Monday, September 13, 2010


While I am writing my next piece, I wanted to share this documentary so that others could see some of the ideals at work in technological advancement. There is a blend of Trans-humanist and New Age ideals at work within the scientific community, particularly as it pertains to human modification. There is a belief that not only is human consciousness evolving into godhood, but that it can be artificially stimulated. This film is lengthy, but certainly worth watching for those interested in the topics discussed here. Part one deals mostly with the idea of human modification from a technical standpoint, while the second and third parts deal with spiritual and moral issues that surround the subject. I thought a film might also be a welcome change of pace from the depth of reading material my posts usually incorporate. If well received, I may try to use pieces like this from time to time just to change things up.


  1. Thanks for posting this J.D. Since I am looking at theories in difference feminism. It's interesting to note that certain difference feminists were opposed to the metaphysical concept, that we can all be grouped under the human umbrella, because it did not take into account the separate experiences of men and women.

    There have also been secular scientists such as Leonard sax becoming aware of the foul play taking place in scientific studies. Looks like Christians might not be alone in our opposition to the New Age.


  2. Savvy,

    You are quite welcome, glad it was of interest in your line as well. Note sure if you made it all the way through the film (it is lengthy), but would really like final thoughts once you are. Given that these thoughts are coming from scientific minds and academia, it adds a different perspective on how we view technological advancement.

  3. JD,

    I just watched the whole thing. Pride does come before a fall.

    This convergence of religion and science should be disturbing to both Scientists and Christians.

    One of the guys interviewed wrote a book called "A world without women", where he blamed the effects the Catholic Church had on Western science, this also kept it separate from the East. The book argues that the Protestant reformation changed this. Protestants not familiar with the New Age lingo used in the book, would actually fall for the bait, that they can converge religion with science.

    A material scientists who deny's the existence of God, is at least being honest. These people are wolves in sheep's clothing.


  4. To add to the above. There's also a lot of scientism involved in this thinking. Scientism is basically psuedo-science. Brendan O'Neil who's an atheist and humanist has spoken about this new alliance of extreme Protestants and New atheists, that he says humanists should stop.


  5. These people are watching way too much science fiction. Maybe they should stick to light-hearted comedies.

  6. Savvy,

    It is one thing to attempt to observe facts within the creation, that bear witness to the creator. These folks are attempting to change the creation to fit their beliefs. In my opinion, this strays greatly from the realm of science and into the realm of godhood. Arguments can be made that western religions and science have had a past relationship, but it has with few exceptions been from a role of thesis to the observer.

    This is taking your beliefs and what already exists and forcing the two together to create a synthesis. It is forcing a change onto the natural world, with little regard for the outcome. They openly admit to desiring a extinction of the human species so that they can set themselves on high places as gods. The extremely sad part to me is, not only is there attempts being made by some within the scientific community, but many of these individuals are within the academic community as well, thus making them priests of the philosophy.

  7. JD,

    People in academia usually have crazy views, but their views don't extend beyond other people in the same circles.

    I do agree that they are trying to spiritualize science. One of the reasons why I am suspicious about the Intelligent Design community or Creationism. This can be taught in religion and philosophy classes, but not in science classes. Science only tells us how things work. It does not tell us why they work.

    Trying to find a link between the fall of man and gravity, only ends up in spiritualizing gravity, like transhumanism attempts to do or declaring that since science can't prove the fall of man, it never took place.

    The methods of philosophy are different from the methods of science.

    "They openly admit to desiring a extinction of the human species so that they can set themselves on high places as gods."

    Yes, also known as the end justifies the means.

    I did come across similar views in John C. Wright's sci-fi books. But, he was an atheist who recently converted to Christianity. I don't know if he saw the link between spiritual transhumanism and therefore embraced Christianity or what his intentions to convert were.

    It's good that these people have realized that the things spoken about in the Bible are possible, but it's bad that they think they can make it come to life without God and then kill God once, they become God.


  8. JD,

    With regard to Part III of TechnoCalypse, it is unbelievable that people are actually thinking in terms of "becoming gods."

    If you try to tell people about these bizarreries in the course of ordinary conversations, they not only tend to disbelieve you, but sometimes they also roll their eyes as if to write you off as a "wing nut" or "conspiracy theorist."

    I have read some of the writings of the heretical Jesuit priest Pierre Teilhard de Chardin who is mentioned several times in the video and have studied what he taught with a view to gaining an understanding of his errors.

    The video presentation frequently mentions Teilhard de Chardin in the context of his blasphemous so-called "Omega Point."

    Certain people speaking during the presentation also use an incorrect translation of the most sacred name of God - the name (JAHVEH) revealed to Moses atop Mount Horeb in Exodus 6:3.

    The presentation refers to God as "I shall be who I shall be"....FUTURE tense!

    Since a translation is also an interpretation, incorrect translations result in erroneous interpretations.

    In terms of the erroneous translation of JAHVEH the becoming which is proper to creatures is erroneously given priority over BEING which is proper to God the Creator and makes God subject to time......which God also created. The truth is that God "IS." Creatures "become."

    And here we are not talking about Christ's created human nature. We are referring to His uncreated divine nature.

    It is this incorrect translation of God's most sacred Name ( "I shall be what I shall be" ) that supports Teilhard de Chardin's heretical "evolutionary pantheism" and the "Omega Point."

    The correct translation ( "I AM WHO AM" and "HE WHO IS") does not support Teilhard de Chardin's theories. The correct translation "I AM WHO AM" and "HE WHO IS" implies that God creates nothing equal to or greater than His Word!

    The heretical Swiss Roman Catholic priest Hans Kung - who is involved with United Religions Initiative -defends Teilhard de Chardin and similarly tries to peddle the incorrect translation of the most sacred name of God in his book DOES GOD EXIST?


  9. cont....

    Again, the translation is not "I shall be what I shall be" in a future tense. It is "I AM WHO AM" or HE WHO IS" the present the absolute eternal NOW.

    The "I" and the "He" indicate the absolute Personhood of God - and not some impersonal, amorphous entity analogous to the "Force" frequently mentioned in Star Wars.

    The "AM" and the "IS" indicates the present tense...the describes the absolute eternal NOW of God's existence that goes way beyond our understanding.

    Moreover, from the correct translation of the most sacred Name of God revealed to Moses in the Bible, we can infer that in the absolute NOW of eternity, the procession of the Trinity ( Father, Son, Holy Spirit) does not take place "one after another" as it does with creatures who live in time. It takes place "all at once" in the absolute NOW of eternity.

    Thus, Creatures Proceed from God "one after another" in time by External Procession.

    But the Son and the Holy Spirit Proceed "all at once" from the Father by an Immanent ( Inborn) Act of the Most Holy Trinity ( Father Son & Holy Spirit) from all eternity, since They ( the Son & Holy Spirit ) belong to the Internal Life of God.

    As you can see, if this is true, then there is no possibility of man "evolving" into some bogus "equality with God" referred to by Teilhard de Chardin as the "Omega point" because as creatures, we do not belong to the" internal life of God." In order to do that, we would have to be God.

    Interestingly, Hans Kung derides the correct translation of JAHVEH by promoting the idea that "I AM WHO AM" describes a "stagnant" God.

    The fact that Kung uses the unfortunate word "stagnant" in reference to "I AM WHO AM" speaks volumes by way of indicating that Kung is either unable - or unwilling - to consider even the possibility of a divine dynamic which is so absolutely dynamic that it takes place "all at once."

    While this may seem like a trivial matter at first glance, it is of very great importance in terms of its consequences.

    The reason why it is so important that the most sacred name of God be translated and understood correctly is because of its implications in our understanding of the Holy Trinity ( the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit ). Most of the Christological errors that involve the "severing of Christ" which qualifies them as "the spirit of the antichrist" are derived from a misunderstanding/ misrepresentation of the procession of the Trinity that is often a direct result of a mistranslation of the most sacred name of God.

    Think about this. If the translation were "I shall be what I shall be," then in John's Gospel, Jesus would have had to say "before Abraham came to be "I shall be."

    But Jesus did not say that.

    He said " "Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham came to be, I AM." John 8:58 And the Gospel goes on to say,"So they picked up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid and went out of the temple area." John 8:59

    The reason they picked up stones to throw at Jesus was because in so far as Jesus referred to himself as "I AM," He was telling them that He was God.

    The term "came to be" is the term used of all creation in the Prologue to John's Gospel, while the word used for "AM" is the one reserved for the Word (Logos), our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

  10. Susanna,

    This movie was shown at the Top documentary film festival, so you can't be called a conspiracy nut for telling people about it.


  11. Saavy,

    I completely agree that the two should be seperate, but as I said before science is a process of identifying facts or methods. This is also not to be confused with using scientific methods to invent something that is yet to exist. What we are dealing with though is a group of people, with a preconceived notion, trying to exterminate all other possibilities, thus forcing their belief to be the only acceptable application.

    In my opinion this goes beyond religion, beyond invention, beyond science, and obviously beyond human experimentation. At least with experiments there is a given thought of failure. In this case the end result is a forgone conclusion. I might look at the idea with a less than serious concern, if it were not for the fact that at least parts of the ideals are permeating every aspect of our life.

    That it is being sold to the average consumer that man-machine interfacing is just natural progression of technology. That such interfacing must include every facet of someones life. That people are being taught on a academic, social, business, and political level that such was desired and in the best interest of the populace. When those at the top completely understand that the ramifications will only be beneficial to a select few.

    That New Age beliefs are involved can only serve to grease the wheels. As you know these beliefs lead one to ideas that individuals are expendable. You also understand how these beliefs currently fit into the context of our world on social and political levels. In this it becomes not just a matter of science mixed with a religious belief. But a religious belief aided by technology, with a public accustomed to and in many ways primed to accept the drastic change.

    I think in many ways, we may be saying the same thing. These are simply my thoughts laid bare to avoid confusion.

  12. Susanna,

    Thanks for your assessment, I could not agree more. The Lord's intent was to state that He is, was, and forever shall be. That before all else, "I AM", not I will be, or even you will be, as Chardin laid out and other New Agers have echoed.

  13. JD,

    Thanks for explaining things. i do agree with you. I explained this documentary to my friend who's agnostic, and she said it was an imposition on free will.


  14. JD,

    These created beings will not be unique in any way. They will be a fixed model of created individuals replicating themselves. The hope that these machines will someday develop their own personality is just weird and also impossible.

    What do you think?


  15. Savvy,

    In the general sense of a robotic being, I would probably agree. If their desired end result of being able to essentially download a human being into a computerized format were to be realized, then that is a whole other ball of wax.

    Far from ever achieving this point though, there is first the reality of a man-machine interface, such as neurochips. Unfortunately this is becoming a reality now. The application of such could forever alter human perception of reality, which again brings us into a completely different realm. Think of a world where a select group can download vast amounts of information directly into their brain in the time it takes a pdf document to load on your computer. This alone would make differences between classes monstrous. Or a world where perception of reality could be altered simply by hacking into someones brain directly. Or on a simpler scale, where you could control the emotional reaction of a populace to any given event.

    These things are becoming possible now. They are being developed now. Given the publics cry for instant gratification, how long until such a thing becomes the trend like a iPod or the latest Smart Phone? As much as I dislike the idea of any form of implantable traceability technology like RFID, such seems like a baby step in contrast.

    Such sentient beings, I don't worry about so much, at least not to the point where humanity faces extinction. We can be sure the Lord won't let it get that far. However the steps man takes toward such could shed a completely different light on elements of prophetic scripture.

  16. J.D.

    I remember being made to read a book in school called "a short history of progress". It was an indoctrination into this. My prof. was an ardent supporter of Malthusian theories.

    This is an interesting article on an atheist website about forced population control.


  17. Just to show you guys what is in the works - including neurochips!!!!

    Here is an article about "chimeras" that I thought you might want to check out. Between neurochipped "cyborgs" and genetically created "chimeras," the integrity of the human race the way God created it, may one day be in jeopardy.

    The following articles are "must reads!" The second one is a jackpot of information on transhumanism. All these articles are mindblowers!!!




    Postgenderism is a diverse social, political and cultural movement whose adherents affirm the voluntary elimination of gender in the human species through the application of advanced biotechnology and assistive reproductive technologies.[1]

    Advocates of postgenderism argue that the presence of gender roles, social stratification, and cogno-physical disparities and differences are generally to the detriment of individuals and society. Given the radical potential for advanced assistive reproductive options, postgenderists believe that sex for reproductive purposes will either become obsolete, or that all post-gendered humans will have the ability, if they so choose, to both carry a pregnancy to term and father a child, which, postgenderists believe, would have the effect of eliminating the need for definite genders in such a society.[1

  18. Thanks Susanna,

    We won't be welcome in this new world. I do think that they would however have to get rid of democracy and freedom of religion in order to do this, because it's an imposition.


  19. In case it has slipped past anyone, with the events taking place at the UN this week also comes the annual meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative. They webcast meetings which are almost always worth watching. I am including the link to the webcast which shows the times of various meetings and topics they will cover. Anyone following the work Susanna and I have been doing may be interested in the Special Sessions on microfinance, which will take place from 4:30-6:00pm today and 3:30-4:30pm Wednesday. Speakers for these sessions include Muhammad Yunus and Van Jones. Other sessions are loaded with the who's who, including the Obamas, Gates, Laura Bush, and the Clintons.