Faith or logic

Does everybody seem to forget that Paul was struck blind by a light and Jesus asked him why he was persecuting "Him" (Jesus)?

Does everybody forget that Peter came to Paul and healed him of his blindness when the scales fell off?

Isn't this faith based on logic? Sure, humans tend to vary on their faith, but God has shown human beings of His existence all through the scriptures.

The Jews who were rescued from the Egyptians after many plagues. The red sea killed the Egyptian army. The Jews were fed in the desert wilderness. They followed a cloud by day and column of fire by night. Then as soon as Moses goes up on the mountain, with God, they build a golden calf.

God indicates that we see Him in His creation.

Jesus performed miracles while He was on earth; WHY? Because He only felt sorry for the sick? That might have been part of the reason, but the main reason was to show that He was God on earth.

Today we have it recorded for us.

If this isn't faith based on logic, then "what is it?" We are the ONLY religion in the world that is truly based on historical documentation and multitudes of witnesses. Today, our Bible contains that witness, whether in the KJV, NIV, or NASB. They all tell the same story. We base our faith on what we read. The faith isn't just blind faith in something that is undocumented.

 

Philip: "Does everybody forget that Peter came to Paul and healed him of his blindness when the scales fell off?"

Was Peter the middle name of Ananias? This is advanced revelation!

 

Uh, 'scuse me, but the FDA has not allowed genetically altered chicken for human consumption at this point in time. Maybe in the future your use of this concept might be true, but not yet.

The bottom line is, you have NEVER proven that doctrines have been altered. You have never proven that the KJV is the ONLY English Bible.

If you cannot show this, you revert to scriptures that slam wise-men and you imply that it must be applying to those scholars here that study the Bible. Don't say that you do not do this, because why else would you bold the verses regarding the wise and perverse generation.

How can YOU be the judge and jury as to exactly who Paul is referring to?

Finally, let me show you something with one question. The reason I pose it is to show you the lack of logic in your argument (now that we have established that both our logic and faith are derived from the Scriptures.). Answer this question with simply the name of the Bible, not a long speech about how we are all corrupt and haven't yet "seen the light".

Tell me, what was the ONLY English Bible in 1601 AD?

 

--------------------------------------------------
You're nothing more than a hit and run poster who attacks and hides when things get tough. That's the truth of the matter. You still have yet to answer why you believe the KJV teaches one version onlyism.
--------------------------------------------------


And this above statement is also very untrue. One will be able to determine this not only by going back and reading my posts, but to take note of how many posts I have posted since I became a member in December. I also am not on here claiming the KJB teaches one version onlyism. If you have read my posts, it would be very clear to many the real reason why I have come here, and what I believe and why. You seem to choose to ignore this.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

What! See this Website:

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/k/kfcgeneticchickens.htm

You really ought to check your sources. You should know better by now. And you wonder why people do not take you seriously. As spock would say: "That's illogical, captain"

 

--------------------------------------------------
Tell me, what was the ONLY English Bible in 1601 AD?
--------------------------------------------------


Irrelevant to this issue, and cannot be answered by me, but by those believers during that time. Good luck trying to find someone today, who lived during that time.


Yes, it has been shown to you all many times, how and exactly what has been ALTERED in the modern versions and the effects that will come from it. You refuse to see it.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Michelle, I've only been back myself for a little over two months and have gained over 1,200 more post than I had...so what??? Your reasoning is sort of silly there. You do hit and run post when the going gets tough...or you come back and continue to use your circular, denegrative style to demean others who don't follow your "logic".
You, to date, have posted NOTHING, I REPEAT NOTHING, to support one version onlyism, especially KJVOnlyism.
We're all still waiting.

 

Uuuuuh, Yeah, Ziggy, real proof that we shouldn't take the words of men over The Bible. Uhhh, yeah, that was my point!

You have me flustered now, I've had to edit this thing three times.

(boy did I mess up)

 

Michelle, LOGICALLY explain your choice of the KJV. Don't go on long tyrades of posting tons of KJV verses. What are your outside sources? What proof from OUTSIDE SOURCES do you have to back up your choice?

 

What a cop out!!!!! See my point, no logic, then the KJVO will come up with some smart answer explaining why are question is dumb. Yep, didn't think you could answer it. Because if you named a Bible, then why did the KJV have to replace it?

 

--------------------------------------------------
If this isn't faith based on logic, then "what is it?" We are the ONLY religion in the world that is truly based on historical documentation and multitudes of witnesses. Today, our Bible contains that witness, whether in the KJV, NIV, or NASB. They all tell the same story. We base our faith on what we read. The faith isn't just blind faith in something that is undocumented.
---------------------------------------------------


The problem concerning this issue is when many use their OWN LOGIC AND HUMAN REASONING outside of and contrary to the logic and reason of the truth in the scriptures. Our logic and wisdom comes from God through our FAITH IN HIS WORDS OF TRUTH. Anything outside of this is of our own logic and wisdom.

So please tell me, which is the absolute truth:


God was manifest in the flesh.

or...


He was manifest in the flesh.


Please also explain to me, what Phillip's response to the Enuch when He asked what kept him from being baptized? And how do you know?

Who are the three witnesses in heaven and on earth? How do you know?


Did Jesus say he would go up to the feast not yet and then go up later? Or did Jesus say he would go not up to the feast, and then later go? Is Jesus Christ a liar, and the Holy Spirit who caused the apostle to write, cause him to write a lie? How do you know?

Is Jesus Christ the morning star? Who is Lucifer? How do you know?

Can or do people flatter God with their lips? or can or do people decieve God?


There are MANY more, but these should suffice.


Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Sadly enough C4K, the subjects do overlap (in my humble opinion) simply because faith based on logic vs. faith based on feelings are the heart and soul of the KJVO argument.

I was not trying to go off-subject by asking what Bible was the real one in 1601, the only reason I did that is to show that there is no "logic" behind the faith shown by the KJVO person I was responding to. Does that make sense? Probably not......illogical. Oh well.

 

Absolutely, (and at the risk of being chastised) and my NIV tells me so!

 

Not actually, michelle, because these all have ben addressed and readdressed by faith and logic to you, and you have arbitrarily dismissed the Word of God in favor of your opinion. You have no grasp of how logic and faith work together because you are missing or twising one of the two...logic. Yet you try to reason away anything that doesn't follow your line of thought. This is called twisted logic, or in in the case of religion it would be warped theology. Oh, but I know, if you would understand then you'd know...right?

 

--------------------------------------------------
What a cop out!!!!! See my point, no logic, then the KJVO will come up with some smart answer explaining why are question is dumb. Yep, didn't think you could answer it. Because if you named a Bible, then why did the KJV have to replace it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Do you know anything about the history of the English language? Do you know anything about the technology back then? Did you know the REASON the translators gave for WHY they were commissioned to translate the Bible? Once you research these things, then you will know the answers. It has been explained to you all many times before, but you unfortunately choose to ignore, or forget this, so as to try to pull others into your irrelevent and circular reasoning and arguments to evade the REAL TRUTH and ISSUE of this debate.


love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
michelle

 

Oh oh...here we go again with the "if you understood, then you would know" circular reasoning from michelle, yet she has the gall to try and say we're the one who is doing such. Her LOGIC and FAITH are both based on flawed premises.

 

Can I ask you to clarify then? Do you believe there is some sort of absolute authority other than the scriptures for the practice of using only the KJB? Do you believe that there is some absolute authority outside the scriptures for faith in only the KJB as God's word in English?

 

What is the only Authorized inspired infallible version in China? in India? in Afghanistan? in Pakistan?

What was the only Authorized Version in the first and second centuries?

Or is your belief: "If the KJV was good enough for Paul, then it is good enough for me?"
DHK