Most Christian denominations are Psuedo christian, or Athiestic Christian churches

In your first argument, you claimed that "If churches actually did believe such things you would see all Churches (without exception) practice and openly offer to do laying of Hands for healing and deliverance..." This is the point of contention. You are saying that because churches do not practice healing, they do not truly believe in Christ. You then brought up 1 Corinthians 12:4-11 (I will address Mark 9 later). This passage is actually what I believe my argument is based on. "There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit distributes them. There are different kinds of service, but the same Lord. There are different kinds of working, but in all of them and in everyone it is it the same God at work." If this is true, then there is not just one way to exemplify belief in Christ. Healing is good, and from God, but he does not give it to everyone. "Even so, the body is not made up of one part, but of many." Though a church that performs healing is good, it is not the only way for a church to devote itself to God. In Acts 2, it says this about the early church: "They devoted themselves to the apostle's teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. Everyone was filled with awe at the many signs and wonders performed by the apostles. All the believers were together and had everything in common. They sold property and possessions to give to anyone as he had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved." The main features of the early church were: -devotion to teaching/learning -fellowship -prayer -being filled with awe -signs and wonders performed by apostles (it is a piece of it, but it is not the defining feature) -being in communion with each other -charity -praising God Churches who follow this example are certainly not atheist, and if they are praising God and devoting themselves to knowing Him, then they are not pseudo-Christian. I fully agree, there are some who talk about the fruits of the spirit, but do not practice them. However, I would not say that it is "most churches". Also, the fruits of the Spirit are not inherently miraculous, in the way that healing, prophesy, and tongues are. They cannot be accurately judged from the outside; only God can see the true heart. I am not against healing, or prophesy, or tongues. My parents had a missionary experience in Africa during which they spoke in tongues. However, they no longer do. Is that because they are pseudo-Christians? No, it is because God chooses where and when to show his power, so that He may be glorified, but not so that those who perform such works will become prideful. I believe denominations are necessary; not necessarily right, but necessary due to our human nature. I wish whole-heartedly that we could exist as one fully unified Church with no separations. However, that could only happen in a world where every person knows everything. I'll use this example as just one situation where denominations can actually reduce conflict. Jason is "non-denominational", but he does not believe in infant baptism. Lucy is also, "non-denominational" but does believe in infant baptism. They get together, fall in love, and get married. During this time, they are both dedicated to loving everyone, following God, and generally being good Christians without being worried about the fine points of their faith. Infant baptism never comes up. Then, Jason and Lucy have a child. Lucy just assumes that they will have the child baptized, because they have never discussed the issue at all. Jason did not even consider infant baptism until this moment, and suddenly, there is a lot of strife. Had they just been willing to say, "I ascribe to mostly Baptist beliefs," or "I ascribe to primarily Lutheran doctrine," this issue could have been foreseen for a long time. Scriptures most certainly are talking about the Holy Spirit. I never said they did not. I said that simply because churches do not perform miracles does not mean they are not Christian. If they profess faith and truly believe, then they are Christian, and the fruits of the Spirit, such as love and joy, will result from that. Take the thief on the cross. Was he a Christian? Most certainly, for Jesus specifically told him that the thief would be with Jesus in paradise. Yet he performed no miracles, the Holy Spirit did not flow out of him to others, and he really did not even show the fruits of the Spirit. "Where does the scripture not talk of spirits and demons and the understanding from the Holy Spirit all throughout the new Testament and referring to the Old Testament for directional guidance and influence everywhere?" I'm not sure what the point of this is, or how it relates to most churches being atheist/fake. I wish separate names were unnecessary. However, since not all truth has been revealed to us, there will be differences. They should not cause aggressive division, but they should be addressed (as we are doing now). For it is pleasing to God that we should desire to know truth. Take the example of the Bereans in Acts 17. It says they were of noble character, because they examined the scriptures and sought to know truth. Denominations help us do so, because we can more easily discern what is true and what is false. If we were to eliminate them, you could have one person who believes that Jesus was simply a great prophet standing next to another who understands the Incarnation, and they may not even realize it or try to correct it. You are trying to make it black and white now, but you did not start off that way. Certainly, there are some vipers, some liars. Joel Osteen and his prosperity gospel is an example. But there are many churches who quietly go upon loving the Lord and obeying Him. I never said there were no wolves. I'm claiming that it is incorrect, (and even arrogant) to say that "most churches are false." Why arrogant? Because you are claiming to know what only God can know --- the condition of the heart. This claim also seems to exclude churches outside of America. The church in China is burning with fervor for God [1]. Christians persecuted by ISIS are on fire for the Lord, but they do not perform healing or miracles. Okay, back to Mark 9. I honestly saved this for last because I was not at all sure what you intention was in quoting it. And I'm still unsure. I don't believe I said that we should stop people from driving out demons; I said that it was not necessary to do so if you believe in Christ. In fact, the section you quoted specifically says, "anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward." Miracles, tongues, prophesy --- these things are wonderful works of the Holy Spirit, but they are not a prerequisite for being a true Christian. I am with in your spiritual anguish about how some Christians act. It is frustrating that the media focuses on Christians like Donald Trump. However, it is extremely judgmental to believe that most Christians are not true believers simply because they do not advertise healing and miracles. Instead of laying a blanket statement down about how most Christians are actually atheists, and are vipers, we should seek to build each other up and encourage each other into true faith -- into a conviction of the truth that Jesus Christ is Lord. Sources: 1: http://www.cfr.org...