I'm not sure our American-grown religions are anything to be overly proud of – you've got your Xenu-lead space aliens, and your coffee-eschewing sacred underwear donners. As everyone else would say: "Only in America!"
Given 5 minutes to reflect, I would like to apologize if I've offended any Scientologists or Mormons… But obviously not quite enough to delete my comment. ;-)
yay, I did it, a lot of guessing was involved though...Calvanism and Mennonites, at least I knew the approximate area, and I just kept entering countries until I got it right. :)
Is Virginia a country, too? They have their own government modeled after the national one, as do the rest of the states, but they're not countries. I've never understood why people make the distinction for the UK. Northern Ireland, Scotland, England, and Wales haven't been countries for decades. They've been considered countries, but tell me the last time Northern Ireland has been allowed to invade another country.
My mom is from the town in the Netherlands where Menno Simons, the founder of the Mennonites was born. Of course, she was born 432 years after him. Don't know why, but I felt like sharing that. :-)
Arguably Hinduism originates in Pakistan, not India, since that is where the Indus Valley civilization was centered, although of course it's hard to nail down exactly when Hinduism, as it exists today, really started.
(And before you say that religion is not a matter of consensus, may I remind you that you've used the consensus argument to back up your own beliefs as regards Palestine.)
Fact and reality are objective and not subject to popular opinion. I have never said otherwise, including in regards to Palestine. So what the heck are you talking about? I'd also like to point out that 30% is a smaller number than 70%.
someone: do you believe in silly or supernatural things without good evidence? If so, they might. There's nothing wrong with having beliefs. But it's worthwhile to take some time to reflect on why you believe what you believe. And why you dismiss the things that other people believe. And whether or not you are applying an inconsistent standard.
I hate to broadcast my ignorance however can someone explain the difference between Scientology and Christian Science? Thought they were the same thing.
Christian Science is a term the left came up with for stuff like Answers in Genesis that explains the Bible biblically, in an attempt to make it and supposedly separate denominations look unintelligent. The truth is that it is merely a logical conclusion of most Christian sects.
I swear almost 80% of the comments you ever make are wrong. No, Christian Science has nothing at all to do with "the Left," or Answers in Genesis. It is a label adopted by its own adherents and not meant as a pejorative. And Ken Ham and his supporters don't need any help at all to look unintelligent or illogical.
And Answers in Genesis is not a denomination of Christianity. It's a organization devoted to pushing the ludicrous scam that Creationism is a valid scientific theory.
I never said Answers in Genesis was a denomination of Christianity. And you can't just say 'Christianity is ridiculous' and be right. I don't think I've ever heard you actually argue your position beyond blathering about how stupid we Christians are.
I would quote you but all of your words are three inches up the page... Answers in Genesis is insanity and lies. It is not logical. It is not a sect of Christianity. Most sects of Christianity do not officially hold a position on Creationism, the only one I'm aware of that does is Catholicism and the pope has officially endorsed Evolution, rejecting AiG. Denomination is a synonym for sect. I don't blather. If I did then you would be right to complain. There would be no need to blather about the subject you claim I blather about because you and others like you provide so much AMPLE evidence for it. You want proof for evolution? Don't look to the JetPunk comments section. This isn't the forum for that. Pick up a science text book and read.
Answer in Genesis is hilarious, and if you can't appreciate it for the prank to con the stupid it clearly is, it's going to be very hard for you to follow any kind of argument.
It's not a prank (that would be some serious high-level trolling if it were!). At least not obviously. If you take the time to listen to Ken Ham's stupid beliefs and arguments, I do believe he is totally sincere and that he honestly believes in the literal truth of the Book of Genesis. Sometimes he's not 100% honest, sometimes he seems to have selective memory, and of course he is obviously very biased (which, to Ham's credit, he actually openly admits to (he just argues that everyone else (including all scientists) are equally as biased)). But... the same could be said for some other people commenting on this very page. And I don't think those people are trying to scam anyone. They're just human and opinionated.
Anyway, Ham, as scientifically illiterate as he may be, isn't just trying to trick you or make money. He legitimately believes this stuff and his arguments, though silly, at least have an internally consistent logic. Most of the time.
I'm sorry that I know so much about this, but I do. The chapter of my life where I was learning about it was invaluable, however, when it came later to learning about things like skepticism, bias, and objectivity. And human psychology in relation to these things. So in a way, I'm thankful that I was so wrong for so long. It was instructive.
India really got a better deal than Germany there. If you're gonna be associated in the popular imagination with a foreign-born person, better it be Buddha than Hitler.
Although called Roman Catholicism, the title just addresses the headquarters of the church, Rome, not the place where it originated, Israel. No other legitimate Christian church existed until Martin Luther created Lutheranism. I would suggest revising this to reflect the truth. Obviously there is no overarching church that governs all denominations, and we didn't have to distinguish specifically which church until many other denominations were created. Please consider changing this Italy----->Israel
If Israel is listed as the country of origin for Christianity, then Ethiopia should be listed as the country of origin for Rastafarianism.
In both cases, there was a person who became the messiah figure of these religions who lived (though, we have much stronger evidence that Selassie was even a real person than we do for Jesus, who may have been mythical) in these countries, but, while they were alive in those countries they did not believe they were founders of nor did they make any effort to begin a new religion. Jesus was Jewish. So were his followers. Selassie was Ethiopian Orthodox. And he had no followers who knew him.
In both cases, religions were formed later, in different places, by different people who never met these so-called messiahs. Marcus Garvey started Rastafarianism in Jamaica. Credit for the founding of Christianity most credibly goes to Paul the Apostle whose 1st century writings formed the basis of the new religion and its early belief system.
Paul wasn't from Israel. He was a Greek-speaking Roman citizen born in Turkey and he lived, traveled and wrote extensively around the Roman Empire in lands that are today in Turkey, Syria, Greece, and Italy. But not Israel. Not to the same extent.
The answers on the quiz are therefore inconsistent and a bit culturally chauvinistic. On the one hand, you are trusting Christian tradition that Jesus was the messiah and that he intended to make a new covenant with man. On the other hand, you are completely ignoring Rastafarian tradition that Selassie was the messiah and that his divine reign (and subsequent transformation into an object of worship) began when he ascended to the throne in Ethiopia. You are ignoring the historically accurate version of the founding of Christianity, where the religion was created by men with no special powers or relation to their messiah, while accepting the same historically accurate version of the origins of Rastafarianism.
A similar argument could be made for Islam... though this is hotly contested and we have no consensus among historians like we do about Paul the Apostle or Marcus Garvey... but there is a lot of historical evidence that the birthplace of Muhammad and original holiest city in Islam was in fact the Nabatean city of Petra, in Jordan, and not the Arabian city of Mecca. This is a lot cloudier than the Christianity/Rasta thing... but it would make sense to at least add Jordan as a correct type-in for Islam.
Final note: KSA is not accepted as a type-in for Saudi Arabia on this quiz, unlike other quizzes.
Just curious, but why is there is Christianity and then several of it's denominations as if they are separate religions from Christianity.
On top of that there can be Christianity and then several of it's denominations, but find a spot for Judaism which predates Christianity by 2,000 years.
Those denominations had places of origin just like Christianity did, even if they were all founded as part of the Christian religious tradition, just like Christianity was founded in the Jewish religious tradition. The line between new denomination or sect and new religion is often blurry.
KSA and ROK still not working. Please at least state this in the introduction if you can’t fix it, so people don’t just think they’ve got the wrong answer.
To my knowledge christianity originated in Bethlehem and that's in West-Bank wich is part of Palestine. I know jetpunk doesn't recognise Palestine but Bethlehem definitly isn't in Israel.
Another great quiz! Because you either know (or have heard) of these religions or you don't/haven't! Lost out on four answers - tried to cheat by applying the logically feasible Iran-Iraq-India-Turkey and USA (king of Evangelist sects) random shots, but it didn't work out that well... Some relatively occult religions (for me, anyway) from Netherlands, South Korea and Vietnam did me in this time. Guess l am "Wicca" at the topic than I first imagined...
Anyway, Ham, as scientifically illiterate as he may be, isn't just trying to trick you or make money. He legitimately believes this stuff and his arguments, though silly, at least have an internally consistent logic. Most of the time.
Its just like how Hitler is associated with Germany, although he was born in Austria.
In both cases, there was a person who became the messiah figure of these religions who lived (though, we have much stronger evidence that Selassie was even a real person than we do for Jesus, who may have been mythical) in these countries, but, while they were alive in those countries they did not believe they were founders of nor did they make any effort to begin a new religion. Jesus was Jewish. So were his followers. Selassie was Ethiopian Orthodox. And he had no followers who knew him.
In both cases, religions were formed later, in different places, by different people who never met these so-called messiahs. Marcus Garvey started Rastafarianism in Jamaica. Credit for the founding of Christianity most credibly goes to Paul the Apostle whose 1st century writings formed the basis of the new religion and its early belief system.
The answers on the quiz are therefore inconsistent and a bit culturally chauvinistic. On the one hand, you are trusting Christian tradition that Jesus was the messiah and that he intended to make a new covenant with man. On the other hand, you are completely ignoring Rastafarian tradition that Selassie was the messiah and that his divine reign (and subsequent transformation into an object of worship) began when he ascended to the throne in Ethiopia. You are ignoring the historically accurate version of the founding of Christianity, where the religion was created by men with no special powers or relation to their messiah, while accepting the same historically accurate version of the origins of Rastafarianism.
Final note: KSA is not accepted as a type-in for Saudi Arabia on this quiz, unlike other quizzes.
On top of that there can be Christianity and then several of it's denominations, but find a spot for Judaism which predates Christianity by 2,000 years.
I just find it kind of strange is all.