Hey folks, for the second part of our quiz, I am going to modify the rules a bit. Though I am confident all of our readers learned a few new fascinating facts about our Church history, scoring below 50 can be disheartening for test takers. But don’t fret, I am going to curve the grades from the first quiz to make the highest score 100 and advance the other grades accordingly. Make no mistake, everyone still has a chance to win! If you are new to this contest or did not get a chance to take the first quiz, be sure to take it first. Quiz, Pt. 1, will be open for scores until Sunday afternoon.
Also, in this part of the quiz, for anyone willing to take it cold turkey, you can subtract 5 points for every question missed from 120 instead of 100. Then, for those who want to take the quiz with a little internet help, you can begin at 90 instead of 75 and subtract 5 for every wrong answer. So, I expect to see some better grades. You can thank your benevolent quiz giver! :) I will post the answers in the first comment just like the first part of the quiz.
If you want a few study tips, I would strongly suggest you listen to Pastor Tommy Nelson’s lectures on Church History . . . hint, hint. I suggest this because I hope you will get much more out of our fun study of Church history than just the answers from our fill-in-the-blank quiz. Besides, we are giving away a free copy of The Gospel for Real Life by Jerry Bridges to the winner!
Lastly, if you are new to the contest or don’t remember, there are three levels of difficulty to choose from:
- Cold Turkey – Take the quiz without any help at all, (help = books, Google, or any other internet aid).
- Easy, but annoying – Take the quiz with help (e.g. internet, Google, Wikipedia, books, etc.). If you choose this option, you will need to subtract 10 points from your final score. Don’t make it too easy! Try to finish the quiz in 15 minutes.
- Lazy cheater mode – Skip the quiz and look at the answers.
Ready? Take the quiz and enjoy.
- As Martin Luther read Romans 1, he began to see that salvation cannot be earned–it must be by grace alone. He began to see that indulgences are a corruption of the Catholic church that needs reform. Soon after, he nailed his _______ on the door at the church in Wittenberg.
- Jerusalem was sacked by Rome in _______. (year)
- The _______ was the leader of the local New Testament and early church.
- Some Christians in the early church abdicated or denied their faith during persecution. Following the Edict of Toleration in 312 AD, many of the ‘apostates’ wanted to come back to the church. _______ said that they should not be allowed to come back to the church, but _______ made the argument that they could return to the church, because the bishop could forgive sins.
- _______ did not accept the canon. Instead he put together his own Bible including only parts of the Gospel of Luke and some of the writings of Paul. He was condemned as a heretic and excommunicated by the Church c. 144.
- Jerome said that _______ was the ‘incomparable master of Christian philosophy.’ He was one of the early Christian apologists. (person)
- _______ was the one of the first to put together a systematic theology. He wrote about sin, prophecy, salvation, and Jesus Christ. He was also tortured for his faith later in his life day after day until he died at age 69.
- _______ issued the Act/Edict of Toleration in 311. (person)
- _______ embraced the Christian faith after he had a dream about the cross that told him, “In this sign, conquer.” He is one of the most important influential persons in history.
- _______ was the emperor who made it illegal to be a pagan. He would make people walk through the river at sword point to be baptized. After this, the Church’s eschatology seems to have shifted from premillennialism to amillennialism.
- In 325 AD, Arius was condemned by the Nicene Council. The _______ was written there to define the differences between church orthodoxy and the Arian heresy. (creed)
- The _______ are modern-day Arians. (religious sect)
- In 431 AD, the church rejected Nestorius because he said that Jesus had full deity and full humanity, but his human mind and soul did not intermix with the divine nature of Christ. In response, the Council of Ephesus affirmed the _______ of Christ, which later become official at the Council of Chalcedon. (nature of Christ . . . a technical term)
- _______ was a Syrian hermit who brought his sexual urges under control by studying Hebrew and Greek. He was the first to translate the Bible into Latin; it was called the Vulgate.
- _______ was a monk who helped to preserve a New Testament sense of piety and purity by keeping the monks within the monastery. They would plant vineyards and make wine for money and food. He is considered to be the founder of western monasticism.
- _______ is another word that is often an umbrella term for anti-supernaturalism. It tries to make the Christian faith to be all mental and all logical without the need or the want for the Supernatural. (major branch of theology)
- Liberalism denies four things: 1) the virgin birth, 2) the resurrection of Christ, 3) the second coming of Christ, and 4) _______.
- The _______ movement began with the adoption of certain beliefs typical of those held by Pentecostals. The Azusa Street Revival is often thought to mark the beginning of this movement.
You’re finished, almost! Be sure to post your full real name and your score to the comment meta. Also, make sure you link your name to something that allows me to contact you if you win. If you prefer, include your email address in your comment. If you do that, write your email address like this: example at gmail dot com (that way, we won’t lose your comment in the spam filter and you won’t get any new spam in your inbox).
Sorry if you think question 17 is open-ended. If everyone misses it, I will not count it against you. Let me know if you missed it . . .
Alrighty, here are the answers (don’t peek before you take the quiz . . . remember the honor’s system!) . . .
I think this one is a little easier than the first.
1) Ninety Five Theses
2) 70 AD
3) bishop/overseer/elder
4) a. Novation; b. Cornelius (worth 10 points . . . they must be in that order!)
5) Marcion
6) Clement of Alexandria
7) Origen
8) Galarius
9) Constantine
10) Theodocious
11) First Nicene Creed (OR I will accept Athanasian Creed)
12) Jehovah’s Witnesses
13) Hypostatic Union
14) Jerome
15) Benedict
16) Liberalism
17) Divine inspiration of Scripture
18) Charismatic
Fun post… Cold turkey…
1. 95 Theses
2. 70
3. elder/overseer
4. *
5. Marcion
6. Justin Martyr*
7. Origen
8.*
9. Constantine
10. Theodosius
11. Athanasian Creed
12. Jehovah’s Witnesses
13. hypostatic union
14. Jerome
15. Benedict
16. Classic Liberalism (*?)
17. inspiration
18. Charismatic
Paul, you dominated. Well done, sir. If you haven’t taken the first quiz, be sure to do it in order to qualify for the contest to win the prize.
You missed 4 of 19 . . . take 20 points off of 120 and your score is:
100!
**I edited the score, sorry. I forgot #4 has two answers.
What is this?! Part 2 is off to a slow start . . .
1. 95 theses
2. 70 a.d.
3. presbyter-bishop
4.
5. Marcion
6. Clement of Alexandria
7.
8.
9. Constantine
10. Theodocius
11. Nicene Creed X
12. Episcopalians ;) X
13. Hypostatic union
14. St. Jerome
15. St. Benedict
16. Rationalism
17. Divine inspiration of scripture
18. Charismatic/Pentecostal
Great quiz. Takes me way back.
I am not really playing as I did miserably on the first quiz. I do wonder if you will accept my answers for 12 and 16 ;)
I believe the spelling in 13 is Nestorius.
Fr. J., thanks for pointing out the spelling mistake. It is corrected now.
You did well in today’s quiz. I don’t think your answer for #12 will go, but it was a little funny. I’ll give your #16 4 points credit. I really am looking for Liberalism, Liberal Christianity, or something like that. Sound like a compromise? :)
Kevin
I assume you took it cold turkey . . . so your score would be 89 out of 120.
Update scores:
This is the list of scores I have been given so far (as of 12:20 pm CST, Friday). A couple have come in via email, so I’ll do my best to keep their identities somewhat obscure . . .
______________
Quiz #1 (20 pt. curve):
Brandon C = 40
Lisa of Longbourn = 75
Rick = 65
JBuck33 = 70
Asabaka = 75
SPeek = 60
A Simple Sinner = 90
Paul Cable = 105
CPeek = 95
Joshua York (via email) = 100
AJ (via email) = 50
LP (via email) = 65
RJ (via email) = 60
TV (via email) = 40
______________
Quiz #2 (120 pt. scale for Cold Turkey, 90 pt. scale for Easy, but annoying):
Paul Cable = 100
LP (via email) = 85
Fr. J. made an 94 but isn’t competing in the contest. :)
______________
The contest is still wide open . . . no one is out yet! Even if you think you’re out, you can still take the others . . . you don’t have to leave a score, but leave some kind of comment, please!
Quiz 1 will be open to receive scores until Sunday @ 1:00 PM CST. Quiz 2 will be open until Tuesday @ 6:00 PM CST.
**I updated the scores to give credit for #11 . . .**
This has been a very informative read. I greatly enjoy studying religious history, but I don’t have nearly enough skills to compete on this level. I have always been of the impression that if people would only learn the history of their religion, they would find it hard to be religious. However, I see that you (as a group) are well informed on history, yet you maintain your faith. How is that? Please, don’t interpret this as an attack on your faith, I am simply curious. Obviously, you can’t be fundamentalists when it comes to biblical interpretation. Is there something I am missing?
Zhann,
Thanks for dropping by our site. I didn’t interpret your comment as an attack–thanks for asking it. There is much that could be said in answer to your question but I will be try to be brief. We think it is critical to understand the history of our religion, in part, so that we understand where people were faithful to the Lord and where they went astray. Certainly there are times when the “church” went astray, but when they did at these times they were not following the teaching of the Bible and had begun to seek out their own selfish interests rather than those of God.
We need to understand that that temptation is ever before us, to seek to live for our glory and our own advancement rather than that of the God who created us.
So your question hits on a number of issues. The reason the “church” (i put church in quotes because I am refering to formal groups of people who call themselves Christians, those in these groups may or may not actually at heart be genuine Christians) has gone astray is because we all at heart have desires to do evil. Call it what you want but each of us is in some way responsible for the presence of evil in the world and we believe this stems from Adam on from a propensity inside of us to do evil, to rebel against God’s rule and reign in his place.
Again, there is much more I could say, but the good news is that while we have rebelled against the God who created us, he has acted in mercy towards all who believe in Christ by offering up Christ on the cross to pay the penalty for our sin and rebellion against him. So God pays the penalty for sin for all who believe on Christ for salvation.
So that is why we can see the mistakes made in the past and yet still hold to the teachings of Christ and the Bible, because the Bible does not call us to faith in people or in institutions like the church, but to faith in the living God who came to earth in human flesh and took our place on the cross bearing the penalty for our sin so that those who believe might be brought to fellowship with God.
Again, there is much more that could be said and many verses in the Bible that I could cite and talk with you about if you would like.
Again, thanks for dropping by, we encourage questions such as the one you asked–so drop by and ask more questions any time!
Hey folks, I received the following scores via email today:
RJ = 70
AJ = 80
There is still time to take the quizzes. If you have already taken quiz #1 but not #2, remember, we will close #2 on Tuesday.
Hello again. I hope I am not crossing the line here, and if I am please let me know. I have opened a thread on my blog as well in case you would like to take this conversation elsewhere. Let me start by saying that I am an atheist. I have no real qualms with religion in general, my only problem is when religion attempts to influence public policy … currently: Muslims and Freedom of Speech, and Christianity and Stem Cell Research. Of course, everyone has different views, but this is just an introduction to me.
With that said, I have a few questions. First, you mentioned Original Sin (technically you mention Adam as the root of all evil). I assume that you are saying this in a literal context rather than a symbolical one, correct? If so, in this day and age how can you justify Adam as history? I can understand reading the Old Testament as symbolism meant to guide individuals in their daily life, but taking anything in the first 5 books (Torah) literally is difficult for countless reasons.
Second, moving toward the history of Christianity, my first question would have to be the history of the Bible itself. The first four books of the New Testament were written long after Christ’s death. This implies a degree of story telling (story may be a poor word). When looking back at history, especially in those times, it is expected that stories become exaggerated in order to make a point, or to sway an audience. How do Christians that know history look at this?
I can list hundreds of questions, but I will stop here. I enjoy history, and since Religion is such an integral part of history, I try to study religion whenever I can. Again, if you feel that I am crossing the line here, please feel free to ask me to stop, or feel free to post on my site.
Zhann, you are not crossing the line, you can ask such questions any time. This is a church history post and may not be the best place to discuss such things, but nonetheless you are not crossing the line.
I need to get to church right now, but I will try to stop by your site and answer some of your questions later tonight.
First, again, I went Cold Turkey, and missed 13 (not counting 11, see below). So my score is 55.
Ok, so I took the quiz the “easy” way which was much harder than guessing and putting question marks cold turkey. My score was 60 pts, but I strongly challenge question 11. The Athanasian Creed, from all I can find online, was not written at the Nicene Council. (So I’d say my score is 65.) #17 is ambiguous, but as a last resort I said what seems most logical to me, and got it right. Liberal theologians deny a lot of things. My brother said liberals deny “hell.”
Kevin, #1 says that the answer is a person. I don’t think Luther nailed any person to the doors of the church.
I’m so jealous of Paul.
To God be all glory,
Lisa of Longbourn
Lisa, you sound a little annoyed at a couple of my questions. :)
I do think #17 is open-ended, not necessarily ambiguous. If anyone listened to Pastor Nelson’s Church History lectures, they would have aced the whole thing, because these quizzes are largely based off of them. Liberals may indeed deny hell, but to get there, they must deny the divine inspiration of Scripture . . .
Sorry about leaving the person-thing on #1. I thought I edited that off last week. Oops.
I will accept your challenge, also, for #11. Upon further investigation, I would have to agree with you. Athanasius was the key player opponent to Arius and his followers at the First Council of Nicea in 325, which produced the first Nicene Creed. I believe since the Athanasian Creed has been traditionally attributed to Athanasius, even though it is widely believed he did not write the creed, the Anthansian Creed is thought to be an orthodox response to Arius. So, even though some still believe it may find its origin in the 4th century, it is very likely you are right. And upon that kind of evidence, I think the Nicene Creed of 325 would likely work better.
But I wonder . . . how is it that Paul Cable got it right if the answer is actually wrong? Perhaps there is a pretty good reason why the Anthanasian Creed was my original answer to #11. I had to get it from somewhere . . .
Anyway, I will edit the answer key to include the above.
Here is my contribution late in the game. (A sixth man of sorts!) Cold turkey answers (correct answers in parantheses):
1. Ninety-Five Theses
2. 70 A.D.
3. Overseer/elder – as sports writers would say, “pick ‘em”
4. Donatists/Cyprian (Novatian; Cornelius)
7. Ireneaus (Origen)
9. Constantine
11. Athanasian Creed
12. Jehovah’s Witnesses
13. Dual natures (hypostatic union – should have known this one from the “homoousia” principle of the Athanasian Creed!)
14. Jerome
18. Charismatic
As a side note, wasn’t Arius actually a deacon and not a bishop, in reference to Piper’s bio sketch of Athanasius?
As for the actual Final Four, Memphis is considered a safe pick, but UCLA could actually add some West Coast sunburn to the decidedly Southern flavor of the semifinals and title game. Aloha!
Rick, I imagine as you can see in the other comments in these quizzes, I’m learning too!
You are right. Arius was actually a priest who was opposed by his bishop, Alexander of Alexandria. I suppose the term deacon would apply there, as Piper says.
You did well (70).
Thanks for stopping by . . . Final Four stuff. I watched the games. I thought Texas would put on a better show than they did, but Memphis has some tremendous talent. I still like Kansas and North Carolina more than UCLA and Memphis. But, we’ll see next weekend!
I just don’t like not knowing things. I like to be right. It’s good for me to be challenged, but I haven’t had much practice.
My family kept asking why on earth I was taking the quiz if I was so frustrated. It’s stuff worth learning, I think, and the exercise is good.
Thanks for the concession.
I’m a coach for Awana Bible Quiz, and we say, “According to your lesson book, what is grace?” If we say it or not, the students understand that they are being asked to answer from what they have studied. Other definitions might be correct, but to keep it fair, they have to answer by the book. I think what you’re telling us is that these quizzes are according to Pastor Nelson’s Church History Lectures. Guess I should listen to them sometime (before Quiz 3).
To God be all glory,
Lisa of Longbourn
Lisa, I can be the same way. Al Mohler talked about the new attitude in our schools a few weeks ago on his radio show. He said something like, why have we begun to think that making a 90 or a 100 is a normal thing? 90 or a 100 should mean, exceptional, above average, etc. 70 is average, but it seems most people think that is failure. So, either the tests are too easy and many are scoring higher than they should, or we have raised the bar of average too far that it is difficult to distinguish between average and exceptional. Anyway, I thought that was interesting. But I am like you . . . I want to make an ‘A’ on everything . . .
Yes, you should listen to Nelson’s lectures. There are ten though. I think you’ll do fine on the next quiz. Most of the questions deal with Reformation history.
I missed that question (#11) on a test for Dr. Nettles, too. I put Athanasian because Nicene seemed too easy, given the wording of the question. oh well…
[...] will keep the introductory chatter short to briefly explain the rules. If you still have not taken Quiz, pt. 2, be sure to take it [...]
Joshua York sent the following via email (it was lost in my spam filter . . .)
(* = wrong answer)
1. 95 Theses
2. 70AD
3. bishop
4. The Donatists*
Augustine*
5. Marcion
6. Polycarp*
7. Origen
8. Galerius
9. Constantine
10. Constantine*
11. Nicene Creed
12. Jehovah Witnesses
13. hypostasis (-2)
14. Jerome
15. Pachomius?*
16. existentialism*
17. Deity of Christ (-2 . . . ambiguous question)
18. Spiritualism*
I just made a stab at the one’s i didn’t know…I remember most of this from last semester!
Score = 76