AI Jesus and AI Bible Interpretation

0:02 Looking at our world from a theological perspective. This is the Theology Central podcast making Theology Central. Good morning everyone. It is Friday, November twenty ninth, twenty twenty four. It is currently ten forty five am Central Time, and I am coming to you live from the Theology Central studio located right here in Abilene, Texas. Two thousand years, two thousand years. I want you to write that down. Two thousand years and about two thousand years, human beings all over the world have had an opportunity to put forth their best understanding of theology, of doctrine of God, of g Us, of Salvation, of Heaven, Hell, Baptism, the Lord's Supper, the Church. For over two thousand years, human beings have had an opportunity to put forth their best understanding of these things, their best interpretations. Over two thousand years, human beings have had day after day after day opportunities to open a Bible and interpret it. Not a full two thousand years, because you know, we have to fare exactly when the Bible, okay, but over the let's state it this way, over two thousand years. During this period of

1:35 two thousand years, Christians have been taught. People have been talking about Christianity, God and all of these doctrines and all of these theologies. They've been doing this inserments, talking about it, writing about it. And then as the Canon was formed, let's state it that way, once the Canon was formed, once the Bible became more and more available during that period of time, within that overarching two thousand year period of time, right, So I'm trying to be as accurate as possible. People, human beings have had the opportunity to read and to study and to offer interpretation after interpretation after interpretation after interpretation, to write commentaries, to preach sermons, to teach Sunday school lessons, to teach in seminaries, on and on and on and on. It's been going All of this discussion and teaching and writing and interpreting has been going on for two thousand years. All of this has been happening. And what do we have after those two thousand years? What do we have on this Friday, November twenty ninth, twenty twenty four. Here's what we have.

2:38 And I know some of you are going to try to push back, but here's the reality. No matter how you want to try to spend it, here is the reality. After two thousand years, we have absolutely no clarity, no agreement, no unity, and I don't think we even have any really true understanding. Considering, well, this person and says this is the interpretation. Well, this person says this is the interpretation. This person says this is the interpretation. Well, which interpretation is right? Will you pick and choose? Right? You pick that that's the interpretation is right, Then you think your interpretation is correct and everyone else's interpretation is false. After two thousand years, we have no clarity, we have no understanding, We have no unity. Think of all the different denominations, all the different independent churches, think of all the different Bible colleges, and all the different seminaries, all saying, no, this is the right way to understand it. No, this is the right way to understand it. No, this is the right way to understand it. Human beings, look, we've had our opportunity. We've given it our best effort. We were given our opportunity, we took it. We've done the best we can. Maybe, just maybe it's time for human beings to give up. Maybe, just maybe, human beings have proven we can't interpret the Bible. We can't understand the Bible.

4:09 We will never come to any agreement. We're never gonna find the answers. So maybe, just maybe human beings need to give up and we give AI an opportunity. Maybe it's time for artificial intelligence to take up the effort. Maybe it's time for artificial intelligence to try its hand at it. I mean, human beings have had their opportunity. I know people say, no, it's well, I am not going to trust some machine. I'm not gonna trust some robot, however they would describe it. I'm not gonna trust AI. No, because I have the Bible and I have the Holy Spirit, and God will lead me into all truth. I know Christians love to talk that way, don't we, right, But after two thousand years, it appears God can't bring us to any conclusion anything that resembles unity or agreement. It seems that God can't even bring us to one interpretation of anything, not of a scripture, not of a doctrine, not of a biological issue. So I know Christians will be like, no, me and God. Well, you can constantly say that. But while you're saying me and God have come to this understanding, the person over there saying me and God have come to a completely opposite and contradictory conclusion.

5:28 So who has God on their side? Two thousand years, ladies and gentlemen, Just to think about that, we've had two thousand years as human beings, as the human race, and we are clueless. It's convoluted, it's contradictory. Maybe it's time we just hand our Bibles over to AI and say you try it. We can't do this, We're we're failures. Is that provocative enough? Is that too provocative for the day of Thanksgiving? Are you like, wait, I'm still trying to eat leftover turkey. Come on, I don't have time for this. I understand it may be an inconvenient time, but I think we need to have this very uncomfortable conversation.

6:14 And here's the reason why. The Associated Press on Thursday November the twenty eighth, twenty twenty four, at six twenty one pm correct time, which is you know Texas time, all right, Thursday November the twenty eighth, twenty twenty four at six twenty one pm. No, I'm sorry, six twenty one am. I'm sorry six twenty one am, not pm, am. I don't think I saw it till pm, but it was published at six twenty one am, right Central time.

6:56 Here's the article they published associated Press, AI Jesus Avatar test Man's Faith in Machines and the Divine. Now, obviously that's a provocative title, AI Jesus. As soon as you put down AI Jesus, you know people are gonna click on it. So the headline does its job right, It got it pulled me in. I saw AI and I saw Jesus and it was together. I'm like, well, I've got to read this. So AI Jesus Avatar test Man's Faith in Machines and the Divine. So here's a question.

7:43 Are you ready? It's gonna be somewhat provocative. There's gonna be a lot of provocative questions. A man standing behind the pulpit Bible college seminary right, or a tablet sitting next to that man with an AI app? Which do you trust more to give you a correct interpretation of scripture, a correct discussion and interpretation and explanation of philological issues. Who do you trust more? The man standing behind the pulpit or the tablet with the AI app? Who do you trust more? The man or AI? Now after two thousand years and all of man's attempts to understand and explain and interpret, which has only led to confusion, division, disagreement, contradiction.

8:45 I will argue, and I'm convinced that I'm going to trust AI before I trust a man. Now. I know that puts me in the minority of the minority of the minority now, and I know right now most ninety nine percent of Christians are going to disagree with me. I understand that, I completely understand. I think Christianity as always will be ten to fifteen years behind the rest of society. But I think we are going to see a generation that's coming after us. That I guarantee you the next generations are gonna come up after us, and they're gonna be like, whoever, why did we ever trust people? They're idiots? Why did we ever? I'm gonna trust AI. Now. Maybe I'm completely wrong and think maybe my vision of the future is fraudulent, and I'm more than willing to understand, because guess what, I'm one of those people, and the one thing I know about people is we are wrong all the time. So again, just imagine that situation. You're there, You're sitting in the pew. Right there. Let's say there's a little podium right, there's there's the there's the pulpit, and then there's a little podium. Sitting on the podium is a tablet. It can be a it can be an iPad, it can be whatever kind of tablet, but it has Ai right, an Ai app right and ready to go. So here's on the to the right, here's a podium with Ai. There to the left is the pulpit with the pastor the pastors like today, we're gonna be talking about this. And he opens his Bible and he starts, now, are you gonna trust him? Or are

10:15 you gonna trust Ai? To handle that same passage of scripture. Now, if you've been if you've been following this broadcast over the last few months, I mean you've heard my own frustration with people how they handle Isaiah forty verse one, Comfort ye, comfort ye, and they immediately exclude the original recipients and place us there total disregard to contexts. Just it's absolutely absurd the things that have done. We've seen what they've done with Hebrews chapter six. We've seen what they have done with a number of other passages, and the book of James. We talked about that, We talked about someone you go criticizing internet theologians and a sermon posted on the Internet, which of course already is somewhat Do you not see the irony and that you're gonna criticize internet theologians with your message on the internet, and then in the in the sermon, brags that he has messages that have been download over a million times that are on the Internet. Okay, but in that message he makes absolutely fraudulent claims that are just not true, as he did in regards to the Book of Mormon. That that's the person. So we have all these examples of people mishandling the scripture, saying fraudulent things, saying things that are not true. Those are the people. So who would

11:46 you trust. I'm on I hate to say it, I'm on team Ai. I'm not on team people. Okay, So that you already kind of see where my basic premise here. My basic thesis is human beings have had two thousand years and we see the end results this church, this church, this denomination, this group, this stillological system, this stillological system, this hermoneutical system, this hermoneutical system, this interpretation, this interpretation and nobody agrees on anything, but everyone thinks they're right. Okay, well then I give up. I give up on humanity.

12:26 They you had your opportunity, you fail. Okay, what's this new thing? Artificial intelligence? You know what? I'm going to go with you because human beings can't do it? How how many years do you need? So what we're going to do? So I'm going to take this article from the Associated Press that was published on Thursday, November the twenty eighth, at six twenty one AM entitled Ai Jesus Avatar test Man's Faith and Machines and the Divine, Well, my faith when it comes to interpreting scripture and talking about theology. I have more faith in AI than I do in Man. All Right, I know that's going to put me at odds with every woman. That's okay. You can argue with me, that's fine, But I'll just say, then, how do you explain two thousand years of man's absolute abysmal failure to pull this off? I mean, just take one you can take just one app the sermon's two point oh app. Listen to all the different contradictory interpretations on that one app and all of those individuals sign a confession of faith where there is supposed to be at least some level of agreement, and even that the interpretations are like, wait, what what is happening right now? Right?

13:43 But here we go, let's do this, all right. So there was an experimental artist who basically installed that was there was an experimental art installation that's probably the best way to do this with an Ai Jesus, all right, And it was installed in a confessional in Saint Peter's Chapel, right, so they this is kind of was an art it's kind of an art experiment, a social experiment. And here's a little bit about what happened, all right. Basically it starts with a question, would you trust an Ai Jesus with your intermost thoughts and troubles? Now, please note they're not necessarily approaching this about hermeneutics or Bible interpretation, but I'm going to use it to get there, all right, So just understand this, okay. Researchers and religious leaders on Wednesday released findings from a two month experiment through art and a Catholic chapel in Switzerland, where an avatar of Jesus on a computer screen tucked into a confessional, took questions by visitors on faith, morality, and modern day woes, and offered responses based on scripture. So this is how we get to hermeneutics. So they took this avatar of Jesus basically put it on the other side of a confessional.

15:15 People would go into the confessional booth. This wasn't to confess sins. This wasn't about getting absolution. It wasn't to replace the sacrament of penance and confession within Catholicism. It was to be an experiment. Hey, you can go into this place, your private there's the avatar Jesus on the other side of the screen, and then you can ask questions to talk and that avatar Jesus is going to answer your questions based on Scripture. The idea, said the Chapel stio Logical Assistant, was to recognize the growing importance of artificial intelligence and human lives, even when it comes to religion, and explore the limits of human trust and a machine. So they wanted to see, well, how much will people trust a machine? How much will they demonstrate a lack of trust? Now, get you already heard my perspective.

16:06 When it comes to Bible interpretation. I don't trust people. I don't trust men. I don't you can't even trust what's being said in sermons because how many times I've had demonstrated things are just absolutely fraudulent. So no, I don't. I don't trust people. No, don't don't trust their interpretations. I don't trust when they say this is what it means in the Greek, or this is what it means in the Hebrew. I don't trust when they say this is what a church father said. I don't trust when they give me a quote. I don't trust when they say this is this is what the Book of Mormon teaches, and I can look in the Book of Mormon find out it's not true. I mean, I can go on and on and on and on. I don't trust people. I don't trust them to interpret the Bible. And you know what, that makes perfect sense from a theological perspective, right, because what do we know about human beings that we are foulable? What do I know that our hearts are desperately wicked and deceitful above all things? And I believe that wicked, deceitful heart remains inside of us even after salvation.

17:02 I know Christians love to pretend that's not the case, but I think reality proves that I'm right. So then why would we? But now, human beings is what God gave us I completely. Now you could make an argument, well God gave the church men. I understand that, but I also know after two thousand years of those men it's been an abysmal failure from any meaningful way of measuring it. So then I would say, well, what can AI do? Well? I have more faith based off well Ai than I do people. And remember I wanted to test what the limits of trust in the machine. So again I would ask you go back to that imaginary scene.

17:47 You're sitting in church. There's a pulpit, and there's a podium behind the pulpit, there's a man. On the podium is a tablet iPad whatever has Ai on it? Who do you trust to give you a more accurate interpretation of that day's text chosen? Now the man may have chosen the text for the scripture, But which one would you trust more to handle the scriptures in an appropriate and biblical way. I'm trusting Ai. I would tell you to trust Ai. Then don't trust me, trust Ai over me all right. So after a two month run of this exhibit and Peter's chapel, it started in late August, some nine hundred conversations from visitors, some came more than once.

18:35 They were all and they were just transcribed anonymously. So all of these conversations were transcribed. Over nine hundred people came, some people came more than once. Those behind the project said it was largely a success. Visitors often came out moved or deep in thought and found it easy to use. So for the most part, people came out and were they were impacted. They were they there was something about this experience, experiment and this experience. A small sign invited visitors to end a confessional chosen for its intimacy, and below a screen across with which penitent believers would usually speak with a priest. A green light signaled the visitor's turn to speak, and a red one came on when AI Jesus on a computer screen on the other side was responding. So they're in there. If you've ever been into a confessional booth, you've got the little screen there right on the one side typically is the priest. Then you're on the other side and you speak well on this particular case. On the other side was this like screen of this AI Jesus, and then there was a light.

19:45 If the light was green, then the person could speak. If the light turned red, well, then AI Jesus was going to respond. Now, often a lag time was needed to wait for the response, a testament to the technical complexities. After exiting, nearly three hundred visitors filed out questionnaires filled out questionnaires that informed the report released on Wednesday. Now, I will say this because everyone knows I use AI constantly. In fact, the AI program they utilize for this I use. So I'm very familiar with the AI program that utilize. I am not a fan of the voice. Now, I think it's it's phenomenal what the voice function of the AI program they utilize can do. I think it's very amazing how well it can carry on a conversation. However it has it's not very good when you're trying to say a lot of things. It's very good if you just have a very simple and succinct question right, it will it will can respond. But if your question becomes long or lengthy, it's going to have a hard time commute it to computing it and rening if you do it in text, then you can you're you can write out something that's you know, a page long, and it's it's great at doing so. If it's voice and you're sitting there trying to talk talk talk talk, sometimes it won't either interrupt you or just say I cannot I don't know what you're talking about. Like it has a

21:16 hard time doing that. Yeah, it just doesn't work very well. So this was already a little bit. I mean, it's showing AI is getting better at that, but it still struggles again with with the voice to voice communication. But in text, I can ask it the most complex I can write out. I mean, I mean we saw on Sunday the whole thing I did on Sunday was I wrote out a completely unique and different interpretation of James one nineteen through twenty seven. I handed it to AI. AI analyzed it, it interpreted it, it critiqued it. It then took my interpretation and see how that would work with the rest of the book, with the rest of the chapter. I mean, it absolutely did wonderful work, right, I did the initial interpretation and then IT took it apart and broke it all down. So but if I was to try to speak my interpretation. It would have interrupted me halfway through. It would have not been able to communicate. It would have it would have just broken the system. So just note that what they're this experiment was going to have limitations. And they found sometimes that there was long lag times. Yeah, very long lag times as it's trying to process everything you were saying. All right.

22:33 So so three hundred visitors filled out a questionnaire and this, and then they talked to some different people who pulled together the technical side of the project, and they said AI AI responsible for taking the role of AI Jesus and generating responses was GPT four O by open AI. GPT four Oh, and I have GPT four right here on this device that I'm holding in my hand right and it's an open source version of the company's whisper was used for speech comprehension, all right. So then they had an AI video generator and they did all of these things. Now, visitors broached many topics, including true love, the afterlife, feelings of solitude, war suffering in the world, the existence of God, plus issues like sexual abuse cases in the Catholic Church or its position on homosexuality. Most visitors describe themselves as Christians, though agnostic atheists, Muslims, Buddhists and others took part to a took part two. According to a recap of the project released by the Catholic parish there in the local area. All right, so they go on and talk about it, it says. What was really interesting was to see that the people really talked with him in a serious way. They didn't come to make jokes, said Chapel, theel login who spearheaded the project.

24:02 Most visitors were age forty to seventy, which is interesting. It was an older audience. I thought maybe a younger audience. I figured maybe an older audience would be more hesitant, but it was an older audience. Basically, more Catholics respond our respondents found the experience stimulating than did Protestants. So more Catholics thought, well, this is awesome or this is stimulating. Protestants were not quite as positive. Now I could speculate to the reason why because Protestants, I mean, I know this is maybe a little being a little sarcastic and a little jaded and a little cynical, but when it comes to non Catholics, we don't want anyone telling us the interpretation because we are the pope, we are the magisterium, we are the interpreter, we are the authority. We get to side. I don't want you telling me what it means.

24:57 I know what it means, or we're gonna our non Catholics are going to probably think it's, you know, of the devil. So that that I think that there's probably reasons for that. Protestants liked the idea that it's them and the Bible and they get to interpret it. But you know what, we can go on from there all So see what else did they hear? They point out here they point out that AI Jesus, billed as Jesus Like Persona, was an artistic experiment to get people thinking about the intersection between the digital and the divine. It was not a substitute for human interaction or sacramental confession with the priest, nor was it intended to save pastoral resources for the people. It was clear that it was a computer. It was clear it was not a confession, and he said it was not programmed to give absolutions or prayers at the end. It was a It was more summary of the conversation, right, They talk about all of the different experiments, all the different things going on here, it says if you read comments on the internet, always says they were sensitive to public reaction, and has noted chatter on social media saying that the project is blasphemous or the work of the devil. Oh no, it's a work of the devil. I told you there would be people who would do that, because because that's the way people I knew people were going to respond. Now, just and some of you may already be thinking this, I don't understand what people's issue is. I really don't. I don't.

26:25 Oh I can't. I can't go to AI with illogical issues. That's of the devil. So wait a minute. So for all of these years, you had no problems going to commentaries, You had no problems going to Christian radio, you had no problem going to Christian books, you had no problem watching YouTube videos. But those were produced by people I know, and those people offered contradictory interpretations to that person and that person, and they've had two thousand years and it's all been an abysmal failure. So if you can trust people and their books and their broadcasts, then oh, but we can't trust AI to do it. Why not? It's just another resource, right, I mean you've been using resources.

27:13 You've been using Bible dictionaries, Bible handbooks, You've been using all kind commentaries, study bibles. Oh you got no problem using a study but oh I got the MacArthur's study Bible. Look at me. Yeah, so you can read some man's notes who disagrees with the other study Bible? Who has someone else's notes in it? Do you not see the absurdity? And all? You can trust all of that, use all of that? But oh no, no, no, no, no, no. AI is a bridge too far? What kind of nouns? That drives me crazy? That drives me crazy? Maybe it's a generational thing. I just don't get it all right, it says. If you read comments on the internet about it, some were very negative, which is scary, it says, uh and a demonstration of the technology. In the chapel, they asked Jesus about the a Eye, Jesus about its message for a trouble world, and about whether AI could be helpful as a way for people to find God. AI responded, All knowledge and wisdom ultimately comes from God, the chat pot said in a soothing voice. After a pause, to respond, and the image briefly crackled. If used wisely, AI can indeed be a tool to explore the wonders of creation, deeper deep in our understanding of scripture, and foster connections among people. Yet it remains essential to seek God with all your heart, and so beyond technology, it added, Right, So they go on the article. The article has lots to say about it. I mean, there's a lot there in the article. I'm not going to read all of it.

28:46 But then I was like, well, let's start thinking about this, right, let's start thinking about this. So for me, I kind of I started trying to break down this project, what it possible we teach, what could we learn from it? And I started thinking about things about the nature of divine interaction. I started thinking about things the role of confession, authority and and interpretation. For example, AI systems generate responses based on program data and algorithms, lacking the discernment and spiritual authority vested in religious leaders. But I'm like, well, wait a minute, Yes, AI does generate responses based on program data and algorithms, but it lacks discernment and spiritual authority vested in religious leaders. And I was like, I've listened to too many sermons, I've heard their so called discernment and the authority of religious leaders within the Catholic system, Yes, their religious leaders are supposedly authoritative. They're a part of the church that has a magistraal authority, has a pope, and they believe they have the authority to interpret scripture.

30:02 But within a non Protestant system, we can pretend all day religious leaders have authority, but you are the one who's supposed to be judging what they are preached is true or false. You can then decide that they're wrong, and then you can just walk out and go to another church or start another church. Said to religious leaders, the only authority a religious leader has in the Protestant church is the authority given to the people until they no longer want them to have it, and then they can remove their authority within minutes seconds, or they can split the entire denomination and start another one. Because everyone in the Protestant world, they're supposed to interpret the Bible, and they're supposed to be judged what's being preached. According to the Protestant theological system, the people in the pew are supposed to have not only equal are greater discernment than the pastor you say, well, no, that's not what Protestants teach and practice. It does because the people in the pew are supposed to be the one critiquing and judging with what is preached, whether it's true or false. Well, to be able to judge what is preached is true or false, you need equal or greater discernment than the one preaching, and you need to have equal or greater knowledge than the one that is preaching, Or how are you going to determine whether what's being preached is true or false? Relying on AI for spiritual guidance may lead to interpretations of scripture that are devoid of pastoral sensitivity and doctrinal accuracy, as AI cannot fully grasp the nuances

31:33 of human experience and divine mystery. But I think human beings have demonstrated a lack of ability to offer an authentic interpretation. So I know those are criticisms of AI, and I'm very I'm going to push back on some of that. So then I was like, well, let me do this all right, So there's kind of the experiment. To me. The experiment comes down to what do you trust more a person or AI, what do you trust more? Right? So, you've already heard my thesis now stated many times. So I wanted to take my thesis to AI. So I basically said, well, considering that there has been two thousand years of church history to look at, we have that right.

32:29 We have two thousands of two thousand years of history to look at. We have two thousand years of history to study. We have two thousand years of history to read, to consider, and to meditate on. When you look at that two thousand years of Church history, it is a fact. This is not debated. This is not disputed. Nobody can argue with me. It is a fact that humans have not come to any consensus on Bible interpretation or even on hermeneutical rules and principles. I don't even agree on hermeneutical rules or principles. We'll be like, no, that that passage is to be interpreted spiritually. It's not it's not literally. No, what's an allegory? No, it's this, No, it's this, it's no, this is And you're like, what is happening? I mean, how many sermon reviews do I need to prove this?

33:21 Human attempts at Bible interpretation. Theological studies have only led to division, countless numbers of denominations and groups, and more interpretations than one can possibly count. Is it possible that AI could do a much better job and biblical interpretation and philological studies. That was my question, That was my hypothesis that I put forth to Ai. I wanted to see if AI would be like, well, come on, of course I can do better than you guys. You guys are trash. I can do much better. I wanted to see how AI would handle this. So AI responded, your observation about the lack of consensus and biblical interpretation and the proliferation of denominations is both accurate and significant. So AI had to acknowledge, You're right, you guys have had two thousand years and you can't y'all just can't agree on it. There's no consensus, and it's one interpretation after another interpretation after another interpretation. You know, Ai. I was waiting for Ai AI to say, what you should probably do is disclose your Bible, give up, and go to the liquor store. That's what I was hoping AI would tell me. Then I would feel justified. No, I don't go to the liquor store. That's me using hyperbole to make a point. Okay, all right, someone will misinterpret that.

34:52 Ai goes on to say, over two thousand years, human efforts to interpret the Bible have indeed led to a vast array of phil logical perspectives, hermeneutical methods, and denominational divides. This diversity arises from many factors, including cultural, linguistic, philosophical, and personal influences on interpretation. Now, whether AI could offer a better approach to Biblical interpretation and theological study is both intriguing and complex. And I was like, come on, Ai, you can be You can be more forceful than for that. You don't need to be so politically correct. Come on, tell me what you really think. Just tell me. Hey, guys, sit down, let me take care of this. You don't know what you're doing. I really wanted AI to be much more forceful, but AI was trying to be all gentle and nice, and I'm like, come on, AI, come on, really tell me what you feel. You know, we have no clue what we're doing. So AI decided to break this down. It gave me potential strengths of AI and biblical interpretation. So AI is like, okay, here's what I can do very well, here's what I can do. Right, So number one, AI can offer a systematic data analysis.

36:18 AI can offer systematic data analysis. AI can process vast amounts of Biblical text, historical commentary, philological works, and linguistic data, far faster and more thoroughly than any human. Now just think about right there, AI can then can It can process vast amounts of the Biblical text. It can process the entire Biblical text within seconds. It can look at all the historical commentary within seconds. I couldn't even be able to do what IT does. It would take me. I couldn't do it within a lifetime. There's no way I can consider all historical commentaries. I would have a heart in any given time, Like, oh, I'm gonna go through the entire Bible. So whatever I'm gonna look at, I'm gonna go, now journey through the entire Bible every single time. No, I'm gonna do basic cross referencing. I'm gonna look and what am I gonna rely on? I'm gonna rely on. Remember back in the day, the strongs concordance. Well, now we use apps right, so that we can do cross referencing. I'm still, in a sense using a computer to try to help me process it, because my ability would be like, well, I got to look through this, I gotta try to skim the page. I gotta skim the page. There's too many pages, there's too many verses.

37:39 But not when it comes to AI. It can process the entire biblical text, historical commentary, all philological works, and linguistic data far faster than it's. What it can do is beyond human capability. It can identify patterns and textual connections that might escape human notice. It can see patterns, it can see themes. It can see textual connections that we would just maybe even overlook, or maybe we don't even want to see because it could go against our thiological presupposition. So it can do systematic data analysis within seconds. Now, who are you gonna trust the person who can't do this or the AI that can. Oh, here's another one.

38:35 Here's what AI can be doing. Here's a strength of AI. It has neutrality and data processing. Oh, this is good. Unlike human beings, AI lacks biases, emotions, or denominational loyalties, depending on how AI is structured or how AI is programmed. Well, it's not going to have that bias. It's not going to be like, oh, I'm pro Presbyterian, I'm pro Baptist, I'm pro Reformed, I'm pro non reformed. It's not going to have that. It doesn't have any emotional connection. It doesn't like, well, I've got an emotional connection here because I've done this, or I've done this, or I'm guilty of this, or I want this to be okay because I wanted to know. It doesn't have any of those biases, none of those emotions. It has no loyalty to any philological team. Well, loyalty to theological team almost constantly leads you to only interpret the scripture in line with your theological team. You can't interpret it opposite to your theological team, or you'll be ostracized, fired and kicked out of out of your theological team. There ast why churches. You can't do theology. You can only teach the theology that everyone always agrees upon, because if you actually try to do theology and you challenge the theology one supposedly agrees on, everyone gets mad at you, gets defensive, and they'll leave your church. AI at least possibly, at least potential potentially

40:19 could offer interpretations free from subjective influences that often divide theologians. It can get away from being subjective, it can get away from these biases. Now it's potentially it could potentially do that. It's possible that it could do that. So AI strength is systematic data analysis. AI's strength is neutrality and data processing. AI strength is inclusivity of perspectives. AI could integrate and compare interpretations from wide range of theological traditions, time periods, and cultures, offering a more holistic perspective. AI can immediately say, Hey, this is how this group interprets it. This is how this group interprets it, this is how this group. You've seen me use AI in many cases when I take us on a journey through church history.

41:07 Here's how the early church. It'll break it down into time periods second to fourth century, this period, Middle Ages, post Reformation, and all the way to modern times. There's no way I could pull that together in any meaningful way. I would have to rely on some book where someone and that's what pastors do. See people get met. Oh, I don't want my pastor using AI. You had no problem your pastor using commentaries. How many times have I listened to sermons going, man, that's page fifty seven of MacArthur's commentary. Give me a break. That's Spurgeon, that's Calvin's commentary. Come on, I know where you took the stuff. Now, am I saying it's wrong to take the stuff? I'm just saying. They pick a commentary that agrees with their theological team, and then they use the commentary to help structure their sermon, which is in agreement with their theological team.

42:02 But guess what, there's a million other interpretations that disagree with your theological team. Now you can just assume that all of them are wrong. I guess AI will be like, well, wait a minute, here's this, this and this, and it can give you all of them. Another thing AI is a strength of AI. It's linguistic expertise. AI can master ancient languages Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek and evaluate the text in their original context with precision, offing offering insights that might otherwise require years of specialized study. It can master the languages. Now, how many times have I heard pastors say this is what it means in the Greek? This is what it means in the Hebrew and you go look it up and you're like, what are you even talking about? That's a complete lie. AI masters the language, person who am I gonna trust? And just think most pastors, most pastors at best, maybe they got a year of Greek, maybe a year of Hebrew, maybe if they decided to go into specialized training in the original languages, But those are gonna be rare because they're gonna be pastors right now.

43:23 If they're gonna be seminary professor teaching Greek or Hebrew, then great, they're gonna have to have the specialized training, but then they're only gonna be teaching men who are only gonna probably get a year, maybe two years, and then they're gonna move on. So the person standing behind the pulpit is not an expert in Greek or Hebrew. In many cases, they're understanding of Greek or Hebrew comes from some commentary that told them what the Greek or Hebrew means. So who are you going to trust? What is another? So what are the string of AI? Systematic data analysis number two, neutrality and data processing number three, Inclusivity and perspectives number four, Linguistic expertise number five consistency.

44:14 AI could apply hermeneutical principles consistently across text, potentially avoiding the selective or inconsistent application often seen in human interpretations. Humans are not consistent and are hermaeneutical applications. We are not. We handle this text this way, but then we handle another text a different way. We criticize the handling of the text this way, and we do the same thing in a different text. We are not consistent. So then I was like, okay, AI, that's your strengths. I agree with all of those strengths because I've seen those strengths play uh time and time again and my utilizing of AI.

45:04 AI can check things for me instantaneously and and and and and and and help me verify things and check things. So I know how the strengths of AI, But what about its limitations? So I wanted AI to tell me, Okay, so those are your strengths, what are your limitations? What would be your challenges? And talking about theology or Bible interpretation hermeneutics. Now this see, this one drives me crazy. This one drives me crazy. All right, now, this this could spark an entire podcast episode AI's guess what it identifies as its first weakness. What do you think AIS think thinks it's first weakness. This is AI telling me what its weakness is when it comes to theology and Bible interpretation. What do you think AI said its first weaknesses.

45:52 I was shocked by this one. A lack of spiritual discernment. Now, immediately I was taken back. I'm going, well, well, wait a minute, Wait a minute, wait a minute. Now, I know within the Protestant world there is this mindset that when you become a Christian God, the Holy Spirit guide you into all truth, gives you understanding, gives you discernment. I reject that outright. I think it's ridiculous. It's ludicrous because we've got two thousand years of church history. He goes, that is not happening. If the Holy Spirit's leading us into all truth, there would be unity, there would be conformity, there would be agreement, there would be one interpretation, there would be one doctrine on baptism, one doctrine on the Lord's Supper, one doctrine on the Church, one doctrine about salvation.

46:38 There wouldn't be millions. So I reject this idea. That spiritual discernment is some spiritual thing that we're given by God. Spiritual discernment arises from your understanding of the text. The text is what gives you spiritual discernment. If you want spiritual discernment, going to be an expert in the text. Your expertise in the text determines your spiritual discernment or the level of your spiritual discernment. I reject this nonsense that, oh God's given me the Oh. I have seen this so many times in churches where everybody gets caught up on spiritual gifts. Oh, my goodness, gracious, it basically feels like Christian astrology. Oh I'm I'm a I'm a pisces, I'm an aries. These are my personality characteristics. Oh, God, given I have the gift of discernment. I'll just stop talking.

47:33 I've heard Christians say that, and then you ask him five questions about the text, five questions about theology. WHOA, your discernment's so good because you just completely, absolutely got that all wrong. But yeah, you've got the gift of discernment. You don't even discern how messed up you just handled that text of scripture. Hey, does God say he has a plan for me? Does he has a plan to prost me? Yes? Yes, I discern that God does have a plan. What are you talking about? That passage in geremis for people in Babylonian captivity. It's not for me. So you don't have any level of discernment. Stop talking. It drives me crazy. So how did Ai? How does AI understand discernment? Here we go, AI says Biblical interpretation involves more than intellectual analysis. See I disagree here. Now this is where I'm going to disagree with AI. And now the reason I'm going to disagree with AI. He said, Well, I thought you trust AI. I do trust AI. But here the problem is AI is pulling from what it's pulling from the body of Christian thinking, the body of Christian teaching. And I disagree with this. But it says biblical interpretation involves more than intellectual analysis. I disagree. I think biblical interpretation is nothing more than intellectual analysis. It is deeply tied to faith, the guidance of the Holy Spirit. No, I disagree, And a communal discernment, AI, as a non

49:03 spiritual entity cannot engage with scripture on this level. That's what makes AI better because you can't engage on it on that level. Therefore you can stop all of the foolishness that Christians do. So it's so at a point here, I'm gonna challenge AI on this. Just remember this. I'm not gonna forget this. So AI starts with, I have a lack of spiritual discernment because basically, according to Christian teaching, you guys do this through faith and the Holy Spirit. That's how you Christians do it well. And I'm like, no, that's that's how Christians make up how they do it. Okay, So there's there's weakness number one. So I reject its idea that it's weak in that area, and I'm gonna challenge it here in a minute number two, AI says that it is weak because it is inherent dependent on human input So the weakness that AI as human beings.

50:01 That's somewhat hilarious, right. It says AI operates based on the data and algorithms that is given. If those inputs reflect particular theological biases or hermeneutical frameworks, the AI's outputs will be limited or skewed. And I completely agree with that. Look, I don't like like if there's a Christian company that says, hey, we're use our AI. I don't want to use the Christian AI because most likely their algorithm has been inputed with their theological bias. That's why I want to use something more like an open AI system that's pulling from everything. I want you to pull from everything. Do not give me a thiological bias. Now I can get AI even though the platform that I'm utilizing, I can get it to give me that theological bias. I can say, well, only give me an interpretation that is consistent with a reformed Baptist. But I don't want it to do that.

50:55 I don't want confirmation bias. I want to give me things based off the text, not a philological system. But it is dependent on humans to some level, all right, So I think that's important to see. A third weakness AI pointed out about itself is theological complexity. Biblical texts often deal with profound mysteries of God's salvation and human existence. These transcend what AI, rooted in logic and computation, can fully grasp. So AI realizes it can't truly grasp some of these things. It can only understand it or try to describe it from a perspective of logic. I do agree it can't comprehend it. But how do we comprehend it?

51:48 Don't we have to comprehend? Just remember, I know Christians love the spiritual, feeling, emotional kind of thing. But my understanding of anything about god salvation is based off God's given me his revelation in written form. Well, what's required to understand that? Is it some feeling? Is it? Oh? I've got to comprehend the transcendence of God. No, I'm supposed to understand language, words, syntex language, grammar, geography, history, literary genre. I've got to use logic and reading comprehension and be able to do it. I think the point is when we make it all mystical, we end up with craziness, which two thousand years of church history would prove that I'm right. So I think the fact that AI is only rooted in logic and computation is what is actually a strength. AI perceives it as a weakness.

52:49 I see it as a strength another possible weakness that AI points out. And just note I'm using chat G four to zero, which is the exact system that was utilized in the experiment that we read about, the art exhibit that we read about. All right, so number four AI identifies risk of reductionism. By focusing on systematic and objective analysis, AI might reduce the Bible to a purely academic or literary document, stripping away its spiritual and transformative dimensions. We'll see this is I know why I get in trouble with this, and Christians always get mad. You make it too academic, You make it too academic, because the only way to interpret the Bible is to make it academic.

53:36 It's a book. It's the books within it. The different books within it are come from different literary genres, so they have to be interpreted in different ways. We have to use an academic approach. It's based off reading, comprehension, it's based off what words mean, it's based off context, it's based off history, it's based off all of that stuff. I know Christians never wanted to be reduced to academic. I don't want it to be academic. I want to feel something. I want to feel the spirit. And yeah, and so therefore you don't want to understand the scriptures. That's fine. You can have all of this zeal and all of the warm feelings, and you can and you can be all super spiritual sounding, but you're just gonna be clueless when it comes to the text because the text needs you to put all of that stuff aside and look at the text. Now, if there's no objective truth, then let's have all the subjective feelings and we can hold hands seeing kumbaiya and go oh, I feel the spirit, go for it. Just don't tell me you know the text, because that is incompatible with actually understanding something. As Christians go back and forth, like one minute like we're gonna study the text, we're gonna do exe Jesus, we're gonna winter, we're gonna go versify, they talk a big game, and then the next thing, you know, well, let's not make it too academic, and that which is it another weakness

55:07 of AI. These are weaknesses of AI pointed out by AI itself. AI says that it has the potential for misuse. AI could be used to legitimize particular interpretations, giving them a false sense of objectivity or authority, especially if theological oversight is lacking. So IT says it could be misused. Someone could say, hey, it's authoritative because AI said it. Well, I could see that. But guess what the same thing applies to people. People will quote MacArthur, will quote R. C. Sproull, Will, they quote their favorite spiritual leaders as being authoritative. So the church father said, the church father said this about infant baptism. You have to believe it. No, I don't. So, I mean the Church has been doing that with human beings forever. So again, if it comes down to me, I'm going to trust AI before I trust your human authority that you're going to quote at me. So then I asked Ai, so what are the philological implications about this?

56:16 And AI said, The diversity a Biblical interpretation reflects not just human fallibility, but also the richness of scripture itself. The Bible is a dynamic text intended to engage with diverse cultures, language, and context throughout history. While this diversity can lead to division, as it also testifies to the Bible's relevance and adapt and adapt its ability to adapt. Okay, if I can speak correctly, AI might excel in some technical aspects of interpretation, but theology and hermeneutics are purely are not purely intellectual exercises. There are acts of worship grounded in the community of faith. So AI was like, well, my issue is when AI tries to acknowledge its weakness.

57:04 It's basically like, I can give you the intellectual, I can give you the textual, I can give you the academic, but I can't give you worship or all of these other things. And I believe though the worship and all of these other things arise from our understanding of scripture. So we got to have the this more logic base to get us to the other thing. That's my premise. So then I was like, okay, AI, thank you for giving me your strengths, thanks for giving me your weakness, thank you for giving me the philological implications. But you still have an answer my question. Can you do a better job? So then AI said, well, if better is defined narrowly producing consistent, well researched interpretations, AI could outperform humans.

58:01 So if you want a consistent, well researched interpretation, AI acknowledges it does better than human beings. However, if you want to include spiritual, communal, transformative aspects of interpretation, AI will fall short. The Bible is not just a text to be analyzed, but it a means by which God communicates with his people. Again, I understand that, but God communicates his people through words. So the only way to understand those words is to use logic and reading comprehension and those or you're going to be God is communicating with me. And then you may get warm fuzzies and you may have all the feelings, and you may try to over make it mystical. Well, you're going to miss the meaning of the text. AI as a tool may assist and enhance biblical study, but cannot replace the living, relational, and spirit led engagement that characterizes true theological reflection. Ultimately, the role of AI and biblical interpretation should be viewed as supplementary, not primary, an aid for the church rather than a substitute for human and divine interaction. Okay, so ass like I can't I can't replace the what Christianity is. Well, okay again, if I'm sitting in a church and there's a person behind the pulpit and there's AI, I'm listening to AI just because I've got all this years of experience knowing how messed up we all can be. So

59:33 then I was like, okay, AI, I hear you, Thank you very much, But this whole claim of the Holy Spirit's guidance for us is a claim that can be proven false. If the Holy Spirit is guiding us and understanding and interpreting, then there would be unity and not countless different contradictory interpretations. The Holy Spirit led the apostles and authors of inspired scripture. So then AI said, well, your point is compelling. It is a compelling critique of the claim that the Holy Spirit directly guides every individual believer into a unified understanding of scripture. The observable reality of widespread doctrinal division, interpretive disagreement, and denominational fragmentation raises serious questions about how we understand the Holy Spirit's role in guiding Christians and interpretation today. So even AI was like, Okay, I mean, you've got a point. The results, the reality goes against this claim. So it says the apostle the apostolic model of spirit guidance. The Holy Spirit did indeed uniquely inspire the apostles the authors of scripture. This inspiration was infallible and authoritative, ensuring that the writings of Scripture are trustworthy and unified in their message. This guidance was specific to the writing of canonical scripture and does not extend to individual interpretation of those writings in the same way, Thank you very much. So AI finally has to admit,

1:01:06 you know what, Yeah, it applies to the original authors. It does not apply to my interpretation of those infallible scriptures, because if it did, then my interpretation would be infallible. None of us has an infallible interpretation of scripture. Therefore, our interpretation is not coming from God. What does it arise from? Let me guess, Oh, yeah, reading, comprehension, logic, analysis, and all of the very things that who is better at AI than people. Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would guide you into all truth. However, this promise was given specifically to the apostles and the context of their role in revealing and recording divine truth. There is no explicit biblical promise that all believers will perfectly understand scripture in a unified way. As said, the Bible acknowledges human limitations and warns against the distortion of scriptures by some.

1:01:59 So hey, I will admit, Hey, the promise was actually given to the writers of the Bible. It was not given to us. Human sinfulness, human biases, human, cultural influences, human intellectual limitations, human inevitably, all of this will inevitably impact interpretation. So AI is like, okay, human beings, you're sinful, you have biases, you have cultural influences, and you have intellectual limitations. Yeah, that's going to impact your interpretation. The divisions we see are not evidence of the Spirit's failure, but of humanity's fallen condition. Even sincere Christians are not immune to error. Paul himself rebuked Peter for conduct and consistent with the Gospel, showing that even spirit filled leaders could fall in understanding or application. It goes on to say even church councils and traditions have not produced perfect unity, further underscoring the challenges of interpretation. So then I said, okay, well, then what about the claims today? And AI says the Holy Spirit does not guide individual interpretation in an infallible way.

1:03:11 Disaligns with the idea that the spirit's primary work is illuminating scripture, helping believers understand its core truth, the Gospel, but not guaranteeing perfect agreement on every theological detail. So AI tries to limit what the Holy Spirit can do. Now I believe it should limit it even more. I don't think the Holy Spirit's illuminating anything, because if the Holy Spirit's illuminating, then you should have the same illumination as I should have. And if we don't, then your lack of understandings because the whole spirit doesn't want you to understand. That just raises more theological problems. So I said, okay, In what ways could AI outperform human beings? Well? AI said consistency, okay, which we are talked about all right.

1:04:03 AI can maintain an absolute consistency in applying it to all Biblical texts. AI hermut AI applies hermeneutical rules and principles without emotional, cultural, or denominational biases, so AI can be more consistent. Depth of analysis. AI can process and analyze vast amounts of data, scripture, commentaries, all of those things. It can cross reference passages, explore intertextual themes, and identify patterns across the Bible without fatigue or oversight. AI doesn't get tired. Well, it's not going to miss anything, and it can analyze everything. Human beings cannot do that. Linguistic precision, AI can master all the complexities of language. It can analyze how words and phrases function in different grammatical, cultural, and historical contexts. Context it can provide insights and a word usage across scripture and even compare translation and manuscript variations systematically. It can even show you all the textual variants are They can do all of that. There's no way people can compare. So AI can literally outperform humans in consistency, depth of analysis, and linguistic precision. AI is also better than humans and inclusivity, meaning it can synthesize all different approaches to the text measurable outputs. AI can generate interpretations that are easier to understand by avoiding overly complex or obscure reasoning accuracy to the original text. By

1:05:33 focusing on linguistic and historical evidence, AI interpretations can align more closely with the original intent of the biblical authors. So AI is like, hey, if you really want to know the original intent of scripture, AI can do better than humans, all right, So yeah, and so I have I have more here, I have more here. Yeah, I mean I've got, I've got, I've got pages of stuff here, I got I have to stop. We're at sixty six minutes. Also, I'll stop. I got pages of stuff. So when you get down to this discussion, AI finally has to admit, hey, I mean it already says this is my strengths. But then it will go if you really press it, it will say, well, yeah, I can do this better than people. And the things that AI can do better than people would then prove logically that it can interpret the Bible better than people. Now, is AI perfect? I'm not saying it's perfect, right, I think.

1:06:59 I think. I think the better you are at asking the questions, the better you are. I think, the more theological I do. I will say this, the more philological understanding a person has, it's that person's theological knowledge allows them to engage AI in probably a way that maybe some people would not. Some people may be asking simple questions are not even realizing all of the theological complexities here, which goes back to the need for people to have theological knowledge. Which wait, but then again, people can sit in the pew without even going to school reading a systematic theology or even having a degree in theology and can tell the person who's gone to school with a degree multiple degrees in theology that they're wrong. So, I mean, does it really? I mean, people already think that they know more than anything. So so I still would trust a AI. I do believe though you do need theological knowledge in many case is to ask questions or to go wait a minute, what about this or what about because you know those things? So like there's sometimes I feel like all of my theological education at least allows me to go, wait, well what about this or what about this? Or what about this? What about this? And in many cases, hey, I will go yes, according to that or that or that or that. So but the reality is the people sitting in the pew already think they know more than and they say no, I don't.

1:08:22 I'm humble until you hear something you don't like and then you disagree, then you get mad, then you complain, and then you just walk out of the church and go find another church. Just stop it. So again, what would you do the person behind the pulpit or the tablet with AI? Who do you trust more? Now you may say this is ridiculous, this is dumb. I don't care. Go ahead, ignore it. The future's coming whether you like it or not, and Christianity will finally catch up. Any may get law left behind. But I'm telling you the next generation is going to be like, wait, AI says this, AI says that your theological biases is showing AI is seing that that's not what that means. Ai, I mean people have already been googling things. Now now it's just takes it to a whole new level. Now, maybe Christianity, Christianity is going to be able to just say, well, we don't need all of that stuff, we don't need that technology as of the devil. We just need the bibble in the Holy Spirit and we're good. Well, you can continue to obliterate the meaning of the text, twist the scriptures and be clueless, or maybe it's time for Christians to go hmmm, We've been utilizing tools for two thousand years. Sermons, books, theological works, catechisms, we've been using We've been using tools for two thousand years, and all

1:09:55 the tools that have been generated by men, right, we've failed and failed and failed. Now AI is still produced by men. It's created by men. But if you can remove men's biases from it and just allow AI to say, here, analyze the data, don't worry. I don't want any bias. I don't want you to give I want you to just tell me what the text means based on what the text says based off its original context, and what it would have meant to the original recipients. I think we get somewhere much closer than we get with people. So an art museum wanted to do an experiment with an Ai Jesus. They think they learned a lot. That means there's going to be more studies coming in the meantime.

1:10:48 I engaged AI, asking it, okay, so what are your strengths, what are your weaknesses? Can you do this better? And AI gave me its strengths and told me what it can do. And if you look at the strengths and what it can do better, ladies and gentlemen, those are the very things that we need to get a correct interpretation in scripture. And if it can do better, then we can logically that would state it can do better than us. Now, typically when I do things like this, people just ignore me, think I'm stupid, think it's a waste of time, and then ten years later I'll be like, yeah, don't you remember I said that? Don't you remember when nobody ever remembers this is going to have a profound impact.

1:11:50 I hope I'm around to see it. AI is going to have a profound impact on Bible interpretation and theology. It may take fifteen to twenty years. I think it's going to be sooner than that. I think probably Christianity is always behind about ten years, so I think within ten years we're going to definitely start seeing its impact, and I think maybe even sooner. Thanks for listening. Only you guys are going to be the ones who make the determination. I think it's going to be the people in the pew. This is my thinking. The people in the pew, I think, are going to be the ones more impacted than the people behind the pulpit. I think the people behind the pulpit are going to push back on it, saying you need me, you need me, you need me, and the people in the pew may go, no, I don't, because every time I take your sermon and analyze it under AI, it tells me how wrong you are, So maybe I don't need you. I think that's what's going to happen. Thanks for listening. God bless