Circular Reasoning

Notice that the individual in the following clip is advancing the following two pseudo-arguments.

P1: The Bible is Divinely Inspired.
_____________________________
C : The Bible is Infallible (i.e., everything it says must be true).

and

P1: The Bible specifically says that is Inspired by God.
____________________________________________
C: It must be Inspired by God.

Please check out the clip from :50 to 1:39.

Notice in the first "argument" the claim that 'the Bible is Divinely Inspired' is logically equivalent to the claim that 'the Bible is Infallible' since it is only upon the assumption of the existence of God that either claim/both claims goes/go through.  But the existence of God is precisely what is in dispute.  Hence the argument is circular, i.e., assuming precisely what it is trying to prove.

The second "argument" is perhaps even more transparently circular.  It is roughly equivalent to saying that one knows a source is telling the truth because they have asserted that they are telling the truth.  So, accepting that what they are saying is true rests upon the assumption that they are telling the truth--but that is precisely the issue in question.