Spidey Fallacy Two Debunks

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Spidey Fallacy Two Debunks · New blog on the kid: Alex Yordanov Objected · Perspective on the Children's Crusade

Eric Manning's debunk on his channel Testify:

This Terrible Atheist Meme About the Gospels Must Stop
Testify | 16 July 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYULmDa_NSo

My own:

There is more to the answer than that.

When two friends of mine (well, at least one's a friend) visited NYC, I asked them to take a photo of the Daily Bugle building.

For some reason, they didn't.

Almost seems as if Daily Bugle were a made up institution ...

Meanwhile, Gospels and Acts (etc) mention the Church. Seems to have been documented in other resources too, including Josephus calling them a "tribe" ...

Real stories don't leave just imaginary institutions.

Fake stories either do that or add some bends and flourishes on existing ones. D.D.T. = Direction départementale des Territoires exists. But it never had one Edmond Fouvreaux. (Yes, I'm a fan of Signé Furax). Baker Street preexisted certain stories, but Conan Doyle invented 221B (it later became a real adress).

Fake origin stories don't explain real institutions.

I

Alex Yordanov

@alexyordanov6250

That's what I am saying. Spiderman has multiple comics with different narratives that don't add up , have no date consistency, have many fictional celeberty characters and places, and many accounts contradicting it's otherwise massive events, as well as being explicitly stated by the writer as fiction and coming from source specifically from fiction writing .

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

@alexyordanov6250 "as well as being explicitly stated by the writer as fiction"

Even if it weren't, it would have been taken as fiction by the first known audience (and the only one so far).

Alex Yordanov

@hglundahl I was just saying on top of everything. The point is that the Spiderman falacy can be used to disprove Napoleon and is nothing more than a slogan.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@alexyordanov6250 Indeed, on top of everything.

I've seen other disproofs of Napoleon, care to spell out this one?

Alex Yordanov

@hglundahl I was saying that you can use this falacy to disprove any historical event , I could simply say , well Napoleon attacked real places, but Spiderman also visited real places.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@alexyordanov6250 True.

The difference is, the original audience of Napoleon seems to have recalled him as a real person, the original audience of Spiderman as fiction.

That difference basically means, Gospels are historic, not fictional, as to basic genre.

This test is obviously not fine enough for divine authority, but it is fine enough for historicity on a basic level.

Alex Yordanov

@hglundahl
What do you mean,, Basic level " and what do you mean,,Not fit enough for devine athourity".

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@alexyordanov6250 Basic level = not yet ruling out error or lies. Just ruling out fiction, that's impossible if everyone from the first took it as history.

Not fit enough is not what I said, I said not fine enough.

What is however fine enough is the details of the story. Both to rule out lies and honest mistake and to establish the man who claimed to be God rose.

Alex Yordanov

@hglundahl What you define as mistakes are simple your inability to understand ancient cultures and perspectives. Obviously someone from historical perspective writing a record won't knock perfectly everything, but write it from personal perspective, either doing so would make it less of a history. For example someone writing of historical event in the future wouldn't make the mistake of someone writing it from the perspective of the people of the time and place depicted. The writer of the Gospels excpect the readers to perfectly know the tradition of the short period and recent events already, a fictional writer would never do that. Also yours ,, Fictional writing doesn't explain institutions " context is very important on that , for example you can't expect an outside account to perfectly understand the politics and institutions that the average man doesn't. For example someone from colony of an empire can't understand the complex inner politics of the elities or institutions whose function isn't meant to be understood by the average man. The point of this video was to show that the Gospels couldn't be written outside the time, place and events they depict, if you want to argue about something else, there are other videos for it . Here we argue about the Gospels being in the time frame they depict.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@alexyordanov6250 "The point of this video"

As far as I know, the video owner's name isn't Alex Yordanov but Eric Manning.

And one point of the video is to answer the talking point about "Spiderman fallacy" ... where I think Eric Manning misses a beat which is somewhat simpler than the point he's making.

If he has ever made any video adressing my answer to the Spiderman fallacy, please link to it.

Alex Yordanov

@hglundahl That doesn't answer my comment. I do like you and I don't define it as answer, therefore, you don't address anything of what I said in my comment.

Look how well everyone can play your childish game. The answer not being in your convince doesn't mean it's less valid, unless you see your fat tummy feeling as the definition of all truth.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@alexyordanov6250 Look here, your comment was long, and I adressed the end section of it.

I think Apologetics is important, I think my point makes an important contribution, I think some in your comment I didn't adress was totally beside the point to anything I said.

So, I still think I had a reason to comment, call it "my childish game" if you like, I don't care.

However, if Eric Manning ever did say "Spiderman was taken as fiction from the first, Gospels as history from the first", please do link to it. Until he does, he's missing an important point in Apologetics, I am not denigrating the one he offers.

II

In response, no doubt

to "Fake origin stories don't explain real institutions."

Porky Minch

@porkyminch2231

Uhm yes… they do??

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@porkyminch2231 OK, the USA is a real institution of the type "state" or "empire" or "federation of states" ...

Are you claiming the US was not founded in 1776 by the Declaration and up to 1783 during the War of Independence?

Mormonism is a real institution of the type "sect" or "religion" or if you will "church" ...

Are you claiming Joseph Smith never existed? Because the contents of the Book of Mormon, fake as they are, are not and are not presented as the direct foundation of the Latter Day Saints in Missouri, later resettling to Utah.

Alex Yordanov

@porkyminch2231
Yeah, because only an author who writes from meta perspective would know perfectly institution's complex inner workings of which they are not part of. For example Spiderman perfectly shows how J.Jamoson is outside camera perspectives and how the Daily Bugle works in terms of administration, something a writer shouldn't be capable of knowing.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@alexyordanov6250 OK, sounds like a third answer to the Spiderman fallacy argument. Besides Eric Mannings, besides mine.

Thank you.