blistermoth: (wisdom)
blistermoth ([personal profile] blistermoth) wrote2005-06-22 10:03 am

anselm who? or my "Lutheran" college education has failed me

You scored as Anselm. Anselm is the outstanding theologian of the medieval period.He sees man's primary problem as having failed to render unto God what we owe him, so God becomes man in Christ and gives God what he is due. You should read 'Cur Deus Homo?'

</td>

Anselm

67%

Friedrich Schleiermacher

60%

Karl Barth

60%

John Calvin

53%

Jonathan Edwards

53%

Charles Finney

53%

Augustine

40%

Martin Luther

40%

Jürgen Moltmann

33%

Paul Tillich

27%

Which theologian are you?
created with QuizFarm.com

[identity profile] daisydumont.livejournal.com 2005-06-22 08:32 am (UTC)(link)
your lowest score is my highest. i like these theological quizzes, though this one was hard to reply to (for me).

[identity profile] blistermoth.livejournal.com 2005-06-22 08:46 am (UTC)(link)
I've definitely taken quizzes with better written questions.

[identity profile] ms-priestypants.livejournal.com 2005-06-22 09:41 am (UTC)(link)
weird, me too. I would have sworn on being Karl Barth, but this might reflect what point I'm at in my seminary education, just having finished a healthy dose of medieval church history;)

[identity profile] angevin2.livejournal.com 2005-06-22 11:21 am (UTC)(link)
I got Jürgen Moltmann, but it was actually a three-way tie between him, St. Anselm, and John Calvin. This makes my brain hurt.

[identity profile] novak.livejournal.com 2005-06-22 01:30 pm (UTC)(link)
Ach! Anselm totally rocks! You really should read him, maybe especially for the experience of digging in to his Ontological Argument for the existence of God. Which settles the question. Or is totally stupid. Depends on the day of the week, but it's like having a philosophical computer virus in your head once you understand it: you can't get away from how fascinating it is!

Alright, now I'm going to take the exam, although I'm a theologian myself and there doesn't seem to be any leeway for that here. And "Thomas Aquinas" (or any of the Cappadocians, or Origen) aren't options, which makes this totally biased.... :-)

[identity profile] blistermoth.livejournal.com 2005-06-22 01:51 pm (UTC)(link)
I can bareful understand what Wikipedia says about him (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontological_argument)!

[identity profile] novak.livejournal.com 2005-06-22 02:11 pm (UTC)(link)
Huh--that's a thorough article! But yes, it's a mind-bender at first.