Has Anyone Else Tried Quizfarm Theology Quizes?

[Steeltemplar]

Oh, that's right. I had forgotten it was by Luther first. Thank you.

But yes. I highly recommend the Bach piece. It is quite beautiful and inspiring.

[PigtailsJazz]

Anselm

80%
John Calvin

80%
Karl Barth

80%
Friedrich Schleiermacher

60%
Martin Luther

60%
Jonathan Edwards

53%
Charles Finney

33%
Augustine

33%
Paul Tillich

20%
J?Moltmann

13%


I scored as Karl Barth....

....I don't know who that is.....

[Puritan]

Karl Barth was a Reformed theologian from Switzerland who founded the Neo-Orthodox school of theology in the early 20th century.

[mitsuki lover]

Has anyone gotten an answer that they totally were shocked with and disagreed with the result?

[GhostontheNet]

Has anyone gotten an answer that they totally were shocked with and disagreed with the result?

Only being dubbed an atheist on a poor substitute test really.

[Bobtheduck]

Um... It was amazing that there were like 6 questions on there that related to beliefs that John said flat out meant you were following satan... Jesus being only a spirit, that the entire physical world is corrupt (material world made by satan?!)

Suicide is a good way to get rid of the evil of the body: There are people who believe this? Eiri Masami's influence spreads beyond anime! O_o

Having been the first creation of the Father, the Son then created the Holy Spirit: Except that The Holy Spirit is mentioned in the Old Testament... a number of times...

Other questions on here seem like, oh what's the word, "nitpicking"? It's like they have to have a firm grasp on something the Bible is somewhat vague on and make it fit their tiny little box. I say, no, it's not like that because "my ways are not your ways and my thoughts are not your thoughts"

Miracles show Jesus divinity. Hunger shows his humanity: I think this is just one of those cool things to say, not really some divine truth you have to know... It's not really "truth" in the sense of the basis for a doctrine (really, where would you take it?) but... Actually, miracles don't show divinity (the disciples performed miracles as well and healings and exorcisms had been performed by rabbis and even non-jewish people for a long time)

A baptism is invalid if performed by a minister who later renounces his faith: Doesnt' that mean that your fate (given this likely means that person believes babtism is a requirement for salvation) rests upon the personal choices of someone other than you? Um... I'll say straight out, relax... Don't worry about your salvation in the event your pastor sticks his hand in the cookie jar or runs away with the organist (or worse) because if you believe in Jesus and give your life to him and confess your sins and confess Jesus as your savior, you're saved... Has nothing to do with the heart of anyone else involved in the process... Man, what a silly thing to create paranoia about...

"You are Chalcedon compliant. Congratulations, you're not a heretic. You believe that Jesus is truly God and truly man and like us in every respect, apart from sin. Officially approved in 451." What the heck does that mean? I guess I'm not all that familiar with Church history, not enough to know all those terms...

[Puritan]

What the heck does that mean? I guess I'm not all that familiar with Church history, not enough to know all those terms...

This question, and your other questions, is related to the Council of Chalcedon. It was an Ecumenical council which was held to counter a number of heresies that had popped up in the Church, and the Chalcedonian Creed produced by the council is a statement of Christian belief made to counter these ideas. There are still disagreements about some of the things decided by the seven ecumenical councils, but the Chalcedonian Creed (along with the Nicine Creed) is considered by many to be a good benchmark of orthodox Christian beliefs. Thus the strange statements it asked you to agree with or disagree with. Some of them may be open to interpretation, but many of the ideas you mention are statements of ideas condemned by the ecumenical councils. The things mentioned might seem nitpicky at times, but some of these ideas caused (and sometimes still cause) huge problems for the Church.

[Arnobius]

Um... It was amazing that there were like 6 questions on there that related to beliefs that John said flat out meant you were following satan... Jesus being only a spirit, that the entire physical world is corrupt (material world made by satan?!)

Here's a rundown on some of the heresies that these questions were based on. Maybe it will help in understanding why some of the questions were asked (or maybe not).

This first one was from a heresy called Docetism that said matter was evil so God wouldn't really become human, but just "appeared" [from the Greek "dokeo" (to seem, to appear)] to look human.

Suicide is a good way to get rid of the evil of the body: There are people who believe this? Eiri Masami's influence spreads beyond anime! O_o

Several forms of gnosticism held that matter including the human body was evil. The approaches they took varied from extreme asceticism (denying the body any chance to do evil) to extreme licentiousness (since the body is evil, it doesn't matter what was done with it)

[EDIT] Actually this was Albigensianism (AKA the Cathar), which was a medieval variant of gnosticism, taking place some 800 years after Chalcedon, so technically it's a bit out of place here. But they did believe matter was evil, and they had one rite done on the deathbed which was believed to remove all sins and send a person straight to heaven. Unfortunately they believed it could only be given once so if the person recovered from the illness, they had to be killed so they didn't go to hell for any sins committed afterwards. So they would give the individual a choice... a "martyr's" death (being smothered right there) or a "witness" death (being starved to death. They rejected all governments and institutions and legal contracts, and abused scripture to attempt to prove Christ was only a spirit.

Having been the first creation of the Father, the Son then created the Holy Spirit: Except that The Holy Spirit is mentioned in the Old Testament... a number of times...

Arianism reasoned that if God was the Father and Jesus the Son, then it followed that there must have been a time before God created Jesus and thus Jesus was not eternal, but a creature though one greater than humans.

This was a popular heresy that spread all over the Roman Empire, and The Church was constantly fighting it. Condemned at the council of Nicea, but variants popped up and had to be refuted one after another.

A baptism is invalid if performed by a minister who later renounces his faith: Doesnt' that mean that your fate (given this likely means that person believes babtism is a requirement for salvation) rests upon the personal choices of someone other than you? Um... I'll say straight out, relax... Don't worry about your salvation in the event your pastor sticks his hand in the cookie jar or runs away with the organist (or worse) because if you believe in Jesus and give your life to him and confess your sins and confess Jesus as your savior, you're saved... Has nothing to do with the heart of anyone else involved in the process... Man, what a silly thing to create paranoia about...

This was the heresy of Donatism. It came up during the late persecutions of Christianity when some of the clergy recanted their faith and surrendered scripture to their persecutors. Donatus and followers claimed that their ordination was made invalid by their apostasy and thus anyone baptised by themwas not validly baptized. It was condemned as a heresy pretty much because by these standards nobody could be considered pure enough to be a Christian. I think this quote below sums up the reason for rejection.

The effectiveness of the baptism or administration of the Lord's supper does not cease to be effective if the moral character of the minister is in question or even demonstrated to be faulty. Rather, the sacraments are powerful because of what they are, visible representations of spiritual realities. God is the one who works in and through them and He is not restricted by the moral state of the administrant.

These tests can be fun, but I certainly wouldn't use them as a proof of faith or an accurate representation of what someone believes. The weakness is a certain % of the questions are seen as being a part of a certain belief, so if you found and answered only those questions for a certain belief with the strongest "Agree" and put the strongest "Disagree" with the rest, you would have 100% with the position you wanted and 0% for the rest, even though that doesn't give an accurate portrayal: For example, with the "Theological Worldview" quiz I had trouble with because every denomination/worldview has opinions on the subjects of the questions given (favorable or opposed), so to say "82% Neo-orthodox, 72% Wesylian" seems rather artificial since only 7 questions were scored for each worldview.

[PigtailsJazz]

Karl Barth was a Reformed theologian from Switzerland who founded the Neo-Orthodox school of theology in the early 20th century.

Thank you! *is too lazy to look it up....*

[mitsuki lover]

To be honest a perfect personality quiz of any type would have to be more than 20 pages long and have hundreds of questions with each question having more than
5 or 6 possibilites.However such a test would be impossible to administer on the
internet considering bandwidth involved.
Also you have to remember that such quizzes will more or less reflect the creators personal bias in some subtle way.

[GhostontheNet]

To be honest a perfect personality quiz of any type would have to be more than 20 pages long and have hundreds of questions with each question having more than
5 or 6 possibilites.However such a test would be impossible to administer on the
internet considering bandwidth involved.
Also you have to remember that such quizzes will more or less reflect the creators personal bias in some subtle way.

Personality quiz? That wouldn't say anything about theology, particularly with a more limited focus like base orthodoxy.

[Arnobius]

Personality quiz? That wouldn't say anything about theology, particularly with a more limited focus like base orthodoxy.

It's a good point. Though I'm sure there are many who would disagree on what consisted of orthodoxy too. It would be rather hard to create a test everyone would be satisfied with.

[GhostontheNet]

It's a good point. Though I'm sure there are many who would disagree on what consisted of orthodoxy too. It would be rather hard to create a test everyone would be satisfied with.

These days it seems it's generally agreed base orthodoxy would be agreement with the Apostolic, Nicene, and Chalcedonian creeds, and since these aren't themselves very long or complex (though the Chalcedonian is the most complex), it doesn't take long to test.

[Arnobius]

These days it seems it's generally agreed base orthodoxy would be agreement with the Apostolic, Nicene, and Chalcedonian creeds, and since these aren't themselves very long or complex (though the Chalcedonian is the most complex), it doesn't take long to test.

Ah, that orthodoxy. I was thinking of the different understandings between denominations and their definitions of orthodoxy. Yes I would think those creeds would be a good place to start.

[GhostontheNet]

Ah, that orthodoxy. I was thinking of the different understandings between denominations and their definitions of orthodoxy. Yes I would think those creeds would be a good place to start.

Ah yes, the root of the occasional outbreak of spiritual McCarthyism in some churches where woe is you if you disagree with some of their positions - you will get seriously censured or kicked out. Whence all this accursed factionalism in the Church? This isn't what Yeshua prayed for! Arrghh.

[mitsuki lover]

My point is that there is no such thing as a perfect test when it comes to personality wheter it be theological,political or psychological.There are too many factors that need to be considered for an overall perfect test.And while the Creeds are considered the basis of Orthodoxy it should be pointed out that not all Christians necessarily agree with the importance of the Creeds these days.

[Arnobius]

Ah yes, the root of the occasional outbreak of spiritual McCarthyism in some churches where woe is you if you disagree with some of their positions - you will get seriously censured or kicked out. Whence all this accursed factionalism in the Church? This isn't what Yeshua prayed for! Arrghh.

I don't think it's all Spiritual McCarthyism. There are some elements that are seen as crucial for the faith. People who want to reject that can't expect to be seen as members in good standing. Even Christ made reference to treating the people who will not hear the Church as if they were a tax collector.

As for the factionalism, I think it will go on until we all can agree on a common faith. However I know many religious leaders have been thinking about the words of Christ "That they maybe one."

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_25051995_ut-unum-sint_en.html
Here's one view on that if anyone is interested

[Phantom_Sorano]

Quizfarm???

[GhostontheNet]

I don't think it's all Spiritual McCarthyism. There are some elements that are seen as crucial for the faith. People who want to reject that can't expect to be seen as members in good standing. Even Christ made reference to treating the people who will not hear the Church as if they were a tax collector.

In context the passage is about one who transgresses against their brother. Getting kicked out for holding to systems like partial/orthodox preterism (as has happened to some of us), or getting kicked out for playing styles of music they don't like, etc. would hardly count as not being spiritual Mcarthyism. Getting kicked out for denying the terms of the creeds which have been the cornerstone of apostolic Christianity for centuries is an entirely different thing altogether though.

[Arnobius]

In context the passage is about one who transgresses against their brother. Getting kicked out for holding to systems like partial/orthodox preterism (as has happened to some of us), or getting kicked out for playing styles of music they don't like, etc. would hardly count as not being spiritual Mcarthyism. Getting kicked out for denying the terms of the creeds which have been the cornerstone of apostolic Christianity for centuries is an entirely different thing altogether though.

Ah, I see what you mean now. I misinterpreted your previous statement to mean you thought the differences were unimportant in general. Thanks for clarifying matters

[GhostontheNet]

And while the Creeds are considered the basis of Orthodoxy it should be pointed out that not all Christians necessarily agree with the importance of the Creeds these days.

So too a good deal of Christians have very little inkling of the importance and meaning of our history at any stage of it - a pity. The serious downside of denying articles of the classic creeds is that it greatly diminishes the elegant beauty of the Biblical narrative and leaves major aspects of God's nature to be essentially half-baked. A lot of churches will at least teach the contents of the creeds though not in the form of the creeds.

[JediSonic]

Roman Catholic

100%

Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan

68%

Neo orthodox

68%

Fundamentalist

54%

Emergent/Postmodern

43%

Classical Liberal

43%

Charismatic/Pentecostal

39%

Reformed Evangelical

32%

Modern Liberal

25%

w00t!

[mitsuki lover]

One of the things that I think is funny about the theology worldview quiz is even though I'm not a Catholic I still get 100% Catholic on it.