"Here are some that txaq007 might look into checking out:
1) Subjectivist Fallacy
2) Hasty Generalization
3) Appeal to Ignorance
4) Equivocation"
Class dismissed? That's a bit arrogant, wouldn't you say?
As for my alleged logical fallacies:
1) Subjectivist Fallacy: Never have I stated or implied that truth is relative. In fact, I have emphatically argued
here that truth is absolute. Now, I suppose you are referring to my statement that I am 100% certain about Jesus because of my personal experience and that if you knew Him as well, you would feel the same. That statement was not part of any type of logical proof and I explicitly stated so.
2) Hasty Generalization: Where have I committed this fallacy? Hasty Generalization deals with sample size. If anybody has committed this, it is Sklansky with his "90% of scientists" statistic.
3) Appeal to Ignorance: There are certain types of reasoning that are distinguished apart from this fallacy. I'm going to assume here that you are referring to my statement that there is no evidence that Jesus was some non-devine being who just had access to some type of advance science. The flaw in your thinking is that the burden of proof usually lies on the person making a new and improbable claim. If there is no evidence, that claim can be logically dismissed.
4) Equivocation: Where have I committed this?