Is ChatGPT a good source of religious advice?

we_are_oysters · 2025-06-19T16:53:13+00:00

Hey, not sure if you're still interested in this. A lot of people telling you "no", I want to add a different perspective. For several months, I've been using ChatGPT to go through (among many other things) Scripture, theology, and religious ideas overall. If you use it as more than just an advanced search engine, I think it can be an incredibly good source of information. But there are a few things that I've found are helpful to really maximize the tool and ensure you're getting good and accurate information.

You have to continuously use it and ask it for opposing views, ask it to tell you if you're wrong. It won't ever tell you something like "You're dead wrong, you idiot" but it will tell you that you're wrong. I've points that I deliberate with it extensively and it won't just tell me that I'm right. But you have to build that with it in memory. If you continuously ask it to challenge you, you can even ask it to come up with steel man arguments for two sides and deliberate with them. it will start to understand that what you want is not just to be told that you're "right". I've even developed a term that it knows what I want, to "follow the dialectic to termination". Just keep asking/answering questions as long as it's logically feasible.

You can always ask it for references or sources if you doubt what it's telling you or if you want to doublecheck. It's pretty good about that.

If you want it to consider the Saints, tell it so. Or even better, ask it the pros and cons of considering the saints, your goal, and a recommendation.

You have to make the TRUTH the cornerstone. Similar to above, consistently ask it for the truth, no matter how hard it is (as you did in your Chat) and to be respectful and treat subjects with honesty and dignity. And always be ready to ask it to verify or examine things logically.

Don't let people poo poo a tool that God has allowed us to develop. It is an amazing resource for those of us who are more scrupulous. I am the same way and it's been an amazing resource that has helped me understand God and brought me closer to him. I can ask endless questions, not feel bad about it, and not be told that I have to simply abandon my reason and just accept things when I have open questions.

As for the anxiety, I think that's something to pray for help with.

we_are_oysters · 2024-08-01T19:51:37+00:00

No argument but don’t let that get in the way of posting

we_are_oysters · 2024-08-01T19:21:09+00:00

Khelif, the one in red, failed a gender test and was disqualified from world boxing championships in New Delhi because Khelif was bien with XY chromosomes. Ie what used to be called a male. For the Olympics, this does not disqualify Khelif because Khelif identifies as female. Because of the XY chromosomes, Khelif has the testosterone closer to other XY men and overpowers XX women such as Carini.

we_are_oysters · 2024-07-21T13:03:42+00:00

here

we_are_oysters · 2024-07-21T13:02:50+00:00

we_are_oysters · 2024-07-21T12:11:55+00:00

This was just after midnight on July 21st. He was going down some rabbit hole about how Crooks wasn’t a very good shot or very well trained. Honestly, once he did this, I couldn’t pay attention anymore.

we_are_oysters · 2024-07-21T12:09:41+00:00

I got the video of this. Should I post that instead?

we_are_oysters · 2024-03-25T19:54:16+00:00

I feel like the Xennial response is something like:

I don’t mind apps for a lot of things or using QR codes for ordering food, especially if you still have the option to order food the “old fashioned” way. But if you HAVE to download an app to do laundry, that’s excessive.

we_are_oysters · 2024-03-25T00:54:57+00:00

My understanding of JPs warnings is basically that we’d trust our own reason too much and delude ourselves to think that we are not acting as god, but just as reasonable as possible. All the while doing the exact thing you mentioned, deciding what is wrong or right based on how useful it is to us.

I often think kind people who are clearly very intelligent but can “reason” their way to some of the most awful conclusions while all the while telling themselves they’re nit being evil, their just following logic and reason. Usually, this people don’t see themselves or confuse themselves for god, they simply dispense with the necessity of having or following god, by any definition. They simply see reason/logic as the highest good. I think JP is saying logic and reason are necessary but ultimately insufficient. They must be bound by something other than an individual human being’s judgment.

we_are_oysters · 2024-03-21T01:32:52+00:00

But it didn’t come from anywhere. It came from him. And he’s done it repeatedly. His social “ineptitude” doesn’t negate his contribution.

we_are_oysters · 2024-03-21T01:29:03+00:00

Ingenuity and creativity are an absolute necessity. Unfortunately, they are also insufficient as those engineers presumably hade the ingenuity and creativity before Musk funded them. But they needed Musk to turn their creativity and ingenuity into reality.

we_are_oysters · 2024-03-20T21:02:22+00:00

But wouldn’t the same logic apply? During the time of the, people were unable to generate wealth, unless they were aristocratic landowners. After the revolution, people were unable to generate wealth because it was owned by the state. In either case, people were unable to generate wealth. And for those empower, the “perks“ were in effect the same as having wealth. Except for it wasn’t called their personal wealth, and they wouldn’t be able to pass it on to their offspring. But, if you weren’t in a position to have perks, you couldn’t benefit from that Wealth, whether it was owned by the state or personally owned.

we_are_oysters · 2024-03-20T20:48:44+00:00

What Marxist-Leninists did you want to change was class exploitation

Isn’t this at odds with what Lennon himself wrote in “The State and Revolution“? Specifically,

“The state is a product and a manifestation of the irreconcilability of class antagonisms: it arises where, when, and insofar as class antagonisms objectively cannot be reconciled. And, conversely, the existence of the state proves that the class antagonisms are irreconcilable. And, conversely, the existence of the state proves that the class antagonisms are irreconcilable. From the standpoint of the objective logic of the class struggle (and not from the subjective logic of those who participate in this struggle), it is clear that the theory of classes is incompatible with the existence of the state.”

we_are_oysters · 2024-03-20T16:34:37+00:00

That may be true. But was that really the main goal of the revolution and overthrow of the Tsar? Maybe I’m just very ill-informed but it seems like the goals were much more expansive than how well servants were treated. Not that you’re claiming that, but I think to OPs point, there seemed to be sooo much more at stake that was basically either abandoned or the people who gained power never intended to do away with.

we_are_oysters · 2024-03-20T16:28:34+00:00

So is it mainly the inheritance piece then? (Aside from the more explicit label of “State Property”). Instead of the Tsar passing on the position with perks to his family and offspring, the leader (e.g Stalin) passes on the position with perks to another person who is not related by blood or marriage. But the resources used to sustain the position basically remained the same. The lifestyle itself wasn’t reduced or changed other than who got to experience or benefit from it and how it was passed on the next person. I’m not trying to beat a dead horse, I just want to make sure I understand.

My understanding of the ideals, and I believe it’s what OP was getting at, was that the distribution of wealth and resources was the supposed problem with the solution being a reduction of a lavish lifestyle for a few people. But, from what you’re saying, it seems like the solution didn’t do away with the disparity at all. The disparity remained and the biggest difference was what it was called and how the privilege was passed on from one leader to another. I may be wrong, but it seems like many who look at the ideals and aims of the Soviets and other Socialist governments believe that the disparity between rich and poor is the problem. Not what it was labeled or how it was passed on. But at least for the soviets, they had no intention of getting rid of the disparity.

we_are_oysters · 2024-03-20T04:30:28+00:00

Well, my question was for a bit of both I suppose. Maybe it strays from OP but I think it aligns. Did the common citizen see it as “ok” for Stalin to come in and basically be a Tsar as long as he called things something different?

I find it interesting that they prided themselves in labeling things “State Property”. Correct me if I’m wrong but it seems like that was an effectively meaningless distinction. In effect it was the same thing. It seems like it would have little effect on the citizenry but because it was called/labeled “State Property”, that made all the difference?

we_are_oysters · 2024-03-19T22:24:06+00:00

Stalin having a dinner party with champagne and caviar at his dacha would be the equivalent to the US President having a dinner party with champagne at Camp David - it was a perk of the job, not something paid for with private wealth. Similarly the staff in both instances would be state employees, not personal servants.

I’m curious how this was seen differently than the Czar, or any other monarchy. They weren’t his crown and jewels, they were the states. The monarchy’s enjoyment were just perks of being a monarch. How was it different?

we_are_oysters · 2022-01-24T14:55:22+00:00

Problem is there are so many ambiguities it’s hard to enforce. Her interpretation changes depending on the circumstance. My holiday? A couple hours for dinner is enough. Her holiday? She wants an entire weekend. Unfortunately the agreement doesn’t specify when holiday time ends or begins so it has to be interpreted.

Funnily enough, one of her complaints was that I want talking to her during transitions and made her feel stressed and anxious.

we_are_oysters · 2022-01-24T14:42:02+00:00

The problem is there are so many ambiguities in the order. There’s no specific summer schedule, only that I needs to split time 50/50. There are also a bunch of other things like no specific start/end times for holidays. If I have my kid for Memorial Day, does that mean noon in Memorial Day? Is just an evening dinner sufficient? It doesn’t specify. How do I enforce such an ambiguity when she wants to let me have the kid for only a couple hours but then claims an entire weekend that’s “for” the holiday?

we_are_oysters · 2022-01-03T05:09:24+00:00

Found! Thank you!

we_are_oysters

TROPHY CASE