Some people are so devoted to deep religious beliefs that their life is wholly influenced by this system of beliefs. It seems a logical assumption that there must be something interesting going on in their brain. It is also quite possible that brain processes in such people are different from those of people without religious beliefs. This is the core of studies in the new field neuro-theology, which examines the neural correlates of religious and spiritual beliefs. Such studies can help us to reveal why some people are more inclined to spirituality and some others are deeply skeptical of the existence of God.

Ambiguities of neuroscience for religion and theology are manifested in the various ways of neuro-theology development or the application of neuroscience in religion and theology. The term “neuro-theology” became more generalized after James Ashbrook, a neuroscience student working on theology, published a paper about neuro-theology in 1984. Although this term is widely used in academic contexts, it is not still globally accepted. In addition, there is no standard definition of this term beyond something that merely confirms its association with the potential application of neuroscience in answering religious and theological questions. It seems that this term is unpleasant event to Ashbrook; his first use of this term was immediately followed by the phrase “due to the lack of a simpler title”. The main reason for this complexity is the distinction between two types of practice, both of which are often referred to as neuro-theology. First, neuro-theology can be defined as a branch of neuroscience that studies religious phenomena (religious beliefs and practices). Second, neuro-theology can be regarded as a branch of theology that focuses on conscious neurological-theological thoughts. More distinctions can be deduced from each of these two definitions.