Which logical fallacy is this argument?

October 15, 2005 | Blogger

[Blogger]

Trying to figure out what the name of the fallacy is with this argument:

1) God is love 2) God has declared only one way for salvation 3) Most of the world does not know about that way of salvation 3) Therefore, either a) God isn't love or b)There is more than one way to salvation

[Blogger]

Okay, philosophers, sorry for the vanity, but who knows which logical fallacy this one fits?

[Smogger]

bifurcation (false dichotomy) occurs if someone presents a situation as having only two alternatives, where in fact other alternatives exist or can exist.

[highlander_UW]

Perhaps this website might be helpful: http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e06b.htm

[NonLinear]

beat me to it! You win the prize!

[ovrtaxt]

The logical fallacy is plain old ignorance?

There seems to be a lot of that when people start discussing the Bible. (not meaning you- I've just seen plenty of wrong conclusions that stem from a very shallow understanding.)

[Blogger]

Thank's Smogger! THANK YOU TO EVERYONE ELSE AS WELL!

[combat_boots]

God has expressed a history of not bothering with Pharisees.

[NicknamedBob]

If there is more than one way to salvation, do not try sneaking in through the fireplace.

[carlr]

Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them;for God hath shown it unto them.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen,being understood by the things that are made,even his eternal power and Godhead,so that they are without excuse.Romans 1:19,20.

I don`t know if this fits the question but is cited as an argument to those who propose that since there are those that have never heard the message of salvation through Jesus Christ how can they be condemned.

[Louis Foxwell]

The fallacy is non sequitor (it does not follow that...).
B does not follow from A.
C does not follow from A or B.
The sylogism is irrational.

[TeenagedConservative]

Either/Or, also known as bifurcation. Someone will have identified it by the time this posts though...

[Blogger]

It's exactly where I was heading

[kcar]

The fallacy of 5 or 6 or 7 terms?

[Choose Ye This Day]

Blogger, Smogger.

Smogger, Blogger.

[SAJ]

Yes, indeed a non sequitur, well done. This isn't false dichotomy, because the limitation of exactly two alternatives is not defined. The presence of a quantified epistemic premise ('Most of the world does not know') as the operational impetus to 'conclusion' makes this argument a hopeless muddle, logically. Probably should be phrased as ((p ^ q) ^ r) > (~p v ~q), or perhaps better, ((p ^ q) ^ Kr) > (~p v ~q), both of which are clearly not theorems by inspection.

[Melas]

Non sequitur would be the closest, but in truth, the problem is that the expression isn't even remotely syllogistic.