Yesterday’s hijacking of Aeromexico flight 576 shows how wildly inaccurate initial media reports can be. Some media reported seven bolivians with explosives strapped on their bodies were demanding to speak to Mexican president Calderón. But, the truth is so bizzarre, it beats any of the media’s guesses by far.

The suspect, Josmar Flores Pereira, a Bolivian minister. His motive: to warn Mexico of an impending earthquake. Why? Because yesterday was the ninth day of the ninth month of the ninth year of the second millennium in our calendar system (09-09-09). He said that is you turned the date upside down, it would become 666 (06-06-06), and signified the great earthquake of Revelation 16:18. Why he didn’t hijack a plane on June 6, 2006 is anyone’s guess. I guess we’ll have to ground all flights for the Maya calendar’s end on December 23, 2012.

The “bomb” was nothing more than a can of soda rigged up with lights. How this man could smuggle such an object on board is troubling. More troubling is the portrayal of Christians as ignorant and potentially dangerous psychotics.

The song in the background was composed and recorded by Flores, and speaks of when he was arrested and was converted to Christianity while in prison. I have friends who have been converted to Christ while in prison; what a disservice to them this act has made! Let me say this carefully: it is a very public and embarrassing exposure of the widespread fraud committed by many sincere but deluded “prophets” in the Latin American pentecostal movement.

Although I may seem very anti-socialist, I understand and denounce the many evils of capitalism. Actually, my vision of an ideal society could seem socialist.

There are two reasons why I reject socialism. One is history. No organized society has ever survived on pure socialism without becoming more tyrannical than the tyrannies that preceded them. Socialism effaces the individual. The other is greed.

Greed pervades both capitalist and socialist societies. But capitalism doesn’t try to deny greed, but uses egotistical self-interest to promote, if very weakly, some altruism. Socialism on the other hand, is based on altruism, but ignores the problem of greed, making itself blind in the process, and thus fails.

Consider this excerpt from the journal Socialist Alternative:

Is Socialism Against Human Nature?

“Wherever socialism’s been tried, it always results in a dictatorship because humans are greedy by nature.”

This is a common refrain activists hear when they raise the ideas of socialism. Marxists reject the notion that human nature is fixed or set in stone. In reality, human nature is distinguished by its variability and adaptability. For most of human history, we lived in egalitarian hunter-gatherer societies.

Capitalism pits us all against one another and brings out our competitive, selfish sides. Nonetheless, it is precisely because capitalism does not work in the interest of the vast majority of the world’s population that it compels workers to unite and fight for greater equality and ultimately a new system that will work in the interests of the majority.

A socialist society based on justice and equality – where all our basic needs are provided for, with no ruling class dividing us and pitting us against one another – will be much more conducive to cooperation and solidarity.

A socialist democracy would have nothing in common with the dictatorships in Russia and other “communist” countries (which arose for a variety of historical, economic, and political reasons, not because human nature is “inherently greedy”).

Although these Stalinist countries had elements of a planned economy, working-class people did not democratically control society. Instead, the corruption and repression by the ruling bureaucracy ultimately led to economic collapse and mass rebellion by workers and youth.

To avoid corruption, socialists believe all leaders and officials in workplaces and the government need to be elected, subject to immediate recall by their constituents, and receive the same wage and benefits of the average worker they represent. The workweek needs to be shortened so people have time to democratically participate in the running of society, and the vast gap between rich and poor needs to be eliminated.

The arguments here are very weak. The author alludes to anarchical, pre-agricultural societies to show examples of succesful socialism in mankind’s past. Also, it says capitalism brings out our “competitive, selfish sides”. But it is individuality and competitiveness that fuels innovation and motivates excellence. Even socialists compete with capitalists to prove the capitalist wrong…with often dismal results.

What do I suggest? I suggest we stop looking to the government to solve our problems, and to be revolutionaries in our love for everyone, rich, poor, educated, uneducated, religious, irreligious. That would silence our critics and bring the applause of those who really do care for the poor. This will also attract enemies, of course.

My personal hero is Jesus, who fed the poor, but was not swayed by them. He rejected those who would make him king; he came to serve, not govern. (Presidents, take notice). He was much more effective as a teacher than as an emperor. He made disciples, who made disciples, and in an exponential explosion, overwhelmed the Roman Empire. He gave his life to prove his selfless love, and remains very relevant, two thousand years later.

The more we are like him, the less necessary socialist governments become.

Image by Paco Juarez, used with a Creative Commons license.

My parents celebrated 50 years of marriage on Saturday, in a mass at the local Catholic parish, in the presence of family and friends. Father Porfirio, the priest who officiated the mass, is an old friend of our family, and knew my brothers and sisters as they grew up. He didn’t recognize me, as I was a very small boy when he last saw me before.

Now however, almost all of my parents’ descendants and I have left the Catholic church for the Baptist church and an evangelical church called Gran Comisión. Nevertheless, in a touching sign of love and solidarity, my uncle, a Baptist preacher, my brother-in-law, a pastor, all embraced my parents during the traditional moment of peace.

The Mass was followed by a reception at the local Golf club. My sister Eveline had worked all day, together with my nephews Oscar and Joshua, to decorate the room, which looked resplendent in gold and white. About 100 guests, many of them lifetime friends of the family filled the place, together with my nephews and nieces, brothers and sisters, and an extra friend or two.

After a prayer, a toast to my parents, and a feast, we watched a fascinating video with pictures of our family, some of which dated to the turn of the 20th century, with my great-grandparents.

Then there was a brief dance, which only a few of the family felt like joining. One of my sisters, who has a fracture in her foot, was the soul of the party, dancing with a cast, her crutches abandoned nearby.

But the party was cut off much too soon, because of the curfew at twelve. We rushed to clean up and pack everything before leaving back to the hotels and my parent’s house, and in my case, saying goodbye to most of them, as many of us would be leaving early the next day.

Back in the house we enjoyed late night conversations, and eventually retired to bed, tired but extremely happy. A few hours later we were on our way back home, some by car, others by bus, and some by air. A beautiful weekend, and a once-in-a-lifetime event.

Chet Thomas, a missionary with over 30 years on the field, and the leader of the Global Village Project, has launched a new blog named Help Honduras Now. His first post is very promising.

UPDATE: there are some inaccuracies in the blog post, read Pete’s comment below.

The Catholic church reiterates their position, that Mel Zelaya should not return.

The bishop was much more successful than Micheletti in defending himself. I love the way he said that it was a lie that people had died because of government oppression in the last week.

The call to love and brotherhood is exactly what we need. Please God, let there be absolute peace later today when Zelaya returns.

This video is very thought provoking and I’d like to hear your opinions about it. One thing I know, and that I’d like to meet that young man ten years from now, and see what he has learned from experience. My faith has been challenged to its foundation; I once was much like him. Although now my faith remains in the God of the Christian Bible, I have many more questions than when I was his age.

Thanks to David Morán for posting it on his blog El Catracho.

Would Rick Warren be vindicated if Jesus were around? This hilarious musical sketch uses humor to hint at the deeper truths of this contentious issue. But does it reach the right conclusion?

One of the signature moments in Jesus’s life was when a religious mob brought a woman to him surprised in the act of adultery. Theocratic law prescribed death by stoning for this fault, provided there were at least two witnesses.

But, the whole thing was obviously staged. Why isn’t the man who also commited adultery accused, if there were witnesses? The fanatics, who hated Jesus for mingling with drunkards, thieves, prostitutes, the poor and uncultured, were trying to discredit him by daring him to have mercy on this “sinner”.

But all Jesus did was to start writing in the sand. When the rioters demanded an answer from him he said, simply: “Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.” He then continued to write in the sand. One by one, the entire crowd dispersed, starting with the older men.

When they were all gone, he asked the woman “has no one condemned you?”, to which she replied , “no one.” He said, “Neither do I condemn you, go and sin no more.”

It seems much of the Christian religious world is behaving like this mob. I don’t believe Jesus condemns or hates gays; at least, not any more than thieves, the greedy, or drunkards (1 Co 6.9).

Religious people are just as sinful as the irreligious. It is just that for many of them, their sins are socially acceptable, or hidden by a thick wall of self-righteousness. Jesus called them “whitewashed tombs”. None of them are keeping the commandments, especially the first, but they maintain an aura of sanctity. They are blind to their own failure, and have the arrogance to condemn gays. The irony is thick enough to bury us all.

But of course, although Jesus had a merciful attitude toward sin and sinners, he nevertheless called it sin. Somehow he managed to do it without offending anyone, except the religious.

But believing homosexuality is sinful is an act of hate for many gays. Greed is evil. Is it hateful for me to think people are greedy? Lying is wrong. Is it hateful to think someone a liar?

The key here is not whether I believe homosexuality or gay marriage to be evil or not. For the record, I believe neither to be God’s idea, and thus they are sin. The issue isn’t even whether I sanctimoniously condemn, or warmly offer grace to my fellow sinners, the gays. The key to proposition 8 is to remember the separation of church and state; the law is not religious.

As a believer I should not force my faith down the throats of non-believers. Just as non-believers shouldn’t force me to be agnostic or atheist against my will. Churches should not be forced to marry gays or face prosecution. Religious beliefs shouldn’t be classified as hate crimes any more than irreligious beliefs.

I think both Warren will be vindicated for calling sin sin, and that the conclusions made in the video are flawed. But not as flawed as the attitudes of the religious crowd. As an alleged follower of Jesus, I should offer unconditional grace, but salted with truth. This in the end will attract more people to Jesus than fiery diatribes about gays roasting in hell. But I should be free to believe as I will, and even to publicly say so, as long as I respect the rights and beliefs of others.

But anyway, I thought the video was hysterical. Thanks to Matthew Hogg for posting it!

Despite the paradox of an omniscient being now knowing something, there are five things God never knew. In the first two of these, he remains ignorant by choice.

1. A sin he didn’t hate.

Before we get all riled up here, the reason God hates sin isn’t because he wants to fry sinners in hell, but because our imperfections leave him with almost no other choice. Our imperfections separate us from him. Eternally.

2. A sinner he didn’t love

God loves everyone. But, everyone is a sinner. So he loves us all.

3. A better plan of salvation

Any plan that requires our effort is susceptible to the greatest foible of all: pride. So in order for no one to be able to boast, he regales salvation on anyone who chooses to believe in him, regardless of past, present or future sinfulness.

4. A good reason to reject salvation

All reasons to reject salvation boil down to pride, mistrust, or worse, ignorance. Some people don’t want to receive eternal life if the price is to believe in a God they perceive as an odious killjoy. Many see the actions of real Christians, and cannot reconcile them with the God they claim to profess. Some have been poisoned or offended by false Christians and their doctrines. Many others simply haven’t heard of God’s plan of salvation; fortunately they won’t be judged harshly.

5. A better moment to accept it than today

The eternal life God offers was described by Jesus as “rivers of living water” and begins to flow from the moment a person chooses to believe in him. No theological training is required. No special incantation or ceremony, not even a prayer, only the choice to believe Jesus to be “the way, the truth, and the life”. To receive it at death’s door is to waste a lifetime.

Image by Thomas Hawk, used with a Creative Commons license

When I read the headline “Obama’s inaugural choice sparks outrage”, I expected to find that Obama had made a controversial left-leaning political statement. But surprisingly, the outrage is because he chose Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at his innaugural address. Rick Warren is outspokenly pro-life, and against same-sex marriage. He and James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, are lightning rods for the Christian community, and were labeled “radical” in the article.

But Obama’s choice is hardly unprecedented. Billy Graham, for instance, has been unofficial spiritual advisor to many presidents, Republican or Democrat, despite his conservative views. Why should the choice of Rick Warren be controversial, or even “radical”? The article bemoans that Obama didn’t choose someone who represented “mainstream American values” Mainstream American values! Had Obama chosen Jeremiah Wright, his former pastor, that would be radical.

Obama has shown the grace to include people he doesn’t agree with in his inner circle. This is a very wise policy. Surrounding himself with sycophants, or even with people with similar views, would create an atmosphere similar to that which led to Bush’s many blunders.

I applaud Obama’s centrist choice. Sadly, CNN is frustrated that he isn’t more liberal. To me, that’s a very good sign.

Image of JFK Inauguration courtesy of the LIFE Photo Archive.

Thanks to Pat Dryburgh for blogging about this