Pages

Sunday, August 24, 2025

The Elusive "God Spot": Exploring the Neural Foundations of Spirituality and Religiosity

 

In the quest to understand the human experience, few topics bridge science and philosophy as intriguingly as the intersection of the brain and spirituality. For decades, researchers have debated whether spirituality and religiosity—encompassing feelings of transcendence, connection to a higher power, and religious practices—are tied to a specific "God spot" in the brain, a singular region responsible for these profound experiences. Proponents of this idea suggest that evolution might have wired us with a dedicated neural hub for divine encounters, while skeptics argue that such phenomena arise from complex, distributed networks across the brain. This debate has gained momentum through the emerging field of neurotheology, which applies neuroscience to unravel the biological underpinnings of faith and mysticism. While early searches for a "God spot" yielded mixed results, landmark studies in 2012 and 2021 have shifted the conversation, highlighting both the dispersed nature of spiritual processing and potential key circuits involved. This article delves into these developments, examining the evidence and ongoing controversies.

What Is Neurotheology?

Neurotheology, also known as the neuroscience of religion or spiritual neuroscience, is an interdisciplinary field that investigates the neurological and biological mechanisms underlying religious and spiritual experiences. It seeks to correlate brain activity with subjective states of spirituality, such as mystical encounters, prayer, or feelings of unity with the universe, using tools like neuroimaging (e.g., fMRI and EEG), magnetic stimulation, and neuropsychological analysis. Unlike the psychology of religion, which focuses on behavioral responses to faith, neurotheology emphasizes how the brain's physiology might predispose humans to religious beliefs or transcendent states.

The field's roots trace back to the 1960s, with Aldous Huxley coining the term "neurotheology" in his novel Island to describe a blend of neuroscience and spirituality. It gained academic traction in the 1990s through works like Laurence O. McKinney's 1994 book Neurotheology: Virtual Religion in the 21st Century, which linked religious inquiry to brain development, particularly the prefrontal cortex's role in perceiving time and existence. Key figures include Andrew B. Newberg, who has used brain scans to show altered activity during meditation and prayer, suggesting transcendent experiences feel "real" due to shifts in neural processing; Michael Persinger, known for his controversial "God helmet" experiments attempting to induce spiritual sensations via magnetic fields; and Mario Beauregard, whose fMRI studies on nuns revealed no single "God spot" but involvement of multiple brain regions.

Neurotheology's research spans several areas: neuroimaging of spiritual practices, the neuropsychology of conditions like temporal lobe epilepsy (which can cause hyperreligiosity), and psychopharmacology exploring how substances like psilocybin mimic mystical states. It also incorporates biocultural perspectives, recognizing that religious rituals—such as chanting or dancing—engage sensory and chemical pathways in the brain, varying across cultures. However, the field is not without controversy. Critics argue it risks reducing profound cultural and social phenomena to mere brain chemistry, potentially overlooking religion's broader context, and some label early experiments (like Persinger's) as pseudoscience due to replication failures and suggestibility biases. Despite these debates, neurotheology continues to evolve, offering insights into why humans seem "hardwired" for spirituality.

The 2012 Study: Challenging the Single "God Spot"

A pivotal moment in the debate came in 2012 with a neurotheology-based study led by Brick Johnstone and colleagues at the University of Missouri, published in the International Journal of the Psychology of Religion. This research directly addressed the notion of a distinct "God spot," concluding that "spiritual experiences are likely associated with different parts of the brain."

The study involved 20 participants with traumatic brain injuries primarily affecting the right parietal lobe, a region linked to self-perception and spatial awareness. Researchers surveyed participants on spiritual traits, such as feelings of closeness to a higher power and belief in life's divine purpose, while also assessing religious practice frequency. Brain activity, especially in the frontal lobe, was examined through neuropsychological tests. Building on prior findings, the team replicated that decreased right parietal lobe function correlated with heightened spiritual transcendence, interpreted as a reduced focus on the self, fostering a sense of unity with something greater. Conversely, increased frontal lobe activity was associated with more frequent religious behaviors, like prayer or attendance at services.

These results refuted the idea of a single "God spot," portraying spirituality as a multifaceted phenomenon involving dynamic interactions across brain areas. Johnstone emphasized that while certain regions like the right parietal lobe play prominent roles in selflessness and transcendence, no one area monopolizes spiritual experiences. This aligned with neurotheology's broader view, reinforcing that religion and spirituality emerge from widespread neural networks rather than isolated spots. The study sparked discussions on how brain injuries or variations could influence faith, but it also faced limitations, such as its small sample size and reliance on self-reported data.

The 2021 Study: A Neural Circuit Centered on the Periaqueductal Gray

Nearly a decade later, a 2021 study published in Biological Psychiatry reignited the conversation by proposing a specific brain circuit for spirituality, potentially rooted in the periaqueductal gray (PAG) area of the brainstem. Led by Michael Ferguson from Brigham and Women's Hospital's Center for Brain Circuit Therapeutics, this research used lesion network mapping to identify neural pathways linked to self-reported spirituality and religiosity.

The team analyzed two datasets: one with 88 neurosurgical patients undergoing brain tumor removal, and another with over 100 Vietnam War veterans who had sustained penetrating head injuries. Patients were surveyed on spiritual acceptance (e.g., belief in a higher power) versus formal religiosity before and after lesions. Results showed varied changes: about one-third reported decreased spirituality, one-third increased, and one-third no change. By mapping these lesions, researchers pinpointed a circuit centered on the PAG, a brainstem structure known for roles in fear conditioning, pain modulation, altruism, and unconditional love. The PAG exhibited both positive and negative nodes, where damage could either heighten or diminish spiritual beliefs, corroborated by historical case reports of hyperreligiosity from specific lesions.

This finding suggests the "God spot" may not be a single locus but a distributed network anchored in evolutionarily ancient brainstem areas, challenging earlier dismissals of a dedicated spot while supporting a more nuanced, circuit-based model. Ferguson argued that spirituality is embedded in fundamental neurobiological processes, possibly conferring evolutionary advantages like resilience during hardship. However, the study doesn't prove causation or address whether these circuits validate spiritual truths, leaving room for philosophical interpretation.

The Ongoing Debate and Implications

The contrast between the 2012 and 2021 studies encapsulates the evolving debate: the former emphasizes dispersion across brain regions, while the latter highlights a core circuit involving the PAG, suggesting spirituality might be more localized than previously thought but still not confined to one "spot." Critics of the "God spot" idea point to neurotheology's consistent findings of multifaceted involvement—no single area lights up universally during spiritual moments, as seen in Beauregard's nun studies. Yet, the PAG's role aligns with theories that ancient survival mechanisms, like those for attachment and fear, underpin modern religiosity.

This discourse has profound implications. Clinically, understanding these circuits could inform treatments for conditions like depression, where spiritual practices aid coping, or neurological disorders altering faith. Ethically, it raises questions about free will—if spirituality is neurologically driven, does it diminish its authenticity? Neurotheology advocates argue it enhances appreciation for human complexity, bridging science and faith without reductionism.

As research advances with better imaging and larger datasets, the "God spot" debate may resolve into a consensus on networked, adaptive spirituality. For now, it reminds us that the brain's mysteries mirror the enigmas of the soul—profound, interconnected, and ever-elusive.

God spot ‘laughable’ (Dr Peter Line, B. App. Sc., M.App.Sc., Ph.D., is a neuro­scientist whose research specialty is the electrophysiology of the brain. Before retiring he was a lecturer in the Biomedical Science area, including teaching neuroanatomy and skeletal muscle biophysics, at an Australian university.) So what does he think of the recent research about a ‘God spot’ in the brain, that allegedly makes people believe in God? ‘Scientifically, the whole notion is quite laughable, really’, Peter says. ‘We can see which part of the brain “lights up” in various situations, such as a person having some sort of “religious experience”, but that does not mean that there is a place in the brain set aside for religious experience, such as a “God spot”’. Although brain regions may “light up” due to neuronal activity, we just do not know what this means in terms of enabling a person to think.4 Although he had what he calls ‘some mild religious instruction’ as a child, Peter says, ‘I had no knowledge of the Gospel or how to be saved. I used to take evolution for granted, because that is what society conditions you to believe, although my knowledge about evolution was really no better than my poor knowledge of the Bible. I wrestled with the idea of God. Any belief system that could interest me had to be true—I didn’t want to waste my life believing in a false God, a false religion.’ Peter was a keen triathlete, even competing successfully in ‘ironman’ events,5 but found that it didn’t satisfy him. ‘I knew deep down that I was a sinner’, he says, ‘but I didn’t know whether heaven or hell—or God—were real. I thought I would just hope for the best if I died. I realized early on, though, that the idea of God creating Adam from the dust, and the idea we descended from apes, were mutually exclusive.’ One day, when pondering this, Peter told God that ‘if you really are there, God, then you have the power to solve this problem for me’. Months later, and after having commenced a university degree, he attended one of a film lecture series featuring the late triple-doctorate scientist, Dr Arthur Wilder-Smith.6 He says, ‘I thought I was going to hear an evolutionist, but he was giving evidence against evolution. I was taken by complete surprise, but what he said really made sense with what I knew about science. I felt a sense of relief—there is a God. I became a creationist in my heart right then, and I felt that this must be why Christians have that strong faith.’ A few months after his intellectual conversion to creation, he says, ‘I knew I had to personally make the decision right there, or else risk an eternity in hell rather than spending it with the Lord Jesus.’ Peter was in for a shock, though—the first church he went to (after he became a Christian) praised Darwin for being ‘a great Christian’.7 He says, ‘Many churches did not want a bar of anything that connected Christianity to reality—that satisfied rational people and made for coherent doctrine. I realized, though, that the teachings of the Bible formed a coherent whole, something which had to be taken as a “complete package”.’

Sunday, August 17, 2025

“Surrender or Starve”: Zama-zamas, dispossession, and the state’s violent impasse

In January 2025, the world’s attention flicked to a maze of abandoned shafts at Buffelsfontein near Stilfontein, where a months-long police “surrender or starve” operation ended with at least 78–87 illegal miners dead and more than 240 survivors brought to the surface, many straight into handcuffs. Rights groups denounced the siege as a “massacre,” arguing that cutting off food and water to people trapped underground weaponized starvation as a tactic of law enforcement. South African authorities defended “Operation Vala Umgodi” as a necessary strike against criminal syndicates. Whatever label one prefers, the human toll was stark. Al Jazeera+1Human Rights WatchAP News

This was not an isolated tragedy but the clearest, deadliest flashpoint in a long conflict over South Africa’s abandoned goldfields and the marginalised people who mine them. The men and women colloquially called zama-zamas—“those who try their luck” in isiZulu—work in disused or even active shafts with rudimentary tools and makeshift supply lines, frequently under the thumb of violent gangs who extort, traffic and control access to ore. Police and soldiers raid camps, seize equipment and explosives, and, increasingly, lay siege to mine openings to starve miners out. Journalists and researchers estimate that the illegal trade captures a significant slice of South Africa’s gold output and is deeply entangled with organised crime, corruption, and cross-border migration. WikipediaThe New Yorker

Yet to understand why zama-zamas go underground at all—and why some frame their digging as reclamation of stolen wealth—you have to read their actions against a longer history. South Africa’s mining economy was built on land expropriation, migrant labour controls, and racialised dispossession that channelled mineral rents upward while impoverishing “labour-sending areas” across the region. As formal gold mines aged and closed, regulatory pathways into small-scale mining largely failed to materialise, leaving thousands effectively barred from legal extraction. For many in Lesotho, Zimbabwe, Mozambique and in South Africa’s own townships, illegal mining is not just a gamble; it is the only available livelihood and, in some miners’ narratives, a moral return of wealth taken by colonisers and corporations. Global Initiativewits.ac.zaScienceOpenResearchGate

The state’s turn to siege tactics

The government’s multi-agency Operation Vala Umgodi—deployed nationally since late 2023—targets illegal mining hubs with arrests, deportations, and the cutting of supply lines. At Buffelsfontein/Stilfontein, police ring-fenced shafts and blocked surface access to food, fuel, and medicine. Over days, bodies and survivors emerged; witnesses and advocates said many had succumbed to dehydration and hunger underground. The state has argued that sieges save lives in the long term by breaking syndicates’ grip and preventing further looting of national resources. Rights groups counter that starving people cannot be an acceptable policing method and want a public inquiry with possible criminal accountability. AP NewsAl Jazeera+1Human Rights Watch

Parallel reporting paints a grim ecology around the shafts: gang gunfights, coerced labour, and months-long entombment in hellish conditions; laundered doré feeding legitimate refineries; and officials accused of complicity higher up the value chain. Critics argue that starving miners on the lowest rung leaves the financial architects untouched. Even some pro-enforcement voices now urge a pivot to follow the money rather than focusing on desperate diggers. The New Yorker

“Reclaiming” gold: a politics of restitution from below

Not every zama-zama articulates their work in political terms. Many say plainly that they dig to eat. But a discernible strand of miner testimony and community advocacy frames informal mining as a rightful recovery of wealth: gold taken historically through conquest and corporate extraction, with little returned to the places people come from. In this telling, the shaft becomes a site of counter-extraction—a risky, improvised attempt to pull life from the ruins left by a century of capital-intensive mining. Academic and civil-society research echoes parts of this claim: criminalisation of artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM), coupled with a licensing regime few poor people can navigate, pushes communities into illegality while reproducing the inequalities that mining created. ScienceOpenwits.ac.za

That politics of reclamation sits uneasily alongside the very real harms tied to the trade. Zama-zamas are not a monolith: alongside self-organised crews, violent syndicates extort “taxes,” recruit with deception, and trap miners underground. Communities above ground endure cable theft, toxic processing, and sporadic gun battles. Any honest account must hold both truths: a grievance rooted in dispossession and a dangerous, exploitative shadow economy that preys on the vulnerable. The New Yorker

From Marikana to Stilfontein: different miners, rhyming lessons

South Africa’s most infamous mining-related atrocity remains Marikana in 2012, when police shot dead 34 striking formal platinum workers during a wage dispute with Lonmin. Marikana was about union politics and corporate-state power, not illegal mining. But two lessons resonate: first, that militarised policing of labour conflict can be lethally misjudged; second, that post-apartheid promises in mining towns remain threadbare. Those continuities—precarity, institutional distrust, and the quick resort to force—help explain why many South Africans hear “Buffelsfontein” and think “again.” WikipediaThe Guardian

What an alternative would require

1) De-criminalise and formalise ASM where feasible. Civil-society submissions urge a regulatory carve-out for small-scale operators with safety, environmental and traceability requirements that poor miners can actually meet. Without a lawful route in, raids simply chase people from shaft to shaft. wits.ac.za

2) Target the finance and logistics networks. Follow the money: buyers, smugglers, transporters, and complicit officials who alchemise illicit ore into legitimate bullion. Starving men underground is a brutal shortcut that leaves the value chain intact.

3) Protect life first in enforcement. When sieges are mounted, minimum humanitarian standards—access to water, the ability for neutral rescue teams to operate, medical triage—should be non-negotiable. January 2025 showed the cost of abandoning them. Al JazeeraAP News

4) Repair mining’s social footprint. Investing in alternative livelihoods in labour-sending regions and cleaning up abandoned shafts would shrink the pool of people for whom a descent is the only option. Historical responsibility demands more than fencing off holes. Global Initiative


Conclusion

Calling zama-zamas “criminals” or “victims” alone misses the point. They are workers of last resort operating in the cavities of a profoundly unequal resource economy. Many genuinely believe they are taking back what was taken from them—gold pried from stolen land and generations of cheap, expendable labour. The state’s current strategy—visible force above ground, starvation below—has produced a humanitarian scandal without uprooting the illicit value chain. If South Africa wants fewer bodies at the mouth of its abandoned mines, it will have to choose a harder path: one that treats desperate miners as citizens with rights, not enemies to be besieged, even as it dismantles the syndicates that profit from their desperation. Al JazeeraHuman Rights Watchwits.ac.za

Thursday, August 14, 2025

Biblical Rationale for Christians to Expect God Will Hear and Answer Prayer

David wrote: “In the morning, LORD, you hear my voice; in the morning I lay my requests before you and wait expectantly,” (Psalm 5:3 NIV).

Belief that God hears and answers the prayers of Christians is well-supported throughout Scripture. Here’s the biblical rationale rooted in both Old and New Testaments:

1. God’s Promises to Hear and Answer Prayer

  • Jesus’ Direct Teachings: Jesus repeatedly encouraged believers to pray with the expectation that God will listen and respond. For example:

    • “Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened” (Matthew 7:7-8).

    • “If you ask anything in My name, I will do it” (John 14:13-14).

    • “Whatever you ask the Father in My name He will give you. ... Ask, and you will receive, that your joy may be full” (John 16:23-24).

  • Apostolic Confidence: The apostles taught Christians to expect that God will answer prayer, especially when it aligns with His will.

    • “And this is the confidence that we have toward him, that if we ask anything according to his will he hears us. And if we know that he hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have the requests that we have asked of him” (1 John 5:14-15).

  • Old Testament Precedent: God’s character as a prayer-hearing God is consistent with His dealings in the Old Testament:

    • “The Lord is near to all who call on him, to all who call on him in truth” (Psalm 145:18).

    • “Then you will call upon Me and go and pray to Me, and I will listen to you” (Jeremiah 29:12).

2. Prayer Is Built on Relationship with God

  • Christians, by faith in Christ, are considered “righteous” and are invited into a relationship with God:

    • “Proverbs 15:29 says God ‘hears the prayers of the righteous.’ By grace through faith in Jesus Christ, that's us, friends. God hasn't saved us so He can ignore us—God's saved us so we can enjoy Him”.

  • Adoption as Children: Through Christ, believers become children of God (Romans 8:15-16), qualifying for direct access and assurance that a loving Father hears them (Matthew 7:9-11).

3. The Condition of the Heart

  • While assurance is strong, the Bible emphasizes the importance of praying with a sincere, obedient, and faithful heart:

    • “The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working” (James 5:16).

    • Jesus said, “If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, you will ask what you desire, and it shall be done for you” (John 15:7).

  • This does not mean perfection is required, but that sincere relationship and a posture of obedience do matter for answered prayer.

4. God Always Responds, But Not Always As Expected

  • Scripture teaches that God’s answers may be “yes,” “no,” or “wait.” All such responses are rooted in His wisdom and love.

  • “All prayer is actually answered by God. ... God answers prayer in three distinct ways: yes, no, and wait”.

5. Examples of Answered Prayer in the Bible

  • The Bible is filled with concrete examples—ranging from Abraham and Sarah (Genesis 21:1-8), to Hezekiah (2 Kings 20:5), to the early church in Acts—of God responding to the petitions of His people.


Proverbs 15:29 states: “The Lord is far from the wicked, but He hears the prayer of the righteous.” This verse directly supports the biblical rationale that God hears the prayers of believers by drawing a distinction between the wicked and the righteous.

  • The term “righteous”, within biblical theology, refers to those who are in right relationship with God. In New Testament perspective, this is applied to all who trust in Christ and are justified by faith (cf. Romans 3:22-24). Therefore, Christians—considered righteous through faith—are assured that God is attentive to their prayers.

  • The verse emphasizes that God’s attention is specific and relational: while He is described as “far from the wicked,” He actively “hears” (listens to with favor and willingness to respond) the prayer of those who are righteous.

  • By linking God’s hearing to righteousness, Proverbs 15:29 affirms that Christians, in their justified state, can be confident that God is disposed to listen to and answer their prayers in contrast to those separated from Him by persistent wickedness.

Thus, Proverbs 15:29 provides both a promise and a principle: those who belong to God by faith (the righteous) have the privilege of expectant prayer, grounded in God's expressed commitment to hear them.


Conclusion

Christians can expect God to hear and answer their prayers because:

  • God promises throughout Scripture to listen to His children.

  • Jesus explicitly taught and modeled expectant prayer.

  • The apostles affirm this posture of confidence.

  • The witness of the Old Testament and countless biblical testimonies confirm it.

  • God’s loving character and the believer’s status in Christ underpin this expectation.

These truths lead Christians to approach prayer with faith—knowing God not only hears but answers in the way that is ultimately for our good and His glory.