Most Christian denominations are Psuedo christian, or Athiestic Christian churches

Almost 0% of your last argument had evidence as to how most churches are atheist or pseudo Christian. Instead, it focused on the Holy Spirit and His influence. If you're not going to debate the original topic, then I will not be responding at length any more. Sorry. I have finals to study for and papers to write. "The church that Paul was addressing, I want to know your biblical knowledge that your man-lead scholarly piece of paper leadership has provided you how many churches was PAUL REFERRING TO WITH THE GIFTS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT? " Well, this sentence is barely comprehensible, but I'll try and dissect it. Okay, I assume from "man-lead scholarly piece of paper leadership has provided you" that you think I am getting my ideas from someone else. Yet this is a baseless assumption. I have generated these ideas based on scripture and logical reasoning. I ask questions of people with greater knowledge than me, but I never blindly accept their teachings. I personally do not ascribe to any denomination, because I have asked questions and developed my own beliefs based on the instruction of the Holy Spirit, the Bible, and logic (a God-given gift). "Why do you and everyone else defer your lack of spiritual wisdom from man's foolish teachings? Do you truly not seek and desire to be led, taught and instructed on such things, or are you truly just a sheep being led blindly to the slaughter by wolves in sheep clothing? " This does not apply to my situation at all. I have not claimed to believe any of "man's foolish teachings". "I need to see this passage in scripture you referred to with LUCY believing in sprinkling of a newborn. I'm 100% that is man's teaching to the blind sheep. " Okay. I'm attempting to restrain myself here. I'm sorry if I did not make it clear that the story of Jason and Lucy was an analogy, depicting a circumstance that could possibly occur since they did not choose to identify the details of their beliefs. I personally agree that there is no evidence of infant baptism in the Bible; I have no idea what you thought that I did. However, there is the story of the jailor's household, which could have included an infant, so it is not "spitting in the Holy Spirit's face". It is an attempt to sanctify children so that they may be saved in case of premature death. "The point I'm saying is, every single thing spoken of spirits/demons, angels, prophets prophecies are all evidence of a spiritual entity either good or bad. " This is not the debate I accepted. I accepted the debate that said, "Most Christian denominations are Pseudo christian, or Atheistic Christian churches". "And Seperate names are not necessary, but the way mankind has established their doctrine of yes and no based upon man's understanding and not the HOLY SPIRIT's understanding (as I just referenced above) you will slightly begin to see and understand this if you ask the HOLY SPIRIT for wisdom and discernment of such things. " They are a necessary evil, because people will believe different things. If we did not have separate names, then you personally could be lumped into the same church that believes in the Immaculate Conception, or the idea that Jesus was not God. By no means do denominational beliefs take precedence over the Holy Spirit. People from nearly every denomination can be filled with the Holy Spirit. "Scriptures make it black and white for those who seek the HOLY SPIRIT, do you seek the HOLY SPIRIT for answers, or just the first commentary and dialogue you get from your PHD Pastor who was taught by man's understanding of the scriptures" It clearly is not black and white on every subject. God is, but the scriptures do not address every problem that faces the church. How should we use technology? What is a proper age to start dating? What is the correct interpretation of the fossil evidence? The guidance of the Holy Spirit can most definitely be sought in all these things, but the Bible does not directly address every problem we face. My PHD pastor. .. Oh dear. I love my pastor, but I would never read a commentary by him. "There are more prosperity preachers (in terms of brick and mortar churches itself) seeking to be self-sustained by a church following than those who seek after CHRIST's HOLY SPIRIT directly for guidance and direction. " Source this? "Just because one is persecuted does not mean that they seek the HOLY SPIRIT. .. does it? " You'd have to be a special kind of idiot to tell the ISIS member with a sword at your throat that you believe in Jesus if you didn't actually have that faith. "And are you implying that if someone's a Christian one does not have any spirits or demons possessed in them still and that the temple of the HOLY SPIRIT is automatically clean? " Nope. I never intended to imply that. If you think I did, please quote where I said that and I will clarify. "I mean, its like the HOLY SPIRIT would drive you physically towards talking to someone to be healed, prayed for, laying of hands, on the spot prayer for someone, or divert your prayers to someone you don't even know, or anything else right or wrong? " I feel that this was originally intended to be sarcastic. I certainly have felt driven by the Holy Spirit to pray for someone on the spot --- I have blogged about just such an experience, and it changed my life. If I had not had that experience, however, I would still be a Christian, not pseudo-Christian or atheist. "I tell you I cannot build up and encourage division among man's understanding of who and what the scripture directly speaks against otherwise I feel my HOLY SPIRIT would pronounce curses upon me for disobeying JESUS CHRIST/GOD/HOLYSPIRIT. " I didn't tell you to build up and encourage division. I said that you, and all of us Christians, should seek to build up one another into truth and faith, rather than fruitless name-calling and finger-pointing.