Times change and businesses and organisations have to change too. You see the same situation in ecosystems: weather patterns change, or a new species of plant or animal moves in, and the balance shifts.
It’s perplexing how much has changed in US domestic politics and international relations since Donald Trump’s second term as president began on 20th January.
I’m not going to try to summarise his actions, analyse his reasons for them or the effect they may have going forward. Instead I’m going to explain how one ordinary British citizen (me) views the underlying reasons for the way Trump behaves and why those around him act the way they do.
Right at the start I must admit that I have little to go on; my knowledge is limited to what he has done and said as reported by the news media, the reactions from the many world leaders and business people who have met him, the outcome (so far as we know them) of his actions, and comment from others on his personality, character and behaviour. But mostly, what I write below will be based on what I’ve observed in interviews and on news broadcasts, articles, and the response of others.
So, if you’re prepared to hear thoughts and opinions from a very ordinary member of the British public – read on.
Intellect
Donald Trump has a BSc in economics (and I have one in horticulture, another in mathematics and computing as well as an MSc by thesis on plant reproductive biology). I appreciate, therefore, that Trump has both the intellect and work ethic required to achieve his degree. It’s a significantly harder challenge than doing well in primary or secondary education.
Legal issues and bankruptcy
Following his university education, Trump found work in the family property business. However, things didn’t always go too well for him, there were legal battles over race discrimination and contempt of court, and six of his businesses have been declared bankrupt. The details are included in the Wikipedia article about him, with references to sources.
How things look
This seems to have set the tone for his current approach to legality and success in politics as well. Winning by whatever means he deems necessary seems to be his normal approach to political life. As long as he gets what he wants, he doesn’t seem to care it it’s legal or illegal, innocent or corrupt, good or bad for the American economy, good or bad for the world economy, good or bad for the environment. Sometimes he may genuinely not understand what he’s dealing with, ‘Drill Baby Drill’ is a dreadful intention to express if you’re a person who understands the damage that will be done to to our very fragile environment and ecosystems. And he clearly had no idea that imposing tariffs on imports was tamtamount to a severe tax on United States Citizens.
Mt Trump has stabbed Ukraine in the back by his unkind and unhelpful remarks to Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the White House combining ignorance and rudeness in an extraordinary way. He tries to be friendly to the some of the world’s worst characters – Vladimir Putin is a prime example, Benjamin Netanyahu is another – while at the same time rudely dismissing and criticising many who would help him if he took a more conciliatory line, people like the leaders of Canada, most European nations, and so forth.
War
Mr Trump has skilled and experienced military analysts and experts ready with good advice and wisdom. He ignores them. Apparently he prefers guesswork, trial and (mostly) error to sound advice, good judgement and deferring to those with experience, an ability to think through the options and war game out the possible and likely outcomes.
See also:
Here are some further links to Fraser’s material, as well as a few other content creators using Patreon very effectively:
If you enjoyed this or found it useful, please like, comment, and share below. (If you don’t see those links, click the article’s title above the main photo and they will appear.) Send a link to friends who might enjoy the article or benefit from it – Thanks! My material is free to reuse (see conditions), but a coffee is always welcome and encourages me to write more often!
Paul’s letter to the Ephesians has sometimes been described as the constitution of the church, but that’s not strictly correct. Paul didn’t write Ephesians to define what church is and is not, so it contains much more than the bare bones of a definition. Constitutions are (relatively) brief but very clearly lay out the essence and limits of something, be it an organisation like a business, a charity, or indeed a nation. They also spell out definitions of terms as well as the concept being defined, as clearly as possible. So if we want a constitution for the church, we must think in terms of something succinct, crystal clear, and complete but not providing unnecessary additional detail.
Why have a constitution?
The church has never truly had a constitution, some might argue it doesn’t need one. But recently I’ve begun to feel it does. Almost every denomination imposes customs and requirements on their adherents, over and above anything that Jesus taught. There are paid leaders and managers, forms of infant baptism, doctrine, so much encrusted over the basics. So much that can be seen as unnecessary when we compare it to the earliest forms of church as we find it in the New Testament.
Some form of declarative constitution might bring clarity to all this muddled confusion. Over the centuries there have been repeated reforms and corrections, but generally these have resulted in yet more varieties of belief and practice. A constitution might help us simplify and see some patterns in the prevailing mess; we should at least make an attempt to form one.
There are probably as many definitions as there are denominations, and that’s quite a large number; a constitution provides a reference point. The Bible, and even just the New Testament is far too detailed to be a definition; yet it contains everything we need to know and does not support the additions and concretions of the last two millenia.
The essentials, but no more
What else can we say about constitutions in general? The key point, I think, is that a constitution should contain everything essential but nothing beyond that, to bring clarity and focus. Constitutions are usually amendable both for corrections and for additions or deletions. There is normally an agreed process for amending a constitution.
So where would we begin for the church? As always, we must begin with our source – Jesus himself.
Jesus’ claims
Jesus made some pretty fundamental claims; the constitution will need to say whether we accept these claims or reject them.
He said that his father is the God of his ancestors and that he was there with his Father when the universe was conceived and created. He claims to have come into this created world like one of us, as an ambassador for and from his father, to reveal the father to us and to make it possible for us to communicate with the father again. So continuing with the results of part 1 of this series, we can add an additional clause about Jesus. Let’s put that new clause at the beginning, where it belongs.
The Constitution of church so far
1 – Jesus was sent by his Father to be present in the world to reveal the nature and the loving heart of the Father. He returned to his Father and deposited their Spirit to remain in his followers as a perpetual gift.
The Spirit lives within us, giving us the potential to continue the work Jesus began in this world – loving, reconciling, transforming, encouraging, guiding.
2 – Church is not a particular place or building. It is, instead, a particular people.
Church consists of every person following Jesus, but the term also applies to local church where it’s limited in time and place to a particular group or gathering meeting and working together more or less regularly.
3 – A named place is not required, people can meet anywhere convenient to them.
An informal name may be helpful to explain where and when meetings take place, but names are not intended (and should not be interpreted) to indicate any sort of hierarchy within, or separation from, any other part of church, even if those other parts regard themselves as different or separate.
We’ll continue adding and editing clauses of our Constitution next time, rearranging them as seems necessary and appropriate.
If you enjoyed this or found it useful, please like, comment, and share below. (If you don’t see those links, click the article’s title above the main photo and they will appear.) Send a link to friends who might enjoy the article or benefit from it – Thanks! My material is free to reuse (see conditions), but a coffee is always welcome and encourages me to write more often!
This index links to my ponderings on creating a constitution for church to help us focus on what matters while avoiding wasting time and effort on what does not.
[Why do] we have and use the term ‘church’ at all? It’s come to mean those buildings in most towns and cities in the world where Christians gather on Sundays (and often at other times, too) to read Bible passages, listen to sermons, take communion, and in some denominations have one or more leaders at the front.
I made a start on a stand-alone article on this topic as one of my ‘Ad hoc’ articles, but thinking about it again more recently I felt it would make a good, stand-alone series that I could develop over time.
But something I didn’t consider was why we have and use the term ‘church’ at all. It’s come to mean those buildings in most towns and cities in the world where Christians gather on Sundays (and often at other times, too) to read Bible passages, listen to sermons, take communion, and in some denominations have one or more leaders at the front wearing funny clothes (or ordinary ones). That’s a sort of caricature of course. Churches and church members often do much more than that. They may run a food bank, hold evening meetings to study the Bible more deeply, visit local hospitals to visit patients, and a whole lot more besides. But these activities are not church; in a sense they are add-ons, though they are certainly good things to be doing in the communities where we live.
Places or people?
But why are they called ‘churches’ in the first place? This is something we need to consider; over time, people have used both place-words and people-words for gatherings. Church is a place-word and we could also mention a series of other place-words used in different times and languages to express the same concept. For example kyriakón / Kirche / kirk, as well as basilica, cathedral, and chapel.
All of these in one way or another are used to signify places of gathering.
Kyriakón is from Kyrios, the Greek word for lord or master. Kirche is German, kirk is Scots, and church is of course English. However derived they all speak of a place but significantly also of kingship, rule and authority.
In a Roman city the Basilica had the appearance of a traditional European church building. Two rows of large columns supporting arches and a high roof, with a semi-circular and sightly raised area at one end. So architecturally it was church-like but was not a place of worship. It was the Roman law court and the judges sat on the raised area in the apse (the semi circular end section). The idea of authority hovers there in the background again.
The Greek word cathedra simply means a chair, a cathedral is the ‘seat’ of a bishop. The word chapel is Latin, from cappa, a mantle or cloak. It entered English in the 13th century from old French.
Going back to Hebrew and Aramaic brings in other aspects. Hebrew was used in the Jerusalem Temple and to read the Old Testament scrolls in the synagogues. Jesus and his followers spoke Aramaic in everyday life. Synagogue is a Greek word and means an assembly or gathering, literally a bringing together (the New Testament was written in Greek and there were well-established Greek versions of the Old Testament as well). The Greek term packages up two Hebrew words, edah (congregation or community – a people word), and qahal (summoned or called together – a people/action/place word). After the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD, the Greek term synagogue was used to bundle up the senses of gathering, learning and intercession.
There were other words for the buildings themselves. Beit ha-knesset is the house of assembly, Beit ha-midrash is house of study/interpretation, Beit ha-tefillah is house of prayer.
No need for a name
Taking all of this together we can see that when we meet, wherever that might be, it’s a place, a gathered people, and has senses of assembling, study/interpretation, and prayer, as well as Lordship. So where can we gather to achieve all of that? Anywhere we like! We have only to agree a time and place to turn up together to pay attention to Jesus. Anywhere will do. It could be the temple courts, the upper room, my house, your house, a garden, a woodland clearing, a supermarket car park, or it could be somewhere we call a baptist church or a house church. The place itself is of no significance, all of the significance rests in the fact that Jesus is here and we are with him, that he is teaching us and we are learning ever more from him. Have you ever been in a place like that? Does it need a name? I’m going to provisionally call it a House of Presence or a House of the Spirit.
But the constitution of the Church doesn’t need to name things. So we won’t define a name in our constitution at all. We should include a note to say that a name is not required, it’s important to state that; because the name doesn’t help to define church. Why did the 1st Century believers talk about Lydia’s House. or the gathering at Corinth? Because they knew what we have often forgotten – it’s no more than a matter of convenience. We can (and should) meet anywhere; a river bank is enough, or a market place, someone’s home or a hired room.
It’s not the place that matters, it’s the people and the purpose that are significant, the presence of the Spirit of Jesus in his gathered people is what really matters. However, it’s worth mentioning that big spaces with hundreds of people are usually too large for very practical reasons. There’s a need to sit around with no more than one to ten other people. Everyone needs to know one another, like a family, everyone needs to be able to share freely what they’re reading or hearing from the Spirit. If it’s big and impersonal many opportunities will be missed. We can come together in larger numbers with a band of musicians to celebrate and sing our hearts out. That’s good too, but it’s a different kind of meeting. But it’s still an expression of church and life together.
Paul’s letter to the Ephesians has sometimes been described as the constitution of the church, but that’s not strictly correct. Paul didn’t write Ephesians to define what church is and is not, so it contains much more than the bare bones of a definition. Constitutions are (relatively) brief but very clearly lay out the essence and limits of something, be it an organisation like a business, a charity, or indeed a nation. They also spell out definitions of terms as well as the concept being defined, as clearly as possible. So if we want a constitution for the church, we must think in terms of something succinct, crystal clear, and complete but not providing unnecessary or irrelevant additional detail.
Why have a constitution?
The church has never truly had a constitution, some might argue it doesn’t need one. But recently I’ve begun to feel it does. Almost every denomination imposes customs and requirements on their adherents, over and above anything that Jesus taught. There are paid leaders and managers, forms of infant baptism, doctrine, so much encrusted over the basics. So much that can be seen as unnecessary when we compare it to the earliest forms of church or to what we learn from the New Testament. Some form of declarative constitution might bring much needed clarity to the current confusion.
Over the centuries there have been repeated reforms and corrections, but generally these have resulted in yet more varieties of belief and practice. A constitution might help, I think we should at least make an attempt to form one.
So first of all, why would we even want a church constitution? There are probably as many definitions as there are denominations, and that’s quite a large number; a constitution provides clarity and a reference point. The Bible, and even just the New Testament is far too detailed to be a definition; yet it contains everything we need to know and does not support the additions and concretions of the last two millenia.
The essentials, but no more
What else can we say about constitutions in general? The key point, I think, is that a constitution should contain everything essential but nothing beyond that. Constitutions are usually amendable both for corrections and for additions or deletions. There is normally an agreed process for amending a constitution.
So where would we begin for the church? As always, we must begin with our source – Jesus himself.
A good start would be to state that church is defined by everything that Jesus is and does and teaches and by nothing beyond that. Having leaders of a particular flavour or style and how we name those leaders are not fundamental. Whether you have a priest, a vicar, a pastor, elders or deacons, those are all secondary features of church life and practice. They cannot form part of the definition.
Let’s begin by saying church is a group of people striving to follow Jesus. I don’t think we can start in any better way.
So we’ll make that our primary clause.
The Constitution of church so far
1 – Church is not a particular place or building. It is, instead, a particular people
2 – A named place is not required, people can meet anywhere convenient to them.
We’ll take those as the first two clauses of our Constitution for now
If you enjoyed this or found it useful, please like, comment, and share below. (If you don’t see those links, click the article’s title above the main photo and they will appear.) Send a link to friends who might enjoy the article or benefit from it – Thanks! My material is free to reuse (see conditions), but a coffee is always welcome and encourages me to write more often!
We live in a culture deeply uncomfortable with grief. We rush people through heartbreak. We hand out silver linings while wounds are still open. Even in faith spaces, we sometimes move too quickly toward redemption language because suffering itself makes us uneasy. We want resurrection without sitting at the tomb. We want healing without fully acknowledging what was lost.
It’s quite easy in life to bounce from one thing to another without paying much attention to anything. It’s the usual mode of the world we live in. But when we do that, we miss a very great deal. We don’t really get into the deeper aspects, we don’t think things through properly. On the one hand we don’t see the wood for the trees, but on the other hand we don’t have time to even get to know one, single tree in the depth it deserves – the crevices in the bark, the shades of green in the details of the leaves, the patterns of the veins in those same leaves, the gentle sound of the breeze filtering through the canopy. The aroma of moist earth and leaf-mould.
Sandy doesn’t make that mistake, it’s even in the title of her blog – Run with Patience (KJV Heb 12:1). Here’s an extract from a recent article to give you a flavour of her approach, at the end of the extract I’ll place a link so you can read the rest direct on Sandy’s site.
Extract from Sandy’s article – The slow Return of Hope
There are seasons when the soul does not sing easily. Seasons where faith feels less like soaring and more like sitting quietly in the dark, trying to remember what light once felt like.
I think that’s why I keep returning to Book of Lamentations, not because it resolves suffering neatly nor because it offers quick comfort, but because it refuses to lie about pain.
The older I get, the more I realize how rare that is.
We live in a culture deeply uncomfortable with grief. We rush people through heartbreak. We hand out silver linings while wounds are still open. Even in faith spaces, we sometimes move too quickly toward redemption language because suffering itself makes us uneasy. We want resurrection without sitting at the tomb. We want healing without fully acknowledging what was lost.
But Book of Lamentations lingers in the ruins. It lets the smoke rise, the silence ache, and grief breathe.
And strangely, that honesty feels sacred to me.
Because there are losses in life that cannot be reduced to inspirational lessons. Some grief changes the architecture of a person. Some suffering rearranges the nervous system, the body, the assumptions you once held about safety, love, God, or the world itself.
Sometimes you survive something, but you do not emerge untouched.
I think Scripture knows this better than we often allow ourselves to admit.
Read the full article on Run with Patience
Here’s the entire article on Sandy’s site. I suggest you read it to discover the precious truth it contains. Explore the other articles on Sandy’s thoughtful site as well. Perhaps bookmark the blog, or sign up for email notifications whenever new articles appear.
If you enjoyed this or found it useful, please like, comment, and share below. (If you don’t see those links, click the article’s title above the main photo and they will appear.) Send a link to friends who might enjoy the article or benefit from it – Thanks! My material is free to reuse (see conditions), but a coffee is always welcome and encourages me to write more often!
Read the rest of Jonathan’s article in its original form – System or Ecosystem. And don’t forget to download a copy of the book, read it, and share it with anyone who might benefit.
An online friend (Jonathan Rovetto) mentioned this book and website to me. He posted about it himself and invited me to re-post his article here on JHM. I’m minded to reproduce part of his article to get you interested, and then point you back to his original to read the rest as a way (hopefully) of increasing his readership as well as mine. I’ve done this before, it might be something I’ll do often. We’ll see.
Extract from Jonathan’s article
The System or The Ecosystem is a new book by author Michael H. Peters. It contains great words of wisdom, seasoned with over forty years of practical experience, presented in concise, easy-to-digest segments. I highly recommend this book. It’s free to download or you can request to receive a free hard copy. You can check it out here along with some excellent resource materials.
AS AN ENGINEER and “Expert in Residence” at the Harvard Graduate School of Design, home of the #1 ranked School of Architecture in the world, I can tell you: architecture and design determine outcome.
You cannot build the 500,000-ton, 2,717-foot Burj Khalifa (the Mission-Impossible-Tom-Cruise-climbing, “world’s tallest building” in Dubai, a Harvard Architect product) on a foundation designed for a three-foot doghouse.
You cannot modify a bicycle into an F-16 no matter how many parts you replace.
You cannot optimize a failing system into success if the system itself is wrong for the task.
Would you try to fix Alaska to grow an orange tree? Perhaps optimizing Alaska weather isn’t the right solution. If Orange Tree Habitat Life is the goal, why not try to grow any Lifeform in the place it grows naturally?
It is the same with “Growing a Christian.” Why not use the Ecosystem God Designed for JesusLife in humans, that they might grow as mightily as they possibly can in the shortest amount of time, to harvest the best fruit? And that CANNOT be the System of Sunday attendance, programs, missions and clergy.
Similarly, learning how to dribble an American football is a really dumb thing to try to optimize. Why not just do it right in the first place? Trying to optimize the wrong system versus allowing the Ecosystem to flow.
But that is Precisely what Christianity has tried for centuries:
Optimizing a thing Jesus never designed. Jesus designed a“walk along with Me daily real-life apprenticeship,” and the apostles then of course did the same with those they encountered and shared life with: the priesthood of ALL believers.
Just to demonstrate further why “The Master Teacher” chose to bring an Ecosystem of Life from Heaven, a daily hand-to-hand apprenticeship (the Greek word for “disciple” is well-translated apprentice), rather than a classroom or “study” or speech, is convincingly portrayed in the book On Combat, by Lieutenant Colonel Dave Grossman.
Colonel Grossman tells of the necessity of “high fidelity” training, true life training rather than classroom or theoretical incomplete practice. Everything is different when life is authentic, rather than theatrical or an academic exercise or information dump.
Here’s how it went. A police officer in training practiced disarming an intruder or criminal who was pointing a gun at him. Literally, hundreds and hundreds of times he had friends and family members surprise him with a replica dummy gun pointed at him. The policeman understudy would practice responding instantly, by snatching the gun out of the hand of the bad guy. Again and again. He became very, very proficient at snatching the gun in a smooth, lightning-fast move. He would then hand the “gun” back, and they would soon sneak up on him again-training, training, training.
Then, finally and predictably, came the moment of truth. As the rookie police officer was in a convenience store bodega with a partner, he stepped around an aisle and a criminal pointed a gun, close range, at the officer. They were both shocked at how fast he disarmed the thief. Good on you!
And both the officer and the criminal were also equally shocked when the officer, having magically stripped the gun right out of the gangster’s hand, proceeded to hand the gun back to the criminal. Just as he had practiced 1,000 times with his friends and family members. True story…
Read the rest of Jonathan’s article in its original form – System or Ecosystem. And don’t forget to download a copy of the book, read it, and share it with anyone who might benefit.
If you enjoyed this or found it useful, please like, comment, and share below. (If you don’t see those links, click the article’s title above the main photo and they will appear.) Send a link to friends who might enjoy the article or benefit from it – Thanks! My material is free to reuse (see conditions), but a coffee is always welcome and encourages me to write more often!
They took down the body and followed the Jewish practice of spice embalming and wrapping it in linen strips. Very short of time before sunset, they found a newly-carved tomb nearby and laid the body there, Matthew’s Gospel suggests it was Yusuf’s own tomb.
Greek commentary on John’s gospel dated 1190-1200 (Bodleian Library)
19:31-37 – Because the following day was Shabta (Aramaic), Shabbat (Hebrew) or the Sabbath (English), it was an important day of rest. Shabta began at sunset on the previous day and ended at sunset too.
19:38-42 – So any tasks that needed to be done on Shabta would have to be completed before sunset the previous day. That’s why the Jewish leaders asked Pilatus to take the bodies down from the crosses before nightfall. Normally, bodies would be left to decay on the crosses and the corpses would be consumed by rats or by birds over the following days and weeks. But if it was necessary to remove them earlier, the Roman custom was to break the legs. It could take up to three days for a healthy, fit individual to die following crucifixion. Because a person on a cross would have to use their legs to lift their body to inhale, soldiers might be ordered to break the legs so the prisoner would be unable to breathe and would die within a few minutes. The Roman soldiers broke the legs of the criminals either side of Yahshua as both were still alive. But a spear in Yahshua’s side proved that he was dead, not just holding his breath and staying very still.
Removing Yahshua from the cross
Yusuf min Arimathea (Joseph of Arimathea) was a secret follower of Yahshua and later, probably by then already late afternoon, he was joined by Naqdimon (Nicodemus), who brought the necessary materials. Both men were members of the Sanhedrin (the Jewish religious council), both followed Yahshua despite the high risks involved, both would have known and been known by the disciples. They took down the body and followed the Jewish practice of spice embalming and wrapping it in linen strips. Very short of time before sunset, they found a newly-carved tomb nearby and laid the body there, Matthew’s Gospel suggests it was Yusuf’s own tomb.
Like those who had seen Yahshua die, Yusuf and Naqdimon must also have thought that this was the end of everything, that for all his amazing teaching and wisdom, this was the end of the ministry of Yahshua bar Yusuf (Jesus son of Joseph, as people generally believed him to be). They would not have understood yet, despite his teaching, that he was also, and far more significantly, Yahshua bar Yahweh! He was, and would remain, the Son of the Eternal Father.
*This Mormon discussion is interesting as it describes Jewish burial practices in the first century CE in some detail. It’s also downloadable as a PDF.
If you enjoyed this or found it useful, please like, comment, and share below. (If you don’t see those links, click the article’s title above the main photo and they will appear.) Send a link to friends who might enjoy the article or benefit from it – Thanks! My material is free to reuse (see conditions), but a coffee is always welcome and encourages me to write more often!
Although used by pre-Roman societies, crucifixion was one of the worst experiences the Romans could inflict on a captured enemy, a violent and vicious criminal or a traitor. Remember the reluctance of the scared Roman Governor and the insistent demands of the angry Jewish High Priest that this terrible execution must go ahead.
Greek commentary on John’s gospel dated 1190-1200 (Bodleian Library)
19:25-27 – It’s impossible to imagine the horror of death by crucifixion. The shame of hanging naked in front of family, friends and strangers is hard to grasp in a society where nakedness was deemed utterly unacceptable. Add to this the extreme pain of the body’s full weight supported on heavy nails driven through wrists and heel bones (the feet were nailed from the side, one each side of the central wooden post) and the exhausting effort of getting enough air into the lungs – muscles continuously straining (despite the extreme pain) to lift the body enough to breathe. More recent studies suggest that an inability to inhale was not normally the cause of death. Also used by some pre-Roman societies, crucifixion was one of the worst experiences the Romans could inflict on a captured enemy, a violent and vicious criminal or a traitor. Remember the reluctance of the scared Roman Governor and the insistent demands of the angry Jewish High Priest that this terrible execution must go ahead. We discussed those factors last time.
Family
Yahshua’s mother (Mariam), his aunt Mariam and Mariam of Magdala (three Mary’s in total) were there in front of the cross as he suffered, and also one of his disciples, the one Jesus loved, usually thought to be Johanan (John). If that’s correct we’re reading the words of an eyewitness. Yahshua, seeing them there before him and thinking of them more than about himself (as he always did) tells John that from now on his mother is John’s mother and tells her that John is now her son. In this way he is taking care that both of them will be cared for in their sorrow and their longer term needs (both practical and emotional).
The death of Yahshua
Making sure that the Old Testament writings were fulfilled was important and was one way to help people understand that Yahshua was who he claimed to be. It was especially useful as a way of reaching the Jewish teachers of his day. Yahshua was aware of this even as death approached and remained committed to such fulfilment, in this case of Psalm 69:21. So he called out, ‘I’m thirsty’. After drinking from the sponge they held up for him, he said, ‘It’s done’, lowered his head and died.
And the little group of friends, family and followers in front of the cross must have thought this marked the end of his mission, the end of his purpose, and the end of everything. They couldn’t know it yet – but they were so very mistaken.
See also:
Crucifixion (WARNING, graphic and disturbing) – Wikipedia
If you enjoyed this or found it useful, please like, comment, and share below. (If you don’t see those links, click the article’s title above the main photo and they will appear.) Send a link to friends who might enjoy the article or benefit from it – Thanks! My material is free to reuse (see conditions), but a coffee is always welcome and encourages me to write more often!
SpaceX hit a problem just 30 seconds or so before launch and recycled to 40 seconds. The same problem returned and they tried several times but eventually had to give up.
This is a monthly roundup of news and events in the world as well as in my life. So expect to find thoughts and comment on international and local events as well as links to anything I’ve seen or read that seems either relevant or interesting to me. I’ll republish every time I add a new item, so check back often.
Try again!
Starship launch aborted
22nd May 2026 – I stayed up late last night to watch the launch attempt live, they hit a problem just 30 seconds or so before launch and recycled to 40 seconds. The same problem returned and they tried several times but eventually had to give up. I believe the problem was not in Starship but in some of the equipment in the launch tower. There may be another attempt this evening but I don’t think I can watch it live two days in a row. Here are the current details for the next attempt.
Starship flight attempt
Starship Flight 12
21st May 2026 – After various delays, the current plan is that SpaceX will attempt the first launch of the third version of Superheavy and Starship from the Texas coast this evening (UK time). Everything is new, including the launch pad, the engines (Raptor version 3) the Superheavy booster (version 3), and the Starship (also version 3). Everything benefits from previous flights of versions 1 and 2, but with so many changes nothing is certain. The details will be updated regularly at Space.com and at SpaceX, even more techy details from Everyday Astronaut. Success is not guaranteed (though I think fairly likely), but excitement is certainly guaranteed. Don’t miss it! If the flight is delayed for some reason there are several more opportunities in May; and if even more time is needed there’s always June or July – but we hope that won’t happen.
Back in 1946
Blast from the past 40
15th May 2026 – Today I updated Blast from the past 40 right back to 1946 when my father was travelling from Bombay to Singapore during the second world war (visiting Rangoon en route). There’s a lot of interesting family and world history in this post now
7th May 2026 – The famous science journal, Nature, provided a fantastic selection of stunning photos this week, along with a great deal more information about science events and news. I loved all of the photos, but this image of Japanese cherry blossom is my favourite. It’s part of a data set of flowering dates going back 1 200 years.
Anyone can sign up for these excellent news updates.
If you enjoyed this or found it useful, please like, comment, and share below. (If you don’t see those links, click the article’s title above the main photo and they will appear.) Send a link to friends who might enjoy the article or benefit from it – Thanks! My material is free to reuse (see conditions), but a coffee is always welcome and encourages me to write more often!
It’s a great place to stay up-to-date on all sorts of important topics. Furthermore, you need a university degree as the bare minimum if you want to write articles for the website. This results in a high standard of writing.
I’ve started reading The Conversation, not every item but whenever I spot something that catches my attention. This happened back on 8th April when I added a news item based on a post from ‘The Conversation’. This time I’d like to write about the website itself, not just an item that I read and liked.
The web as intended
I mentioned this in the news item. Tim Berners-Lee, the creator of the World-Wide-Web, made his original intentions very clear in his recent book, ‘This is for Everyone’. The web, especially recently, has significantly tampered with and damaged what he had hoped to create. If you read the book you’ll see what he means and how he intends to fix things and is already working to do so.
The Conversation is a website that already conforms rather well to Berners-Lees’s intentions. For one thing it’s completely free to use, like Wikipedia, the Internet Archive, and my own site which you’re reading now. Everything here is free to read, use, copy, and re-use. Check my copyright page for more details.
‘The Conversation’ presents world news and updates and articles on research and development; so it’s a great place to stay up-to-date on all sorts of important topics. Furthermore, you need a university degree as the bare minimum if you want to write articles for the website. This results in a high standard of writing and articles you should be able to trust. There are different versions for different nations and regions, every Conversation page has a drop down list near the top where you can select the version you want to view.
That’s all I wanted to say about ‘The Conversation’. If you subscribe for notifications and read whatever grabs your attention, you’ll stand a good chance of being better informed than ever before and enjoying the process as well. Happy reading!
If you enjoyed this or found it useful, please like, comment, and share below. (If you don’t see those links, click the article’s title above the main photo and they will appear.) Send a link to friends who might enjoy the article or benefit from it – Thanks! My material is free to reuse (see conditions), but a coffee is always welcome and encourages me to write more often!
Journeys of Heart and Mind 
