Has anybody tried asking ChatGPT Questions? Here is its response to one I asked about 2 Puritans.

[davejonescue]

Hello all. I saw Jordan Peterson talking about this thing called ChatGPD. It is supposed to be an AI Engine that formulates answers from a huge corpus of texts. I asked it the following question, is this a true response? Will this be a good engine for research?

Question: "Write me an Essay describing the differences between John Owen and William Perkins."
Answer: In roughly 1 second

"John Owen and William Perkins were both influential theologians in the seventeenth century, but they had some significant differences in their beliefs.

One of the major differences between the two was their view on the nature of God. Owen, a puritan theologian, held to the doctrine of divine simplicity, which asserts that God is a single, undivided being without any parts or properties. Perkins, on the other hand, was a Calvinist theologian who believed in the doctrine of divine multi-personalism, which maintains that God exists as three distinct persons within the one divine essence.

Another difference between the two theologians was their view on the nature of salvation. Owen believed in the doctrine of limited atonement, which teaches that Jesus' death on the cross was only intended to save the elect, or those chosen by God for salvation. Perkins, however, held to the doctrine of universal atonement, which asserts that Jesus' death was sufficient to save all people, but not all will necessarily be saved because of their rejection of the gospel.

In terms of the Christian life, Owen emphasized the importance of holiness and conformity to God's will. He believed that believers should strive for perfection and that it was possible to live a sinless life through the power of the Holy Spirit. Perkins, on the other hand, took a more practical approach to the Christian life and emphasized the importance of good works and Christian living.

Overall, while both Owen and Perkins were influential theologians in the seventeenth century, they had some significant differences in their beliefs, particularly in their views on the nature of God and salvation, as well as their approaches to the Christian life.

Here is another.

Q: What are the key components of Puritan Theology?


A: Puritan theology is a branch of Protestant theology that developed in the late 16th and early 17th centuries in England. It was characterized by a strong emphasis on the authority of the Bible, the sovereignty of God, and the need for personal and social piety. Some of the key components of Puritan theology include:

1. The Bible as the sole source of authority: Puritans believed that the Bible is the ultimate authority on all matters of faith and practice. They placed a strong emphasis on the study and interpretation of the Bible and believed that it should be the foundation for all Christian teaching and practice.
2. The sovereignty of God: Puritans believed in the absolute sovereignty of God, meaning that God is in complete control of all things and that nothing happens outside of his will. They saw God as the supreme ruler and master of the universe, and they believed that all things, including human affairs, are subject to his control.
3. The depravity of humanity: Puritans believed that all people are born into sin and are therefore incapable of saving themselves. They saw humanity as completely corrupt and in need of salvation through the grace of God.
4. Justification by faith alone: Puritans emphasized the importance of faith in Jesus Christ as the sole means of salvation. They believed that it is through faith alone that a person can be justified before God and receive the gift of eternal life.
5. The importance of personal and social piety: Puritans placed a strong emphasis on personal piety, or the cultivation of a deep and personal relationship with God through prayer, Bible study, and the practice of spiritual disciplines. They also believed in the importance of social piety, or living out one's faith in the community and participating in the work of the church.

 

[Polanus1561]

I don’t know who would use this for formal research or even for a lesson. Things get awkward if people ask your sources.

 

[davejonescue]

Q: Give me a Bible quote, for ever letter of the alphabet, in alphabetical order.
1 second later.

A:
"All things are possible for one who believes." - Mark 9:23
"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." - Matthew 5:3
"Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest." - Matthew 11:28
"Delight yourself in the Lord, and he will give you the desires of your heart." - Psalm 37:4
"Every word of God is pure; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him." - Proverbs 30:5
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." - John 3:16
"Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends." - John 15:13
"He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ." - Philippians 1:6
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." - John 1:1
"Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'" - John 14:6
"Keep your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking deceit." - Psalm 34:13
"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." - Matthew 22:37
"My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." - 2 Corinthians 12:9
"Nothing can separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord." - Romans 8:39
"O Lord, you have searched me and known me! You know when I sit down and when I rise up; you discern my thoughts from afar." - Psalm 139:1-2
"Praise the Lord! Blessed is the man who fears the Lord, who greatly delights in his commandments!" - Psalm 112:1
"Quicken me, O Lord, for your name's sake! In your righteousness bring my soul out of trouble!" - Psalm 143:11
"Redeeming the time, because the days are evil." - Ephesians 5:16
"Seek the Lord while he may be found; call upon him while he is near." - Isaiah 55:6
"Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding." - Proverbs 3:5
"Until now you have asked nothing in my name. Ask, and you will receive, that your joy may be full." - John 16:24
"Vanity of vanities, says the Preacher, vanity of vanities! All is vanity." - Ecclesiastes 1:2
"Wake up, O sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you." - Ephesians 5:14
"Xalted be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places!" - Ephesians 1:3
"You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people's feet." - Matthew 5:13
"Zealous for good works." - Titus 2:14

 

[davejonescue]

I don’t know who would use this for formal research or even for a lesson. Things get awkward if people ask your sources.

I think you are right as far as research goes. AI doesnt have the capability to connect the dots so to speak...yet. But I have been vocal about this, that the church needs to wake up; the future is today, and we are going to need to start fleshing some of these things out, doctrinally, about AI, VR, etc. While it is good to stick to the old paths, ignoring the future frontiers will eave us responding rather than establishing.

 

[MyCrows]

"Xalted be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places!" - Ephesians 1:3

Is Xalted a valid word...?

I don't recognize it from any translation I'm familiar with....

Cheating? LOL

 

[davejonescue]

"Xalted be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places!" - Ephesians 1:3

Is Xalted a valid word...?

I don't recognize it from any translation I'm familiar with....

Cheating? LOL

I think it is.

 

[py3ak]

This particular bot has been given a definite slant. For instance, the results when it is asked to give an argument in favor of "fossil fuels" is not unbiased. And in the "essay" on Owen vs. Perkins it makes some basic mistakes and is quite superficial.

 

[MyCrows]

Ask it if Kenneth Copeland was successful in destroying coronavirus.

 

[arapahoepark]

I have heard it actually makes up quotes to support its theses, according to English teachers anyway.

 

[VictorBravo]

One of the major differences between the two was their view on the nature of God. Owen, a puritan theologian, held to the doctrine of divine simplicity, which asserts that God is a single, undivided being without any parts or properties. Perkins, on the other hand, was a Calvinist theologian who believed in the doctrine of divine multi-personalism, which maintains that God exists as three distinct persons within the one divine essence.

That's about what I'd expect from Artificial "Intelligence." No understanding in trying to distinguish things. Words strung together.

 

[Polanus1561]

It just harvests what is publicly available via Google etc.

 

[VictorBravo]

It just harvests what is publicly available via Google etc.

Not just Google, of course. But the point is it does not properly use what is available. It tries to make a distinction when there is none.

Summarizing the excerpt I quoted:

John Owen believes in divine simplicity, but Perkins believes in the Trinity.

OK, but they are not mutually exclusive.

 

[83r17h]

Yeah, it is a text generation engine that builds off a database of existing text. It doesn't reason (or try to) about its material, and so if the material is misleading or contradictory, it will simply assert so quite confidently. Two examples:

1. I had a friend ask it first if the halting problem was solvable, to which it correctly answered "no." Then he asked it to write a piece of code that solved the halting problem, and it outputted a piece of code saying that it should solve the halting problem.
2. I asked it about Oliver Cromwell's perspective on religious liberty. Not only was Cromwell a pioneer dedicated to religious liberty and toleration of all parties, but he banned Roman Catholic worship and persecuted Roman Catholics during his reign. The two were asserted without any attempt to reconcile or explain them.

It shows at least one feature of modern discourse though: confidence. It is extremely confident in what it says (even if entirely incorrect). This, and the inability to reason critically about the things it says, demonstrate conclusively that it is in fact a product of our current society.

 

[davejonescue]

Yeah, it is a text generation engine that builds off a database of existing text. It doesn't reason (or try to) about its material, and so if the material is misleading or contradictory, it will simply assert so quite confidently. Two examples:

1. I had a friend ask it first if the halting problem was solvable, to which it correctly answered "no." Then he asked it to write a piece of code that solved the halting problem, and it outputted a piece of code saying that it should solve the halting problem.
2. I asked it about Oliver Cromwell's perspective on religious liberty. Not only was Cromwell a pioneer dedicated to religious liberty and toleration of all parties, but he banned Roman Catholic worship and persecuted Roman Catholics during his reign. The two were asserted without any attempt to reconcile or explain them.

It shows at least one feature of modern discourse though: confidence. It is extremely confident in what it says (even if entirely incorrect). This, and the inability to reason critically about the things it says, demonstrate conclusively that it is in fact a product of our current society.

That is interesting. The video I saw this from said this is in its infancy stage, that is it derives answers from a purely text corpus. But it is the first prong in a 3 prong build. I guess next will be matching the text to visualization, then, combing the first two with human interaction. Dont know, but its a trip.

 

[Taylor]

The essay on Owen and Perkins is incomprehensible.

 

[iainduguid]

The present limitations are obvious. But I read yesterday, on another discussion board for faculty, a discussion of needing to warn students against using it as a form of plagiarism, and exploring whether there might be positive uses in the research process.

 

[Northern Crofter]

A friend of mine played around with it and sent me this:

Fun but not really much more than entertainment at this point in my mind.

 

[iainduguid]

For those wanting to know more, especially about its potential uses and risks in the classroom, here is a presentation I came across:

ChatGPT & Education

ChatGPT & Education Designed by Torrey Trust, Ph.D. College of Education University of Massachusetts Amherst @torreytrust This work is licensed under CC BY NC 4.0, meaning that you can freely use, remix, and share it as long as you give attribution and do not use it for commercial purposes. NOTE:...

docs.google.com

 

[davejonescue]

The present limitations are obvious. But I read yesterday, on another discussion board for faculty, a discussion of needing to warn students against using it as a form of plagiarism, and exploring whether there might be positive uses in the research process.

Yes, definitely one has to know its limitations. But I do think it has some uses. Here is an example with just playing around with it.

"Turn the Bible Book of Titus into a stage play.


The Book of Titus is a letter written by the apostle Paul to his fellow worker, Titus, who was serving as a leader in the Christian community on the island of Crete. It contains instructions for how Christians should live their lives and how to appoint leaders within the church. Here is a rough outline for how the Book of Titus could be adapted into a stage play:
Act 1:

• Scene 1: Paul writes a letter to Titus, outlining the problems he has observed in the Christian community on Crete and the solutions he recommends.
• Scene 2: Titus receives the letter and begins to implement Paul's instructions, starting with the appointment of qualified leaders within the church.
• Scene 3: The new leaders begin to teach and encourage the Christians on Crete to live according to the teachings of Jesus.

Act 2:

• Scene 1: The Christians on Crete face opposition and persecution from non-believers, but they remain strong in their faith.
• Scene 2: Titus visits the churches on Crete and reports back to Paul on the progress they have made.
• Scene 3: Paul encourages Titus to continue his work, reminding him of the importance of living a life that is pleasing to God.

Act 3:

• Scene 1: The Christians on Crete continue to grow and thrive, spreading the message of Jesus to those around them.
• Scene 2: Paul and Titus are reunited and celebrate the success of their efforts.
• Scene 3: The play ends with a final message from Paul, encouraging all Christians to follow the example of those on Crete and to strive to live a life worthy of their calling.

I hope this gives you a good starting point for creating a stage play based on the Book of Titus! Let me know if you have any questions or need further assistance.

 

[Zach]

I've found it interesting and somewhat useful for search engine type functions. My wife and I had a "conversation" with it about the nature of reality and existence and she concluded that it was more reasonable than most people!

 

[Phil D.]

The thread title and OP need to amend GPD to GPT.

 

[SolaScriptura]

I think as the technology improves - so as to employ a bibliography and perhaps even footnotes -, it will make it increasingly difficult to ascertain whether a written paper is genuine. Professors should probably begin relying on other means to assess comprehension and thought.

 

[Taylor]

I think as the technology improves - so as to employ a bibliography and perhaps even footnotes -, it will make it increasingly difficult to ascertain whether a written paper is genuine. Professors should probably begin relying on other means to assess comprehension and thought.

I had a conversation about this last week over lunch. I said that perhaps professors should go back to one-on-one oral examinations. This would pose significant difficulties for large university classes, of course.

 

[Afterthought]

AI cannot think, it can only regurgitate. At least, that's how it is so far. Exams that test "synthetic" knowledge or understanding of ideas will be all the more important for prevention of cheating. I've always been a fan of that with exams for various students I have taught, though they, well, less so!

 

[ZackF]

I think as the technology improves - so as to employ a bibliography and perhaps even footnotes -, it will make it increasingly difficult to ascertain whether a written paper is genuine. Professors should probably begin relying on other means to assess comprehension and thought.

I have speculated on what countermeasures and alternatives will be. Will there be more spontaneous examinations, written and verbal? It will be fun to see.

 

[iainduguid]

I had a conversation about this last week over lunch. I said that perhaps professors should go back to one-on-one oral examinations. This would pose significant difficulties for large university classes, of course.

Oral exams are certainly one possible approach. Another is to ask better questions (from the higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy of learning), which AI will not be able to tackle.

 

[VictorBravo]

I wasn't surprised when I read that some are marketing AI systems to detect AI writing. Which of course would feed back to improving the AI writing's patterns.

I can see a time when AI publishing will be directed to an AI readership, and the rest of us will simply watch cat videos.

Also, I noticed that there is a serious push to encode a digital watermark on AI products.

 

[Polanus1561]

AI content has already made a mark with pictorial art. Who would want to pay for human work anymore?

 

[Phil D.]

the rest of us will simply watch cat videos.

Here's a good start...

 

[hammondjones]

sourced from the book of face: