Would be nice to do so because apparently it is a common mistake to believe Hell/Purgatory comes from the Bible and not from the Middle Ages Catholic culture.
Yeah, it's in no Protestant translation, except for some which include a separate section for "Apocrypha" chapters. The difference arises between what is in the Hebrew translation of the Old Testament vs what's in the Greek. Luther, Calvin, et al agreed that if Scripture is the inerrant word of God (it is), any material which cannot be traced back to the original language ought to be omitted.
But to view it from the Catholic perspective, I still think they get it wrong. Maccabees occurs roughly 200 years before Christ. Dead believers had not yet been absolved of their sins through His work. It is a prayer for the Redeemer, not something we are to continue doing after the arrival of same.
The Catholic doctrine of purgatory is a creation of the Middle Ages. It begins with a faulty premise of being able to lose one's salvation despite numerous passages assuring believers that once chosen, they are sealed until the end of the age.
Where it gets nigh on heretical is that it challenges the very nature of Christ's sacrifice and God's holy justice. The purpose of Christ's work was to pay the price for sinners who could not live up to divine standards on their own. To then make those sinners pay AGAIN for something Christ already paid for amounts to a form of double jeopardy. God's just nature precludes unjust actions. Forcing a penalty to be paid twice (i.e. by Jesus and then again by you or me) is necessarily unjust and beneath God. Purgatory is bunkum.
It's less about paying or being penalized and more about preparing a soul to be in full communion with God. One way to understand it is that unless you're an incredibly holy person, you aren't quite ready to see God face-to-face. In this sense, purgatory is a 'time' of purification.
As someone already mentioned, the concept of praying for the dead is present in 2 Maccabees. Whether you recognize this book as being part of Sacred Scripture, this still demonstrates that the concept of purgatory existed, though unnamed, far before the Middle Ages.
Multiple punishments for the same crime is beneath God. And, as I pointed out, even using Macabees, it's wrong. The need to pray for the dead would cease after the coming of Christ. It's one of those things, like temple sacrifice, that we no longer need to do because He made it unnecessary.
Hi again. I wasn't trying to convince you whether it was right or wrong, just stating that your claim of how it's a creation of the Middle Ages is historically false.
The names of the wise men are not mentioned, and the number of them actually isn't either. Three gifts are mentioned, which is where the number comes from, but there's no clear statement of there being three wise men.
I beg to differ on question #11. The chapter (Genesis 32) in which the wrestling match occurs never explicitly states that Jacob wrestled with God, only that he wrestled with a "man" who refused to identify himself and that the man blessed him. Other parts of the Bible refer to the being as an angel. This question falls in the same camp as the one about the Magi IMO: if making assumptions is considered false here, then the question should either be marked false or replaced.
I feel like the seven deadly sins one is a trick question. The seven deadly sins are not mentioned in the Bible, but if you commit sin in general (including things like pride, greed, wrath, envy, etc) and you have to confess them and ask for forgiveness through Jesus (1 John 1:9, Acts 3:19) or risk being sent to hell (Rev 21:8).
All sins are worthy of damnation if they are not repented of. Only believers repent.
"The seven deadly sins" is an explicitly Catholic doctrine which holds that certain sins can cause the revocation of salvation until and unless penance is done. Any sin not on this list falls into the venal sin category which they believe send you to purgatory if you die without doing your penance for.
Protestants argue that God does not take away something once given. That would make Him either capricious or capable of error, neither of which is true.
"The names of the three wise men are never mentioned"
Not only that, but it doesn't say that there were three wise men! There were three types of gift (gold, frankincense, and myrrh). The idea that there were three wise men is derived from that.
Since the Bible doesn't say otherwise, I choose to believe that there were three wise men who each gave a gift of gold, seven wise men who each gave a gift of frankincense, and nine wise men who each gave a gift of myrrh. Three gifts of gold from the wise men under the sky, seven gifts of frankincense from the wise men in their halls of stone, nine gifts of myrrh from the wise men doomed to die. One type of gift to rule them all, one type of gift to find them, one type of gift to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
I breezed through this question with no issues...i always had a good understanding about what was in the bible versus what was added after by catholic doctrine...then there's the Mary Madeline question. Looks like i'm not the only one that missed this one. Can someone please explain which part is not in the Bible?
I laughed when I started to read "Nitpickers who don't provide exact Biblical citations...", but was surprised when the sentence didn't end with "... will go to hell". I'm sure that's somewhere in the good book, at Hostetler 3:15-17, I think.
There's a simple smell test: Christian concepts which are openly manipulative and abusive are probably later religious doctrines, while that which is merely ridiculous is more likely to actually be in the Bible.
Misleading questions. E.g. question 15. Did Jesus befriend Mary Magdalene? Yes he did. Was she a prostitute? No she wasn’t. It’s basically two questions in one. Same with the wise men question.
Questions could be worded much better so it’s clear what you’re after and you’re actually testing knowledge, rather than trying to catch people out.
Yes, that was the only question I got wrong and as you point out it's because it's a compound question. "Mary Magdalene, companion of Jesus, was a repentant prostitute" would be much better.
That is such odd thing to say. Would you have the same complaint about the statement "Sweden is a country in the Southern hemisphere". Would you call that misleading too? Because; is Sweden a country? Yes it is. Is it in the Southern hemisphere, no it isn't.
Or is a pig an animal that can fly? Misleading! because it is an animal! But it just can't fly (on its own, without being tossed or put on a plane...)
Question #1 is in the Bible. Lucifer is cast out of Heaven because of pride. Isaiah 14:12-15, especially versus 13-14.
12How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
15Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
Well it seems that that may be Lucifer, but it may be not. The Bible commentary I've just picked up says it refers to the King of Babylon (as in verse 4), although as you point out the KJV does actually translate the bit about "morning star / bearer of light" as Lucifer, unlike the other translations I've picked at random. Obviously "Lucifer" does mean "bearer of light".
Yes given the ambiguity I'd personally be inclined to change the question, but from my rather cursory check on t'Intarweb it seems that the weight of scholarly opinion (including the Ampified Bible, indeed) is behind it referring to that king...
I think you've really got to contort your words if you think exalting your throne above the heavens or comparing yourself to the Most High doesn't "say anything about pride."
On a quiz like this, based on interpretations (interpretations of translations, in fact, and in a context where there's not even such a thing as "The Bible"), you should probably avoid edge cases; or at least, misleading phrasing in the question. If you want to ask if "Lucifer was an angel" in the Bible, then ask that.
An anti-catholic quiz lol. Confession being a part of salvation is certainly in the Bible, and Purgatory is alluded to in Maccabees, Corinthians, and Revelations. Plus it can be easily deduced from the other soteriological truths we have from the Bible. While not explicitly outlined, it certainly has more biblical support than the protestant doctrine of immediate entry into heaven for believers which is certainly found nowhere in the Bible. It also isn't at all a medieval invention, we have attestation to it in the very early church, but we have no record of people believing immediate entry into heaven for all believers until Luther. Still got 100% on the quiz tho lol, bc I saw the slant the creator had.
Yes, someone is definitely going to feel like they're on the losing end in a quiz which hinges on interpretations of the Bible. You might as well make a quiz about what is or isn't in the Bill of Rights.
Luke 23:43 would be more than an allusion. "Truly I tell you that today you will be with me in paradise." Were the Catholic doctrine accurate, a thief condemned to death would require time in purgatory, as his account would have some debits on it despite his repentance.
It seems you don't understand the doctrine. Purgatory is typically viewed as not necessary for one in a "state of grace", i.e., being fully contrite and having confessed his/her sins, which the thief would arguably be in after having just expressed his faith and contriteness to Jesus.
Moreover, both purgatory and paradise are outside of time, so technically after his death, which was "today" on that day, he both was in purgatory and paradise. This doesn't really make sense, but that's expected as both are outside of time.
Once again, God bless! Let's say a prayer for one another.
Purgatory, however, has almost no basis in the Bible. The single verse that "supports" it, 2 Maccabees 12:45, isn't even found in most translations.
But to view it from the Catholic perspective, I still think they get it wrong. Maccabees occurs roughly 200 years before Christ. Dead believers had not yet been absolved of their sins through His work. It is a prayer for the Redeemer, not something we are to continue doing after the arrival of same.
Ah yes, the innerant word of an omnipotent being, that still needs to be edited by humans to be correct.
Where it gets nigh on heretical is that it challenges the very nature of Christ's sacrifice and God's holy justice. The purpose of Christ's work was to pay the price for sinners who could not live up to divine standards on their own. To then make those sinners pay AGAIN for something Christ already paid for amounts to a form of double jeopardy. God's just nature precludes unjust actions. Forcing a penalty to be paid twice (i.e. by Jesus and then again by you or me) is necessarily unjust and beneath God. Purgatory is bunkum.
As someone already mentioned, the concept of praying for the dead is present in 2 Maccabees. Whether you recognize this book as being part of Sacred Scripture, this still demonstrates that the concept of purgatory existed, though unnamed, far before the Middle Ages.
God bless :)
Because they wouldn't be able to find three wise men and a virgin.
Whether or not you believe it, you must admit it is indeed very cool.
"The seven deadly sins" is an explicitly Catholic doctrine which holds that certain sins can cause the revocation of salvation until and unless penance is done. Any sin not on this list falls into the venal sin category which they believe send you to purgatory if you die without doing your penance for.
Protestants argue that God does not take away something once given. That would make Him either capricious or capable of error, neither of which is true.
Enjoyed the quiz, though.
Not only that, but it doesn't say that there were three wise men! There were three types of gift (gold, frankincense, and myrrh). The idea that there were three wise men is derived from that.
Since the Bible doesn't say otherwise, I choose to believe that there were three wise men who each gave a gift of gold, seven wise men who each gave a gift of frankincense, and nine wise men who each gave a gift of myrrh. Three gifts of gold from the wise men under the sky, seven gifts of frankincense from the wise men in their halls of stone, nine gifts of myrrh from the wise men doomed to die. One type of gift to rule them all, one type of gift to find them, one type of gift to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
Formal rules that implement basic teachings are likely to be developed by people. Narratives are likely to be from the book itself.
Questions could be worded much better so it’s clear what you’re after and you’re actually testing knowledge, rather than trying to catch people out.
Or is a pig an animal that can fly? Misleading! because it is an animal! But it just can't fly (on its own, without being tossed or put on a plane...)
Another great one would be "God will never give you more than you can handle." Which is commonly believed to be in the Bible, but actually isn't.
(Misremembered wording of "God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear")
I laughed out loud at no. 9.! Seems like somebody watched Good Omens and appreciated that scene as much as I did.
12How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
15Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
Yes given the ambiguity I'd personally be inclined to change the question, but from my rather cursory check on t'Intarweb it seems that the weight of scholarly opinion (including the Ampified Bible, indeed) is behind it referring to that king...
Judasim does not have a concept of heaven and hell nor do we have lucifer.
Just something for you to keep in mind.
On a quiz like this, based on interpretations (interpretations of translations, in fact, and in a context where there's not even such a thing as "The Bible"), you should probably avoid edge cases; or at least, misleading phrasing in the question. If you want to ask if "Lucifer was an angel" in the Bible, then ask that.
Moreover, both purgatory and paradise are outside of time, so technically after his death, which was "today" on that day, he both was in purgatory and paradise. This doesn't really make sense, but that's expected as both are outside of time.
Once again, God bless! Let's say a prayer for one another.