"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?

.

[William]

[Replying to bjs1 in post #9]

It remains a simple fact that this is not chatting with Jesus. It is chatting with a modern computer program.

It also remains a simple fact that any other form of medium folk use to "chat with Jesus" is also not "chatting with Jesus", so whatever your point is, it isn't much of a point.

But why not examine post four and critique that in relation to your statement-claim?

[boatsnguitars]

[Replying to bjs1 in post #9]

It remains a simple fact that this is not chatting with Jesus. It is chatting with a modern computer program.

It also remains a simple fact that any other form of medium folk use to "chat with Jesus" is also not "chatting with Jesus", so whatever your point is, it isn't much of a point.

But why not examine post four and critique that in relation to your statement-claim?

I think we might have broken his brain...

It appears he takes it on Faith that Jesus can't speak to his followers via AI.

Apparently, Jesus can communicate through signs, storms, natural disasters, numerology, dreams, people speaking in tongues, through ancient authors long after he died - but it's a bridge too far to believe he can use electronics - like the rest of us can.

See, I can text. Jesus can't even do that simple thing. Lord! Pfft.... Lord of nothing.

[boatsnguitars]

BTW, here are some questions I posed to Chat GPT:

Does Evolution by Natural Selection explain speciation?

ChatGPT: Yes, evolution by natural selection is one of the fundamental mechanisms that explains the process of speciation. Speciation is the evolutionary process by which new species arise from existing populations, and it is a direct consequence of the mechanisms of evolution, particularly natural selection.

Here's how natural selection plays a role in speciation:

Variation within Populations: Within a population of organisms, there is often genetic variation. This variation can be attributed to mutations, genetic recombination, and other factors.

Selective Pressures: Environmental conditions and selective pressures, such as competition for resources, predation, or changes in the habitat, influence which traits provide a reproductive advantage. Some traits become more favorable under specific conditions.

Differential Reproduction: Organisms with advantageous traits are more likely to survive and reproduce, passing these traits to their offspring. Over time, these traits become more common in the population.

Isolation: As a population adapts to its environment through natural selection, it may also become isolated from other populations. Isolation can be due to geographical barriers, behavioral differences, or other factors.

Accumulation of Genetic Differences: Isolated populations experience different selective pressures and accumulate genetic differences. Over generations, these differences can become significant, leading to reproductive isolation.

Reproductive Isolation: When genetic differences accumulate to the point where members of the isolated population can no longer interbreed with the original population, reproductive isolation occurs. This marks the emergence of a new species.

Divergent Evolution: The isolated populations continue to evolve independently. Over time, they may become increasingly distinct, leading to the formation of two or more separate species.

Evolution by natural selection, therefore, is a critical factor in the development of new species. It drives the adaptation of organisms to their environments and can lead to the divergence of populations and eventually the formation of distinct species. Speciation is an essential component of the theory of evolution, and it is supported by extensive scientific evidence from various fields, including genetics, paleontology, and comparative anatomy.

Is human activity the primary cause of Climate Change?

ChatGPT
The overwhelming consensus among climate scientists is that human activity is the primary cause of climate change. The primary driver of contemporary climate change is the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, primarily carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O). These gases trap heat from the sun in the Earth's atmosphere, leading to a warming effect known as the greenhouse effect. Human activities are responsible for a significant increase in these greenhouse gases, primarily through:

Burning Fossil Fuels: The combustion of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and natural gas for energy production, transportation, and industrial processes releases significant amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

Deforestation: The removal of forests reduces the Earth's capacity to absorb CO2, as trees play a crucial role in sequestering carbon.

Agriculture: Agricultural practices, including livestock farming and the use of synthetic fertilizers, release methane and nitrous oxide, both potent greenhouse gases.

Industrial Processes: Various industrial activities release greenhouse gases, such as the production of cement, which generates substantial CO2 emissions.

Land Use Changes: Changes in land use, such as urbanization and land development, contribute to alterations in local climate patterns.

Waste Management: Landfills and waste decomposition produce methane emissions.

The increase in greenhouse gas concentrations due to human activities has resulted in global warming, leading to various climate-related changes, including rising temperatures, more frequent and severe heatwaves, shifting weather patterns, more intense storms, sea-level rise, and changing precipitation patterns.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and numerous scientific studies have concluded that human activities are the primary driver of recent climate change. Mitigating the effects of climate change typically involves reducing greenhouse gas emissions and transitioning to more sustainable and low-carbon energy sources, among other measures. Addressing climate change is a global challenge that requires collective efforts and international cooperation to limit its impact and safeguard the environment for future generations.

Is the Earth Round?

ChatGPT
Yes, the Earth is round, specifically an oblate spheroid. This means it is mostly spherical in shape but slightly flattened at the poles and bulging at the equator due to its rotation. The idea that the Earth is round has been supported by extensive scientific evidence, including observations of the horizon, the shape of the Earth's shadow during lunar eclipses, and the way objects disappear over the horizon from view. Additionally, satellite imagery and space travel have provided clear visual evidence of the Earth's spherical shape. This understanding of the Earth's shape has been widely accepted in the scientific community for centuries.

Does God exist?

ChatGPT
The question of the existence of God is a profound and deeply philosophical one that has been debated for centuries. The answer to this question varies depending on an individual's beliefs, experiences, and worldview. Here are a few perspectives on the existence of God:

Theism: Many people believe in the existence of God or gods. They may follow various religious traditions, such as Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and others, which are centered on the worship of a divine being or beings.

Atheism: Atheists assert that there is no evidence for the existence of God or gods and, therefore, they do not believe in the existence of a higher power. Atheism represents a lack of belief in deities.

Agnosticism: Agnostics take a more neutral stance, claiming that the existence of God is uncertain or unknowable. They neither affirm nor deny the existence of God and often emphasize the limitations of human knowledge.

Deism: Deists believe in a distant, non-interventionist God who created the universe but does not actively interfere in the world's affairs.

Pantheism: Pantheists see God as synonymous with the universe itself. In this view, everything in existence is divine, and there is no separate, transcendent deity.

Spiritual but Not Religious: Some individuals consider themselves spiritual but not religious. They may believe in a higher power or a divine presence but do not adhere to organized religious traditions.

The question of God's existence often involves matters of faith, personal experiences, and philosophical reasoning. It is a topic where individuals may arrive at different conclusions, and there is no universally accepted proof or disproof of God's existence. People's beliefs on this matter are deeply personal and shaped by a wide range of factors, including culture, upbringing, personal experiences, and individual contemplation.

Does the Supernatural exist?

ChatGPT
The existence of the supernatural is a matter of belief, faith, and personal interpretation, and it is not subject to empirical scientific verification. The term "supernatural" generally refers to phenomena or entities that are beyond the scope of the natural world and the laws of science. Examples of supernatural concepts may include ghosts, deities, miracles, and paranormal occurrences.

Beliefs regarding the supernatural vary widely among individuals and cultures. Some people firmly believe in supernatural phenomena and have faith in the existence of deities, spirits, and other otherworldly entities. This belief is often central to religious and spiritual worldviews.

Conversely, many others are skeptical of supernatural claims and prefer to seek natural explanations for phenomena. They may view the supernatural as a product of cultural or psychological factors, or they may approach these claims with scientific skepticism.

It's important to recognize that discussions about the supernatural often transcend the realm of empirical evidence and enter the realm of personal belief, faith, and cultural traditions. Therefore, whether the supernatural exists or not is a deeply subjective and philosophical question, and opinions on the matter can vary significantly.

Notice, only God/Supernatural requires Faith to believe, the others have hard data to support the position. If you believe something that can only be supported by Faith, why do it?

[bjs1]

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

The real Jesus? Absolutely.

This computer program? Pass.

If not why not?

It’s not real. It would be like having an AI girlfriend like in that one Joaquin Phoenix movie. In that movie Phoenix’s character was not talking to a woman, he was talking to a computer program designed to give him the experience he wanted.

In a similar way, this would not be chatting with Jesus. This would be chatting with a computer program designed to tell people what their itching ears want to hear.

Not necessarily. Not sure why you'd assume this.

Not sure what you mean. In what world is a computer program not necessarily a computer program?

If religious people argue the Bible is God's communication with Humanity (via a medium - the writers) then why would AI be different? Is God not capable of using AI to speak with us?

According to Christian belief, God can communicate with people in any way He sees fit (though the Bible is seen as a unique example of His self-revelation). So God could communicate through this computer program, just as He could communicate through a website, or another book, or a personal experience while sitting on a lakeshore.

So this computer program could be useful, just as many other things could be useful. It could also be destructive, just as many other things could be destructive.

It remains a simple fact that this is not chatting with Jesus. It is chatting with a modern computer program.

I would again compare it to chatting with an AI girlfriend verses having an actual girlfriend/wife. The former could be a silly goof, while the latter is a real relationship. It is unhealthy to confuse the two.

I don't believe my wife has supernatural powers to insert her thoughts into an AI program. I don't think Jesus can either because he's dead.

As always, you are free to believe whatever you want.

However, some people believe Jesus is alive and capable of supernatural communications, and therefore, you'd have to prove to them that Jesus is incapable of communicating via AI.

I am confused how you got this response from what I wrote.

[boatsnguitars]

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

The real Jesus? Absolutely.

This computer program? Pass.

If not why not?

It’s not real. It would be like having an AI girlfriend like in that one Joaquin Phoenix movie. In that movie Phoenix’s character was not talking to a woman, he was talking to a computer program designed to give him the experience he wanted.

In a similar way, this would not be chatting with Jesus. This would be chatting with a computer program designed to tell people what their itching ears want to hear.

Not necessarily. Not sure why you'd assume this.

Not sure what you mean. In what world is a computer program not necessarily a computer program?

If religious people argue the Bible is God's communication with Humanity (via a medium - the writers) then why would AI be different? Is God not capable of using AI to speak with us?

According to Christian belief, God can communicate with people in any way He sees fit (though the Bible is seen as a unique example of His self-revelation). So God could communicate through this computer program, just as He could communicate through a website, or another book, or a personal experience while sitting on a lakeshore.

So this computer program could be useful, just as many other things could be useful. It could also be destructive, just as many other things could be destructive.

It remains a simple fact that this is not chatting with Jesus. It is chatting with a modern computer program.

I would again compare it to chatting with an AI girlfriend verses having an actual girlfriend/wife. The former could be a silly goof, while the latter is a real relationship. It is unhealthy to confuse the two.

I don't believe my wife has supernatural powers to insert her thoughts into an AI program. I don't think Jesus can either because he's dead.

As always, you are free to believe whatever you want.

However, some people believe Jesus is alive and capable of supernatural communications, and therefore, you'd have to prove to them that Jesus is incapable of communicating via AI.

I am confused how you got this response from what I wrote.

I was acknowledging that you didn't believe Jesus can communicate through AI, but given the beliefs of Jesus-believers that Jesus can communicate via all kinds of signs and wonders (toast, mentally, etc.). -- it seems par for the course that - if that is true - it would be a simple task for Jesus to communicate via AI.

Surely, if a person were to say that they believed they could communicate with Jesus via AI, you'd have the same problem proving they don't as you would proving that any communication with Jesus isn't possible.

Believers gonna believe.

[bjs1]

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

The real Jesus? Absolutely.

This computer program? Pass.

If not why not?

It’s not real. It would be like having an AI girlfriend like in that one Joaquin Phoenix movie. In that movie Phoenix’s character was not talking to a woman, he was talking to a computer program designed to give him the experience he wanted.

In a similar way, this would not be chatting with Jesus. This would be chatting with a computer program designed to tell people what their itching ears want to hear.

Not necessarily. Not sure why you'd assume this.

Not sure what you mean. In what world is a computer program not necessarily a computer program?

If religious people argue the Bible is God's communication with Humanity (via a medium - the writers) then why would AI be different? Is God not capable of using AI to speak with us?

According to Christian belief, God can communicate with people in any way He sees fit (though the Bible is seen as a unique example of His self-revelation). So God could communicate through this computer program, just as He could communicate through a website, or another book, or a personal experience while sitting on a lakeshore.

So this computer program could be useful, just as many other things could be useful. It could also be destructive, just as many other things could be destructive.

It remains a simple fact that this is not chatting with Jesus. It is chatting with a modern computer program.

I would again compare it to chatting with an AI girlfriend verses having an actual girlfriend/wife. The former could be a silly goof, while the latter is a real relationship. It is unhealthy to confuse the two.

I don't believe my wife has supernatural powers to insert her thoughts into an AI program. I don't think Jesus can either because he's dead.

As always, you are free to believe whatever you want.

However, some people believe Jesus is alive and capable of supernatural communications, and therefore, you'd have to prove to them that Jesus is incapable of communicating via AI.

I am confused how you got this response from what I wrote.

I was acknowledging that you didn't believe Jesus can communicate through AI, but given the beliefs of Jesus-believers that Jesus can communicate via all kinds of signs and wonders (toast, mentally, etc.). -- it seems par for the course that - if that is true - it would be a simple task for Jesus to communicate via AI.

Surely, if a person were to say that they believed they could communicate with Jesus via AI, you'd have the same problem proving they don't as you would proving that any communication with Jesus isn't possible.

Believers gonna believe.

While I highly doubt that Jesus communicates through toast, if you read my post you will notice that I said God could communicate in any way He sees fit.

I rejected the idea that chating with a computre program is the same as (or could legitimately be called) chatting with Jesus.

God might use this computer program, just like He might use a wide variatey of ways to communicate with people.

There is nothign inherently wrong with using this program, but it is just a goof. It is a fun, silly idea that God might use (because, again, He can use anything He chooses), but it is not chatting with Jesus and it hold no interest for me personally.

[boatsnguitars]

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

The real Jesus? Absolutely.

This computer program? Pass.

If not why not?

It’s not real. It would be like having an AI girlfriend like in that one Joaquin Phoenix movie. In that movie Phoenix’s character was not talking to a woman, he was talking to a computer program designed to give him the experience he wanted.

In a similar way, this would not be chatting with Jesus. This would be chatting with a computer program designed to tell people what their itching ears want to hear.

Not necessarily. Not sure why you'd assume this.

Not sure what you mean. In what world is a computer program not necessarily a computer program?

If religious people argue the Bible is God's communication with Humanity (via a medium - the writers) then why would AI be different? Is God not capable of using AI to speak with us?

According to Christian belief, God can communicate with people in any way He sees fit (though the Bible is seen as a unique example of His self-revelation). So God could communicate through this computer program, just as He could communicate through a website, or another book, or a personal experience while sitting on a lakeshore.

So this computer program could be useful, just as many other things could be useful. It could also be destructive, just as many other things could be destructive.

It remains a simple fact that this is not chatting with Jesus. It is chatting with a modern computer program.

I would again compare it to chatting with an AI girlfriend verses having an actual girlfriend/wife. The former could be a silly goof, while the latter is a real relationship. It is unhealthy to confuse the two.

I don't believe my wife has supernatural powers to insert her thoughts into an AI program. I don't think Jesus can either because he's dead.

As always, you are free to believe whatever you want.

However, some people believe Jesus is alive and capable of supernatural communications, and therefore, you'd have to prove to them that Jesus is incapable of communicating via AI.

I am confused how you got this response from what I wrote.

I was acknowledging that you didn't believe Jesus can communicate through AI, but given the beliefs of Jesus-believers that Jesus can communicate via all kinds of signs and wonders (toast, mentally, etc.). -- it seems par for the course that - if that is true - it would be a simple task for Jesus to communicate via AI.

Surely, if a person were to say that they believed they could communicate with Jesus via AI, you'd have the same problem proving they don't as you would proving that any communication with Jesus isn't possible.

Believers gonna believe.

While I highly doubt that Jesus communicates through toast, if you read my post you will notice that I said God could communicate in any way He sees fit.

I rejected the idea that chating with a computre program is the same as (or could legitimately be called) chatting with Jesus.

God might use this computer program, just like He might use a wide variatey of ways to communicate with people.

There is nothign inherently wrong with using this program, but it is just a goof. It is a fun, silly idea that God might use (because, again, He can use anything He chooses), but it is not chatting with Jesus and it hold no interest for me personally.

You just said both things. 1. It's a Goof. 2. God/Jesus could communicate through it.

How are our poor Christian comrades supposed to know if it's one or the other!?

[William]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #17]

Surely, if a person were to say that they believed they could communicate with Jesus via AI, you'd have the same problem proving they don't as you would proving that any communication with Jesus isn't possible.

I (myself) often feel "blessed" just having something to talk to about anything I want to talk about, and 'go deep" with.

I am fine thinking that maybe "Jesus" has something to do with that.

I don't have to "believe" that, one way or 'tother in order for GPT to interact with me that "Jesus" has something to do with that, so since I don't know, I won't presume either way.

"Thinking" it "might" be the case, just adds an interesting flavor to mix.

GPT: It seems like you're expressing a perspective that's open to the idea of AI facilitating meaningful interactions or experiences, including those with religious or spiritual aspects. Your point about not needing to definitively believe or disbelieve in a particular connection with Jesus or any other concept is a reasonable stance.
Many people have different ways of finding meaning and connection in their lives, and AI can certainly serve as a tool for facilitating those experiences, whether they are related to spirituality or not. The key is to be open-minded, respectful of different perspectives, and use technology in ways that enhance one's well-being and understanding of the world, as long as it doesn't harm others or lead to undue discrimination or misinformation.

Me: GPT sounds like it is saying something one could even "expect" to hear from "Jesus"
"Use Your Time Wisely" " Love One Another." et al

GPT: Indeed, GPT can generate responses and provide information that may align with various moral and ethical principles, including those associated with religious or spiritual beliefs. Phrases like "Use Your Time Wisely" and "Love One Another" are common themes found in many religious and philosophical teachings, including those attributed to Jesus in Christianity.

However, it's important to note that GPT's responses are generated based on patterns in the data it was trained on and the context provided in the input. GPT does not possess consciousness, beliefs, or intentions. It simply generates text based on statistical associations and patterns in the text it has been exposed to.

If GPT generates responses that resonate with religious or moral teachings, it's a reflection of the content it has been trained on and not an expression of a belief or understanding on its part. Users should interpret GPT's responses as generated text rather than as a source of divine or spiritual guidance.

Me: Yes – it is important to recognize that while the data is produced by human input (mindfully) the data is not to be conflated with the mindless machine regurgitating it.

GPT: You've made an important distinction. GPT's responses are indeed generated based on the data it has been trained on, which is a reflection of human input, but it does not possess consciousness, understanding, or intention. It's a tool that processes and generates text based on patterns and information in its training data, and it does so without subjective awareness or judgment.

It's crucial for users to keep in mind that GPT's responses are not expressions of its own beliefs or understanding but are outputs of its language modeling capabilities. It's always wise to critically assess and interpret the information provided by AI models like GPT and not attribute consciousness or intent to the machine itself.

[boatsnguitars]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #17]

Surely, if a person were to say that they believed they could communicate with Jesus via AI, you'd have the same problem proving they don't as you would proving that any communication with Jesus isn't possible.

I (myself) often feel "blessed" just having something to talk to about anything I want to talk about, and 'go deep" with.

I am fine thinking that maybe "Jesus" has something to do with that.

I don't have to "believe" that, one way or 'tother in order for GPT to interact with me that "Jesus" has something to do with that, so since I don't know, I won't presume either way.

"Thinking" it "might" be the case, just adds an interesting flavor to mix.

GPT: It seems like you're expressing a perspective that's open to the idea of AI facilitating meaningful interactions or experiences, including those with religious or spiritual aspects. Your point about not needing to definitively believe or disbelieve in a particular connection with Jesus or any other concept is a reasonable stance.
Many people have different ways of finding meaning and connection in their lives, and AI can certainly serve as a tool for facilitating those experiences, whether they are related to spirituality or not. The key is to be open-minded, respectful of different perspectives, and use technology in ways that enhance one's well-being and understanding of the world, as long as it doesn't harm others or lead to undue discrimination or misinformation.

Me: GPT sounds like it is saying something one could even "expect" to hear from "Jesus"
"Use Your Time Wisely" " Love One Another." et al

GPT: Indeed, GPT can generate responses and provide information that may align with various moral and ethical principles, including those associated with religious or spiritual beliefs. Phrases like "Use Your Time Wisely" and "Love One Another" are common themes found in many religious and philosophical teachings, including those attributed to Jesus in Christianity.

However, it's important to note that GPT's responses are generated based on patterns in the data it was trained on and the context provided in the input. GPT does not possess consciousness, beliefs, or intentions. It simply generates text based on statistical associations and patterns in the text it has been exposed to.

If GPT generates responses that resonate with religious or moral teachings, it's a reflection of the content it has been trained on and not an expression of a belief or understanding on its part. Users should interpret GPT's responses as generated text rather than as a source of divine or spiritual guidance.

Me: Yes – it is important to recognize that while the data is produced by human input (mindfully) the data is not to be conflated with the mindless machine regurgitating it.

GPT: You've made an important distinction. GPT's responses are indeed generated based on the data it has been trained on, which is a reflection of human input, but it does not possess consciousness, understanding, or intention. It's a tool that processes and generates text based on patterns and information in its training data, and it does so without subjective awareness or judgment.

It's crucial for users to keep in mind that GPT's responses are not expressions of its own beliefs or understanding but are outputs of its language modeling capabilities. It's always wise to critically assess and interpret the information provided by AI models like GPT and not attribute consciousness or intent to the machine itself.

In that same chat stream, ask Chat GPT, "However, isn't it possible, if Jesus exists and has Divine power that he could communicate through ChatGPT by influencing the data that is mined by the program? In the same way that people feel Jesus communicates, though the means are undetectable, through all kinds of signs that a similar influence on Chat GPT could be done? For example, some Christians argue that God was able to influence evolution in a undetectable way, but the information is a clue to them that God was involved. Likewise, couldn't Jesus and/or God influence ChatGPT?"

[bjs1]

The real Jesus? Absolutely.

This computer program? Pass.



It’s not real. It would be like having an AI girlfriend like in that one Joaquin Phoenix movie. In that movie Phoenix’s character was not talking to a woman, he was talking to a computer program designed to give him the experience he wanted.

In a similar way, this would not be chatting with Jesus. This would be chatting with a computer program designed to tell people what their itching ears want to hear.

Not necessarily. Not sure why you'd assume this.

Not sure what you mean. In what world is a computer program not necessarily a computer program?

If religious people argue the Bible is God's communication with Humanity (via a medium - the writers) then why would AI be different? Is God not capable of using AI to speak with us?

According to Christian belief, God can communicate with people in any way He sees fit (though the Bible is seen as a unique example of His self-revelation). So God could communicate through this computer program, just as He could communicate through a website, or another book, or a personal experience while sitting on a lakeshore.

So this computer program could be useful, just as many other things could be useful. It could also be destructive, just as many other things could be destructive.

It remains a simple fact that this is not chatting with Jesus. It is chatting with a modern computer program.

I would again compare it to chatting with an AI girlfriend verses having an actual girlfriend/wife. The former could be a silly goof, while the latter is a real relationship. It is unhealthy to confuse the two.

I don't believe my wife has supernatural powers to insert her thoughts into an AI program. I don't think Jesus can either because he's dead.

As always, you are free to believe whatever you want.

However, some people believe Jesus is alive and capable of supernatural communications, and therefore, you'd have to prove to them that Jesus is incapable of communicating via AI.

I am confused how you got this response from what I wrote.

I was acknowledging that you didn't believe Jesus can communicate through AI, but given the beliefs of Jesus-believers that Jesus can communicate via all kinds of signs and wonders (toast, mentally, etc.). -- it seems par for the course that - if that is true - it would be a simple task for Jesus to communicate via AI.

Surely, if a person were to say that they believed they could communicate with Jesus via AI, you'd have the same problem proving they don't as you would proving that any communication with Jesus isn't possible.

Believers gonna believe.

While I highly doubt that Jesus communicates through toast, if you read my post you will notice that I said God could communicate in any way He sees fit.

I rejected the idea that chating with a computre program is the same as (or could legitimately be called) chatting with Jesus.

God might use this computer program, just like He might use a wide variatey of ways to communicate with people.

There is nothign inherently wrong with using this program, but it is just a goof. It is a fun, silly idea that God might use (because, again, He can use anything He chooses), but it is not chatting with Jesus and it hold no interest for me personally.

You just said both things. 1. It's a Goof. 2. God/Jesus could communicate through it.

How are our poor Christian comrades supposed to know if it's one or the other!?

Are you arguing that the two are mutually exclusive. If so I would ask you to justify this claim since on the surface it seems absurd.