There is a big difference between the following two sentences:
“Human beings are comprised of material elements”
“Human beings are comprised of material elements”
The first sentence is factual (but incomplete imo)
The second sentence may be factual, but also may be reductionist.
We are in FACT made up of material ‘stuff’, but to go further and say ‘material stuff and nothing else’ is, I think, unwarranted.
This is where a theist might part company with an atheist - the atheist has a truncated view of reality; the theist accepts material reality - he recognizes the same ‘stuff’ that the atheist does, he recognizes scientific methodology as well as a priori mathematical certainty, etc, - but finds the meaning of that reality to lie OUTSIDE of that reality. Finding that meaning is in fact warranted, justified and rational, but not rationalistic.
In addition, there is little doubt that the rational choice for/against God draws on deeper springs than the rational mind. For instance, a compelling case has been made that many famous atheists have ‘projected’ their experience with bad fathers, absent fathers, cruel fathers - onto the world, and that is the spring of their anti-faith. Yes it is the same type of projection that many famous theists have experienced, but with good, attentive, and loving fathers in their background.
It is tempting to call our intellectual findings completely ‘rational’ but in fact we often are only justifying what lies deepest within us.
.