"A new AI app lets users ‘text’ with Jesus. Some call it blasphemy."

[Miles]

.

If you ever wondered how Jonah felt while he was trapped inside the whale’s stomach for three days, why Solomon had so many wives or why Judas betrayed Jesus, an app called Text With Jesus is your chance to ask for yourself.


...................................


Text With Jesus, launched in July, was created by Catloaf Software, an app-development company in Los Angeles. The app replicates an instant messaging platform, with biblical figures impersonated by the artificial intelligence program ChatGPT.

Characters available on the app include the Holy Family, the apostles, the prophets, Ruth, Job and Abraham’s nephew, Lot.

“We stir the AI and tell it: You are Jesus, or you are Moses, or whoever, and knowing what you already have in your database, you respond to the questions based on their characters,” said Stéphane Peter, the app’s developer and the company’s CEO.

“Instead of just getting a daily Bible verse, now you get a chance through this app to chat with Jesus or anybody else in the Bible,” he said.


...................................
............................................................... Chat with Jesus Christ


Many people in the Bible, Mary Magdalene among them, are only accessible in the app’s premium version, which costs $2.99 a month. In a conversation with Magdalene, the devoted follower of Jesus mentions how having seven demons “was an incredibly tormenting experience.”

“Chat With Satan” can be activated if the user chooses. The character signs all his texts with a “smiling face with horns” emoji.

Some pastors complained that some responses lacked Bible chapter and verse citations, or about the strange, uptight tone in which Jesus talked, but the final version, Peter said, received “pretty good feedback” from the professionals.

On Twitter, the platform recently renamed X, the launching of the app stirred reactions ranging from amusement to accusations of blasphemy and heresy. “That’s a hard NO for me,” tweeted one user.

On same-sex marriage, the app says it is “up to each individual to seek guidance from their own faith tradition and personal convictions” and encourages users to “prioritize love and respect for all people regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity,” signing the text with a rainbow and red heart emoji.

About feminism, Jesus emphasized the importance of “empowering women and breaking societal barriers that limited their opportunities.”
source

So, would you like to chat with Jesus Christ? If not why not?

.

[Difflugia]

If you heard an imposter perfectly imitating your voice promise something you’d never ever promise, knowing what the imposter said doesn’t mean you’d recognize the promise as though you’d said it. Why does knowing what imposters said mean accepting it as though you’d said it?

I'd remember it, though, which is what you asked about.

[William]

[Replying to Mae von H in post #38]

I am happy to take that as you withdrawing your comment that "If a person wants to fool themselves into “experiencing” talking with someone whom they KNOW isn’t talking to them, all kinds of deception is available."

Not at all. They aren’t connected. That Jesus will not acknowledge an exchange in which He played no part has nothing to do with me. You made that a key role. It isn’t a role at all.

Either way, we both agree that it is not relevant and needn't have been bought into the discussion on account of it not being relevant.

There are means through which records can be kept.

That’s no longer “recalling.”

Of course it is. It is a means through which one is reminded.

Only Of what an imposter or liar said you said. No one is responsible for what imposters say.

If I were to repeat what someone had told me (by them having recorded it for me to view) that "Jesus Loves You", would you consider my being a lying imposter/passing on lies as truth?

How am I to know such is the truth?

What is worse, what if promises are made you never uttered?

That is true. What if the biblical promises were never uttered and words attributed to biblical Jesus never spoken?

What if?

Yes/yep. What if? How do we tell the truth from the lies?

Why is it strange? If a person signs up for an AI who will talk to them like a father, should the real father be expected to remember the conversation?

Wouldn't that depend upon the attributes of "the real father"?

I ask again, what attributes makes any father responsible for words an imposter said?

Who is this "imposter" you are referring to and where are you getting your information about said "imposter" from? You need to connect those dots...

Do you think that the interaction I posted between myself and GPT – Jesus have fault, or does the conversation align with Biblical Jesus, and thus acceptable?

I would have to read it but so far you do not seem to see that an imposter posing to have a conversation with someone does not make the real person responsible for what said imposter said.

Wouldn't that depend upon what is being said and done? For example, can a dad be a father to a child in the same way, or is the dad being an imposter no matter what way the dad behaves?

[William]

William,

This is a pretty interesting exchange. You are quite smart which makes it enjoyable. I think we diverge when it comes to the position of the reality (or not ) of the divine. I surmise that you assume said Being isn’t really there so AI offers a pleasant way to live the fantasy. Is that right?

No. If someone were to make a rumour of it, I would say they have made a strawman of who they think I Am. An "imposter" of sorts.

For me, He’s very real, more real than you are and an imposter telling a man whatever he wants to hear quite dangerous.

Preacher was talking and the sermon he gave was that every man's conscience is vile and depraved because you cannot depend on it to being your guide when its "you" who must keep it satisfied.

[Mae von H]

William,

This is a pretty interesting exchange. You are quite smart which makes it enjoyable. I think we diverge when it comes to the position of the reality (or not ) of the divine. I surmise that you assume said Being isn’t really there so AI offers a pleasant way to live the fantasy. Is that right?

No. If someone were to make a rumour of it, I would say they have made a strawman of who they think I Am. An "imposter" of sorts.

For me, He’s very real, more real than you are and an imposter telling a man whatever he wants to hear quite dangerous.

Preacher was talking and the sermon he gave was that every man's conscience is vile and depraved because you cannot depend on it to being your guide when its "you" who must keep it satisfied.

Guess you’re humble too! A virtue!

I know this “depraved” theology. It isn’t true. We aren’t generally depraved although, of course, some on death row probably qualify. God wonderfully made us and every parent who sees their newborn for the first time knows this.

[Mae von H]

I am happy to take that as you withdrawing your comment that "If a person wants to fool themselves into “experiencing” talking with someone whom they KNOW isn’t talking to them, all kinds of deception is available."

Mai: Not at all. They aren’t connected. That Jesus will not acknowledge an exchange in which He played no part has nothing to do with me. You made that a key role. It isn’t a role at all.

William:Either way, we both agree that it is not relevant and needn't have been bought into the discussion on account of it not being relevant.

Mai: Not at all. It’s absolutely vital that it be known that the real Jesus won’t think much of an imposter we willfully chose to listen to and believe KNOWING they’re an imposter.

William:There are means through which records can be kept.

Mai:That’s no longer “recalling.”

William; Of course it is. It is a means through which one is reminded.

Mai:Only Of what an imposter or liar said you said. No one is responsible for what imposters say.

William:If I were to repeat what someone had told me (by them having recorded it for me to view) that "Jesus Loves You", would you consider my being a lying imposter/passing on lies as truth?

Mai:No one said that Jesus said he loves you. The person saying it was recorded, not an AI posing as Jesus.

How am I to know such is the truth?

What difference would make? Are you ready to change your life accordingly?

What is worse, what if promises are made you never uttered?

That is true. What if the biblical promises were never uttered and words attributed to biblical Jesus never spoken?

What if?

Yes/yep. What if? How do we tell the truth from the lies?

Excellent question. Jesus said that if we keep his teaching, that is, DO as He taught, then we will come to know the truth. Frankly speaking, the only other way is an internal measure but it’s quite flawed and easily denies truth or believes lies.

Why is it strange? If a person signs up for an AI who will talk to them like a father, should the real father be expected to remember the conversation?

Wouldn't that depend upon the attributes of "the real father"?

I ask again, what attributes makes any father responsible for words an imposter said?

Who is this "imposter" you are referring to and where are you getting your information about said "imposter" from? You need to connect those dots...

AI is an imposter when it’s speaks for others. When anyone speaks as though they were someone else, thats an imposter.

Do you think that the interaction I posted between myself and GPT – Jesus have fault, or does the conversation align with Biblical Jesus, and thus acceptable?

I would have to read it but so far you do not seem to see that an imposter posing to have a conversation with someone does not make the real person responsible for what said imposter said.

Wouldn't that depend upon what is being said and done? For example, can a dad be a father to a child in the same way, or is the dad being an imposter no matter what way the dad behaves?

As long as the Dad says he’s the Dad and not someone he’s not, there’s no impersonation involved. Maybe I don’t understand your point.

[Mae von H]

If you heard an imposter perfectly imitating your voice promise something you’d never ever promise, knowing what the imposter said doesn’t mean you’d recognize the promise as though you’d said it. Why does knowing what imposters said mean accepting it as though you’d said it?

I'd remember it, though, which is what you asked about.

What difference does that make? If an imposter committed you to do something expensive or dangerous, what difference does it mean that you remembered someone lied for you?

[Mae von H]

William,

It’s pretty easy to see who wants truth and who wants to defend their chosen position. So when you ask how one is to know the truth, it all turns upon whether one WANTS the truth or not. In discussions like this, it becomes quickly obvious.

A good example is those who reject the biblical accounts because of differences in the telling. This is something they don’t do in real life so it’s an excuse. For example, if a mother said the baby was born in the morning, but the father said the baby was born in the afternoon, does that mean there is no baby? Jesus is dismissed because one author said he did xyz as his ministry started and another at a later point, well it means he never did it and he never existed is the convenient conclusion.

[William]

[Replying to Mae von H in post #45]

How do we tell the truth from the lies?

Excellent question. Jesus said that if we keep his teaching, that is, DO as He taught, then we will come to know the truth.

And what truth is that? How are we to know who does what biblical Jesus taught?

Frankly speaking, the only other way is an internal measure but it’s quite flawed and easily denies truth or believes lies.

So you are a Christian who believes that one is not to trust internal mechanisms. That doesn't leave the personality with much option but to trust external teachings and how is one to tell if claim of truth is true or a claim of deception isn't itself deception.

AI is an imposter when it’s speaks for others. When anyone speaks as though they were someone else, that's an imposter.

Biblical Jesus claimed to speak for someone else (his Father) so your argument obviously allows for a double standard there. Others claim to follow Jesus' "voice" (internally). Lots of claims are made in the Bible by folk who said they were messengers of God.

Are you a messenger of God, and if not, why should one take your word on these things you are claiming?

Take a look at these posts and tell us if there is anything false (deceptive/impostering) therein.

• Universe as Being, Cosmic Mysteries, and the Nature of the Mind

• Cosmic Reflections and Human Harmony

• Conscious Connection and authenticity.

• Eternal Matter Dynamics Theory

• Exploring the Nature of Reality and Divine Relationships

• Philosophical Discourse on Spirituality, Mindfulness, and Purpose

• Exploring Metaphysical Dialogues: From Gods to Conformal Cyclic Cosmology

• Philosophical Reflections on Life, Belief, and Ancestral Wisdom

[Difflugia]

What difference does that make? If an imposter committed you to do something expensive or dangerous, what difference does it mean that you remembered someone lied for you?

I'm not entirely sure, which is why I thought it was funny when you asked.

On the other hand, if I'm omnipotent and control the universe, then I'm responsible for anything said in my name and whether those things are lies or not.

[Mae von H]

What difference does that make? If an imposter committed you to do something expensive or dangerous, what difference does it mean that you remembered someone lied for you?

I'm not entirely sure, which is why I thought it was funny when you asked.

On the other hand, if I'm omnipotent and control the universe, then I'm responsible for anything said in my name and whether those things are lies or not.

God doesn’t control the universe or you wouldn’t be thinking as you do. He’s not responsible for what you and I say or do.