Is this a contradiction or am I reading it wrong? Genesis 5:28

[Anomalocaris]

“I believe” has no place in civilized conversation unless one is ready to explain why one believes and more importantly what would be sufficient to cause one to no longer believe.

Otherwise “I believe” is just a fart in polite company.

[Neo-Scholastic]

I preface statements with "I believe" when expressing an opinion. I preface statements with "I know" when I have more certainty.

[Anomalocaris]

an opinion is a bare assertion unless there is obvious good reason for the opinion, and more subtly but more importantly for the purpose of the credibility of the holder of the opinion, there is evidence that the holder of the opinion is willing and capable of changing his opinion when confronted with reasonable evidence of the inadequacy of the opinion.

A person who believes out of faith is not a thinking person offering an opinion but a mindless phonograph playing back nonsensical recording.

[Ferrocyanide]

an opinion is a bare assertion unless there is obvious good reason for the opinion, and more subtly but more importantly for the purpose of the credibility of the holder of the opinion, there is evidence that the holder of the opinion is willing and capable of changing his opinion when confronted with reasonable evidence of the inadequacy of the opinion.

A person who believes out of faith is not a thinking person offering an opinion but a mindless phonograph playing back nonsensical recording.

But he told us why he believes the Bible is true.
many years back I had a visionary experience concerning the Scriptures...it's very difficult to put into words. For me the Scriptures felt alive somehow...like directly confronting the Otherness. And I think the supernatural context of the ancient Middle East lends to its depth and strangeness.

I have heard this kind of thing from a bunch of christians (stuff about having feelings).
A lot of mormons say the same kind of thing. That’s the evidence for them that their religion is true.

I don’t know if the above is called blind faith.
Maybe they are assuming that the jewish god is the one that is activating emotions in them. Is that the blind part?
Neo-Scholastic, is that what you believe?
And is it something that happens to you every time you think about scripture?

Personally, I would not choose that that god and religion is true bc of feelings I am having. I think Anomalocaris is like that as well.
For example, if I feel like eating at McDonald’s, I am not going to claim that god is real because he is activating hunger emotions in me.

There are all sorts of possibilities:
1. It is possible that the hamburgers at McDonald’s are connecting to my brain and they want me to eat them.
2. It could be that there are aliens that are not from this space and they are outside time, and they are sitting right next to the jewish god and they are activating circuits in my brain as part of an experiment and later, they want to take me to heaven, which is their homeland.
3. It could be that there are things doing on in my brain that I am not actively conscious of and they are making decisions for me.
4. ...and you can go on making up other possibilities.

I remember watching a documentary about India. There was a 10 y old kid saying that he was reincarnated and that he remembers who is wife was and he remembers being shot in the head and there is also a scar on his forehead and he says it is at the same location as where the man was shot. The wife of the dead husband was amazed and said that the things the 10 y old is saying is true.

[Neo-Scholastic]

As I said, my experience accounts in for my motivation to study the bible and is not a testimony to others. And like most here, I do not believe there is any firm connection between feelings and verasity. Feelings are good at motivating an inquiry but poor at producing conviction. An effective medicine can have more than one active ingredient. Similarly, my Christian faith can be both motivated by awe and intellecually satisfying. And, yes, I find the biblical texts intellectually satisfying and spiritually nourishing. Then again it baffles me why some athiests think Christian believers, like me, should be bothered by the fact that the bible isn't something it was never meant to be. The texts use the understanding of nature common to the ancient world to communicate theological messages to a pre-modern audience. Explain to me why that is is a problem?

[The Grand Nudger]

Importantly, your christian faith can be unalike an effective medicine at all...even if there are multiple avenues for your personal satisfaction. Your christian faith is silly and amatuerish...and this..even when we acknowledge that you've put more thought into it than most.

To be blunt - your good effort stands accusing the common effort of a shared idiocy.

[Ferrocyanide]

As I said, my experience accounts in for my motivation to study the bible and is not a testimony to others. And like most here, I do not believe there is any firm connection between feelings and verasity. Feelings are good at motivating an inquiry but poor at producing conviction. An effective medicine can have more than one active ingredient. Similarly, my Christian faith can be both motivated by awe and intellecually satisfying. And, yes, I find the biblical texts intellectually satisfying and spiritually nourishing. Then again it baffles me why some athiests think Christian believers, like me, should be bothered by the fact that the bible isn't something it was never meant to be. The texts use the understanding of nature common to the ancient world to communicate theological messages to a pre-modern audience. Explain to me why that is is a problem?

For reference, I will once again post what you said to make it easier for people to read these comments:

many years back I had a visionary experience concerning the Scriptures...it's very difficult to put into words. For me the Scriptures felt alive somehow...like directly confronting the Otherness. And I think the supernatural context of the ancient Middle East lends to its depth and strangeness.

I have noticed the words “visionary experience” and “felt alive”.

As I said, my experience accounts in for my motivation to study the bible and is not a testimony to others.

That doesn’t matter. What matters is, how does the system work, how does the machine work?
All humans are machines. In this case, we need to understand you.
How did Neo-Scholastic end up as a christian?


You said that you do not believe that there is feelings and veracity.
Apparently, there was a video and audio and emotional experience you had. Did Jesus appear to you while you were awake?

I find the biblical texts intellectually satisfying and spiritually nourishing.

With respect to what? Are you looking for a meaning in your life? Are you wondering about the afterlife?

[Angrboda]

[Neo-Scholastic]

Yeah, that is a clever meme. In all seriousness though, just because textual ambiguities allow for multiple interpretations of a text does not mean said text can mean whatever you want it to...unless you want to argue for a very extreme position of post-modern semiotics or a Borges-like fantasy world.

[Fake Messiah]

In all seriousness though, just because textual ambiguities allow for multiple interpretations of a text does not mean said text can mean whatever you want it to...

They definitely don't allow you to answer simple questions, like do you believe that Jesus was magically implanted into Mary, no matter how long you study them.