A Conservative Christian Critique of Religious Transhumanism

Speaker 1

Next, we’ll be pleased to hear from a special guest speaker, Carl Tykrib. Who described himself to me earlier today as an oddball? And I don’t know how you get more oddball than the group that we have here. Carl is a Canadian-based researcher, writer, and communicator regarding historic and And contemporary worldview shifts taking place, including political and economic globalization and socio-religious trends. He is the editor of Forcing Change at www. forcingchange. org. a monthly publication dedicated to documenting and analyzing the structures of transformation, and is a frequent guest on radio talk shows. Over the years, his work has been utilized by other researchers, authors, and commentators. Carl’s biases are transparent. He embraces a Christian worldview, evangelical conservative. is pro-liberty versus politically imposed equality, pro individualistic versus consensus collectivism, and pro-free market volunteer and consensual exchange. And he will be speaking on a Christian critique of Christian transhumanism.

Carl Teichrib

Well, first of all, I want to thank you for inviting me to this event, and I especially want to thank Lincoln. For his willingness to bring me on board, because I know that I’m holding to a different perspective and view than the majority in this room. And so, in that sense, it was just interesting to be asked, and thank you.

Carl Teichrib

I also think it’s appropriate to be asked, because as many conservative-minded Christians today are now starting to come around to the ideas of what transhumanism is looking like, we’re beginning to wrestle through this. We’re trying to understand it, to grasp it. That said, as awareness grows within the Christian community. As questions surface and as concerns are expressed, we will find ourselves bumping into each other as we engage in the marketplace of ideas. So a talk like this has relevance. A talk like this has necessity.

Carl Teichrib

When I was asked to give a Christian critique of Christian transhumanism in under fifteen minutes wow It compelled me to explore what the core tension is between Christianity, particularly from an evangelical conservative position, and what could be argued as Christian transhumanism. And this is important, for there is a division and a tension between these two camps. And no doubt arguments could be made regarding the ethical questions that sometimes come into play. We look at issues of genetic manipulation, the concepts of social technologies in shaping human behavior. All of these have relevance and importance. But I believe that if we really want to get down to it, we need to understand what the core difference is. And that’s where we need to focus our attention. What is the heart of the matter?

Carl Teichrib

Up front, I want to bring in three qualifiers. First, Christianity is not opposed to achieving human longevity. expanding human capability, or overcoming medical obstacles through technology. The ethics of how these goals are achieved may come into question. But Christians do not oppose betterment. Indeed, when it comes to the betterment of society, Christianity has a long and unprecedented track record of actions. From the establishment of hospitals, orphanages, schools to disaster relief, and a multitude of other humanitarian work. Second qualifier.

Carl Teichrib

My focus here is on the side of transhumanism that links itself with what is typically viewed as religious constructs. Couching itself in terms of immortality, perfection, and salvation in particular.

Carl Teichrib

And third and final qualifier, the end goal that Christianity speaks to could be labeled transhumanism in the sense that it speaks to redemption, immortality, and perfecting. It recognizes and teaches that mankind is fundamentally flawed at the spiritual level, and that our sin nature is wrapped up in our spiritual DNA, and that this also has a bearing on the physical. Therefore, salvation, which lifts people up from sin, the way of death, and brings us back to the way of life, first in the spiritual and later the physical, is central to the Christian message.

Carl Teichrib

And yet, here is the point where we see the divergence taking place between historical Christianity and Christian transhumanism. And to understand this difference and what it looks like. What we need to do is engage in a brief survey of Christian theology and then a short survey of Christian transhumanism. In regards to the evangelical biblical perspective, I will give this survey in four points. First,

Carl Teichrib

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth, Genesis 1:1. Here, the identity of the one who created is expressed. God did it. More than that, He wants you to know that He did it. In this sense, He is addressing Himself to us. And here we have implied a relational setting, a relational aspect to our Creator. God wants to be known by His creation. Furthermore, the New Testament expands on this, demonstrating that through Jesus Christ, God manifested in flesh, all things were created by Him, as John 1:3 tells us. God, which is Jesus Christ as Creator, is therefore the author of life and the author of love.

Carl Teichrib

Second point: Mankind is created in God’s image. This does not mean that humanity is equal to God, for a limited created being cannot equal an unlimited Creator. But rather, this speaks to mankind’s role as representative of God’s qualitative attributes, love. Righteousness, and is a special creation having an eternal soul, a spiritual dimension. Moreover, Genesis chapter two places God and Adam and Eve in a really relational setting. Here, God provides all of the first human couples’ physical needs, and more importantly, He is in direct communion with them. This is an unbroken fellowship between the creation and the creator.

Carl Teichrib

Third, but as God is the author of love, choice is required if love is to exist. For love without choice is bondage. Thus, in Genesis chapter 2, a choice is placed before Adam and Eve, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. And the option to partake of it or obey God and abstain. And with this choice comes a warning. If you eat of it, you will perish, you will die. For to partake means a choice has been made to step away from the author of life. The creator of life, to literally break away from God’s blessing in an act of disobedience. It would be as if to say, God is not sufficient.

Carl Teichrib

In Genesis 3, humanity is faced with a tempter, as some call Lucifer, who presents the justification now to disobey God. Through this act, Adam and Eve are told that they can become god-like, or as God, through special knowledge, and that they will not die. They eat, and in doing so made the conscious decision to step outside of God’s hand, thus removing themselves from the Giver of life as they now pursue their own destiny to become gods or godlike. And here we see now a break from the blessing of God’s fellowship, and one that pits us as humanity against our Creator. This is not a benefit, but a self-caused curse. As Proverb 14, 12 reminds us, there is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death. Since then, humanity has striven to regain that which has been lost, a right relationship with God and immortality, and we continue to strive to do this on our own terms. We do this through rituals, technique, religion, endless cycles of good work, to no avail. We still die physically and spiritually. We’re still in separation.

Carl Teichrib

Fourth point Two thousand years ago, God entered humanity’s domain through Jesus Christ, literally God in flesh, walking among men. Here, Jesus, not becoming God, but was and is God, engaged in the one thing necessary To re-establish a relationship between the creation and the creator, death needed to be overcome. So Christ Jesus allowed himself to be executed on a cross, experiencing himself the full consequences of our sin, our disobedience. Then, demonstrating himself to be God, did something no man could do. He raised himself from the dead, thus breaking the bondage of this curse. This was a finalizing act. It was finished. It was done. Nothing more could be done. Nothing more could be required.

Carl Teichrib

But even in this, love is presented with a choice, just as in that in Adam’s day. And the choice here is to believe that Jesus Christ alone provides salvation, immortality, and perfection. Which requires that we, in humility, acknowledge our own disobedience, recognizing our own good works do not save us. We already see a foreshadow of what this looks like with King David in Psalm 51, where David, confronted with his own sin, recognizes that God isn’t so interested in his sacrifices. But in a broken heart, a contrite spirit. As Ephesians 2:8 tells us, For by grace you have been saved through faith. and not of yourselves. It is a gift of God, not of works, lest any one should boast. And here in this sense we either place our trust in Christ alone, or we choose our own way, however this may appear, or however this may look. That is the Christian survey.

Carl Teichrib

A brief survey of Christian transhumanism. And here again, we could actually expand this. Way out into all kinds of territory, including Gnosticism and mystic thought and all kinds of areas, because it’s broad. It’s a very, very broad subject. What I want to do here is quickly point out a few examples for you, and you’ll see how the contrast comes into play.

Carl Teichrib

Historically, we could even loosely lump in as a Christian transhumanist, again loosely, nineteenth century the father of sociology, Saint Simon. who, while rejecting Christian orthodoxy, called for a new Christianity, led by men of science, led by men of industry. And that this new Christianity was to be a rejection of the Christian dogma of salvation, replacing salvation through the attainment of the works of our hands.

Carl Teichrib

Another Christian transhumanist, so to speak, would be the Orthodox Russian and cosmist Nikolai Fedorov, who it could be argued is one of the fathers of modernist transhumanism. Federoff held that science would provide the path for immortality, that science and the works of our hands through technology would provide the salvation of mankind.

Carl Teichrib

And Catholic mystic Tehr Desjardin, who started using the phrase transhuman in 1950 Envision an evolutionary convergence taking place in the social and spiritual sphere, driven in part through technological development Transforming mankind and bringing about a type of salvation for humanity, in essence, through the works of humanity.

Carl Teichrib

And more recently, I remember in the 2010 conference you had James Ledford, who incorporates a technological justification into the idea of Christian salvation. So there’s already been a lot of thought in this as well. And in the last few years, an evolutionary Christianity platform has emerged. Incorporating social evolution into the Christian salvation message. We are saved in this sense in part through our social action and evolutionary progress. This is the implied claim.

Carl Teichrib

In conclusion, whereas historical Christianity recognizes that salvation, immortality, and perfection come through Jesus Christ alone, Christian transhumanism says Jesus Christ plus science plus technology plus social action plus good works and obligations plus plus plus And that is the difference.

Carl Teichrib

In a sense, we could see how this plays out actually when Jesus was being crucified. Jesus hanging on the cross with a thief beside him on either side, one thief Calling down on Jesus, the other thief recognizing Jesus, and the thief who recognizes Jesus calls out in fear of God Recognizing that he is undone, asks Jesus to remember him when you enter the kingdom, which, in essence, is a plea for salvation. How did Jesus respond? Actually, how did he not respond? He did not say to the thief, First, get down off your cross and go do good works. He did not say to the thief, Go down off your cross. and find a technological solution for your problem of death. He didn’t say any of that, obviously. He didn’t have any choice, did he? He’s there. It’s his end. All he could do was the one thing that was required of him to do: fear God, acknowledge Christ, and have a contrite heart. How did Jesus respond? Today you will be with me in paradise.

Carl Teichrib

Here is the criticism. Christian transhumanism, in essence, commits the same mistake that Adam and Eve committed. God, in essence, you are insufficient. And it compels us to attempt to save ourselves in our own power. Whereas the historical Christian position Puts faith in Christ alone, recognizing that in due time He will complete what He promised, bringing us back into a right relationship with Him.

Carl Teichrib

In giving you these contrasts, in setting this up for you, I’m hoping that this presentation will help you to understand the distinction, the difference, the tension point that there is, because that’s there. between Christian transhumanism and the orthodox historical conservative position. Again, Lincoln, thank you for letting me come. This has been good, and I really just appreciate spending time with you folks. I don’t think they’ve got a question in the chat.

Speaker 3

Here’s a question coming from online. You mentioned Christian transhumanism is Christ plus plus plus. Do not those pluses, our ability to do these uplifting things, come by and through Christ’s grace? Sorry.

Carl Teichrib

That’s the issue of where salvation and works are different. When we are saved, faith brings that salvation. But now we’re open to doing good works. We are open to doing plus, plus, plus. With the right mindset, the right heart attitude. And that really is the difference. It’s not that your faith will compel you to do good works, but it is now that you are saved, you should be doing good works. You now have a reason, a right reason. to do those good works, those plus, plus, plus. But when you say plus, plus, plus and have that as a justification or qualification for the salvation, that’s where it misses the point in terms of the Christian historical position.

Speaker 1

Sorry. About to fall off.

Carl Teichrib

Absolutely. I’ll be around in. Until you guys send me home.