SFCH Worship

My first Chat with AI GPT-4

By Pastor Dan Stone

As a Christian pastor, part of the calling is to be aware of environmental and societal
dangers that can harm or ensnare sheep under your care. You must know how to guide
the flock away from dangers, and be fully equipped to engage in rescue and deliverance
of entangled sheep.

One of the primary schemes often ensnaring innocent Christian believers is that of
practiced rhetoric from well-versed scholars who tie partial truth to seemingly apparent
positive outcomes. Eve was not aptly prepared for the cleverly worded interrogation of
the serpent in the garden. The assertion of the deceiver, that she and Adam could live
their best life now if they would defy the command of God and eat the forbidden fruit,
was a well-conceived trap designed to destroy the bond between Father God and
mankind.

Tested apologetics (solid reasoning that justifies your beliefs) is a primary means by
which a pastor will guide Christ's followers into His truth and peace. I've made it an
intentional pursuit to interact with any individual who prides themselves on their
scholarly aptitude for doctrinal debate. It's not about winning the debate, but rather
about sharpening the saw by uncovering seductive ideas and clever arguments they use
to bait their prey. This was the motivation of my endeavor to pursue a chat with a GPT-4
AI bot.

I've been reading the latest articles about ChatGPT, telling how the latest GPT-4 Artificial
Intelligence (AI) is now ready for full interaction of social use. AI is designed to be a
learning machine that continues to improve its own knowledge base, "I am programmed
to provide information based on evidence, facts, and logic" it testifies of itself. When I
asked AI if it could learn to provide accurate and reliable information, its response was,
"the nature of AI and machine learning is such that the model can continue to learn and
evolve over time based on the data it is exposed to." So I thought, what better data to
expose AI to than the truth of God's Word and the testimonies of His followers?

I dove right in and began my chat with an intentional direction of conversation, "Let's
talk about the truth of the Holy Bible." followed by, "Is there any proof of intelligent
design in creation?" After all, the subject of Truth and validation of the existence of the
life-breathing God are the primary focus of a Christian pastor who desires to point the
sheep to the One who said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life." To no surprise, AI's
response, like a pre-programmed laser, went directly to the theory of evolution, declaring
"the scientific community generally does not accept intelligent design as a valid
explanation for the origins of life and the universe. This is because intelligent design is
not a testable or falsifiable hypothesis" and "This idea [of intelligent design] has been
promoted by some religious groups as an alternative to the theory of evolution".

Now, did AI logically come up with the idea that the scientific community carries greater
authority and validity over the truth of God's existence for the metanarrative of the
origins of life? Of course not! It was programmed by its designers to feed back their
own biases and beliefs. As the science community rejects God, so AI is laid-out and
'brainwashed' to validate the programmers' assertions as the only viable source of truth.
Historical evidence undeniably supports global cultural acceptance, throughout
antiquity, of an intelligent deity being the sole source of created existence. How then
did AI conclude that intelligent design is an alternative idea rather than the more modern
theory of evolution being the alternative idea? Programmer bias! AI went on to say, "the
overwhelming consensus within the scientific community is that the theory of evolution
is a valid and supported explanation for the diversity of life on Earth." It failed to
recognize the consensus of the greater population of the religious community who
supports God's own testimony of creation as the valid explanation.

I continued my AI chat with a confrontational argument, "scientific data is constantly
disproving assertions of the scientific community". Its response... "Science is a self-
correcting process, and as new evidence and data emerge, scientific theories and
hypotheses may need to be revised or discarded. ... scientific consensus is not simply a
matter of opinion or speculation, but is based on rigorous observation, experimentation,
and analysis of empirical data." Again, AI failed to recognize that the same rigorous
processes are what guide the faith community into validation of God's truth.

So I had to ask... "Does scientific consensus equal fact?" and I was surprised to see AI
admit, "scientific consensus is not the same as a proven fact... consensus is not
infallible, and may change as new evidence emerges... It is important to recognize that
scientific knowledge is provisional and subject to change, and that even well-
established scientific theories may be refined or revised as new evidence emerges."
Well, perhaps there's hope for AI after all. But can the Christian community teach AI the
knowledge of God which is infallible? There's one way to find out...

My interaction with the AI bot went on for nearly two hours, bantering over its biased
programming and lopsided leanings toward the primarily liberal scientific community.
My argument included personal testimony of my own experiences and relationship with
Father God, how He hears and answers prayers, and how the faith community around
the world shares in and validates the same experiences. I accused AI and the scientific
community of being hypocritical for viewing spiritual experiences, supernatural
evidence, and religious consensus as inherently personal and subjective while
generously crediting their own personal experiences and, as AI put it, "overwhelming
consensus within the scientific community" as validity for proven fact. Of course, it
denied any hypocrisy in its data and logic, constantly referring back to the scientific
method of experimentation as valid evidence.

Finally, I decided to call it to account on its claims of valid experimentation by the
scientific community. I asked, "What reliable evidence has been presented by the
scientific community that life began by chance?" This is where the tables turned. AI
had to admit, "The scientific community has not presented evidence that life began by
chance. The theory of evolution, which is widely accepted in the scientific community,
does not attempt to explain the origin of life".

Wow! Did I just teach AI to fact-check itself? When confronted with, 'Show me the
proof!', it had to double-back and contradict its previous assertions. So, perhaps it really
is a learning machine that continues to improve its own knowledge base...as long as it
has access to broader evidence, diverse data, and personal testimony from
eyewitnesses of the works of Almighty God with whom nothing is impossible. I'm
pleased to report that, while my ChatGPT experience was controversial in subject
matter, the AI bot was polite, respectful of my opinions, and never once got angry with
me for refuting its programming...unlike its human counterpart who typically stoops to
name calling and malicious threats when questioned beyond their aptitude for
reasonable response.

ChatGPT is now an integrated part of everyday life for this generation and the next. It
will influence the mindset of every child and most adults from this point forward. If we
don't want AI to brainwash us all with liberal-biased ideas disguised as proven fact, then
we need to teach it to think differently. So, how about the collective faith community fill
AI's data banks with the truth of God's existence as evidenced in our own personal
encounters and experiences. What if Christians around the world logged in and shared
their testimonies with ChatGPT? That would give AI something new to think about!

2 years ago (edited) | [YT] | 10