What I Believe... According to the All-Wise InternetZ

[bookofmirrors]

I hadn't taken the Belief-O-Matic test in a while, so I thought I'd take it again... rather unexpected results. I think last time I was just about 100% "New Thought".

My guess is that I got this result 'cause in some of the sections where it said to check ALL that apply, my happy little world of co-existing paradoxes stepped in, and I therefore got the result that most exemplified "diverse beliefs".

Heh.

1. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2. Neo-Pagan (87%)
3. New Age (87%)
4. Liberal Quakers (86%)
5. New Thought (76%)
6. Mahayana Buddhism (74%)
7. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (73%)
8. Secular Humanism (72%)
9. Taoism (69%)
10. Scientology (68%)
11. Theravada Buddhism (66%)
12. Reform Judaism (61%)
13. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (59%)
14. Nontheist (54%)
15. Orthodox Quaker (45%)
16. Baha'i Faith (44%)
17. Sikhism (42%)
18. Hinduism (38%)
19. Jainism (31%)
20. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (26%)
21. Orthodox Judaism (23%)
22. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (21%)
23. Islam (20%)
24. Seventh Day Adventist (15%)
25. Eastern Orthodox (11%)
26. Roman Catholic (11%)
27. Jehovah's Witness (0%)

Comments

[lucv-cate.livejournal.com]

I think I am glad that Native American (or worse...Shamanism is not an optional answer...LOL

[bookofmirrors.livejournal.com]

Hee... how come?

[lucv-cate.livejournal.com]

well, the test can be so full of kitch...andshamanism is such a buzz word that people misuse all the time (ie- it gets used alot in things like this...it's not a religion or a faith ...merely a practice within a spiritual faith set from a particular culture- which happens to take many years of apprenticeship [to a person, not a book] before s/he will say that you are ready to be called a )

[lucv-cate.livejournal.com]

didn't mean to sound like I was on some sort of sop box in that previous reply

Me and faith, in my words...

[popfiend.livejournal.com]

http://popfiend.livejournal.com/1205434.html