Wrestling with AI, Ethics, and the Image of God
Recently, I was invited to speak on AI and Ethics at a gathering of missionaries. Talking on AI is a challenge for me because I’m somewhat cynically inclined to simply say “this is an old problem with new polish.” However, since researching for and giving the talk I’ve been sucked in. This is an old problem with new polish—but both the problem and the polish are very poorly understood. Accordingly, it gives us the chance for much needed re-engagement with fundamentals and with creeping problems our society has largely ignored in the favor of speed and money.
In my September talk I tried to survey the question of AI and ethics in the following way (which you can see an excellent summary of on Ed Nye’s podcast here, further episodes are still in production)
The problem is whether we can work well with partners, platforms, and tools that don’t align with our goals or values.
The problem must be situated in theology, which means it’s fundamentally a question of obedience and worship. Both of those concepts, of course, expand rapidly.
The problem must be situated in the story of who God is, his mission, who man is, and our mission.
AI is a set of technologies and terms that are used loosely but have relatively specific and helpful meanings that draw into question what AI is competent at, what AI isn’t designed for, how machines are made, and what they can achieve.
Machines cannot solve all problems, and cannot create truly new information, and cannot become sentient—though they can certainly give the impression of all of the above.
Current ethical frameworks fail to define AI, are not up to date, and suffer from internal inconsistencies. They further fail to be practical for purchasers or users of AI systems and lock the ethical discussion with builders and regulators.
I closed with some musings and questions to ask ourselves such as:
Is this tool replacing me or enabling me? (Which mirrors John Dyer’s points on “becoming” over “doing”)
Does the tool present itself as a defined tool/system, or is it an “invisible” mediator?
If it doesn’t lean towards New Creation, can it be restored or redeemed?
Should we have different questions for users of AI vs for those procuring AI systems?
Since then, I’ve done a decent amount of reading and listening on the topics of AI, the mission of God, the platform/surveillance economy, etc. and I’m even more convinced that the theological positioning of the AI ethics/use question is essential for navigating our current times. I think you could legitimately approach this question using Biblical theologies about the pattern/purpose of Creation, God’s purpose or mission, the temple, the image of God, creation and resurrection/new creation, putting on the mind of Christ, and more.
Swimming in too much information, I’ve landed on the image of God in the Bible—especially as clarified at the Cross—as an essential guidepost for the people of God when selecting or using AI tools. The image of God has already served as a guidepost for much of the writing and thinking on AI and ethics, such as the frameworks from the ERLC and Praxis Labs, but much of the current thought is focused on the value of man as shown in the image of God and neglects the vocation of man in the same concept, which leads to inconsistencies and limits applicability.
Fundamentally, the image of God is not simply God’s most prized possession places in creation immediately before God rests but is also God’s representative and agent in creation. God forms man out of dust and then breathes life into him in a manner that reflects the very pattern of the rest of creation. The world is formless and void (or empty) in Genesis 1:2. God then creates the world in two sets of three days, first by forming the world and then by filling its partitions with creatures, which sets up the form-fill pattern.
Adam is created in the form-fill pattern in Genesis 2:7 and the command to Adam and Eve (Genesis 1:28) also has a fundamental form-fill pattern in its commands to “subdue [the Earth], and have dominion” and “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth” (Genesis 1:28, ESV; I’ve reversed the order they appear in the text).
We’re at risk of a 900-page biblical survey here. So, briefly, the form-fill pattern continues through Revelation. It also morphs into a for-from pattern where the blessing of God is for man and from man to the world. In the covenants, it’s for God’s people and then from God’s people. The for-from pattern is a verbatim part of the cycles of covenant and promise (c.f. Genesis 12:1-3), is exemplified at the Cross, and is clarified in the two greatest commandments: Love God (for) and love your neighbor (from).
This places the image of God at the crossroads of all these other patterns in a way that asks not only, “Who is God and who are we?” but also “What is God up to and what should we be doing?” We’re somewhat able to use it as shorthand to wrestle with all the Biblical images I mention above and to put them directly in use. After all… its us.
Here’s the tentative outline. We have several concepts to wrestle with going forward while we ask “what is AI and what can it do or become?” What does the image of God tells us about:
The likeness of God and the breath (or Spirit) of God
The value and dignity of man
The vocation of man
All of these are, of course, impacted by man’s fall and then by salvation from Christ’s work on the cross. Briefly put: salvation positions man inside Christ Jesus the Lord, which is much more but not less than re-commissioning man into the work of God, re-equipping him, and making amends for man’s sin.
After considering the fall and the cross, can examine whether how we view AI will reshape how we view ourselves and God. What is AI—or what can it be—in relation to:
Vocation
Value
The Spirit of God
The likeness of gods
In summary—for today anyway—if we are to meaningfully engage with the emerging AI age, we need to deeply consider the Biblical question of “who is man” not only in terms of our value, but also and essentially in terms of our vocation.