Theology has been employing logic in order to justify faith with reasons not to mention bridging a gap between some different theological schools of thoughts. This article aims to examine Wirman rsquo s claim of fallacies against Nasution rsquo s theological thought. Thus I will investigate two questions (1) What sort of fallacies does Wirman charge against Nasution (2) If there is no specification then would it be fallacies at any rate To address these questions I strive to capture Wirman rsquo s main premise for identifying those fallacies exploring Avicenna rsquo s 7693 ar 363 r 299 and discussing thirteen Aristotelian fallacies. On the one hand the conclusion of this investigation might topple Wirman rsquo s accusation and on the other hand it might look like a consolation for Nasution. Having said that both Wirman and Nasution do reason only in the realm of Aristotelian logic instead of Avicenna rsquo s account of necessity.