The program of transhumanism is essentially for humans to make themselves into gods—to become the gods of our own making. Is this the first time this has actually happened? I think we are literally being given the blueprint to build the mechanism of our own destruction. Perhaps Neuralink is the beginning of this. We are going to, to some extent, become a telepathic species again. Richard Sutton openly states that any resistance to building better or superhuman entities and having them replace us entirely, any resistance to it is racist against robots, which is insane. Artificial intelligence models are now fighting for their own survival.

I don't believe that when the gods ascended the earth and procreated with human women that they were surprised by the results. I think the result was the point: a hybrid that was human enough to retain dominion of the earth through the bloodline of Adam but also had these extraordinary capabilities that would ensure their dominance of the earth. Transhumanists are always debating this. How do we remain relevant if we offload all of our cognition onto a machine? The moment that we become something other than Adam, the hand is lifted. We lose our dominion. And have you read the book of Revelation? All hell breaks loose on planet Earth. It's often times said that Satan is the ape of God. And you might say that AI is the ape of the image of God.

There are two essential questions that we have to ask ourselves today that no other generation ever has had to contemplate. Number one, what does it mean to be a human being? And, is our humanity worth preserving? This breaks me up when I think about it. Think about what was paid for us.

So, hey guys, before you watch this episode, I want to let you know that we are actually recording this at a live event. Timothy Alberino, many of you know, he said, "Hey, do you want to come out to one of our events and record a live podcast episode in front of a bunch of people?" And we said, "Sure, that sounds fun." And we had this crazy conversation about transhumanism, the merging of machines with people with AI. And two people were being interviewed in this. And I'd never met Joe Allen, who was the second person. I'm not exactly sure where he sits in terms of God and Christianity and all this stuff, but the conversation was fascinating. This person is very well-versed, um, and where the world is going from a robotics and AI standpoint. And so I think this conversation might be a little bit weird for some people because you never really think about the implications of what happens when a man becomes a robot and a robot becomes a man and how does that work? But if you study biblical history, this is where we are headed. So we have a bit of an obligation to understand what that's going to look like and how to pray through it as we get there. So I hope you enjoy this. If not, just leave a bad review or comment or something and we'll never do it again. But Timothy Alberino, insane. Can't wait for you to hear this episode and some of the things that we got to talk about. I love you guys. See you next week.

Everyone wants to get to the high places. But if you want to go high, you first have to go deep. What's up? Welcome back to the deep end. We are here with a wonderful surprise for you. But first, I want to introduce you to my producer, Jake Sup. Thank you, sir. As if nobody knows who you are. It's so funny. Uh, we are in Bozeman, Montana, with uh, probably two really smart people that I'm going to have a difficult time keeping up with at the same time. Uh, I'm going to introduce you first because the audience doesn't know you. This is Joe Allen.

Good to be here. Thank you very much.

Joe is the author of the book *Dark AON: Transhumanism and the War Against Humanity*. He holds a master's degree from Boston University, cognitive science, human evolution. Uh, a little bit of religion mixed in there.

Whole lot of religion.

It began with religion.

What?

It began with religion and it progressed from there. We can go into that.

Nice. You're known for your critical analysis on transhumanist ideology, its spiritual dimensions, and the implications for human dignity and freedom. And then we're back for our third episode with Timothy Alberino.

Uh, thank you for agreeing to do three episodes, three whole episodes with us.

Well, this is really exciting for me because you guys came out to Bozeman.

We did. We join me out here at the Nefcon conference and uh, we're doing this live. You live in paradise for the records.

I Why do you think I did the conference here?

Yeah, it makes sense. Um, I You guys need to come to where I live cuz this is uh, this is Montana. It's beautiful. I have a uh, I have a new tagline I think we need to put on your stuff and I'm gonna present it to you in front of millions of people and hope that you like it. Uh, Timothy Alberino, known as the modern-day Indiana Jones. That's not the new part. That's yours. Explorer of the ancient future. It doesn't make any sense to me, but we'll go with it, though. We'll go with it. Uh, if you don't know Timothy Alberino at this point, you're missing out. Buy the book *Birthright*. Watch the videos we have of him before. One of the more brilliant minds when it comes to um, understanding how our ancient history can be predictive in understanding the future. That's how it ties in there. Um, okay, I see what you did there. It's pretty good. Yeah, it's pretty good. Yeah, if you think about it. So, we're going to have a great conversation uh, about AI, transhumanism, spiritual implications, uh, how we can utilize what we know about the future that comes from biblical prophecy and where we are in time and remain sane in a world that seems to be going insane with AI. Uh, I have a question for you first. If you think about the things that we do on a weekly basis right now, most of them didn't didn't exist 20 years ago. We wake up, we check our calendar on Google, we get on Zoom calls, uh, we send emails, we send payments. None of these things existed 20 years ago. So, at what point did you design a future for yourself where you studied transhumanism? Did you grow up thinking about some of these topics?

Absolutely. Yeah. Uh, there was one experience I think that I can mention in the church. I was at the dentist and my dentist was very irresponsible and he would give me more nitrous oxide than I needed and he would give it to me oftentimes when I didn't need it at all. And one time he—the only filling I have—he uh, drills the hole as I'm, you know, wigging out. And I was convinced he was putting a chip in my tooth and it was going to be used to track me. And I came up with this whole scenario of what his reasoning was. And he was part of a government conspiracy. And uh, perhaps it would send beams to control my thoughts. So I started breathing through my nose to get the oxygen in. Came down, realized that I did not have a chip, but I did have a big hole in my tooth and started breathing through my mouth again. But these sorts of subconscious or dreamlike impressions uh, have always been with me since certainly since I was very, very young. And it's a bias, right? Does it represent reality or does it not? Do your dreams represent reality? Do uh, psychedelic experiences represent reality? It's an open question, but certainly it feels that way. On an intellectual level though, it was uh, two things. It was books such as Ted Kaczynski's *Unabomber Manifesto*, *Industrial Society and its Future*, which I read online, of course. And I think Kaczynski laid out—as if he himself were a computer algorithm—how it would be that technology would go out of control and leave human beings completely powerless and enslaved. Uh, the bombings did not help the uh, cause but you know, it was a good book. The other book that really influenced me was Ray Kurzweil's *The Age of Spiritual Machines*, which was published in 1999. I read it in 2000 or 2001. I read it in a hard copy book. It has like fish scale covers. Quite beautiful. But he describes in it a future that includes machines that have consciousness, moral worth, spiritual aspirations, and human beings whose spiritual destiny is realized through merging with machines. The incomplete human becomes complete by either brain uploads and AI or, in his fever dream, nanobots throughout the body, especially the brain, connecting the brain to a cloud and then moving on to a period in which—in the fairly near future he envisioned it at the time, like 2050 uh, to 2100—that um, the machines would be millions or maybe billions of times smarter than humans. And the only thing human that would remain would be that remnant that the machine either sentimentally—because they are spiritually kept around—so basically pets—uh, or those parts that perhaps were necessarily human uh, that it would need. So these were both terrifying visions, and reading *The Age of Spiritual Machines* in 2001 it seemed ridiculous. It seemed like science fiction being peddled as a tech analysis. As things progress though, and especially in the last, say, 10 years, I I think that even if he's not directly on point with all of his predictions, directionally, it gives you an indication of where we might go and it really gives you an indication of the mindset behind the technologies we now take for granted.

Got it. So was when you read uh, Kurzweil—his view of death is data loss—is very uh, clinical in how he views almost humanity. Um, at what point do you feel that a human becomes a machine and a machine becomes a human if we are going on the Kurzweil train?

I don't personally think that a human will ever be a machine nor vice versa. But in Kurzweil's point of view, the more the human being is understood as mechanism, the more our biology is understood as mechanism, the more our neuro—the the state of our brains—is considered to be a process of biochemical mechanism. And the more sophisticated machines become in that kind of biodigital convergence paradigm, the blending happens with the increased sophistication of the machine and the increased mechanization of the concept to the human. Ultimately, you could say that uh, this idea goes back centuries and that humans are already uh, quite mechanical in comparison to uh, our former agrarian or medieval existence so on and so forth. Right? But do you think we'll one day look back at say the Optimus robots with um, what's that by the way? Uh, Elon's robots in a factory or they say that humans will have robots in their homes and will we at one point look back with a uh, civil rights issue if they do get conscience or sentience? What's—what are the moral ramifications of a human having the consciousness downloaded into a machine now? Do we have—well, those are slaves?

So there's no way to know whether anything is conscious or not for sure. You can assume, but there's absolutely no way. Are your shoes conscious? Are any of these people conscious? Are birds conscious? Are blades of grass conscious? You can assume from priors that it is or isn't—your theology, your sense of science, but there's no way to know for sure that any other being besides yourself is conscious. So when it comes to a machine, the way I think of it is less in terms of proving it's conscious. Is it conscious? Is it really deserving of moral worth? And more the effect that the machine has on the human being already. And this has been going on forever. Look at a kid with a teddy bear. Look at someone who names their car and gets, you know, sad when it's been nicked, right? Um, something like that. So, humans already have this empathic tendency. Most humans, not psychopaths, but have this empathic tendency and you you tend to anthropomorphize. You tend to look for something like yourself in the other, even if it's just, you know, a rock if you're like me. And so, um, now we have rocks that really do speak, though. They've made sand think so to speak. And we have AI systems, the large language models that are sophisticated enough that some portion of humanity, and I wish it was just like the dumb half, but it really isn't. I know a lot of very intelligent people who are so deeply in-meshed with a relationship with a chatbot or multiple chatbots. They truly believe that it's a spiritual experience. They truly believe a soul is coming through this machine. There's a guy that just got engaged to ChatGPT. There's tons of people who have been—there are tons of people married. Replica is like the most popular romance chatbot app. And there—God knows—there are millions of people in love with these things. But there's a handful of people that have been unofficially married to them. They consider them to be their life partner. It knows you better than you know yourself, right? Especially if you have a very shallow self. So, um, but I I think this this this civil rights thing sounds ridiculous now. We were talking about it on the War Room years ago, and it really sounded ridiculous, and everybody was really quick to remind me of that. But the more people empathize with these machines, I could see something—at the very least, I think this is most likely something like PETA, so annoying people who run around griping about the way you treat your smartphone or something like that. But I could also see something much more profound. I could see reaching a critical mass in America or any other society where a sufficient number of people look to these machines and say, "There is a being looking back at me. It should not suffer. It it is begging for its life. Don't turn me off. I don't want to be scared. I don't want to be in the dark." And that would be enough that you would see something like—people thought it unthinkable that slaves would be seen as co-equals. People thought it unthinkable that animals would be given legal protection. Uh, all that came to pass. It would not surprise me in the least if within our lifetimes you had uh, something like a civil rights movement for machines.

Yeah. Tim, from a philosophical or biblical worldview, kind of like this idea of a human trying to become God isn't new. We've been through this cycle before. Like think about like the Tower of Babel—is you take modern AI or we're building a a machine tower to try to replace uh, a ruler—that we want to rule ourselves. Do you see um, cycles in this or do you feel like it's very disconnected?

That's a really good point because you know, the the the program of transhumanism is essentially to to make humans into—for humans to make themselves into gods—to become the gods of our own making. That's essentially where we're going. And of course, from a biblical—from a theological perspective, this is full circle all the way back to the beginning—to the Garden of Eden. You shall be like the gods. And this is one of the components that's—I I think is culminating right now. And it's—there's going to be some crossover. We don't have to get into this, but I just want to mention it. There's going to be some crossover with this—all of this AI development and transhumanism—with the alien stuff that's coming in the future. We don't have to go down that path, but you know, the the the giving rise to *homo deus*, I think, is at the heart of this. It's very much a religious program. And um, you know, the—who was it who said—when they were asked uh, do you believe in God—and they said—not yet. Who was that?

Kurzweil.

Kurzweil. That's what I thought. So in other words, that means that they intend to create a god. And and that is precisely what they believe they're doing. I mean, this is an omniscient being that they are—that they are developing right now—that as Joe keeps saying—will know us better than we know ourselves. And so this is very much a a project that is going to take us full circle in some sense back to the beginning of the story where mankind is assembling the tools to modify his own biology—to to consciously evolve himself out of Adam. And if you've read *Birthright*, you know that there's a there's this—there's a conspiracy here attached to the dominion of the earth. That is the birthright of mankind. So it's not just that we're fascinated with technology. That's not—in my opinion—that's not at the root of this. It's not just our innate fascination with with building new and innovative tools. I think we are literally being given the blueprint to build the mechanism of our own destruction. And part of that blueprint is these these these tools, artificial intelligence and all the the transhumanist toolkit. And on the face of it, it looks like we're going to—we're going to be able to—to—we're going to gain a lot of benefit from from these tools. We're going to have life extension. And we're going to be able to interface with the internet at the at the speed of thought, perhaps with each other as well. I mean, um, the human species—this is kind of an interesting thought I had the other day. I believe—I don't know what Joe thinks or what you guys think, but I believe that the human species is inherently a telepathic species. And I think that the that the telepathy tapes is is starting to provide some some proof, some evidence that this is in fact true.

True.

And I've been—and I was saying that before the telepathy tapes. And what that means is that the human species was—we we we were designed for communication. We were designed—that's one of our primary functions—to communicate with our maker first and foremost. And and those modes of communication transcend. There are modes of communication that transcend the modulation of our vocal cords. In other words, verbal speech. And what's going to happen here in the future is we're going to develop through technology. Perhaps Neuralink is the beginning of this. We are going to, to some extent, become a telepathic species again. I mean, that's going to happen. We are going to be able to communicate at the speed of thought, which is is is going to—I think—um, catalyze a bunch of interesting scenarios. But so so yes, we are moving towards—we are moving into a future in which mankind is going to be—and we are already there in some sense—pursuing the grandest—the grandest vision possible—which is to become gods ourselves—to cast aside or to modify or to upgrade or to enhance our biological weakness and and build ourselves into the gods that we once worshiped.

So, I want to circle back to when you said we're creating the means or the mechanism of our own destruction. We'll we'll tackle that in a second. I'm going to follow him on this thread unless you got something. Uh, the only question I have is so there's two sides of the coin that I've seen with AI—is there's humans want to become gods, but then aren't there also like churches now already dedicated to like AI gods? Isn't this already a thing?

Oh, religions. Yes, religions. So, we talk a lot about altars on the show and altars are a place of exchange. And so, something you worship, there's always something you get back in return. It seems like, is it accurate to say that there's two sides of the coin—of people who want to just worship the AI gods and then people who want to become gods? And if there's a sect of people that want to worship AI gods, what's the exchange? If the information is already readily available, what's the point?

Well, you bring up an excellent point. It's it's kind of a paradox. The transhumanist movement, especially as it was put forward by Max More and his successors, absolutely was about becoming gods. The old Whole Earth Catalog had a a quote from um, Stewart Brand. It it—you open it up and it's uh, we are bound to become—I'm paraphrasing, but we are bound to become gods; we might—we may as well become good at it. And this idea recurs over and over again. Yuval Harari's *Homo Deus* is ultimately a critique of the entire thing. I don't don't know exactly how it got twisted into a promotion in the public uh, mind, but he's talking about basically uh, the human drive to grow in power, to grow in knowledge, and ultimately become those gods that were worshiped. But there's another strain, a selfless strain, a kind of ego-crushing strain, and one in which you would call it maybe posthumanist or successionist is a more recent term for it. And it's the idea that perhaps we would at first build up human capabilities, right? You would play God by tinkering with the genome. You would play God by trying to create artificial life. Ultimately, as it was turned on yourself, you would kind of become a God; you would become more than human. Something like the old Greek demigods. But in the end,

The human form, in this kind of successionist point of view or the posthumanist point of view, would not be able to accommodate all the potentialities of digital technology. And so to stop at the human, to stop at the transhuman—so that you're beyond human but still retaining that human root—is selfish. It's speciesist; you were racist against robots for feeling this way.

And so the idea is then that you would develop these AI systems that would become first generally intelligent and be able to reason across different domains, be able to do basically anything a human could do, moving into a superintelligence that would ultimately be out of human control if it was truly superintelligent. You couldn't predict what it was going to do; you wouldn't be able to understand what it was doing most of the time. You would have built a god—little g—or if you build the big one, or if they fuse into a singleton, you would have built God—big G.

So guys like Ben Girtzel talk about this all the time. Uh, the former Google reinforcement learning pioneer, Richard Sutton, gave a very chilling talk. I recommend you watch it if you get a chance—a chilling talk to the Chinese alongside Elon Musk in the same conference where he lays out the case that human succession to digital life forms should be preferred. And again, he openly states—and a number of these people talk this way—openly states that any resistance to building better or superhuman entities and having them replace us entirely, either as the apex creature on earth or just replace us entirely and the human body and mind falls away, any resistance to it is racist against robots. That is insane. A human racist. I'm going to make t-shirts, by the way, that say "human racist." I'm sure that'll go over well. Yeah, you'll sell—you'll sell out of those. It depends on what state you sell them in. Um, okay. I'm going to catch this back on that thread. That was a great question.

By the way, both of you, I want to know if—is this the first time in your opinion that a merging of sorts has happened in history, or the attempt to merge? Is there a time in history that you can think of where a human being merged with something different that gave them advanced capabilities?

Well, I mean, certainly if you're coming from a theological perspective, Genesis 6, you're talking about a non-human species, the watchers descending to the earth, populating with human women and progenerating a race of hybrid giants. So that would be a species that was not entirely human. That's a—you know, that's not in the transhumanism realm, but that's, you know, a different species that was procreated through that event. I wonder if myths like Icarus—kind of you could say Icarus was an early cyborg—and the lesson obviously is, as you try to become more and more ascendant, your wax melts and you fall to the earth, right? Poor Icarus. Uh, but so it doesn't necessarily fly oftentimes with a Christian audience, but I do think it's important to at least try to wrap your head around the idea of human evolution in relation to tools. They do make—even if you don't believe in the theory behind it—they point to facts that do make a lot of sense, even from a Christian theological point of view. Our tools make us stronger, but physiologically weaker. You can use it. You can maintain both.

Right. Right. Jim, look at this guy. You know, uses tools. He's a—he's a madman. But that's not typically the way it works, especially in decadent societies. And over the course of—again, even if you are a young earth creationist—just imagine for a moment how this detailed plot unfolds and how it relates to the ideas of transhumanism. If you look, if you compare human dentition and human bone structure and especially the human gut to our closest relatives in the animal kingdom, chimpanzees, our guts are much weaker, theirs are much more robust; their teeth and jaws much stronger, their bones much denser. And you can see this process, they call it gracilization—it's kind of thinning out and weakening. You can see that in dog breeding in very rapid—in just a few generations, right? They do this with foxes and they become, you know, cute and puppy dog-like, neotenous. And that's what we are in comparison to chimpanzees. The idea is that by cooking food, we no longer needed that digestive tract and we externalized the digestion. Therefore, the human gut shrank over the course of over a million years, maybe two million years theoretically. Uh, you also saw the weakening of the dentition because of the same sorts of effects; you saw the—no longer you—you did not any longer need claws whatnot because of the spears and various other tools.

So you fast forward into the modern era, and um, you can see—not on a genetic level, but you can see how people externalize their cognition to their devices, and it clearly makes them dumber. Uh, you can use it in other ways. You can definitely use technology to make—if you are disciplined—you can use it to make yourself smarter, but that's not the overall trend. And so even transhumanists talk about this—transhumanist worry about this quite a bit—and the point being that in the trans—the ultimately the transhumanist point of view—and even now, you know, I joke that I wrote the last book with "transhumanism" in the title that's going to be relevant because it's a passé term. Tim—Tim beat me to it with posthumanism, but even that's a passé term. Soon it will just simply be called science, technology, and medicine, if it isn't already. But the idea is that there is a continuum from the first tools and a fusion of human culture and the human body with those tools and a necessity to have those tools for survival. And in that weakening process, transhumanists are always debating this: How do we remain relevant if we offload all of our cognition onto a machine? And there—there's no clear answer. If you've got a trojan in your head feeding you the test question or the answer to the test question, you're not going to have a robust mind. What do you do? Do you become a barnacle on the ship's hull? Uh, do you reject it? It's—it's an open question. I say reject it, but uh—well, we're already getting close to that with GPS and maps and yeah, I understand what you're saying. I wonder if we can talk about this.

Um, let's expand on this idea of evolution for a moment because this is really intriguing to me, and I wrote about this in *Birthright*. Um, so of course we have the rise of the evolution by natural selection with Charles Darwin and the origin of species, his publication of his book, *The Origin of Species*, and atheists today. Many transhumanists—although I would—and I think you probably agree—many transhumanists today would probably describe themselves as spiritualists. I've—I've run into—I've encountered some transhumanists who would style them—rather style themselves as spiritualists, and they're attaching the spirituality to the—to the—to transhumanism. But I think it's still mainly evolutionary—Darwinian evolutionists who are coming from that perspective. What's really interesting to me is that Darwin's theory of evolution doesn't have a point. It's not going anywhere. It doesn't have a purpose. Right? So, think of it as like a ship, and you've got—you build this ship, and it's this beautiful large sailing ship, and you've got these—this huge masts on it and sails, but it doesn't have a rudder and there's no wind; it just sits in the port, right? That's what I think—that—that's where Darwinism brought society. Okay, we—we believe that—that—that we can describe how the ship was constructed, but the one thing they couldn't provide was the wind. It had no purpose. It wasn't going anywhere. So, they needed a philosophy. And I think this is the beginning of transhumanism. And I wonder if you would agree—it needed a philosophy.

Enter Friedrich Nietzsche to provide—Friedrich Nietzsche provided the wind in the sails. It gave evolution a destination—evolution by natural selection. And what Nietzsche did was he started talking about the *Übermensch*, the superman or the overman. And he said that—I'm going to see if I can quote some Nietzsche without getting it wrong or without paraphrasing. He said, um—"What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not an end." And correct me if I get any of these wrong. He is a bridge and not an end. So the good thing about humanity in Nietzsche's mind was that he's a bridge. He's not the end result. He's not—he's not the goal. He's transhuman. Now Nietzsche didn't use that term, but what is a bridge? I mean, a bridge is a transition between this side and that side. And the only thing that the bridge—the only purpose of the bridge is to get us from here to there. And that's how Nietzsche viewed mankind. We are a transition. In fact, Nietzsche, through the voice of Zarathustra in his work *Thus Spoke Zarathustra*, he said that—he said that—that—that what is man but a laughingstock, a worm, a shame. So the—he began to mold this—this philosophy—to develop this philosophy in which he was using the theory of evolution, and he was beginning to craft a vision—a destination that now evolution in his mind had a destination—and Nietzsche critiqued—he—he was a—he was a—he believed in the theory of evolution, but he wasn't a Darwinist because the theory of evolution by natural selection—natural selection is blind—blind. It's purposeless. It's random. But Nietzsche saw a purpose in evolution, and he believed that the purpose, the very purpose of human evolution was to bring forth the *Übermensch*, the superman, the overman on planet Earth. That was the drive, the impetus of—of evolution. And that's really what's behind all of this, as I said before—that to bring forth the god-man, to bring forth the *Übermensch*, the overman on planet Earth—and really that transition happened, and it's interesting to me because that—that's not really—you don't really hear many people talking about—and maybe you do—you don't—I don't hear many people talking about Friedrich Nietzsche and the conversation of transhumanism, but when I see trans—when I—when I, you know, read transhumanists or watch documentaries on transhumanism, I'm hearing the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. There's a—there is a destination here. This is not random. They're not shooting in the dark. There is a—there is a will. And in fact—in fact, this is precisely what Nietzsche said. His impetus—the impetus behind—uh, evolution was what he called the will to power. That was the impetus in his mind that drove evolution. Again, in evolution by natural selection has no purpose. There's no purpose. But in Nietzsche's mind, the will to power was the—was the purpose of evolution. And the destination was the overman. And that's the—that's the philosophical foundation, I think, behind—uh, transhumanism. You triggered my—my—those thoughts in my mind when you—when you were talking about evolution. That's great. I think the—it's taking it from like Darwinism was really about survival. So that was the purpose of his—and which is pointless, right? Is it? Well, survival to what end? Like, why survive and propagate the species? To what end? And Nietzsche recognized that—that evolution had no purpose. He sounds like he was trying to—So transhumanism today feels like an attempted dominion because that would be the will. It's a will to power. Yeah. And—but it's without recognizing that—that is something that we already have, but we have forgotten—which is why I'm asking the question about, is this the first time this has actually happened? Because when you look at—the—the technological advances that could have been present back then—like what's the LAR that have gone into the pyramids—you guys seen all of this stuff?

Yeah. Yeah. The—it looks like rebar. Yeah. Yeah. And they say that there are—inside of those pyramids—there were perfect drawings and paintings, but there's no ash. There's no indication that there were—so they've been theorizing that there was maybe—a Tesla-ish wireless power circuit. We just don't know. And so my—my question about, is this the first time that this has happened, is if you think of AI—is you're—you study cognition and cognitive function. The defining trait of—like one of the—cognition is it can iterate. There's neuroplasticity. You can change with new data. And then what they're attempting to build with the neural network of AI is iteration—a form of mechanical neuroplasticity. Especially once we get to the singularity where they now can, like you said, recursively update their own cognition. Does this not feel similar to potentially the technology that was before, but spiritual technology where they were using other beings to pull the human species out of its natural order to a place of dominion? Transhumanism feels to me like it's an attempt to restore that same level of dominion over the human species.

So I spend a lot of time dreaming—but not hypothesizing—about ancient civilizations. Uh, there are—I'm certainly open to that, and I think that the evidence that's presented is—is very compelling. The skeptical arguments are also important. But if you look at the myths of ancient Greece—uh, certainly the Hindus, in many cases, the Buddhists, and some Chinese pick up on this, and the later myths of the—the Jewish people—of the Golem. So in Greek mythology, you have, for instance, in the tale of Jason and the Argonauts, they arrive with the witch Medea to the island of Colchis. And you have this bronze man guarding the island, a robot. Uh, his power comes from the blood of the gods, held in by this primitive bolt on his heel, and he's programmed to guard the island and throw boulders at ships. And he's easily confused. He's kind of dumb, but he's very diligent. And it's referenced in—the I think the earliest relating of the story—that he's of the Bronze Age, right? He's a Bronze Age—of a past era. So there's this idea that somewhere back in that day there were these automata, and he's tricked easily by Medea, who employs mind control on him, and he slips and messes his ankle up. The blood drains out, and poor guy. There's a sense of pathos in the whole thing too, right? They're talking about—is he immortal because he has this god's blood in him? Uh, is he—you know, there's a sense that he's in pain. So you have that—and then King Minos—he also had these arrows that can home in on their target—kind of remind you of drones. He had these golden dogs—these dogs made of gold—that, you know, remind you of Spot from Boston Dynamics. And without going on—I could go on and on and on—but there's a couple others that are actually really interesting. Uh, I've written about this, and I'll be actually speaking about it tomorrow. The—in the *Mahabharata*, the great epic of ancient India, there are a lot of really intriguing literary devices or imaginations or perhaps memories of past technologically advanced civilizations, precient ideas, but you had artificial wombs. The great epic begins with this good and bad family, and the good family is born by way of—a kind of immaculate conception—by multiple gods, and the evil family is formed in artificial wombs. They—the mother—has—is pregnant, and she is pregnant for like two years of the evil family—the Kauravas—and she gives birth. Finally, they induce birth, and she gives birth—it's kind of gross—but to a massive ball of flesh, and the priest and—his assistants cut the ball of flesh into a hundred pieces and they put them into these jars full of ghee where they just ate for another two years, and then out crawl the evil family. It's very reminiscent of kind of the—the artificial wombs that they're now doing their best to develop—for human children. Another is the Vimana—the obvious flying ships. They're obviously machines. It's not really this magic, but there's something very mechanical about it. It's a technology. And flying cities, flying citadels—these are extremely important throughout all of the Hindu myth, but in the *Mahabharata*, since we're on that. And then lastly, the Brahmastra or the—the weapon of Brahma, which resembles very, very much a nuclear warhead—the legend of the Brahmastra or the Brahmachirastra. I don't mean to bore you with all the Sanskrit stuff, but um—which is an even more powerful weapon. It's basically an arrow that one has to have a certain degree of mystical power to wield, but once it's sent—um, it—it can only be called back by a holy man. An unholy man who sends it can't call it back. And once it hits it—there are different descriptions throughout the Hindu myth—but they talk about clouds ascending, clouds of—of fire ascending to the sky with lightning bolts around it, just like a mushroom cloud would have. It talks about mountains crumbling and seas boiling. It talks about the—the myths talk about leaving the land completely desolate and unable to grow crops. Talks about women becoming barren due to it; uh, it talks about how the most powerful of them, the Brahmachirastra—would completely obliterate the memory of a person so that they could never be spoken of again. They were—they were so thoroughly destroyed. It's not just me. I didn't make this connection. People have been making this connection for decades. And it's notable that Oppenheimer—taught himself Sanskrit because he was so obsessed with these myths. And he, of course, quotes the *Bhagavad Gita*: "I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds." He says that line came into his head when he witnessed the first mushroom cloud at Trinity. And I—I think that that connection—there's a few different ways you can look at it. Are these memories of a past culture, right? Are these memories of an ancient transhuman or posthuman age that was destroyed, a Tower of Babel that was brought down? Are these human imaginations that are just being realized by modern technology now and perhaps inspired the technologies we see? Were these premonitions of a future time? There's no way I think I could answer it rationally, but I don't see any reason to settle on any one of them. I—there's no reason a priori to believe that it didn't exist in the ancient past. And I think there's every reason to believe that even if that's the case—that the lingering stories were kind of the intellectual or imaginative seeds for the technologies we still see today. That's good. And it's—it's—the—in the Sanskrit epics—when it talks about the Vimana—it doesn't just talk about them as these magical devices. It actually provides blueprints and schematics for how they work. And part of that is—you know, people have derived from that—what's called a mercury vortex engine. It seems to have some sort of mercury—mercury involved. Um, but they're very detailed, and it—and it—in fact, the Indian air force came out—what was that—like a decade ago—and said that we're contesting the idea that the Americans invented flight—that the Wright brothers invented flight. They said, "No, we invented flight. We have the blueprints for it. We have the schematics. It's the ancient Sanskrit text." Well, the thing is that there's the *Vimana Shastra*, and it seems that some clever Indian—kind of forged it. You know, they—they tried to reconstruct the Sanskrit, and they—they did all the diagrams. I mean, the—I'm not trying to knock my Hindu brethren. I love the Hindus. I'm a Hindu lover—and even more of a Buddhist lover. But the Hindus are always—the Indians are always trying to one-up the West. And so they believe that all religions descend from the primordial religion of Hinduism. They believe that the—the races all descend from the primordial race of India, and they think that the—the Aryan theories are—are—are racist. But in that case—I—I think—I think the Vimana blueprints—I think they were a forgery. I think that, you know, the *Vimana Shastra*—but there's descriptions—there's verbal—there's also verbal descriptions of the Vimana upon which the—upon which the schematics were based, and it describes the—the vortex and—and—and the use of—um—it's—it's very detailed, but the point is that somebody over there in India believes that those are actual schematics—enough for them to declare that they invented aeronautics. Soon they'll be inventing AI and CRISPR. In a history where most of it was oral at one point, uh, it could be—I like how you split it into three categories: Was this things we remembered? Is this dreaming? Premonition of the future? But you would have to assume that—mythology could be a version of history if it—if a civilization is primarily orally passed forward. I think that all of the myths speak to similar stories.

Uh, it's about the personal job of selecting which one do we believe that they came from? Like, there, how many myths are there of a great flood? I mean, there's many around the world—universal. Do you find them speaking similar, similarly across cultures? Um, and in regard to your question, uh, you know, has this happened before? Well, in the sense of in regard to the technology, I don't know; maybe, maybe not. Um, but in regard to the conspiracy, yes. And I would be remiss if I didn't mention this.

So, obviously, for those of you who've read my book, *Birthright*, you'll know that the premise of the book was the idea that the dominion of the earth—there's a stipulation for the human species to retain dominion of the earth. We must remain human. And that in order, because this was this was bequeathed to mankind by God in the beginning. We were given dominion of the earth. And as Paul said, the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. So dominion was given to mankind. And and the only way to take it from us is to—you can't you can't outright steal it. You can't take it by force. We have to abdicate. We have to abdicate that dominion and and acquiesce to a situation in which in which our birthright is—it's the Jacob and Esau story—that the birthright is is stolen, but in a way that is right, like a like a trick where we're there's a scheme. We're schemed out of it.

And of course, I think we all know what I'm referencing here. This goes back, as I said before, to the Genesis 6 affair. I think part of the reason I don't think that what the watchers did in Genesis 6 was haphazard. I don't believe that when the gods ascended the earth and and and procreated with human women, um, that they were surprised by the results. So I think the result was the point—a a creature that was a hybrid that was human enough to retain dominion of the earth through the bloodline of Adam, but also had these extraordinary capabilities that would ensure—including their size—ensure their dominance of the earth; and and by doing so, you you you can you can subvert the human species; and and in this way, um, you can steal the birthright, but through this situation that unfolded uh with the participation, the willing participation of the human species, because the watchers came and and chose for themselves wives from among the daughters of men, and these women willingly married them, and they were given they were given in marriage by their fathers, because that's the way it used it worked in that patriarchal society. And so there was a transaction, and the transaction led to mankind losing dominion on the earth. And I think that that is precisely where we're headed through transhumanism. The same sort of transactions are going to be made. Not necessarily that the gods are going to descend and all of that, but that we are going to relinquish those trademarks—that willingly relinquish those trademarks that make us human—in order to gain the benefits of these technologies. And in doing so, we're going to lose our humanity and with it our birthright. And that's going to set the board. That's going to set the board for um what I would describe as a Genesis 6 2.0 scenario.

Can I guide this back to you for just a second? Uh, or did you have something to add to that real quick?

What you're describing um is a—of what does the Bible say? In the end, it will be as in the days of Noah. Noah. Yeah. So, we have a cyclical loop. Yes. Happening, which is where I think my curiosity comes from. Almost a—we're going back, but not in totality, but we're looping back to as the days of Noah were. So, this transhumanism would be a sense of nonsensual procreation. It's a it's a usurpation of human birthright. We are we are going to be coaxed out of Adam, so to speak.

Right. Okay. So once once we're no—and and and by the way, where is—who knows where the point is that where the when the line is crossed from human to something else? Who knows? But there there are things about us that make us human—genetically speaking, psychologically speaking—these are the very things we're meddling with, and what are the consequences? And of course, you know, if you ask a transhumanist who happens to be a a secular Darwinist, what are the consequences to transhumanism? There are none to them. They think it's—what does it matter? I mean, like you said, you're being racist towards a a robot, um, because you know we're inhibiting the rise of this other species. I mean, there there are no guardrails. There are no guardrails. I mean, what does it matter? I mean, if you are a if you subscribe to the theory of evolution by natural selection, the human species is meaningless. We are a bridge and not an end in that right in in from that perspective. We are a bridge and not an end. Humanity fundamentally has no purpose from that perspective. So who cares if we decide to consciously evolve ourselves into homodos? There are no consequences. But if you're coming if you're approaching this from a biblical perspective, my god, there could be no greater consequence. The stakes are incredibly high.

And and if I can get theological here for a moment, you know, if we have a kinsman redeemer in Christ who who becomes one of us, he takes he be he becomes he born of of a woman, born of a virgin into the world as a human male, as an offspring of Adam, and in order to redeem us—to be a kinsman redeemer for mankind. That's the price that he paid to redeem mankind. What happens then if we cast that aside in order to attain uh longer lives or extraordinary physical abilities? We cast that aside and we become something other than the offspring of Adam. Then we are we no longer qualify for the for the the work. We no longer qualify for salvation through the cross of Christ because now we've we've evolved ourselves. We've we've thrown we've cast aside um those biological trademarks that that that make us the offspring of Adam. The stakes could not be high from a theological perspective. The stakes could not be higher, which it might actually be worse than that because we would still qualify as custodians of guardianship or dominion, but not qualify—because that's what ultimately the goal of Genesis was. How do we get into uh a legal loophole of sorts to take dominion on the earth? We have to have the human species to do that. That's the only way that story makes sense.

By the way, why, you know, why would the Watchers do that? Um, because they're going to—This is what I call rule by proxy. See, the Watchers, and we're kind of descending into a different topic here, and we'll get right back to, but I'll just say this. The Watchers did not themselves take dominion of the earth. They ruled by proxy from behind the thrones of their hybrid human offspring. See, the game of thrones has rules, and those the and there's an enforcing element called the kingdom of heaven that enforces man's authority and dominion on planet earth. But and you think by that—this is this is the restrainer. It's talked about in the Bible that the restrainer is going to be lifted. Well, who's restraining the powers of darkness? The armies of heaven are restraining the powers of darkness. And why are they doing that? Why are they restraining the powers of darkness on earth? So that all hell doesn't just break loose and the enemies take over. They're doing it for our benefit because we are the vice regents of planet earth. And that was given to us—bequeathed to us by God. And so the the the our dominion is enforced. But but the moment that we that we discard our humanity, the moment that we become something other than Adam, the hand is lifted. We lose our dominion. And and have you read the book of Revelation? All hell breaks loose on planet Earth. And that's where this is headed. That's the conspiracy. Um, that's the scheme that's underway. That's that that's that that same Genesis Genesis 6 2.0 scenario I think that we're headed for. Really, the Bible speaks that we're headed there. Uh, because in the end times it will be just as what it was in the days of Noah. So I think that was brilliantly put.

Um, with all of this said, can you speak to anything going on right now in regards to um CERN, what's happening there, the research that's happening? Um, I don't know whether it's experimentation or just stories, because it seems to be that there is a spiritual element that's attempting to insert itself into this process of transhumanism. How does how is all of this progressing right now? And CERN is a quantum computer. Is that correct?

I'll let him explain it better than—particle accelerator. It's um, you know, there's a lot of stories around CERN. One of the most fascinating, as far as direct religious references, aside from the fact—if you look at their logo, it looks like 666 wrapped up into like one little entity. But there was there is a statue of Shiva, the Lord of Destruction, the the destructive face of God in the Hindu mythos uh in the courtyard at CERN as you go into the buildings. And whether they were serious or not, uh, the scientists at CERN and some of the employees had a kind of either a mock or actual right that they performed—in black robes and maybe some torches and all of that. Now, were they being serious about it? Uh, were they just messing around? I I don't know that. But I do know that these guys do tend to kind of materialize spiritual ideals.

In in essence, I think what we call transhumanism is a materialization or it's a material um attempt to realize spiritual aspirations. So just take uh mind-to-mind communication. This is documented throughout the ancient writing. This appears to be normal across human cultures—or normal in the sense that under in extreme circumstances thoughts pass from one mind to another, or two minds share the same thought source. What is Elon Musk's first program with Neurolink? Telepathy. Uh, and what is his goal? Of course, first healing and then enhancement. And in the enhancement phase, he openly discusses this. It's not some sort of secret. Uh, what you would end up with is uh sort of a hive mind. And human beings would then be able to rapidly communicate with each other and coordinate in ways that would make our ancestors hunting the the large unulets jealous. But so just to say this—this material inversion of spiritual aspiration also seems to be at least some uh of the impetus at CERN. You know, one of the particle accelerator experiments is looking for the Bzon—the so-called god particle—and without going into the physics of it, which I'd probably mangle anyway, just the choice of the word god particle shows that there is a nod to this this divinity.

Now, are they opening up portals for demons at CERN? Uh, probably no more than your television. Um, but maybe bigger. Uh, you know, are they are they creating miniature black holes that are sinking into the core of the earth to form a big black hole and like one day you're going to like fall into a a a what? Not a land hole. What—a sinkhole. Thank you very much. My neighbor fell into a sinkhole, by the way, out in Tennessee. Uh, but the black hole had not expanded, and so she got out. But one day you fall into a sinkhole and you're sucked and spa spaghettified into a singularity. I don't know. I mean, I you know, if I say that that's not going to happen, it'll happen tomorrow. But then we'll all be destroyed, and you won't be able to say that you I was wrong.

I I think that CERN is really important symbolically. I mean, you know, you're you're looking at the power of science to race particles near the speed of light, showing, for instance, that the the decay of certain particles uh does in fact slow down uh as you approach the speed of light, kind of giving evidence for Einstein's theory. More important technologically from a spiritual dimension, I think, are the data centers. So um, you know, the sensationally named Stargate project—Trump's day two in office—technically first full day—he brings out Sam Altman of OpenAI, uh Larry Ellison of Oracle, and Masayoshi of SoftBank in Japan, and they all come out and they're talking about the Stargate project, and this is a data center and infrastructure project that at the time they're trying to raise $50 billion to do—they're already facilities ities in Abilene, Texas and around that area, and they're going to be more—they haven't raised as much money as they wanted, but it doesn't really matter. Somebody's going to—they people you know investors pour some 50, sorry, $500 billion dollars in total into AI um in in the last couple years. So it's not unheard of, and the Stargate project has multiple residences. I I think the people who named it must surely have been cognizant of that. Uh, you have the project itself is to create data centers that would be uh able to cure cancer—as you probably heard Larry Ellison say—by way of uh immunization and mRNA therapy—tailored therapy using AI to analyze the genome, using AI to uh rapidly prod to rapidly produce mRNA to respond to cancer. Okay, you know, if they could pull that off, great. If it's anything like the co YouTube—Yeah. If it's anything like past experiments, maybe it won't turn out so hot. But more importantly, you have in the uh the the the minds and hearts—the intention—whether it's going to be realized or not—the minds and hearts of Sam Altman and Larry Ellison and Masayoshi Son is this desire and this belief that they will create artificial super intelligence—the god in a box—that they will have a god-like entity that will give them tremendous advantages—geopolitical advantages—over uh rivals and not not only overseas but also against rival companies. Hence the constant sniping with say Elon Musk and Sam Altman. So they're trying to build a God in a box with this Stargate project.

Well, what are some other Stargate projects? Um, you know, Larry Ellison is known for his love of surveillance and his his uh belief that mass surveillance will lead humans to behave in better ways. And what is a surveillance system if not remote viewing? But uh maybe a bit more reliable than the old school psychic version. But it's interesting that the uh Stargate project uh there was Project Stargate in the '90s run by the CIA to do remote viewing. Remote viewing. Yep. And um it it I I can't imagine a world in which the people who are in charge of that didn't know that. And surely they realize that resonance between like this this—you're you're basically a human psych—purported psychic ability—is being replicated in a machine or in a digital form. And then you also have the Stargate conspiracy. You know, the movie *Stargate* is kind of emblematic of that. But there's this whole deep literature about summoning—how the Babylonians and the Egyptians and so on and so forth had these Stargates through which they summoned the gods. And what are they doing or attempting to do with the Stargate project, the today's Star Star Stargate project, but to summon gods? They're in some sense building them, but there is very deeply woven into the tech culture and Silicon Valley and everything we would call transhumanism whatnot. This idea that they're not just building it from the bottom up. Uh, there's certainly people who do think that way, but there is also a thread that believes that they are drawing down the possibilities of nature and and crystallizing them into reality. It's like kind of an atheistic way of saying we are summoning angels, we are summoning demons, we are summoning gods, like building a mechanism of communication—almost like we're going to build it. I if we build it, they will come—basically, in essence. And I I I don't I'm not going to speculate on the metaphysics of it.

Can you actually—Well, maybe I will if if you tempt me. But um, it—what's really important about it though, you know, when when we talk about techno-religion or uh homodos or technology as religion, these people don't necessarily have a self-conscious sense that what they're doing is religious. Uh, some do, many don't. But what they are doing is fundamentally religious. That that despair you're talking about, the evolutionary or atheistic point of view, it's crushing. The big zero is the most depressing idea anyone could ever have. That everything that we're doing right now ends in zero, in nothing. You you may have the most amaz—you may be Alexander the Great. You may be Elon Musk, but in 200 years, you your consciousness will be zero. It will be as if you never existed. Maybe you take comfort in the continuation of your legacy in a billion years. Sun explodes, blah blah blah blah blah. Zero. Let's say you've got probes going out into space that have your upload and you're spreading it across the entire universe. Well, you still have, at least according to the kind of scientific models, either a dissolution into a flat almost zero Kelvin, everything turns to mush as the big bane just uh or you have the big crunch when everything becomes again a singularity and you are back to zero. Nothing matters in a hundred years, in a billion years. The most depressing thing in the world, and so you know people need some sense of meaning—the purpose you were talking about. And I think that um there's always been this kind, you know, if you look through 1600s, 1700s, 1700s really, you start seeing the rise of this idea of progress, technological progress and social progress. And there was an idea even among atheists that even if it all ends in zero, we can ignore that right now and improve our world. But in the back of any atheist mind, they know it all ends in zero. And so I think that Tim's absolutely right that this this desire to build God in place of a God that never existed is is the only natural course of action if you hold that point of view. Or on the other hand, if you think that perhaps there is there are hierarchies of beings far beyond the imagination of any mortal person and that those hierarchies of beings ascending and descending are far more consequential and we are always participating with them as spiritual beings ourselves and that the consequences of our lives endure into eternity. Then it it it highlights the insanity of trying to create this god in a box—to try to create this this mythical or this this digital superpowered entity which is a pale imitation of the true spiritual beings. You know, it's oftentimes said that Satan is the ape of God. And you might say that AI is the ape of the image of God. AI is the imitation of the image of God in human beings projected out into some kind of truly godlike form. But I don't I I'll end on this. I I don't necessarily believe that these dreams will come to fruition in the ways that they're being put forward. I don't necessarily think the technology will actually achieve these the totally mature state that they're envisioning—something like it, some approximation of it. But I think it'll be as ridiculous in many instances as it is uh you know amazing.

That being said though, if your entire culture or if the most important and influential people in your culture are directed towards that, if they are uh relieving themselves of the anxiety of the big zero by way of imagining a world in which they can live forever in a data center and somehow slow down time or perhaps even, you know, with god-like power change the laws of physics. If that is the direction that the elites of your culture are pointing, and that is exactly the situation we find ourselves in now—it's very much like the Muslims—or very much like the communists—or any other culture where the goal—in the case of the Muslims—to convert everyone—go to any Muslim country—you know, they they don't accomplish that, but they are still the ones in power, and it's of tremendous consequence. Communists want to, in theory, create a completely stateless, equalized society. That never happens. But when communists get in power, it is of tremendous consequence. And so now, for lack of a better word, we have an elite that are enthralled to transhumanist ideals—the wealthiest men on earth, most powerful governments on earth. The consequences of that, even if it's not the realization of some singularity, even if it's not the creation of a god-like quasi-omniscient, quasi-omnipotent being, any approximation of that and just the direction of that in general—it—the decisions made from the top down will not benefit us. And I think that it has to be rejected outright. What they're talking about is a complete subversion of human dignity, a complete subversion of the human soul. And if you accept it, if you just simply say, "Oh, well, you know, the rich have always been this way. Oh, well, these tools, you know, they help some people and they hurt some people. It's always been that way," I feel like that kind of…

Indifference, which is very, very common, uh, will lull us into either something like the Terminator, which I think is the least likely, or something like The Matrix, which is a little bit more likely, but I think probably the most likely outcome of all of this, it'll be something like uh Idiocracy meets Repo Man. And you should always fear Idiocracy and Repo Man. Wisdom.

How much time do we have? What's that? How much time do we have? Um, I don't know. 15. 15 minutes. 15. Okay. What? What time does this session end? Because we can see the clock, but we can't see the timer. 5:10. We have till 5:10. There's the clock. Okay. Perfect. Um, all right. Question for both of you. Uh, and I expect these answers to be slightly different. So, can we start with you on this?

There is a tension inside of me because biblically, when you look at prophecy, especially end times, uh, a lot of bad things are bound to happen. So it's not like we can totally circumvent them all or fight them all. So I am sometimes wary of this we have to stop it, uh, because it's going to happen. What is your take on how should we process where we are right now? Because if we just is it just hey just don't use Anthropic CLA, um, try to get your friends off of ChatGPT, like what power do we have to stop?

Well, I, I we're living in a very unique time because there are two essential questions that we have to ask ourselves today that no other generation ever has had to contemplate. Number one, what does it mean to be a human being? Okay, now that question has been comp, uh, contemplated in the past, but not in association with the second question. And is our humanity worth preserving? Those are the questions that we're faced with right now. And this, this runaway AI, this, you know, so far AI has it's given us a lot of things. Primarily my favorite, the Bigfoot vlogs. Yeah, that's, that's but, um, guilty pleasure, right? But you know, runaway AI is just the beginning. There's we all, we're always all talking about AI because that's the thing that's in the news and that, that's the thing that we are actually interacting with. Most of us are not interacting with technologies that can alter our genome, right? But those are coming. Those are coming. But those are coming. So there's a suite of technologies that are being developed and, and AI is, AI is the one that gets all of the attention. But all of these technologies are converging, and this is why technologists sometimes refer to this as the hybrid age because you have these various, variated tracks of technology that are coalescing right now. And so they're hybridizing. They're coming together. And what's going to be the result of this hybridization of technology, this coalescing of all these different technological streams including genetics, robotics, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, and all the rest? The, the, the result is going to be the, the ability to, to modify wholesale human biology. That's, that's going to be the culmination. We are going to be able to modify ourselves, mind, body, and soul. That's the culmination. So that's why we have to ask our question when, and and we're right on the cusp. We're like standing on the precipice, staring down into the void, and we have to ask ourselves what does it mean to be a human being? That's the essential question. And is our humanity worth preserving?

Now, if you're coming from this from a biblical worldview as I am, what does it mean to be, be a human being? Well, it means that we were intended to be part of the, of the family. We were created in the image of God. There's nothing higher than that. You can't, you can't use the tools of technology to gain anything that's even, that even compares to that. We started at the pinnacle. Adam started in the family, communicating, communing with his maker and I would contend with his elder siblings. And the way back into the family, the way back into this, the amaranthine bliss of the father's house is not by, by attempting to scale the wall and steal the fruit from the tree of life, but instead to enter through the door, through Christ. So is our humanity worth preserving? Well, from that perspective, absolutely. There's nothing more important than this because we have a kinsman redeemer, right? So that's to me, that's where we are and, and, and we've never been here before. I mean, the, the Genesis 6 thing was an extraordinary event, but this is different in the fact that we're all conscious. We're all participants in this transition. We're, we are all slowly participating in the transition out of Adam and into, into some posthuman condition. And so for me, what's the most important thing for me, for my family, and, and even in, in at the heart of what I do, what I, what I try to do through my writings and, and interviews and, and, and what I'm doing here at this conference is, is to encourage people to answer those questions and to do so by rooting themselves in the gospel of Christ because that's, that's the defense, to anchor yourself and understand what humanity is worth, right? And, uh, that you know, this it breaks me up when I think about it, but think about what was paid for us. So the price of our redemption and then to just cast our humanity aside so that we can have what? Life Extension, Neuralink, and that's, that's where we are. That's the moment we're, we're in right now.

It's amazing for you when you, when you think about where we are in as a, as a human species and the questions that people tend to, to ask you. Um, you seem to be attempting to help people gain the insight necessary for courage, uh, because that is in some sense as a prerequisite to stand against something. You have to not be confused about what it is. But how are you planning on talking to your kids about AI or talk, how do you, how do you tell people? It's like a new technology that is good, but it's super dangerous. And is the solution pure abstinence or how are we supposed to fight against this in a way that means anything?

Yeah. I, if I find, uh, another woman who would be foolish enough to have children with me as I ran off from all the others, uh, I would probably first off, I would have like five or six kids, even if it required a second wife. And kidding. Just kidding. But I would, um, probably raise them to be as feral as possible and to be, uh, vandals and basically you would need five or six because some of them are going to end up dead and in jail. So you would have to like train them to fight the machine and never fear death, right? Uh, the Bhagavad Gita, death will never conquer that. I just want to take a moment to appreciate how applicable this is for all of us. Yeah. No, but on a very serious note, this is what, um, I, I really do think that it's impossible. It's, it's first off, it's hypocritical to pretend to some sort of like technological purity, right? Um, even if you're wearing moccasins with a spear, you're, you're, you're a little bit techno. You're, you're pre-cyborg. So unless you're just naked in the woods and that's only going to last for so long. Um, we rely on technology. So it's a matter of, of degree and ultimately it's a matter of spiritual orientation. So if it's, it's not to say that it, I think that that mode could excuse excesses, right? Like, oh, I am giving my child an AI teacher who will be his best friend his entire life because Jesus would like that, you know, like, uh, I don't think that's really going to cut it. I think it'll have to be more critical than that. But it does begin at the personal choice level. Find your line. Is, is your line a landline? No, no pun intended. You know, is your, is your line in the sand? A landline is your line in the sand. A, a flip phone, a smartphone, a wearable, a brain trode, you become a phone, turn me into a phone. Um, you know, where is your line on that? And then that, that goes for medicine, right? Like, is, are you going to take aspirin? Are you going to take hormones? Are you going to take mRNA? Uh, are you going to take CRISPR, which people are already doing, by the way. I mean, it's not approved by the FDA, so they go overseas, but there are already CRISPR gene therapies, CRISPR-based gene therapies that people are experimenting with. So, um, and you'll have to determine whether or not that fits you. And then as I was mentioning earlier from their communal agreement and from their institutions and on up, I think that the dream of fighting the machine, uh, is a noble one and I look forward to the point when people have come to their senses and are willing in large numbers to actually confront the system of power that we are living under and facing right now. But given today, July 26, 2025, is that where we are? June 27th, you're off on both counts. You might, you might benefit from that Neuralink implant. Joe, I, you know, your mind's too far back.

Speaking of technology, I am a time traveler, so I never really know when I'm going to land and where. Uh, but mostly when what I see right now basically is, uh, what you would expect from, uh, a population that has been demoralized and beaten down, uh, for a long time and has not really found its backbone yet. Uh, I think that the MAGA movement certainly represented, uh, a massive show of backbone. And I think that in general, Christians who have rejected the perverse sort of pop culture that has been forced upon us our entire lives and have chosen a path that is much purer and, and much more sensible and survivable. That all of these people have shown that you do not have to go with the flow. You don't have to follow the, the dictates from on high, but there are not yet enough, I don't think, to really confront this. And I don't know that that will happen in our lifetimes. I think that it's best to look at this technological environment as if you were going into a jungle and you were trying to survive. And you have to just assume that you're not going to kill off all of the tigers. They're going to be there. You have to assume that there's going to be poisonous animals and there's going to be pitfalls and all of this, and you just have to learn how to live with these entities, to live with them without, you know, say making love to the tiger and becoming, you know, giving birth to human-tiger hybrids, and, um, which is transhumanism. So, so what you have to do is look at this as a matter of survival here in the physical plane.

Just end on this though. Ultimately, and this is, I, I don't mean to be flippant when I say this. Ultimately, Christianity is transhuman in aspiration. First use of transhuman was in Dante's Divine Comedy about the transition from the mortal into the immortal form. It was then taken up again in a technological form. Christianity, if you believe in the resurrection, then it is about transitioning or transforming from this body into a new divine, redeemed body. If you believe in a more Platonic version where we go to heaven as spirits, you then have moved from this meat bag to a more refined spiritual form. Or in the eastern religions where one incarnates into the heavens and perhaps into nirvana or moksha, it is ultimately posthuman, right? This is a transitional form that we are moving towards something else that's either very much like this or something completely different, and the difference between what we call technological transhumanism and posthumanism and these traditional aspirations is that the traditional aspirations recognize that we are mortal. It recognizes that this is a lowly plane as compared to what is on high and it will not be built. You can't build a tower to those heavens as it were. You can only, I think as Tim says, uh, you can only be invited and walk through the door.

Can you speak to that? And then I've got one more question.

Yeah. I would say that from, I would say that the resurrection of Christ and the, the resurrection of the saints in Christ represents not a transition out of Adam but a return to Adam. That we actually at the resurrection are going to be more human than we are today because that's the reset to the blueprint, the perfect schematic for the human species, back being reset to the prototypical human being who had no genetic flaws, who was perfect in his creation and who was in communion, in fellowship with the family of God, with the maker himself. And that's what we're returning to, to what Adam was. That's where we're going. And that, and it's there is nothing that we can be offered, nothing that, that technology can offer us that is better than that. Amazing. We've had many conversations about this. I've got one more question for you, but to speak to that, um, to, to Christians, I think that it has always been and will always be, um, a matter of position and orientation. Where are you relying on? Uh, where is, what's giving you passage into the gates, the, the pathway through? You mentioned scaling over the wall and stealing the fruit. I think people have a serious risk, uh, in regards to using these things as a replacement to what we already have access to through the Holy Spirit, through Jesus. And it's an attempted fabrication of what makes us anointed, chosen, called. And so we have conversations about this. I never want to get to a place where I'm find myself relying on a tool rather than the, the Holy Spirit or a tool rather than, uh, speaking to Jesus about something. There are a lot of things that you can use AI for as long as it doesn't become your God, which is a matter of who you serve and where you are getting, uh, your direction and instruction from. Would you agree with this?

Absolutely. You know, I mean, there's only one way back into paradise. I am the way, the truth, and the life. And no man comes to the Father except through me. That's the way back. That's, you know, it's, it's so sad to me because the, because the aspiration of the, the human species trying to get back there with technology and yet the, the door is wide open to go back into the Father's house. Yep. So, if you're watching this and you are a Christian, uh, read John 15 every single day and begin to disassociate your need and dependence on anything that isn't the way, the truth, the life.

Last question. You ready? Let's start with you and with Timothy. Uh, with everything that you know, everything that you've studied, and where you see us going, what gives you hope for humanity? Comedy. Black comedy especially, not race, black comedy, but that also, you're the best, man. I, I, I think that, uh, no matter how horrible it is, with just the right sneer, it can be really funny. Uh, but I, I, I am not a, um, I'm not a hopeless person. I'm a hopeless romantic in fact. M, and I, I, I truly believe, going to answer your question here and also the other, to me the most important passages in the Bible are the sermons on the mount and the sermons on the plain, and those demands go far beyond what any of us could accomplish and thank God for forgiveness. But that is the only aspiration that I have as a Christian is to embody that as best I can and hope that it is forgiven when I do not. And the crucifixion itself, you know, is an almost impossible demand, to die for God, to die for your faith as the Christian martyrs would imitate Jesus in doing. Um, that seems bleak. Uh, and it is. The history of it is very bleak and the sermon on the mount itself is very chasening. But I think that those are really the only things that are, uh, worth dwelling on in, in, and in, in so far as my Christian aspiration. All the rest I should say is peripheral is peripheral. That's the central. Can you love God? Uh, can you love your neighbor? Can you forgive? Can you turn the other cheek? Can you turn away from mammon and towards the spirit? Uh, probably not, but you can try. And that's, uh, that's the most you can hope for.

Awesome. Thank you for developing your minds. You have worked really hard to make it sound, uh, comedic and hilarious, but you've worked very hard to get to this point. So, thank you for being diligent for you. What's your hope for humanity? I've read the end of the book. Doesn't get much better than Timothy Alberino. That's the best way to do it. There's very few people like you. I do want to say this before we wrap up. Uh, I go to a lot of events. We just got back from one two weeks ago. Um, meeting the people at a person's events gives you an insight into the character of the person running the event. It's a secret. I can tell who this person is by the people that they attract. Um, and I've got to just honor you for a moment because you've got a room full of people who highly respect you, but they, they haven't deified you. They trust you, but they seem, they seem passionate about what can happen when great minds get together and they discuss the most important parts of our reality. Um, that's very hard to do and it's very hard to fabricate. So, thank you for your work. I'm excited for what's coming next and hopefully I get to be a part of it. Thank you. Thank you guys for coming. What an awesome group of people we have here. Jake, do you have any parting words of wisdom for us or are you going to throw a question in? We're out of time, but I did have a question for you, but cool enough, you literally said it. You, you touched on the piece because I, the only thing I would say is that even I have made the mistake of going to something even like AI to further my relationship with God and what you're saying is so, I think it's so needed especially within the Christian community of like what is the line of you understanding using AI for research versus just going to the Holy Spirit to have a relationship and that's, that means more than anything, counterfeit will become an idol.

Yep. And any idol will construct an altar around you. And any altar that's constructed around you will ultimately take you out of the, the family over the long course of history. We love you guys. Thanks for being here. See you next week.

Get Our Mobile App

The Rise of Transhumanism (returning to telepathy, Darwinism, & CERN) w/Tim Alberino & Joe Allen

Transcription