Most Christian denominations are Psuedo christian, or Athiestic Christian churches

"It may well be (although this is deeply contentious) that many Christians are "lukewarm Christians" and do, in fact, "breed atheism"... however, even if they do, this would not make them "atheistic Christians". What was the classification of a "NUN" and the initial bad mouthing of the term arriving from? Was it not from a specific denominational faith to turn to a denominational practice and therefore become widely used not as an insult but as a categorical acceptance? If Christians do not seek after the HOLY SPIRIT to know and understand all things how do they not breed contempt with the HOLY SPIRIT causing an athieistic christian to be formed in manner likewise? "Likewise, if a church (by way of sincere but according-to-Pro wrong belief) bred atheism, this would not make it an "atheistic Christian church", merely (in Pro's opinion) a "pseudo-Christian church" which, by abnegation of duty, caused the spread of atheism. If you are not for something, you are against something... (Either part of the problem or part of the solution right? There are no neutral biases when it comes to observing and watching something take place. Adults grouping together to watch a fight take place in the mall, are they for the fight or against the fight? They didn't take sides... but they didn't stop the fight either to risk their own lives and health to prevent the fight from continuing or taking place.) Do you mean to tell me that athiesm is spread by purely a lack of faith in GOD or just ignorance of GOD then? If Christian churches professed with their lips but not with their hearts, soul, and mind then for me they breed athiesm in the same manner of a fight in the mall with only observers and no security to stop the fight. Therefore I ask again whether it would be acceptable to my opponent to concentrate only on the aspect of this resolution that deals with "pseudo-Christianity". I hope the gentle reader will agree with me, irrespective of Pro's position, that this is the only aspect of the resolution that could possibly carry the debate." From the above responses. I will politely say, "NO." KJV Rev 3:15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. Rev 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. I have heard of denominations having key words of their doctrine of faith be worded in such a way that although one must be baptized to be saved by Christ, (like the baptists) that even methodists or presbtarian actually believe of a similiar manner if not the same actual doctrine of faith. So to say that denominations cannot change up the meaning of their words to say certain things I would question that ability. If you do not understand, I am lumping all denominations, all churches that do not profess and openly communicate: "1. Belief in evil spirits 2. Belief in demons 3. Belief that said spirits and demons can influence our actions 4. Belief that the Holy Spirit can cure people of said afflictions of the spirit 5. Belief that said healing can be effected by the laying on of hands of a believer" To be that of a Psuedo or Athiestic denomination practice. I again, will not answer which denomination these are as each denomination is different and each church's direct doctrine of faith varies upon the flavor of the week of what holds the most congregation's population attendance. The words of some sermons will not entice and induce a following, then the next week sermons are changed up because the pastor found a study that if you preach on such and such later it will gather more people as well. "However, I know that those good Christians within those denominations would fight tooth and claw against the claim that they were not "true Christians"; I would like to know how (and why) Pro has come to such a specific definition of a true Christian." I will re-state my basic claim, if a church/group of people do not profess and teach on the HOLY SPIRIT (or JESUS CHRIST or GOD ALMIGHTY) for understanding of all things big or small then who are they turning to? If not asking upon the HOLY SPIRIT (or JESUS CHRIST or GOD ALMIGHTY) for discernment of how to do 1-5 of what I agreed with you posting as my basic faith practice then they are not true Christians and I'd ask particularly how they claim to of faith in the HOLY SPIRIT (or JESUS CHRIST or GOD ALMIGHTY). Any church/denomination can change in a moment's notice and change up its doctrine if desired. But I would have to clarify that it is only through the HOLY SPIRIT that all things are made possible, and it may very well be that certain individuals of different denominations truly know the HOLY SPIRIT but would agree themselves that the majority of the congregation would be highly contentious and questionable if walked up to someone else that said they were a christian and was asked, "Can you pray for me I have this evil spiritual desire in my life I need removed and help battling for complete victory." What I am saying is, most congregations would produce difficulty finding people that would actually know how and be willing to pray by laying of hands according to scripture for any deliverance or healing on the spot. If you know of any denomination that can easily find and spot these individuals any time of day, any type of problem I would say they are not "psuedo-christians, or 'athiestic-christians denominations" and are actual Christians, and Actual Christian denominations. I am painting a broad stroke of label on many denominations, making it hard for you to pin-point each denomination pro or con in what I am saying. Key-reasoning for this is I am asking for you to cite to me every denomination you know of that does practice this directly and WHY THEY PRACTICE IT VERSUS OTHERS WHO DO NOT primarily having you state to me why and how I am wrong because of the massive flow of direct claims from individuals and denomination teach such things. I do not desire to directly name-call any denomination, but more as some may say "raise-awareness" that their denomination or faith's teaching may infact not be what it should be doing and needs to be elbowed (so to speak) or nudged to teach and seek in this direction. If you are able to provide me a broad paint stroke of all the denominations that teach this, you prove me wrong and I will admit I am wrong, if you are not able to provide me with all the names of denominations you are admitting to me I am correct. I do not desire to be correct, for my own upbringing was through a southern baptist denomination in the united states that never directly spoke of such things my entire 18 years that I can remember openly inside their pulpit speaking of laying of hands or direct deliverance from spirits or demons openly and publicly. Sure there may be off-branch roots and sections of the congregation that might know someone who has formed such small groups that practice this, but openly and publicly announced is taboo, forbidden, or against the denomination's open acceptance of speaking to everyone. Tell me of your denominations that you know which do openly practice and speak of such things that have not been labeled as vanity by most denominations, and you will only find small off-shoot ministries that are not publicly known or openly accepted by all the denominations for the same teachings they proclaim compared to the mainstream denominational practices that I am calling all of them out in JESUS CHRIST'S CONVICTION on my soul. Am I clear enough? You are encouraged, and welcomed to leave additional remarks in the comments portion if you want to provide more questions or understanding of where I am coming from. Bottom-line, unless you can clearly provide an overwhelming massive majority of churches that do practice 1-5 openly and publicly and are not out-numbered by attendance of population with different denominational faiths I will accept I am wrong and say you are right. Is this bone big enough for you to chew on?