Artificial Intelligence Will be Tough on Religion



Readers are welcome to correct my understanding of AI. Seeing it work, I see it as a way to summarize lots of information and present it in a way that has been predetermined by those who program the reading and summary. Wikipedia was/is similar in that readers can edit what appears and monitors can correct of challenge what is written. The difference is that Wikipedia posts were written, hopefully, by individuals and not by a computer. 

It was fascinating to me to read an analysis of AI on a Christian site, Christian Post. The link is a discussion of a survey which, apparently, asked various parts of Christianity whether they used AI to interpret the Bible. Included were preachers who were asked if the approved or disapproved of those in the pews asking AI their questions about the Bible.

A majority of the preachers did not approve of using AI to learn about the Bible. They are afraid the interpretation provided by this computerized summary of published views will be incorrect. A majority of respondents who were not preachers approved of using AI to learn several different points of view and learn which is the most widely accepted.

An official from Barna research put positive spin on this protective shield preachers preferred. He interpreted their reluctance in seeing church members learn about the Bible from AI sources instead of from themselves as a desire by preachers to instill in church goers more critical thinking skills. It is as if clergy are best able to judge the credibility of a source interpreting lessons from the Bible and they, clergy, have no reason to push points of views that serve their own interests. 

This understanding of critical thinking be the Barna official seems naive and limited. We should be cautious about the motives of any source claiming to know the minds of those who wrote the Bible and consider that such people have self-serving motives. 

Certainly, the Barna official is not speaking for Southern Baptist officials or Catholics who maintain clergy and officials only are qualified to interpret what the Bible means or how it applied to modern life. The Barna official's encouragement of critical thinking is exactly what a large number of Bible scholars today do. They try to determine the motives and self-interest of the ancients who wrote the Bible itself. It is not hard to understand how the interests of the wealthy of that time were served by what appeared in the Bible. Only the very wealthy were literate.  

P.S. Allow me to pass on a note of thanks to you who take a look at this blog regularly or occasionally. The number of visitors since I switched to this platform just passed half a million. I write the blog for my own enjoyment but it's also pleasant to see visitors.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Talarico Looks Like an Obama II

Image
We all have our ideas about what is good or smart politics. I'm no different. Those who read this blog have to hear mine. My thinking is millions of voters will go to the polls in the next two elections for the specific purpose of voting against Trump. Most of these voters, however, will not admit that is why or how they are voting. They will have convinced themselves they are voting for some reason more idealistic and loftier. An example of what they might say to themselves is, "I'm voting for a better country." The job of Democrats, Libertarians, Socialists and whomever is to give those voters something that ends the sentence, "I'm voting for someone other than a Republican because..."  The sentence will not end in "...I hate Trump." It will be something else. That is what Texas Govitorial Candidate Talarico is doing so well.   Talarico is telling Texans their state is too big and too important to yield to the narrow views of the far right. T...
Read more

Will We Ever Know How Accurate Current Bibles Are

Image
When I discuss the many times the Bible was copied and recopied by scribes over a couple of thousand years, the reply is often, "I have a book by this (or that) expert who says the Bible is 99% accurate to its original writers." The 99% claim appears in various places defending the Bible. There is one thing we know absolutely: There is no surviving original copy of the Bible. Even the oldest surviving material is a generation or two after the time some of the Bible was written. This means no one can claim he has, or ever will, compare the current Bible to the original Bible and find the two are 99% the same. We cannot claim either that it is not 99% accurate. For the sake of discussion, however, assume the current Bible is 99% accurate. That would mean the one word out of every 100 was inaccurate. It could still mean an important misreading of the original text. An example is the passage referring to punishment for a man who kills a fetus. In the oldest know materia...
Read more

Time to Forget the Christian Nation Thing

Image
While women are forbidden from being priests/preachers in some branches of Christianity thank goodness they are not forbidden from writing and lecturing about Christianity. A great article about the "Christian nation" notion shows us the U.S. is not a Christian nation and hopefully never will be. It is written by a woman with nerve and was published on a very Christian site, Christian Post.  Among the pilgrims were a few that wanted to establish a utopian Christian society. Some of their brethren stayed behind in Europe hoping the push aside worldly forces there and bring sinners to God. Today, whether it is the anti abortion, anti gay/trans, anti immigration or the put prayer back in schools branch there are those who want a version of what some pilgrims wanted, a utopian Christian society. The pilgrims were disappointed. Today's Christian utopians will be also. Here is why. The children of pilgrims did not believe the same things as their parents. Parents were roundly d...
Read more