Saturday, April 20, 2013

My Testimony Transcript - Original Uncut Version


Good morning everyone! My name is Hamish Anderson or An Tian En. The existence of God to me has always been a fact that has been firmly imprinted in my mind and something that I have always taken for granted. I remember the first time hearing about God and Jesus wasn't at church but, ironically, at a public primary school. They had Bible classes every Wednesday morning and I would hear about all kinds of stories about God and Jesus. At that time I don’t think I questioned whether or not I believed what I was being taught in Bible class. They were stories that I accepted as a child just like how Jesus says in Matthew 18:3 that we should become like little children and humble ourselves. I treated them as morality stories about how we should always do good things and never do bad things.

The challenge to my faith came when I first started studying science, or what often passes for science, during intermediate and in the first couple years of high school. When I started reading science books I was perplexed as to why God was never mentioned even once. I didn't stop believing in God but I did start to question in my mind certain stories in the Bible particularly in the Book of Genesis such as the Creation Story and Noah’s Ark. As a logical thinking type of person I had to reconcile my analytical mind with what I thought at the time were scientifically impossible events.  I had this perception, which I suspect a lot of people have, that Christianity was incompatible with reason. Faith and science are complete opposites of each other. Or so I thought.

Until I started going to Auckland Christian Mandarin Church I didn't really go to church on a regular basis on Sundays but relied on the Bible classes at Henderson Primary and (later then, at Rangeview Intermediate, on the Bible assemblies they had every second Wednesday morning) for my spiritual nourishment. I vaguely remember that when my brothers and I were very young we would sometimes go to the same church our cousins used to go to but I think this was mainly for the fun childcare aspect rather than serious theology. We also used to spend Sunday mornings at Chinese School in Mangere until my dad’s shift work made that logistically inconvenient. For a few years after that, even though I would waste my Sunday mornings watching What Now?, I still generally considered myself a Christian at least nominally and culturally. In other words, New Zealand is a Christian country (or it’s supposed to be) so being a good Christian boy wasn't something I thought about much but was just the normal thing to do. I didn't really have a proper Bible except this Children’s Bible in 365 Stories that I got at primary school that was supposed to be signed by Jonah Lomu but was actually signed by another former All Black (Eroni Clarke). This was really useful in helping me understand God’s Word but I didn't get a proper Bible until I got this really little one that was on a keychain. Yes it was really hard to read but it was still a real Bible!  So, around this time I still took my Christian faith for granted and did all the Christian stuff that you’re supposed to do such as praying before dinner but I started to read a bit deeper and be more curious about God’s Word. The weird thing was that, even though I called myself a Christian, I didn't go to church every Sunday so it felt as though I was missing out on some sort of systematic fellowship with other believers. This all changed one Saturday morning in 2002 during violin lesson when the mother of one of the students suggested we go to Auckland Christian Mandarin Church. I was studying Chinese at Rutherford at the time so I thought it would be a good opportunity to not only be more familiar with Chinese but, more importantly, enjoy the mutual company of fellow believers and spiritually feed myself on a regular basis. Even though I'm half Chinese I wasn't as fluent in Chinese as I’d like to be so I felt like I was slightly socially isolated. Fortunately, I listened to the English translations of the sermons and was put in an English speaking Sunday School class so that made it easier to understand God’s Word. I started to grow more socially over the next few years and develop better friendships with other people at church. But it wasn't until the Oddfellows English fellowship was started in 2008 that I felt like I belonged.

My understanding of Christianity started to change as I began to have my misconceptions challenged. Before going to ACMC I always thought of myself as a Christian but didn't really understand what that meant. Originally I always thought that being a Christian was just being a good boy like study hard, reading your Bible every day and being nice to everyone. But then one day I came across a tract that I think was entitled “Why Not All Good People will Go to Heaven” and this changed my whole outlook on what Christianity is about. I had always considered myself a Christian in the sense of always trying to do the right thing but, until I went to ACMC, I thought there was a conflict between my Christian faith and my rational reasoning abilities. This was one of the many misconceptions I had because Isaiah 1:18 says “Come, let us reason together” and 1 Peter 3:15 says that we should always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks us the reason for the hope we have. Furthermore, Jesus says that the first and greatest commandment is to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This means that being a Christian isn't about blind faith and believing in Jesus just for the sake because then that wouldn't be loving God with all your mind. I used to think that being a Christian was about following a bunch of rules and regulations but I still didn't really think about what makes Christianity so special. As I started reading more of the Bible and about the Bible I came to the realisation that Christianity actually makes sense.  God created us with free will but Adam and Eve had to ruin things by eating the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Because of their deliberate act of disobedience sin infected the world in such a way that everyone is born with a sinful nature. This completely shattered my simplistic thinking of Christianity which went something like this: If you’re good you’ll go to Heaven but if you’re bad you’ll go to Hell. I had this idea in my head that as long as I tried to be, what I considered good boy, then I would get into Heaven and that Hell was only for really evil people like Hitler and Osama bin Laden. The problem was that I treated Christianity just like any other religion and focused my attention on my good works and how I could please God with my own efforts instead of realising that nothing I could ever do would make me good enough for salvation. Other religions are all about doing good works to try and earn your way into Heaven but Christianity stands above the rest because it isn't just any old religion but a loving relationship with our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Ephesians 2:8-9 says that it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.

If you think about it this actually makes sense because if we could be saved by our own efforts then that means there was no point in Jesus dying on the cross and rising from the dead to save us from our sins. People often question the fairness of not allowing a good person into Heaven just because he or she is not a Christian. But that begs the question as to how you define fairness and what constitutes a good person. God created Heaven to be perfect not just good. Therefore, there’s no room for any sin. Even if you tried your hardest not to sin and followed every rule in the Bible you will inevitably feel pride in your righteousness. But then pride itself is a sin so that immediately disqualifies you from Heaven. Fortunately God provided a way for us to have a loving relationship with Him by sending his only son, Jesus Christ, to take the sins of the world upon the cross and conquer death on the third day. Many atheists claim that they respect Jesus’ teachings but don’t believe in His resurrection. Problem is they let their preconceived naturalistic worldview cloud their objectivity. Also they deny the fact that Jesus is God. If Jesus was just a normal person then it probably would be reasonable to not believe he rose from the dead. But that assumes that God is bound by the rules of science instead of allowing for the fact that God Himself created the rules of science and can suspend them any time He likes to display His glory.

A few other facts support the historical evidence of Christ’s resurrection such as the fact that Mary Magdalene was the first to witness Christ after His resurrection. In those days a woman’s testimony was not considered trustworthy so, if Mary Magdalene was making up crazy stories, why would the apostles accept her testimony and risk looking stupid? Another fact is that Jesus’ tomb was empty – something that not even the Roman and Jewish authorities denied. Some atheists suggest that maybe the disciples stole Jesus’ body. But they would've had to not only overpower the professionally trained Roman guards but also remove the one and a half to two tonne stone at the entrance of Jesus’ tomb. Others argue that the Romans or Jews probably stole His body. But if that was the case why didn't they just produce Jesus’ body and crush Christianity once and for all.

I have also heard the theory that Jesus didn't really die but was just really wounded and somehow managed to escape from His tomb. Even if you put aside the fact that crucifixion (a punishment so severe it was only reserved for the very worst of the worst and never applied to Roman citizens) is physically impossible to survive, it is hard to believe that a weakened and wounded Jesus would've been able to overpower the Roman guards (who were so strictly disciplined that failing their duties would've resulted in death) let alone remove a stone that weighed almost two tonnes.

Then you have the theory that Jesus’ disciples were just hallucinating. If there were only one or two people who claimed to have seen Jesus alive again then maybe their mental capacity could be called into question. But it wasn't just one or two people who saw Jesus after his resurrection, it was over 500 people who saw Him and not just at one time but over a period of 40 days until His ascension to Heaven. Many of these witnesses originally didn't believe it was really Jesus and thought it was just a ghost. For example, Doubting Thomas didn't believe he was really seeing Jesus until he physically touched His wounds. Add this to the fact that Jesus ate food at least four times after His resurrection and the hallucination theory loses its credibility. Hallucinations, by definition, are subjective to the individual person experiencing them so group hallucinations are impossible. The resurrected Jesus didn't just appear to His disciples but to his sceptical half-brother James and enemy Saul of Tarsus (who would later be known as the Apostle Paul). Even if the hallucination theory is correct Jesus’ body should've still been in the tomb but the fact is that it wasn't.

At this time Christianity was heavily oppressed by the Roman Empire and Christians were heavily persecuted to death. These persecuted witnesses of Christ’s resurrection chose to give up their temporary physical lives in exchange for eternal life with God in Heaven because they couldn't deny what they believed and saw with their very own eyes. If Jesus didn't die on the cross and rise from the dead then these brave martyrs would've been stupid for not taking the countless opportunities that were offered to them to deny their faith and save their own lives.

After hearing these facts some people claim that the Bible is old and too unreliable anyway. But there’s only a 25 year difference between when the New Testament was written and its earliest copy in contrast to the more than thousand year difference between the writings of Caesar, Aristotle and Plato and their earliest copies. So if the New Testament is unreliable then much of the rest of ancient history is even more unreliable. As if this isn't enough evidence for the life and resurrection of Jesus Christ there is also the fact that there are numerous prophecies in the Old Testament that aren't just vague and generally symbolic but, especially in Isaiah and Psalms, attest in great detail to Jesus Christ’s life and ultimate destiny and thus God’s plan for our salvation. It would be easy for atheists to say that this was just all coincidence but the chances of one man fulfilling even eight of these prophecies is 1 in 10^17. That’s 1 with 17 zeroes. To put this into perspective, that’s the same chance as covering the whole of Texas in coins 2 feet deep and getting a blindfolded guy to pick up a randomly marked coin on his first try. Also, the Bible isn't just one book but 66 books that were written by a whole range of people over a long period of time. So it’s not like there was a whole bunch of people who conspired to make up a huge story. When confronted with these facts some people still argue that it doesn’t really matter whether or not Jesus was resurrected as long as you follow His moral teachings. But if Jesus didn’t rise from the dead then essentially He was no more than a raving lunatic and our faith is useless because no one is saved. All of His good moral teachings would've been worthless. Whether or not Christianity is true depends on whether or not Jesus Christ’s bodily resurrection actually took place (1 Corinthians 15:17). This is what separates Christianity from other religions which are just arbitrary belief systems that can’t be proven one way or another.

I chose to be a Christian because it makes more sense to me than atheism or any other religion. As I continued to study the historical evidence supporting Jesus’ resurrection it became really easy for me to love God on an intellectual basis and accept Jesus as my personal Saviour. But I knew that I also had to accept Him as my Lord and give Him total control of my life. For too long I had treated God as my personal genie to whom I would only pray if I wanted something. I always thought of myself as in control of my own life and relied on my own efforts to get into Heaven. Circumstances (whether at home, or work or uni) would fluctuate between good and bad. However, as I have developed spiritually (and especially since I started participating in this course called Experiencing God), I learned to trust my life in God’s hands and let Him be Lord of my life because He is above all kinds of circumstances and above all things.  I know that I am not perfect and will never be perfect enough to please God. But that doesn't matter. To paraphrase John F Kennedy, it’s not about asking what God can do for us or even what we can do for God but about thanking God for what He has already done through atoning for our sins and offering the ultimate gift of eternal life via a relationship with Jesus Christ. Accepting Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour is not the end of my spiritual journey, and I can’t predict what kind of hazards will lie ahead, but he is my GPS and I know that by letting Him take the wheel He will steer me in the right direction. Thank you and God Bless!

©Copyright Hamish Anderson 2013

Thursday, April 18, 2013

My testimony transcript


Good morning everyone! My name is Hamish Anderson or An Tian En. I’ve always believed in God ever since I can remember. The first time I learned about God and Jesus wasn't at church but, ironically, at a public primary school. They had Bible classes every Wednesday morning and I would listen to all kinds of stories about God and Jesus. At that time I don’t think I questioned what I was being taught. I just treated them as moral lessons about how we should always be good.

The challenge to my faith came when I first started studying science during intermediate and in the first couple years of high school. When I started reading science books I was wondering why God was never mentioned. I didn't stop believing in God but I did start to question certain stories in the Bible particularly in the Book of Genesis. As a logical type of person I had to reconcile my analytical mind with what I thought were scientifically impossible events.  Faith and science are complete opposites. Or so I thought. I had always considered myself a Christian in terms of morality but, until then, I thought there was a conflict between my Christian faith and my reasoning abilities. This was a misconception I had because 1 Peter 3:15 says that we should always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks us the reason for the hope we have. This means that being a Christian isn't about blind faith and believing in Jesus just for the sake of it, otherwise that wouldn't be loving God with all your mind.

Until I went to Auckland Christian Mandarin Church (ACMC) I didn't really go to church regularly on Sundays but relied on the Bible classes at Henderson Primary and the Bible assemblies at Rangeview Intermediate for my spiritual nourishment. I took my Christian faith for granted and did all the Christian stuff that you’re supposed to like pray before dinner. But then I read a bit deeper and became more curious about God’s Word. The weird thing was that, even though I called myself a Christian, not going to church every Sunday made me feel like I was missing out on some sort of regular fellowship with other believers. This all changed one Saturday morning in 2002, during violin lesson, when the mum of one of the students suggested we go to this Chinese church. I was studying Chinese at Rutherford at the time so we thought it would be a good opportunity to not only be more familiar with Chinese but, more importantly, enjoy the company of fellow believers and spiritually feed myself every week. Even though I’m half Chinese I’m not as fluent in Chinese as I’d like to be so I felt slightly socially isolated. Fortunately, I listened to the English translations of the sermons and was put in an English speaking Sunday School class so that made it easier to understand God’s Word. Friendships developed over the next few years but it wasn't until the Oddfellows English fellowship started in 2008 that I felt like I truly belonged.

My understanding of Christianity changed as I began to have my misconceptions challenged. Before going to ACMC I always considered myself a Christian but didn't really understand what that meant. I used to think that Christianity was a bunch of rules and regulations and didn't know what made it so special. As I studied more of the Bible I realised that Christianity actually makes sense. I thought that being a Christian was about being a good boy like study hard, read your Bible every day and be nice to everyone. But one day I came across a tract about how being good won’t necessarily get you into heaven and this changed my whole outlook on Christianity. The problem was that I treated Christianity like a typical religion and focused my attention on good works and how I could please God with my own efforts. Instead, Ephesians 2:8-9 says that salvation is a gift from God, not due to good works, otherwise people could just boast. If our own efforts could save us then there was no point in Jesus’ sacrifice.

From studying the historical evidence of Jesus’ resurrection it became really easy to love God with all my mind and accept Jesus as my personal Saviour. But I knew that I also had to accept Him as my Lord and give Him total control of my life. I always tried to be in control and rely on my own efforts for salvation but circumstances in my life were constantly changing. However, as I have developed spiritually (and especially since I started taking the Experiencing God course) I learned to trust my life in Jesus and let Him be my Lord because He is always present and can calm any storm.  I know I’m not perfect and will never be perfect. But that doesn't matter, because it’s not about what I can do for God or what He can do for me, but about thanking Him for what He has already done on the cross. Accepting Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour is not the end of my journey, and I don’t know what hazards lie ahead, but he is my driver and I know that by letting Him take the wheel He will steer me in the right direction. Thank you and God Bless!

Delivered on 10 February 2013.




Saturday, September 8, 2012

Why I'm against gay marriage

Homosexuality is no worse than any other sin but it's still a sin and a moral wrong can never be a civil right. Obviously I'm not suggesting it should be recriminalised but the problem is that now it's treated as just another lifestyle and now they're trying to hijack the sacred institution of marriage. If it's just about rights then we've already got civil unions. But that's not enough. Their real agenda is to destroy our traditional values under the guise of "marriage equality." Btw I notice how the liberal media use the newspeak term "marriage equality." That's implying that all types of relationships are just as equal as marriage but, in that case, why should the govt be involved in relationships at all? Marriage wasn't created by the State (or for that matter religion). It was created by God so nobody has the right to redefine it. It takes one man and one woman (who are different but complement each other) to produce a child and that's what makes marriage the foundation of the family. Govt's role is to protect marriage because it provides the most stable environment in which to raise children. If marriage is just about love then why not allow polygamy or incest? And if marriage is a right then what about people who can't find spouses? Should the govt then step in? Another common pro-gay marriage argument is comparing banning gay marriage to banning interracial marriage. Don't know if you've seen the NZ Herald cartoon calling Louisa Wall NZ's Rosa Parks but if I was black I would consider it a huge insult to such a famous Civil Rights icon. The difference is that when interracial marriages were wrongly banned it was because of the spouses' individual attributes and perceived threats to racial purity. A marriage between a black man and a white woman was still (by definition) a marriage, just not a legal one. In contrast when you legalise same-sex marriage you're not just allowing more people to get married (because gays can already get married as long as they follow the same rules as everyone else) but you're actually completely redefining and overthrowing the whole fundamental nature and purpose of marriage itself. Hence gay marriage is an oxymoron. By redefining marriage (instead of just recognising and enforcing it) the govt is actually imposing its own moral value judgement on society and abusing its powers thus leading to a real threat to freedom.

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Liberal hypocrisy on John Banks' religious beliefs

Liberals often like to tout themselves as compassionate and preach tolerance of diversity. They always go on about how we shouldn't be judgemental about other people or legislate morality. Whenever a controversial issue (such as same sex marriage, terrorism, immigration or abortion etc.) is being discussed, instead of allowing the facts to be presented openly and fairly, we're expected to tiptoe around the issue for fear of being accused of homophobic,islamophobic, racist or sexist or whatever ism or somethingphobia the liberal establishment decides to make up. MMP, in contrast to First Past the Post, is claimed to be a better electoral system because it supposedly makes Parliament more representative of the diversity of New Zealand. Then along comes John Banks who comes out of the closet as an openly conservative Christian who believes in the Biblical account of creation and suddenly they become the intolerant bigots they accuse their political opponents of being. On Monday the ACT Party leader told the Christian radio station, New Zealand's Rhema, "That's what I believe, but I'm not going to impose my beliefs on other people, especially in this post-Christian society that we live in, especially in these lamentable times.'' It seems there's an unwriten footnote in The Official Socialist Handbook that you have to be compassionate and tolerant towards everyone except of course white conservative Christians. Yesterday morning I was listening to Newstalk ZB's Mike Hosking  interview Dr Peter Lineham, the religion and politics specialist from Massey University, about this non-issue and the antichristian media bias was so blatently obvious.  They may not have actually said anything biased but the tone that was used sounded as though they though they were discussing whether John Banks had suddenly lost his mind. Hosking asked Lineham if this has any effect on him as an MP and cabinet minister, to which Lineham replied that it might in the case of issues such as gay marriage (something that is unbiblical). John Banks is the Associate Minister of Education and supports starting up charter schools, some of which would be Christian schools that teach Creationism, so secular liberals claim that this is relevant because he might "impose his beliefs on other people." But when Chris Carter, who is openly gay, was the Minister of Education during the last Labour Government these same secular liberals who don't want christians to "shove their beliefs down people's throats" never raised questions about whether his sexuality had any relevance to his ministerial duties. More recently, lesbian Labour MP Louisa Wall has had her gay marriage bill drawn out of the ballot but, of course, anyone who tries to make her lesbianism a relevant factor in the gay marriage debate is immediately labelled a homophobe. So being gay is completely irrelevant if you support gay marriage but if you're a Bible-believing Christian (like John Banks) you can't be against it without being biased? Even if John Banks does vote against redefining a sacred institution because of his religious beliefs what makes his views any less deserving of tolerance than anyone elses's? There seems to be a politically correct double standard where liberals are tolerant towards and terrified of offending all kinds of sensitive specially-favoured minorities but conservative Christians are fair game for ridicule and mockery. Their complaints towards Christains for wanting to "legislate morality" shows their hypocrisy even further especially when they're quite happy to force New Zealanders to tithe more to the Church of Climate Change through the Emissions Tax Scam despite the fact that New Zealand's carbon emissions are so miniscule (0.11%) that EVEN IF man-made climate change is happening it wouldn't decrease carbon emissions at all but instead decrease our economic growth. I don't hear John Banks demanding taxpayers pay for his religious beliefs. Another example of beliefs that liberals don't have a problem with imposing is Maori mythology.  For example, significant transport projects (like the Auckland rail loop) are often stalled because it might offend the Taniwha and of course you can't offend the Taniwha because that would be culturally insensitive.

Many liberals claim they have no problems with Christians but that's only as long as you're one of those fake politically correct types who caves into secular liberalism. As soon as you declare yourself as a proper Bible-believing Christian who's not afraid to stand up against their secular liberal agenda (like Colin Craig) you make yourselves eligible for persecution. I would like to think that most people, apart from militant atheists, have no problem with politicians believing in God. But, as Leighton Smith (who came after Mike Hosking) rightly pointed out, if it's possible to believe in God then why isn't it possible to believe that He created the world in 6 days and Adam and Eve last? Atheists often go on about how Christians are intolerant judgemental bigots who believe in some "Sky Fairy" as opposed to themselves whom they portray as "rational free-thinkers." But try having an open and informed debate about evolution or man-made climate change and see how rational and free-thinking they really are. John Banks dared to admit that he doesn't subscribe to the belief that there was nothing and then nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything. Yeah, he must be a real crazy nutcase!
DISCLAIMER: I have NEVER been a member of the ACT Party nor have I ever voted for ACT or have any association whatsover with the ACT Party or John Banks or anyone associated with John Banks - just in case you think I'm being biased.

Friday, July 27, 2012

Olympics and the Nazis

The world's greatest sporting event has finally arrived. But while you're all excited about the London Olympics it may shock you to know that much of the pageantry of the Olympic Games (especially the torch relay) actually has influences from Nazi propaganda. Unlike the Olympic flame, which symbolises the stealing of fire by Prometheus from Zeus, the torch relay did not originate from the ancient Olympics. It was in fact started by Nazi sports administrator, Carl Diem. As the General Secretary of the German Olympic Committe, this guy was responsible for helping Berlin win the 1936 Olympics in 1931. Adolf Hitler, who came to power 2 years later, was originally not too keen on the Olympics and called it "an invention of Jews and Freemasons." However, Joseph Goebbels (the Nazi propaganda minister) was like "Hey wait a minute. This is like the world's greatest sporting event! Why don't we use this as a chance to showcase Aryan racial supremacy?" Hitler was convinced and, after a meeting in March 1933, told Carl Diem that he would support the Olympics. The Nazis used the opportunity of the Olympics for racial propaganda purposes by claiming that the great civilization of Ancient Greece was due to the supremacy of the Aryan race. Carl Diem came up with the idea of the Olympic torch relay to link the ancient Olympics with the modern Olympics. Hitler wanted to use the torch relay to supposedly represent the connection between the rituals and ceremonies of Ancient Greece and the claimed physical superiority of the so-called "master race" that the Nazis were eager to show the world at the Berlin Games. Like all other Olympic torch relays after it, the first one in 1936 was lit in Olympia, Greece (the site of the Ancient Games) and eventually made its way to Berlin. On the way it went through Yugoslavia, Hungary, Austria and Czechoslovakia. It's interesting to note that all of these countries would later suffer the fate of Nazi oppression. Another interesting fact is that the 1936 Berlin Olympics were actually the first to be broadcast live. This made spreading Nazi propaganda a whole lot easier because you could reach a far greater audience more effectively than just through word-of-mouth. So when you're watching the London Olympics and getting all pumped up don't forget that the Olympic Movement is not all about world peace and harmony. Also, you will notice that many of the athletes are sponsored by Adidas. There's Nazi connections there too. But that's another post!

Saturday, June 2, 2012

Making Mugabe tourism envoy only makes UN even more of a sick joke

The United Nations was set up in 1945 after World War II in order to supposedly facilitate peace and human rights. That's what it's supposed to do. Unfortunately, what started out as a great idea to get countries to get along with each other has now become a huge joke and has made the UN about as useless and irrelevant as its predecessor, the League of Nations. There are too many examples of their incompentence but let's start with failing to prevent the Rwandan or Bosnian Genocides in the 1990s. Then you have the oil-for food scandal in which Russia, France and China (the 3 permanent Security Council members that opposed the Iraq War) continued to prop up Saddam Hussein's tyrannical regime in exchange for oil while at the same time accusing the United States and Britain of fighting a war for oil. The fact that Russia, France and China kept pushing to remove sanctions on Iraq kind of destroys the whole "blood for oil" argument that liberals kept going on about since it was the countries that opposed the Iraq War that were the ones truly motivated by oil. Next example: Israel bashing. Israel gets hounded by the UN every time they try to defend themselves against terrorists (who hide among civilians in order to elicit sympathy) yet the UN hasn't even passed a single resolution to condemn the genocide in Sudan. The UN is supposed to protect and promote human rights but it does anything but that. For example, the so-called Human Rights Council flew the UN flags at half-mast after Kim Jong-il died and, more recently, the United Nations can't really do anything about Syria because Russia and China (who both have veto power) have such cozy relationships with that murderous regime. Want another example of the Useless Nations hypocrisy over human rights? The UN Human Rights Council is supposed to protect human rights which you would've thought includes free speech. Not according to the Human Rights Council, otherwise they wouldn't have passed a resolution banning criticism of Islam so they could appease Muslim dictatorships and legitimise their persecution of Christians. Oh, and don't even get me started on the ironically named UN World Conference Against Racism providing a soapbox for Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to air his antisemtic holocaust denials and demands for Israel to be wiped off the map. When you notice all these scandals you start to realise how much of a joke this waste of a talkfest has become. Making Robert Mugabe, an evil dictator that commits atrocious human rights violations and has turned Zimbabwe into a complete basket case in the space of just 30 years, the Special Ambassador of the United Nations World Tourism Organization is yet even more proof of how irrelevant and out of touch the UN really is. Obviously there are heaps of other examples of the UN's uselessness but this post is long enough already. Feel free to comment below with your own examples.

Sunday, April 8, 2012

Why is Easter different every year and how is the date determined?

Easter is different every year because it is around the same time as the Jewish festival of Passover which is based on the Lunar Calendar.Ok so how is it the date determined? Well basically Easter Sunday is the first Sunday after the Paschal Full Moon which is the first full moon on or after 21 March. Therefore Easter Sunday can never be earlier than 22 March or later than 25 April.