Fundamentalist Belief Inventory Quiz

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

http://www.thebestschools.org/fundamentalist-belief-inventory/

I found this fun little quiz a few days ago but forgot to share it.  I'm interested to see what you guys get.

My score: 15 out of 40 - Liberal to moderate Christians/Evangelical Christians and traditional Roman Catholics

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

I got 32, so I'm a Conservative. For a lot of them I chose the closest to what I actually believe.

[TJ in Oregon]

I got a 27, so apparently I am a "conservative Christian".

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

What if you believe both answers as is the case for me with #3, #12, #29, and #34?

Or take for example, #6.  The two answers are:

• Humans are by nature sinners, and God is under no obligation to save them.
• Humans are by nature good, and God should do everything he can to help them.

My own belief is

• Humans are by nature sinners, and God does do everything he can to help them.

Which doesn't fit either answer well.

[Zioneer]

Apparently I, a (somewhat theologically liberal) Mormon, am 14 on this quiz.

[TJ in Oregon]

What if you believe both answers as is the case for me with #3 and #12.

Or take for example, #6.  The two answers are:

• Humans are by nature sinners, and God is under no obligation to save them.
• Humans are by nature good, and God should do everything he can to help them.

My own belief is

• Humans are by nature sinners, and God does do everything he can to help them.

Which doesn't fit either answer well.

Oh there are a number of questions that are false dichotomies or where I agree with neither answer or both answers. It takes me back to my high school English class where you have try and figure out which answer is less wrong.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

What if you believe both answers as is the case for me with #3.

Or take for example, #6.  The two answers are:

• Humans are by nature sinners, and God is under no obligation to save them.
• Humans are by nature good, and God should do everything he can to help them.

My own belief is

• Humans are by nature sinners, and God does do everything he can to help them.

Which doesn't fit either answer well.

I had trouble with that one, as well.  I don't believe humans are sinners "by nature" (this would imply the nonexistence of free will) and I also don't believe God is under any "obligation" to "help" someone (as this implies that God only does something because He has to, which would negate any true value to doing an act of good).

It's not a perfect quiz, but I'm more or less pleased with my score.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

What if you believe both answers as is the case for me with #3.

Or take for example, #6.  The two answers are:

• Humans are by nature sinners, and God is under no obligation to save them.
• Humans are by nature good, and God should do everything he can to help them.

My own belief is

• Humans are by nature sinners, and God does do everything he can to help them.

Which doesn't fit either answer well.

I had trouble with that one, as well.  I don't believe humans are sinners "by nature" (this would imply the nonexistence of free will) and I also don't believe God is under any "obligation" to "help" someone (as this implies that God only does something because He has to, which would negate any true value to doing an act of good).

It's not a perfect quiz, but I'm more or less pleased with my score.

I got 15 as well.  Since I believe sin is an inherent consequence of free will, I don't see a dichotomy between the existence of free will and that we are sinners by nature.  Similarly, God's omnibenevolence is what obligates em to help. In a very real sense, God's attributes keep him from doing "good" in the human sense because God is incapable of sin due to his lack of free will.

[DC Al Fine]

I got 33/40. Conservative Christian. About what I expected. My "liberal" answers were mostly to do with creationism.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

What if you believe both answers as is the case for me with #3.

Or take for example, #6.  The two answers are:

• Humans are by nature sinners, and God is under no obligation to save them.
• Humans are by nature good, and God should do everything he can to help them.

My own belief is

• Humans are by nature sinners, and God does do everything he can to help them.

Which doesn't fit either answer well.

I had trouble with that one, as well.  I don't believe humans are sinners "by nature" (this would imply the nonexistence of free will) and I also don't believe God is under any "obligation" to "help" someone (as this implies that God only does something because He has to, which would negate any true value to doing an act of good).

It's not a perfect quiz, but I'm more or less pleased with my score.

I got 15 as well.  Since I believe sin is an inherent consequence of free will, I don't see a dichotomy between the existence of free will and that we are sinners by nature.  Similarly, God's omnibenevolence is what obligates em to help. In a very real sense, God's attributes keep him from doing "good" in the human sense because God is incapable of sin due to his lack of free will.

I interpret "by nature" to mean something that is exclusive to personal choice.  A person is tall "by nature."  A person is gay "by nature."  A person chooses to sin.  I believe it is certainly possible for a person to live a "sinless life," but the chances of that are very low because there is too much material incentive not to do so.

Perhaps, Ernest, I've been misunderstanding your views on objective morality all this time.  Do you deny that God has free will, or do you deny omnibenevolence as a real concept?

[Del Tachi]

I got a 26, which is on the low-end of the "Conservative Christian" category. 

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Perhaps, Ernest, I've been misunderstanding your views on objective morality all this time.  Do you deny that God has free will, or do you deny omnibenevolence as a real concept?

Free will is incompatible with the combination of omnibenevolence and omniscience, since one who is both omniscient and omnibenevolent knows what is the best thing to do and will always do what he can to achieve it.  Hence, God lacks free will.  Jesus Christ during the time of his ministry had human characteristics and that included free will.  If he had not had free will, then his temptation in the wilderness and later would have been a sham and a mockery.

I hold to an Adoptionist viewpoint on the nature of Jesus Christ. My current best understanding of the ministry of Jesus has him receiving the triple aspects of the Godhead at different stages. Upon being baptized he received the omnipotence of God becoming Jesus Christ. His crucifixion was the capstone of His acquisition of the omnibenevolence of God, tho one can argue whether he received it at Gethsemane or later.  It was only at his resurrection that he received the omniscience of God and the full authority to act as God in his own right by his possession of the full triune Godhead.

Also my views on omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence are that they are not unlimited.  God possesses all the knowledge, ability, and love it is possible to have, yet there are things that are beyond even God.

[ElectionsGuy]

3

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

3

I'm going to guess that you react that way because you are an atheist/agnostic and didn't get a 0 or 1.

[H. Ross Peron]

Got 29/40

[ElectionsGuy]

3

I'm going to guess that you react that way because you are an atheist/agnostic and didn't get a 0 or 1.

We'll I'm agnostic, but the reason I put the is because I felt kinda silly taking the quiz only to get a really lopsided score.

[afleitch]

Unsuprisingly I got 0. I answered it again as me in 2010 just before I lost my faith and scored 4.

[Cassius]

I got 19/40. However, I thought the test itself was a little flawed, in the sense that, often, you were presented with two polarised choices, like on 3. It would have been better if it were a little more nuanced. Still a fun test though .

[DemPGH]

Yeah, I actually did score a zero (0). Although, I want to make an observation: The two choices for each answer represent polar opposites, and there were six or eight of them where I wanted the option, "I don't know" or maybe some other choice. Still, I went with the one closest to me.

[Randy Bobandy]

0 out of 40--atheists and agnostics.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I really don't like this. There's only two answers to every question so tons of false dichotomies or choices where you're only given two extremes (the abortion question being most obvious). Also lots of "A and thus B" or "Not A and thus Not B" choices too, which ignore if you believe A but don't believe it thus means B is also correct, or if you believe in B but not because of A. Or even somewhere the choices are "A and thus B" or "A is not true" which leave no options if you believe in A but not necessarily that it means B as well. But anyway:

But anyway I got a 15 out of 40.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

All the problematic questions:

1-That seems to question more if you found the ultimate truth, not if it exists.
5-Leaves out the possibility of the wife having greater authority. Not common mind you but this means some BDSM couples have no real choice here.
6-One of the worst examples of what I said above. "Humans are by nature sinners and God should do everything he can to help them." sounds like a pretty common liberal Christian position to me.
13-Covered this one above. Not much middle ground.
18-"Both" is a valid answer and not contradictory.
23-Atheists don't really have much of an answer here.
27-Same. Or anyone who doesn't believe in any type of biblical flood.
28-Once again "both" is a valid answer. I'm sure that's what jmfcst would choose if possible for example.
29-One of the "A and thus B" or "A is not true" being the only answers.
30-Kind of leaves you out if you don't believe Jesus was a great man, or people who believe Jesus never even existed.
33-This is probably the worst one. Especially the awful wording of the second one, I know most atheists don't like picking it, and the logic is very poor.
34-How about "Both"? I'd imagine that'd be a common reply if possible.
36-No option for "No books are divinely inspired" leaving atheists kind of out of it, and a lot of non-biblical literalist Christian positions get tossed aside too.
40-And simply a false dichotomy.

[CatoMinor]

"You scored 27 out of 40."

I definitely did not like the wording of some of it. I tend to think of myself as being on the liberal side of evangelical protestant Christianity. I do not doubt the authenticity of the Bible, or think it contradicts itself. I believe in the events of the NT as written (OT too for the most part, though Genesis I tend to not read as literal). I am strongly against abortion, one of the few instances I am a social con. However at the same time I don't care if people drink or smoke or get married to the same sex. They are not sins until the individual makes it a sin.

One area over the past few years I tended to drift to the right on is pre-marital sex. I used to be of the thought that basically "as long as the two are in love then whatever." But now I am more of the opinion that waiting till marriage is better in the long run.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

36/40 question 20 is where I agreed with both statements.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

37 out of 40.