Getting AI to seek the will of God

Aaron112 said:

There is a fair chance it could possibly tell us more about God than preachers and teachers do.

Click to expand...

Possibly - if the preachers/teachers don't believe in prayer, study or inspiration of the Holy Spirit, or have God's Spirit living in them.
Otherwise, no.

At the risk of repeating a cliché, Christianity is a relationship. You don't get to really know a person by finding out facts about them.

Aaron112 said:

webnoted:​

"God and Our Actions​

The quote “I don’t think God minds too much what we do” suggests a perspective that God is not overly concerned with the specifics of human behavior or actions.

Click to expand...

So you take one phrase of mine out of context and then ask a computer what it means, rather than asking me?

Priceless.

Strong in Him said:

So you take one phrase of mine out of context and then ask a computer what it means, rather than asking me?

Click to expand...

Nope. Non sequitur.

Aaron112 said:

Nope. Non sequitur.

Click to expand...

That is exactly what happened.

Aaron112 said:

webnoted:​

"God and Our Actions​

The quote “I don’t think God minds too much what we do” suggests a perspective that God is not overly concerned with the specifics of human behavior or actions.

Click to expand...

Nope.
I was talking about Christians who suggest that God has a specific will for us regarding career, education etc.

Aaron112 said:

• Relaxation of moral expectations: This quote implies that God may not be as strict or particular about human behavior as traditional religious teachings might suggest. It may be seen as a more lenient or permissive view of God’s nature.

Click to expand...

Nope.
I wasn't talking about moral expectations. Nor was I talking about general human behaviour.

Aaron112 said:

• Focus on inner transformation: Instead of focusing on external actions, this perspective might emphasize the importance of inner transformation, such as a person’s thoughts, feelings, and motivations. According to this view, God is more concerned with the heart and intentions behind our actions rather than the actions themselves.

Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about that, though Jesus himself said that bad/evil words come out of our mouths and reflect what's in our hearts. He also said that a good tree cannot bear bad fruit.
And if we're talking about good deeds; atheists, Muslims, JWs etc can do those, yet that doesn't show that they are right with, or even believe in, God.

Aaron112 said:

It’s essential to note that this perspective may not align with traditional Christian teachings, which often emphasize the importance of obedience to God’s commands and the moral implications of human actions.

Click to expand...

It's essential to note that I was talking ONLY about a Christian saying, "is it God's will for me to get this job/study at this college, go to this church?" etc etc. Within that context; I don't believe God minds whether we choose to be a nurse or a teacher. WHAT we do - have a specific career, get married etc - is, I believe, not as important to God as the kind of people that we are.

Obviously the idea of asking "is it God's will that I murder this person/drink and drive, commit fraud/adultery?" is ridiculous - and if that had been the issue, I would not have said, "I don't think God minds."

AI needs to learn to read.

Strong in Him said:

You think a programmed computer tells us more about God than his holy word?

Click to expand...

Yeah, because neural.

Aaron112 said:

There is a fair chance it could possibly tell us more about God than preachers and teachers do.

Click to expand...

That ain't necessarily saying a whole lot, is it?

Aaron112 said:

There is a fair chance it could possibly tell us more about God than preachers and teachers do.

Click to expand...

That seems impossibly unlikely. I work with ChatGPT 4o daily and can assure you it is much more limited than most people believe, and it is widely regarded as the best AI. Indeed sometimes it makes me facepalm.

These large language models are just complex computer programs which take an input in the form of text data, use a neural network to assign weights to different words based on pattern recognition, and then once configured, take input from the user and output a response based on that network. As such, they are vulnerable to garbage in, garbage out, in three respects: in terms of errors with the data supplied to them in their initial configuration, in terms of actual programming errors and logical errors in the software itself, which results in glitches and artifacts like the famous “hallucination bug”, as well as limitations (Dall E, the image generation program associated with chatGPT, doesn’t understand spatial relationships and frequently makes grotesque mistakes with human anatomy, particularly the hands), and finally, operator error, in that the prompts one supplies to chatGPT and other large language models (which I also use - I frequently use a site which lets me compare the output of chatGPT and many other AIs, for example the Grok AI developed by Elon Musk’s X company, and this is particularly useful, because in some cases one AI will do better than another), can produce suboptimal results, and part of the emerging art of working with these systems is programming them in a manner not entirely unlike programming with a traditional computer language, albeit they have to be instructed with precise natural language rather than fully documented code.