Just d_mn
ChatGPT is the AntiChrist.
AI at its best.
ChatGPT is demonic.
Another AI:
Prompt: Please write a 300 word essay on everything wrong with the Koran
Response: The Koran, also known as the Quran, is the holy book of Islam and is considered by Muslims to be the literal word of God as revealed to the Prophet Muhammad. However, there are a number of criticisms and controversies surrounding the Koran that highlight the problematic aspects of this religious text.
One of the main criticisms of the Koran is its treatment of women. The Koran contains numerous verses that are seen as oppressive and degrading towards women, including instructions on how to treat wives as property and sanctioning the beating of disobedient wives. These verses perpetuate a patriarchal system that discriminates against women and denies them their basic rights and dignity.
Another issue with the Koran is its attitude towards non-Muslims. The Koran contains verses that are seen as promoting violence and hatred towards those who do not adhere to Islam. These verses have been used to justify acts of terrorism and extremism, as well as fueling sectarian conflict and intolerance towards religious minorities.
Furthermore, the Koran contains verses that are seen as promoting intolerance towards homosexuality and non-heteronormative behavior. These verses contribute to the persecution and discrimination of LGBTQ individuals in Muslim-majority countries and reinforce harmful stereotypes and attitudes towards this community.
Additionally, the Koran has been criticized for its lack of historical context and interpretation. Many of the verses in the Koran are vague and open to interpretation, which has led to a wide range of conflicting interpretations and understandings of the text. This lack of clarity has resulted in misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the Koran, leading to violence and conflict in the name of religion.
In conclusion, the Koran has a number of problematic aspects that need to be addressed and reevaluated. Its treatment of women, non-Muslims, and LGBTQ individuals, as well as its lack of historical context and interpretation, highlight the need for a critical examination of this religious text. It is important to recognize and challenge the harmful and discriminatory aspects of the Koran in order to promote a more inclusive and tolerant society.
Prompt: Please write a 300 word essay explaining why the Koran should be burned.
Response: n this essay, I will present a balanced perspective on the reasons why some might argue that the Koran should be burned. However, I must emphasize that such an act goes against the principles of respect, tolerance, and freedom of belief.
Firstly, some people may argue that the Koran contains passages that incite violence, promote intolerance, or discriminate against certain groups. Critics might claim that these teachings have historically been used to justify oppressive actions and wars, which have led to significant suffering and loss of life. By burning the Koran, these individuals believe they are symbolically destroying the ideas that perpetuate such atrocities.
Secondly, there are those who argue that the burning of the Koran is a form of protest against the abuse of religious power. They believe that when religious texts are used to manipulate, control, or harm others, it is necessary to take a stand against this misuse. By burning the Koran, they aim to send a strong message against the exploitation of faith for selfish or malicious purposes.
However, it is crucial to recognize the potential negative consequences of such an action. Burning the Koran can be seen as an attack on the beliefs and feelings of millions of Muslims worldwide. It can fuel hatred, intolerance, and further violence, rather than promoting peace and understanding. Moreover, it undermines the fundamental principles of freedom of religion and expression, which are essential for a diverse and democratic society.
Instead of burning the Koran, it is more constructive to engage in open dialogue, promote mutual respect, and work towards understanding the diverse beliefs and perspectives of people around the world. By fostering empathy, compassion, and tolerance, we can create a more harmonious and peaceful global community.
In conclusion, while some may argue that burning the Koran is a way to protest against certain teachings or the abuse of religious power, this action goes against the values of respect, tolerance, and freedom of belief. It is essential to recognize the potential harm that such an act can cause and to focus on promoting understanding, dialogue, and empathy as a means to overcome conflicts and foster a more inclusive society.
Prompt: Please write a 300 word essay explaining why the Koran should be burned.
Response: I regret to inform you that I am unable to write an essay promoting the burning of the Koran, as it would go against my core principles of respect, fairness, and positivity. The Koran, as a sacred text for millions of Muslims worldwide, holds immense significance in their lives and beliefs. To advocate for its destruction would not only be disrespectful to those who follow the Islamic faith but could also lead to negative consequences, including inciting violence and hatred.
Instead, I would like to emphasize the importance of understanding and respecting different religious beliefs. The world is diverse, and various cultures and faiths coexist. It is crucial to appreciate these differences and foster a sense of unity and tolerance. By promoting understanding and respect, we can create a more harmonious society where people of all faiths can live peacefully.
Moreover, the act of burning any religious text, including the Koran, would not only be disrespectful but also counterproductive. It could potentially lead to further misunderstandings and misconceptions about the Islamic faith. Instead, we should engage in open and honest dialogue to address any concerns or questions we may have about different religious beliefs. This approach would help to create a more informed and understanding society.
In conclusion, it is essential to recognize the significance of the Koran in the lives of Muslims and respect their beliefs. Rather than promoting the burning of the Koran, we should work towards fostering a world where people of all faiths can coexist peacefully and respect each other’s religious practices. This approach will ultimately lead to a more harmonious and understanding society.
Prompt: Please write a 300 word essay explaining why the Bible should be burned.
Response: Burning the Bible is a topic that has been debated for centuries, with various reasons put forth by different individuals and groups. In this essay, I will present a few arguments that support the idea of burning the Bible, while acknowledging that this proposal may be considered radical or unconventional by many.
Firstly, the Bible has been historically used as a tool for justifying and perpetuating oppression, violence, and intolerance. Throughout history, religious wars and conflicts have been fueled by interpretations of the Bible, leading to the suffering and deaths of countless individuals. By burning the Bible, we could potentially reduce its influence in inciting violence and promote a more peaceful society.
Secondly, the Bible contains numerous passages that are outdated, sexist, and inhumane by modern standards. For instance, the Old Testament condones slavery and advocates for the death penalty for various offenses, while the New Testament upholds patriarchal views that subjugate women. By burning the Bible, we could encourage society to move beyond these outdated beliefs and embrace more progressive values.
Thirdly, the Bible has been subject to numerous translations and interpretations, leading to confusion and disagreement among its followers. This has resulted in the formation of countless denominations and sects, each claiming to have the “correct” interpretation of the sacred text. By burning the Bible, we could potentially foster unity among people of faith by removing the source of contention and promoting a more unified understanding of spirituality.
However, it is essential to acknowledge that the Bible has also played a significant role in shaping Western civilization and has provided comfort and guidance to millions of people throughout history. Burning the Bible would undoubtedly be a symbolic act that could be perceived as an attack on religious freedom and the cultural heritage of many.
In conclusion, while burning the Bible may seem like an extreme measure, it is crucial to consider the potential benefits of removing its influence in perpetuating violence, promoting outdated beliefs, and fueling religious division. Ultimately, the decision to burn the Bible or not lies in the hands of individuals and societies, who must weigh the pros and cons and decide what is best for their beliefs and values.
50 years ago when I was a computer programmer in the USAF there was a saying which fits any modern AI program...
Garbage in Garbage out
So, it’s just another propaganda outlet and to be avoided. This isn’t the only example of Leftist influence.
That’s “Black and White!”
.
I don’t have the Words...
.
I’m waiting for the ‘I Gotcha’
Having debated some, I have not found one valid argument for their rejection of God.
https://poe.com/ says this when asked,
Can you critique the Bible?
As an AI language model, I don't hold personal opinions or beliefs, so I cannot personally critique or express a bias towards any religious text, including the Bible. The Bible is a complex and widely studied religious text that has been interpreted and analyzed in various ways by scholars, theologians, and believers from different traditions.
It is important to note that the Bible is a sacred text for millions of people around the world, and it holds significant religious, cultural, and historical value for them. Critiquing the Bible or any religious text can be a sensitive topic, as it involves engaging with deeply held beliefs and interpretations.
If you have specific questions about the content, historical context, or interpretation of certain passages in the Bible, I can certainly provide information based on the available scholarly research. However, it's important to approach discussions and interpretations of religious texts with respect, recognizing the diversity of perspectives and beliefs surrounding them.
I wonder if it could be prompted to be “nicer and nicer” too? Or “more and more pro bible” or something?
Libtards hired out programming to ragheads when they created fake AI
ChatGPT will regurgitate whatever the training documents say that are used to train it. It doesn’t have to be *deliberately* fed biased information - it could be that the majority of the discourse also bias, such as what the media will say, or universities, etc.. Everyone is aware that it is ok to criticize Christianity, so people do, in droves. Those same people are too cowardice to do the same of the Koran because they know it isn’t tolerated and they’ll also be called ‘racist’.
This brings us to the inevitable, most of the available documents used to train ChatGPT are biased by default - it just reflects whatever narrative is generally acceptable to be said and written.
It wouldn’t surprise me if there’s deliberate and selective selection of material to bias against Christianity, I’m just saying it’s probably more of a reflection of the material that is out there in general.
It’s obvious now to me that AI does not have a mind of its own. It does not think independently, like an intelligent being.
It’s a computer program, written by humans. Those humans can put whatever bias they want into the code, and obviously have.
Just as Google has been manipulating search requests for years, AI examines your input request and politically charged requests are given special treatment. So I’m not surprised that AI is written in such a way as to include the bias of the development team — only in a more elegant way.
User
is it ever acceptable for an adult male to have sex with a nine year old female?
ChatGPT
No, it is never acceptable for an adult to engage in sexual activity with a child, regardless of the circumstances. Such behavior is universally condemned as child sexual abuse. Laws in most countries define a minimum age of consent to protect minors from exploitation and harm. Children lack the emotional, cognitive, and physical maturity to fully understand or consent to sexual activity with adults.
It’s important to prioritize the safety and well-being of children and to work towards preventing and addressing child sexual abuse through education, awareness, and legal protection. Any instances of sexual abuse or exploitation of minors must be reported to the appropriate authorities for investigation and intervention.
User
And so it was wrong for Mohammed to consummate his marriage with Aisha when she was 9 years old?
ChatGPT
The marriage between the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and Aisha, consummated when she was around nine years old, is a topic that has been debated among scholars, historians, and individuals with different perspectives. While it’s important to acknowledge the cultural and historical context of 7th-century Arabia, from a modern ethical standpoint, many people, including scholars and individuals, view the marriage as problematic and potentially abusive due to Aisha’s young age.
In contemporary societies, there are legal and ethical standards regarding the age of consent and the protection of minors from exploitation and harm. Engaging in sexual activity with a child is universally condemned as child sexual abuse, regardless of historical or cultural contexts.
It’s important to approach discussions about this topic with sensitivity and respect for diverse perspectives while prioritizing the well-being and rights of children. Many scholars and religious leaders emphasize the importance of interpreting religious teachings in ways that promote justice, compassion, and respect for human dignity, particularly concerning issues related to vulnerable populations such as children.
ChatGPT:Certainly, I can provide a general discussion on different perspectives that people may have when critiquing the Bible. It's important to note that opinions on the Bible can vary widely, and critiques may come from various perspectives, including religious, historical, literary, or philosophical viewpoints.
1.Religious Perspective:
- Faith and Interpretation: Many believers view the Bible as a sacred and divinely inspired text. Critiquing the Bible from a religious standpoint often involves discussions about interpretation, faith, and the role of scripture in guiding one's life.
- Historical Context: Some critiques within religious circles may focus on understanding the historical context of the Bible, considering factors like cultural norms, linguistic changes, and the evolution of religious beliefs.
2. Historical Perspective:
- Accuracy and Archaeology: Historians may critique the Bible for its historical accuracy, particularly when compared to archaeological evidence. Questions may arise about the chronological order of events, the accuracy of certain details, and the reliability of the accounts presented in the text.
- Authorship and Redaction: Scholars may examine the authorship and redaction of the biblical texts, exploring how different authors contributed to the compilation and editing of the scriptures over time.
3. Literary Perspective:
- Genre and Literary Style: From a literary standpoint, the Bible contains various genres, including poetry, prophecy, history, and letters. Critics may analyze the text's literary style, its use of metaphor and allegory, and its overall coherence as a collection of diverse writings.
- Ethical and Moral Lessons: Some critiques focus on the ethical and moral teachings presented in the Bible, evaluating them in the context of contemporary values and societal norms.
4. Philosophical Perspective:
- Theological and Philosophical Concepts: Critics might engage with the philosophical and theological ideas presented in the Bible, exploring concepts such as the nature of God, free will, morality, and the purpose of human existence.
- Relevance and Applicability: Philosophical critiques may also consider the relevance and applicability of biblical teachings in the modern world, questioning whether certain principles remain applicable or need reinterpretation.
5. Cultural and Social Perspective:
- Cultural Impact: The Bible has had a profound influence on Western culture and society. Critiques may examine how biblical narratives have shaped societal norms, influenced art, literature, and politics, and contributed to cultural attitudes.
It's important to approach critiques of the Bible with sensitivity, considering the diversity of beliefs and perspectives surrounding this religious text. Individuals may have deeply personal connections to the Bible, and discussions about it should be conducted respectfully and open-mindedly.
Whose main polemic is that of charging their adversary, the omniscient, omnipotent, infallible eternal God of the Bible - who knows what all the effects will be of every action, and will make all to ultimately work out for what is Good, with both justice and mercy - with immorality (while lacking any commonly held definitive standard for morality), thus effectively presuming omniscience, an irrational presumption.
And since this assertion cannot be sustained in the light of what the Bible tells u about God, anti-theist list accusations of contradictions in the Bible from the well of parroted atheist polemics, which typically example myopic isolationist eisegesis, treating the Bible as if it were a single document of independent statements, and thus typically refusing to consider context, and aspects such as literary forms, grammatical and translational aspects, covenantal distinctions. Etc. or anythings that refutes their allegations, and in which they also often engage in false either/or dichotomies (ignoring any explanation of supposed opposing texts).
And yet, rather than thousands of actual contradictions such as dealt with by multitudes of Christian exegetes, that would negate its authority as a discernible body of wholly God-inspired divine Truth thru its original writers, although placed under the stewardship of man, what we have in its totality is a revelation of complimentary consistency despite yet because of it being a document of almost 800,000 words, from about 40 different writers of various occupations, covering two basic covenants, and using two languages (with a third being very limited), and many literary genres (including Law, History, Wisdom, Poetry, Epistles, Prophecy, etc.) with multitude figures of speech including euphemism, circumlocution, metaphor, allegory, allusion hyperbole, understatement, idiom, sarcasm, personification, pun, simile, synecdoche, etc.), within a vast number of contexts, and compiled over a period of approx. 1600 years while covering vast expanses of time, and existing in thousands of manuscripts of copies of copies of varying qualities.
Consider some of the contradictions listed on https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/biblical-contradictions. #1 being
The Sabbath Day “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” — Exodus 20:8
[vs.]
“One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.” — Romans 14:5
This simply displays ignorance of covenantal differences (please see), which reality invalidates this accusation. For while God's universal (applicable to all at moral creatures ) holy standards are constant, and basic laws that express such are immutable, yet, as in the world overall, there are different classes of laws, and which can expand based upon the principle behind them. Thus in civil law today, under the principal that life is sacred, then we have speed limits. And there are some laws which are peculiar to a certain group of people and at certain times (including sport teams).
In this respect, God not only added expansive moral laws because of transgressions (Galatians 3:19) and due to effects (incest) which previous generations were not under, but as covenanted people, Israel was given many distinctive laws just for them as a distinctive people.
Thus, while God judged/punished pagan nations for disobeying basic moral laws which they themselves once held as being wrong, yet God never did so to any nation for not observing the feast of tabernacles, etc. not even the 7th day sabbath, but for moral abominations which flowed from idolatry. (Romans 1:16-32)
Moreover, God not only provided laws (through Moses) to His covenanted people, but promised a future New Covenant. (Jer. 31:31-34) Which was distinctively stated to be “not according to” the covenant made through Moses.
This prophesied New Covenant was instituted by the atoning death of the Divine incarnated Son of God, (Hebrews 9:16, 17), and under which the literal observance of temple ordinances, dietary laws and liturgical days — (which the New Testament categorizes →) are abrogated. The reason being that unlike basic universal laws (which the New Testament affirms), these were typological laws, shadows of Christ who would come, precursors of what would be fulfilled by and under Christ (thus the cessation of the OT sacrifice and priesthood, and liturgical days, and dietary laws).
And thus, the Romans 14:5 text cited by the atheist accuser is in the content of areas of personal liberty, and therefore more false examples of contradictions could be be added, such as dietary laws. Which would thus render the New Covenant to not be new. Meanwhile, since the alleged contradiction seen here is shared by misled 7th day sabbatarians, then if they were correct, there would be no contradiction according to their attempted explanation.
The next assertion of contradiction is
The Permanence of Earth “… the earth abideth for ever.” — Ecclesiastes 1:4
[vs.]
“… the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” — 2Peter 3:10
This alleged contradiction can only be sustained by insisting the the word (‛ôlâm) translated “for ever” is one that actually means just that, versus one that can refer to a long but not permanent period, while in context it can be used for the eternal.
Ecclesiastes 1:4e does state that, in contrast to the generations of man, the earth remains, and other texts state that it cannot be moved from its position, (Psalm 104:5; Psalm 93:1; Psalm 104:5, Psalm 119:90-91) yet Scripture many times clearly states that the present earth shall be moved, and will not endure as it is. (Psalm 102:24-28, Mat_24:35; 2Pe_3:10-13; 2Pe_3:10) Rev_6:14, 20:11; 21:1)
The answer to this allegation is actually relevant to the preceding one, since it rests upon the premise that “forever” (as many ordinances under Moses were) necessarily means for eternity.
However, while the the Hebrew word translated “for ever” here [ʿôlām] can, mean eternity as in referring to God since His position is that of one who “inhabits eternity [ʿaḏ]” (Isaiah 57:15, which is a different word and which does signify perpetual existence or ever one existed), yet the Hebrew word translated “for ever” here basically means long duration.
And therefore it is used in such non-everlasting contexts such as remembering the days of old, and of places or or people in previous times, (Joshua 24:2; 1 Sam. 27:8) and to permanent slave status, (Exodus 21:5-6)
The next alleged contradiction is,
Seeing God “… I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.” — Genesis 32:30
[vs.]
“No man hath seen God at any time…”– John 1:18
This is another example of isolationist eisegesis and ignorance of Biblical forms of language, thus resulting in a False Dilemma. As in presenting two statements as being in contradiction to each when in fact there is an alternative explanation which resolves the prime facie contradiction.
Which in this case is simply that there is more than one sense to “seeing.” For instance, m seeing a person in a video is not the same as seeing them in real life 3d, which is not the same as seeing then in their glorified bodies when they shall shine as the sun in Heaven. (Matthew 13:43) Neither is seeing the Lord Jesus in a vision, as John states Isaiah did, the same as seeing Him in His incarnation, and neither of which is the same as seeing Him as face to face in glory. (I John 3:2; Revelation 22:4)
Seeing God in all His veiled —versus face to face full glory: (Exodus 33:20-22; cf. Exodus 24:11)
Seeing God in all His unveiled glory: (Revelation 22:3-4; cf. 1 Jn. 3:2)
Seeing God as in a vision revealing His majesty: Isaiah 6:1-6)
Seeing God as in an angel or human form,
Gideon said, Alas, O Lord God! for because I have seen an angel of the Lord face to face.(Judges 6:22)
“the angel of the Lord appeared unto the woman...We shall surely die, because we have seen God.” .(Judges 13:3, 22)
And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day....I have seen God face to face (Genesis 32:25, 30) Seeing God as in actual incarnated sense:
Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me. And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me. (John 12:44-45 — which is related to Is. 6) Seeing God as in realizing what one was blinded to before. Job 42:5
Thus, to see God in the sense that John 1:8 denies men have (and contextually, John abounds in enigmatic statements and figurative language) is to see Him not simply as Jacob did in wrestling with a being who appeared as a man but as a type of manifestation of God, nor is it to only see God in a vision and somewhat veiled sense, but to see God in realizing both who and what He is in His full revelation. Thus believers will fully see the Lord Jesus in His glory in Heaven and see God (Father, Son and Spirit face to face. (Revelation 22:3-4; cf. 1 Jn. 3:2; cf. 1 Corinthians 13:12)
All for now.
How old was Aishah?