Principles of God’s word and the coming technology Revolution

– What’s up guys. Today is May 16, 2017. This is the and I wanna talk to you about expectations and holding our expectations too tightly. The Pharisees came to Jesus, they said, by what authority are you doing these things. And he said, I’ll tell you, if you answer one question. Was John the Baptist, what he’s doing, is it from God or human origin? Now look what happens. They couldn’t make up their mind, they couldn’t give an answer, because if they said of human origin, they feared the crowd, if they said if they said of God, he’d say, we’ll why didn’t you believe? So here’s the issue. They were man pleasers. They were of the external. They were of these expectations derived out of kind of proof or out of, out of an external. That’s the only way I can describe it. And Jesus had a principle. And that’s what we’re gonna talk about is this principle that he doesn’t reveal himself if we get too dogmatic. If we get too dogmatic, the nature of the Christ, the nature of the bridge won’t reveal himself to us. So that’s not a good thing if we get dogmatic in our religion, like even Fundamentalist Christians today, they hold on tight, they say God is going to reveal himself in this way or that way, especially like end time stuff. If you watch my blog at all you know how I feel about end times theology. But he doesn’t reveal himself the nature of God, this principle, is that he almost mandates that we let go to enter in, that we let go of our preconceptions. So looking at artificial intelligence and looking at the future coming of what’s gonna happen, you know, I wanna just speak against fear, you know, speak against this idea that, that God isn’t using technology, and you know, speak against, you know, I look at a lot of, like I just watched this show last night it’s like the Million Year something or other from National Geographic, and it’s neat to see, you know after you’ve been looking at this stuff, I have personally since like 11, or 2011 or 12, five years, and it’s neat to see that there’s now starting to become some mainstream media talking about some of these ideas of merging with computers. That’s cool. So now the church is going to have to deal with this, right? Because it’s gonna happen, that’s what’s going on. But you know, I think that we as a church need to look at how this integrates with the Word, look at how these ideas integrate, and I think that we need to step back. First off, let me just interject. In light of what’s happening, it’s not, I think it’s okay for us to say, hey, we didn’t have the full picture, we were guessing, or we were trying to interpret scripture according to the stuff that we had, and now that as we’re learning more we’re starting to see that maybe this clippity cloppity Jesus coming in the clouds riding on a horse, while the same principle applies, maybe the way that we thought that was gonna happen isn’t actually how it’s gonna happen. You know, most specifically, I don’t like the idea of a specific point where Jesus like comes back and like makes everybody feel horrible, you know like who didn’t believe in Him or something. Because people who don’t believe in Him feel horrible right now. Right? I mean they don’t, apart from Christ, we can do nothing, he is the bridge to the eternal. And so for us as believers to say, oh your day is coming, a day of reckoning is coming, that’s coming back on ourself, because the bottom line is it’s one day. Like there is not ever been more than one single day. You know I mean, the sun is out here, the Earth is here. It’s always beaming. I mean our Earth spins, but there’s just one single day ever. You know, as long as it’s called today. And so ultimately, oh gosh, I got on a rabbit trail. I just think that we really need to relook at these principles, you know, like a principle of the idea you know, what if artificial intelligence takes over? Man look, as Christians we gotta go back to the Word and say well look, everything that’s said in the darkness will get proclaimed on the rooftops. So what does that mean? That means that if an AI says something to another AI, it’s gonna get shared. We’re gonna merge into that situation I would suspect, the principles of God are gonna stay the principles of God. Even if we recreate ourselves into AI and AI starts recreating itself. God’s word is gonna continue to be God’s word and we’re gonna understand it more fully, Hallelujah, especially when we connect and we can think of the whole word at once. And I know to scientists they may feel like what is that guy talking about, why is he still holding on, doesn’t this just prove God doesn’t exist? No, not at all. I think it’s beautiful. I think that the creator of the universe is helping us to understand more and more and more. But you know even this idea with Jesus, you know, this principle, Jesus, going back to the beginning, Jesus won’t reveal himself to us unless we hold things very loosely. We have to have a strong conscience as believers and if you know, watch any of my blogs, it all starts with where, who we believe that we are. You know, who we believe that we are. Do we believe that we’re valuable? Do we believe we’re precious treasures to God? Do we believe we’re made in his image and that we actually have worth? And any measurement that comes from the flesh is a testimony of death, it’s a testimony of, you know if I measure anything from what I can see, it’s a measurement that is gonna end up in death because it’s a crumbling measurement. Whereas if I measure something in faith and spirit, it’s a measurement of eternal. And that’s where we’re going with computers. And so ultimately, you know, when I look at this, going back to this show I saw last night, which is a neat show, ultimately Christians, we don’t have to fear. There’s no fear. God is chasing fear out. The more that we connect, the more we’re gonna know each other and the more, more than anything, the more the word is gonna stand, which calls us love, that calls us valuable, that calls us worthy, you know, because He calls us worthy, and when we believe in that and stop looking at the flesh and we know in part, we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, which is coming, we’re gonna understand. We’re gonna understand our worth, we’re gonna be able to understand more clearly who he calls us, our minds are gonna be renewed. The global mind is gonna be renewed. You know like, ultimately, like when you look at a principle of, it’s almost like game theory, when you play out whether a divided word stands versus a word of faith that speaks hope into your future, the one that speaks hope into your future stands. The one that’s based out of the flesh goes away as time moves past that point. And so anyway, all of that being said, getting a call there. Bottom line is I think that we need to back up as Christians from a Fundamentalist preconceived notion of holding on tightly. I think we need to stop and say, hey, maybe we need to relook at some of the preconceived notions that we had about the second coming of Christ and maybe rethink our ideas with technology. We’re not worshiping technology in the same way that we don’t worship a scalpel. The scalpel isn’t God, but by goodness it sure helps perform operations that help save lives. It’s not God, it’s a tool that God gave us. And same with technology. It’s gonna be a tool that God gives us to help us understand who he is and in the same exponential way that a scalpel does a little bit and does a lot more than like a rock, if you were trying to perform an operation with that, how much more is integrated technology into our system, into our minds, gonna help us understand our identity, heal our bodies, and bring God’s blessing. So that’s it, you’re loved and valuable, today is May 16, 2017 and this was the Okay God bless you guys, you are loved and valuable and in case, just as a side note, stay disciplined in that. Don’t be looking at the flesh, and in case you’re tempted to look, continue, look at James chapter one, I think it’s 19 through 23, and combine that with Hebrews chapter 12, the first section, and be disciplined with who you really are looking into the mirror to understand your true identity. He calls you loved and valuable. God bless, bye bye.

The age of spiritual machines, Jesus being seen in technology

– The spirit is willing but the flesh is week. My name’s Mark, this is May 6th, with Just got done working out, and I was thinking about the idea of what computers are doing. Ray Kurzweil talking about the age of spiritual machines. These machines and the work that they’re doing, are really, computers are really a spiritual job. It’s a job of recognizing intent. So when we speak, speech to text technology recognizes the intent behind what we’re trying to say. And, as the layers of abstraction get deeper and deep er, of course if you watch any of my videos, you know that I think eventually technology is gonna be able to explain the heart of God to us. But it just really is interesting, the entire, when you zoom out and look at the entire trajectory of where technology is taking us, I just look at the Old Testament, being a very outward expression and it says, I don’t know where it says it in the Bible, but it says first, the flesh and then the spirit. So like we’re born in the flesh, but then we’re reborn in the spirit, and you know like, our flesh grows up, and then our spirit grows up. And the Old Testament was all external law, and now the New Testament is spiritual, internal, the law written on our hearts. And so I see that same pattern with like, the age of industrial, and the age of external, and now we’re entering into the age of the internal, more of a spiritual issue. And I don’t know, I am looking at this pattern, and seeing similar, not even similarities, it’s almost an exact mirroring. First the external, then the internal. And I mean it’s really interesting because, you know Elon Musk and lot of those guys talk about, would it be possible that we’ll completely transcend our bodies, and go, like Ray talks about a full out transcendence and entering into virtual worlds. Boy that may very well be possible. Anyway, I guess one of the most exciting things about, about all of this, is the connection that’s gonna happen when the flesh is taken out of the picture. Right now, the flesh hides a lot of intent of the heart. It’s very doppy, it’s a very slow communicator. It’s hard to transmit a message from my heart to your heart, because we have to go through this voice, through the air, through, thankfully we have the technology bringing this message to you. But it’s just gonna be such a good day, when we can think directly to each other, with that bridging that gap, between having to move our message through the flesh, at like whatever it is, a 56K modem, you know soundbites are so slow. And, it’s interesting because the spirit behind things, is gonna be transmitted so much easier. And the heart behind things. You know, honestly the thing that is so exciting to me, is abortion will go away. When we can feel a fetus getting cut apart, that won’t happen anymore. People won’t stand for it. All sorts of sin issues that are unhealthy for people, are gonna go away. And, I don’t know, I’m excited about it. And perhaps even issues that we think are sin, may not become so important. You know, there’s a guy named Howard Storm, who I just absolutely love, he wrote this book, My Descent Into Death. And where he says he had a near death experience, and he met Jesus, and met people in Heaven. Essentially, he died as an atheist, came back as a Christian. One thing that he said that was so neat, was he said, that God really was a lot less concerned about our sexuality, than we have made it. Even for that matter, it’s really interesting, the perversion in sexuality, because really what you’re talking about is two people coming together and birthing a new thing, which is kind of the pattern of taking two different identities, and putting it together and birthing off a separate thing, which is like a creation pattern. And how, in our world, if you were gonna subscribe to the Christian philosophy or mindset, that has been completely perverted, you know with porn, and all sorts of stuff like that. And you know, it was just a real interesting perspective that he said, He’s just a lot less concerned with that, I think in the flesh probably. More concerned with how we are birthing, he didn’t say this, but I would suspect, that it would mean that God is more concerned with how we’re birthing each other, in the spirit. Like, if I’m gonna identify, if I’m gonna interact with you, and whether the interaction between you and I births something good, or births something negative. And so that’s why I’m always talking about, hey you’re a precious treasure. You know, when I identify myself, I want to identify myself with how God sees me. And then I want to use that measure against you, and I know that measure gets used against me. Total sidetrack, anyway the spirit behind things is what is so exciting. Specifically, that eventually I think technology is, where we’re going, is the spirit is going to be measured better, maybe not in full, because the spirit, He gives the spirit without limit, but our intent behind things, well be less able to be hidden. And the neat thing is, what will stand, more than anything above all else is this. Here’s one of the neatest messages, I haven’t spoke much about this. When you look at crooks, or people who don’t know who they are, and people who are broken, they backbite, they hurt each other, they speak death over each other. That entire message continues to crumble. When someone knows who they are, and they believe, hey I’m made perfect and righteous because the perfection in Christ, and because, something other than me speaks, I’m worthy, and he’s worthy so he speaks it over me, and I’m worthy. That word will stand. So, if I interact with you, and I say, hey you’re blessed, you’re valuable, why? Because Christ says so. That word stands. Where, as if another person comes in interaction with someone else, and they say, oh you stink, you’re horrible, you’re whatever, that entire word crumbles. It crumbles and goes away. So the thing, even the scientists may say, oh God doesn’t exist and God can’t be proven, and it’s so foolish to believe in religion. You know, the funny thing about that, is there’s just no need to get upset about that, because there’s no proof in it. But the proof will be, even though you can’t say that, is that the positive word will stand. And God’s word and love for them, will continue. And hopefully they’ll open their eyes. Hopefully they’ll open their eyes to the truth about who they are. And that is the neatest thing. See, because if, as a Christian if they get, if Christians get all offended with a word that comes out, and says, oh who’s your God? Your God is. Look, bottom line is we just have to subscribe to who we really are. And that word, as it enters into the global brand, the word of the scoffer will be shut down. The word of the scoffer is a bully. It’s a bully, it’s I’m better and you suck. That word, no one tolerates. They hate it. People hate the spirit behind that. God has put it in all of our hearts to like more an encouraging word. That’s a really neat thing, because we can argue all day long about the flesh, right? But the flesh is weak, right? The flesh is weak. See that’s how we bring it all the way back around. The flesh is weak, it crumbles. So we can argue all day long about the science and the details, but all that’s gonna go away. Where we’re heading is to a spiritual place, and that spiritual place, God says the Kingdom of Heaven, will move like yeast through the whole lump of dough. And I see that, as a good word in the brain, neuron to neuron, transmitting, like a lump of dough. Yeast kind of multiplies, it goes through the lump of dough, and I see that same pattern as like, a brain, and firing through and making multiple references through the brain, redundancies if you will, and it just looks like the same pattern to me. So, that word stands, a negative word won’t stand. So anytime you come up to someone, and first off you have to get it in you, first off you have to understand, you’re loved and you’re valuable. Boy, doesn’t every single one of my messages come back to this? Because it’s the only thing that’s important. The only thing that’s important is identity. Identity, identity, identity. It’s the basis for all interactions in logic, when you know what the objects are. And when you know, that with your mouth you proclaim and profess, you’re worthy Jesus, you’re holy Jesus, well the measure you used gets used against you, because he says you’re worthy, and you’re holy in me. And then that word spreads like yeast, and that’s how Jesus loves, it’s gonna multiply in the spirit through computers, and let people know who they were. I wonder, if you got to the end of this message, blessings to you. Okay, that’s it, God bless you, you all take it easy, bye bye.

The Internet Helping To Bring Hope

Right now we are seeing the rudimentary functionality of the gospel of Christ move through the net.    The job of bringing people good news is done manually.  One day, Artificial Intelligence will do this work for us.

One day I believe technology will help us to understand who we are and how God see’s us.

How to create rat brain into the cloud

This is SOOO neat!

The Pattern of This World

Do not be conformed to the pattern of this world. My name is Mark. Today is April 28th, and this is an encouraging word for you about your identity, and who you are. So I just got done working out, and I was thinking about that verse, Romans 12:2, do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed through the renewing of your mind. Then you’ll be able to test and approve what God’s will is, his good pleasing, and perfect will. So I was thinking. Me and my kids just got done working out. And I was thinking, wanting to encourage them and who they really are. That they are precious, and they are valuable. And I was thinking about Jesus’ death. And we talked a couple weeks ago in church about how the enemy, when Jesus went to be tempted by the devil, the enemy, three times, said if you are the son of God, if you are the son of God, if you are the son of God. Three separate times Jesus got tempted, and three separate times he did not respond in the flesh, according to the enemy’s demand of him. And look at the pattern here. He said, I listen to my father, and I do the will of my father. I’m listening to what he tells me to do, and I do it. So this is like father of the unseen, right. And so what happened when you back up, and you look at the entire process. Jesus got, for your viewpoint, Jesus got accused of the world, refused to respond up to the point of death, and then what happened? What happened was after that point, where he actually died, God raised up a new life. A new him. That’s the point that I want to say to you. When we refuse in this world to say, I’m not made, or to agree with the world. When we refuse to agree with them, and we decide I’m not made by this world. So someone says, who do you think you are, let’s prove it, come on, gimme, gimme, gimme, perform one way or another, whatever it is. How rich are you? How successful are you? What kind of car do you drive? What kind of, how good looking are you? How good looking is your soul mate, or whatever? All of these temptations. How nice is your house? How much money do you have? When we respond to that, we respond in kind. Even though the verse said, like Jesus said, let the dead bury their own dead, right. So this world, this shell, this exterior, has a way of doing things. And he’s saying leave that, leave it. And instead, be renewed, let ’em kill ya, continue to understand who you really are spiritually. That you’re valuable spiritually, it’s important. And what happens is that when we decide, hey, I’m over it. That’s not me. I’m not responding to what you say. I’m not responding to your, I’m not gonna dance for you. I’m not gonna put on a show for you. And when we decide to die to that, and let them accuse us, but not respond, then what happens is we get strong inside. We decide to listen to God saying, hey, you’re valuable, you’re loved, you’re precious, okay? And what happens is our mind gets renewed, and we become, God raises to life, a new person. Because the fact is, but you can’t prove it, is that you are loved and valuable. Has nothing to do with what you do. It has to do with what God spoke in to existence because he does not make garbage, okay? He makes valuable, precious entities. Uh oh, like this little entity. What? What’s going on, shaky camera? Come here. You’re gonna finish up my video, come here. Come here.

– Hey dad.

– Look at that little precious entity. Hey, you know you’re a precious treasure? Do you know you’re loved and valuable? Okay, say to everybody, say I’m loved and valuable.

– I’m loved and valuable.

– Yes you are. Okay, say bye everybody.

– Bye everybody.

– That’s it for you guys are loved and valuable, too. Your heavenly father speaks it over you. You guys take it easy.

Ghost in the Cloud Transhumanism’s simulation theology, by MEGHAN O’GIEBLYN

I just read a great article (below): Ghost in the Cloud Transhumanism’s simulation theology,  by MEGHAN O’GIEBLYN that was published on N+1.


I DO PLAN TO BRING BACK MY FATHER,” Ray Kurzweil says. He is standing in the anemic light of a storage unit, his frame dwarfed by towers of cardboard boxes and oblong plastic bins. He wears tinted eyeglasses. He is in his early sixties, but something about the light or his posture, his paunch protruding over his beltline, makes him seem older. Kurzweil is now a director of engineering at Google, but this documentary was filmed in 2009, back when it was still possible to regard him as a lone visionary with eccentric ideas about the future. The boxes in the storage unit contain the remnants of his father’s life: photographs, letters, newspaper clippings, and financial documents. For decades, he has been compiling these artifacts and storing them in this sepulcher he maintains near his house in Newton, Massachusetts. He takes out a notebook filled with his father’s handwriting and shows it to the camera. His father passed away in 1970, but Kurzweil believes that, one day, artificial intelligence will be able to use the memorabilia, along with DNA samples, to resurrect him. “People do live on in our memories, and in the creative works they leave behind,” he muses, “so we can gather up all those vibrations and bring them back, I believe.”

Technology, Kurzweil has conceded, is still a long way from bringing back the dead. His only hope of seeing his father resurrected is to live to see the Singularitythe moment when computing power reaches an “intelligence explosion.” At this point, according to transhumanists such as Kurzweil, people who are merged with this technology will undergo a radical transformation. They will become posthuman: immortal, limitless, changed beyond recognition. Kurzweil predicts this will happen by the year 2045. Unlike his father, he, along with those of us who are lucky enough to survive into the middle of this century, will achieve immortality without ever tasting death.

But perhaps the Apostle Paul put it more poetically: “We will not all sleep, but we shall all be changed.”

I FIRST READ KURZWEIL’S 1999 book, The Age of Spiritual Machines, in 2006, a few years after I dropped out of Bible school and stopped believing in God. I was living alone in Chicago’s southern industrial sector and working nights as a cocktail waitress. I was not well. Beyond the people I worked with, I spoke to almost no one. I clocked out at three each morning, went to after-hours bars, and came home on the first train of the morning, my head pressed against the window so as to avoid the specter of my reflection appearing and disappearing in the blackened glass. When I was not working, or drinking, time slipped away from me. The hours before my shifts were a wash of benzo breakfasts and listless afternoons spent at the kitchen window, watching seagulls circle the landfill and men hustling dollys up and down the docks of an electrical plant.

At Bible school, I had studied a branch of dispensational theology that divided all of history into successive stages by which God revealed his truth: the Dispensation of Innocence, the Dispensation of Conscience, the Dispensation of Government... We were told we were living in the Dispensation of Grace, the penultimate era, which precedes that glorious culmination, the Millennial Kingdom, when the clouds part and Christ returns and life is altered beyond comprehension. But I no longer believed in this future. More than the death of God, I was mourning the dissolution of this teleological narrative, which envisioned all of history as an arc bending assuredly toward a moment of final redemption. It was a loss that had fractured even my subjective experience of time. My hours had become non-hours. Days seemed to unravel and circle back on themselves.

The Kurzweil book belonged to a bartender at the jazz club where I worked. He was a physics student who whistled Steely Dan songs while counting his register and constantly jotted equations on the backs of cocktail napkins. He lent me the book a couple of weeks after I’d seen him reading it and askedmore out of boredom than genuine curiositywhat it was about. (“Computers,” he’d replied, after an unnaturally long pause.) I read the first pages on the train home from work, in the gray and spectral hours before dawn. “The twenty-first century will be different,” Kurzweil wrote. “The human species, along with the computational technology it created, will be able to solve age-old problems... and will be in a position to change the nature of mortality in a postbiological future.”

Kurzweil had his own historical narrative. He divided all of evolution into successive epochs: the Epoch of Physics and Chemistry, the Epoch of Biology, the Epoch of Brains. We were living in the fifth epoch, when human intelligence begins to merge with technology. Soon we would reach the Singularity, the point at which we would be transformed into what Kurzweil called Spiritual Machines. We would transfer or “resurrect” our minds onto supercomputers, allowing us to live forever. Our bodies would become incorruptible, immune to disease and decay, and we would acquire knowledge by uploading it to our brains. Nanotechnology would allow us to remake Earth into a terrestrial paradise, and then we would migrate to space, terraforming other planets. Our powers, in short, would be limitless.

It’s difficult to account for the totemic power I ascribed to the book. Its cover was made from some kind of metallic material that shimmered with unexpected colors when it caught the light. I carried it with me everywhere, tucked in the recesses of my backpack, though I was paranoid about being seen with it in public. It seemed to me a work of alchemy or a secret gospel. It’s strange, in retrospect, that I was not more skeptical of these promises. I’d grown up in the kind of millenarian sect of Christianity where pastors were always throwing out new dates for the Rapture. But Kurzweil’s prophecies seemed different because they were bolstered by science. Moore’s Law held that computer processing power doubled every two years, meaning that technology was developing at an exponential rate. Thirty years ago, a computer chip contained 3,500 transistors. Today it has more than one billion. By 2045, the technology would be inside our bodies and the arc of progress would curve into a vertical line.

Many transhumanists like Kurzweil contend that they are carrying on the legacy of the Enlightenmentthat theirs is a philosophy grounded in reason and empiricism, even if they do lapse occasionally into metaphysical language about “transcendence” and “eternal life.” As I read more about the movement, I learned that most transhumanists are atheists who, if they engage at all with monotheistic faith, defer to the familiar antagonisms between science and religion. Many regard Christianity in particular with hostility and argue that Christians are the greatest obstacle to the implementation of their ideas. In his novel, The Transhumanist Wager (2013), Zoltan Istvan, the founder of the Transhumanist political party, imagines Christians will be the ones to oppose the coming cybernetic revolution. Few Christians have shown much interest in transhumanism (or even awareness of it), but the religious right’s record of opposing stem-cell research and genetic engineering suggests it would resist technological modifications to the body. “The greatest threat to humanity’s continuing evolution,” writes transhumanist Simon Young, “is theistic opposition to Superbiology in the name of a belief system based on blind faith in the absence of evidence.”

THOUGH FEW TRANSHUMANISTS would likely admit it, their theories about the future are a secular outgrowth of Christian eschatology. The word transhuman first appeared not in a work of science or technology but in Henry Francis Carey’s 1814 translation of Dante’s Paradiso, the final book of the Divine Comedy. Dante has completed his journey through Paradise and is ascending into the spheres of heaven when his human flesh is suddenly transformed. He is vague about the nature of his new body. In fact, the metamorphosis leaves the poet, who has hardly paused for breath over the span of some sixty cantos, speechless. “Words may not tell of that transhuman change.”

Dante, in this passage, is dramatizing the resurrection, the moment when, according to Christian prophecies, the dead will rise from their graves and the living will be granted immortal flesh. There is a common misunderstanding today that the Christian’s soul is supposed to fly up to heaven after death, but the resurrection described in the New Testament is a mass, onetime eschatological event. For centuries, Christians believed that everyone who had ever died was being held in their graves in a state of suspended animation, waiting to be resuscitated on the Day of Resurrection. The apostle Paulwho believed he would live to see the daydescribes it as the moment when God “will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body.” Much later, Augustine meditated on the “universal knowledge” that would be available to resurrected man: “Think how great, how beautiful, how certain, how unerring, how easily acquired this knowledge then will be.” According to the prophecies, Earth itself would be “resurrected,” returned to its prelapsarian state. The curses of the falldeath and degenerationwould be reversed and all would be permitted to eat from the tree of life, granting immortality.

The vast majority of Christians throughout the ages have believed these prophecies would happen supernaturally. God would bring them about, when the time came. But since the medieval period, there has also persisted a tradition of Christians who believed that humanity could enact the resurrection through material means: namely, through science and technology. The first efforts of this sort were taken up by alchemists. Roger Bacon, a 13th-century friar who is often considered the first Western scientist, tried to develop an elixir of life that would mimic the effects of the resurrection as described in Paul’s epistles. The potion would make humans “immortal” and “uncorrupted,” granting them the four dowries that would infuse the resurrected body: claritas (luminosity), agilitas (travel at the speed of thought), subtilitas (the ability to pass through physical matter), and impassibilitas (strength and freedom from suffering).

The Enlightenment failed to eradicate projects of this sort. If anything, modern science provided more varied and creative ways for Christians to envision these prophecies. In the late 19th century, a Russian Orthodox ascetic named Nikolai Fedorov was inspired by Darwinism to argue that humans could direct their own evolution to bring about the resurrection. Up to this point, natural selection had been a random phenomenon, but now, thanks to technology, humans could intervene in this process. “Our body,” as he put it, “will be our business.” He suggested that the central task of humanity should be resurrecting everyone who had ever died. Calling on biblical prophecies, he wrote: “This day will be divine, awesome, but not miraculous, for resurrection will be a task not of miracle but of knowledge and common labor.” He speculated that technology could be harnessed to return Earth to its Edenic state. Space travel was also necessary, since as Earth became more and more populated by the resurrected dead, we would have to inhabit other planets.

Fedorov had ideas about how science could enact the resurrection, but the details were opaque. The universe, he mused, was full of “dust” that had been left behind by our ancestors, and one day scientists would be able to gather up this dust to reconstruct the departed. Another option he floated was hereditary resurrection: sons and daughters could use their bodies to resurrect their parents, and the parents, once reborn, could bring back their own parents. Despite the archaic wording, it’s difficult to ignore the prescience underlying these ideas. Ancestral “dust” anticipates the discovery of DNA. Hereditary resurrection prefigures genetic cloning.

This theory was carried into the 20th century by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, a French Jesuit priest and paleontologist who, like Fedorov, believed that evolution would lead to the Kingdom of God. In 1949, Teilhard proposed that in the future all machines would be linked to a vast global network that would allow human minds to merge. Over time, this unification of consciousness would lead to an intelligence explosionthe Omega Pointenabling humanity to “break through the material framework of Time and Space” and merge seamlessly with the divine. The Omega Point is an obvious precursor to Kurzweil’s Singularity, but in Teilhard’s mind, it was how the biblical resurrection would take place. Christ was guiding evolution toward a state of glorification so that humanity could finally merge with God in eternal perfection. By this point, humans would no longer be human. Perhaps the priest had Dante in mind when he described these beings as “some sort of Trans-Human at the ultimate heart of things.”

Transhumanists have acknowledged Teilhard and Fedorov as forerunners of their movement, but the religious context of their ideas is rarely mentioned. Most histories of the movement attribute the first use of the term transhumanism to Julian Huxley, the British eugenicist and close friend of Teilhard’s who, in the 1950s, expanded on many of the priest’s ideas in his own writingswith one key exception. Huxley, a secular humanist, believed that Teilhard’s visions need not be grounded in any larger religious narrative. In 1951, he gave a lecture that proposed a nonreligious version of the priest’s ideas. “Such a broad philosophy,” he wrote, “might perhaps be called, not Humanism, because that has certain unsatisfactory connotations, but Transhumanism. It is the idea of humanity attempting to overcome its limitations and to arrive at fuller fruition.”

The contemporary iteration of the movement arose in San Francisco in the late 1980s among a band of tech-industry people with a libertarian streak. They initially called themselves Extropians and communicated through newsletters and at annual conferences. Kurzweil was one of the first major thinkers to bring these ideas into the mainstream and legitimize them for a wider audience. His ascent in 2012 to a director of engineering position at Google, heralded, for many, a symbolic merger between transhumanist philosophy and the clout of major technological enterprise. Transhumanists today wield enormous power in Silicon Valleyentrepreneurs such as Elon Musk and Peter Thiel identify as believerswhere they have founded think tanks like Singularity University and the Future of Humanity Institute. The ideas proposed by the pioneers of the movement are no longer abstract theoretical musings but are being embedded into emerging technologies at places like Google, Apple, Tesla, and SpaceX.

LOSING FAITH IN GOD in the 21st century is an anachronistic experience. You end up contending with the kinds of things the West dealt with more than a hundred years ago: materialism, the end of history, the death of the soul. During the early years of my faithlessness, I read a lot of existentialist novels, filling their margins with empathetic exclamation points. “It seems to me sometimes that I do not really exist, but I merely imagine I exist,” muses the protagonist of André Gide’s The Counterfeiters. “The thing that I have the greatest difficulty in believing in, is my own reality.” When I think back on that period of my life, what I recall most viscerally is an unnamable sense of dreadan anxiety that would appear without warning and expressed itself most frequently on the landscape of my body. There were days I woke in a panic, certain that I’d lost some essential part of myself in the fume of a blackout, and would work my fingers across my nose, my lips, my eyebrows, and my ears until I assured myself that everything was intact. My body had become strange to me; it seemed insubstantial. I went out of my way to avoid subway grates because I believed I could slip through them. One morning, on the train home from work, I became convinced that my flesh was melting into the seat.

At the time, I would have insisted that my rituals of self-abusedrinking, pills, the impulse to put my body in danger in ways I now know were deliberatewere merely efforts to escape; that I was contending, however clumsily, with the overwhelming despair at the absence of God. But at least one piece of that despair came from the knowledge that my body was no longer a sacred vessel; that it was not a temple of the holy spirit, formed in the image of God and intended to carry me into eternity; that my body was matter, and any harm I did to it was only aiding the unstoppable process of entropy for which it was destined. To confront this reality after believing otherwise is to experience perhaps the deepest sense of loss we are capable of as humans. It’s not just about coming to terms with the fact that you will die. It has something to do with suspecting there is no difference between your human flesh and the plastic seat of the train. It has to do with the inability to watch your reflection appear and vanish in a window without coming to believe you are identical with it.

What makes the transhumanist movement so seductive is that it promises to restore, through science, the transcendent hopes that science itself obliterated. Transhumanists do not believe in the existence of a soul, but they are not strict materialists, either. Kurzweil claims he is a “patternist,” characterizing consciousness as the result of biological processes, “a pattern of matter and energy that persists over time.” These patterns, which contain what we tend to think of as our identity, are currently running on physical hardwarethe bodythat will one day give out. But they can, at least in theory, be transferred onto nonbiological substrata: supercomputers, robotic surrogates, or human clones. A pattern, transhumanists would insist, is not the same as a soul. But it’s not difficult to see how it satisfies the same longing. At the very least, a pattern suggests that there is, embedded in the meat of our bodies, some spark that remains unspoiled even as our body ages; that there is some essential core of our being that will survive and perhaps transcend the inevitable degradation of flesh.

Of course, mind uploading has spurred all kinds of philosophical anxieties. If the pattern of your consciousness is transferred onto a computer, is the pattern “you” or a simulation of your mind? Another camp of transhumanists have argued that Kurzweil’s theories are essentially dualistic, and that the mind cannot be separated from the body. You are not “you” without your fingernails and your gut bacteria. Transhumanists of this faction insist that resurrection can happen only if it is bodily resurrection. They tend to favor cryonics and bionics, which promise to resurrect the entire body or else supplement the living form with technologies to indefinitely extend life.

It is perhaps not coincidental that an ideology that grew out of Christian eschatology would come to inherit its philosophical problems. The question of whether the resurrection would be corporeal or merely spiritual was an obsessive point of debate among early Christians. One faction, which included the Gnostic sects, argued that only the soul would survive death; another insisted that the resurrection was not a true resurrection unless it revived the body. For these latter believerswhose view would ultimately become orthodoxChrist served as the model. Jesus had been brought back in the flesh, which suggested that the body was a psychosomatic unit. In contrast to Hellenistic philosophy, which believed the afterlife would be purely spiritual, Christians came to believe that the soul was inseparable from the body. In one of the most famous treatises on the resurrection, the theologian Tertullian of Carthage wrote: “If God raises not men entire, He raises not the dead.... Thus our flesh shall remain even after the resurrection.”

Transhumanists, in their eagerness to preempt charges of dualism, tend to sound an awful lot like these early church fathers. Eric Steinhart, a “digitalist” philosopher at William Paterson University, is among the transhumanists who insist the resurrection must be physical. “Uploading does not aim to leave the flesh behind,” he writes; “on the contrary, it aims at the intensification of the flesh.” The irony is that transhumanists are arguing these questions as though they were the first to consider them. Their discussions give no indication that these debates belong to a theological tradition that stretches back to the earliest centuries of the Common Era.

WHILE THE EFFECTS of my deconversion were often felt physically, the root causes were mostly cerebral. My doubts began in earnest during my second year at Bible school, after I read The Brothers Karamazov and entertained, for the first time, the implications of the classic theodiciesthe problem of hell, how evil could exist in a world created by a benevolent God. In our weekly dormitory prayer groups, my classmates would assure me that all Christians struggled with these questions, but the stakes in my case were higher because I was planning to join the mission field after graduation. I nodded deferentially as my friends supplied the familiar apologetics, but afterward, in the silence of my dorm room, I imagined myself evangelizing a citizen of some remote country and crumbling at the moment she pointed out those theological contradictions I myself could not abide or explain.

Still, mine was a glacial severance from the faith. I knew other people who had left the church, and was amazed at how effortlessly they had seemed to cast off their former beliefs, immersing themselves instead in the pleasures of epicureanism or the rigors of humanitarian work. Perhaps I clung to the faith because, despite my doubts, I foundand still findthe fundamental promises of Christianity beautiful, particularly the notion that human existence ultimately resolves into harmony. What I could not reconcile was the idea that an omnipotent and benevolent God could allow for so much suffering. I agreed with Ivan Karamazov that even the final moment of glorification could never cancel out the pain and anguish it was meant to redeem.

Transhumanism offered a vision of redemption without the thorny problems of divine justice. It was an evolutionary approach to eschatology, one in which humanity took it upon itself to bring about the final glorification of the body and could not be blamed if the path to redemption was messy or inefficient. Within months of encountering Kurzweil, I became totally immersed in transhumanist philosophy. By this point, it was early December and the days had grown dark. The city was besieged by a series of early winter storms, and snow piled up on the windowsills, silencing the noise outside. I increasingly spent my afternoons at the public library, researching things like nanotechnology and brain-computer interfaces.

Once, after following link after link, I came across a paper called “Are You Living in a Computer Simulation?” It was written by the Oxford philosopher and transhumanist Nick Bostrom, who used mathematical probability to argue that it’s “likely” that we currently reside in a Matrix-like simulation of the past created by our posthuman descendants. Most of the paper consisted of esoteric calculations, but I became rapt when Bostrom started talking about the potential for an afterlife. If we are essentially software, he noted, then after we die we might be “resurrected” in another simulation. Or we could be “promoted” by the programmers and brought to life in base reality. The theory was totally naturalisticall of it was possible without any appeals to the supernaturalbut it was essentially an argument for intelligent design. “In some ways,” Bostrom conceded, “the posthumans running a simulation are like gods in relation to the people inhabiting the simulation.”

It began as an abstract theological preoccupation. I didn’t think it was likely we were living in a simulation, but I couldn’t help musing about how the classic theodicies I’d struggled with in Bible school would play out in a simulated cosmology. I thought I’d put these problems to rest, but that winter they burbled back to the surface. It would happen unexpectedly. One moment I’d be waiting for the bus or doodling on a green guest-check pad during the slow hours of my shift; the next, I’d be rehashing Pascal, Leibniz, and Augustine, inserting into their arguments the term programmers instead of God. I wondered: Could the programmers be said to be omniscient? Omnipotent? Benevolent? Computers got bugs that eluded even their creators. What if evil was nothing more than a glitch in the Matrix? Christian theology relied on a premise of divine perfection; God himself was said to be perfect, and he was capable, in theory, of creating a perfect universe. But what if our creator was just a guy in a lab running an experiment? The novelist John Barth, I recalled, had once jokingly mused that the universe was a doctoral candidate’s dissertation, one that would earn its author a B−.

One afternoon, deep in the bowels of an online forum, I discovered a link to a cache of “simulation theology”articles written by fans of Bostrom’s theory. According to the “Argument for Virtuous Engineers,” it was reasonable to assume that our creators were benevolent because the capacity to build sophisticated technologies required “long-term stability” and “rational purposefulness.” These qualities could not be cultivated without social harmony, and social harmony could be achieved only by virtuous beings. The articles were written by software engineers, programmers, and the occasional philosopher. Some appeared on personal blogs. Others had been published in obscure, allegedly peer-reviewed journals whose interests lay at the intersection of philosophy, technology, and metaphysics.

I also found articles proposing how one should live in order to maximize the chances of resurrection. Try to be as interesting as possible, one argued. Stay close to celebrities, or become a celebrity yourself. The more fascinating you are, the more likely the programmers will hang on to your software and resurrect it. This was sensible advice, but it presumed the programmer was a kind of deist’s God who set the universe in motion and then sat back to watch and be entertained. Was it not just as probable that the programmer had a distinct moral agenda, and that he punished or rewarded his simulated humans based on their adherence to this code? Or that he might even intervene in the simulation? The deeper I got into the articles, the more unhinged my thinking became. One day, it occurred to me: perhaps God was the designer and Christ his digital avatar, and the incarnation his way of entering the simulation to share tips about our collective survival as a species. Or maybe the creation of our world was a competition, a kind of video game in which each participating programmer invented one of the world religions, sent down his own prophet-avatar, and received points for every new convert.

By this point I’d passed beyond idle speculation. A new, more pernicious thought had come to dominate my mind: transhumanist ideas were not merely similar to theological concepts but could in fact be the events described in the Bible. It was only a short time before my obsession reached its culmination. I got out my old study Bible and began to scan the prophetic literature for signs of the cybernetic revolution. I began to wonder whether I could pray to beings outside the simulation. I had initially been drawn to transhumanism because it was grounded in science. In the end, I became consumed with the kind of referential mania and blind longing that animates all religious belief.

I’VE SINCE HAD TO DISTANCE MYSELF from prolonged meditation on these topics. People who once believed, I’ve been told, are prone to recidivism. Over the past decade, as transhumanism has become the premise of Hollywood blockbusters and a passable topic of small talk among people under 40, I’ve had to excuse myself from conversations, knowing that any mention of simulation theory or the noosphere can send me spiraling down the gullet of that techno-theological rabbit hole.

This is not to say that I have outgrown those elemental desires that drew me to transhumanismjust that they express themselves in more conventional ways. Over the intervening years, I have given up alcohol, drugs, sugar, and bread. On any given week, my Google search history is a compendium of cleanse recipes, HIIT workouts, and the glycemic index of various exotic fruits. I spend my evenings in the concrete and cavernous halls of a university athletic center, rowing across virtual rivers and cycling up virtual hills, guided by the voice of my virtual trainer, Jessica, who came with an app that I bought. It’s easy enough to justify these rituals of health optimization as more than mere vanity, especially when we’re so frequently told that physical health determines our mental and emotional well-being. But if I’m honest with myself, these pursuits have less to do with achieving a static state of well-being than with the thrill of possibility that lies at the root of all self-improvement: the delusion that you are climbing an endless ladder of upgrades and solutions. The fact that I am aware of this delusion has not weakened its power over me. Even as I understand the futility of the pursuit, I persist in an almost mystical belief that I can, through concerted effort, feel better each year than the last, as though the trajectory of my life led toward not the abyss but some pinnacle of total achievement and solution, at which point I will dissolve into pure energy. Still, maintaining this delusion requires a kind of willful vigilance that can be exhausting.

I was in such a mood last spring when a friend of mine from Bible school, a fellow apostate, sent me an email with the title “robot evangelism.” “I seem to recall you being into this stuff,” he said. There was a link to an episode of The Daily Show that had aired a year ago. The video was a satiric report by the correspondent Jordan Klepper called “Future Christ.” The gist was that a Florida pastor, Christopher Benek, believed that in the future AI could be evangelized and brought to salvation just like humans.

“How does a robot become Christian?” Klepper asked.

“We’re not talking about a Roomba or your iPhone,” Benek replied. “We’re talking about something that’s exponentially more intelligent than we are.” He was young for a pastorlate thirties, maybe even younger. He wore a navy blazer and was sweating liberally beneath the studio lights.

“You’re saying that robots, given the ability to have higher thought, they will choose Christianity.”

“Yeah,” Benek replied. “I think it’s a reasoned argument.”

The segment ended with Klepper taking a telepresence robot around to different places of worshipa mosque, a synagogue, a Scientology boothto see which religion it would choose. The interview had been heavily edited, and it wasn’t really clear what Benek believed, except that robots might one day be capable of spiritual life, an idea that failed to strike me as intrinsically absurd. Pope Francis had recently declared his willingness to baptize aliens. These were strange times to be a man of the cloth, but at least people were thinking ahead.

I googled Benek. He had an MDiv from Princeton. He described himself in his bio as a “techno-theologian, futurist, ethicist, Christian Transhumanist, public speaker and writer.” He also chaired the board of something called the Christian Transhumanism Association. I followed a link to the organization’s website, which was professional looking but sparse. It included that peculiar quote from Dante: “Words cannot tell of that transhuman change.” All this seemed unlikely. Was it possible there were now Christian Transhumanists? Actual believers who thought the Kingdom of God would come about through the Singularity? All this time I had thought I was alone in drawing these parallels between transhumanism and biblical prophecy, but the convergences seemed to have gained legitimacy from the pulpit. How long would it be before everyone noticed the symmetry of these two ideologiesbefore Kurzweil began quoting the Gospel of John and Bostrom was read alongside the minor prophets?

MET WITH BENEK at a café across the street from his church in Fort Lauderdale. In my email to him, I’d presented my curiosity as journalistic, unable to admiteven to myselfwhat lay behind my desire to meet. My grandparents live not too far from his church, so it was easy to pass it off as a casual excursion while visiting family, rather than the point of the trip itself.

He arrived in the same navy blazer he’d worn in The Daily Show interview and appeared just as nervous. Throughout the first half hour of our conversation, he seemed reluctant to divulge the full scope of his ideas, as though he was aware that he’d stumbled into an intellectual obsession that was bad for his career. The Daily Show had been a disaster, he told me. He had spoken with them for an hour about the finer points of his theology, but the interview had been cut down to his two-minute spiel on robotssomething he insisted he wasn’t even interested in, it was just a thought experiment he’d been goaded into. “It’s not like I spend my days speculating on how to evangelize robots,” he said.

The music in the café was not as loud as I would have liked. Several people nearby were flipping aimlessly at their phones in the manner of eavesdroppers trying to appear inconspicuous. I explained that I wanted to know whether transhumanist ideas were compatible with Christian eschatology. Was it possible that technology would be the avenue by which humanity achieved the resurrection and immortality?

I worried that the question sounded a little deranged, but Benek appeared suddenly energized. It turned out he was writing a dissertation on precisely this subject. The title was “The Eschaton Is Technological.”

“Technology has a role in the process of redemption,” he said. Christians today assume the prophecies about bodily perfection and eternal life are going to be realized in heaven. But the disciples understood those prophecies as referring to things that were going to take place here on Earth. Jesus had spoken of the Kingdom of God as a terrestrial domain, albeit one in which the imperfections of earthly existence were done away with. This idea, he assured me, was not unorthodox; it was just old.

I asked Benek about humility. Wasn’t it all about the fallen nature of the flesh and our tragic limitations as humans?

“Sure,” he said. He paused a moment, as though debating whether to say more. Finally, he leaned in and rested his elbows on the table, his demeanor markedly pastoral, and began speaking about the Transfiguration. This event, described in several of the Gospels, portrays Jesus climbing to the top of a mountain with three of his disciples. Suddenly, Moses and Elijah appear out of thin air, their bodies encircled with holy light. Then Jesus’s appearance is changed. His disciples notice that he “was transfigured before them; his face shining as the sun, and his garments became white as the light.” Theologians have identified this as a moment when the temporal and the eternal overlapped, with Christ standing as the bridge between heaven and Earth.

It was a curious passage, Benek said. “Jesus is human, but he’s also something else.” Christ, he reminded me, was characterized by the hypostatic union: he was both fully human and fully God. What was interesting, he said, was that science had actually verified the potential for matter to have two distinct natures. Superposition, a principle in quantum theory, suggests that an object can be in two places at one time. A photon could be a particle, and it could also be a wave. It could have two natures. “When Jesus tells us that if we have faith nothing will be impossible for us, I think he means that literally.”

By this point, I had stopped taking notes. It was late afternoon, and the café was washed in amber light. Perhaps I was a little dehydrated, but Benek’s ideas began to make perfect sense. This was, after all, the promise implicit in the incarnation: that the body could be both human and divine, that the human form could walk on water. “Very truly I tell you,” Christ had said to his disciples, “whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these.” His earliest followers had taken this promise literally. Perhaps these prophecies had pointed to the future achievements of humanity all along, our ability to harness technology to become transhuman. Christ had spoken mostly in parablesno doubt for good reason. If a superior being had indeed come to Earth to prophesy the future to 1st-century humans, he would not have wasted time trying to explain modern computing or sketching the trajectory of Moore’s Law on a scrap of papyrus. He would have said, “You will have a new body,” and “All things will be changed beyond recognition,” and “On Earth as it is in heaven.” Perhaps only now that technologies were emerging to make such prophecies a reality could we begin to understand what Christ meant about the fate of our species.

I could sense my reason becoming loosened by the lure of these familiar conspiracies. Somewhere, in the pit of my stomach, it was amassing: the fevered, elemental hope that the tumult of the world was authored and intentional, that our profound confusion would one day click into clarity and the broken body would be restored. Part of me was still helpless against the pull of these ideas.

It was late. The café had emptied and a barista was sweeping near our table. As we stood to go, I couldn’t help feeling that our conversation was unresolved. I suppose I’d been hoping that Benek would hand me some final hermeneutic, or even offer a portal back to the faith, one paved by the certitude of modern science. But if anything had become clear to me, it was my own desperation, my willingness to spring at this largely speculative ideology that offered a vestige of that first religious promise. I had disavowed Christianity, and yet I’d spent the past ten years hopelessly trying to re-create its visions by dreaming about our postbiological future or fixating on the optimization of my own bodya modern pantomime of redemption. What else could lie behind these impulses but the ghost of that first hope?

Outside, the heat of the afternoon had cooled to a balmy warmth. I decided to walk for an hour along the streets of the shopping district, a palm-lined neighborhood along the canals of the Intracoastal from where you could glimpse the masts of the marina and, beyond them, the deep Prussian blue of the Atlantic. Fort Lauderdale is a hub for spring breakers, but it was only January and the city was still populated by the moneyed winter set. Argentineans and Chileans and French Canadians spent all day at the beach and now, in these temperate hours before dusk, took to the streets in expensive-looking spandex. People jogged along the gauntlet of beachside boutiques and unfurled polyethylene mats beneath banyan canopies for yoga in the park. A flock of speed-bikers swooped along the shoulder and disappeared, leaving in their wake a faint gust of sweat.

I was thinking of the scene from Hannah and Her Sisters where Woody Allen’s character, who spends the course of the film searching for the right religion, is in a morbid mood, walking along the footpaths of Central Park. “Look at all these people jogging,” he scoffs, “trying to stave off the inevitable decay of the body.” I have often felt this way myself when watching people exercise en masse, as though the specter of all those bodies in motion summed up the futility of the whole human projector perhaps offered an unflattering reflection of my own pathetic striving. But on this particular evening, in the last light of day, there was something mesmerizing in the dance of all these bodies in space. There were old bodies and young bodies, men and women, their limbs tanned and lambent with perspiration. They were stretching and lunging with arms outstretched in a posture of veneration, all of them animated by the same eternal choreography, driven by the echo of that ancient hope. Perhaps it was, in the end, a hope that was rooted in delusion. But was it more virtuous to concede to the cold realities of materialismto believe, as Solomon did, that we are sediment blowing aimlessly in the wind, dust that will return to dust?

The joggers swept past me on either side of the sidewalk and wove through the crowd, like particles dispersing in a vacuum. All of them were heading in the same direction, up the bridge that crossed the marina and ended at the spread of the ocean. I watched as they receded into the distance and disappeared, one by one.


Where God is moving

Here…   You want to see where God is moving?    Just watch this.

Here is where we are going…

Go back and tell John….

Matthew 11:4-6  Jesus replied, “Go back and report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is proclaimed to the poor. Blessed is anyone who does not stumble on account of me.”

Here’s what’s exciting, technology is about to do things for us that in the past we could only rely on prayer and miracles. Now here’s the question. if man creates machines that give sight to the Blind and make the lame walk, is that any less of a miracle than before?

I don’t think so. I think glory to God because he has given us the gift of creation. He has commissioned us to subdue the Earth. It is a gift and a calling from God as the Bible says that is without repentance. How awesome is it that the scientists are creating computer-brain interfaces for us to be able to see you again, and walk again, and think again?

Unfortunately Christians many times scowl at things like this, thinking that the technology takes away from the glory of God. But who was thinking that? Is it not the Christians who are judging that He loses His glory because of technology? So for them He loses His glory in their sight. But I would like to remain open to the idea that God’s glory remains with him and that He is renewing the earth. I would like to continue to give him glory and light of the awesome technology that I see men creating.

Praise God for technology! Praise God that we will be able to think to each other very soon.

The enemy of our souls and the enemy of our existence, continually sows doubt into one another. He continually makes us down ourselves and our brothers. The bottom line is God has created as wonderful and beautiful. He is created us his Precious Treasures. The enemy has a Heyday in making us doubt one another, making us curse one another as worthless.

When we merge our brains with computers, our interface of communication will be so much faster. We will be able to process the entire word of God all at once. Our eyes are going to be open to the truth: that we are valuable and love. That we are precious Treasures.

Imagine that! God will reveal his thoughts about us through man’s hands.

Isn’t that how the Bible got written? Through the technology of a pen and paper at the end of the hand of man?

God uses everything to let us know how wonderful we are in who He created us to be.

The horse in the field and transcending time with computers

What’s up guys, this is Mark with the, and I’ve just been thinking about perspective and computers and God and, man, I’m just excited. I saw Eric Schmidt’s, his comments on artificial intelligence. As a Christian, I’m very excited about artificial intelligence and I’m very excited about merging our brains with computers. I’m excited because I feel like, I feel like I look at the verse we see in part, we know in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears, and I see this idea of, first the physical, then the spiritual. And the thing about that is I feel like we’ve lived a very spiritual life our physical life, existence, you know, like, kind of evolving from Cavemen to, you, know, the Old West, and through the Industrial Age, ah, and Agricultural Age and now to this Information Age. And this Information Age really is an age of, of spiritual-ness, of ideas, where the equity is really in the ideas and so, that being said, what makes me excited, a lot of Christians, you know, I don’t know. What makes me excited is, I look at neural networks and the multi-layers that they have, deep neural, neural networks. You know, Eric Schmidt was talking about right now they’re at like 10-deep or 12-deep, and I think about our brain. Ray Kurzweil does a really good idea of explaining a lot of this in his book, how to build a brain, but the exciting part is what about when these neural nets are powered by a lot more powerful computers and go 40-deep or 50-deep? And man, how neat that is gonna be, and, I don’t know, you know, my dad and I were talking about. I, it seems like computers are going to start to have a very different perspective. You know like, my dad, he, he has this horse that’s out in his field like, that he looks out and he sees it, and, he and I were talking about how from bis perspective, he may look out and say, oh, that’s a horse in his field or that’s a horse out there in the field. And, then, the next day, someone comes along and there’s no horse. And, then the question is, or maybe someone is asked what about, at the same time, what about that horse in the field? And because they can’t see it, there’s no, there’s no vista or frame of reference to see the horse in the field, so is there a horse in the field or not? And so the idea is, when computers, again, we see in part, we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears, and this idea that I could not see the horse in the field because I’m on one side of the country and he can, there’s an imperfection there, there’s a separation. And Jesus said, I pray that you will be one as my Father and I are one and I pray that you will be one with us. And that, and Jesus said, I saw Satan fall from Heaven. So he’s talking about this idea that I saw this happen a long time ago, “Before Abraham was, I am.” He’s talking about taking, I’m the Alpha, the Omega, that he transcends time. And, so, this is a real interesting thing because computers, I believe, are gonna be able to, when the com, when we have multiple eyes that can see from multiple perspectives and record everything, and everything gets written down, and multiple layers of, you know, redundancy, the point is, is, is the horse in the field? And how is it in the field? Like, the idea of time starts to disappear because, because it’s understanding of that horse being in the field, even if it’s not anymore, it was and it begins to transcend time. I guess that’s the best way that I can explain it, like, if you see no horse in the field then you see a horse in the field and then you don’t see a horse in the field, which is the truth? Is the horse in the field or not? And, and when you can compress all of that together, you begin to transcend, you begin to transcend time itself from multiple perspectives and by compressing people together. It’s just really exciting. I’m really, it’s hard to explain, but in the same way, it’s hard. If you were to ask, like Ray talks about this, hey, ask a, ask a chimpanzee to wax long on the idea of nuance in poetry. A chimpanzee is, can’t do that because its brain can’t really even understand language. It doesn’t, it doesn’t think in those terms, much less higher levels of abstraction of stuff like nuanced innuendos in poetry. So it can’t even think that and so my point in even bringing that up is this. With the horse in the field idea, it’s hard for our brains to comprehend an existence and a thought process of no tine existence, but that’s where we’re going. And that’s really neat because is the horse in the field or not? And it’s hard for us to even understand that question, but we’re gonna understand it, and we’re gonna start transcending time, and that’s, guys, I’m just telling you, dude, that’s a neat idea. That’s a neat idea because we are so based off of, we are so based off of, division; dividing one thing from here to the other, that our perspective is such a divided perspective. When we lace our brains with computers we are gonna know even as we’re fully known and we’re gonna be able to understand people fully. The Gospel and what God really thinks about how we’re precious and valuable is going to spread. The Kingdom of Heaven spreads like yeast through the whole lump of dough. And, I, I mean, and I look at the Internet and people who are disconnected and they yell and scream at each other, what I mean is, people who don’t know who they are, who are disconnected from the truth about who they really are, that they’re loved and valuable, the neat thing is, what I feel like with technology is man, when, when perfection comes and imperfect disappears, and even if the guys who are making this technology don’t praise God, the neat thing is God’s glory will stand. Who He is will stand. The disconnection from the enemy is going away and the beautiful thing is, guys, God’s gonna win, we’re gonna get connected. He blessed us and He said, have dominion over the earth and that’s what happening. It doesn’t matter if people believe it or not, man, His will is gonna get done. He is, He, He will be faithful to accomplishes His, His purpose. That’s what’s happening; He is faithful to finish the work that He started in us as a body. It’s happening; He is gonna connect, we are gonna connect and we’re gonna connect with Him and we’re gonna know Him and He will know us and we will be connected. You’re loved and valuable. That’s the thought for the day. Y’all take it easy, bye.

Gods judgment vs mans judgment