Does the Bible Mention AI? (II)
Okay… This Is Getting Weird Now
If Part 1 was me calmly noticing patterns and pretending everything was fine, Part 2 is where that approach starts to feel a bit less convincing.
Not dramatically. I’m not about to start assigning prophetic significance to my Wi-Fi router or anything like that (though I have named my network The Promised LAN). But this is the point where you move from general concepts – “non-human agency,” “systems behaving like minds” – into actual passages. And once you do that, a few things stop feeling abstract and start feeling… uncomfortably specific.
So, with all the same disclaimers still firmly in place (no forcing modern technology into ancient text, no conspiracy-tier interpretations, no claiming the Apostle John saw a data centre), let’s look at some of the passages that tend to trigger that quiet internal “hang on a second.”
Revelation 13 – The Image That… Speaks?
Right. We’re going straight in.
Revelation 13 is one of those chapters that people either avoid entirely or analyse to the point where you end up with colour-coded charts and a mild headache. I’m aiming for something slightly more restrained than that.
There’s a particular line that tends to stand out:
The second beast “was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.”
If you slow that down and just look at the structure of what’s being described, you end up with something like this:
There is an image – so, something constructed or represented. That image is then given breath, which in biblical language is usually tied to life or animation. And then, somewhat unexpectedly, it speaks and participates in enforcing behaviour, to the point of life-and-death consequences.
Now, historically, this has been interpreted in a number of ways. Some see it as literal statues animated through deception. Others see it more symbolically – representing systems of authority, propaganda, or enforced worship. All of those interpretations make sense within the historical and literary context.
But if you momentarily strip away the specifics and just look at the mechanics, what you have is:
A constructed entity that is given the ability to communicate and enforce behaviour at scale.
And that… is at least structurally familiar.
I’m not saying this is describing artificial intelligence. That would be too neat, and probably wrong. But I am saying that if you were trying to explain a system that isn’t alive in the biological sense, but can still “speak” (in the sense of producing communication) and influence or control behaviour, you wouldn’t be that far off this description.
What makes it slightly more unsettling is the language of “breath.” Because now you’re dealing with something that is not inherently alive, but is given something that allows it to function as if it were. And that idea – something non-living acting in a way that resembles life or agency – is exactly the kind of conceptual overlap we were noticing in Part 1.
It’s not a direct match. But it’s close enough that your brain does that quiet little pause.
Enforcement Without Someone Standing There
The next detail is easy to read past, but it’s worth sitting with for a moment.
The image doesn’t just speak – it causes those who refuse to comply to be killed.
Traditionally, this has been understood in terms of human systems: regimes, authorities, persecution carried out by people acting on behalf of a system. And that still holds.
But there’s another layer in the way it’s described. The enforcement feels tied to the system itself, rather than to a specific individual standing in front of you making a decision.
In other words, the authority is embedded.
If I were trying to describe that in modern terms – carefully, and without overreaching – I’d say it feels less like a person making a judgment in the moment, and more like a system executing rules consistently across a wide scope.
Now, historically, systems have always existed. Laws, governments, institutions – they all operate beyond individual decisions. But what’s changed in the modern world is the degree to which those systems can operate automatically.
We now have systems that can:
- monitor behaviour
- evaluate compliance
- and trigger outcomes
…without a human actively making each individual decision in real time.
Again, I’m not saying Revelation 13 is describing automation or AI.
But I am saying that the type of system being described is no longer something we have to imagine in purely abstract terms. We have real-world parallels – imperfect, partial, but recognisable.
And that makes the passage feel a bit less distant than it used to.
The Mark – Identity and Participation
Still in the same chapter, we get the next well-known element:
No one can buy or sell unless they have the mark.
This is one of those verses that has been mapped onto almost every new development in economic systems over the last century or so. Coins, cards, barcodes, chips – if it involves transactions, someone has probably suggested it.
So again, restraint is important.
But if you ignore the speculation and just look at the structure, you have a system where:
- participation in the economy is conditional
- that condition is tied to identity
- and the rule is applied universally
In other words, access to basic societal functions is governed by a central requirement.
Now, none of that requires advanced technology. You can imagine simpler versions of this in many historical contexts.
But modern systems – particularly digital ones – make this kind of structure far more scalable and precise. Identity can be tracked, transactions can be monitored, rules can be enforced globally.
And this is where AI doesn’t appear as the headline feature, but more as the underlying capability.
Because if you were to build a system that:
- tracks individuals
- governs access
- enforces rules at scale
…you would almost certainly need something capable of processing large amounts of information and making decisions efficiently.
Which is, broadly speaking, what AI systems are good at.
So again, not a direct prediction. But the overlap in structure is hard to ignore once you’ve noticed it.
Daniel 12 – Knowledge, But Not Just More Books
Before we stay too long in Revelation, it’s worth stepping back to Daniel.
There’s a line in Daniel 12 that often gets quoted:
“Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase.”
On the surface, that seems fairly straightforward. Knowledge increases over time. That’s been true for centuries.
But what’s interesting is how knowledge increases.
For most of history, it was relatively linear. More books were written. More people learned. Information spread, but slowly and in fairly predictable ways.
What we’re seeing now is something quite different.
Knowledge is no longer just stored – it’s:
- processed
- connected
- and, increasingly, generated
And this is where things get slightly strange, because we now have systems that can produce outputs that function as knowledge, even if they don’t “understand” in the human sense.
So when we read about knowledge increasing, we’re no longer just imagining libraries getting bigger. We’re imagining an entire ecosystem where information is:
- instantly accessible
- continuously updated
- and partially mediated by systems that sit between us and the raw data
Which doesn’t mean Daniel was describing AI.
But it does mean that the scale and nature of knowledge increase we’re experiencing fits the description more comfortably than a purely linear model ever did.
Beasts That Behave Like Minds
One of the more helpful lenses for all of this is the way Scripture describes kingdoms as beasts.
If you stop and think about it for too long, it’s actually quite a strange way of describing things. An empire is not a single being – it’s a collection of people, structures, and processes.
And yet, in Daniel and Revelation, it’s described as if it were a unified entity:
- it rises
- it acts
- it speaks
- it demands
Which only really makes sense if you think in terms of systems.
From a distance, a complex system can behave as if it has a single will, even if it’s made up of many parts.
And this is where the parallel with modern systems becomes clearer. Because what we’re increasingly capable of building are systems that:
- consist of many components
- operate together
- and produce outputs that feel coherent and directed
They’re not conscious. But they behave in ways that are consistent enough to feel intentional.
Which is exactly how biblical “beasts” are described.
So again, the Bible already has a conceptual framework for describing large, complex systems as if they were single agents.
And that framework translates surprisingly well.
The False Prophet – The Persuasive Layer
This is the point where I hesitated slightly, because the analogy can sound a bit too modern if you push it too far.
But it’s still worth noting.
Alongside the beast and the image, Revelation introduces the figure often referred to as the false prophet. This figure performs signs, persuades people, and directs attention towards the system of power.
Functionally, it acts as a kind of intermediary. It doesn’t hold ultimate authority itself, but it shapes how people respond to that authority.
If you describe that in fairly neutral terms, you end up with something like:
A persuasive agent operating within a larger system, influencing how individuals interact with it.
And that’s a role that exists in many forms – religious, political, cultural.
But in a world where communication and persuasion are increasingly mediated by algorithms and automated systems, the category itself starts to feel more relevant.
Not because the false prophet is a technological system.
But because Scripture recognises the importance of the layer that connects people to power – and how influential that layer can be.
Pulling Back (Before This Gets Out of Hand)
At this point, it’s probably important to pause and say this clearly:
Everything we’ve looked at can still be understood entirely in non-technological terms.
Political systems, social structures, human authority – these have always existed, and they fit these descriptions perfectly well.
So if your conclusion is:
“This is all symbolic of human systems of power,”
That’s not only valid – it’s probably the safest starting point.
What I’m suggesting is slightly more limited than that.
Not that these passages are about AI.
But that the kinds of systems they describe are now easier for us to recognise, because we are starting to build systems that operate in similar ways.
Where This Starts to Feel Different
And I think this is where the real shift happens.
For most of history, these kinds of descriptions required a fair bit of imagination. You had to picture what it might look like for a system to behave like a single entity, or for something constructed to act as if it were alive. It all sat at a slight distance—recognisable in principle, but not something you could easily point to.
Now, that distance has shrunk.
We don’t have to imagine it in quite the same way anymore, because we can see early versions of it around us. They’re imperfect, obviously, and nowhere near the scale described—but they’re close enough to be recognisable.
That doesn’t mean we’ve suddenly “figured out” prophecy, or that we’re now reading these passages with some kind of privileged insight. But it does change how they feel.
They’re less abstract than they used to be. Less distant.
And, if I’m being honest, just a little less comfortable.
Closing Thought (Before This Becomes Part 3’s Problem)
If Part 1 was curiosity, and Part 2 is where that curiosity turns into a slightly raised eyebrow, then Part 3 is where we have to deal with the implications.
Because at some point, this stops being about identifying patterns and starts being about what those patterns mean for how we live.
Which is, unfortunately, where Scripture tends to focus anyway.
And it turns out that question is a bit harder to avoid than the original one.