This week, Ravi Zachariah’s Institute here in Atlanta hosted an event entitled: “Should we fear Artificial Intelligence?” In it, British Mathematician and Christian Apologist John Lennox gave a lecture on the challenge of AI and Transhumanism to the Christian faith. Dr. Lennox’s talk covered a wide range of topics including the difference of general and narrow AI, emerging Transhumanism, relevant literature and theological responses.
Coming from an apologist (defender of the faith) approach, the professor focused on how the emergence of AI diverges from Classical Christianity. While affirming some of the possibilities this technology brings, Lennox’s emphasized in how it was contrary to a Judeo-Christian understanding of the world. By citing many examples, he sees the rise of AI and Transhumanism as another tower of babel project. In Transhumanism, more specifically, he sees a direct counterfeit of Christian eschatology. That is, while the New Testament speaks of a final human transformation through the Second Coming of Christ, the first speak of a similar transformation through technology. Furthermore, Dr. Lennox saw echoes of Revelation in the rise of Superintelligence as a possible tool for global social control. To drive this point he drew a parallel between Max Tegard’s image of Prometheus and the biblical figure of the beast.
In his view, there was a clear difference between AI and humanity. The first a invention of humans while the latter being God’s creation. In doing so, he reinforced a separation between technology and biology as opposing endeavors with little connection. His main concern was that by focusing too much on AI, that he rightly defined it as algorithms, we could lose sight of the Imago Dei of humanity. In short, while not explicitly telling us to fear AI, Dr. Lennox driving narrative was one of caution and concern. In his view, Transhumanism is a re-formulation of the Second Century heresy of Gnosticism. With that said, he affirmed the Christ would rise victorious at the end even if AI could bring havoc to the world.
From Confrontation to Dialogue
Dr. Lennox presentation rightly uncovered and explored the the idolatrous tendencies in the Transhumanist movement. Pushing the boundaries of immortality can be an exercise in human-centrism in a direct defiance to God’s sovereignty. The optimism that intoxicates the movement can well be tempered by a healthy dose of Judeo-Christian skepticism. For Christians and Jews, humanity is steeped in sin which makes any human endeavor to achieve ultimate good suspect.
Yet, by painting Transhumanism as an offshoot of atheistic naturalism, he misses an opportunity to see how it can enter into a fruitful dialogue with Christianity. What do I mean by that? Well, If Christianity and Transhumanism both preach transformation of humans into an elevated ideal state, could there be parallels among them that are worth exploring? For centuries Christianity has preached spiritual transformation as humans are shaped into the God-human Christ. Can technology be part of this transformation? Can the transformation of individuals and communities include technology, to enact here a picture of the coming kingdom of God?
I suspect that to enter into this dialogue, two prior movements are necessary. The first is re-framing the relationship between Christianity and Science. While not explicitly said, Dr. Lennox seem to espouse the view that Science (and more specifically Evolutionary Biology) contradicts the claim of Genesis and therefore cannot be reconciled. In this binary view, there is only atheistic naturalism or theistic supernaturalism where God’s action is confined to a strictly literal view of the first books of the Pentateuch. If that is the case than the idea of past evolution proposed by Darwin and future evolution proposed by Transhumanism is a direct threat to the Christian faith. If, however, science can be harmonized with the Biblical view of creation, then evolution (either past of future) are no longer challenge to Christianity. Instead, it can find parallels with the Christian idea of Deification (East) or Sanctification (West).
The second movement is re-defining the separation between nature and technology. Dr. Lennox spent portions of his talk differentiating AI from human intelligence. His main point was that the biological one was divinely made while the latter was human created. By framing these two as opposing ideas, the connection between them is lost. Technology will always be an inferior pursuit compared to the biological reality around us. What if these two were not opposing phenomena but two sides of a continuum? What if technology was God’s way to further perpetuate Creation?
A New Strategy
I recognize that asking these questions pose tremendous challenges to a classical (Modernist) understanding of Christianity. The avenues explored above are not new nor am I the first to suggest it. They are well fleshed out in the writings of Teilhard de Chardin. The Jesuit Paleontologist initiated this dialogue in the middle of 20th century, well before digital technology transformed our lives. We do well to re-visit his ideas.
Yet, a traditional view of apologetics that simply fits AI and Transhumanism as past heresy will not suffice. It overlooks the breadth and depth of how these developments are re-defining humanity. It also pegs them to past ideological challenges that while similar in the surface belong to very different historical contexts.
To establish boundaries and define what is right and wrong is a good first step. However, in a time of fast-paced change, these boundaries will have to be re-visited often making the whole enterprise inadequate. Moreover, such strategy may help keep some in the faith but will certainly do little to attract new comers to the faith. For the latter purpose, there is no alternative but to engage more deeply with the challenge that AI and Transhumanism pose to our time.
There is much to be said on that. For now, I propose the outlines of an alternative Apologetics through a few provocative questions. What if instead of challenging competing ideologies directly we instead try to subvert them? What if instead of exposing fault lines between Christianity and a competing ideology to defend orthodoxy, we appropriate Transhumanist’s aspirations and direct them towards Christian aims?