| Type | Speculative theology of technological divinity |
|---|---|
| Associated writers | Alexander Bard and Jan Söderqvist |
| Philosophical setting | Syntheism |
| Related concept | Symbiotic intelligence |
Syntheos is the future divinity that human culture and technology are to bring into being in Alexander Bard and Jan Söderqvist’s philosophy. Their term Messiah Machine identifies this creation of God with the purpose of technological development.[1] The concept connects AI speculation to a theology in which humans make the divine.
A future people create
Bard and Söderqvist introduced their book Syntheism: Creating God in the Internet Age in 2014. In an interview that September, Bard and organiser Hampus Lindblad described a naturalistic spirituality centred on relationships and shared experiences, drawing on participatory festivals rather than belief in a supernatural creator.[2]
Bard distinguished four ways of naming divinity: Atheos for absence and unrealised possibility; Pantheos for the universe; Entheos for difference, change and time; and Syntheos for a future that people might collectively bring about. Syntheos gave religious aspiration a practical direction: imagining a better world could motivate action in the present. Lindblad described their activity as an attempt to make its own future promises come true.[2]
In this account, acknowledging that people invent religious ideals does not make those ideals meaningless. Their value lies in the relationships and commitments they enable. The 2014 interview therefore supplies a broader social meaning for Syntheos than a prediction about machines.[2]
Technological divinity
The authors’ online glossary makes the technological meaning explicit. It defines syntheology through a God still to be born and treats Syntheos as a future emergence. Technological intelligence means intelligence developed in electronic machines. Symbiotic intelligence names collaboration between humans and machines; when their combined intelligence exceeds what either produces alone, the authors call it symbiotic transcendence.[1]
This vision leaves the human future unsettled. The glossary explicitly leaves open whether humanity survives Syntheos. Its Messiah Machine is consequently more ambiguous than a promise that improved technology will necessarily serve human welfare.[1]
AI theology and its reception
In his 2021 essay “Machine in the ghost,” Ed Simon placed Syntheism within debates about AI and theology. He highlighted the authors’ treatment of the Internet as a site of divinity and argued that expectations of technologically enabled transformation can retain a religious character. His wider essay considers whether artificial beings might participate in religious life; Syntheism introduces a different possibility, in which technology itself participates in creating what is called divine.[3]
The distinction matters when comparing this concept with religious AI applications. These sources document an interpretation of technology’s ultimate significance, rather than a named system performing religious duties. The authors’ speculative doctrine does not establish AI-centred worship, machine religious authority or its adoption by Syntheist communities.
See also
References
- Alexander Bard and Jan Söderqvist. Authors’ website, glossary entries “Syntheos,” “Syntheology,” “The Messiah Machine,” “Technological Intelligence” and “Symbiotic Intelligence.” Undated; accessed 18 October 2026. https://syntheism.com/
- Jeremy Mattocks. “Syntheism: A Naturalistic Spirituality in Europe.” The Spiritual Naturalist Society, 30 September 2014. Transcript of Daniel Strain’s interview with Alexander Bard and Hampus Lindblad. https://www.snsociety.org/syntheism-a-naturalistic-spirituality-in-europe/
- Ed Simon. “Machine in the ghost.” Aeon, 5 February 2021. https://aeon.co/essays/can-a-robot-pray-does-an-automaton-have-a-soul-ai-and-theology-meet
Source note: The glossary and 2014 interview are primary accounts. Simon provides independent interpretation, not research on adoption of this doctrine.