Friday, January 20, 2006

Is Nathan a Heretic?

Thankfully not, according to this online quiz, which asks you some finely shaded questions about what you believe (about sin and the divinity of Jesus) and then compares it to the creed of the Council of Chalcedon, held in 451. I passed!


You scored as Chalcedon compliant. 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.

Pelagianism


100%

Chalcedon compliant


100%

Monophysitism


75%

Modalism


58%

Nestorianism


58%

Socinianism


50%

Adoptionist


50%

Apollanarian


25%

Monarchianism


25%

Gnosticism


17%

Donatism


17%

Albigensianism


8%

Arianism


0%

Docetism


0%

8 comments:

Tam said...

That test is really challenging! I didn't understand some of the implications of the questions.
I got rated as an adoptionist. Not sure if this is good or bad...?

Joel Baltaks said...

Phew! Chalcedon compliant - I won't be burned at the stake. Now, hopefully they won't ask me to recite the names of the twelve disciples.

Interesting, I only scored 33% on Pelagianism, while Nathan scored 100%. Heretic!!!!

Nathan Zamprogno said...

I consider myself to be in good company in regards to Pelagianism, with Charles Finney being one of the modern figures to espouse it (whilst still emphasising the importance of salvation by faith, not by works or by obedience.) Here's more info.

bigbodylittlebrain said...

Cool! I thought my ignorance had fallen on deaf ears. Please give me your insight. Uh....no pantheists or maybe even Panpsychism?

nilmot said...

Well there's a suprise Nathan! I had you pegged as a heretic for sure ;-)

The Odd-Father said...

YAY, now I dont have to burn you at the stake....mm...Stake. Ah crud, thats my Zamprogno gene kicking in...

Joel Baltaks said...

I have embedded a subliminal meNATHAN YOU MUST POST ENTRIES MORE OFTEN BECAUSE THEY'RE REALLY COOLssage in this sentence - see if you can spot it.

Apologies that this has nothing to do with the current discussion :)

Troy Waller said...

I am sorry this comment is posted here but I couldn't respond to your 'current reading' link anywhere else.

Is this ANOTHER book written from a Xian point of view to undermine the Atheist perspective to the point of saying there is really no such thing as an Atheist? "If you can't beat 'em, deny they exist." As a former Xian, and now an Agnostic (no, not an Atheist but defintiely Atheist friendly), I have to giggle at these kinds of books as I lapped them up once in my life. But I have heard Atheism defined as 'Lacking a conviction of the existence of god(s)' rather than 'A conviction of the non-existence of god(s).' Semantics? Perhaps.

I really enjoyed your comments on Family First too. As an ex-AOG minister (in training) I saw them for what/who they were...even from China.