»

Moltmann Wins With 80%

Which Theologian Are You?
find out at quiz farm

So I ran across this quiz online that will tell you which theologian you most resemble. I have to tell you, I was a little bit disturbed to see that I’m 40% Calvin. But knowing that being like Calvin doesn’t necessarily make you like a Calvinist seems to offer some comfort in a time like this. And luckily, he’s still near the bottom. Perhaps more disturbing is the Anslem thing up there in 2nd place. I’ve read very little Anslem, only cur dues homo. At least Barth is in there next.

Take a minute and do this quiz and post your results in the comments, (it literally takes 2 minutes, so actually…how accurate could be?). I would love to hear who you most closely resemble.

It’s ironic to be 80% Moltmann since I’ve only just begun to read his work. I’m working through The Church in the Power of the Spirit right now. The way I understand it, the trilogy of Theology of Hope and The Crucified God link up with the book about the church and form a pretty accurate picture of his approach. I started with the last in the series because I’ve been chewing on questions of Ecclesiology quite a bit lately. Here are a few highlights from the first few chapters of The Church in the Power of the Spirit.

“It is only where Christ alone rules, and the church listens to his voice only, that the church arrives at its truth and becomes free and a liberating power in the world. The theological concept of the church belongs to this specific tradition of the church’s liberation through the lordship of Christ, and it knows that it is committed to that tradition.”

“A consistent theological doctrine of the church is by its very nature an eminently political and social doctrine of the church as well.”

“It is in the interest of everyone who calls on the name of Christ to subordinate his own particular interests to ‘Christ’s interest’ and hence, as Paul says, to ‘live no longer for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised’ (2 Cor. 5:15); and consequently the theological concept of the church serves Christianity as a whole and not only the theologians in the church. In this respect every Christian is a theologian.”

“If theology were to lose its freedom to criticize, it would turn into the ideology of the church in its existing form.”

“What we have to learn from them [the missionary church] is not that the church ‘has’ a mission, but the very reverse: that the mission of Christ creates its own church. Mission does not come from the church; it is from mission and in the light of mission that the church has to be understood.”

“The real point is not to spread the church but the spread the kingdom.”

“The church against world horizons also means: the church’s existence against the background of the world’s increasing interdependence and its growing tension, the struggle for world domination and the fight against exploitation and oppression.”

“Reading the bible through the eyes of the poor is a different thing from reading it with the eyes of the man with a full belly.”

That’s mostly from chapter one, so my guess is that I’ll do some more posting about Moltmann.

About Tim Suttle

Tim Suttle is a pastor, writer, and musician. He is the author of several books: Shrink: Faithful Ministry in a Church Growth Culture (Zondervan 2014), Public Jesus (The House Studio, 2012), and An Evangelical Social Gospel? (Cascade Books, 2011). Tim's work has been featured at The Huffington Post, The Washington Post, Sojourners, and other magazines and journals. Tim is also the founder and front-man of the popular Christian band Satellite Soul, with whom he toured for nearly a decade. He has planted three successful churches over the past 13 years and is the Senior Pastor of Redemption Church in Olathe, Kan. Tim's blog, Paperback Theology, is hosted at Patheos.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/00956440143192393295 The Reluctant Pontificator

    The daddy of 20th Century theology. You perceive liberal theology to be a disaster and so you insist that the revelation of Christ, not human experience, should be the starting point for all theology.

    Karl Barth 87%
    Anselm 87%
    John Calvin 80%
    Jonathan Edwards 67%
    Jürgen Moltmann 53%
    Friedrich Schleiermacher 53%
    Augustine 40%
    Charles Finney 40%
    Paul Tillich 33%
    Martin Luther 33%

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/02289110643212600386 Scott Stone

    Nothing like a good quiz to mess with my head. Tim, have you seen the other quizes? ‘What’s your eschatology?’ is a good one.

    Jurgen Moltmann 73%
    Karl Barth 67%
    Friedrich Schleiermacher 67%
    John Calvin 47%
    Paul Tillich 40%
    Charles Finney 40%
    Martin Luther 33%
    Johnathan Edwards 33%
    Anselm 33%
    Augustine 20%

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/10974397437648079481 Tim Suttle

    Nice, reluctant is a Barthian to the hilt!!! I can’t figure out why Luther is so low on all of our lists. We’re all protestants for heaven’s sake.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/07632153347046833262 todd

    The problem of evil is central to your thought, and only a crucified God can show that God is not indifferent to human suffering. Christian discipleship means identifying with suffering but also anticipating the new creation of all things that God will bring about.

    Jürgen Moltmann 67%
    Friedrich Schleiermacher 60%
    John Calvin 53%
    Anselm 47%
    Paul Tillich 47%
    Martin Luther 40%
    Augustine 33%
    Charles Finney 27%
    Karl Barth 27%
    Jonathan Edwards 20%

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/10974397437648079481 Tim Suttle

    Hey Todd,

    You are really low on the Barth-o-meter. Have you read Moltmann at all?

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/13128303391144284885 casey elizabeth

    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?’

    Anselm 87%
    Calvin 67%
    Tillich, Moltmann, Edwards 47%
    Augustine, Barth 40%
    Schleiermacher 33%
    Luther 20%

    Ah, quizzes…I am intrigued by the Moltmann quotes you posted Tim. More! More!

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/10974397437648079481 Tim Suttle

    Our first Anselm Candidate!!!

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/00956440143192393295 The Reluctant Pontificator

    Am I right in thinking that Calvin and Barth would be opposed to Anselm?

    Wikipedia said my man Francis Schaeffer was Barth’s chief critic. I’m not sure what to make of that. Maybe I’ve got to start trying to “cheer for another school”

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/10974397437648079481 Tim Suttle

    I don’t really know. I think Barth was primarily writing against 19th Century liberalism (Schleiermacher) and eventually the liberalism of his contemporaries in Europe (like Bultmann, Tillich, Brunner). All of his teachers and friends supported the policies of the Kaiser in WWI. Later they would support Hitler. It all led to a total crisis for him. He was trying to create a system which was not subject to the fatal critique which liberalism fell into. Barth seems to work with Calvin constantly.

    I don’t Barth was working against Anselm in particular, but more against liberalism and with the reformers, but I could be wrong. I really need to bone up on Barth, it’s like I’m forgetting everything I learned about him.

    That Schaeffer was Barth’s chief critic might be giving Schaeffer a little too much credit. Not that he wasn’t a great mind, but I don’t think he’s on the same field with Barth in terms of world-wide influence. Again, I could be wrong about that. Maybe I should do some research?

    Yeah man, cheer for as many schools as you can.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/07632153347046833262 todd

    I haven’t read any Moltmann.

    I’m sure my low Barthness came from the questions on revelation. I don’t think I disagree with him, I just thought those quiz questions were worded funny. You probably know more than I do, but my understanding of his big assertion is:

    Humans are unable to know God except thru his self-unveiling revelation. But the Bible is not the direct revelation, it just points to revelation (Jesus).

    I like Barth because claims like that will annoy both liberals and conservatives.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/02289110643212600386 Scott Stone

    Reluctant,

    I don’t think Schaeffer was as much of a critic Of Karl Barth as was who Schaeffer studied under. I could be wrong but I think I remember reading about the rift.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/02289110643212600386 Scott Stone

    Reluctant,

    I posted an example of the argument between Barth and Schaeffer on my blog. It is way to long to include here. I thought you might like it.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/10974397437648079481 Tim Suttle

    Yeah, Barth was quite critical of Natural Theology or General Revelation. I’ve read his debate with Emil Brunner on that subject – his side was entitled “Nein!” I’ve had to write on it twice, I’ll read through my papers and see if they are worth a crap. If they are I’ll post them. Much of what I understand of Karl Barth (I’ve read some of “Church Dogmatics” as well as 2 books: “The Word of God and the Word of Man” and “The Humanity of God,” both of which are testament to the reality that Barth is hard to read), comes to me via other writers and thinkers. It is just going to take me a few years to get a handle on his thinking. That’s just my opinion.

    What I understand to be the seminal Barth move is that he was educated by 19th Century liberals & was working among them. The central tenet of that sort of liberal philosophy was largely a religious application of Kant. Barth attacked the liberal ideology saying that it had accepted the Renaissance idea that humans are the measure of all things. Barth’s response to that idea was that “there was no effective answer to be given to Feuerbach [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Andreas_Feuerbach] who eagerly invoked Luther’s sanction in support of his theory that statements of the Christian faith, like those of all other religions, are in reality statements of more or less profound human needs and desires projected into the infinite.”

    Feuerbach is an important part of the picture. His critique of liberalism was essentially that it was that within their system, God is really nothing but humanity projected into the infinite. Barth was convinced that 19th Century liberalism was fully vulnerable to Feuerbach’s critique (there’s much more to it as well). His alternative was to insist that the subject of theology is not man, but the God of Jesus Christ. His reticence to embrace any sort of Natural Theology stemmed from his belief that “a proved God is world, and a God of the world is an idol.” Hauerwas also insists that his rejection of it was wrapped up in the liberal involvement in WWI and WWII. He writes: “For Barth, the denial of natural theology as well as the discovery of the Christological center in theology (that’s what Todd was talking about in his post), were aof a piece with his opposition to Hitler,” (With the Grain of the Universe, 170).

    Hauerwas also writes: “In his Romans commentary, Barth was doing no more than reminding us that what is wrong with the world is its failure to acknowledge that God is God. This news, of course, came as quite a surprise to Protestant liberals who had long regarded humans, not God, as the center of Christian faith.” (With the Grain of the Universe, 152).

    It seems to me that liberals ended up appreciating Barth’s approach much more than fundamentalists. I really don’t know that much about Schaeffer’s school of thought, but it seems like he could be in that camp.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/05917441853062317185 Anthony

    You scored as Karl Barth.

    The daddy of 20th Century theology. You perceive liberal theology to be a disaster and so you insist that the revelation of Christ, not human experience, should be the starting point for all theology.

    Anselm 93%
    Karl Barth 93%
    John Calvin 67%
    Friedrich Schleiermacher 67%
    Jonathan Edwards 60%
    Martin Luther 53%
    Charles Finney 40%
    Jürgen Moltmann 33%
    Paul Tillich 33%
    Augustine 13%

    Apparently mine was a tie between Anselm and Barth, and with the tie-breaker question I was given I fell more in line with Barth.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/13381590952425773053 David

    You seek to make inner feeling and awareness of God the centre of your theology, which is the foundation of liberalism. Unfortunately, atheists are quick to accuse you of simply projecting humanity onto ‘God’ and liberalism never really recovers.

    Friedrich Schleiermacher 87%
    John Calvin 80%
    Anselm 67%
    Martin Luther 53%
    Karl Barth 53%
    Paul Tillich 33%
    Jonathan Edwards 33%
    Augustine 33%
    Charles Finney 20%
    Jürgen Moltmann 13%

    Tim, it was good to see you yesterday.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/12115880211314881430 Dawson

    You scored as Martin Luther.
    The daddy of the Reformation. You are opposed to any Catholic ideas of works-salvation and see the scriptures as being primarily authoritative.
    Martin Luther
    73%
    Charles Finney
    60%
    Anselm
    40%
    John Calvin
    40%
    Karl Barth
    40%
    Friedrich Schleiermacher
    33%
    Augustine
    27%
    Paul Tillich
    27%
    Jonathan Edwards
    20%
    Jürgen Moltmann
    20%

    Ok Suttle do what does this all mean to a green horn?

    D

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/00225021464704425050 !jon

    Crap. I’m both Karl Barth & John Calvin.

    I thought I was more *EXTREME* than that.

    :-(

    !jon

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/16280716611138226877 J.

    The daddy of the Reformation. You are opposed to any Catholic ideas of works-salvation and see the scriptures as being primarily authoritative.

    Martin Luther 100%
    Anselm 67%
    John Calvin 60%
    Friedrich Schleiermacher 60%
    Karl Barth 60%
    Jonathan Edwards 53%
    Jürgen Moltmann 47%
    Charles Finney 47%
    Augustine 40%
    Paul Tillich 27%

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/16280716611138226877 J.

    The daddy of the Reformation. You are opposed to any Catholic ideas of works-salvation and see the scriptures as being primarily authoritative.

    Martin Luther 100%
    Anselm 67%
    John Calvin 60%
    Friedrich Schleiermacher 60%
    Karl Barth 60%
    Jonathan Edwards 53%
    Jürgen Moltmann 47%
    Charles Finney 47%
    Augustine 40%
    Paul Tillich 27%

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/10974397437648079481 Tim Suttle

    dude, look at J.’s score – he’s 100% on Luther! That’s sick.

  • david lisenby

    I’m sure that my not understanding a few questions skewed the results, but since I also have no idea what some of these guys thought, it makes little difference to me. My general sense is that I may be pretty far left of center from what I gather from the other comments. Tim, please interpret my theology for me:

    The problem of evil is central to your thought, and only a crucified God can show that God is not indifferent to human suffering. Christian discipleship means identifying with suffering but also anticipating the new creation of all things that God will bring about.

    Jürgen Moltmann 73%
    Paul Tillich 67%
    Friedrich Schleiermacher 60%
    John Calvin 60%
    Anselm 47%
    Augustine 40%
    Charles Finney 27%
    Martin Luther 20%
    Jonathan Edwards 20%
    Karl Barth 20%

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/10974397437648079481 Tim Suttle

    Here are some great resources for interpreting the table & just for further reading about some of these guys. I’ve copied in the URL for Wikipedia on each of them as well as the Boston Collaborative Encyclopedia of Western Theology main address. From that main page you can read articles about almost everyone on the list. These guys are all too complex to label one as conservative or liberal, with I guess a few exceptions. Fun stuff.

    BCEWT:
    http://people.bu.edu/wwildman/WeirdWildWeb/courses/mwt/dictionary/mwt_themes.htm#Index%20of%20Articles

    Jurgen Moltmann:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurgen_Moltmann
    http://people.bu.edu/wwildman/WeirdWildWeb/courses/mwt/dictionary/mwt_themes_855_moltmann.htm

    Anselm of Canterbury
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anselm_of_Canterbury
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atonement_%28satisfaction_view%29

    Karl Barth:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Barth

    Friedrich Schleiermacher:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schleiermacher

    Augustine of Hippo:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Augustine_of_Hippo
    http://people.bu.edu/wwildman/WeirdWildWeb/courses/mwt/dictionary/mwt_themes_200_augustine.htm#top

    Charles Finney:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Finney

    John Calvin:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_calvin

    Jonathan Edwards:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Edwards

    Martin Luther:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_luther

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/15986675502287659811 Adrienne M. Lisenby, Club Founder, President

    Tim, Here is mine…

    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?’

    Anselm

    73%
    Jürgen Moltmann

    67%
    John Calvin

    60%
    Paul Tillich

    40%
    Charles Finney

    33%
    Augustine

    33%
    Jonathan Edwards

    27%
    Martin Luther

    20%
    Friedrich Schleiermacher

    13%
    Karl Barth

    7%

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/15986675502287659811 Adrienne M. Lisenby, Club Founder, President

    Tim, Here are my scores. You really should be a seminary professor. -Adrienne

    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?’

    Anselm
    73%
    Jürgen Moltmann
    67%
    John Calvin
    60%
    Paul Tillich
    40%
    Charles Finney
    33%
    Augustine
    33%
    Jonathan Edwards
    27%
    Martin Luther
    20%
    Friedrich Schleiermacher
    13%
    Karl Barth
    7%

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/02289110643212600386 Scott Stone

    Someone please help!!
    My wife is not into the theology geek thing like I am so I decided we should take one of the other quizzes. We tried the ‘What is your eschatology?’ I scored as an Amillenialist which I can accept, but to my horror she is a ‘Left Behind’. What do I do know?

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/16280716611138226877 J.

    i’m not exactly sure how i did that. i just answered all the questions as honestly as i could. i guess me and luther agree on EVERYTHING…….HA.

    perhaps i should start reading him…..

  • t-

    Here are my scores…

    Anselm 80%
    Jürgen Moltmann 73%
    John Calvin 73%
    Friedrich Schleiermacher 67%
    Karl Barth 60%
    Martin Luther 33%
    Augustine 33%
    Charles Finney 33%
    Paul Tillich 33%
    Jonathan Edwards 20%

  • Weeping Willow

    ya’ll need to read ESCAPE FROM REASON by Francis Schaefer.

  • http://www.blogger.com/profile/07471917839762088035 Keith Willson

    You scored as a Karl Barth
    The daddy of 20th Century theology. You perceive liberal theology to be a disaster and so you insist that the revelation of Christ, not human experience, should be the starting point for all theology.
    Karl Barth
    100%
    Anselm
    100%
    Martin Luther
    87%
    John Calvin
    67%
    Jonathan Edwards
    67%
    Charles Finney
    33%
    Friedrich Schleiermacher
    33%
    Paul Tillich
    33%
    Augustine
    0%
    Jürgen Moltmann
    0%

    Help, I’m 33% heretic. Well that’s probably true in practice. I don’t know much about Barth and Anselm. I’m a relatively knew believer. I’m a little suprised I am 0 % Augustine. I thought some of the questions were worded in a way that would force me into a position I could not hold. For instance the statement “No one can be saved except by the exercise of their free will”. I do believe in part of luther’s idea that we are in bondage to a corrupt heart, but I believe that we do freely choose God with a regenerated heart at conversion. So I would agree with the statement but I knew the spirit of the question so I had to say no or I might be 60% Finney, LOL. Also the statement, “Sinners will be tormented in a literal lake of burning fire forever and ever”. While I do believe that hell is real and really bad and eternal, and sinners without Christ are going there, I don’t believe it has to be a literal lake of fire. Not that it is any better or worse, but the bible uses imagery to make a point. Anyway this wasn’t that important of a question so I answered true to the “spirit” of the question.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X