2.Premise:  The criminal mind cannot be rehabilitated.

Conclusion: Those criminals who have been rehabilitated don’t have a truly criminal mind.

Attack: Sean’s argument violates the beg-the-question definition fallacies. At the beginning of his argument, he has made the premise that the criminal mind couldn’t be rehabilitated, which, to say the reverse, is the equivalent of the reserve “Those criminals who have been rehabilitated don’t have a truly criminal mind”.

4. Premise: The content of the Bible is given by inspiration of God according to one sentence in chapter 3.

Conclusion: The divine words in bible should be followed because it’s wrote by the God.

Attack: Dorothy’s argument violates the attacking in a circle fallacy. He draws the conclusion that we should behave as the god tells us in the book on the basis of the passages in the book which already mention that the word are inspired by the god.