In Factum

Rebekah may not be rebuked for her connivance into deceiving Jacob's father, Isaac for giving Jacob the blessing reserved for the firstborn son. This is because even when the twins were still in the womb, Rebekah was already told by the Lord: “Two nations are in your womb and two people born of you shall be divided; the one shall be stronger than the other, the elder shall serve the younger -Genesis 25:23

It was Sarah's idea, being advanced in age, that Abraham would father an heir through their slave, Hagar. Hagar naturally accepted the prospect of being mother to Abraham's heir for she had nothing to lose but gain. And then, the patriarch's firstborn, Ishmael came to be.

Cain was a tiller of the land while Abel pastured his flock. As Adam's sons, they both have access to God. In their respective altars, they could offer God their very best so that God in turn, can acknowledge as His own like Adam before Eden was lost.

Dr. Ricardo de los Santos, in his many talks concerning mysteries and the supernatural one time spoke of the very first vampire. And this he said he based on an old Jewish legend which circulated in the very first century. Some of us were really surprised when he revealed that the very first vampire was not Count Dracula himself but someone more notorious and tragic when presented as he is. He disclosed that this is the enigmatic man from Kerioth; the ultimate traitor himself, Judas Iscariot. How this came to be is one the subplots of Dr. de los Santos’ second novel, he said.

I'd like to make a confession. My elder Arci is right. I'm indeed a hopeless romantic. Not that I don't have hope but there's no hope changing me from being a romantic. And for this I have prepared a sonnet confession.

I know that Rico del Sol is one of you. I can't blame my younger brother because he had always been a hopeless romantic. But I am a man of science, I even wrote a book in science but this does not make me a slave of modernism either. However, your tone and orientation in In Factum is always subjective, heightened by emotional appeal and may therefore be considered ad hominem. I hope that you will disprove me as I do not ascribe to your ideas of a pope leading his flock to apostasy and especially of the church dying right in front of us, the militant church. As proof of your objectivity, therefore, I request that this article of mine will be published in your forum, in its whole length, form and context. And with that I will have done my part as probably you believe that you have done yours.

Benedict XVI died as a resigned Pope emeritus on the last day of the year leaving just one dominant shepherd to feed the flock. In terms of Roman mythology, the two-faced god Janus must be in operation leaving Francis I the only one who must now be responsible for pasturing the flock. But Zeus Jupiter even when Benedict resigned as Pope, must have observed its significance because out of some Olympic premontory he caused a lightning to strike the apex of St. Peter's basilica.

The first century of Christianity witnessed the pendulum clashes of dignified values learning in philosophy and theology. There were the Jews, the traditional keepers of the depository of faith who the Samaritans accused as adding apocrypha to the canon. And among the Jews the Pharisees whose application of theology made them the separated ones and the Sadducees who were the righteous and aristocratic ones. Then, there were the Gentiles who were shunned by the Jews because of their Hellenistic and foreign leanings that defy Jewish traditions. No wonder that even Saint Peter and Paul had a confrontation concerning the apostolate of these peoples.

Although modern man is said to be stripping the bible of its mythology in order to arrive at the truth, mythology seems to thrive on and perhaps, unwittingly, he is even applying it to its most comprehensive intent. Funny that it is singling out the bible in its process of demythologization.

The 66 dollar (two dollars increment for questioning fee) question now is: is Muhammad a true prophet or just made everything up for profits? Remember that he was a very good merchant which caught the fancy of his first wife who was very much indeed in the mercantile profession. Let us therefore consider the many variables which could help us decide later on the question.

Proudly and grandly, they unfurl The obnoxious multi-colored flag Damning indignities they hurl; Real straight ones they vex and nag. Demiurges, they protest loudly Concerning their dire sexual rights As if they’re oppressed totally, Pushing, generating fights. But look who’s cruelly bashing The now truly marginalized Other’s rights they trample truly, Let all the truths just be denied.       And make the children grow horny;       Let the world be disorderly!           Look Who’s Oppressing?! -- Daniel Santos

"The worst form of inequality is to make unequal things equal.” -Aristotle I am not a political scientist, I am just a lowly philosopher where faculty is minding my own. But recently, I read Ryszard Legarko’s “The Demon of Democracy: Totalitarian Temptations in Free Societies” and suddenly I am spooked about two ideologies that seemingly are poles apart when I realized he was right in his analysis. A totalitarian regime like a communist state and a liberal regime like what we find in free societies have the same goal: perfect man and perfect society: men can be the best they are if they are given equality, or are treated as equals. In communism, friends, foe or family are all fellow citizens. That's the spirit of brotherhood (fraternity) which operates in both political systems.