You can listen to a church presentation I did on this matter here:

The Church has spent much time on combating or reacting to Critical Race Theory, Marxism’s Class-Warfare, and Transsexuality (Transgenderism-Grooming-kids), but little is said on Transhumanism by the Church. In worse scenarios, the “church” might even have adopted some of these so-called ‘virtues’ as talking points or even as values to be pursued. As society raises certain questions, the Church should respond to those concerns, but the wise among the Church know that responding must be marginal compared to crafting a positive theological vision or narrative on the issues. The Church understands the issues, then advances its own foundational narrative on the matter from the Church’s rich resources, dominate among these are scripture, tradition, and theology.

The danger is simply letting society frame the conversation and therefore the threshold of how that conversation can be addressed. When the Church frames out the issues from its own resources, the thresholds and the entire conversation is reframed. This is as much a rhetorical move as it is an epistemological one: rhetorical because the Church could be set up to be jeered within certain frameworks and epistemological because certain frameworks may not ultimately be reconcilable with a Christianity guided by analogia fidei (analogy of faith). In such circumstances, the Church should respond to the issues, consider the framing, reject that framing, and then offer its own framing on the matter. Lest I be misunderstood, I am not saying that the problems raised by the topics above are invalid; I am saying that how those problems are packaged and then framed while seeking solutions are far from or even hostile to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Church doesn’t need the “best of the secular world’s ideas” to frame out how to solve problems; it has its own riches from which to do it, and the Church can still integrate good ideas from the world while rejecting its frameworks.

I am attempting here to cast a theological vision that will bear on the topics I’ve mentioned to this point: viz., why I am a Son of God Human Supremacist.

1. The Son of God is the Living Logos Who existed before all and in Whom all subsist.
   1. He is therefore Supreme in preceding all.
   2. He is therefore Supreme in substantiating all (ensuring their integratas).
2. The Son of God became embodied as truly human as Jesus of Nazareth, and He demonstrated perfect humanity; He articulated and fulfilled what the Imago Dei (Image of God) entails humanly in the fallen world.
   1. Perfect humanity is concerned with influencing through love and tough truth.
   2. Perfect humanity uses its excellence to humbly serve others not to arrogantly act better than others.
   3. Perfect humanity does not allow race or culture to frame or control behaviors among humans; Perfect humanity reframes human behavior to accord with the virtues and commandments of God. In other words, Perfect humanity attunes itself to a moral framework for human behavior in order to connect with God. Morality for morality’s sake is not the intended goal. Morality to connect with God is a framework that transcends mere human behavior.
   4. The Imago Dei is intimately tied up with man and woman procreating and filling the earth per Genesis 1:27 – 28 in which we find God’s declaration of making humanity in His image (v. 27) combined with God’s purpose for humanity “be fruitful, multiply, subdue the earth (v. 28).” The Imago Dei is thus tailored to this activity contained in God’s 1^st command to humanity.
3. The Son of God is humanity’s destiny. The rather fancy teaching of Church Tradition, as contained in the Church Fathers, is that of the hypostatic union, which means that the “Person of the Logos (eternal Son of God)” united truly to humanity, playing out in our real world as Jesus of Nazareth — Jesus’ name literally means “Yahweh saves” in Hebrew. What this means for humanity’s destiny is that the divinity of the Son of God has permanently been conjoined to humanity. Immortality embraced morality; the Life-Giver indwelt the life-needy.

Son of God Human Supremacy Applied to Transhumanism

We reject this world as it is, destined for futility; we accept only the world to come as encapsulated by the Resurrection of the Son of God.

We reject the perpetuating of life in any way in this world of death, sickness, and entropy; we embrace eternal life by the union of humanity to the Son of God, deposited in us by the Holy Spirit’s presence in us, and enjoyed in the loving grasp of the Father of all things.

We reject that humanity’s destiny is to become a machine, a cyborg, or a digital consciousness of any type; we replace this grotesque visage with a divinized humanity, as presently marked out by the resurrected Son of God, a humanity that deepens its humanity as more time passes. Humanity as image bearers (Imago Dei) are muted in their true human capacity in this world because of sin and death; human image bearers gain profound capacities as they drink deeply of the perfect representation of God, that is, Jesus of Nazareth, to Whom they are united forevermore.

We reject technology as savior; we embrace Christ as Lord and Savior.

We deny that technology can produce any lasting happiness beyond banal pleasure of the increasingly dissatisfying type; we affirm that humanity was created to be satiated only by union with the Son of God, by the reunion of the image bearer with the One after whom the image is made. Humanity, designed to be eternal into the future, can only be satisfied by something eternal or infinite.

We deny that humanity is nothing more than an earthly specimen; we affirm that humanity is designed for transcendence, as evidenced by humanity’s great “story making” capacities. The union of humanity with the Son of God is the embodiment of transcendence made immanent.

We affirm theosis; we deny se-apotheosis or apotheosis.  Theosis of the unmerited, provided by the Son of God type, is reaffirmed.

We affirm the real threat of genocidal for the entire human species that technology provides or represents; we affirm that only the Maker has the authority to exert genocide on humanity although this affirmation does not mean that we believe God would do that (Romans 9). The Son of God came to eliminate sinful humankind; He embraces all those who embrace Him, annihilating who they once were by uniting humanity to the Spirit of God, or by putting unforgiving, unrepentant humanity into perpetual death. Bear in mind here, that transhumanists desire to put humanity into a state of perpetual death by inseparably wedding humanity to this realm destined for “total death” as entropy reaches maximum levels. In light of the genocide that technology threatens, we hope that God would intervene in much the same way He did at the Tower of Babel.

We affirm the very real possibility that any human becoming too digitized, cyborged, or machine, may lose opportunity to be among those who can be saved: the Son of God became human in very respect, and as the Great Tradition teaches, “that which is not assumed is not saved or healed.” We therefore affirm that a transhumanist transformation into something of a hybrid human type may pose the greatest threat to the future of humanity and its relationship with God since Genesis 6.

We affirm the need for humanity to reconnect with wilderness places and simpler ways of life even as the realm ruled by the Son of God in future heaven is represented by a garden temple; we deny that technology, or machina (philologically means ‘magic’ or manipulation of nature), should advance down certain lines of advancement. We further affirm that if technological advancement leads to the annihilation of the human species, then all the times ‘religion’ or the Church inhibited technological advancement may have indeed been net goods for the human species.

More to come as I work out Son of God Human Supremacy as it applies to the other topics aforementioned . . . . . . . . . . . . .