Evidence for God from Science

Watch this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFJPtVRl ... r_embedded

Rofl that hilarious!

How do they ask the one person questions for their different brain halves? I know that these certain people operate with two separate brain halves, but how did they do that study he is referring to? I wonder how these people operate in the world. If their two brain halves are disconnected, how does the brain decide which half to use, or which half will dominate in any given situation? I guess God knows the "heart," huh? I can't remember where the verse is that I'm thinking of, that the heart or soul is what really believes, it's not simply a cerebral decision.

I thought it was rather odd of him to think that his experiment (anecdote, actually) should have any serious theological repercussions. Why would it? A person with multiple personality disorder could present the same problem. Or perhaps someone is once a firm believer, but then has an accident that results in amnesia, and in their "new life" they change belief systems.

So there's hardly anything "new" here. And in any case, every theological system has a pretty set answer to this. Calvinists would say the person is saved based on God's election. Those who think you can lose your salvation would conclude that such a person simply lost their salvation (unless the accident left them in such a condition that it could be argued they were no longer persons, as if they were brain dead, but then, it wouldn't make much sense to say that they had changed their belief systems). And those who believe in eternal security would simply point out that salvation can't be lost, regardless of your future state of belief or disbelief.

Still FURTHER, despite the two facts above that render this question less than interesting, the speaker for some reason assumes that mere belief in God decides one's eternal destiny. I'm not aware of any religion that says if you believe in God you go to heaven and if you are an atheist you go to Hell.

All in all, there are so many things wrong with his presumption that I'd classify it silly long before I classified it as awkward, and, apparently, the rest of the theological community has done the same thing, since he hasn't even gotten a ripple, in his own words. :p