when someone says there are 45,000 sects of Christianity, yet don’t know the criteria that determines what a Christian Church is then you have a problem. That criteria is only found in the Bible.
That is incorrect. The Bible defines nothing for the skeptic. His criteria come from elsewhere. I have to keep reminding you that you don't determine such things except for yourself. The proper way to express that idea is to say that for you, the criteria are found only in scripture rather than that that is true for them and everybody else.
according to the Bible you are being influenced by demons or the prince and power of the air.
Isn't that a lovely thing to teach people. You're literally demonizing them, the first step toward marginalizing and dehumanizing them. Wasn't being demon-filled the justification for Jesus destroying a herd of swine?
In your thoughts, you going to accept that all your thoughts come from you? They also take advantage of the fleshly desire
The idea of demons whispering in one's ear is a Christian device used to demonize the voice of reason when it causes cognitive dissonance considering Christian doctrine. Often, this is depicted as an angel and a devil sitting on the shoulders of a person while arguing with one another through the ears.
And it's one of the many alienating and self-loathing teachings of Christianity. Also, the universe is made of base matter fit for destruction. And that one is to be separate from the world, an evil place. Also, the body is a fleshy enemy corrupting a spirit within. And yours, which depicts the mind as being infested with an enemy that need to be shut out. The secular humanist is burdened with none of those anti-spiritual concepts. Authentic spirituality derives from a sense of connection to the world, and has nothing to do with spirits like demons. The Christian worldview does just about as much violence to that connectivity with the cosmos as is possible.
It’s better to submit to God resist the devil and he will flee.
That's the church asking you to crucify your innate sense of reason and morality and to substitute its versions of what is true and what is good instead.
Humanism teaches the opposite. Man is the determiner of what is true and what is real. He has a duty to himself to take control of his own life, the be an autonomous citizen rather than a subject, and to achieve Maslow's highest need in his hierarchy of needs, self-realization, or self-actualization.
I will just leave it at you have no idea what the Bible says but talk about it anyway. Pick up a copy and start reading is my recommendation.
I've explained why believers are a poor resource for deciding what the Bible says. It's the motivated (tendentious) reasoning. The believer starts with assorted faith-based beliefs about what the Bible says even before he opens it up, such as that God is perfectly good, or that the Bible contains no errors. What use is such an opinion to one who doesn't decide such matter by faith, but by the evidence of his senses (his own eyes). He reads a biblical story and find the actions of the deity immoral. Then the believer gets to work trying to make the words conform to his preconceptions. Such words are of no value to one who processes information from evidence to sound conclusion rather than beginning with a faith-based belief.
And finally, even though I would trust an unbeliever more than a believer, I trust my own understanding of what the words in the Bible mean more than that of others just as with all other text using plain language. Unless we are talking about material written in the jargon of a profession or in unfamiliar English as with Chaucer, I think this claim that "you aren't qualified to disagree because you don't have the power to understand the words, which don't mean what you say they mean" is pretty much limited to the Bible. Think of all of the other books that people buy and read, and nobody makes that claim. They may say that the words mean more than the reader realized, the hidden message of the story or what it is intended to symbolize, but nobody claims that the words require a special spirit, for example, to understand.
The first requirement and qualification to be considered a biblical scholar is that you are born again of the Holy Spirit because Scripture is spiritually discerned.
Nope. It's that one shows expertise in matters biblical. As I alluded, I'm averse to the opinions of those trying to justify their faith-based beliefs. And scripture is discerned like any other text in a familiar language - by the language centers of the brain.
Do you even know what principles or tenets the 45K different sects you’re talking about adhere to?
What difference would it make other than that they be different interpretations of scripture, which is the point when the Christian begins talking about Christianity as a unified entity? Comedian Emo Phillips summarizes the divisiveness leading to new denominations and sects nicely in a joke:
I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. So I ran over and said, "Stop! don't do it!"
"Why shouldn't I?" he said.
I said, "Well, there's so much to live for!"
He said, "Like what?"
I said, "Well...are you religious or atheist?"
He said, "Religious."
I said, "Me too! Are you Christian or Buddhist?"
He said, "Christian."
I said, "Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?"
He said, "Protestant."
I said, "Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?"
He said, "Baptist!"
I said, "Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?"
He said, "Baptist church of God!"
I said, "Me too! Are you original Baptist Church of God, or are you reformed Baptist Church of God?"
He said, "Reformed Baptist church of God!"
I said, "Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915?"
He said, "Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915!"
I said, "Die, heretic scum", and pushed him off.