I'm sure this isn't going to go over well, but here goes.

Let's hit this from two angles.  The first will be "is there an objective difference between the two questions?", and the second will be "Does who posted them factor into voting?".

**Is there an objective difference between the two questions?**

 - The first question is "bad" from a lack of original research, but it's answerable.  There are actually recorded statements from Jesus Himself teaching about the end times.  And for a beginner question, or someone not as familiar with Scripture as some of us, it's a fair question.  Not great, not worth a dozen up-votes, but fair, and answerable.

 - The second one is asking "Do Bishops have free will".  It's a question of interpretation, personal opinion, etc.  It's unanswerable except by conjecture.   It should have been closed, not just voted down.  

**Does who posted the question factor into voting?**

There's a possibility that who is asking also played a role here.  

 - The first example, basic as it was, stayed within the Truth guideline, something that's very difficult to do for a brand new visitor.  I don't know what the odds are of that happening.  I've only seen it a handful of times.
 - The second one was from someone who, as of this moment, has been a member for 349 days.  And it's still a Truth question.

Whether it's here, or in the real world, getting it right and picking things up quickly is looked favorably upon.  An experienced person making a mistake they should know better than to do, isn't.  

I'm a fair example.  I post some stupid stuff sometimes.  I've had some pretty high-rated answers, but when I post a boneheaded one, there's no mercy.  I get down-votes, comments, and sometimes invites to be scolded in chat.  (And rightly so.  I know better.  When I mess up, I *should* be taken to task.)  

People appear to have voted that way in this case, too.