#unscriptural

[agungrichardelvonscestmavie]

_"Allah tidak memperoleh kemuliaan dari semangat dan kegairahan yang tidak terjamin Alkitabiahnya."_ ~ Matthew Mead, ulama Puritan.

[isfjmel-phleg]

😶

[saintsheriff]

⠀⠀BLOOD SPRAYS AGAINST RICK'S CHEEK. he hauls the body off from on top of his own, teeth gritted in violent anger. it seemed that people had gone bad everywhere now, like they'd all simultaneously passed their expiry dates. if it wasn't negan and the saviours, it was some savages from across the way. rick and esther were gathering supplies when a pack of three guys came running, wielding axes and machetes. they'd winded the fuck out of rick, caught him by surprise.

⠀⠀‘y'alright?’ he turns to esther, the ground beneath them decorated with the brains of their attackers. rick looks down at the one esther had killed, bring his foot heavy and hard into his ribs. and again, and again. he spits blood from his mouth, mostly his own from the punches he received, onto the body.

⠀⠀‘got everything?’ rick asks, as if the outburst of anger had not occurred. he passes esther to grab his own bag of supplies, placing a hand on her shoulder and hushing a ‘thank you.’

inbox: @unscriptured / sender kills someone to protect receiver.

[khyatigautam]

The Unscriptured | Sourish Roy | Book Review

Publisher ‏ : ‎ Redgrab Books Pvt Ltd (16 May 2024); http://www.redgrabbooks.com Language ‏ : ‎ English Paperback ‏ : ‎ 224 pages Imagine if Vivekananda had actually wrung a police officer’s neck and survived even after his Mahasamadhi. Suppose Sri Aurobindo had written a theoretical exposition on the principles of The Bomb. Consider if Indian history had always been connected to a recurring…

[vandnaagrwal]

[govindnager]

[haggishlyhagging]

There is another way in which the general opinion, that women are inferior to men, is manifested, that bears with tremendous effect on the laboring class, and indeed on almost all who are obliged to earn a subsistence, whether it be by mental or physical exertion—I allude to the disproportionate value set on the time and labor of men and of women. A man who is engaged in teaching, can always, I believe, command a higher price for tuition than a woman—even when he teaches the same branches, and is not in any respect superior to the woman. This I know is the case in boarding and other schools with which I have been acquainted, and it is so in every occupation in which the sexes engage indiscriminately. As for example, in tailoring, a man has twice, or three times as much for making a waistcoat or pantaloons as a woman, although the work done by each may be equally good. In those employments which are peculiar to women, their time is estimated at only half the value of that of men. A woman who goes out to wash, works as hard in proportion as a wood sawyer, or a coal heaver, but she is not generally able to make more than half as much by a day's work. The low remuneration which women receive for their work, has claimed the attention of a few philanthropists, and I hope it will continue to do so until some remedy is applied for this enormous evil. . . . There is yet another and more disastrous consequence arising from this unscriptural notion—women being educated, from earliest childhood, to regard themselves as inferior creatures, have not that self-respect which conscious equality would engender, and hence when their virtue is assailed, they yield to temptation with facility, under the idea that it rather exalts than debases them, to be connected with a superior being.

-Sarah Grimké, qtd. in Alice S. Rossi, The Feminist Papers: From Adams to de Beauvoir

[wishesofeternity]

“An assessment of Anne (Boleyn) and the Reformation must commence with an evaluation of her own religious views. Unlike Henry’s sixth wife, Katherine Parr, Anne wrote no religious works, so we lack much direct evidence from which to assess her convictions. We instead rely on the assertions of others and what can be surmised from her behaviour and belongings. It is nonetheless clear that Anne was by no means a kind of proto-protestant. For instance, when Thomas Revell tried to present her with his translation of François Lambert’s radical Farrago Rerum Theologicarum—which included scepticism about the real presence of Christ in the eucharist, and detailed the socially disruptive implications of the priesthood of all believers—she declined his request, saying “she would not trouble herself” with the book. Likewise, Anne’s comments during her imprisonment imply that—at least during this difficult period—she maintained many orthodox views. Sir William Kingston, constable of the Tower, wrote to Cromwell that she spoke of retiring to a nunnery; that she asked whether she would go to heaven, for she had “done mony gud dedys in my days”; and that she “meche desyred to have here in the closet the sacrament,” suggesting that she held traditional views on transubstantiation, the issue which Henry saw as the test of sound belief.

There remains much evidence, however, that Anne had evangelical sympathies. For example, Cranmer, who knew the Queen well, noted the “love which I judged her to bear towards God and his gospel,” when writing to Henry following her arrest in May 1536, and Richard Hilles lamented her loss in 1541 as one of the “sincere ministers of the word” who had been taken away. Yet, perhaps the most telling evidence of Anne’s personal piety comes from the books that she owned. These included a copy of William Tyndale’s 1534 edition of the New Testament, which was banned and considered to be a heretical work, and a part copy, part English translation, of Jacques Lefèvre d’Étaples’s Epistres et Evangiles, a work condemned by the Sorbonne for its potential Lutheran echoes. Thus, while Anne cannot be described as a ‘protestant’—a term that did not become naturalised in England until after 1553—she seems to have been genuinely interested in religious reform and evangelical issues.

Anne’s impact on the Reformation is most obvious with Henry’s break from Rome. This was recognised in Anne’s own lifetime; when told that there was no pope, but only a bishop of Rome, one Henry Kylbie replied that “this business had never been if the Kinge had not maryed Anne Bullen.” Although it was Henry’s desire to annul his first marriage to marry Anne that caused conflict with the papacy, the Boleyns provided more than a spark for this clash. They offered patronage to academics who worked on the campaign for Henry’s annulment, including Thomas Cranmer, the future Archbishop of Canterbury, and Edward Fox, the future Bishop of Hereford; they took a keen interest in the progress of Henry’s “Great Matter”; and they seemingly furnished Henry with evangelical literature, with Anne reportedly introducing him to both Simon Fish’s virulently anticlerical Supplication for the Beggars and Tyndale’s Obedience of the Christian Man, which argued that papal claims to independent power were bogus and unscriptural. While the contribution these works made to the elaboration of the royal supremacy has been doubted, they may well have helped, and can hardly have hindered matters. In these ways, Anne and her family played an important part in encouraging the rejection of papal authority and achieving Henry’s Break from Rome, a fundamental element of the English Reformation.

Anne also facilitated religious reform by furthering the careers of evangelicals. Writing to Elizabeth I in 1559, Alexander Ales hailed “the evangelical bishops whom your most holy mother had appointed from among those schoolmasters who favoured the purer doctrine of the Gospel.” Who were these bishops? While William Latymer asserted that her influence lay behind the promotion of Thomas Cranmer to Canterbury, Hugh Latimer to the bishopric of Worcester, Nicholas Shaxton to Salisbury, Thomas Goodrich to Ely, and John Skip to Hereford, the evidence is clearest in the cases of Latimer and Shaxton, who Foxe also thought she “placed” and “preferred” to their sees. Although Anne certainly did not ‘appoint’ Latimer and Shaxton to their dioceses, she undoubtedly assisted them, lending each £200 to pay their first fruits to the King after their elevations, and their preferment was plausibly due to what Latymer described as her “continuall mediacione.” Anne herself recognised her links to these bishops, speaking in the Tower of “my bysshoppys.” Her part in the promotion of these men to the episcopal bench was important, for it meant they could wield the power of episcopal office to promote fellow evangelicals, pursue reform in their dioceses, and frustrate the efforts of their opponents.

Anne also influenced lesser clerical appointments. She employed a series of evangelical clergy as her chaplains, including Latimer and Matthew Parker. She also sought appointments for her favoured clergymen elsewhere, and was prepared to pressure them into taking them up and making the most of them, as in May 1535, when she addressed Edward Crome concerning the parsonage of St Mary Aldermary in London, which she had “obtained for him.” She exhorted him to make “no farther delays in this matter, but to take on … the cure and charge of the said benefice,” for she desired “the furtherance of virtue, truth, and godly doctrine, which we trust shall not be a little increased, and right much the better advanced and established, by your better relief and residence there.” The indefatigable commitment that some of the clergy she appointed showed to driving reform at a local level is clear in the case of William Barlow, who she made prior of Haverfordwest in 1534. From his position, Barlow “endeveryd … with no smalle bodely daunger agenst Antichrist, and all his confederat adherentes, sincerely to preche the gospell of Christ,” arousing much hostility from the local clergy. Anne’s promotion of such clerics was significant. Not only did men like Barlow show great zeal in fighting for reform within their spheres of influence, but her promotion of men as her chaplains also proved an important step in the careers of individuals like Latimer, who became Bishop of Worcester in 1535, and Parker, who became Elizabeth I’s frist Archbishop of Canterbury in 1559. This was attested by Parker himself, who wrote to William Cecil, Lord Burghley, in 1572, professing that “if I had not been so much bound to the mother [Anne], I would not so soon have granted to serve the daughter [Elizabeth] in this place.’

While previous queens had often interceded for those facing punishment, Anne used her intercessory role in to protect those interested in reform. For instance, in 1528 she wrote to Cardinal Wolsey, beseeching him “to remember the parson of Honey Lane for my sake.” This was a reference to either Thomas Forman (rector of All Hallows, Honey Lane) or Thomas Garrett (curate of the same church), who were both implicated in the trade of evangelical books. Likewise, in May 1534, she wrote to Cromwell asking for Richard Herman, one of the principal promoters and financial sponsors of Tyndale’s New Testament, to be restored to his position, after hearing that he had been expelled from his “fredome and felowshipe of and in the Englishe house” of Antwerp, because he helped “the settyng forthe of the Newe Testamente in Englisshe.” Anne may have acquired a reputation for lending aid in such matters, which might explain why Thomas Alwaye sought to petition her in 1530 when imprisoned for his involvement in buying English New Testaments and other prohibited books. While the evidence is not certain, Anne’s patronage potentially had longer-lasting repercussions, as individuals like Thomas Garrett later became troublesome evangelical preachers.

Anne was thus clearly an important figure in the early stages of evangelical reform in England. She was by no means an omnipotent proto-protestant—that evangelicals like Thomas Bilney and John Frith were burnt between 1531 and 1533 reveals limits to either her beliefs or her infuence. Yet, individuals did not need to be all-powerful to encourage religious change: Thomas Cranmer’s failure to prevent the passage of the Six Articles in 1539 did not hinder his influence in the ecclesiastical politics of the early Tudor period. Nor did they have to be fully fledged evangelicals to have sped the course of reform. That Henry VIII himself published Assertio Septem Sacramentorum in 1521 (a rebuttal of Martin Luther’s anti-papal De Captivitate Babylonica), remained devoted throughout his life to the Blessed Sacrament, and consistently rejected the teachings of Luther and Huldrych Zwingli does not invalidate his centrality to the reforms of his reign. Moreover, Anne’s infuence on reform need not be at the expense of others. The course of religious change in sixteenth-century England was not simply shaped by monarchs, devout conservatives like John Fisher, or devout evangelicals like William Latimer, but also by many who lay between these extremes, like Stephen Gardiner, who argued for Henry’s divorce and accepted the Dissolution of the Monasteries, but fercely defended transubstantiation. Anne—as a promoter, defender, and supporter of evangelicals, who played a significant part in instigating the Break from Rome—was one of the most important of these individuals.

- Chloe Fairbanks and Samuel Lane, “Anne Boleyn: Traditionalist and Reformer” in “Tudor and Stuart Consorts: Power, Influence and Dynasty”

[churchblogmatics-blog]

Every so often I like to check in with theologically conservative Calvinist opinions of things (the tradition of thought I was raised in), and I'll be darned if even their description of Barth's doctrine of creation doesn't sound way cool - not sure why they can articulate this beautiful idea that isn't at all unscriptural and then be like "nope this won't do"

"To summarize, Barth’s interpretation of Scripture regarding creation is determined by his judgment of the nature of the relationship between God and man. God freely chooses to love mankind and to reconcile mankind to himself by means of his incarnate Son, and it is this decision that leads him to create. This free choice of God is the core of Barth’s doctrine of creation. In this way, creation is rooted in the triune God’s work of reconciliation. If not for God’s free choice to love man, there would be no creation. As such, creation provides the historical stage in which God’s reconciling drama can be played out. Furthermore, this reconciliation is the very reason for creation. It is because of God’s covenant—not because of scientific proofs or philosophical treatises—that creation exists. Thus, for Barth, the doctrine of creation itself is rooted in faith in the reconciling God through Jesus Christ his incarnate Son."

- Jarred Jung, Trinity, Creation, and Re-creation: A Comparison of Karl Barth and Herman Bavinck’s Trinitarian Doctrines of Creation, Themelios - Volume 46, Issue 1

[azspot]

But I, quite to the contrary, believe the idea of a hell of eternal torment to be unscriptural, logically incoherent, depraved, psychologically destructive, and morally corrosive. And I believe also that far more have been driven away from real faith by the absurd doctrine of eternal torment than have ever been coerced into earnest belief. I do not think that people can be persuaded to love God by teaching them that God is an omnipotent brute of obscene, irrational cruelty.

David Bentley Hart

[bloodsalted]

𝐊𝐍𝐎𝐖𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐘𝐎𝐔𝐑 𝐏𝐀𝐑𝐓𝐍𝐄𝐑 𝐖𝐄𝐋𝐋 𝐂𝐀𝐍 𝐏𝐎𝐓𝐄𝐍𝐓𝐈𝐀𝐋𝐋𝐘 𝐌𝐀𝐊𝐄 𝐖𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐓𝐎𝐆𝐄𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐑 𝐀 𝐋𝐎𝐓 𝐄𝐀𝐒𝐈𝐄𝐑. REPOST DO NOT REBLOG !!

NAME : dixon. been going by it for too long to change it. thought about it a couple times but it's stuck with me for a handful of years now. oop! also not my real name.

PRONOUNS : she/her/numbnuts/idc!

PREFERENCE OF COMMUNICATION : i lose track of tumblr ims very easily. discord is preferred and i will give it to any mutual that might want it!

NAME OF MUSE(S) : dean winchester is my main. i have jack kline @lasthymn and a human oc that gets demon possessed kinda dual muse at @unscriptured . my multi is low activity atm and i'm just replying to what i got at the moment. my spn brainrot is very real.

BEST EXPERIENCE : meeting all the people i have here and enjoying our time together. hanging out with @hostiae / @devourcr at eccc. generally, just the experience of meeting such lovely, awesome partners that become friends and people i cherish. even if we don't speak often. i really do adore the people who i get to share this lil orbit with.

RP PET PEEVES / DEALBREAKERS : not reading my rules. becomes obvious when you don't. especially with a couple character or plot types i list that i don't feel comfortable writing and they get pushed on me. always read rules so you start out on a good page. it's so important! using roleplay to make yourself seem better than others. whether that be that you're more virtuous than them (as my buddy ava said) because they write things you don't like (rant to a bud, get your feelers out, block and move on??) or way more hip, progressive or whatever for plots you do or won't do or fcs or graphics you use. we're all just here writing. it's not that serious. have fun with it. curate your experience. screw anon button on. you'll be way less stressed. and a tiny one. refollowing on repeat. but that just gets a block eventually. and super easy to handle.

MUSE PREFERENCES : flawed heroes, burdened souls that are good people deep down, the distant person that has walls because of self-preservation, kind souls that've been burned too many times that they are cautious to warm up to others. misunderstood, thoughtful types. characters that still need to learn themselves and grow. on the complete opposite side? completely unhinged psychopaths, sociopaths, whatever else that falls under that line.

PLOTS OR MEMES : ava said this really well. memes are the easiest way to get my attention. i don't mind sending them in. or having them sent (though rn my inbox is a little big but i'm working on it, might just take me some time!). and then from there as we build up, if we match well, plotting is something i LOVE to do. i get that some don't though and i'm always more than fine winging it to see what happens. pretty flexible. but i really do love things that stick between muses.

LONG OR SHORT REPLIES : i write a lot most of the time. usually on accident. sometimes i get carried away and am enjoying myself. i, in no way, expect replies to match length and i mean it. i just need smth to work with. i've been keeping some posts purposefully shorter. especially meme replies as i work through my inbox. we can expand or shrink as needed!

BEST TIME TO WRITE : usually really late at night. i'm a night owl with insomnia and, as much as sarah threatens to beat me with a chair? i find sleep difficult. writing helps that!

ARE YOU LIKE YOUR MUSE(S) : i don't know? i'm probably more like dean than i am any of them. but i try to make better choices that won't end up with me getting hurt. though there are people i'd let the apocalypse happen to save. some people are just that important. sorry world. if we're going down. we're going down together at least? dean and i have very very similar music tastes. though some of my stuff would be thrown out the window. we both have stupid humor. we're loyal. i do like my jeans, t-shirts and flannels. but we are VERY different in many ways. or it'd be boring to write someone just like me.

TAGGED BY: @murderdeals TAGGING: anyone who follows me! i'd love to know more about you! tag me so i can read! and this means...YOU'RE IT!

[hollers-and-holmes]

This might not be controversial in your circles, I don't know; it certainly has been in my life.

Your take on miracles seen as 'supernatural' still happening in this day and age? Such as healing someone 'stand up and walk' style or transforming substances? Adjacently, interacting with the unseen things - not only the demons we rebuke but the angels that are our allies?

Alright, this one could get proof-texty if I let it and that would be not so much a take as an essay, so I’m going to splatter up a handful of short bullets instead and you guys can poke me for further clarification or to object if you want.

👻 I’m a cessationist, which is a schmancy term to describe what I believe about the miraculous gifts of the Spirit we see in the New Testament accounts, namely healing, prophesy, and speaking in tongues.

👻 Definitions matter. We are talking here of the ways these gifts manifested themselves to members of the early church. I am not saying that God does not still heal people or that no one has ever miraculously understood a language not their own.

👻 I am saying that these gifts are no longer dispensed as gifts, that is, as abilities that the gifted person can wield at will. If you have the gift of teaching, you carry it around in your pocket and can apply it whenever you like all your life without a special zap from the Holy Spirit to kick it off. If there were still members of the Body who could do this with healing cancer or raising the dead, we would have records of it.

👻 But the main reason I believe this is not evidential, but theological. In Scritpure, miraculous abilities were given to men who were speaking with the authority of God Himself. Moses, Elijah, Elisha, Christ, the Apostles… “The God of Abraham has told me to tell you…” The fact that reality itself obeyed them was was meant as an evidence to the fact that God had chosen them to speak His word to the people.

👻 We no longer need men like this. Why? Because we have a perfect spoken Word. Hebrews 1 says:

“Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.”

God has spoken to us with authority and finality in the revealing of Christ, and this speaking needs no improvement. The apostles were writing Holy Scripture and so the miraculous gifts they wielded (at will—Paul could heal anyone he pleased, but even this gift shows evidence of decline in his later writings as the completion of the written canon approaches) gave credence to their words, in a similar way to Moses who came before Pharaoh, spoke the words God had given him to speak, and then backed them up with real physics-breaking miracles.

👻 As for the question regarding the angelic realm, I’ll quote Jack regarding the dark side:

“There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe, and to feel an excessive and unhealthy interest in them. They themselves are equally pleased by both errors and hail a materialist or a magician with the same delight.”

And regarding the light side I’ll say that we have zero scriptural evidence of human people being the ones to initiate angelic contact (I mean this like—no one summoned a “good” angel at will, as far as I know—they arrive on the scene at God’s bidding and not man’s). We have no instructions from the authors on how to lawfully interact with angels besides being hospitable to strangers, because we might be unknowingly entertaining a messenger of God.

I grew up in charismatic circles and learned many unscriptural things regarding the supernatural and the ways Christians should interact with it, so it’s very possible I am overcautious now to compensate for that. God seems to wish for us to let Him worry about the heavenly hosts and their fallen counterparts, because there just isn’t a lot of solid teaching on our relationship with them. We’re to be obedient: this causes the devil to flee and causes the angels to rejoice. But still our orientation is toward Christ.

[shammah8]

It was then that she realized she had come into agreement with a spirit of infirmity—a familiar spirit.It is not uncommon for people with certain conditions to gather around, and build community with, others based on their shared afflictions. While I am an advocate of support groups, we must be careful not to build “community” around demons. Unfortunately, many people have unknowingly granted agreement to demonic entities because they have believed a narrative that was untrue and unscriptural. For example, they may think that their condition is chronic and hopeless. Beloved, this is a lie from the pit of darkness.

You can be healed! You can be free! You can be whole in every area of your life. However, demons do not want you to believe this is possible or walk in this truth. They will torment, harass, oppress, and afflict in order to maintain their open door—the door of agreement.☕️Kynan Bridges

[mybeautifulchristianjourney]

Mornings and Evenings with Jesus

by William Jay

Morning Devotional for March 9th

Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. - 2 Corinthians 3:17

Liberty has always been highly prized, and can never be prized too highly. Well, we have civil liberty as Britons and spiritual liberty as Christians,-a liberty “unsung by poets, and by senators unpraised.” Let us endeavour to exemplify our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus. It will be found to include five things: First, Our freedom from the exactions and impositions of men in religion. Now, observe, we say in religion, because we do not here refer to civil things. We are willing to abide always by our Saviour’s distinction:-“Render unto Cæsar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” Where religion is concerned, “The Lord is our King, the Lord is our lawgiver; and, if any require us to believe or do what he has not enjoined us to believe or do, we are to obey God rather than man. The Saviour says, “Call no man master upon earth; for one is your master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren.” When will men distinguish between civil governments and Christianity? The one regards us as citizens, the other as Christians.

Secondly, This liberty includes a freedom from the tyranny of Sin and Satan. As saith the apostle, “What fruit had ye in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now, being made free from sin and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.”

Thirdly, It includes a freedom from the condemnation of the law. “The soul that sinneth shall die;” and, saith the apostle, “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them.” And “who has ever done this?” Who has ever continued, from the first hour of reason, in avoiding every thing the law forbids and in doing every thing the law commands? But whose curse is it? The curse of Almighty God: and who knoweth the power of his anger? And the execution of this power is certain, unless-unless what? unless a surety be found; and such a Surety has been found, who has come forward and said, “Deliver them from going down to the pit;” I will give myself a ransom; I will bear their sins in my own body on the tree; I will suffer, “the just for the unjust, to bring them to God.” “There is, therefore, now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus.” No; he has “redeemed them from the curse of the law, being made a curse for them.” Now, “therefore, being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Fourthly, It includes freedom of access unto God. “He is the greatest and best of Beings.” The effect of sin is to separate between us and God. When the angels sinned in heaven, they were immediately banished thence; when Adam and Eve sinned in the garden of Eden, they were driven out of it; and for sinning, the Jews were expelled from the land flowing with milk and honey. So many instances of actual fact show us-every one of them-what is the effect of sin:-that it is to separate between us and God, and to keep us from God. But now, through Christ Jesus, who is the Mediator between us and God, “we have access by one Spirit unto the Father.” The believer has the liberty of approach unto God at all times, in every place, under all circumstances; they have full liberty to hold communion with him in the fields, by the way, in their ordinary business; they have full liberty to enter his house, to come to his table, to hang upon his arm, to recline upon his bosom, to call him their Lord and their God,-the strength of their heart and their portion forever.

Fifthly, It includes freedom to partake of and enjoy the good things or nature and providence. Unscriptural self-denial and self-imposed severity, with regard to abstinence from the blessings of providence, have never promoted the mortification of sin or sanctification of heart. Here is our charter: the Scripture hath said, “Every creature of God is good and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.”

[raccoonshinobi]

Sunday, October 1

Happy is the one who finds no cause for stumbling in me.​—Matt. 11:6.

God’s Word forms the basis for our teachings and beliefs. Even so, many today are stumbled because they think that our way of worship is too simple and that what we teach does not match what they want to hear. How can we avoid being stumbled? The apostle Paul told Christians living in Rome: “Faith follows the thing heard. In turn, what is heard is through the word about Christ.” (Rom. 10:17) So we build up our faith by studying the Scriptures, not by participating in unscriptural religious ceremonies, no matter how pleasing to the eye these ceremonies might be. We must acquire strong faith based on accurate knowledge because “without faith it is impossible to please God well.” (Heb. 11:1, 6) Thus, we do not need to see a spectacular sign from heaven to prove that we have found the truth. A careful examination of the Bible’s faith-strengthening teachings is enough to convince us and to dispel any doubt. w21.05 4-5 ¶11-12

Examining the Scriptures Daily—2023

[awideplace]

Do you think Christians should know everything about each denomination?

I don't think someone has to, but why not? Know what's scriptural so you can spot fallacies in unscriptural teachings that some denominations may have. We know what's scriptural by studying the Bible.