 | You scored as Christianity. Your views are most similar to those of Christianity. Do more research on Christianity and possibly consider being baptized and accepting Jesus, if you aren't already Christian. Christianity is the second of the Abrahamic faiths; it follows Judaism and is followed by Islam. It differs in its belief of Jesus, as not a prophet nor historical figure, but as God in human form. The Holy Trinity is the concept that God takes three forms: the Father, the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Ghost (sometimes called Holy Spirit). Jesus taught the idea of instead of seeking revenge, one should love his or her neighbors and enemies. Christians believe that Jesus died on the cross to save humankind and forgive people's sins.
Which religion is the right one for you? (new version) created with QuizFarm.com |
As you can see, I scored 100% Christian. And then I offended Trixie. I didn't mean to, but I said I think if you score higher than 0% on Satanism, you might want to re-evaluate your belief system. I only answered the questions according to what the Bible says, because I believe the Bible to be completey true and infallible. See how you do.
32 comments:
Christ....I hate these quizes. I don't know why I wasted my time:
You scored as agnosticism.
You are an agnostic. Though it is generally taken that agnostics neither believe nor disbelieve in God, it is possible to be a theist or atheist in addition to an agnostic. Agnostics don't believe it is possible to prove the existence of God (nor lack thereof). Agnosticism is a philosophy that God's existence cannot be proven. Some say it is possible to be agnostic and follow a religion; however, one cannot be a devout believer if he or she does not truly believe.
agnosticism
79%
Islam
63%
Christianity
54%
Buddhism
54%
Hinduism
50%
Paganism
50%
Judaism
46%
atheism
42%
Satanism
33%
Re, "I said I think if you score higher than 0% on Satanism, you might want to re-evaluate your belief system."
Mark, are you really incapable of being inoffensive? What a jerkwaddish thing to say.
To fix your layout, go back into the post and look for something in the coding that says "width," close to the top. It should say "600." Adjust it down; I think I changed mine to 200. It might not show the change on the preview, so yoyu might have to republish a couple of times.
And you should quit being a Jerk for Jesus. It's not Jesus that offends. It's most of his followers in the United States. Sheesh!
I suppose you could say that I was being a jerk if I had said that only after I took the quiz, but if you return to Trixies's place and re-read the comments, I actually said that BEFORE I took the quiz, also.
If I had scored something like 17% in Satanism, myself, I would be very concerned about what beliefs I might have that what Paul, in 1st Timothy chapter 4 says are "things taught by Demons".
The quiz, in my opinion, is meant to encourage us, each of us, to look within ourselves and re-evaluate our belief system, and if for some reason, a Christian doesn't score 100% Christian, and even scores some percentage of Satanism, and still doesn't think he/she needs to re-evaluate their belief system, that would be the epitome of arrogance in my opinion.
Arrogance, for instance, like making the outlandish claim that God doesn't really mean what He said, that it's a matter of individual interpretation because the Bible is unclear.
Actually, that idea is exactly what Satan expressed in the garden when he said to Eve, "You will not surely die, for God knows if you eat of the fruit, your eyes will be open and you shall be like God, knowing good and evil".
And I would even go so far as to say that if you are offended by me suggesting you should re-evaluate your belief system, then maybe you should re-evaluate your belief system to see why you are so arrogant as to be offended by the truth.
I am addressing Christians here. I don't expect unbelievers to score 100% Christian.
As one who scored a 33% on Satanism, I'd like to know how the scoring is done to qualify for a higher percentage on satanism. It's not like I was asked, "Cutting off the heads of chickens and putting them on a pentagram altar will bring you prosperity....'agree' or 'disagree'".
How is Satanism being measured in the test?
One of the problem with these things, is, like poll questions, the language can make you answer a certain way, depending on how you are choosing (or not choosing) to interpret them. I could have answered several different ways, to varying degrees of answering them, depending on my mood.
(Not saying that I am ashamed of my score results...just don't see the point or the relevance). It's not like it is a legitimate quiz created by God to measure your true level of faith.
"How is Satanism being measured in the test?"
I don't know, Smithy, I don't even know how i managed to score 17 on paganism.
I suppose you can take whatever you like from it, but overall, i am pretty pleased with it. The Biblical conclusions it makes I feel are pretty accurate.
You score pretty high on Christianity for an agnostic, Smithy. I would have guessed that about you, from what you say about lots of stuff.
Maybe the way I answered this question lakes the case for paganism:
There should be no images, statues, etc. of God or his messengers.
I said disagree, because I was thinking there isn't anything wrong with making statues or paintings of people like His messengers, ie, St Peter, or The Pope or Billy Graham, etc...
The Bible says we should not make for yourself any idols. I guess that's what the quiz refers to. But that only applies if you elevate those idols above God. And that isn't how I interpreted the question.
Mark, your literal approach to all things faith will eventually cause you to be locked in a spiritual box so tiny you won't be able to breathe.
Feel free to call on any of us despised "liberal" Christians to help you out of it.
Oh, never mind. Trying to talk to anyone whose mind is so made up, about things accepted without questioned, is futile. Carry on.
Jesus saves, though. Not "the Bible," and certainly not anyone's understanding of it.
Trixie was so hurt by your rudeness-in-the-name-of Jesus, she asked you not to come back.
But thick-headed literalists are always welcome at my place, whether they're overly and baselessly proud or make sense or not.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
As I said, The quiz is intended to make you re-evaluate your belief system. If you don't use it for that purpose, you are effectively saying you have nothing more to learn, and you see yourself as equal to God in that respect.
I look at it and say, "Why does it say I have any paganism in me? And I examine myself to find out why.
You seem to say, "I already know everything about myself, and I am comfortable with the fact that the quiz says I am 44% satanic. I don't need to be concerned with that."
I would not be surprised if an unscientific Internet quiz indicated that I had monkeys flying out of my butt.
I attribute any lingering "satanism" in me to the fact that I'm a sinner, saved by grace, who wrestles daily, and who constantly evaluates my faith -- not a 100-percenter whose knee-jerk piety thinks it OK, for some reason, to BOAST of one's own religiosity and to denigrate that of others.
Sheesh, I say again. Sheesh!
ER has "monkey's flying out of his butt".......Nanny, nanny, boo, boo.
These quizes are stupid......I could create one to make us all look like anything I want. Such is the power of the quiz maker.
But, I did it anyway......LOL!
agnosticism 75%
Islam 50%
Judaism 42%
atheism 33%
Buddhism 33%
Hinduism 25%
Paganism 21%
Satanism 17%
Christianity 8%
Honestly, I'd say this is probably pretty true for me......Very agnostic with a lot of Jewish, Buddhist and Hindu beliefs.
And I'm about 50% sure I'd like to be a "head lopping Muslim".......Ok, 49%. The Kerry voters. LOL!
Polls like this are easy to skew, answered honestly it was fairly accurate with me being 83% Christian and 50% Jew and 33% pagan since I am a nature nut. Hey the Goat is Pan the pagan godhead, LOL. I think y'all know me better than that since I reject satan completely and scored a 10% in that column. Oh well such is humanity. Mark may I remind you that bragging or posing your supposed religiosity over others is rejected by Christ. Don't climb on a high horse and look down your nose, you may get bucked off.
ER, Since I got the quiz off your site, where you scored 75% Christian, about which you, yourself, said "Not that I "doubted"!" and then you said,"I must confess a little apprehension that this contraption says I'm 42 percent Satanic.", it seems a bit disengenuous for you to then reverse yourself and say that it can be unscientific, implying that you can't take it seriously.
Sounds a little like sour grapes, my friend.
That said, I agree that you can't take it too seriously. As I stated, (again) I believe this quiz is intended to make you look inward and re-evaluate your belief system. That goes for eceryone, including me.
I asked these questions before without receiving an answer. If some parts of the Word of God are not true, Tell me please, which parts are, and who gets to be the final arbiter on what is or isn't? ER? Drlobojo? Some other acedemic "expert"? And if God isn't telling the truth, who is?
Oh, never mind. Trying to talk to anyone whose mind is so made up, about preferring to believe that not ALL the Bible is true, is futile.
I believe the Bible calls that casting pearls before swine. Not that you are swine. That's what's called an analogy.
Goat. Of course. The biggest hoax Satan ever perpetrated on mankind is that he doesn't exist.
Mark, oooooh, you are SO witty!
Sorry, but what the Scriptures are, and are not, is not so simple that it can be explained in a comment on a blog.
If you really want to know some of the answers to the questions you pose, go buy and read -- uh oh, it's a BOOK!
"Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism: A Bishop Rethinks the Meaning of Scripture," by John Shelby Spong.
And if you DON'T want to know the answers to your questions, quit asking them.
One more thing: What Goat said.
Thanks, Mark. I had talked myself out of going to church today because I got some headway on a project yeasterday and I am anxious to get back to it today.
This reminds me that the religious left needs EVERY voice it can get, since there are so many arrogant, unthinking fundamentalist right-wing Christians out there giving Jesus a bad name.
Which just shows to go you: Just because I think yer off yer rocker doesn't mean that the Lord can't use ya.
No one has answered my questions yet. Or even tried to. Is it possible that to admit you don't know the answer is to admit no one is qualified to decide whether the Bible is inerrant than God Himself?
Who would have thought a simple quiz would start such a disxcussion? Trust me on one thing. I don't care if I offend someone with the truth. I scored 88% Christian, gonna have to take it again to see where things were.
ER: You said, "Sorry, but what the Scriptures are, and are not, is not so simple that it can be explained in a comment on a blog." Actually, I believe that it can. The Bible is the inspired word of the one and true God.
jgf, I agree. But what that *means* is what people disagree on!
Sacred? Yes. Inspired? OK.
But "the Bible" has only been "an" "it" since King James got tired of all the different manuscripts that were floating around and ordered an "Authorized" version.
A. Version.
And subsequent scholarly study has revealed problems with the King James version, issues of addition as well as ommission.
"It" is not an "it" -- the Bible is a "those" or "them."
Not that the Bible, whichever version, can't be relied on for everything one needs to hear to find salvation. Because for that, it IS "THE" source.
Other stuff? Not so much, if at all.
Oh, Mark, the following was my answer to your question? Did you not see it?
Sorry, but what the Scriptures are, and are not, is not so simple that it can be explained in a comment on a blog.
If you really want to know some of the answers to the questions you pose, go buy and read -- uh oh, it's a BOOK!
"Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism: A Bishop Rethinks the Meaning of Scripture," by John Shelby Spong.
And if you DON'T want to know the answers to your questions, quit asking them.
JUST making sure you saw that I answered your question. I just didn't give you the type of answer you wanted.
Oh, and for it's worth, I think this is a fine discussion.
A book, written by an imperfect man, to explain how a perfect God is wrong or mistaken? No thanks. I've read all the volumes written by Christian-Hindu-Buddhist-Secular-New Age-Humanists that I can stomach.
A heart knowledge of the things of Christ are as legitimate as a head knowledge, and possibly more.
Re, "A heart knowledge of the things of Christ are as legitimate as a head knowledge, and possibly more."
I absolutely agree. But that is not even close to what we were talking about.
And the author of that book is a devoted Christian.
Oh, and the point of the book is not to assert that God is anything but perfect.
It does, however, assert that it doesn't make any sense, spiritually or intellectually, to take the Bible utterly literally, which almost nobody does despite their claims that they do.
It argues, actually, that strict insistence that the Bible be worshiped, or even venerated, as the "infallible and literal Word of God" puts Jesus Christ himself in a little box that God never intended.
But it IS a book -- a controversial one, at that -- and so I can see how you wouldn't want to learn anything about it.
By the way, I'd say that, judging from his own confession of his own struggles in Romans 7, that Paul hisself would rate about 44 percent Satanist!
21So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22For in my inner being I delight in God's law; 23but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. 24What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!
Sheesh, I say, and again I say, Sheesh!
(Before you ask, I attest that I fully accept that Paul, previously known as Saul, did, in fact, write the above as part of one or more longer missives to Christians living in or around Rome sometime after Jesus walked the earth. That much is arguably "true." Whether every dang word, jot and tittle of it applies directly to us today is another question entirely, and one well worth pondering).
To listen to men like John Shelby Spong is to listen to unbelievers. The man is so lost it's hard to take him seriously... and what he ends up doing is making himself the arbiter of what is to be believed and not believed. How ironic that anyone would not listen to one sector of men in the faith, and listen to one who's faith is so wanting that it's hard to call JSS a Christian at all. The man denies the virgin birth, the miracles, the necessity of Christ for salvation, the resurrection, ect. He denies so much of what it means to be a Christian that to call him such is ridiculous.
Timothy
Hoo hoo. Re, "what he ends up doing is making himself the arbiter of what is to be believed and not believed."
So sayeth ER of (Pastor) Timothy!
(It's hard to believe that this point is actually being argued about amongst Christians.) A true Christian knows he's a sinner, but is working on his salvation through repentance and being obedient to the Word. That is sanctification. It is good to have your faith questioned as a believer, not a sin or an insult. It is a way Christians edify other Christians. It is a chance for repentance, forgiveness, prayer and commune with God through Jesus Christ, and pruning in order to grow better fruit (of the Spirit) for the glory of the Lord.
Being Satanic is not "simply" being a sinner. The best of us Christians, even as Paul wrote about himself, are sinners. Being a Satanist has to do with doctrine that is followed, as with Islamist, Pagans, Hindus, Buddhists, Jew and Christians. It's based on what you believe, and how live out your belief, not the fact that you are a sinner. I think that if you fell into one of the other categories and call yourself a Christian, you need to take a look at what you believe. Your faith needs to be questioned. It may not fall in line with Christian doctrine.
(Nicene Creed "We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of his Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made, being of one substance with the Father; by whim all things were made; who for us and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; he suffered and was buried; and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father; and he shall come again, with glory, to judge both the living and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end. And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, who proceeds form the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets; and we believe in one holy catholic (universal) and apostolic church; was acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come.")
Being a Christian does not mean we are perfect, by any means, but that through sanctification and eventually glorification we are being made perfect, because we are justified through Jesus Christ. Being a Christian means that we believe, and by the help of the Holy Spirit, we live out the doctrine as given to us in the Bible. As Christians, we must all constantly ask our selves if what we believe, how we behave, and what we say, fall in line with Scripture. We must “work out” our “salvation with fear and trembling.” Phil. 2:12
Exactly, Polly. you are a wise women. That was the point I was trying to make. Unless we think we know all we need to know about what we believe, we should continually examine what we believe in order to grow in our faith.
ER,
No, there is a difference. My guiding truth of what I'm saying comes from Scripture. Spong's guiding truth of what he is saying, comes from Spong. That is the difference between liberals and conservative Christians.
No, we don't believe in literal interpretation as defined by Spong. That is misrepresentation. We do believe that if it says that Mary was a virgin, then she was a virgin. We also believe that if the Bible says that Jesus is the son of God, concieved by the Holy Spirit, then that is how He was conceived, making God His Father, not Joseph.
Yes, there are times when we do not take the Bible in a literal interpretation. But not usually in the narrative portions. For instance, when John writes about the 1,000 year reign in Revelation, many do not take that literally, but see it is a symbol for an unending reign of Christ. Why? Because so much of the apocalypse is symbolic. But we don't take the miracles, or His return, or His birth, or the rest of the events as symbolic. The general principle is that we take it as literal, unless there is something in the text to leads us not to.
Mark,
I love it that Polly is so into these things. She is a blessing to me.
Blessings
Fair enough, Timothy. I appreciate you expressing yourself without jumping on me personally, and I apologize for the jab.
I don't buy everything Spong has written. But he's not just nitpicking. He's calling for what amounts to a second Reformation.
However, I simply reject the idea that one believer questioning another's faith -- other than half-arsed rants in the heat of argument -- is anything but arrogance on the part of the questioner. I refuse even to question Fred Phelps's faith. I think he's possib;e deranged, which, if so, gets him more grace.
And while it seems terribly counterintuitive, I wonder, based on a litera consideration of Scripture (for the sake of argument), why God hasn't removed him. Possibly because his presence, as dreadful as it seems, leads people to God more than it drives people away. I mean, I'm sure people have scoured the Scriptures to find what Phelps claims is justification for his hatred, and in the process, have discovered no such basis whatever and instead have managed to detect God's love.
Dangerous, haughty thing to question people say they are Christians. And not your place, outside your own congregation.
ER,
I guess I would have to agree with Spong in the need for a Second Reformation. Although, I would say that we probably would disagree on what that Reformation would look like. I think the need for a Reformation should look much like the first in order of faith, but hopefully, without all the stake burnings, etc. The need for the gospel is just as strong today, as it was the first day Peter proclaimed it 2100 years ago. Yet, Spong would disagree about what needs to be proclaimed. If he denies the main tenants of the faith, which he has done, what would he proclaim and what would his Reformation look like?
As for questioning of faith, I do believe it is necessary by people of faith. Paul said we are to judge those in the body, not outside. There is a need for questioning... not in the sense of saying: "you're not saved because you didn't meet my litmus test." But more along the lines of "are you really saved, here are some principles to examine yourself." That is a roll the pastor must fulfill in his congregation to be faithful to God's calling. We are to feed the flock, and that does mean a need for questioning. But the questioning must, and I make a point of this, always include the pronoun "we." It is not a "you people aren't save..." but "are we saved if we don't love Jesus? Are we saved if we disregard His commands and His word? Let us endeavor to follow His word despite our failures..."
As for men like Phelps, they trouble me as well. I've read enough at your site about him and he does bother me. But men like him played a roll in my coming to know Christ as well. Not in a positive sense, but a negative. It made me question my cousin: what about the yelling nincompoops... and of course, my cousin took me to Matthew 7:21... the famous "Lord, Lord" passage. That let me know quickly that nincompoops may fool us, but not him. (Not that Phelps is a full-fledged nincompoop (a theological term there) but he does trouble me.)
The reality is that Christ sees the heart.
Blessings
Post a Comment