Great article!
Debates are not sincere discussions, because both sides are committed to winning an argument, not coming to an understanding. Debate is a form of violence, if you will, where one side is trying to conquer, embarrass, defeat, or subjugate the other. While logical fallacies are poor arguments, they can be employed for nothing more than the effort to unseat one’s opponent. Lawyers and police use them all the time, as do politicians and bureaucrats.
What religious people trying to do when they defend and push their agenda is make this statement: “This is my belief, and others like me agree. If you don’t agree, you make me feel uncomfortable, so I will say and do anything to defend my position. I demand to be validated."
Religion is founded on fear, and its teachings reinforce a sense of fear. The psychological threat is great because a supernatural being that cannot be thwarted (God) is promised to destroy the non-believer. To those who can think sanely and without fear on this issue, religion represents a sort of insanity. And arguing with religious believers yields no improvement or hope for a better future.
There are several aspects of Christianity that are irrefutable such as the fact that there is no proof at all that Jesus, as an historical figure, existed. All sorts of arguments have been used to refute this, but there really is no proof. Using quotes from the Bible, referencing biblical “scholars,” and citing vague sources that do not refer to Jesus by name is a common defense. This may be why religious people are averse to science. Science demands proof, not just evidence, and definitely not hearsay or unsubstantiated comments.
You mentioned your own spiritual experiences and that they may be unreliable as arguments. I contend, however, that such experiences are not meant to be used to sway anyone. They are meant to bring meaning, even if delusional, to the experiencer so he can figure something out about himself.
Overall, I really like your exploration of logical fallacies. These are used so often and those who are unaware of how they are employed are apt to fall victim to them. Religion can do no better than to employ them, however, because without them they really don’t have any argument at all. Each religion uses a version of the logical fallacies you described. I have also heard cult members use them, including the Trump cult. It's so very easy to say, "You just don't understand," but what this really means is, "You just don't share my delusion, so you don't understand."
