Maybe I'm being needlessly pedantic, but it would make a bit more sense to me if it read "Esau is to Jacob" instead, since Aaron and Esau are both the elder brothers. But it's still pairs of brothers, so hey.
Also, atheism is lack of belief in gods, but agnosticism isn't doubt. Agnosticism isn't even a position on belief- it's a position on knowledge. It means a person who thinks it is impossible to prove or know with certainty whether a god exists- it says nothing about whether that person believes in a god. Most people- atheist and theist alike- are agnostics.
There are gnostic theists who believe that the existence of the god or gods they believe in can be definitively proven through (faulty) logic or reasoning or some other means like faith or intuition (necessarily implying they don't really understand what faith is, but still). And many who think that the Bible or the Quran or "miracles" or religious artifacts or even "Creation" (i.e. everything in the Universe) constitute evidence and proof of a god. And there are also gnostic atheists who feel certain that science or whatever else has proven that there is no god. But... yes, everything you said is basically correct. I just question if gnostic theists are really in the minority (many will say things like "I just KNOW there is a God"); I know that gnostic atheists are.
But at any rate... the very poor analogy about agnosticism = doubt that used to be on here seems to have been deleted or moved anyway, to the quiz's credit and credit to those who pointed this out.
As with any philosophical disagreement, you have to define your terms. I don't think that all of the groups you just named could ever agree on a definition for "God."
For example, I would describe myself as a gnostic atheist. I am 100% certain that there is no omnipotent conscious being that controls the universe and interacts with (or has interacted with) humans. At the same time, I know many theists whose definition of "God" is not something I could reject. So am I no longer a gnostic theist? Are they no longer theists? I think these categories are impossible to define because nobody will ever agree on what "God" really is.
it has all the trappings of any other religion. books, meetings, sky-people, money laundering, every flavor of abuse that can be mentioned, etc. So yeah it qualifies.
Of course. It's no different. It's just newer than all the other cults that have been brainwashing people for thousands of years, so people act like it's sillier than Christianity or Islam, but it's not. Same ridiculous nonsense that's just newer and less familiar to the masses.
I love how Christians will laugh at the whole Xenu/volcano stuff...and then will turn around and read their bible where dudes lived hundreds of years, the earth was created in mere days, no dinosaurs ever existed, virgin teenager is raped by a sky daddy and impregnated by a magical dude who walks on water, and two of every species of animal fit on a boat and avoided a world ending flood. Hysterical!
I think one of the key differences between a religion and a cult is level of control. Christianity has over a billion followers, there is no one central organisation that dictates your day to day life. Sure there are some sects of Christianity that can be considered cults, but in general this isn't the case. This is in stark contrast between Scientology and Mormonism for example.
You should also accept "brother" for the nuns question. In fact, at least from a Catholic perspective, "brothers" is more correct than "monks" for an analogy to nuns. Monks live away from society, but most nuns do not. The nuns were an integral part of our parish when I grew up (as they are in most Catholic parishes). Most of them taught in the parish school. They collected donations, organized fundraisers, etc. They were often more involved in the community than the priests. The male version of a nun in this sense -- a person who takes vows and lives a life of worship and community service but is not a priest -- is a brother. The brothers are also teachers and also very involved in the church community. In fact, the Marianist brothers (the ones who taught me) identify their contributions to the community ("charism") as their defining quality. Also worth considering that nuns take the appellation "sister," as in "Sister Mary Clarence." That's no coincidence.
Depends on the order, nuns used to be very cloistered indeed in the past. Some more so than monks. See The Nun's Story a film with Audrey Hepburn as a nun.
If I got the question right, monk is the "profession" (like "king") while brother is the word you use when addressing a monk (like "your majesty" when addressing a king) so in my opinion "brother" is correctly not an eligible answer.
On the other hand, in my opinion, another possible answer to the quiz could be "friar".
It's really simple. Nun-monk, sister-brother. As for the way of life, it really depends on the order, for both genders. Some are extremely reclusive, others are very much involved in society, running schools and hospitals etc.
Pronunciation depends on the language. In Sanskrit it is Shiva. In some of its descendants its Shiv, but in Telugu it's Shivudu with the Telugu masculine suffix.
I don't get the 'jihad' and 'Akbar' question - and I have googled it so please don't berate me for stupidity, just explain. I thought jihad was a holy war and Akbar the Great was an Emperor??
@Rozzi The question is asking for the translation of these two terms. Jihad literally translates as "struggle" and can refer to internal struggle (thought of by folks like the Sufis and Al-Ghazali as the greater struggle, and is sometimes referred to as al-jihad al-akbar) or external struggles (which can refer to warfare, debate, jurisprudence, and persuasion; this application is somewhat analogous to "crusade" not least because both can refer to a holy war). The word has a storied history, usage, traditions and has been a topic of scholarly and religious discussion for centuries in a variety of cultural contexts; it should not be reduced to only Salafi jihadism or an AP sound byte.
It's not that hard to understand. Just because Johnson fought a "War on Poverty" doesn't change the definition of the word war in other contexts. We weren't dropping parcels of food stamps on the Vietcong.
Jihad means holy war, or war waged to advance the cause of Islam (often poorly translated by Western Muslim apologist white washers as "personal spiritual struggle"). Akbar means great.
.. by ignorance do you mean facts? I lived in Saudi Arabia for six years you know. Visited Mecca. Converted to Islam. Impressed everyone I met there with the depth of my knowledge of the Quran, that hadith, and Islamic history. Studied and taught languages there. But yeah you know so much more about this than I do.
@Kalbahamut So what you've been in Saudi Arabia for six years? that doesn't make you an expert in Islam! Do you even know the Arabic language??
I am an Arab Muslim and I'm telling you that Jihad means "to strive" and not the western propaganda "Holy war" just to make us look terrorists or bad... this stereotypical image of us must end because it's offensive!
Yes, Jihad can mean to defend against attacker in war which comes from striving to die in the name of God in DEFENSIVE WAY, but mainly the word "Jihad" means to strive, like a Muslim is fasting Ramadan in a non Muslim country where everybody is eating and drinking around him while he is fasting for God, that's called Jihad. Or leaving your country in order to get master's degree in another country, that's also called Jihad. Or not replying at a person who is swearing at you or bullying you that's called Jihad.
BTW, in the Arab world you would find many men have the name Jihad which obviously means striving and not holy way -_-
I guess all those books and pamphlets I was given to read in the kingdom, written by Arabic-speaking Muslims trained in classical Arabic, usually aimed at converting Westerners to the religion, where jihad was repeatedly described as a war waged or struggle undertaken to advance the cause of Islam (war for Islam; for Islam = holy, in the eyes of Muslism; thus: holy war, spiritual struggle, striving to advance the cause of the Allah, whatever same g-d thing. it's a perfectly fine translation), were all Western propaganda? Wow. That's really interesting.
And I suppose all the many Arabic-speaking self-described Jihadists out there whose leaders do study carefully the Quran, and for whom jihad explicitly means the use of violence, they must be agents of Western propaganda, too, right? I did hear in Saudi that Osama bin Laden was working for the CIA... also that he was a secret Jew... also that he was a noble hero everyone lied about... hm....
what a predicament. who to trust? Scholars? Experts without an obvious agenda? Or Jormist, who is repeating the meme that every war Muslims every fight is defensive. Yeah I'm sure he's unbiased...
Anyway, in the middle of your hysterical comment above I noticed that you did concede that jihad can mean to die in war fighting against the enemies of Islam. Who you choose to define exclusively as attackers, that makes you seem super neutral, but... attackers.. defenders... you're still fighting a war. So I win. Thanks.
Yes! All those books and pamphlets might be wrong, so what? They are not Quran!
Please stop telling me your own experience, I'm not interested in your subjective experience, it's not necessarily the objective truth. If you want to know about Islam then read the Quran and ask trusted scholars, not some pamphlets.
Yes, one of the definitions is to strive in fighting context but that's just one branch out of many ones, and you can't limit it based on that and ignore the true original meaning of it, you can't take it out of context based on your political agendas, we are arabs and we know our language and we know that "Jihad" is a very nice word which means "to strive". It's like saying the word "Fun" means mocking because you can make fun of somebody! while you ignore the original good meaning which is a joyful time! If I want to say "Holy War" in Arabic it would be الحرب المقدسة "AlHarb Almuqaddasah", which was never mentioned in Quran or Hadith!
I never said "every war Muslims every fight is defensive." Don't put words I've never said. I'm saying, as per the Islamic teaching you should only fight back the people who are attacking/oppressing muslims, so it's basically defending islam and muslims. Don't judge Islam based on some behaviours rather than the core teachings of it in Quran and Hadith. Yes, few Muslims fought throughout the history but that does not necessarily represent the true message of Islam, same as the crusaders do not represent Christianity, or Zionists represent Judaism. You must judge the religions based on their scriptures and the science of language, and not on Muslims behaviors. people are humans and can do wrong.
Oh please, don't interfere politics now. Osama Bin Laden was created by USA, and the "many Arabic-speaking self-described Jihadists out there whose leaders do study carefully the Quran, and for whom jihad explicitly means the use of violence" that's only the western media narration to fulfill its agendas and brainwash people like you. Didn't you watch American movies? They always show the white man as the hero and the Arabs are backward people from the desert who are terrorists and killing left and right...
I'm not forcing you to believe me, go and search about it by yourself. I am putting links from a trusted scholar of Islam telling you exactly the meaning of Islam. He is non-Arab, still he studied the standard Arabic language and might be even better than some native Arabic speakers.
youtube.com/watch?v=guw5bez0wuA
youtube.com/watch?v=FljwMcmj5Rk
I suggest you open your mind and be rational and watch these links instead of trying to "win" the argument.
1.) Taoism is the antiquated spelling. While Daoism is accepted, it should be the displayed spelling, and "taoism" should be the accepted alternative, especially since you use the spelling Laozi instead of Lao-Tzu.
2.) "Akbar," especially in the implied context, means "Greater," not just "Great." It should be displayed as such. "Great" can still be an accepted answer.
3.) Since this quiz is about multiple religions, you should use "Hebrew Scriptures" instead of "Old Testament."
I tried hellooo for inferno ( no joke haha I was looking for an italian sounding word that was a synonym for hell, but couldnt thinkof one, closest I could think of was diablo also tried purgatory, hell+o was my final desperate attempt haha)
Patriarch is the highest in the hierarchy. So it fits. Unless there's another religion with an official worldwide leader, though offhand I can't think of one.
I don't understand why this quiz was recently reset, when I remember taking it not too long ago and it seems like maybe one question was changed, but the legitimate concerns raised by commenters like "Daoism" being a preferable spelling, Shiv being a valid name for Shiva, Ummah being a reasonable answer in place of mosque, and some other suggestions that I can't comment on but maybe deserve consideration were just ignored.
Also, atheism is lack of belief in gods, but agnosticism isn't doubt. Agnosticism isn't even a position on belief- it's a position on knowledge. It means a person who thinks it is impossible to prove or know with certainty whether a god exists- it says nothing about whether that person believes in a god. Most people- atheist and theist alike- are agnostics.
But at any rate... the very poor analogy about agnosticism = doubt that used to be on here seems to have been deleted or moved anyway, to the quiz's credit and credit to those who pointed this out.
For example, I would describe myself as a gnostic atheist. I am 100% certain that there is no omnipotent conscious being that controls the universe and interacts with (or has interacted with) humans. At the same time, I know many theists whose definition of "God" is not something I could reject. So am I no longer a gnostic theist? Are they no longer theists? I think these categories are impossible to define because nobody will ever agree on what "God" really is.
What is legally classified as a religion in the United States, a cult in France, and a business in Switzerland?
I love how Christians will laugh at the whole Xenu/volcano stuff...and then will turn around and read their bible where dudes lived hundreds of years, the earth was created in mere days, no dinosaurs ever existed, virgin teenager is raped by a sky daddy and impregnated by a magical dude who walks on water, and two of every species of animal fit on a boat and avoided a world ending flood. Hysterical!
On the other hand, in my opinion, another possible answer to the quiz could be "friar".
Actual nuns live away from society just as much as monks.
It is also used by extremist for armed struggle in the sense of holy war. But it is not the primal meaning of it.
Akbar is often used beside Allah to mean "Allah is great".
I am an Arab Muslim and I'm telling you that Jihad means "to strive" and not the western propaganda "Holy war" just to make us look terrorists or bad... this stereotypical image of us must end because it's offensive!
Yes, Jihad can mean to defend against attacker in war which comes from striving to die in the name of God in DEFENSIVE WAY, but mainly the word "Jihad" means to strive, like a Muslim is fasting Ramadan in a non Muslim country where everybody is eating and drinking around him while he is fasting for God, that's called Jihad. Or leaving your country in order to get master's degree in another country, that's also called Jihad. Or not replying at a person who is swearing at you or bullying you that's called Jihad.
BTW, in the Arab world you would find many men have the name Jihad which obviously means striving and not holy way -_-
And I suppose all the many Arabic-speaking self-described Jihadists out there whose leaders do study carefully the Quran, and for whom jihad explicitly means the use of violence, they must be agents of Western propaganda, too, right? I did hear in Saudi that Osama bin Laden was working for the CIA... also that he was a secret Jew... also that he was a noble hero everyone lied about... hm....
Anyway, in the middle of your hysterical comment above I noticed that you did concede that jihad can mean to die in war fighting against the enemies of Islam. Who you choose to define exclusively as attackers, that makes you seem super neutral, but... attackers.. defenders... you're still fighting a war. So I win. Thanks.
Please stop telling me your own experience, I'm not interested in your subjective experience, it's not necessarily the objective truth. If you want to know about Islam then read the Quran and ask trusted scholars, not some pamphlets.
Yes, one of the definitions is to strive in fighting context but that's just one branch out of many ones, and you can't limit it based on that and ignore the true original meaning of it, you can't take it out of context based on your political agendas, we are arabs and we know our language and we know that "Jihad" is a very nice word which means "to strive". It's like saying the word "Fun" means mocking because you can make fun of somebody! while you ignore the original good meaning which is a joyful time! If I want to say "Holy War" in Arabic it would be الحرب المقدسة "AlHarb Almuqaddasah", which was never mentioned in Quran or Hadith!
youtube.com/watch?v=guw5bez0wuA
youtube.com/watch?v=FljwMcmj5Rk
I suggest you open your mind and be rational and watch these links instead of trying to "win" the argument.
2.) "Akbar," especially in the implied context, means "Greater," not just "Great." It should be displayed as such. "Great" can still be an accepted answer.
3.) Since this quiz is about multiple religions, you should use "Hebrew Scriptures" instead of "Old Testament."