That is extremely faulty logic. Paul was using a rhetorical device in the specific context of what he had written earlier in the same letter:
Originally Posted by derekkye
2 Corinthians 11:1 Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me. 2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. 3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. The Apostle Paul knew precisely what he meant when he used the word "guile" in 2 Cor 12:6, and it was nothing like what you suggest.
To be frank, such arguments appear to me to be utterly moronic. No offense intended, but since you feel comfortable telling me what you think, as when you said I have been "caught hook, line, and SINKER," I figure you deserve an equally honest response.
See ya! (or not),
PS: If you want to pursue this topic, I would be most interested in your answer to the question I asked in Post #6:
The question I am most interested in is how you could convince yourself that only two of the 27 NT books are valid, and the rest corrupt. That seems like an impossible position to support with any logic or facts.