James says:

Hi Ryan, thanks for reblogging this. Since there is a discussion of a different nature going on at the other two blogs, I figured I’d comment here. I’d like to quote a few of Chuck’s statements:

“I repeat it was a wonderfully comfortable exclusive club to belong to.”
“In my mind I always wanted to reserve the right to question ideas that within the group are widely accepted.”
This, to me, seems to be perhaps where things start to come undone. When Christians are left “comfortable” instead of being encouraged in areas such as the fight against abortion and euthanasia. I would also hope that I am challenged by my brothers and sisters in Christ should I ever become too “comfortable” in an alien world. To quote Rev. Schouten, however, “…this doesn’t mean that the departure of someone from the path of faith is sure evidence that we have failed that person.” I think this is a good thing to keep in mind.

“I am very interested in science and knew that by this time evolution and old earth as true as the round/flat earth argument of 250 years ago.”
I find that the more I discover about creation, the more I can’t accept this. My undergrad from a secular university convinced me the world is far too beautiful and complex for it to come from anything but a Creator, indeed, a Creator who creates by love, not death and destruction.The grip that the scientific community has on the world, led by such open-minded men as Richard Dawkins, is a dangerous one.

“The audacity that one does not belong to one’s self is so absolutely absurd to me and of course as I knew is also the very first step used by any person or force that wants to dominate someone.”
Indeed, this is the only truth that keeps me going at a time like this.

“An atheist acts ethically and morally only for the sake of good social order expecting no further reward!”
I would like to see this statement played out consistently in a secular world, but sadly, the more the world rejects Christianity, the more unethical and immoral it becomes.

And, finally, to take an atheist’s comment on the blog to Rev. Schouten:
“Reason is the most reliable “path to truth”, however. Just think of all those other faith-based religious belief-systems that you likely label false, and it should be clear that “faith” isn’t as reliable as the reason that you use to dismiss said belief-systems. At least atheists are consistent across the board, whereas, you decry “reason”, but then turn right around and use it to dismiss other people of “faith” IOW, you compartmentalize.”
I just thought he had at least one good point to make. Reason only goes so far. God has given us reason to discover the truth about his creation. To take reason out of the sphere for which God has given it and to apply it to proving/disproving God is a bit like taking a Chevrolet and saying there is nothing about the car that proves it was made by Chevy (even if the name is written on every part). Everything must be kept in context. Unfortunately for atheists, context is arbitrary.