Imagination Archives

AI Revelation: From Natural to Artificial Theology

Systematic theology organizes theological ideas into topics. The original intent was to construct a system that could explain the many facets of the Christian faith to its adherents. If Scripture described the experience of God through history, systematic theology sought to organize the knowledge emerging from that historical experience into a cohesive group of propositions and arguments. This system consists of specific topics that include esoteric terms, often coming from Greek or Latin such as Trinity, Eschatology and Deification. Each of these terms carry centuries of arguments, reflections and stories within them.

Dusting off Seminary Books

It is unfortunate that such approach has now fallen into neglect. Even those who have studied these concepts in seminary will often not use them again in sermons, writings even less day-to-day conversations. When was the last time you discussed the different views of the Trinity with your spouse? Their historical nature is what makes them both distinctive but also disconnected from contemporary language. They require a pre-requisite knowledge that is no longer taught in western societies.

Even so, maybe it is time we re-visit this age-old tradition with a fresh perspective. In that vein, I have recently gathered some books I acquired in seminary and browsed through them again. Almost three years since I have graduated, I must confess my theological thinkings has grown rusty. Just like any art or skill, you lose it if you don’t use it.

As I looked over them, I re-encountered the concept of revelation. This loaded term is theology’s way to describe how God communicates with humanity. It speaks of the role of Scripture, tradition and experience in how divine truth is communicated. I acknowledge that in a secular world, the idea that an unseen being would speak is quite scandalous. Yet, hang in there for a bit.

General, Special and Natural

Theologians have often divided the topic into general and special revelation. Special revelation speaks of the exclusive way in which God directly speaks through the Hebrew and the Christian faith. This is where Scripture and religious experience fits in. Yet, theologians recognize that God’s revelation was not limited to those means. That is where the concept of general revelation emerged as a way to express these instances where God communicates through non-religious means.

One way general revelation occurs is through nature. I can personally attest to that reality. Many times I have had life-changing moments of clarity, peace and resolve while hiking through the woods. There is something compelling about being outdoors. It touches our senses in rich ways.

Thomas Aquinas, a church father and one of the first systematic theologians, recognized this reality and developed some thinking around this phenomenon. This later became known as natural theology – the idea that nature also contains divine truths available to all humans regardless of religious persuasion. Unfortunately, natural theology fell in disrepute with the Reformation. In an effort to elevate the role of God in salvation, reformers emphasized special over general revelation. In reacting against traditional Catholic thinking, they ended up closing the door on this rich avenue of meaning.

From Natural to Artificial

In a multicultural and secular world, the idea of general revelation cannot be denied. That is why Christian theologians and believers must reconsider natural theology. It is time to re-visit Aquinas’ legacy and re-formulate it anew in a technological era.

It is also time to introduce a new concept: Artificial theology. If natural theology focused on how God could speak through nature, consequently artificial theology should explore how God could speak through technology. What if revelation could happen through algorithms? Can we find God in the countless pieces of data circulating through the cyber world?

Many of us can attests that one can find transcendence in nature. However, when it comes to our experience with technology, transcendence is not the first word that comes to mind. More often than not, technology connotes a lifeless sense of utility. It is more like an imitation of reality than reality itself. Hence why we tend define it artificial, implying the opposite of natural. Yet, by doing so, we shut out a growing part of our human experience from divine connection.

Dutch theologian Albert Kuyper believed that no square inch of existence was beyond God’s dominion. If this is true, it must also include our silicon world. The first step in this journey is to open our eyes to this reality.

Re-Thinking Worship: Seeing Liturgy as Technology

Can the technical and the religious intersect? In this blog I want to explore what happens when we look at liturgy (the order of Christian rituals) as technology. What kind of new insights can this perspective provide?

A Personal Struggle

For a few years now, my family has struggled to plug into a church. Part of that is the phase of our lives with small children. Getting three kids ready make any outings an elaborate event! Yet, I know there is more to it. This external struggle only reflects what is happening internally with me and my wife. After growing up as active members in Christian communities we find ourselves struggling to find a spiritual home (in the way we traditionally understood it). Church is no longer an anchoring community but instead a trigger for painful memories. Going to church does not give meaning to our lives as it used to even as we still hold on to the faith it preaches.

This perception is also spilling over to our kids. Any time I mention to my two older girls (8 and 6) about going to church, protest follows. I guess they learned early to be Protestants!

When I probe further, they say that that they do not get much out of it. They don’t see the point dressing up in a Sunday morning to sit with other kids they barely know to hear stories they already know. As a father, my knee-jerk reaction is to contest these impressions, trying to affirm the slow work of grace that happens in the continual exposure to Christian rituals. Yet, the message is not getting through. Often time, I find myself being the only one at home who sees value in going to church on a Sunday morning.

This situation grieves my heart. For all its failures, I still believe in the institutional church. I also see the regular gathering of believers as an essential part of spiritual formation. Therefore, my children’s aversion to church makes me feel like I failed. I know that ultimately they will have to choose the path they need to follow. This is not under my control. Yet, I hope that by then they would have at least as much exposure as I had to the faith. Doing that without regularly participating in a Christian community is very difficult.

A Shift in Perspective

Pondering on this predicament, I wanted to understand why my view of church was so different from that of my kids. There are many differences between our upbringings in culture, language, age and technology. What I realized, however, is that through practice and study, I was encouraged and trained to see the grandeur of God in the life of the church. This has come to me through many avenues. One of them was music and the experience of worship. Another was through listening to preachers and Sunday School teachers. Additionally, I have had multiple personal mystical experiences, deeply personal and emotionally rich, that affirmed the realities being spoken in church. Through study, my vision of the body of Christ expanded beyond a group of a few hundred whom I join on a weekly basis to an unbroken communion of people affirming this faith over time in all continents of the earth. The latter, is one of the main reasons why I still believe in the institution.

The problem is that I expected my young children to simply get all that by simply dropping them off in a nursery or Sunday school class on a weekly basis. This becomes even more complicated when they are bombarded from multiple influences throughout the week that claim their attention. They are not growing up in the same world I was. A new context require different measures.

In view of this realization, I decided to take upon myself the responsibility to pass on the faith, in the best way I can, directly to my children. Relying on others to do is not working. Maybe then, they will come to yearn for gathering with other Christians on a weekly basis. That theological degree may finally come in handy after all!

Liturgy as Technology

As I considered ways to pass on the Christian faith to my children, I wondered whether I could see liturgy as technology.

To level set, liturgy means the order and content of how Christian services are conducted. It it encompasses prayers, music, reading, taking communion (or the Eucharist), baptism, etc. Liturgy is what people do when they come together for worship, hence, the “work of the people.” When ministers prepare for a Sunday service, they consider what the experience communicates. It goes beyond words but can include sounds, aromas and visuals. All these elements shape, direct and communicate through the worship experience. Over time, good liturgy changes those who regularly participate in it. There is not such thing as a liturgical church because every congregation follows a liturgy. Some are implied rather than explicitly stated.

What is the connection with technology? If technology is applied science to solve a problem, liturgy is applied theology to form character. In other words, it is a means, albeit important, to foster divine encounters. These encounters, re-order desires, transform souls and develop faith. When working properly, they have the power to make us better people.

If we are willing to accept this analogy, I wonder if the problem that my kids see no relevance in church is a technical rather than a spiritual one. I wonder if the liturgy is inadequate to do the work at their level of understanding. By that, I don’t mean that they need to experience church through more advanced technological means. The idea is not to create children’s VR church! It is much deeper than that. It is examining the elements that are not working properly and test alternatives that work better.

Can I pass on a faith that will stick over time? Will the liturgy, like a technology, work properly towards that goal? How effective are our liturgies in the goal of spiritual formation?

What do you think?

Is Transhumanism a Challenge or an Opportunity for the Christian Faith?

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?

The Machine Learning Paradigm: How AI Can Teach Us About God

It is no secret that AI is becoming a growing part of our lives and institutions. There is no shortage of article touting the dangers (and a few times the benefits) of this development. What is less publicized is the very technology that enables the growing adoption of AI, namely Machine Learning (ML). While ML has been around for decades, its flourishing depended on advanced hardware capabilities that have only become available recently. While we tend to focus on Sci-Fi like scenarios of AI, it is Machine Learning that is most likely to revolutionize how we do computing by enabling computers to act more like partners rather than mere servants in the discovery of new knowledge. In this blog, I explain how Machine Learning is a new paradigm for computing and use it as a metaphor to suggest how it can change our view of the divine. Who says technology has nothing to teach religion? Let the skeptics read on.

What is Machine Learning?

Before explaining ML, it is important to understand how computer programming works. At its most basic level, programs (or code) are sets of instructions that tell the computer what to do given certain conditions or inputs from a user. For example, in the WordPress code for this website, there is an instruction to show this blog in the World Wide Web once I click the button “Publish” in my dashboard. All the complexities of putting this text into a platform that can be seen by people all over the world are reduced to lines of code that tell the computer and the server how to do that The user, in this case me, knows nothing of that except that when I click “Publish,” I expect my text to show up in a web address. That is the magic of computer programs.

Continuing on this example, it is important to realize that this program was once written by a human programmer. He or she had to think about the user and its goals and the complexity of making that happen using computer language. The hardware, in this scenario was simply a blind servant that followed the instructions given to it. While we may think of computers as smart machines they are as smart as they are programmed to be. Remove the instructions contained in the code and the computer is just a box of circuits.

Let’s contrast that with the technique of Machine Learning. Consider now that you want to write a program for your computer to play and consistently win an Atari game of Pong (I know, not the best example, but when you are preparing a camp for Middle Schoolers that is the only example that comes to mind). The programming approach would be to play the game yourself many times to learn strategies to win the game. Then, the player would write them down and codify these strategies in a language the computer can understand. She or he would then spend countless hours writing the code that spells out multiple scenarios and what the computer is supposed to do in each one of them. Just writing about it seems exhausting.

Now compare that with an alternative approach in which the computer actually plays the game and maximizes the score in each game based on past playing experiences. After some initial coding, the rest of the work would be incumbent on the computer to play the game millions of time until it reaches a level of competency where it wins consistently. In this case, the human outsources the game playing to the computer and only monitors the machine’s progress. Voila, there is the magic of Machine Learning.

A New Paradigm for Computing

As the example above illustrates, Machine Learning changes the way we do computing. In a programming paradigm, the computer is following detailed instructions from the programmer. In the ML paradigm, the learning and discovery is done by the algorithm itself. The programmer (or data scientist) is there primarily to set the parameters for how the learning will occur as opposed to giving instructions for what the computer is to do. In the first paradigm, the computer is a blind servant following orders. In the second one, the computer is a partner in the process.

There are great advantages to this paradigm. Probably the most impactful one is that now the computer can learn patterns that would be impossible for the human mind to learn. This opens the space to new discoveries that was previously inaccessible when the learning was restricted to the human programmer.

The downside is also obvious. Since the learning is done through the algorithm, it is not always possible to understand why the computer arrived at a certain conclusion. For example, last week I watched the Netflix documentary on the recent triumph of a computer against a human player in the game of Go. It is fascinating and worth watching in its own right. Yet, I found striking that the coders of Alpha Go could not always tell why the computer was making a certain move. At times, the computer seemed delusional to human eyes. There lies the danger: as we transfer the learning process to the machine we may be at the mercy of the algorithm.

A New Paradigm for Religion

How does this relate to religion? Interestingly enough these contrasting paradigms in computing shed light in a religious context for describing the relationship between humans and God. As the foremost AI Pastor Christopher Benek once said: “We are God’s AI.” Following this logic, we can see how of a paradigm of blind obedience to one of partnership can have revolutionary implications for understanding our relationship with the divine. For centuries, the tendency was to see God as the absolute Monarch demanding unquestioning loyalty and unswerving obedience from humans. This paradigm, unfortunately, has also been at the root of many abusive practices of religious leaders. This is especially dangerous when the line between God and the human leader is blurry. In this case, unswerving obedience to God can easily be mistaken by blind obedience to a religious leader.

What if instead, our relationship with God could be described as a partnership? Note that this does not imply an equal partnership. However, it does suggest the interaction between two intelligent beings who have separate wills. What would be like for humanity to take on responsibility for its part in this partnership? What if God is waiting for humanity to do so? The consequences of this shift can be transformative.

Shifting Towards Education: A New Direction for 2018

Happy new year, everybody!

After a hiatus for the holiday season, I am now back to blogging with a renewed focus. For those of you who follow this blog or know me personally, last year was an encouraging beginning as I posted here my musings on the intersection between Theology and Artificial Intelligence. Above all, I’ve been encouraged by the conversation some of the posts have started.

After some reflection over the hiatus, I decided to shift the focus of the blog. As you may know, there are not a lot of voices speaking on this field. So the opportunities for making a contribution are vast. Moreover, I don’t see the topic of AI becoming less important in the coming years. The question I asked myself was how could I best contribute considering my skills, passion and knowledge. Promoting discussion on the topic was a good start but I was not satisfied in just being a thoughtful observer. The best insights often come from those who are immersed in practicing the field they are discussing.

Even as I type there are hundreds of AI startups starting to shape the future we’ll live in. There is a growing group of academics, consultants and enthusiasts speculating about what that would look like. Moreover, there are thousands of Data Scientists currently shaping the future of existing organizations building AI applications that will transform these enterprises for years to come. Eventually, politicians will catch up and start discussing policy and laws to regulate how AI is used.

While all this is happening, I think about my children. Will they have the tools they need to navigate this AI future? Will they be ready not only to survive but also thrive in this uncertain future?

When I look at the educational system they are in, it is clearly not up to the task. While I appreciate the wonderful work teachers do daily all over the world, the problem is systemic. The Western educational system was built in the last century to raise industrial workers. The economy required workers to learn a fixed trade that would last them through their lifetime. Moreover, the academic system is always preparing students for the next level of education. Regardless of whether they pursue a job or continue their studies, a high school degree prepares the student for college, which prepares them for Masters’ work which, except for professional degrees, prepare them for pursuing PhDs. Hence, students are conditioned to excel within the academic “bubble” and have little interaction with the real world of jobs, leadership and service. Aside from a few exceptions, students are expected to figure out on their own how to apply the knowledge they learn into real workplace scenarios. While the system forces students to study separate disciplines, life is lived in multi-disciplinary spaces.

Staying out of the politically-charged discussion of “how to save our schools”, I rather work on how to offer something that will build on what the schools already offer. In my view, STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) education continues to be a challenge even as we have made progress in the past years. The concern I have with the current focus is that it separates these disciplines from humanities. In this way, students are taught only the “how” but rarely the “why” of STEM. This approach only perpetuates an uncritical consumerist relationship with technology, where we never stop to ask why are they being created in the first place and how they benefit humanity. Therefore the challenge is to engage young minds critically with STEM early on, empowering them to become creators with rather than consumers of technology.

While I can write about this frequently on the blog, being a detached analyst is not enough. That is why I am planning to develop actual learning experiences that address this gap. I am currently connecting with partners “glocally” to make that a reality. It will have both a classroom component as well as an online component. Stay tuned for more details.

How will that look like in aitheology.com?

The blog will flow from this journey of becoming an education entrepreneur. In this way, it serves as a platform for reflection, discussion, idea exchange and hopefully challenging some of you to join in this new endeavor. While I will continue to explore the themes of AI and theology, there will be an educational focus both in the topics discussed as well as in the way they are conveyed.

I also recognize that in our age, writing is not the most effective way to spread ideas and engage in conversation. Towards that end, I plan to add podcast in the near future so you can interact with AI theology in new ways. Finally, there will be plenty of opportunities for you to get involved in emerging projects.

I am excited for what this New Year will bring to us. I pray for wisdom and guidance in this new phase and I ask you to pray with me as well (if you are not religious, sending good thoughts would do).

Good News: The World is Getting Better

This week I want to discuss how our perception of the world shapes and guides our decisions about the future. In a previous blog, I discussed the power of narrative and how important that is in constructing reality. In this post, I want to challenge a prevailing perspective of doom that dominates the narrative in airwaves, broadcasts and most of social media. The dominant message is that our present world order is falling into chaos with no hope for redemption. This is not just a problem for large Media corporations that need to prey on fear in order to sell news but it has become the de facto perspective on any conversation about national and/or global affairs.

I want to start by making a simple statement: the world is getting better.

Let me take a step back and propose a new paradigm. What if we look at the globe not from the anecdotal evidence highlighted by media stories but actually more like a CEO looks at his/her company? What would that look like? Working for a large corporation for many years, I spent countless hours preparing presentations for executive leaders so they could understand the state of their business. The story told in these meetings is built on numbers and data. The narrative flows from pre-determined agreed-upon measures of success that allow the leader to see whether their unit is on track or not to meet their goals.

One could say that such view does not tell the whole story. That is indeed true. A company may be doing really well but that may not safeguard all employees from the threat of being laid off. For that employee, a profitable quarter means nothing. However, if the numbers are showing times of distress ahead, the story of many employees will be impacted. If the business goes bankrupt – everybody loses their job. Therefore, regardless of how dry numbers may be, they point to eminent signs of trouble that we must attend to. We ignore them at our own peril.

So, if you are the CEO of the globe, what would be some important performance metrics to look for? Thankfully I found this great blog by Bj Murphy that does exactly that, highlighting the trends around important issues like extreme poverty, wars, life expectancy, child mortality and others. The numbers show an undeniable improvement in all these key measures for the last 50 years. Believe it or not, these measures disprove the adage that “things were better in the olden days”. This is not to say that everything is getting better but such overwhelming data should make us pause to celebrate. Things are getting better in many fronts if we just have the eyes to see them.

Are we happier then? Well, if data is any indication the answer is “no.” In fact, quite the opposite, rates of depression are increasing world-wide. There could be many reasons for that. It is not clear, for example, whether people are simply more depressed or whether now we are able to better diagnose it and hence see an increase. Even allowing for that, this data is a sharp contrast to the one from the paragraph above. At least from these two pieces of data, we can conclude that a better world may not necessarily be a happier world.

Re-imagining the Present for Creating a Better Future

An unsung hero of the advances touted in BJ’s post is the rise of technology and science in the last century. If there has been a positive story, it is how science and technology have improved the quality of life. Yet, one can never forget the technology also brought the atomic bomb to our planet. They themselves could never be the answer for a better world but they have certainly enabled dreamers to make it a reality. This seems to be not only reality but also perception. In a recent Pew research survey, 42% of Americans indicated that technology has made their lives better, by far the biggest factor in a list that included medicine, civil rights and the economy. Technology advancement is one of the few narratives of hope in a sea of depressing storylines.

Here is important to highlight that perception is very relative to where we stand in relation to the past. Recently, white older men in the United States as a cohort have experience rising rates of depression and anxiety. One explanations is the sense that their life conditions have deteriorated compared to their parents. The question is not whether the world is getting better but whether “my” world getting better. This is not particular to the cohort of white older males but to all of us. This question is always asked with a point of reference in mind. Yet, is it possible to celebrate positive change even if our personal universe has deteriorated?

The first step towards imagining a new future is assessing the present from the perspective of the most vulnerable. If the world has indeed improved for them, then there is reason to celebrate. The data above supports this perspective. While there have been losers in recent change and much work is left to be done, the good news is undeniable.

From Tech Consumers to Tech Creators

If technology has made life better, it has also made it more complicated. Any PC user who had to endure using Windows for a while will realize that all the convenience brought by technology comes at a cost in complexity and troubleshooting. I believe part of the problem is that most of us approach technology as demanding consumers. That is, we expect technology to provide a pain-free solution to our problems. This is precisely the message large tech companies want us to believe: technology will solve all our problems and make life easier for everybody. That is often not the case.

To fully harness the benefits of technology we must move from consumers to creators of technology. Last week I was inspired by this story of an 11 year-old girl who invented a water tester to detect water contamination. When interviewed, the girl said she was moved by the story of water contamination in Flint, MI and wanted to do something about it. She exemplifies a true technology creator who took upon herself to solve a problem she cared about. Technology creators do not just use tech for convenience, they leverage it to solve problems. They use their God-given creativity to make the world a better place.

What if we could educate children and young adults to do more of that? What type of world could we build?

An Evangelical Reformation: Changing How We View Scripture

The more I progress on this AI theology journey, the more I realize the need for a re-configuration of our relationship between faith and science. Current status quo does not allow space for a conversation and therefore, forces faith, science and technology as a by product to remain separate. This separation impoverishes all sides.

Hence I was pleasantly surprised to see a recent post from my friend Micah Redding. As Reformation turns 500, Micah and others propose new theses to continue reforming the church in our time. Add your own here. I was especially encouraged by Micah’s thesis number 1:

Christians must abandon the war against science and technology, and embrace them both as profound expressions of the image of God.

I could not agree more and decided to write this blog as a way to flesh out what that would look like in an evangelical context.

First, I have a few words about my own ecclesial location and why it is important to name it here. It is difficult to talk about reformation without having a starting point. The Church is so vast and diverse, and in need of so much change, that what seems like reformation for one group may be very well be what another group does well. That’s why I believe that true reformation will only come through a robust Ecumenical movement. If the first Reformation brought division, I pray the coming one will bring the church tribes together.

With that said, I feel comfortable speaking about what reformation means in an evangelical context. I say that because I can include myself in it and therefore speak of how “we” rather then “they” can change. Ultimately, true reformation can only come with repentance and a willingness to re-visit long-held convictions. If the church now consists of many tribes, the evangelical tribe has some work to do and this thesis reveals one of the many paths of repentance for us.

Evangelicals and the Bible

I am eternally grateful that 500 years ago, Martin Luther picked up what Wycliff and others had started centuries early in liberating Scripture for all of us. While that may not have been Luther’s original intention, inevitably the movement he started spurred an explosion of Bible translations that eventually became available directly to the individual. Till this day, the Bible is the anchor, the guide, the foundation of the Christian faith. It is a book not just to be read but to be experienced on a daily basis. It transcends common literary genres and it is unlike any other book out there. It is not just a religious book but its influence reaches to other areas like Ethics, Law, Government and even Science Fiction.

I could go on the importance of the Bible but my intent here is to identify where we as evangelicals have taken a wrong turn in our view of Scripture. First, let’s look at some history. It is important to note that the evangelical movement in the United States started as a way to find a middle ground between the fundamentalist and mainline currents in North American Protestantism. The first stream believed that discoveries of science that challenged the traditional view of Scripture should be rejected outright and that the church should retreat from engagement with the world into bunkers of ideological purity. The second was working hard to incorporate scientific discoveries even at the expense of Biblical faithfulness. Instead of retreat, mainliners believed in fully accommodating all the changes brought by scientific discovery into the Christianity.

Evangelicals wanted to chart a different course that passed through these two narratives. On the one hand, they were committed to the preserving primacy of the Bible in the Christian faith. On the other hand, they wanted to engage with the new discoveries of science through careful dialogue. In the evangelical mindset, the need to proclaim the gospel trumped self-preservation, even if that meant engaging with disciplines that seem bent on discrediting the validity of Scripture. This was especially true for institution of higher learning that were at the forefront of this ideological battle. Fuller Theological Seminary in California exemplified (and continues to do so) this perspective.

In the last 50 years or so, this evangelical project has decisively tilted towards the fundamentalist current. This is especially true in cultural evangelicalism, which aligned with anti-establishment nationalist political views, having further increased its anti-science stance. As fundamentalist voices dominated airwaves and publication, evangelicalism has taken a shift towards the beginning of the 20th century. This was further exacerbated by the sharp changes in North American cultural attitudes in favor of gay marriage and toleration towards non-Christian religions in the last ten years.

Infallible versus Inerrant

This position was well illustrated in the “infallible versus Inerrant” contrast. Statements of faith mostly pass unnoticed except for theology geeks like myself. However, a choice of words in these documents can speak volumes. In most evangelical statements of faith you will find both adjectives for Scripture. Inerrant is often a code word for a literal view of Scripture. It usually means: “What is in the text is the truth and any questioning of it is suspicious of being a heresy.” Infallible is a more nuanced word that affirms the Bible’s efficacy in matters of faith. That is, the Bible is sufficient for guiding and forming Christian beliefs and spiritual growth. It usually means “the Bible can be trusted as a guide towards salvation and spiritual formation.” The second one allows for questions because it delineates Bible’s role in matters of faith primarily. It does not deny that the Bible may have something to say in spheres beyond faith. Yet, it does not make it a pre-requisite for its validity.

So here is where I think evangelicalism has taken a wrong turn. By opting for a rigid “inerrant” view of the Bible we turned into something that was never intended to be, namely an idol. How so, you may ask? This move started by making any questions or doubts about the content of the Bible off-limits. This was a direct reaction against the rise of biblical criticism, which had certainly gone too far. Yet, we didn’t stop there. In a bid to make the Bible speak to our modern lives, we made it into the solution for every problem, the manual of instructions for life and the arbiter of all truth. In an effort to market the Bible to attract new populations, we stretched, squeezed and re-shaped the text into every conceivable way. Furthermore, we baptized our North-American literalist the only objective way to approach the Bible. What we ended up with was not the infallible text that can lead us into all truth about God and salvation, but a document to support Capitalism, American empire and Zionism. In an attempt to keep the text pure, we made the very mistake we accused Biblical critics of doing: shaping the text to our own image. The Bible became the magic book, the box of promises from which we derive comfort and affirmation for our actions rather than repentance.

Charting a New Course

What would a new course look like? Thankfully, I was able to witness some of that by emerging voices in the evangelical world. Fuller Seminary was probably my first exposure to a new course of holding a high view of Scripture while not holding on to an inerrant view of Scripture. Prior to that, I thought that to let go of inerrancy was the same as letting go of Scripture altogether. Yet, to witness faithful believers who do not take a literal view of the Bible was the beginning to seeing that it is possible to love God, revere Scripture while also honestly examine the claims of history and science. In the journey I discovered faith could live with doubt, devotion could live with inquiry and obedience could live alongside faithful questioning. It is a false choice to have to choose between faith and intellectual inquiry.

Certainly, I am not the first one to say these things. Thankfully, others have paved the way for this view of Scripture. One of the most notable thinkers in this area is Bishop, Scholar and millennial seminarian’s superstar N. T. Wright. For those interested in a robust view of Scripture that is not bound by inerrancy, I recommend his book “Scripture and the Authority of God” as a good beginning point.

In closing, I pray that a reformation within the evangelical segment of the church would look at the Bible anew. It will replace dogma with wonder, rigidity with inquiry and arguments with honesty. This is a necessary requirement if we are to survive and thrive in a world to be upended by emerging technologies. It is not time to put aside Scripture but to remove old skins of interpretation so new wine of imagination can flow.

but just as it is written, “Things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard, And which have not entered the heart of man, All that God has prepared for those who love Him. I Cor 2:9

The word of the Lord, thanks be to God.

Can AI Usher in a New Reformation?

As the 500th anniversary of the Protestant Reformation approaches, I want to offer some thoughts on how emerging technologies like AI will revolutionize the face of Christianity. At first, these two seem mostly disconnected yet this could not be further from the truth. AI and other emerging technologies have the potential to disrupt, re-organize, and re-arrange the institutional church for centuries to come. But I am getting ahead of myself. Let me frame this question by first examining the role of technology in the Reformation 500 years ago

Simply put: without the printing press, there would not have been a Reformation in the early 1500’s Europe. With it, Luther and other Reformers were able to disseminate their ideas quickly, bringing turmoil and political unrest for most of Europe. This technological innovation sped up the process of disseminating new ideas enough to irreversibly change the course of history. Now individuals could own a physical copy of the Bible and that changed everything. Would the Reformation have succeeded without it? It is possible but it certainly would have taken much longer and have looked very different from what it did. The printing press enabled unprecedented access to knowledge that would lead to challenging the Roman Catholic’s claim of truth and usher in new centers of authority not just for religion but for reality itself. Along with the Enlightenment, they would lead to the scientific and technological revolutions of the centuries that followed.

Internet as the Printing Press of the 21st Century

At first glance, one could say that the Internet could play a similar role in our times. Internet extended exponentially the access to knowledge that the printing press had started. It allowed individuals anywhere in the world to access information in a revolutionary way. The individual did not need to own a physical copy anymore but could access the text electronically in real-time. Furthermore, with the increase in bandwidth and the rise of Internet 2.0, the dissemination of information was no longer bound to text alone but could now come with sound and moving image. With the emergence of social media, the process of information and knowledge sharing further increased exponentially since anyone could create and share content in a global platform.

However, it is important to highlight the limitation of the Internet as it exists today. While information is abundant, knowledge is scarce. The content is 10 miles wide but 5 inches deep. Then there are issues with accuracy, false information and simply a lot of triviality. The Internet is not a place for knowledge sharing only but also a place to entertain or simply express one-self. Content is abundant and being created each day but in a very disorganized and fragmented way. It is basically an amalgamation of crowds, for good or for ill.

AI Will Bring Order to the Internet Chaos

This is precisely why I believe AI can be a game changer that can truly harness the power of the Net towards more purposeful aims. How? AI will take Internet to a new-level of effectiveness by organizing and transmitting knowledge more efficiently. Intelligence is about analyzing data, identifying patterns and making decisions. Currently, content in the Internet is a mixture of some information with a lot of noise surrounding it. AI algorithms that can filter out the noise from the real information would be a welcome enhancement to the Net.

This can manifest itself in many fronts. One of them is in search engines where AI can improve the accuracy of a search by not only knowing the topic but also the context of the user. Furthermore, with improvements in translation, someone’s search can transcend the bounds of the user’s search language to capture content in other languages. It can also improve the ability to find content not just in text but sound and video which now is fairly limited. All of these enhancements would greatly increase the accuracy of searches greatly optimizing the process of research and knowledge sharing.

Another front is in machine-human interfaces. AI will revolutionize the relationship between humans and machines, therefore bringing the Internet much closer to our bodies. I have covered this extensively in my blogs about cyborgization. For here, I just want to highlight the fact that AI will move the Net closer to our brain. The culmination of this process is what some have called the Hive Mind. Basically, when our minds are connected to the Internet and can work as one collective consciousness. This is similar to swarms of insects that act in one direction with surprising coordination and purpose. Needless to say, this trend has seismic implications not just to the diffusion of knowledge but even how we experience reality itself.

Some of this is years if not decades down the road. Yet, even the process to move towards intelligent content and a collective consciousness is fairly disruptive on its own to upend governments, businesses and, yes, the church as well.

Glimpses of a New Reformation

How will this AI-enabled Internet facilitate a new reformation in the church? Before answering this question, we must recognize that unlike the 1500’s the Christian church is no longer the center of power and knowledge of Western societies. However, it is yet still a remarkable global hub of influence, especially in the developing world. In a world where political, technological and economic change fragments the legitimacy of all centers of power, the search of meaning becomes all the more salient. Many have found it in the ancient path of the Christian faith a contemporary way to make sense of their world (including the writer of this blog). I say this to qualify that any reformation in the church will have very different consequences than the one 500 years ago by the simple fact that now Christianity is just one of the many centers of influence on any given society. Hence, its effects will be more subtle and more spread out than the original Reformation.

With that said, the Internet is already disrupting the church. Computer Scientist and Researcher Allan Downey, believes the Internet is one of the driving factors in the decline of Christianity in the West. Would an AI-enabled Internet mean the end of the church? I don’t believe so. Yet, it would be naive to think that the church would survive this time without any major changes. The main question is what will the church look like in this new era of turbo-charged, AI-enabled disruption of how we create and share knowledge?

It is very difficult to anticipate all the changes that may come in this scenario. One thing is certain, for Christianity to prosper in this future it must learn to integrate advances of science and technology while also holding on to the century-old traditions of worship, prayer, Scripture reading, proclamation and service. Adapting to change while staying true to its values is the challenge for any institution trying to navigate the coming changes. This is especially true for an institution like the church that has notoriously resisted and combated change in the last centuries. It is time to replace old-wineskins with new ones if we are to receive new wine.

My prayer is that in an age of exponential knowledge creation and sharing, the diverging paths between the Reformation and the Enlightenment will come together in a view of the world that is unafraid of discovery but also filled with divine wonder. For the last two centuries, these currents have diverged and opposed each other. Now it is time to reconcile them. I am not sure exactly what that would look like, but I hope to see a glimpse of it in my lifetime.

How Will AI Accelerate Cyborgization?

In a previous blog, I described how current technology adoption is transforming us into cyborgs. In this blog, I want to show how AI will accelerate and reinforce cyborgization and why this matters. Much has been said about the emergence of AI as the fearsome “other” that is coming to challenge humanity. A much more pressing conversation is how AI will redefine humanity. It is not the robot against us but the robot in us that we need to think about. That is why it is important to understand how AI will accelerate the march toward cyborgization.

Enabling Better Interfaces

AI technologies will speed up the march towards cyborgization by enabling more human-friendly interfaces. This is difficult to imagine now when our users experience is tied to a “QWERTY” keyboard. Also, voice recognition is still at its beginning stages (hence, why I keep on having arguments with Siri because she does not understand what I am saying). Yet, it is not a leap to imagine a world in which we do not type but speak to devices. This is only possible if these machines can hear and understand us. It is only safe if they can recognize who we are either by voice of vision. Last week, Apple launched Iphone X with a visual recognition feature that allows you to unlock the phone by simply looking at the screen. This is a breakthrough step in face recognition. Also, as Amazon, Google and Apple race to develop the leading voice-assistant, speaking to our devices will become more common. As AI improves so will our ability to interact with machines in more human-like manners. This will transform how we use these devices allowing them to play a larger role in our daily lives.

Bringing Order to Digital Chaos

Interfaces are not the only areas enhanced by AI. Another notable area is AI’s ability to bring order to our current digital experience. To illustrate this concept, just think about what would be like to connect your brain directly to your Facebook or Twitter feed. It would result in a major headache driven a by a jumble of unrelated topics, pictures, comments, flashing through your mind. Needless to say that It would be disorienting. This is the state of social media delivery and why extended uses of it can be harmful to our mental health. Now imagine if our digital experience could be organized and filtered by an intelligent agent. Let say, there was an AI-enabled app that could automatically filter and organize what you see based on who you are, your mood and time of day. Wouldn’t that transform your digital experience? This way, AI would not only allow easier interface with devices but also enhance the experience with these devices through learning about us as individuals. It is a daunting to imagine that devices could know our thoughts and feelings but this is no longer a far-fetched idea. We are surely giving away enough data about ourselves so they can do just that. As these devices “know” us better we will also be more willing to use, wear or embed them in our bodies.

Facilitating Life Extension

The third area in which AI will impact the march is life extension. This is possibly the most controversial and promising area that AI technologies can impact us. While on paternity leave in the last five weeks, I had the chance to observe our current healthcare system. I am grateful for the care we received through medical interventions and advice as we welcome our son to the world. Yet, it was also clear how rudimentary our health care is. We currently rely on painfully invasive tests, disconnected systems, fragmented knowledge and healthcare worker memories for our medical data. No wonder we are running into so many problems in this area. If we could just improve how we collect, store and analyze health data we could advance the quality of care significantly. To do that would require wearing or embedding sensors in our body for live monitoring and data collection. AI models could analyze the data coming from these sensors and translate them into individualized care plans. That is, medical care that is tailored to your bodies specific genetic and real-time conditions. Moreover, it allows for building predictive models to estimate lifespan. The hope is that those models would not only tell us how long we will live but also uncover ways we can prolong that lifespan.

How Will These Advances Move Us Toward Cyborgization?

If it becomes easier to communicate with devices, it is also easier to involve them in all aspects of our lives. The movie Her explores this trend by imagining a world where humans develop romantic relationships with their digital assistants. Here, I want to suggest it could also lead to making these devices indispensable to our bodies. In short, they would culminate into full-blown auxiliary brains. That is, currently from what we know, our brain has no “hard drive” that stores memories. The brain structure itself is the “memories”. However, if as interface advances from hearing our voice to actually to hearing our thoughts, then it could become an embedded hard drive. This hard drive then could store all the information coming from our senses. With the technology already being developed in intelligent agents, these auxiliary brains would not only store data but also organize, filter and prompt it based on what it learns from us. Moreover, it would benefit from body sensors and connection to advanced medical data to possibly extend our lifespans. Sci-fi literature already explores scenarios with these possibilities. For now, it suffice it to say that our mobile phones are the first generation of our auxiliary brains.

Are we ready to move into enhanced humanity? With the acceleration made possible by Artificial Intelligence, this reality may be here sooner than you think. It would be naive to simply embrace it uncritically or reject it outrightly. The main issue is not IF but HOW this will happen.

Are we willing to embrace the opportunity while also recognizing the dangers of an enhanced humanity?

Are we ready to become responsible cyborgs?

Confronting The March Towards Cyborgization

Science fiction cyborgs are scary. They make me wonder if we would ever co-exist with such beings in real life. Well, if you are looking for cyborgs you might as well start looking at the mirror. Our race to adopt the latest technologies is slowly but surely turning all of us into these fearsome creatures. Cyborgization is upon us whether we like it or not.

It this good, bad? Well, let me describe the trends and then we can discuss it. We’ll never wrestle with a reality that we do not name it first. As the adage goes: “the first step to healing is admitting we have a problem.”

Don’t believe me. Consider the following:

Last week Apple just announced that is making the iWatch less dependent on the iPhone. That means soon you’ll get most of the iPhone functionality in the iWatch. Elon Musk is talking about sending nano transmitters into our blood flow. In Wisconsin, a company is experimenting with just that, paying employees to implant chips in their hands. These are just a few examples of “body hacking”, where people are pushing further the envelope of fusing technology with our bodies. If technology conglomerates have their way, we are moving from buying devices we use to adding them to our bodies. The trend can be depicted as such:

desktop>>laptop>>tablet>>smart phone>>wearable device>>implant

Certainly, not everybody will sign up for implants. Yet, the fact that we now already have people willing to experiment with implants shows how far we have progressed in the spectrum above. Thirty years ago only a few of us owned desktop computers in our homes. Last year, the number of smart phones in the world surpassed 2 billion, just shy of 30% of the world population. The march towards cyborgization is in full-speed.

Cyborgs in Action: Sousveillance

So what would a world with cyborgs look like? What would we do with our extended bodies?

The events of Charlottesville this weekend reminded us of the evil undercurrents of racism that still purveys our culture.

[Here I must stop to make a few comments. Racism is goes against everything Christianity stands for. To say otherwise or to pretend there is equivalency on both sides betrays who we are. My thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families. I also pray that we are able to come together to confront this evil in our midst.]

Curiously, the march and its aftermath also became a notable experiment in Sousveillance. Don’t know what that means, no worries. I just learned about it this week. Sousveillance is the fancy name for the growing phenomenon where people use their phones to record real-life events.

While this has been happening for a while, the novelty was the crowdsourced attempts to identify members of the march through social media. Basically, somebody recorded the faces of white supremacists marchers and posted their faces in twitter asking users to recognize and identify the individuals. As a result, one of the marchers lost his job after being outed in this social media driven act of sousveillance. Such development would not have been possible without the advent of devices that allow us to film and share images at ease.

This is an example of things to come. Ordinary individuals, leveraging their body extension tools to do things that were not possible otherwise. On the one hand this could lead to quicker apprehension of criminals in both identifying as well as providing physical evidence of their crimes. On the other hand this could quickly lead to an augmented version of mob mentality, where people are quickly branded guilty and made to pay for crimes they did not commit.While many are weary of government surveillance, citizen sousveillance can offer a welcome check. This is just one application of how cyborgization can change our world.

Framing the Conversation

So maybe becoming cyborgs is not such a bad thing. However, before dismissing or embracing this trend, it is important to ask a few questions. Here are some that come to mind.

Who is driving the march and who benefits most from it?

How does it help the most vulnerable?

How does it affect human relationships?

How do these devices enhance or diminish our humanity?

My biggest concern is not how fast these technological extensions are being adopted but how is it done. At this point, most of it is driven through marketing by large technology conglomerates telling us that we must adopt the latest gadget or else become irrelevant. The subtle message is not just that our current gadgets are outdated but that we ourselves are becoming useless.

Certainly marketing of artificial needs should not be the main driver for adopting these technologies. Instead, their adoption should undergo a deliberate process in which the questions listed above are at the forefront. Technology should never be an end to itself but a means to life enriching goals. We need to evolve from technology consumers to thoughtful agents that leverage technology for human flourishing.

At a personal level, a simple question would be: does this device improve my quality of life or not? If it does not, then it may be time to re-think its usage.

Category: Imagination