thumbnail

Books of the Catholic Bible Quiz

Name the books of the Catholic Bible.
We also have a quiz for the Protestant Bible
Quiz by Quizmaster
Rate:
Last updated: August 28, 2018
You have not attempted this quiz yet.
First submittedOctober 24, 2009
Times taken54,263
Average score45.2%
Rating4.44
7:00
Enter book here:
0
 / 73 guessed
The quiz is paused. You have remaining.
Scoring
You scored / = %
This beats or equals % of test takers also scored 100%
The average score is
Your high score is
Your fastest time is
Keep scrolling down for answers and more stats ...
Old Testament
Genesis
Exodus
Leviticus
Numbers
Deuteronomy
Joshua
Judges
Ruth
1 Samuel
2 Samuel
1 Kings
2 Kings
1 Chronicles
2 Chronicles
Ezra
Nehemiah
Old Testament
Tobit
Judith
Esther
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
Job
Psalms
Proverbs
Ecclesiastes
Song of Songs
Wisdom
Ecclesiasticus
Isaiah
Jeremiah
Lamentations
Old Testament
Baruch
Ezekiel
Daniel
Hosea
Joel
Amos
Obadiah
Jonah
Micah
Nahum
Habakkuk
Zephaniah
Haggai
Zechariah
Malachi
New Testament
Matthew
Mark
Luke
John
Acts
Romans
1 Corinthians
2 Corinthians
Galatians
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
1 Thessalonians
2 Thessalonians
New Testament
1 Timothy
2 Timothy
Titus
Philemon
Hebrews
James
1 Peter
2 Peter
1 John
2 John
3 John
Jude
Revelation
+2
Level 27
May 29, 2012
You put 1&2 Kings before 1&2 Samuel. It should be the other way around.
+1
Level 45
Apr 19, 2014
i agree, i thought that was weird so i looked it up and every site has 1 samuel 2 samuel 1 kings 2 kings

it never goes 1/2kings then 1/2samuel it's always 1/2samuel and then 1/2kings

+1
Level 52
Apr 5, 2015
Yep. That completely threw me off.
+5
Level 21
Dec 27, 2015
Agreed. Still in catholic high school and learned them in a catchy song. Wish more Catholics knew their bibles
+4
Level 83
Dec 28, 2015
Yeah, seriously. You can't have two books about kings before the first king is crowned by Samuel.
+1
Level 77
Jan 11, 2016
This should really be changed. The order of the books is important.
+6
Level ∞
Nov 11, 2017
Finally fixed after all these years. Sorry about that.
+3
Level 84
Apr 30, 2013
I was raised Protestant... wonder if I'd do any better on the Protestant Bible quiz, but probably not. I don't notice any major differences here.
+6
Level 45
Oct 6, 2013
The Catholic and Orthodox Bibles have several books that the Protestant do not.
+6
Level 68
Dec 23, 2013
Wisdom, 1,2 Maccabees, Baruch, Tobit, Ecclisiasticus and Judith are the differences, and I didn't know any one of them. Funny to see that these 7 books are also guessed correctly least
+3
Level 84
Dec 25, 2013
I knew a couple of these but mostly because I am interested in history, not so much because I've studied the Catholic Bible. I've read the Bible pretty extensively but mostly various Protestant versions/translations.
+5
Level 76
Dec 25, 2015
I'm Protestant but I keep a New Jerusalem Bible for study purposes so I knew several of the books. Still I missed Wisdom, Baruch, and Ecclesiasticus, and tried to include Bel and the Dragon from the Apocrypha. What really burned me was missing Philippians. I should have known that one.
+2
Level 76
Jan 3, 2014
I knew Maccabees from the Holiday Armadillo episode of Friends where Ross is trying to explain Hanukkah to his son. Sigh...
+5
Level 56
Mar 1, 2014
Many Catholic bible name the books differently, such as 1 Esdras = Ezra. And Revelation is also known in Catholic bibles as Apocalypse. (Once lost a pub quiz because the quizmaster only knew Apocalypse and not Revelation!)
+2
Level 56
Mar 25, 2015
I'm Catholic, and I've heard it called Apocalypse before, but usually not by Catholics. It's usually referred to as "Revelations" or "the Book of Revelations." It could also be a culture/area of the world thing, though.
+1
Level 56
Mar 25, 2015
I saw a Catholic bible with full Esdras's (as well as 3 and 4 Esdras not included here), Apocalypse and naming Joshua as "Jesus Nave". It seems this was a very exceptional bible to have gone full Greek in this way, and not like normal Catholic bibles read in churches or people's homes.

How about I saw your reply to my comment of a year ago (my god, a year!) which was posted only today! What are the chances? (Except the quiz popped up on the frequent list).

+1
Level 75
May 11, 2015
Never go full Greek...
+3
Level 88
Dec 14, 2016
Here in Ireland we call it the Book of the Apocalypse.
+1
Level 45
Dec 12, 2022
In Chile we call it "apocalipsis"
+1
Level 53
Dec 28, 2020
When I've been to Catholic churches (here in Britain) it's almost always been called the Apocalypse. Not totally always though.
+2
Level 22
Jan 28, 2015
73/73 BOI
+4
Level 64
Dec 25, 2015
proud to say: 9/73
+2
Level 10
Dec 25, 2015
21/73 AFTER reading the comments.

Wow.

The only reason I know ANY is because this year I am in a Catholic school, where we memorize Bible verses in Spanish.

*insert thumbs up emoji here*

+3
Level 35
Dec 27, 2015
i'm a Lutheran and you should make a quiz on that
+12
Level 6
Dec 28, 2015
How about you and your church reunite with the first and one true chruch.
+1
Level 74
May 3, 2016
+1
+6
Level 61
Jun 18, 2016
Sad.
+10
Level 70
Dec 27, 2017
The Lutherans are too busy singing hymns in four-part harmony and making lethally strong coffee in the church basement to take part in such a quiz.
+1
Level 52
Feb 15, 2016
maccabees is part of the new testament.
+2
Level 65
Mar 22, 2016
No. No it's not.
+3
Level 65
Jan 18, 2019
This is one of those times when you should do research before claiming something is incorrect. Maccabees is most certainly not in the new testament. It is in the old testament.
+2
Level 45
May 24, 2016
I'm Orthodox, and we also have 3 Macabees. Maybe it's combined with 2 Macabees in the Catholic Bible?
+3
Level 61
Jun 18, 2016
It's not considered canon by other Christians. I guess they ret-con'd it out.
+3
Level 39
Jun 30, 2016
Didn't see it was a Catholic Bible quiz

was quite confused near the end with some gaps in-between

+2
Level 81
Oct 15, 2016
Missed Joshua and Judges, but at least I got Haggai :D
+4
Level 37
May 30, 2017
There should be a special quiz category for all of us commenters with whom the quiz master(s) disagrees and, therefore, censor(s) our comments before they're posted.
+2
Level 65
Nov 5, 2017
Isn't it 'Song of Solomon' not 'Song of Songs'?
+2
Level ∞
Nov 11, 2017
It can be either
+3
Level 70
Dec 27, 2017
Protestants call it the Song of Solomon. Every Catholic Bible I've ever owned has called it Song of Songs, which is a closer translation of the original Hebrew (Shir ha-Shirim) than "Song of Solomon".
+1
Level 53
Dec 28, 2020
Which Protestants??
+2
Level 42
Dec 27, 2021
As Protestant I’ve never called it Songs of Solomon 🤔
+1
Level 24
Oct 28, 2022
All protestants I know also call it song of songs.
+2
Level 3
Nov 11, 2017
Ive learnt the order of the books by doing this quiz over and over again. Just looked at the comments and found out that kings and Samuels are in the wrong order. Brilliant 😡. I thought something was weird when I did the Protestant books quiz and they were the other way around. At least now I know why 🙌
+2
Level ∞
Nov 11, 2017
Fixed
+2
Level 60
Dec 27, 2017
Well, I buggered that one all up.
+4
Level 71
Mar 10, 2018
Interesting Fact (by JetPunk standards):

Song of Solomon and Esther are the only books of the bible WITHOUT the word 'God' in them

+1
Level 50
Jun 22, 2021
Not true. In Esther 7:4 the word "God" is there.
+1
Level 20
Jan 14, 2022
AFAIK, I only saw that in the Douay-Rheims Bible, in which the verse says "For we are given up, I and my people, to be destroyed, to be slain, and to perish. And would God we were sold for bondmen and bondwomen: the evil might be borne with, and I would have mourned in silence: but now we have an enemy, whose cruelty redoundeth upon the king."
+2
Level 69
Apr 28, 2019
Funny how the bottom five guessed are all from the fake Apocrypha that the Catholics added in to suit their beliefs.
+22
Level 84
Jun 12, 2019
They weren't added. Martin Luther removed them. And he almost removed Esther, James, Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation.
+5
Level 84
Sep 10, 2020
Every version of this book is full of fake bull poo, with omissions, exclusions, redactions, alterations, questionable translations, inventions, and interpolations decided on by imperfect men with their various biases and agendas. And we have no reason to believe that the original texts, should they even not be lost to us now, were in any way superior to whatever has been identified as apocryphal after the fact.
+17
Level 92
Oct 12, 2020
I see Kalbahamut is still on his campaign to leave a nasty comment on any quiz containing anything remotely Christian.
+7
Level 53
Dec 28, 2020
Just for the benefit of other readers of this site... I know of at least two books written by atheists trying to disprove the reliability of the Bible who, in the course of their research, found the evidence for the reliability of the Bible was overwhelming to the extent that they converted. "The Case for Christ" is perhaps the best-known example.

Just to make it clear that there is rational grounds for not taking the view given above...

+2
Level 75
Mar 23, 2021
The Bible is not 'reliable'. Christianity, like all religions, is based on faith.
+1
Level 63
Dec 12, 2022
And faith is so very unreliable...
+1
Level 84
Dec 12, 2022
Theodore: no campaign... and nothing nasty... just responding to a comment with relevant facts. You see it as something else because this factual information I shared provoked some defensive and emotional overreaction in yourself. Might want to reflect on why that is for a while.

Jon: if only you could see how absurd that book is in the eyes of actual non-believers. The "evidence" laid out in it is so absurdly flimsy it is impossible to believe that Strobel's story is genuine. Just... laughable. There are, however, many millions of much more believable cases of the opposite thing happening: people who studied the Bible or history looking for evidence to support their faith, or went to seminary, and became atheists. I imagine that these stories are *so* common that a handful of people, like Strobel, felt it necessary to try and offer up some counter-point for personal reasons.

+1
Level 84
Dec 12, 2022
QuizzerBros: exactly. realizing this (along with the realization that there is value in figuring out what is or is not a reliable path to knowledge) doesn't make you any smarter, but it does give you the tools necessary to start separating fact from fiction that most people lack, without getting defensive when your faith is called into question since your beliefs are based on a more solid foundation and not emotion or ego.
+2
Level 53
Dec 13, 2022
In my experience atheism (like a lot of our beliefs) is often based on emotion. Certainly most of the atheists I've known are just as emotional about their beliefs as anyone else, and many get very defensive in response to any challenge to them. Which is fine really, I'm sure that's just being human. I just get slightly narked off at the assertion that atheism is somehow more evidence-based and factual - it's just not a, er, factual idea.

I'm sure there are a lot more examples of people losing their faith after examining Biblical history or whatever (though I'm not sure how you know there are millions) but that's naturally going to be the case because most atheists naturally have never studied the faiths they reject. I've only ever met one person who understood Christianity and rejected it, although I don't doubt that there are more. But they seem to be a tiny minority.

(I've deleted my other thing which was, as you say, rubbish! I can't remember where I heard it.)

+1
Level 84
Dec 14, 2022
Atheism is simply a position on a single question... and usually one people are not emotional about at all. I mean... ask any of the billion or so atheists in China how emotional they get thinking about the god that they've never really heard about and I'm sure it's not very.

But... a lot of other unrelated things often get roped in together with atheism (usually by theists, but sometimes even by atheists)... such as... opposition to various organized religions... beliefs about science, skepticism, and rationality... ideas about or values connected to politics, humanism, sexuality, social justice, etc... and so on... and these are things that people do often feel very passionate or emotional about.

But I don't really think anyone is passionate about not believing in something. That would be odd and I've never seen it that I can recall.

But anyway... (cont'd)

+1
Level 84
Dec 14, 2022
though you have mangled what I actually said a bit... (I didn't say "atheism" was fact-based," or even mention atheism for that matter) ... I still stand by my original comment. Every version of this book is demonstrably full of the things that I listed. And this is, indeed, factual and well-documented.

.... If... this fact leads you toward atheism... well... fine.

But there are actually quite a few people who recognize the truth of the above and are still theists. Some of them even claim to believe in the same Christian or Hebrew god described in various parts of the book.

+1
Level 84
Dec 14, 2022
and... do you not see the irony in how many responses my comment is getting when iRDM's comment (that I'm responding to) got fewer than half as many? When you are trying to assert those who believe differently are emotional?

Is it really your well-thought out and researched position that the books that the fallible and ignorant men who collated the Protestant Bible decided to include as part of their canon are perfect and inerrant, perhaps divinely chosen... while the books that the similarly fallible and ignorant men who put together the Catholic Bible, or any other holy book, are fake and just put in to suit the beliefs of those choosing them?

Or do you have some emotional reason for wanting to believe the above (which is implied by your disagreement with what I said)?

Can you not take a step back and realize that the way you see the books of Catholics, Hindus, Muslims, Mormons... is exactly how everyone else sees your books?

+1
Level 75
Sep 1, 2021
A great quiz. Could I suggest that you accept "Apocalypse" for the final answer as this is what it is usually called in Catholicism?
+1
Level 44
Oct 22, 2021
I concur that either Apocalypse or Revelation should be accepted as the final answer.
+1
Level 68
Dec 22, 2021
it accepts john 3 but not john 2, has to be 2 john, could this be made consistent?
+1
Level 83
Dec 12, 2022
Who puts the number after the name? John 3 would be John chapter 3!
+1
Level 74
Dec 12, 2022
At least I got Ezekiel, thanks to Pulp Fiction
+2
Level 50
Dec 12, 2022
Guessed Jesus, then gave up.