3

9/29/2010 3:18:10 PM

oh boy, that was tough

9/29/2010 3:22:41 PM

14 of 15. Not too bad and the one I missed isnt my religion nor have I ever heard of the guy.

9/29/2010 3:23:05 PM

the only one i had to think twice about was the one about joseph smith's...obviously i knew he founded the mormons, but the way the question was phrased, i thought they might have been asking about his religion prior to founding the mormons

then i realized the quiz is dumb and based on earlier questions, it couldn't possibly be that obscure

9/29/2010 3:24:20 PM

yay 100%

I think this is due to 4 years of religion class in catholic high school.
we learned about all the religions.

9/29/2010 3:25:37 PM

Quote :

"and the pope is an extension of God's will on earth that's why Peter was appointed."

I believe according to Catholic dogma, that the Pope is called the Vicar of Chirst, or God on Earth. He is also says he has the power to forgive sins.

How do you blaspheme in the Bible?

1. Saying your God.

2. Saying you can forgive sins.


Oh and I took that quiz. Whats up with all the questions not pertaining to the Bible. If I'm going to take a quiz on my religion I'd like to have it based on what my religion is based on. DERP




Why on Earth would God need his will extended on Earth through a man like the Pope when Christ already came for that purpose. To forgive sins. I don't think we need a procession of elected officials saying when sins are forgiven or not.

[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 3:39 PM. Reason : ]

9/29/2010 3:36:02 PM

Oh yeah to the sum of all hatred that my mother in law owns, I am not much of a catholic.

I was just raised Catholic.

I haven't figured out where I stand yet.

You should have seen my mother in law flip when I told her Arab13 had athiest friends. LOL!!!

9/29/2010 3:48:17 PM

Quote :

"wolfpak4life i answered 14/15 right there i didnt know school teachers were allowed to lead prayer... "

they aren't.

you lose two points for not even knowing what you answered.





[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 3:52 PM. Reason : ]

9/29/2010 3:51:55 PM

Quote :

"LeonIsPro : I believe according to Catholic dogma, that the Pope is called the Vicar of Chirst, or God on Earth. He is also says he has the power to forgive sins. Oh and I took that quiz. Whats up with all the questions not pertaining to the Bible. If I'm going to take a quiz on my religion I'd like to have it based on what my religion is based on."

yeah, is that what you believe? well I believe that

YOU ARE

A GODDAMNED

IDIOT

thank god you aren't an NCSU student, you stupid little cum sock.






[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 4:01 PM. Reason : ]

9/29/2010 3:59:43 PM

Quote :

"Catholics aren't even supposed to read the Bible."

that is patently false

I was raised Catholic and there was a lot of education involved - leading up to my confirmation I was required to attend a class, in addition to the Sunday schooling, educating me on the church doctrine. It is true that it wasn't JUST about the Bible but we regularly studied the text.

You must understand that you get more than one book when you've got the wealth of a continent backing up thousands of years of empire. You get piles of philosophical texts - some good and some bad.

The "Protest" in "Protestant" was initially over the issue of indulgences. Martin Luther's 95 Theses largely dealt with the issue of indulgences (remission of temporal punishment) and was particularly critical of the practice of selling indulgences. Plenary indulgences, however, did not come out of Church philosophy but rather politics and economics.

Some of your misunderstanding might be coming from the practice of the Church to hold Mass in Latin up until Vatican II. Prior to 1967 Mass had been held in Latin because that was the language of the empire and the primary language of scholasticism in Europe. Vatican II sought to engage the lay people of the Church more directly by allowing most of the Mass to be said in the vernacular.

9/29/2010 4:05:48 PM

meh, i choose to learn about getting out of school and having a job.

to each his own.

9/29/2010 4:06:40 PM

you're right

that religious education I got when I was in highschool has failed me!

nice troll


^the report said Black Protestants were among the least educated regarding their religion - only being eclipsed in failure by Hispanic Catholics


[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 4:11 PM. Reason : - :shrug:]

9/29/2010 4:10:11 PM

^ read the question by question breakdown. Black protestants know a lot about the aspects of protestantism that is important to them. it's only the rest of it that can go hang. same with Hispanic Catholics.



as for Leon, he must be a troll. no one gets on a college discussion board and puts up that much stupid.




[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 4:14 PM. Reason : ]

9/29/2010 4:11:50 PM

good thing that the rest of them niggers aint got shit to do with Christopher Crawford

you, on the other hand, have grown roots in the ole lecture hall

I hope the payoff is enough to cover the cost of floor repair.

9/29/2010 4:13:36 PM

10/15


ive never been a history person :shrug:

9/29/2010 4:19:33 PM

I like to gloat as much as anyone, but i believe the test is flawed.

it favors jews, as about half the questions are related to judaism or the OT.

it also naturally favors self-defined atheists/agnostics, because that group is fixated on proving/disproving religion(s), so they study every damn thing they can.

and it favors Mormons, because that is a cult and they make every single member go to weekly temple-studies where they memorize the parts of the bible that jive with their nutty Book of Mormon.

as for the other groups, people who are content in their faith don't have to go searching. so the other groups, they generally know their own faith pretty well, but get tripped up on other things that dont interest them.

what interested me, is that Black Protestants were among the very top correct responders regarding Moses leading slaves out of Egypt, and the long-suffering Job.

9/29/2010 4:19:44 PM

Quote :

"I like to gloat as much as anyone, but i believe the test is flawed. it favors jews, as about half the questions are related to judaism or the OT."

This intersects Christianity in some important ways and Christians should know about it

[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 4:23 PM. Reason : .]

9/29/2010 4:23:19 PM

not particularly.

9/29/2010 4:23:44 PM

why should they know about it?

[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 4:24 PM. Reason : no trolling here. honest question. ]

9/29/2010 4:24:11 PM

thats like saying that since we own a home we should all know extensively about the watershed we live within

[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 4:26 PM. Reason : f]

9/29/2010 4:25:50 PM

Quote :

"why should they know about it?"

Even if you're an ignorant ass motherfucker like Chris Crawford, it would still do you good to know things about the religion that your religion grew out of

If Christianity were initially successful, there would be no Jewish religion. It was very much intended to be a revision / extension of Judaism; the gospel of matthew was aimed directly at a hebrew audience

It helps see one where Christianity diverges from the ideology it grows from, and what Jesus has to work with when building his ideas/ministry. Pretty fucking important if you ask me but I've met maybe 1 or 2 Christians who have actually thought about their religion more than 10 minutes

[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 4:29 PM. Reason : .]

9/29/2010 4:28:16 PM

so this is an issue of knowing your history, not your religion.

correct?





[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 4:32 PM. Reason : no need to get all mad. u mad?]

9/29/2010 4:30:29 PM

You could take a really radical position and say nothing in the OT is worth anything because of Jesus' New Covenant, etc etc

But I don't see how learning the history of your God and his interactions with humans is not learning about your religion. Christians are at least committed to thinking about the events in the OT, the character of God in the OT, etc, and trying to fit this into what they view to be the same God

9/29/2010 4:31:48 PM

mike danger doesnt have the peace of the Father in his heart

so he gets all pissy

probably from the piece of his father he has stuck up his heiney

[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 4:38 PM. Reason : f]

9/29/2010 4:33:46 PM

This is some basic, basic stuff.

The exodus, the ten commandments, and Job are admittedly all old testament (though the ten commandments one is also about the golden rule) but are also very important to stories to Christianity. Noah's ark and Adam and Eve are old testament too, but most self identified Christians would be able to answer questions about them.

Mother Teresa... probably the most famous non-Pope Catholic of the last 50 years.

If you've ever heard of Momons, or watched South Park you've heard of Joseph Smith.

The only ones that are even testers would be when the Sabbath begins, the one about Nirvana, and the one about the Great Awakening. I could see some minor confusion given all the propaganda from right wing nutters about the religion in schools questions, but really... 8/15 should be about the minimum anyone with two brain cells to rub together should get.

9/29/2010 4:37:21 PM

Momons

9/29/2010 4:38:00 PM

how you gonna be a sinner in the hands of an angry god and not know about j. edwards?

9/29/2010 4:39:12 PM

Quote :

"mike danger doesnt have the peace of the Father in his heart so he gets all pissy probably from the piece of his father he has stuck up his heiney"

You're going to die and rot in the ground just like everybody else

9/29/2010 4:40:04 PM

Quote :

"If Christianity were initially successful, there would be no Jewish religion. It was very much intended to be a revision / extension of Judaism; the gospel of matthew was aimed directly at a hebrew audience"

McD, i like your take on a lot of things, but you're way off base here.

there were multiple messianic branches and offshoots and sects within Judaism since the Babylonian exile. there still are. saying Christianity would have wiped out Judaism is like saying that Protestants would have wiped out Catholicism, or that Buddhism would have wiped out Hinduism.

Matthew was written at a Hebrew-speaking audience? so what? Paul wrote to (or at least "at") the Jews extensively. So did the author of James. So did the author of Jude. So the fuck what does this prove? Jesus was a Jew, as were all his followers including Paul, and it's only due to the tolerance of Judaism for Messianic movements that the earliest bloom of Christianity wasn't snubbed out before it ever reached the Pagan Greeks.

9/29/2010 4:40:10 PM

Quote :

"You're going to die and rot in the ground just like everybody else"

as a nigga from da hood i know dat betta than any fool

jk im not from the hood.

9/29/2010 4:41:30 PM

Quote :

"McD: You could take a really radical position and say nothing in the OT is worth anything because of Jesus' New Covenant, etc etc"

this is, in essence, just what the former Pharisee Saul, zealous for the Torah, did. Changed his name to Paul, put on a toga, and and ate ham sandwiches while he told all the Greeks about Jesus new covenant

as for the Law and the Prophets? fuggitaboutit.




[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 4:47 PM. Reason : ]

9/29/2010 4:45:19 PM

Yeah, what became mainstream Christianity was just the most successful of the many offshoots of Judaism that appeared in the same general time period. You just don't hear much about the Essenes, the Gnostics, etc. because they didn't catch on.

9/29/2010 4:49:09 PM

Quote :

"McD, i like your take on a lot of things, but you're way off base here. there were multiple messianic branches and offshoots and sects within Judaism since the Babylonian exile. there still are. saying Christianity would have wiped out Judaism is like saying that Protestants would have wiped out Catholicism, or that Buddhism would have wiped out Hinduism."

Okay fine so there would be a few tiny little pockets. If Christians achieved their early aims they would have converted the overwhelming majority of Jews at the time. Do you dispute this?

Quote :

"Matthew was written at a Hebrew-speaking audience?"

It was written to Hebrews, which is why it appeals so heavily to messianic prophecies. It also has a story where Jesus refers to gentiles as "dogs" in comparison with the Hebrews.

Quote :

"so what? Paul wrote to (or at least "at") the Jews extensively. So did the author of James. So did the author of Jude. So the fuck what does this prove?"

That they were interested in converting Jews? Again, I only made a claim that the early Christians wanted primarily to convert Hebrews. There's not even consensus at this point in time as to whether or not gentiles could be saved, or if they would have to adopt Jewish customs upon conversion to Christianity, etc.

Quote :

"Jesus was a Jew, as were all his followers including Paul, and it's only due to the tolerance of Judaism for Messianic movements that the earliest bloom of Christianity wasn't snubbed out before it ever reached the Pagan Greeks."

What does this have to do with what I said? Remind me how I'm way off base again?

Edit: obviously Paul goes off on his shit to convert the gentiles but only after the Jews largely reject his message. His frustration with this is pretty easy to see in some of his letters.

[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 5:00 PM. Reason : .]

9/29/2010 4:49:14 PM

Quote :

"Even if you're an ignorant ass motherfucker like Chris Crawford"

Heresy!!

I LOVE Chris Crawford and he is the father of our love baby.

9/29/2010 5:00:18 PM

McD

of course Jews were the primary audience. but Paul was the Apostle to the Gentiles from almost the very beginning, establishing early churches throughout pagan Asia Minor within 10 years or so of Jesus' death.

many Jews would never, ever have been convinced becasue of numerous inconsistencies with the prophesied Messiah that did not at all reconcile with Jesus' life. unless you're talking about some Revelations-style apocalypse where Jesus rides down with Death on a pale horse and smites the unbelievers with his sword, the answer is No. This one particular messianic movement would not have terminated judaism any more than any of scores of other messianic movements throughout history.

all you're doing is engaging in speculative, counter-factual history at this point. what if what if what if? I can do that too. What if Pilate was a nice guy, and refused to crucify jesus based on such flimsy evidence provided by the Sanhedrin? then what? boy, that would have thrown a wrench in the gears. He'd have been reduced to a footnote, if even.

9/29/2010 5:01:46 PM

Quote :

"many Jews would never, ever have been convinced becasue of numerous inconsistencies with the prophesied Messiah that did not at all reconcile with Jesus' life. unless you're talking about some Revelations-style apocalypse where Jesus rides down with Death on a pale horse and smites the unbelievers with his sword, the answer is No. This one particular messianic movement would not have terminated judaism any more than any of scores of other messianic movements throughout history."

This.

Most Jews saw (and still do see) the Messiah as a conquering liberator. Jesus hardly fits the bill.

9/29/2010 5:04:11 PM

Quote :

"many Jews would never, ever have been convinced becasue of numerous inconsistencies with the prophesied Messiah that did not at all reconcile with Jesus' life. unless you're talking about some Revelations-style apocalypse where Jesus rides down with Death on a pale horse and smites the unbelievers with his sword, the answer is No. This one particular messianic movement would not have terminated judaism any more than any of scores of other messianic movements throughout history. "

I have no idea what you imagine me to be claiming. What do you think I said? I said Christians intended to convert Jews and Jews were the early Christians primary ranks AND audience. I made no claim about how likely that desired result was.

Quote :

"all you're doing is engaging in speculative, counter-factual history at this point. what if what if what if? I can do that too. What if Pilate was a nice guy, and refused to crucify jesus based on such flimsy evidence provided by the Sanhedrin? then what? boy, that would have thrown a wrench in the gears. He'd have been reduced to a footnote, if even."

I'm sorry, what the fuck are you talking about?

[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 5:04 PM. Reason : .]

9/29/2010 5:04:16 PM

Quote :

""If Christianity were initially successful, there would be no Jewish religion. It was very much intended to be a revision / extension of Judaism; the gospel of matthew was aimed directly at a hebrew audience""

I think he's contesting this part.

9/29/2010 5:07:50 PM

Well then he's wrong

or at least he disagrees with academic consensus on the basis of "here's what I consider a reasonable chain of events"

[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 5:09 PM. Reason : .]

9/29/2010 5:09:00 PM

Hmmm, don't know that I can agree. Comparatively Christianity was very successful. I still don't think even with more success it would have supplanted Judaism as the primary faith of Jews or led to the end of Judaism as a faith today.

9/29/2010 5:12:11 PM

oh, they are allowed to read from the bible as example of literature
i thought it said the same question twice or didnt register my answer since the answers were the same wording.

9/29/2010 5:13:23 PM

Quote :

"Hmmm, don't know that I can agree. Comparatively Christianity was very successful. I still don't think even with more success it would have supplanted Judaism as the primary faith of Jews or led to the end of Judaism as a faith today."

Again I'm making a statement about the aims, goals, and motivations of the early Christians. I'm not making any claims about whether or not their success was feasible.

9/29/2010 5:18:08 PM

Well, whether intentional or not you were making claims about it's initial success as well.

Given the fact that it not only survived as a religion in an area and time frame with many, many competing religions and sects and furthermore flourished into the largest religion in the world, it's hard to deny that it was and is a successful religion.

9/29/2010 5:21:22 PM

Quote :

"If Christians achieved their early aims they would have converted the overwhelming majority of Jews at the time"

omg read and stop wasting my time

Quote :

" Given the fact that it not only survived as a religion in an area and time frame with many, many competing religions and sects and furthermore flourished into the largest religion in the world, it's hard to deny that it was and is a successful religion."

Never claimed it wasn't or isn't successful?

Fuck you guys I'm getting trolled or something because nobody would drop shit this stupid

[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 5:29 PM. Reason : .]

9/29/2010 5:29:21 PM

Ok, yes, conversion of the Jews was an initial goal of early Christianity.

9/29/2010 5:33:43 PM

Quote :

"McD: I have no idea what you imagine me to be claiming. What do you think I said? "

only what you said, quote:

"If Christianity were initially successful, there would be no Jewish religion. It was very much intended to be a revision / extension of Judaism" -- McD

Christianity was exceedingly successful, and on a historically monumental scale. I don't think you can get much more successful than being the #1 most populous world religion, existing for almost 2000 years.

As a messiah, Jesus of Nazareth was initially was no different than any of the other Jewish would-be kings. It was only after his death that a modified version of his teachings, palatable to a pagan audience, was exported outside of Judea. It was only through the efforts of the Hellenized Apostle Paul did a Jewish messiah finally ever "succeed"

Scores of messiahs have come and gone, but until the "true messiah" comes riding onto the world stage -- restoring Jerusalem, reestablishing the Sanhedrin, raising the dead, making the desert bloom with endless produce, and causing all nations to recognized the prime spiritual authority of Israel -- the Jewish Religion will never be displaced by a new religion, and even then at that time it will still not disappear but rather be fulfilled.

Now do not for one minute even think that I believe a bit of this, other than the fact that most observant Jews certainly do believe it, and that the vast majority of them then had -- and still have -- no intention of ditching their religion to follow the ghost of some half-assed itinerant rabble-rousing preacher of questionable parentage from the Galilean hinterlands who didn't even begin to meet the basic messianic requirements as set down in the Ketuvim and the Nevi'im and who just wound up getting himself killed in a most inglorious fashion.

Quote :

"McD: you disagree with academic consensus on the basis of "here's what I consider a reasonable chain of events"

academic consensus? 4 out of 5 dentists? Argumentum ad verecundiam?

So, bring out these sources, any credible academic source, that attempts to argue anything tp the effect that IF Christianity had been "successful", THEN there "would be no Jewish religion". And I'm prepared to accept any reasonable definitions of these terms. Just please do avoid Dispensationalist apocalyptic visions of the Second Coming.




[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 8:03 PM. Reason : ]

9/29/2010 7:34:50 PM

i find it funny that people look at a quiz to see who knows more about religion, no offense, it's a simple quiz and all, but does it really matter?

about the only person that would care would be an atheist (maybe an agnostic too)-- because unlike atheism, nearly every other religion is based on belief, not facts.... but of course you already knew that didn't you

some of the results are not even that surprising.... there actually were only 2 religious questions (plus a 3rd that was cultural) where atheists/agnostics had the highest percentage, it was a question on Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islamic religions... all religions not represented in the survey.

and #10 "According to rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court, is a public school teacher permitted to lead a class in prayer, or not?" 95% of Atheists/Agnostics got it right.... surprising right? lol.

[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 8:52 PM. Reason : .]

9/29/2010 8:51:36 PM

i don't think anyone really cares who knows more, its that people that go around preaching all their shit don't even know about their own religion that they are trying to force on others. i mean, its kinda sad that christians (protestant or not) don't know don't know who martin luther was.

and how the crap do you not know who joseph smith was. mormon or non mormon i feel like everyone knows that (apparently not though)

i just feel like whenever (with anything, not just religion) you go around spouting off knowledge and trying to sway people and encourage them to believe what you believe, you should at least want to be well versed in the subject matter.

but that is just me. i already feel like religion is used as a vehicle for hatred and bigotry and falsities. so couple that with people who don't even understand/know the tenants of their own religion...well it isn't hard to see why we have wars over it.

but that is just my opinion, of course.

[Edited on September 29, 2010 at 9:20 PM. Reason : .]

9/29/2010 9:20:43 PM

Quote :

"actually the full test of all questions"

that one had 32 questions; this one has only 15

9/29/2010 9:28:44 PM

vanity search lead me here.

Quote :

"thanks punchmonk for naming yourself the intelligent open minded chrsitian and calling the rest of us self-centered closed minded idiots."

hahaha...I never said that. Why are you so combative with me, wolfpak4life? I hope you are not this way with people who believe the total opposite of you.

This is what you said....

Quote :

"Christ's death is not about displaying God's power, it is about displaying God's love through his personal sacrifice and pain much like Jesus's life is about showing others love through personal sacrifice and giving. Maybe you just mispoke since Christ's resurrection is a display of God's power, particularly God's power over death."

in response to this statement of mine.

Quote :

"The death is an amazing show of God's power but that is not the fullness of what Jesus was doing, imo."

I never misspoke, you just need to read in full context. I at least hope you do that when reading your bible as well. I do agree with you and believe...

Quote :

"Christ's resurrection is a display of God's power, particularly God's power over death."

10/6/2010 1:48:51 PM