[RJT]

This is not exactly on point (somewhat it is) , but I have a question.

I understand and agree with you that - any believer who says his (or any other) belief is logical is being illogical when he says such.

Can we say this, I think we can (and perhaps, already have):

I understand my beliefs (tenets of the religion, etc.) are illogical. I understand that I am being irrational (illogical? Exactly the same thing? Or is there a technical difference? ) when I say I believe in x. I might even be making the correct choice in what I believe (It might turn out that my religion is correct after all.) But my beliefs can in no way be construed as being logical.

Can we say this, I think, too, we can:

I understand my beliefs are illogical. My decision to believe can be based on logic, though. Example -I choose to believe because the ultimate worse case scenario is (in the case of x belief) is eternal hell. Therefore I error on the side of caution. (and I am not saying this would be a good reason to come to that decision - personally, I think the it wouldn’t be a good enough reason, at least). I followed logical reasoning in my decision.

If we can say the above, is this semantically correct (the same as saying the above):

Even though my beliefs are illogical (by definition) my decision to believe is not illogical.

Saying it this way doesn't sounds correct, but it looks correct. I am just curious if one further dissects this last sentence, it actually doesn’t state the same thing as my prior sentences. Does it? This is not a trick question. Rather easy one too, I assume. Just want to make sure I am not missing something.