What is your answer?
According to the authors, human reason
{ 1 } - is not necessary to understand revelation.
{ 2 } - is not viewed with suspicion by some Christian theologians as a basis for ethical decision.
{ 3 } - is not compatible with revelation.
{ 4 } - is opposed to faith.
{ 5 } - is not corrupted by sin.
{ 6 } - is one basis for ethical theories while revelation is another.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 6.
1 is wrong. Please try again.
According to the authors, human reason
{ 1 } - is not necessary to understand revelation.
{ 2 } - is not viewed with suspicion by some Christian theologians as a basis for ethical decision.
{ 3 } - is not compatible with revelation.
{ 4 } - is opposed to faith.
{ 5 } - is not corrupted by sin.
{ 6 } - is one basis for ethical theories while revelation is another.
See p. 140.
<= back | menu | forward =>
2 is wrong. Please try again.
According to the authors, human reason
{ 1 } - is not necessary to understand revelation.
{ 2 } - is not viewed with suspicion by some Christian theologians as a basis for ethical decision.
{ 3 } - is not compatible with revelation.
{ 4 } - is opposed to faith.
{ 5 } - is not corrupted by sin.
{ 6 } - is one basis for ethical theories while revelation is another.
See p. 140.
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is wrong. Please try again.
According to the authors, human reason
{ 1 } - is not necessary to understand revelation.
{ 2 } - is not viewed with suspicion by some Christian theologians as a basis for ethical decision.
{ 3 } - is not compatible with revelation.
{ 4 } - is opposed to faith.
{ 5 } - is not corrupted by sin.
{ 6 } - is one basis for ethical theories while revelation is another.
See p. 140.
<= back | menu | forward =>
4 is wrong. Please try again.
According to the authors, human reason
{ 1 } - is not necessary to understand revelation.
{ 2 } - is not viewed with suspicion by some Christian theologians as a basis for ethical decision.
{ 3 } - is not compatible with revelation.
{ 4 } - is opposed to faith.
{ 5 } - is not corrupted by sin.
{ 6 } - is one basis for ethical theories while revelation is another.
See p. 140.
<= back | menu | forward =>
5 is wrong. Please try again.
According to the authors, human reason
{ 1 } - is not necessary to understand revelation.
{ 2 } - is not viewed with suspicion by some Christian theologians as a basis for ethical decision.
{ 3 } - is not compatible with revelation.
{ 4 } - is opposed to faith.
{ 5 } - is not corrupted by sin.
{ 6 } - is one basis for ethical theories while revelation is another.
See p. 140.
<= back | menu | forward =>
6 is correct!
According to the authors, human reason
{ 1 } - is not necessary to understand revelation.
{ 2 } - is not viewed with suspicion by some Christian theologians as a basis for ethical decision.
{ 3 } - is not compatible with revelation.
{ 4 } - is opposed to faith.
{ 5 } - is not corrupted by sin.
{ 6 } - is one basis for ethical theories while revelation is another.
See p. 140.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
the end