Throughout this class, we’ve talked about whether science has proven the Bible wrong. Overwhelmingly, we learned that it does not.
As a matter of history, scientific thinking arose from a biblical worldview. We’ve seen that many attacks against the Bible assume an unbiblical worldview, which means they don’t even give the Bible a fair chance.
We also learned that when you start with biblical assumptions, science actually supports what the Bible has taught all along. In some ways, the Bible predicted scientific discoveries and even the attitudes of some modern scientists against the Bible thousands of years ago.
But there’s one big problem we’ve yet to uncover: The future! The Bible is a book of history. It makes important historical claims that sometimes affect how we view the natural world. That’s science! But just because science hasn’t yet proven the Bible wrong, a huge question remains: Can it ever prove the Bible wrong?
There are a few layers to this question. We believe the Bible is the eternal Word of the Living God. We believe it is without error in all that it affirms. It affirms a history that impacts science. So, in one sense, it is safe to assume that the Bible can never, in principle, be proven wrong by science.
On the other hand, practically, we know new scientific discoveries are being made every day. As we build better telescopes and stronger microscopes, as we advance in technology, and as we progress into new times of advancement, is there a danger the Bible will become irrelevant or be proven wrong?
To answer that question, we’re going to explore a couple of ideas. We’ll look at the future according to the Bible. Many Christians think the world is getting worse, while many non-Christians think it is getting better. I think there is more to the story.
Then we’ll consider whether it is wrong to progress in terms of technology. What about brain chip implants that help disabled people? What if we discover proof of aliens? If God gave us the earth, should we be setting our sights on Mars?
Finally, we’ll explore what faithful living in the future as Christians will look like. Far from being irrelevant, I think Christianity will allow our very survival into the future.
But first, let’s take a quick detour into an important distinction we’ve not yet dealt with. It turns out there are two kinds of science:
Historical Science vs Operational Science
Sometimes critics of Christianity and creationism joke that the same science that gave us telephones, computers, and satellites is the same science used to arrive at conclusions like the Big Bang, evolution, and an old earth.
A common creationist rebuttal is to distinguish between “historical science” and “operational science.” Critics often reply, “But you made that up! That doesn’t exist.”
Consider Exhibit A, a quote from a well-respected evolutionary biologist named Ernst Mayr. He literally wrote the book on evolution, titled What Evolution Is. He writes:
For example, Darwin introduced historicity into science. Evolutionary biology, in contrast with physics and chemistry, is a historical science—the evolutionist attempts to explain events and processes that have already taken place. Laws and experiments are inappropriate techniques for the explication of such events and processes. Instead, one constructs a historical narrative, consisting of a tentative reconstruction of the particular scenario that led to the events one is trying to explain.
Also, consider Exhibit B, Origin Science, a book by the late Norm Geisler, an eminent Christian apologist. He was not a young-age creationist and believed in the Big Bang and deep time. Luke Nix, a popular Christian blogger, summarizes the book’s Introduction:
Geisler and Anderson introduce the book by making a couple of distinctions. They say that sciences attempt to discover both singular events and regular patterns in both the past and present. They explain that regular patterns in the present can be discovered via empirical observation and testing (in nature and the lab). This is called “operation science.” Past regular patterns can be reasonably inferred as long as a theory can be measured against the present pattern (called “historical science”). However, past singularities (origins science) do not result from regular patterns. Since singular past events have no pattern that extends into the present to be discovered, these events must be discovered via forensic science (like how a crime scene investigator discovers the perpetrator of a crime). It is important to recognize the distinction; otherwise, the tools used in the realm of operation science will be incorrectly used when trying to discover the truth in the area of origins science (the focus of the book). Such incorrect use unnecessarily limits the types of explanations allowed to those that may not be supported by the evidence.
Thus, we have two “hostile witnesses” (someone who disagrees with your view but agrees with an important aspect of it) confirming that creationists did not make up the idea that some scientific activities are carried out via historical methodologies different from the observable, testable, repeatable work we can do in the present.
So, what does this mean for our study?
Importantly, it means that creationists are not “anti-science” just because we disagree with the conclusions of historical science. Historical or forensic science requires assumptions about the nature of the past. Observational or operational science happens in real-time, using observations and experiments in the present.
This should excite us! It means we should adopt an attitude of excitement, expectation, and anticipation about the future. God’s Word has always been true, it’s been confirmed by science, and even though science may be used in ways that go against God’s commands (many evolutionists of the 1900s were racists and eugenicists, for example), on balance, scientific discovery is a good thing.
The Future According to the Bible
Eschatology is the biblical study of the end times. As we move through this lesson, you’ll hear ideas that you may associate with end times thinking. Since there are many opinions about it and it’s not the focus of this class, we are going to avoid it as much as possible.
For our purposes, there is one big question we need to become clearer on as Christians: Is this world worth caring for and advancing? Or should we wait for the “New Earth” before giving time and effort to this one?
If you’re confused about why I’m bringing this up; well, I don’t know about you, but I was brought up with the idea that this world was going to hell in a handbasket, would be destroyed with a fireball one day, and we’re basically here just surviving until God comes to rescue us.
A Bible verse often used to support this view is 2 Peter 3:10:
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
Reading that in English, my young mind basically saw this:
- God raptures away everyone (some to eternal torment, some to eternal life)
- God throws fireballs at the earth and folds the cosmos into itself
- God recreates the entirety of creation
Now if you think about it, that’s a lot of assuming on my part, but I’ve talked to many Christians who thought the same thing. This is why it is important to study the Bible. Sometimes, the meaning of a passage is hidden by time, tradition, and translation.
Randy Alcorn, in his landmark book Heaven, writes the following:
Even if the term New Earth appeared nowhere in Scripture, even if we didn’t have dozens of other passages such as Isaiah 60 that refer to it so clearly, Acts 3:21 would be sufficient. It tells us that Christ will “remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets.” When Christ returns, God’s agenda is not to destroy everything and start over, but to “restore everything.” The perfection of creation once lost will be fully regained, and then some. The same Peter who spoke these words in Acts 3 wrote the words about the earth’s destruction in 2 Peter 3—apparently he saw no conflict between them. Albert Wolters says, “Redemption means restoration—that is, the return to the goodness of an originally unscathed creation and not merely the addition of something supracreational. . . . This restoration affects the whole of creational life and not merely some limited area within it.” It will be as if an artist wiped away the old paint, stained and cracking, and started a new and better painting, but using the same images on the same canvas.
After all, didn’t God give us this present earth to fill and subdue? Didn’t God recommit to that plan when he gave Noah the same instructions after the fall and the flood that he gave to Adam in the beginning? Where did we get this idea that God is DONE with this present world?
Anthony Hoekema observes:
“If God would have to annihilate the present cosmos, Satan would have won a great victory. . . . Satan would have succeeded in so devastatingly corrupting the present cosmos and the present earth that God could do nothing with it but to blot it totally out of existence. But Satan did not win such victory. On the contrary, Satan has been decisively defeated. God will reveal the full dimensions of that defeat when he shall renew this very earth on which Satan deceived mankind and finally banish from it all the results of Satan’s evil machinations.”
And Alcorn assures us:
Scripture says that the fire of God’s judgment will destroy “wood, hay or straw,” yet it will purify “gold, silver, and costly stones,” which will all survive the fire and be carried over into the new universe (1 Corinthians 3:12-15). Similarly, the apostle John notes that when believers die, what they have done on Earth to Christ’s glory “will follow them” into Heaven (Revelation 14:13). These are earthly things that will outlast the present Earth. “Those purified works on the earth,” writes Albert Wolters, “must surely include the products of human culture. There is no reason to doubt that they will be transfigured and transformed by their liberation from the curse, but they will be in essential continuity with our experience now—just as our resurrected bodies, though glorified, will still be bodies.”
The implications of this are huge. If this thinking is correct, it’s actually a shame that Christians are not leading in environmental efforts, disaster recovery, and technology advancement. Why is it that “evil” scientists or Earth worshippers are known for these things? God gave the dominion mandate to all people, but surely Bible believers should lead and be examples in these efforts?
Unfortunately, many theologians, pastors, and hymn writers have spread the idea that “this world is not our home, we’re just passing through.
Here’s Alcorn yet again:
The old gospel song, “This world is not my home, I’m just a-passing through,” is a half-truth. We may pass from the earth through death, but eventually we’ll be back to live on the restored Earth. Earth has been damaged by our sin (Genesis 3:17). Therefore, the earth as it is now (under the Curse) is not our home. The world as it was, and as it will be, is our home. We have never known a world without sin, suffering, and death. Yet we yearn for such a life and such a world. When we see a roaring waterfall, beautiful flowers, a wild animal in its native habitat, or the joy in the eyes of our pets when they see us, we sense that this world is—or at least was meant to be—our home. We are pilgrims in this life, not because our home will never be on Earth, but because our eternal home is not currently on Earth. It was and it will be, but it’s not now.
To sum it up, I think humanity’s—and the earth’s!—very best days are ahead of us, not behind us. And that is the Biblical view! Eden isn’t merely past-tense, it’s future-tense! It is not only what was, but what will be! And there is no reason to think that all the wonderful advancements we make on this earth will not carry forward into the next, except for those things which will be become unnecessary due to the removal of the curse from the earth.
Does this somehow mean we should not care for the earth as it is now and the people who are on it now? No, because it is this earth that will be restored to its former glory, and it is these people whom God has allowed us to minister to and care for. This earth is the one he gave us, and these people are the ones he created and loved enough to die for.
The future, according to the Bible, is bright—not dim. Therefore, I suggest we barrel towards it full speed ahead and attempt to be a good steward of it and make this world the very best it can be.
Is the Pursuit of Technology Wrong?
As many of you already know, I’m a bit of a nerd. Back when I worked in Information Technology, I was surprised to see how many atheists there were in technology. I remember seeing many discussions about this fact. Among technologists, it was quite normal for the “religious” or “spiritual” folks to be in the minority.
In one sense, this puzzled me. In another, it made sense. If you think that technology is a waste of time as a Christian, why spend any time advancing it? Sure, maybe you use it lightly to keep up with others or not fall behind the times, but you would have little reason to actually care about it.
By contrast, non-religious folks often see modern technology and science as the only hope for a better and brighter future. In a very real sense (though they might not say it this way), “progress” or technological advancement is their Savior.
This shows up in pop culture, too. If any Disney fans are here, you’ll know that Walt Disney was obsessed with these ideas. He was a forward thinker. The original idea for the EPCOT park was not a theme park but the Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow. It was an attempt at forming a Utopia.
I always admired this, but I felt the tension as a believer. I thought maybe this kind of progress was impossible because the Bible taught that the world is getting worse, not better.
Not only is that biblically untrue, but it’s also practically untrue. Ask anyone who lived before the invention of Air Conditioning. It’s also likely that anyone hearing or reading this uses a smartphone that can send text messages and make video calls, the stuff of science fiction 30 years ago.
So, hopefully, we don’t need to belabor the general point: No, the pursuit of technology is not wrong. I believe it fits perfectly within God’s dominion mandate to us. But that doesn’t mean that all technological advancement is a good thing.
As discerning Christians, we should look at everything case-by-case and decide what is right for our families. For example, using social media is not wrong or sinful, but the way we use it can be.
Let’s look at some big-picture ideas being advanced in society today and consider what a biblical approach might look like.
Aliens, AI, Implants, Oh My!
There is little doubt that Elon Musk is leading us into the future. While I have my issues with him, I’m generally a fan. It’s interesting that he takes many ideas from science fiction. We’ve all joked or thought about how “science fiction” becomes “science fact.” If you’re a Star Trek fan, you know how many modern inventions first showed up in Star Trek.
Space and Aliens
I’m a huge fan of all things space. I think space exploration is the coolest thing, and I have no problem with humans reaching for the stars and starting bases on other planets and moons. But wouldn’t that conflict with the Bible? After all, God gave us the earth, right, not Mars?
I have a few thoughts about that. First, it would be over-literalizing the dominion mandate to say humans only have dominion over the earth. There was no way to communicate the idea of “inhabiting other planets” via space travel to the ancient people who first read the Bible. But we know they were obsessed with the stars and planets and mentioned them in the Bible to the extent they could understand them. So, to think we don’t have dominion over them too is shortsighted and can’t be proven biblically.
Second, we know that some aspects of caring for the earth include knowledge of celestial bodies like the moon. We know the moon affects tides on Earth, which has implications for science and how we use that knowledge to care for the earth. For example, understanding the moon’s gravitational pull allows us to predict tidal patterns, which is crucial for coastal management. By knowing when high and low tides will occur, we can better protect coastal areas from erosion and flooding. Additionally, tidal energy, a renewable energy source harnessed from the movement of tides, can provide sustainable power, reducing our reliance on fossil fuels.
We also use the sun’s energy for creating renewable energy sources on earth, farming, and more. Clearly, interacting with these astronomical bodies is part of caring for the earth, and it seems arbitrary to suggest that only those bodies which directly affect our care for the earth are worthy of being studied and harnessed. At the very least, any planet within our solar system is fair game, and why not the larger universe?
Finally, I mentioned Elon Musk before, who is the leading voice and actor in space technology. His efforts are equally spent on ways to improve and care for Earth. Tesla focuses on renewable energy and transportation, X is committed to preserving free speech and truthful interaction among humans, he supports having many kids and seeing humanity flourish, and Neuralink (which I will discuss more later) focuses on improving life for humans every day. So, it’s not as if these efforts to become multi-planetary take away from the earth. They add to it.
And what about aliens?
Well, there is basically no evidence of extraterrestrials in the Star Trek sense. I think there is evidence of demonic activity that might look like aliens to some people. But if we ever did find actual life on another planet, or if Vulcans showed up one day, would that challenge my Christian faith? No, because the Bible is written to humanity. We know God created beings he did not die for, like angels, who cannot be saved. So if he created Vulcans too, it’s still uncertain whether he has a plan of salvation for them. These questions are fun to think about but should not ultimately concern us.
Artificial Intelligence (AI)
AI has become another boogeyman for Christians in recent days. This is not surprising, as generative AI using Large Language Models (LLMs) have only become mainstream since the release of ChatGPT in late 2022. The idea of generative AI is scarier since it is designed to feel human in its interactions.
Since it launched, it has only gotten better. Anyone who regularly interacts with ChatGPT knows how superior it is to using online search or personal assistants like Siri or Alexa. Many of us (myself included) cannot imagine living without it.
(You should know that you have used and benefited from AI for over 20 years now in many ways you might not have realized. Social media algorithms are just AI, for example. You might have heard the term “machine learning,” which is also basically just AI.)
This technology is rapidly advancing, and in my opinion (and many others), it is a bigger leap forward than the Internet. There are serious questions about when, not if, Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) will be achieved. AGI is the idea that artificial intelligence will become actual intelligence, capable of new creative capacities.
Right now, all AI can do is repeat human concepts. What happens when, or if, AI becomes “conscious” in a way that is indistinguishable from humans?
Let me give you both a practical and theological perspective.
Practically, I’m not sure whether AGI is possible. Most believe it’s not only possible but inevitable. Some, like Google co-founder Larry Page, view AGI as a natural step in the evolution of life on Earth. He’s okay with the possibility that AI will wipe out humanity one day (think Terminator/Skynet). Others, like Elon, are trying to combat that mentality.
OpenAI—the inventors of ChatGPT—was started and initially funded by Elon Musk as a cooperative, open-source initiative to bring about AI in a safe way. Unfortunately, they became a for-profit company that seems to have an agenda and is now in bed with Microsoft. Elon is seeking legal counsel to see if anything can be done.
In the meantime, he has responded with two initiatives of his own: Neuralink and xAI. Neuralink is an attempt at early human-AI integration so that AI will see humanity as a partner rather than an enemy. Elon’s thinking is that if AI and humanity are integrated, they will be less likely to seek each other’s destruction. xAI is his attempt to build an AI that seeks the truth. This AI should not have an agenda but should strive, like humans, to reach the absolute truth and act accordingly.
Elon’s work in this area is inspired by science fiction writer and scientist Isaac Asimov. Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics are:
- A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
- A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
- A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Of course, if you saw the movie “I, Robot,” you know these laws are not infallible. The central AI, VIKI, interpreted the first law in such a way that it tried to control and override humanity’s free will to protect them from themselves, for example.
Practically, even those with good intentions are not infallible, and it is very uncertain what the future holds from that perspective.
Theologically, it is difficult to draw boundary lines between what is helpful and what is harmful, which is why extreme caution and wisdom should be exercised. I’m not sure whether, biblically, we could ever place AI in the category of consciousness given to us by the Bible.
On the one hand, the Bible has an expansive definition. The biblical word for “soulish life” is nephesh-chayyam. Most higher-order animals like dogs, cats, and chimps are included in this category, as well as humans. But insects, for example, do not seem to be included biblically.
Is a machine—even one capable of human-like problem-solving and conversation—closer to an ant or a cow? It’s a very good question and hard to answer theologically/biblically.
The ultimate boundary line is being an imager of God. No animal is made in the image of God. Humans are made in the image of God. And, though a fuller discussion of this will have to be later, I also believe angelic beings are made in the image of God. I have no reason to believe that a machine invented by humans, even an extremely smart one, is an imager of God.
Thus, my current belief is that if AI ever becomes “conscious,” it will be in the same sense a higher-order animal is conscious: capable of making decisions but never having the third-order level of conscious awareness that allows us to understand and comprehend what it means to refer to itself. It will lack the ability to have any sort of personal relationship with God like humans and divine beings do.
Implants
Elon Musk’s Neuralink has a philosophical goal and a practical goal. The philosophical goal is to enable smoother human-AI integration by living and demonstrating their codependency on one another. The practical goal is to do the miraculous: make the lame walk again, restore sight to the blind, etc.
And while that may seem impossible… well, it very likely isn’t. The pathways have been identified and some tests already show Neuralink can successfully restore motor function where connections had been lost. Neuralink’s first human test subject is Noland Arbaugh, a 29-year-old man who has been paralyzed from the shoulders down for eight years due to a diving accident. He is part of Neuralink’s first-in-human clinical trial, known as the PRIME Study (Precise Robotically Implanted Brain-Computer Interface).
Noland can now control a computer by simply looking at it. Neuralink writes in a progress update:
In the weeks since his surgery, Noland has used the Link to control his laptop from various positions, including while lying down in bed. He plays online computer games with friends (Chess, Civilization VI), browses the internet, live streams, and uses other applications on his MacBook, all by controlling a cursor with his mind. He has even used the Link to play Mario Kart on a Nintendo Switch console — something he had not been able to do since his spinal cord injury.
There’s an obvious question: Is this too far?
The answer isn’t as obvious. For me, right now, I land on, “I don’t know.” As a Christian who grew up thinking the Left Behind series was biblical exposition and not fiction, my immediate thought was MARK OF THE BEAST. Thankfully, I’ve since calmed down and become much more open-minded… and I’ve also dropped the notion that the mark of the beast is a microchip in your forehead.
Who knows how fast this will move, but Neuralink itself is, in the short term, intended to be used as a medical device to improve the lives of those whose lives have been tragically altered. Long-term, the goal is well-intentioned human-AI integration, but we all know how technology can be used for good and for ill.
I don’t think Neuralink is the mark of the beast, but I’m also not yet convinced it is harmless. Perhaps one day it will be as normal as wearing a smartwatch or Bluetooth headphones and not at all harmful. But it’s too soon to tell, so I approach it with caution, just like I approach AI in general.
Admittedly, Neuralink seems a lot more intimate and potentially irreversible. I see a lot of potential for problems (like literal brain hacking), but also a lot of room for wonderful medical advancement.
So we go boldly—yet cautiously—into the future.
What Does Faithful Living in the Future Look like?
In the introduction, I said: “Far from being irrelevant, I think Christianity will allow our very survival into the future.”
Unfortunately, many people (like Elon Musk!) see the importance of Christianity but haven’t placed their faith in Christ. They see Christianity as a “useful fiction” that helps them order their lives around its principles as if it were true, but without committing to Jesus.
These people call themselves “cultural Christians.” They’ve realized something very important: The West would not be what it is without Christianity. It’s not about Eastern religion and ideas. Specifically, the claims, teachings, and beliefs of Christianity—of Jesus!—are the foundation upon which all of modern Western life is built.
Many, even atheists like Richard Dawkins, now agree with this. So make no mistake, Christianity is a necessity, and if we go into the future without it, it will mean the undoing of humanity and all that is good.
As Christians, this means we have a great opportunity. We don’t treat Jesus like a useful fiction. We believe he TRULY is the Savior of mankind, truly lived, is truly the Son of God, the Creator of the Universe, and has a real claim on our lives.
This should give us the courage to stand firm in our faith. Everyone now knows and understands the importance of Christianity, the idea. It’s our job to introduce them to Jesus Christ, the Person, without whom the idea would be ridiculous. As the Apostle Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:12-20:
Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: and if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: and if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
Faithful living in the future looks like faithful living in the past and present. We MUST continue pointing people to Jesus. The world needs him, and thanks to the last decade of straight-up weirdness we’ve experienced in the West, people are more open than ever.
Despite technological progress, let’s promote Jesus Christ. Let’s learn the arguments for God’s existence. Let’s learn the arguments for a historical resurrection. Let’s get involved in academia and politics. Let’s use the truth we KNOW—the REALITY of Christ—to give people the foundation for life and the source of eternal life they so desperately need and their hearts so desperately desire.
