With my son sick and me with the remnants of a sinus infection and a perforated eardrum, let’s just say nothing is getting cleared off the To-Do list today. The day of rest comes a bit early, but considering all the craziness around here of late, it’s a welcome respite.
In light of this, I offer a bit of frivolity for those who might want to do a Christian doctrinal analysis to see where they stand denominationally. The Christian Tradition Selector quiz is an interesting self-analysis of Christian belief. I found the limitations of the answers to be a little stifling (since I tend to hold many “blended” doctrinal stances that wouldn’t fit into any one line of thinking), but the quiz makes you think nonetheless.
In my case the results turned out to be humorous considering my Lutheran/Assemblies of God/Presbyterian/Charismatic “mongrel” denominational slant, but I guess the results speak for themselves:
1: Presbyterian/Reformed (100%)
2: Baptist (Reformed/Particular/Calvinistic) (94%)
3: Eastern Orthodox (86%)
4: Anglican/Episcopal/Church of England (80%)
5: Congregational/United Church of Christ (80%)
6: Methodist/Wesleyan/Nazarene (69%)
7: Pentecostal/Charismatic/Assemblies of God (63%)
8: Anabaptist (Mennonite/Quaker etc.) (61%)
9: Seventh-Day Adventist (61%)
10: Church of Christ/Campbellite (58%)
11: Lutheran (58%)
12: Roman Catholic (55%)
13: Baptist (non-Calvinistic)/Plymouth Brethren/Fundamentalist (50%)
Gotta wonder how the Eastern Orthodox came in so high and the Pentecostal/Charismatic/Assemblies of God and Lutheran came in so low. Anyway, if you are looking for a diversion to see just how your doctrine lines up, give the quiz a try.
Now I just have to ask whether this entitles me to join the Charismatic Reformed blogroll? 😉
5 thoughts on “Analyze Your Denominational Slant”
That would be interesting to find out, especially since Grudem is a sort of patriarchal, Reformed, Baptist charismatic.
How’s that for a “mongrel”?
I actually like the mongrelizing. 😉 Reminds me of Vern Poythress’s “Symphonic Theology.”
It’s a good sign that one prefers to be biblical rather than “denominational.”
— Jared, http://www.thinklings.org/jared
As to being a mongrel, I found the test difficult because many of my positions are not smack dab on with the descriptions of the positions listed. For instance, my position on communion is that while I do not ascribe to transubstaition or consubstatiation, neither do I go with the more rational explanations. I believe that something mystical does occur when the bread and wine (please make it wine!)are consumed.
On a more difficult subject, I don’t ascribe to either Calvinism or Arminianism, since I believe that both try to describe what happens at the fringes of the faith and that’s not where I am called to dwell. As far as church politics goes, I definitely ascribe to a presbyterian model, but I am not really a Prebyterian in thinking.
Boy, nice spelling in that last post! You could tell I got about three hours sleep last night!
Dan Edelen said…
“I don’t ascribe to either Calvinism or Arminianism”
Im always amused when I hear somebody say that. All Christians hold to the conclusions of either of these two systems, even if they have not thought-through all of the biblical components that lead to those conclusions. Who makes the ultimate determination of whether a man is saved or not? Is it man or is it God? It’s like being a vegetarian; either you are one, or you are not. Nobody can say “Im not a vegetarian nor am I non-vegetarian”. It might be noble-sounding or politically correct to attempt a “middle ground” position on these things, but no middle ground actually exists. And biblical-truth is not a buffet meal where we can pick something we like from here, and then something else we like from over there.
Im confused looking at the books being recommended on this site, some are arminian and others are calvinist. No doubt there are things in these books that would contradict huge portions of the other books being recommended here. Here’s an interesting quote from Charles Spurgeon:
“‘Hold fast the form of sound words,’ again, let me say, because it will tend very much to your growth. He who holds fast the truth will grow faster than he who is continually shifting from doctrine to doctrine. What a mighty number of spiritual weathercocks we have in this world now. We have men who in the morning hear a Calvinistic preacher, and say, ‘Oh, it is delightful;’ in the evening they hear an Arminian, and they say, ‘Oh, it is just as good; and no doubt they are both true, though one contradicts the other!” The glorious charity of the present day is such, that it believes lies to be as good as truth; and lies and truth have met together and kissed each other”
We will have to disagree on a couple points because, at the risk of being labeled “postmodern,” I think that there are aspects of the Christian faith that while they are absolutes do not necessarily fall into one category or another.
Look at it this way…
Have you ever seen the classic illusion of the vase/faces? (You can find it here.) I think that too many times Christians are arguing for seeing the faces only or the vase only when they approach certain doctrines in the Scriptures. Christ is both fully man and fully God. That’s a hard one to wrap our meager minds around. The Trinity is hard for us to grasp, so is the fact that fallen men can be redeemed and that God can live in them. Our tendency as Christians is to only see part of that. Some churches tend to amplify the humanity of Christ while others stick closer to His divine nature.
None of this makes truth less than absolute, only that what is absolute can have facets we may not appreciate once we come upon a single facet that appears to be the most profound of all.
I absolutely agree that Biblical truth is not a smorgasbord. It only appears that way because different Christians accentuate certain parts. I would claim that cessationists are ignoring the power of the Holy Spirit still made available to all Christians today. You would disagree with me on that, I suspect. In just one area we have found diverging opinions. You will claim that I am cherry-picking and I will claim that you are. Some Calvinists are paedobaptists and some are not. Even within a theological construct like Calvinism, there is not agreement. This inevitably leads to splits and the smorgasbord you describe. It’s a consequence of the Fall and seeing through a glass darkly.
Perhaps we are only seeing the faces or only seeing the vase when we are beholding the complete truth of God. Yes, there are some things that are exclusively true, but most Christians tend to agree on those points.