The above OP is something I have posted quite a few times in different places but it occurs to me now that I can do something different here. I can take a look at the connection these reasons have to the sort of God and spirituality that I believe in.
5 - This has one of the more significant impacts. It means that I pretty much equate the spiritual with the subjective side of existence, and the physical with the objective aspect of reality. I think this actually fits very well with many things. First of all, it makes the diversity of belief about spiritual things quite natural and expected. Second, it means that I am predisposed to reject the possibility of proof or evidence for anything spiritual. Third, while the objective aspect of reality can be expected to care nothing for our beliefs and desires, the subjective and thus the spiritual would be quite different. Indeed, I think if there are anything like natural laws for the spiritual they would be tied to the logical conclusions we can make about our desires – for example, the fulfillment of some desires may have a greater ability to make our existence worthwhile than is the case for other desires.
4 - This ties with my frequently pointing out the limitations of logic as depending entirely upon the premises we start with. I will thus grant the importance of logical coherence only as a requirement for meaningfulness but see logic as utterly incapable of generating any kind of singularity of truth. Furthermore, while I believe that the meaningful things we can say about God is restricted to the limitations of logical coherence, I will sometimes suggest that our understanding of logic may be somewhat incomplete. We can easily point to quantum physics as suggesting that we don’t quite have the whole picture with regards to logic. But this does not mean we can abandon the logic we do understand without descending into meaningless noise.
3 - This means that I would pretty much limit all spiritual effects upon physical reality to quantum indeterminacy. This brings me to several conclusion. First is that this is a very narrow window through which the spiritual can act on the physical and thus the relationship between physical and spiritual is mostly epi-phenomenal in the sense that most of the causality is one way from the physical to the spiritual. Second it means that all such effects in the other direction can logically be dismissed as random and coincidental by the skeptic.
2 - My philosophical roots in existentialism means that I place a very high importance upon the freedom of the human will. And this leads to a number of other conclusions. First it explains why I am a libertarian incompatibilist and open theist. Second, there is the impact on my understanding of the human spirit as a creation of our choices in life. In fact, you could say that this is strongly connected to the existentialist maxim that existence precedes essence. But this also strongly confirmed by other Christian beliefs that our choices and resultant behavior has a significant impact on what happens to us after death – not as a matter of judgement but as a result of logical consequences. Third, it ties to why I believe God created the universe, because only a system of natural laws would give us a basis for existence and action with some freedom of will.
1 - This means that I strongly associate the mathematical structure, quantitative and measurable things with the physical aspect of reality and thus see the spiritual as being quite contrary to this – non-mathematical, non-quantitative, and certainly not measurable. So, in fact, this is typically how I explain the difference between the physical and spiritual forms of the same monistic pre-energy stuff: the physical forms are a part of this measurable space-time mathematical structure and the spiritual forms are not.