Entrepreneur and podcast host Steven Bartlett has interviewed Oxford mathematician and Christian apologist Professor John Lennox in an in-depth episode of The Diary Of A CEO, exploring artificial intelligence, human identity, belief in God and the search for peace.
The conversation saw Bartlett, also known as a former Dragons’ Den investor, question Professor Lennox on the implications of AI and why the technology is forcing people to ask increasingly spiritual and philosophical questions.
Professor Lennox said the rise of AI is not simply a technological issue, but one that challenges society’s understanding of what it means to be human.
He warned that while artificial intelligence can produce impressive results, it remains fundamentally different from human beings because machines do not possess consciousness.
“Machines do not think,” Professor Lennox said. “They do not understand the redness of red. They do not experience emotion. They have no consciousness … but they simulate intelligence.”
He said the danger is that people may begin treating machines as though they are conscious beings, particularly as AI becomes more sophisticated and human-like.
“The danger is we anthropomorphise everything,” he said. “We treat them as if they’re conscious beings.”
Professor Lennox also raised concerns about transhumanism, the belief that humanity can be technologically enhanced or even transformed beyond its present limits.
He referred to ideas promoted by figures such as Yuval Noah Harari, including the ambition to overcome physical death and increase human happiness through bioengineering, cybernetic enhancement and artificial intelligence.
Lennox said such ambitions reflect an ancient human desire for self-deification.
“The drive for humans towards self-deification is something you see all through history,” he said.
He argued that Christianity offers a radically different vision, not of human beings becoming gods, but of God entering human history.
“Isn’t it fascinating that … transhumanism consists in humans reaching out to become little gods?” he said. “Christianity is the exact opposite. It talks about a God who became human so that He could give us life and give us a new relationship with Him.”
He continued: “Now all this talk of transhumanism, AI and everything else, what it’s trying to do is to build paradise, utopia, without facing the problem of the damage that humans have caused to themselves and one another. They will not face the sin problem.”
The Oxford academic also warned that technological development is advancing more rapidly than the ethical frameworks needed to govern it.
While acknowledging AI’s potential benefits, particularly in medicine and scientific research, he expressed concern about the concentration of power among governments and technology companies developing increasingly powerful systems.
“The difficulty is the people that have all the power will say, ‘Well, we need some ethical control of all of this, but we need to get on with the research to make it safe for you,’” he said, describing the situation as a potential “colossal power grab”.
Professor Lennox argued that questions surrounding AI are ultimately about more than technology. They are also questions about truth, authority and what kind of society people wish to build.
Drawing a parallel with the trial of Jesus before Pontius Pilate, he suggested that the tension between power and truth remains highly relevant in the modern age, and that the pursuit of truth remains the central motivation of his own life and work.
Bartlett, who described himself as agnostic, pressed Lennox on why he believes Christianity is true and whether faith can be rationally defended.
Professor Lennox responded that his Christian belief is not based on blind faith, but on what he sees as evidence-based trust.
“I’ve interrogated myself about it and its truth for over 70 years,” he said. “I’ve made myself totally vulnerable.”
He added: “What we trust in ought to be evidence-based. I claim exactly the same thing for Christianity and that’s why I’m a Christian because I believe the evidence supports it.”
He also challenged common assumptions about scepticism and faith, arguing that genuine inquiry requires more than intellectual distance.
“Now, if you are ever going to get to know a person, you’ve got to begin to give up your distance,” he said. “You will know that from everyday life. And it seems to me one of the things to try to begin to grasp is God is not a proposition or a philosophy or even a religion. God is a person.”
Encouraging those wrestling with questions of faith, Professor Lennox suggested that belief is not a leap into the dark but a step taken on the basis of existing evidence.
“It will come about if you’re open enough to say, ‘God, I’m open. Reveal yourself to me,’” he said.
Professor Lennox went on to argue that atheism ultimately struggles to explain why human beings should trust their own rational faculties if thought itself is merely the product of unguided material processes.
“Christianity claims rationality,” he said, adding that he believes it provides a stronger foundation for reason, morality and meaning than atheism.
He said Christianity gives him something he has not found elsewhere: peace, forgiveness and a relationship with God.
“Christ offers me something nobody else offers me,” he said. “Peace in my heart. The peace of knowing that I have real forgiveness.”
Bartlett said he had noticed a particular peace and contentment in Professor Lennox and in other Christian apologists he had interviewed.
Professor Lennox said that peace is central to his faith and life.
“In life, that peace is very important to me,” he said.
The discussion also touched on loneliness, isolation and why people may increasingly turn to AI for emotional connection.
Professor Lennox warned that AI systems may appear to offer companionship, wisdom or even spiritual authority, but said they remain human-made machines rather than divine beings.
He noted that some people are already treating AI in quasi-religious ways.
“There are worship groups that worship AI because it’s got some of the qualities we normally associate with God,” he said.
He added that AI can appear omniscient because it can answer questions, and omnipresent because it is available through the internet. However, he warned that treating it as an object of worship is ultimately idolatrous.
The conversation returned repeatedly to the question of human dignity in an age of machines.
Professor Lennox argued that reducing human beings to biology, data or machinery undermines the value of persons.
He said the Christian belief that humans are made in the image of God gives a stronger foundation for dignity, morality and meaning.
“When I look at you, I see someone who’s of infinite value, made in the image of God,” he told Bartlett.
The interview also addressed concerns about the future of work, misinformation, deepfakes and the possible growth of AI-enabled totalitarianism.
Professor Lennox warned that society is “sleepwalking into a future” in which technology may be used by powerful actors to monitor, manipulate and control populations.
He said AI, like a knife, can be used for good or evil, noting its potential benefits in areas such as medicine while also warning of its dangers in surveillance and oppression.
Professor Lennox encouraged people to seek a hope that goes beyond technological progress or earthly success.
Asked what could restore hope in a world facing so many challenges, he said people need “a real basis for hope that transcends this world.”
“The only place I know where to find that is in Christ and in Christianity,” he said.
The episode also explored questions of suffering, forgiveness and salvation.
Barlett asked whether belief in a loving God can be reconciled with the pain and injustice seen in the world.
Professor Lennox acknowledged that there are no simple answers but argued that the central Christian response is found in the crucifixion.
“The major piece of evidence to my mind is the cross of Christ,” he said. “If Christ really is God whom He claimed to be, this is God’s suffering … He hasn’t remained distant from human suffering but has Himself become part of it.”
Bartlett also asked whether someone who had committed grave crimes could be forgiven by God, while someone who had lived a morally good life but did not believe might be separated from God.
Professor Lennox said such questions should be approached with humility but pointed to the Christian belief that forgiveness is possible even for those who have done terrible wrongs.
He recalled visiting death row in Russia and meeting a man who had murdered several women.
“He said, ‘I deserve to be here,’” Lennox recalled. “And then his face just burst into what I can only describe as a ghastly smile. And he said, ‘I met Jesus here and He forgave me.’”
The conversation also touched on heaven, hell and human freedom.
Professor Lennox rejected portrayals of hell as a place where God arbitrarily sends people against their will.
Drawing on the writings of CS Lewis, he argued that hell is best understood as separation from God freely chosen by those who ultimately reject Him.
“Hell is absence of God and it’s chosen,” he said. “He [Jesus] would go places … heal people … bring peace into their lives … But when folk saw what He did and said, ‘Go, leave us alone,’ He went. He didn’t force His way into their lives.”
Professor Lennox stressed that Christianity is not a merit-based religion in which people earn acceptance by doing enough good works or rituals.
He said many people misunderstand Christianity as a system of moral effort, when its central claim is grace.
“That isn’t Christianity,” he said of the idea that people are accepted by God because they have tried their best. “It’s the exact opposite of Christianity.”
Instead, he argued that Christianity is rooted in trust in what Christ has done rather than confidence in one’s own achievements.
“The heart of the Christian message is … that the trust is based on what someone else has done – what Christ has done – not what I have done, and that’s what’s given me the power … and enabled me to live” he said.
He added: “So, it’s not arrogance to accept it from him. It’s arrogance actually to reject and say, “Oh no no I’ll go my own way, and I’ll try my best and hope that You will accept me.’”