AF Hall of Fallacies

[Statler Waldorf]

---

But yes, Christians believe scripture is an infallible authority.

Whether or not the bible is an infallible authority, can you think of any other instances of infallible authorities? I'm just wondering if the category is meaningful apart from the claims attributed to holy books.

Even if someone is in prime position to have seen an event, can we be sure there is no alternative event which could have given rise to what was seen? For that matter, can we be sure that someone in the position to provide authoritative witness to an event will have no motive to give false witness?

I can make sense of someone being an expert witness, who can speak with a great deal of knowledge on a subject. But "infallible"? I don't see how you can be sure of that. Of course I understand that you don't really care how the bible is able to provide infallibly authoritative answers. You're just very certain that it does. However your certainty doesn't assure me that the category "infallible authority" is not in fact an empty set as I suspect.

---

These are all very good questions, but I do not want to take this particular thread off purpose, is there a better place we can discuss this?

Does it surprise you in the least that my opponents in this case would state that my conclusions don't follow from the presmises? You seem to be oblivious to the reality that an atheist is always going to disagree with my belief, is always going to claim they have 'debunked' my arguments, is always going to say the evidence I present has no merit. You seem to be under this strange delusion that atheists are nuetral and objective about this issue and would happily agree with me if I only made a case. Does it surprise you that the head of the DNC always disagrees with the Republicans and vice a versa? Does it surprise you that lawyers on an opposing case will always claim there opponent has failed to make a case?

I think it helps if you identify what fallacy you think has been committed by the poster. Although I do not understand the entire context of that quote, I do not see a very obvious fallacy there.