21. How Not to Argue Like an Idiot...The 15 Most Common Logical Fallacies

There were many people who had the ability to reason and argue in the Christian faith, people like Martin Luther and C.S. Lewis. However, while there is good reasoning there is also bad reasoning. From that bad reasoning, there are 15 most common logical fallacies utilized. The first common logical fallacy is "Ad Hominem" which means attacking the person and not the person's argument. The second is "Straw Man" is stating things that non-Christians have said in a different way or stating something they have not said yet. "False Analogy" is the third and probably most common one, which is settling an argument with an analogy which can eventually be broken down. The fourth fallacy is "Slippery Slope" which follows a "if this is happens then this must happen" statement, it compares two very different argument as the same one. "Confusion equals Cause" is the fifth one and is when the solution to any unknown that cannot be solved by science is God. The next fallacy involves supporting one's argument with authority and assuming that that authority dictates truth. The seventh fallacy is "Correlation equals Causation" which is the assumption that two things that happen at the same time caused the other. The next fallacy, the "Psychologist's fallacy," assumed that people were an unbiased audience and continued with the "False Dilemma." This is to give two extremes with no room for middle ground. The tenth is "Moral Equivalence." In this fallacy, people take two very morally complex events and say they are identical, even though the situations are so different. The "Meaningless Question," the eleventh fallacy, is assuming that every question is logical. The next one is "Argument from consequence" which happens when a person does not happen to like a consequence so they reject the argument, calling it false. The thirteenth fallacy is called "Red Herring" and it is when a person keeps changing the argument. The next to last fallacy is "Begging the Question" and this is when a person assumes their own premises as an effective argument. The last fallacy is "Appeal to Ignorance" happens because God's existence cannot be proven scientifically so He does exist which makes the scientific evidence irrelevant.
I read awhile ago about a person who used circular logic. This person insisted that because God is good, humans are good and therefore are not sinners or deserve to go to hell. This argument is in no way logical for many reasons. It does not prove anything and just makes assumptions based on truth. An artist's creation is not the artist and neither is the artist his creation. In the same way, just because God is good that does not directly mean that humans are good as well. This person made a false assumption and built upon that assumption with circular logic which actually made no strong stand or argument.