Appeal to emotions

I was asked by a former pastor what do you think is going to happen to you in the next 100 years? Then, he said give it 5 years and your life will change once you put trust and faith in Jesus Christ. He asked these questions because I didn't want to go to his church anymore. 

Your former pastor is most likely just not very good at critical thinking, and is suggesting this to you based on personal biases and selective anecdotes.

Extensive research has been done in this area and Christians are no better off by any substantial measure than non Christians. This includes happiness, wealth, prosperity, well being, health, longevity, cancer rates, etc. There IS evidence that belonging to a community (such as a church or other groups) does contribute to well-being. This is what Christians often point to as "proof of God's power". There is also evidence that belief in prayer has positive effects on the one doing the praying. This is attributed, however to the power of belief and the placebo effect not any gods, as the same benefits are shown from virtually all religions studied, and those who meditate and practice mindfulness or affirmations (no gods).

In short, your pastor, assuming he is sincere, is committing an anecdotal fallacy.

The argument presented by the former pastor includes a logical fallacy known as an appeal to emotion. This occurs when someone manipulates another person's emotions to win an argument or persuade them to take a particular action, rather than using logical reasoning and factual evidence.

Here are the main issues related to the appeal to emotion in this scenario:

1. **Preying on Fear of the Unknown**: The pastor asks what will happen in the next 100 years, a time span that most people can't predict with any certainty. This question is likely designed to induce anxiety or fear about the future, prompting you to seek comfort through religious faith.

2. **Promise of Positive Change**: The pastor then offers a reassuring claim that your life will improve in a relatively short period (5 years) if you trust in Jesus Christ. This appeal taps into the emotional desire for positive outcomes and stability, rather than providing any objective evidence or reasoning to support the claim.

3. **Guilt and Obligation**: The context of this conversation—your reluctance to attend his church—suggests that he might be using emotional manipulation to make you feel guilty or obligated to continue participating. This is another way emotions are being leveraged rather than rational arguments or evidence.

By focusing on emotions rather than logical and factual reasoning, the former pastor avoids addressing potential intellectual or reasonable objections you might have to attending church or accepting the religious beliefs he promotes. This type of reasoning can lead to poor decision-making based on feelings rather than objective evaluation of evidence and arguments.

 

It sounds like "No True Scotsman No True Christian Fallacy.