it's time for some tests, please particepate

It's been some time now (I think we last did it in November) and we have many new members and you know what that means. Yes it's time again for testing our spirituality or lack of it and our religious type (atheists included

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

)
All people who I know and have taken these tests always have agreed with the results (me included)

Here are the tests (the previous thread has sunk in the sands of time)

What's your spiritual type? and what's your faith *
* Please take both of the tests and in the end sum both of them.

Here's what I scored->
What's Your Spiritual Type?


You scored 25, on a scale of 0 to 100. Here's how to interpret your score:
25 - 29
Hardcore Skeptic -- but interested or you wouldn't be here!
30 - 39
Spiritual Dabbler -- Open to spiritual matters but far from impressed
40 - 49
Active Spiritual Seeker – Spiritual but turned off by organized religion
50 - 59
Spiritual Straddler – One foot in traditional religion, one foot in free-form spirituality
60 - 69
Old-fashioned Seeker -- Happy with my religion but searching for the right expression of it
70 - 79
Questioning Believer – You have doubts about the particulars but not the Big Stuff
80 - 89
Confident Believer – You have little doubt you’ve found the right path
90 - 100
Candidate for Clergy

AND
What's your faith

1. Neo-Pagan (100%)
2. Unitarian Universalism (89%)
3. New Age (85%)
4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (80%)
5. Liberal Quakers (70%)
6. Secular Humanism (68%)
7. Mahayana Buddhism (65%)
8. Theravada Buddhism (65%)
9. Nontheist (63%)
10. Bahá'í Faith (62%)
11. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (58%)
12. New Thought (55%)
13. Sikhism (53%)
14. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (52%)
15. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (47%)
16. Taoism (47%)
17. Reform Judaism (42%)
18. Scientology (42%)
19. Jainism (41%)
20. Hinduism (40%)
21. Orthodox Quaker (39%)
22. Jehovah's Witness (35%)
23. Orthodox Judaism (30%)
24. Seventh Day Adventist (20%)
25. Eastern Orthodox (17%)
26. Islam (17%)
27. Roman Catholic (17%)


so I am
a highly (hardcore) skeptical neo-pagan
(I agree with this result)

edit- added hardcore as I first smhow replaced it with highly
edit- added neo-pagan definition (I hate to be defined)
=========================================

Neo-Pagans are a community of faiths bringing ancient Pagan and magickal traditions to the modern age--including mostly Wicca but also Druidism, Asatru, Shamanism, neo-Native American, and more. Neo-Pagan is an umbrella term for various and diverse beliefs with many elements in common. Some Neo-Pagans find no incongruence practicing Neo-Paganism along with adherence to another faith, such as Christianity or Judaism.

• Belief in Deity
Some believe in a Supreme Being. Many believe in God and Goddess--a duality. Many believe there are countless spirit beings, gods and goddesses, in the cosmos and within all of nature--God is all and within all; all are one God. The Great Mother Earth, or Mother Nature, is highly worshipped. Divinity is immanent and may become manifest within anyone at any time through various methods.


• Incarnations
No human incarnations are worshipped in particular, as all of nature and the universe are considered embodiments of God and Goddess, or of gods and goddesses, worthy of respect, reverence, or worship.


• Origin of Universe and Life
Generally, there is no conflict between observations revealed through science and Neo-Pagan beliefs on origins of the physical universe and of man. Many believe in a supreme intelligence that created a duality of God/Goddess who then created a spirit world of gods and goddesses as well as all of the universe and nature.


• After Death
Many believe in reincarnation after some rest and recovery in the "Otherworld." There is generally no concept of hell as a place of punishment, but some believe wrongdoing can trap the soul in state of suffering after death. Some (Wicca) believe the soul joins their dead ancestors who watch over and protect their family. Some believe that life energy continues in some, if unknown, form. Some believe in various spiritual resting places. Many say we don't or can't know what happens after death.


• Why Evil?
"Evil" is imbalance. Most believe there is no evil but rather that people sometimes make mistakes. Wrongdoing results when we forget we are one with the universal spirit.


• Salvation
The concept of "salvation" is essentially irrelevant; rather the belief that people can attain spiritual balance and harmony with each other and nature. The path includes group ceremonies, dances, songs/chants, prayers, meditation, trance, altered states of consciousness, the metaphysical, magic, invoking or evoking deities or spirits, Tantric practices. Intercessors are commonly used: psychics, seers, shamans, tarot, Oui-Ja board. Ethical choices are influenced by a belief that one is rewarded or punished within this or after this lifetime for one's choices and an ethical code to do no harm.


• Undeserved Suffering
Most do not believe in Satan or any spirit being as the cause of suffering. Some believe in a karma-like principle, that choosing to live a life of wrongdoing and pain will naturally result in suffering in this or later lifetimes. Many view suffering as a result of spiritual imbalance in one's life or on the planet or in the universe. The focus is generally on healing suffering rather than answering definitively why it exists.


• Contemporary Issues
Abortion is not condemned, as there is no official doctrine; beliefs about abortion range the full spectrum. Views on divorce, homosexuality, and gender equality are generally very supportive of human differences, equality, and personal choice. Many believe that involvement in community action, especially regarding environmental concerns, is integral to the belief in human interdependence and worship of the Earth Mother.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hardcore skeptic, Unitarian Universalist.

(Dunno why Universalist, I'm 100% athiest, however, sexular humanist was second)

*Shrugs*

I'm an athiest, but I'm down with that.

Groovy.

Thanks for the tests, Avatar.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

1. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2. Secular Humanism (97%)
3. Liberal Quakers (94%)
4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (94%)
5. Nontheist (70%)
6. Theravada Buddhism (70%)
7. Neo-Pagan (68%)
8. Bahá'í Faith (66%)
9. New Age (61%)
10. Taoism (58%)
11. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (56%)
12. Mahayana Buddhism (56%)
13. Reform Judaism (55%)
14. Orthodox Quaker (53%)
15. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (49%)
16. New Thought (47%)
17. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (43%)
18. Jainism (42%)
19. Scientology (41%)
20. Sikhism (38%)
21. Jehovah's Witness (34%)
22. Islam (27%)
23. Orthodox Judaism (27%)
24. Seventh Day Adventist (21%)
25. Hinduism (21%)
26. Eastern Orthodox (16%)
27. Roman Catholic (16%)

If I believed in hell, taloned hands woould be dragging me there right now.

Ah well

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I scored 23 on the first quiz ( Making me a Hardcore Skeptic. Duh )

And for the second one, I was..

Secular Humanism (100%)

Nothing new to me

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

My results

What's Your Spiritual Type?




You scored 13, on a scale of 0 to 100. Here's how to interpret your score:

25 - 29
Hardcore Skeptic -- but interested or you wouldn't be here!
30 - 39
Spiritual Dabbler -- Open to spiritual matters but far from impressed
40 - 49
Active Spiritual Seeker – Spiritual but turned off by organized religion
50 - 59
Spiritual Straddler – One foot in traditional religion, one foot in free-form spirituality
60 - 69
Old-fashioned Seeker -- Happy with my religion but searching for the right expression of it
70 - 79
Questioning Believer – You have doubts about the particulars but not the Big Stuff
80 - 89
Confident Believer – You have little doubt you’ve found the right path
90 - 100
Candidate for Clergy

=========================================

1. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2. Secular Humanism (99%)
3. Liberal Quakers (84%)
4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (80%)
5. Nontheist (74%)
6. Neo-Pagan (65%)
7. Theravada Buddhism (62%)
8. Bahá'í Faith (56%)
9. New Age (51%)
10. Reform Judaism (49%)
11. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (48%)
12. Taoism (44%)
13. Orthodox Quaker (42%)
14. Mahayana Buddhism (40%)
15. Sikhism (39%)
16. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (37%)
17. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (36%)
18. Jainism (32%)
19. New Thought (32%)
20. Scientology (31%)
21. Eastern Orthodox (29%)
22. Islam (29%)
23. Orthodox Judaism (29%)
24. Roman Catholic (29%)
25. Jehovah's Witness (24%)
26. Seventh Day Adventist (23%)
27. Hinduism (21%)

 

Hardcore sceptic, UU 100% with secular humanism at 98%.

Interesting and fun. Strange to think I had never answered some of these questions formally, though they are the basic questions in life!

 

I scored a 23, though I thought several of the questions had rather limited options. Of course, that's understandable given the format.

1. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2. Liberal Quakers (92%)
3. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (87%)
4. Secular Humanism (87%)
5. Theravada Buddhism (68%)
6. Nontheist (66%)
7. Neo-Pagan (63%)
8. Bahá'í Faith (53%)
9. New Age (50%)
10. Taoism (49%)
11. Mahayana Buddhism (47%)
12. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (46%)
13. Reform Judaism (45%)
14. Orthodox Quaker (41%)
15. Sikhism (41%)
16. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (39%)
17. Jainism (39%)
18. New Thought (39%)
19. Jehovah's Witness (32%)
20. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (32%)
21. Hinduism (27%)
22. Scientology (19%)
23. Seventh Day Adventist (18%)
24. Orthodox Judaism (14%)
25. Eastern Orthodox (11%)
26. Islam (11%)
27. Roman Catholic (11%)

 

Heres mine:



You scored 42, on a scale of 0 to 100. Here's how to interpret your score:
40 - 49
Active Spiritual Seeker – Spiritual but turned off by organized religion

1. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2. Reform Judaism (98%)
3. Liberal Quakers (94%)
4. Sikhism (90%)
5. Bahá'í Faith (88%)
6. Neo-Pagan (88%)
7. Orthodox Judaism (83%)
8. Jainism (80%)
9. Secular Humanism (77%)
10. Islam (76%)
11. Mahayana Buddhism (74%)
12. New Age (73%)
13. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (69%)
14. Theravada Buddhism (61%)
15. Nontheist (58%)
16. Taoism (57%)
17. Hinduism (55%)
18. Orthodox Quaker (54%)
19. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (51%)
20. New Thought (51%)
21. Scientology (49%)
22. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (38%)
23. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (33%)
24. Jehovah's Witness (32%)
25. Seventh Day Adventist (24%)
26. Eastern Orthodox (23%)
27. Roman Catholic (23%)

 

The minimum score group on the first test was 25-29. I scored 13. What the heck does that mean???

 

extremely hardcore skeptic prefering to laugh at others opinions and not even considerate them

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Anyone know how to make the score to zero? Or is it possible?

 

Here's a test on Nontheistic philosophies/religions for all of us atheists.

http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=atheistphilo

And my results:

Rank
#1 equals your best match Item
Default order is alphabetical

Your Results Page #1 Agnostic Church
Click for more information

#2 Secular Humanism
Click for more information

#3 Unitarian Universalism
Click for more information

#4 Scientific Pantheism
Click for more information

#5 Pantheism
Click for more information

#6 Atheistic Paganism
Click for more information

#7 Deism
Click for more information

#8 Ethical Culture
Click for more information

#9 Transhumanism
Click for more information

#10 Rationalism
Click for more information

#11 Randaism (Objectivism)
Click for more information

#12 Taoism
Click for more information

#13 Freethought, Church of
Click for more information

#14 Atheism a la American Atheists
Click for more information

#15 Theraveda Buddhism
Click for more information

#16 Zen Atheism
Click for more information

#17 Confucianism
Click for more information

#18 Relativism, moral/cultural
Click for more information

~Raithere

 

For spiritual type I got 90, "Candidate for Clergy"

And for faith I got:
1. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (100%)

so, that shouldn't suprise anyone

 

I'm a Spiritual Straddler...

Hiduism (100%)... what the heck... I don't believe there are many gods...!! That's strange...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

2. Mahayana Buddhism (94%)... That makes some sense....
3. Jainism (90%)... what is that...??

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

4. Unitarian Universalism (84%) Hey Xev! Perhaps you are right...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

5. Bahá'í Faith (82%)...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

6. Liberal Quakers (82%)...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

7. Neo-Pagan (79%)...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

8. New Age (78%)... Naaaahhh...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

9. Taoism (76%)... 9th place! It should be first or second!!
10. Theravada Buddhism (76%)
11. New Thought (73%)... what is that...?
12. Orthodox Quaker (72%)
13. Scientology (69%)... naaahhh...!
14. Orthodox Judaism (67%) ... Judaism... perhaps. Not orthodox...
15. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (64%)
16. Sikhism (63%)
17. Islam (60%)
18. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (58%)
19. Reform Judaism (57%)
20. Seventh Day Adventist (49%)
21. Secular Humanism (47%)
22. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (39%)
23. Nontheist (36%)... haha...
24. Eastern Orthodox (35%)
25. Roman Catholic (35%)
26. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (33%)
27. Jehovah's Witness (31%)

I'm also 100% Toltec...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Love,
Nelson

 

if you want to know what means each fate, do the test again (you may just go through it with no correct asnwers) at the end you are able to choose from a list of definitions. (i think it was called-> know what do others believe)

 

From Raithere's test...

#1 Agnostic Church
Click for more information

#2 Secular Humanism
Click for more information

#3 Pantheism
Click for more information

#4 Unitarian Universalism
Click for more information

#5 Ethical Culture
Click for more information

#6 Scientific Pantheism
Click for more information

#7 Atheistic Paganism
Click for more information

#8 Freethought, Church of
Click for more information

#9 Transhumanism
Click for more information

#10 Atheism a la American Atheists
Click for more information

#11 Deism
Click for more information

#12 Rationalism
Click for more information

#13 Taoism
Click for more information

#14 Randaism (Objectivism)
Click for more information

#15 Theraveda Buddhism
Click for more information

#16 Zen Atheism
Click for more information

#17 Confucianism
Click for more information

#18 Relativism, moral/cultural
Click for more information

 

Two cents and a box of soap

As I go through the Spiritual Type test, I'm quite disappointed in the framework according to which Beliefnet seems to have put this test together. The survey presents issues of God through a Westernized filter so that in many cases, there is no adequate expression of the moral condition or philosophical perspective. Consider this question:

Unfortunately, I find all of these conditions inadequate. They are simplified, trailer-park summaries of faith reflective of the idiocy of the masses pitched in a lifelong propaganda war. Answer 1 is a reasonable answer, that God either does not exist or else can never be known. But such an answer is closed and restrictive; one can apply the simple maxim that God is greater than that which can be conceived. From this point, the condition arises that God either does not "exist" or "exists" and cannot be known. Yet is human comprehension, even at its most basic, adequate to discern the essence of existence? I perceive the nature of the question to limit existence to the idea that God either exists the way a rock or snail exists, or else does not. Yet does an idea exist in the same way as a thing? Below are included the primary text and the footnote from Jack Cady's The American Writer:

Perhaps another demonstration:

I find this question interestingly lacking only because earlier in the quiz, a question is asked and an option given that proposes that science will "explain" religion. The question cited immediately above lacks any avenue for one who chooses that earlier option. Prior experience tells us that much of the "spirit world" has natural derivations. From demons and devils infecting the body to the genocidal Antibiotic Wars to the general realization that bacteria and other microorganisms are not necessarily harmful--we use bacteria, for instance, to clean up oil spills, among other things. (Notions of cheeses and other products are noted here, but come on ... we're finding some nifty uses for bacteria.)

If, for instance, there is something substantial to the phenomena of ghosts and angels, then we will someday be able to measure that something. If there is no substance, there is nothing to measure and no event to record. Thus, even if the spectral event is a mere product of the imagination, we will someday be able to quantify that. This all points toward a larger ideological difficulty.

Did anyone else notice a funny thing about Ufos? The "official story" was that these objects did not exist, and then came the assertion that they were military test aircraft. It is only as the internet age makes possible the spewing forth of all we have on the subjects of flying saucers and little gray men that people are realizing that the "test aircraft" excuse only begs the question. Fine, we realize that these are test aircraft, but it only begs the question of where this astounding technology came from, how it was developed or adapted, and it represents a shift of perception from the objects in the sky "not existing" to acknowledging that they exist.

Much of the vitriol of the Ufo debate comes from a bad mix of ideological "lost sheep" (you've seen them on TV, the ravenous and manic of the EBE-enthusiast crowd) and a resentfully skeptical opposition that focuses largely on the transference from the alien to the flying object. In the present, we accept that these funny-moving lights exist, yet much of the difficulty that prevents any truly progressive inquest extends from the EBE issue and the leverage one gets from badmouthing the opposition. There's a good number of people out there who are celebrating these days because nobody says they're crazy for having seen lights in the sky; we now know that aircraft tests go back a while and can account for many of the sightings (e.g. the McMinnville, Oregon, photo of a "Kaiser helmet" in the sky; imagine looking straight down a plane much like the SR-71 (?!) "Blackbird" that has only one tail, ca. 1955).

In the religious/supernatural arena, we have a reverse of that process taking place, with much the same result. For millennia, humans have assumed the existence of God, and it is only in the last couple of centuries, in the era of post-Newtonian Christianity, that a specific brand of atheism has presented the specific question of the existence of God per se. Prior to that, the argument was largely about the nature of God, and "atheist" as a theological description was generally applied to nonsensical theologies. Christians, for instance, were called atheistic by the Romans. It seems that only the Christians didn't find the Trinity idea laughable or slipshod.

Beliefnet's Spiritual Type quiz reflects a post-Diderot atheism as its reflection of the alternative. Diderot wrote that whether or not God exists, it is the most sublime and worthless of mysteries. This is an excellent summation, a beautiful counterpoint to the notion that God is greater than that which can be conceived. It points toward the same essential effect.

Yet, understanding that there exists a rich tradition of speculative theology that does not pretend to comprehend or define God specifically, I find it curious that such a perspective is absent from the Spiritual Type quiz. Nonetheless, I should note that, having finally, amid this rant, finished the effing quiz, I have no objections to how it has qualified my answers: 38/spiritual dabbler. In fact, I have to say that at the most delusional period of my religious juxtapositions, a threat against me was once put aside by a friend with a similar phrase, "He may be a magickal dabbler, but ...."

It's just that this quiz reinforces the either/or division 'twixt people. Of late, if anyone's noticed my relative quietude, I would point out that what I've been dwelling on of late is whether or not people in general understand what religion is for and what it does. It actually started during the last discussions of atheism, when I came across an article by Polly Trout at Killing the Buddha. I must admit that I would have missed a specific point had we not been discussing in part the nature of generalizations. When Dr. Trout wrote, "religion" is what we call our attempts, as human beings, tofigure out what matters and how to live a meaningful, dignified life, my first reaction was much similar to a common reaction to broad statements that I have become accustomed to seeing at Sciforums. My first reaction was to snort derisively and call bullsh-t.

And then I thought about it. One of my favorite obscure media is the local cable channel for the University of Washington, an outlet for educational and university-related materials. (Among other things, the station will show NASA satellite footage for hours for its late-night schedule.) But frequently they have interesting little programs on there, and one was a linguistics and communication study of gestures. Instead of talking to psychologists and anthropologists, the producers talked to a zoologist who tried to view humanity with the Huxley's martian eye.

That perspective is vital to me, and actually is a cornerstone of my philosophical framework. And it's what I forgot when I snorted derisively at Polly's article. For a moment, I was viewing her statement with the eye of one who regards religion only as it relates to me; I was forgetting to view the broader perspective of what religion is for. How can I criticize, for instance, the "failure" of Christianity if I've forgotten what religion is supposed to do? How can I criticize without something to contrast it against? Certes, Christianity sets plenty of boundaries for itself, but to view it with a martian eye and decide whether it's right or wrong, one must also know what it stands for and why those issues are important to human beings.

Such as this. It seems to me that my own understanding of God is the stake in this question. None of these answers puts aside the idea that "God" need not operate according to the morality of humans. We are the ones who set the perceptive values. We are the ones who qualify and quantify tragedies and disasters, crimes and damages. I don't see the mushrooms arguing with themselves about whether or not they want to continue to grow in horsesh-t. (Give it a couple of hours. They might.) I mean, this question reminds me of Stevie Ray Vaughan's video for Couldn't Stand the Weather. It resembles two backwater yokels screaming about the existence of God and the authority of that proposed being. Either/or, right/wrong, all/none. What, are we out of proposed possibilities? Have we truly narrowed the whole of the Universe down to two options? Are we really that delusional as a species and as civilized cultures?

I doubt it. But it's worth asking.

thanx much,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I'll be in the corner, doing my best Wilford Brimley

Being that this is the third or fourth time I've taken the Belief-O-Matic quiz, I think any bitching I might do about it is already in the archive. 'Nuff said.

This looks about like I'm used to seeing out of this. I've gotten a couple of different results, but the first bloc of five seems very familiar to me.

And, should any of our MIA cadre of evangelical Christians stumble across this ... I told you I wasn't Catholic ....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

be good all,
Tiassa

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Question 14 is pissing me off.

Each day’s newspaper brings reports of crimes, natural disasters, and disease. My most basic reaction is:

1. My faith is tested because I cannot understand how a just God could tolerate the agony of the world
2. I feel sadness, but accept that both the good and the bad of life are somehow part of God’s plan
3. Such tragedies make me confused about the nature of the Higher Power
4. Tragedies and disasters in the world convince me there is no God

There should be a (5) - Tragedies and disasters happen.....and that proves nothing.



I scored a 22.

Where did you get all that other stuff though?

 

Scored 18 I must be a Super-Hardcore Skeptic

100% Secular humanist