tough it out – Idioms by The Free Dictionary.

The lower image is courtesy of Stoning of Moses, Joshua and Caleb | Byzantine | The Metroplitan Museum of Art.  (It’s a mosaic from the 5th century.)  See also Stoning – Wikipedia, which includes another painting of the incident. The caption to that painting, under Punishment of the Rebels:  “The Punishment of Korah and the Stoning of Moses and Aaron (1480–1482), by Sandro Botticelli, Sistine Chapel, Rome.”  See also Heresy – Wikipedia.

The “stoning” article said this of the “Korah” painting:

The painting … tells of a rebellion by the Hebrews against Moses and Aaron.  On the right the rebels attempt to stone Moses after becoming disenchanted by their trials on their emigration from Egypt.  Joshua has placed himself between the rebels and Moses, protecting him from the stoning…

Which raises anew the question:  “What would those backward, ignorant, sons-of-the-desert have done to Moses if he’d told them the truth about that ‘big bright round thing in the sky?’”

A scene from the 1978 film “Same Time, Next Year,” which suggested the title of this blogpost…

*   *   *   *

I haven’t had much time to post anything lately, as explained below.

So today – Thursday, December 29 – I present “Same time, last year.”

That’s  an allusion to “Same Time, Next Year,” the 1978 American romantic comedy-drama film starring Alan Alda and Ellen Burstyn. (And featuring the theatrical release poster at left.)

 But getting back to:  “It’s been a while since I’ve posted anything.”

In fact it’s been since December 6, when I posted On the REAL “Jolly Ol’ Saint Nick.”  But I have a good excuse:  I had to go to a funeral.

My aunt died on December 7.  She was a mere 80 years old, and so still fairly young by today’s standards.  (Especially as I myself get closer to that age.)  But she had a host of health problems, and so it wasn’t really surprising to get a text from my sister-in-law on December 3.  It said Joan was in the ICU, “critical but stable.”  But unfortunately she went downhill from there.  So I had to “attend another stinkin’ funeral!”  (As we say in our family, having gone through too many lately.)

Then – less than a week after returning home from the funeral – my “mission” was to turn around and head back north again, this time to Greater Cincinnati and Cleveland.  (A trip that was basically a reprise of the one taken in December 2014, detailed in “Another brick in the wall” and featuring an image of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, as seen in the notes…)

Which is why the title of this post is “Same time last year…”

Last year at this time I posted Develop your talents with Bible study, which “continues the theme of Bible study to open your mind and develop your talents.”  (And which included the image at right, about certain “moral[s] of the story” in the manner of Aesop and his morality tales.)

It included a pretty good summary of the main theme of this blog:  To help you – and me – get a better feel for communicating with the Force that Created the Universe.

It also included a reference to Matthew 25:14-30, about the Parable of the talents.

That parable was about three servants, each of whom were given some “talents.”  Taken literally, a talent was worth 50 or 60 shekels, and “so was a good chunk of change.”  But viewed metaphorically, it can also refer to a “special often athletic, creative, or artistic aptitude.”  Which is something we all have, to one degree or another.

So anyway, one servant got ten talents, and basically doubled his master’s investment.  The same thing happened with the servant given five talents.  But the third servant did nothing:  “So what the master got back on his investment was nothing more than the original talent he’d given out.”  Which led to the moral of the story that Jesus seemed to make:  That you can’t be a “good and faithful servant” unless you give back more to God than what He originally gave to you.  And that you can’t do that by being too focused on “avoiding sin:”

[W]hile it certainly is important to not make really stupid mistakes – which tend to have really bad consequences – that’s not the main job of a Christian.  The main job of a Christian is to “develop his talents[,” which] means a real Christian is bound to make mistakes.

Then too, once you realize that all real Christians make mistakes – if they’re really developing their talents – you’ll be that much less likely to develop the “holier than thou” complex that afflicts so many who call themselves Christian.  (Which is the kind of thing that led Paul to say “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.”)

On that note see Sin and cybernetics:  “Maybe the concepts of sin, repentance and confession are simply tools to help us realize the purpose Jesus had for us, to wit:  to ‘live life in all its abundance.’”  (See John 10:10; the second part.)  Put another way, maybe “sin” is not so much to make people feel guilty – as some Christians say – but rather as a means of self-correction, so that we can better “hit the target…”

Which brings us back to the Parable of the talents, and what it means.  As  Wikipedia noted:

It is clear that the master sought some profit from the servants’ oversight.  A gain indicated faithfulness on the part of the servants.  The master rewards his servants according to how each has handled his stewardship.  He judges two servants as having been “faithful” and gives them a positive reward.  To the single unfaithful servant who “played it safe,” a negative compensation is given.

And speaking of the hazards of a Christian “playing it safe” – focusing too much on sin, and especially that of other people – that’s pretty much what I said in Singing a NEW song to  God: “How can we do greater works than Jesus if we interpret the Bible in a cramped, narrow, strict and/or limiting manner?”  (And for that matter, why does the Bible so often tell us to “sing to the Lord a new song?”   See Isaiah 42:10 and Psalms 96:1, 98:1, and 144:9.)

So here’s a New Year’s wish for 2017:  Let’s all work hard to avoid being boot-camp Christians.  Let’s all work hard, so that this “same time next year” – December 29, 2017 – we can say:

Boy, we sure developed our talents!!

*   *   *   *

*   *   *   *

The upper image is courtesy of Same Time, Next Year (1978) – IMDb.  Photo  6 of 13, with the caption:  “Alan Alda and Ellen Burstyn in Same Time, Next Year … by Archive Photos/Getty Images – © 2012.”

The post  Develop your talents with Bible study included the image at left, of Daniel in the lions’ den.  See also Daniel and the Lions Den – Hebrew Bible and Art.  The painting itself is by Henry Ossawa Tanner (1859-1937), “the first African-American painter to gain international acclaim.  He moved to Paris in 1891 to study, and decided to stay there, being readily accepted in French artistic circles.   His painting entitled Daniel in the Lions’ Den was accepted into the 1896 Salon.”  The painting itself “uses light to symbolize God’s presence.  It is simple and there is not a lot of detail but it gets the point across.”  See also Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Re: Morality plays – noted here as “morality tales.”  See Wikipedia, referring to the…

…genre of Medieval and early Tudor theatrical entertainment.  In their own time, these plays were known as interludes, a broader term given to dramas with or without a moral.  Morality plays are a type of allegory in which the protagonist is met by personifications of various moral attributes who try to prompt him to choose a Godly life over one of evil.  The plays were most popular in Europe during the 15th and 16th centuries.

See also Morality tale … by The Free Dictionary, and/or What is a moral tale? | Reference.com:  “a type of story, popular during the 15th and 16th centuries, that uses allegory to portray the struggle between good and evil, often culminating in a lesson.” 

Re:  The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, “as seen in the notes.”  The “Hall” is shown at left, and in “Another brick in the wall.”

Re: “God’s name blasphemed…” See Romans 2:24.

The lower image is courtesy of  Parable of the talents – Wikipedia, with the caption:  “The parable of the talents, depicted in a 1712 woodcut.  The lazy servant searches for his buried talent, while the two other servants present their earnings to their master.”

Men of the U.S. 1st Infantry Division wade “into the jaws of death,” on D-Day, 72 years ago…

*   *   *   *

As of today – June 6, 2016 – it’s been 72 years since the Normandy landings.  (Otherwise known as “D-Day.”)  See 72nd Anniversary 2016 Events #DDay72, which noted celebrations in France:

World leaders and other dignitaries flew into Normandy to pay tribute to the real VIPs – the veterans themselves – whilst the global media descended on the region in huge numbers as they do every five years.

That article was affiliated with “the UK’s only museum” dedicated to the D-Day Landings,” near the “Southsea Castle in Portsmouth,” England.  It included the picture at right, of last year’s “Canopies Over Normandy (#DDay71).”  In that “jump:”

British airborne veteran Jock Hutton (89) and American veteran Jim “Pee Wee” Martin (93) both returned to the skies above Normandy.  At different ends of the invasion area, both veterans bravely made tandem parachute jumps into the countryside into which they dropped 70 years before.

Closer to home, see D-Day in the United States – Time and Date.  That site noted that throughout America, museums and war memorials “host exhibitions featuring photos and film as a tribute to soldiers who were part of the Normandy landings.  D-Day memorials and ceremonies are also held to remember these soldiers.”  The article also noted that the invasion of Normandy was “one of history’s most significant military attacks.”

I first wrote about the commemoration – and “covenant renewal” – in On D-Day and confession, in 2014.  That post compared the kind of “de-briefing” that American fliers got – after their missions – with the concepts of “sin” and “repentance.”  But the goal back then was not to make people feel guilty.  (As some seem to imply.)  Instead they were and are “tools to help us get closer to the target ‘next time out,’ even if we know we can never become ‘perfect.'”

Then came On the DORs for June 6, 2015.  (Which included the image at left.)  That post noted that June 6, 2015 was a “red letter day, and not just because it’s been 71 years since the best-known D-Day.”  And from the Daily Office Readings for that day, I came up with the idea that those 40 years of wandering in the wilderness were a kind of “boot camp.”

(Of the kind necessary for the armed forces to succeed in their mission, 72 years ago…)

That idea was based on Deuteronomy 29, which was both a commemoration – like our remembering D-Day – and a “renewal of the covenant.”

Which by the way, seems to be another function of such celebrations of such long-ago events.

We “renew the covenant” that led thousands upon thousands of perfectly sane men and women to risk their lives for a cause they believed in.  And in that effort, those people who fought those battles 72 years ago succeeded largely because they weren’t “rigid.”

Put another way, this is a day to remember that “independent judgment” – not rigid obedience to a pre-formed set of “rules” – is the key to success in life, and especially the spiritual life:

During World War II, German generals often complained that U.S. forces were unpredictable…  After the Normandy invasion in 1944, American troops found that their movements were constrained by the thick hedgerows…   In response, “Army soldiers invented a mechanism on the fly that they welded onto the front of a tank to cut through hedgerows…”   American troops are famous for this kind of individual initiative.  It’s a point of pride among officers that the American way of war emphasizes independent judgment in the fog and friction of battle, rather than obedience and rules.  (E.A.)

Which is precisely the kind of Bible study I believe in.  And that in turn is “just another way of saying that by reading the Bible with an open mind, you’ll be on your way to the creative judgment that overcomes ‘the fog and friction’ of everyday life.”

On a somewhat related subject, this upcoming June 11th will celebrate St. Barnabus.  For more on that, see On St. Barnabus’ Day, 2015.  That post spoke of Barnabus, the apostle who was open-minded enough to welcome Paul, formerly an enemy of the early Church.

if it hadn’t been for Barnabas and his willingness to give Paul a second chance – a second chance for the formerly zealous persecutor of the early Church – he might never have become Christianity’s most important early convert, if not the “Founder of Christianity.”

“So we might just call Barnabas ‘the Apostle of Second Chances.’”

 If it wasn’t for Barnabus, Paul’s experience “might have gone for naught…”

*   *   *   *

 The upper image is courtesy of Normandy landings – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.  The caption: “Men of the 16th Infantry Regiment, U.S. 1st Infantry Division wade ashore on Omaha Beach on the morning of 6 June 1944.”  Clicking on the picture in the Wikipedia article will lead to the attribution: “File: Into the Jaws of Death 23-0455M edit.jpg.”

The lower image is courtesy of Conversion of Paul the Apostle – Wikipedia.  The caption:  “The Conversion of Saint Paul, a 1600 painting by the Italian artist Caravaggio.”  See also What happened on the road to Damascus?  That site noted:  “The events that happened on the road to Damascus relate not only to the apostle Paul, whose dramatic conversion occurred there, but they also provide a clear picture of the conversion of all people.”  (E.A.)

“Moses doesn’t like this.  Moses doesn’t like this one bit…*“

*   *   *   *

Last (Holy) Saturday night, I stayed home and watched part of The Ten Commandments.  (Noted further below.) That’s where Moses – as seen in the image above – comes in. And by the way, the “quote” is pure illeism:  “the tendency in some individuals to refer to themselves in the third person.”  That’s where the imaginary quote – “Moses doesn’t like this. Moses doesn’t like this one bit“ – comes in.  (Moses wrote the First Five Books of the Bible in the third person.)

There’s more on that later, but first a note:  Many churches this year will celebrate the Annunciation on April 4, instead of the usual March 25.  (See e.g. The Lectionary Page.)  That is:

The Annunciation would normally fall on Friday, March 25, 2016.  That day, however, is Good Friday, and Annunciation is never celebrated during Holy Week.  It is transferred, therefore, to Monday, April 4, 2016, the first open day after Easter Sunday.

See also An Annunciation-Good Friday anamoly.  Then there’s Easter Season – AND BEYOND, which noted that Easter isn’t just one day, it’s an entire season.  (Aka Eastertide.)  In turn, Eastertide is defined as that long period – of 50 days – from Easter Sunday to Pentecost.  (For more on Pentecost, see Pentecost – “Happy Birthday, Church!”)  But before we get into that, I wanted to make a few comments on watching part of The Ten Commandments, the Saturday night before Easter Sunday.

(The real version, the one with Charlton Heston.  You know, the one God watches?)

I happened on the movie while channel surfing the night of Holy Saturday.   I came in just as Moses was about to learn he wasn’t really a Prince of Egypt, as he’d been taught “since birth.” As the faithful reader will know, that was pretty much the topic of my Lenten meditation.

(Briefly, What did Moses know, and when did he know it?)  

As for watching the movie:  Some time and a lot of commercials after I started watching, I realized this Hollywood version was a whole lot longer than the original.  So I pulled out my trusty Bible and checked.  Sure enough, in a short time I found Exodus 2:11-14, telling what made Moses to flee to Midian (seen at right):

One day, after Moses had grown up, he went out to where his own people were and watched them at their hard labor.  He saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his own people.  Looking this way and that and seeing no one, he killed the Egyptian and hid him in the sand.  The next day he went out and saw two Hebrews fighting.  He asked the one in the wrong, “Why are you hitting your fellow Hebrew?”  The man said, “Who made you ruler and judge over us?  Are you thinking of killing me as you killed the Egyptian?”  Then Moses was afraid and thought, “What I did must have become known.”  (Emphasis added.)

That’s it.   That’s all there was to the Bible version.  But Cecil B. DeMille turned those four short verses into what seemed like hours of viewing time.  (Including commercials of course.)  He also added a host of complicated sub-plots that simply aren’t anywhere to be found in the Bible.

From which – I figured – there had to be some kind of object lesson.

Unfortunately, the Bible doesn’t give any clue about how Moses knew those two fighting Hebrews were “his own people.”  (That passage follows right after Exodus 2:10, describing how Moses was adopted by Pharaoh’s daughter:  “When the child grew older, she took him to Pharaoh’s daughter and he became her son.  She named him Moses, saying,  ‘I drew him out of the water.'”)

The point of all this being:  The 1956 Hollywood-DeMille version of this passage featured a great deal of artistic license, used to fill in a whole lot of blanks in Exodus 2:11-14.

If you don’t believe me, read the Wikipedia plot summary of the movie yourself.  You’ll see that the mere summary alone is much longer than the Bible account.  For another thing, you’ll see that the movie included a whole lot of drama that the Bible doesn’t even infer.

You’ll see things like Moses growing up to be a winning Egyptian diplomat, and general.  (As in “winning a war with Ethiopia.”)  Then too there’s the torrid love affair between Moses and Nefretiri. (Played by a very hot Anne Baxter.)

The movie also had Moses meeting “the stone-cutter Joshua.”

Incidentally, Joshua did go on to become “the leader of the Israelite tribes after the death of Moses.”  (He also went on to write the sixth book of the Bible, after Moses wrote his “First Five.”)  But the movie had Moses meeting Joshua way too early, while the Israelites were still slaves in Egypt.  (And it was this Joshua who – in the movie – tells Moses “of the Hebrew God.”)

But in the Bible, Joshua isn’t mentioned until Exodus 17:9.  That was way after the Israelites had left Egypt, crossed the Red Sea and wandered around the wilderness a good long while.

For more examples of such artistic license – again – check out the Wiki-plot summary yourself.  But here are a few more highlights.

For one thing, while Moses is still an Egyptian general and overlord, he saves an old woman from being crushed to death.  That woman – in the movie – turns out to be “his natural mother, Yoshebel.” (Or Jochebed.)  Then there’s the matter of the beautiful Hebrew virgin “Lilia.”

In the movie – but not mentioned in the Bible – Lilia is engaged to Joshua.  But various bad guys lust after her, like the evil Egyptian “master builder Baka” – played to perfection by Vincent Price – and the “ambitious Hebrew chief overseer Dathan.”  (Ditto, by Edward G. Robinson.)  Then too, in the movie – but not in the Bible – Moses kills Baka, but only to save Joshua.  (In the movie, Joshua attacked Baka to keep him from raping Lilia, and he in turn is rescued by Moses.) 

Further, when Moses “confesses” to Joshua that he too is a Hebrew, the ever-sneaky Dathan overhears the confession.  In turn Dathan tells Pharoah – Yul Brynner – and in turn is rewarded with his freedom, various “riches” – and his own shot at Lilia.

But in a strange turn of events, when Pharaoh tells Moses to take His People and leave Egypt,  Dathan gets turned out with them.  From that point on – throughout the film – Dathan remains a “thorn in the flesh” to Moses.  (As the Apostle Paul might put it.  See 2d Corinthians 12:7.)

There are other examples of such whole cloth and/or artistic license episodes drawn from those four short verses in Exodus 2:11-14.  They include but aren’t limited to: 1) A Hebrew woman named Memnet telling Nefretiri that Moses is the son of Hebrew slaves, then being murdered – pushed off a high balcony – by Nefretiri.  2) Moses voluntarily becoming a slave himself – after he wangles the truth from Nefertiri – “to learn more of their lives.”  And 3)  Moses brought in chains to Pharaoh – played by Yul Brynner – and then “banished to the desert.”  (All because Nefertiri is still madly in love with him – Moses – and because Yul Brynner doesn’t want Moses as a martyr to his new queen.)

These then are the few comments I wanted to make, “on watching parts of The Ten Commandments on the Saturday night before Easter Sunday. ”

Which brings up the topic of rabbit trails.  Some people say running down a rabbit trail is an “exercise in futility.  It means wasting time and energy pursuing leads that go nowhere – or everywhere.”  (Obviously, if a rabbit trail “leads everywhere,” it doesn’t waste your time.)

Others take a more broad view, like Today’s Idiom Is … Rabbit Trail.  That fellow-blogger noted that while going down rabbit trails in “discussions can be fun and interesting,” they can also “interfere with resolving the topic at hand.”  But the blogger noted this distinction:

You would never use that phrase to describe a leisurely trip when you explored a side path and had an interesting adventure.  That’s more like taking the road less traveled[,] which is a literary reference to a poem by Robert Frost, “The Road Not Taken.” (E.A.)

So “we” may have ended up going down a rabbit trail here.  Or we may have “taken the road less traveled.”  Either way, it was fun for me, and I hope for the reader as well.  

In the meantime, back to the subject of Easter being “not just one day, but an entire season.”  (Also called Eastertide.)  I’ll be writing more about Eastertide in the near future.  But for now we can look forward to Pentecost – as the Birthday of the Church!

*   *   *   *

An artist’s depiction of Pentecost – the “birthday of the Church…”

*   *   *   *

I borrowed the idea of the upper image from On Moses and “illeism,” a post I did on May 20, 2014.  But to get a larger version of the image I went to pinterest.com/pin/131237776614965931.

Also, as to the asterisk (*), I cut-and-pasted the caption quote for the upper image from Moses and “illeism.”  As in: “Moses doesn’t like this.  Moses doesn’t like this one bit…“

The map of Moses’ path to Midian is courtesy of treasureboxmy.blogspot.com/2013/12/exodus-moses-flees-to-midian.

Re:  “Yoshebel” or Jochebed.  Wikipedia noted that the “story of Jochebed is thought to be described in the Book of Exodus (2:1–10) – although she is not explicitly named here.”  The article further noted that according to the Torah, she was “a daughter of Levi and mother of Aaron, Miriam and Moses.” Also, she is “praised for her faith in the Epistle to the Hebrews.”

Re: Joshua’s first mention in the Bible.  See When is Joshua first mentioned in the Bible – Answers.com.

Re: Rabbit trails.  Today’s Idiom also noted this:  “If you’ve ever seen a dog follow a real rabbit trail in a field or someone’s back yard, you’ll see where this idiom comes from.  The dog will endlessly sniff around in circles, never getting anywhere.  And it certainly never finds the rabbit!” 

Other links about the “road less traveled” – or more precisely “the road not taken” – include:  The road less travelled – meaning and origin, The Road Less Traveled – New York University, The Road Not Taken – Wikipedia, and How to Take the Road Less Traveled: 14 Steps – wikiHow.

The lower image is courtesy of Pentecost – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, with the caption:  “A Western depiction of the Pentecost, painted by Jean II Restout, 1732.” 

*   *   *   *

The teachings of Jesus: The Parable of the Talents, as etched by Jan Luyken.

*   *   *   *

December 21, 2015 – This post continues the theme of Bible study to open your mind and develop your talents. On that note, the Daily Readings for Friday, December 18, with Zechariah 7:13: “Since they refused to listen when I called to them, I would not listen when they called to me, says the Lord.” Which makes sense. If you don’t pay attention to God, chances are “He” won’t  pay attention to you! And it’s a pretty good summary of the theme of this blog.

The goal here is to help you – and me – get a better feel for communicating with the Force that Created the Universe. On that note, the Gospel for that Friday, December 18, was Matthew 25:14-30. It told the Parable of the talents, shown above. In that parable, a master gave some “talents” to three servants. (Taken literally, a “talent” was worth 50 or 60 shekels, and so was a good chunk of change.) Then the master went off on a long journey. When he got back home, he took stock of his “investment.” The servant with 10 talents gave back the 10 “invested,” plus 10 talents more. (A return of 100%.)  The servant who got five talents did the same. (Returned the original five and another five more, another 100% return.)  

Then came the “wicked and slothful” servant.

That servant didn’t develop his talents. He just buried the money in a hole. (Metaphorically, he – the slothful servant – fit his talents into a pre-formed, pre-shaped cubby-hole.)  So what the master got back on his investment was nothing more than the original talent he’d given out.

So here’s the moral of the story. (Per Aesop – at left – giving the parable its “plain meaning.”) Develop your talents! That’s the point: That you can’t be a “good and faithful servant” unless you give back to God more than what He originally gave you. And you can’t do that by being too literal, too focused on “avoiding sin.”

Doing that just makes you another carbon copy Christian.

Put another way, many Christians seem to think their whole job here on earth is: Avoid sin. And that is important. It’s certainly important to avoid really stupid mistakes, which tend to have really bad consequences. But is that the main job of a Christian?

Isn’t the main job of a Christian to “develop his talents.” Which in turn means a real Christian is bound to make mistakes. Which could be a good thing, keeping him or her from developing a “holier than thou” complex. On that note see Sin and cybernetics: “Maybe the concepts of sin, repentance and confession are simply tools to help us realize the purpose Jesus had for us, to wit:  to ‘live life in all its abundance.'” (John 10:10; the second part.)

On the matter of carbon copy Christians, see “Another brick in the wall” and Reflections on Volume 3. And since we’re looking back on posts from this past year, here are some more:

The Bible and mysticism said Christianity is about “obtaining unity with God, through Christ.” And that fits in with the original meaning of mystic. (One “who seeks by contemplation and self-surrender to obtain unity with or absorption into the Deity or the absolute.”) Also this:

The terms “mystic” or “mysticism” seem to throw Southern Baptists and other conservative Christians into apoplexy.  (Try it sometime!!!)

But of course I was only joking… (About the apoplexy.) On a related note, see The True Test of Faith. It imagined two Christians who both learned at the end of their lives that The Faith was a hoax. The guy who spent his life “avoiding sin” was really mad. But the guy who used the Bible to develop his talents said, “You know, I wouldn’t change a thing.” (Thus “True Test of Faith…”) And finally, see Shadrach and the Fiery Furnace on three other “good and faithful servants.” They were about to be thrown into a burning fiery furnace. And they knew that God could save them if He wanted. But they also knew that that might not fit in with His purpose.

Thus the “real kicker in the story” came in Daniel 3 (16-18). There the three men – on the cusp of being thrown into the fiery furnace – gave their answer to King Nebuchadnezzer:

Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego answered the king, “O Nebuchadnezzar…  If our God …  is able to deliver us, he will deliver us…  But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods and we will not worship the golden statue that you have set up.”

Note the emphasized “But if not…”  So the three men were really saying something like this:  “O Nebuchadnezzar, it’s up to God Himself to decide if He’ll deliver us…  God certainly has the power to save us, but even if He decides not to, we will still believe in and follow Him…”

Now that is a true test(ament) of faith…

*   *   *   *

Another guy – Daniel – who gave a “true test(ament) of faith…”

*   *   *   *

The upper image is courtesy of the Wikipedia article, Parable of the talents.

Re:  God as “He.”  See Anthropomorphism, an “innate tendency of human psychology.”  (Wikipedia.) In other words, human thought tends to limit “God” to its ability to comprehend “Him.”

Re: “To help you – and me – get better…” See Why teachers learn as much as their students. (Which may also apply to bloggers and their readers.)

Re” investment.” See Amount Considered a Good Rate of Return on Investments: “Burying cash in coffee cans in your yard is a terrible long-term investing plan.  If it manages to survive the elements, it will still be worthless given enough time.” See also What rate of return should you expect … on your investments, indicating that as of 2014, a return between 10 and 15% was extremely good.

Re: cubby hole. See Cubby-hole – Wikipedia, on a “small, snug place, which may be considered and used as a place of safety for children.” But see also 1st Corinthians 3:2: “I had to feed you with milk, not with solid food, because you weren’t ready for anything stronger. And you still aren’t ready…” Thus you might say this blog is designed for people who are ready for “something stronger,” to wit: exploring the mystical side of the Bible. See also 1st Peter 2:2.

Re: making mistakes. See The Bible as “transcendent” meditation, on “so-called Christians who seem … to focus on sin – usually somebody else’s – rather than all the positive aspects that the discipline of regular Bible-reading can provide.” On that note, one writer said of meditating – which I thought like the Christian path – that the “would-be meditator might want to give himself permission to make mistakes. ‘You will make them anyway and will be much more comfortable – and get along better with this exercise – if you give yourself permission in advance.’”

The Aesop image is courtesy of Wikipedia. And in case you were wondering, Aesop is the one on the left. The cute babe on the right is “the beautiful Rhodope.” (The complete caption is “The beautiful Rhodope, in love with Aesop; engraving by Bartolozzi, 1782, after Kauffman‘s original.”)  

The point being that Aesop’s ability to have “the beautiful Rhodope” find him attractive offers hope to those gents physically “lacking,” but with an ability “give good story.” (Aesop was said to be not just old, but extremely ugly and a hunchback.)  

 Re: “carbon copy Christians.” See How to Break the Cookie-Cutter, Carbon Copy Christian Cycle, and The Carbon Paper/ Carbon Copy Christian | JUGGERNAUT.

Re: making mistakes. See also Make Mistakes—The Importance Of Failure – Vanseo Design.

The lower image is courtesy of Daniel and the Lions Den – Hebrew Bible and Art. The painting itself is by Henry Ossawa Tanner (1859-1937), “the first African-American painter to gain international acclaim. He moved to Paris in 1891 to study, and decided to stay there, being readily accepted in French artistic circles. His painting entitled Daniel in the Lions’ Den was accepted into the 1896 Salon.” The painting itself “uses light to symbolize God’s presence. It is simple and there is not a lot of detail but it gets the point across.” See also Wikipedia.

*   *   *   *