The founding fathers of modern-day Premillennialism were heretics

[Davidpt]

AI can be useful for some things, but he seems to think that whatever feedback he gets from ChatGPT is true, which is not the case. It is AI, so it just returns information that it finds on the Internet which may or may not be true.

You seem to think you can speak for me even though you are not even me.

So now I think whatever feedback I get from chatgpt is true, when I don't even remotely think that is the case every single time? I'm basically using chatgpt as a research tool, except it has an added feature, it can actually reason with you via these things. I know that for a fact since I have submitted things to it where it entirely disagreed with what I submitted, where I then submitted some of my arguments as to why I am correct but it isn't. It then actually considered my arguments and then went in an entirely different direction, where it was eventually admitting that my arguments are supporting what I was alleging.

Initially it was basing it's opinions on what all it gleaned from the web. But once I started providing arguments, it then went into it's own thinking rather than countering my arguments via what it was gleaning from the web. It even said my arguments were compelling and convincing. Imagine an Amil saying that to me? Well it aint gonna happen ever. Meaning in regards to Premil vs Amil. Therefore, it's refreshing to know that at least something finds my arguments compelling and convincing.

 

[WPM]

You seem to think you can speak for me even though you are not even me.

So now I think whatever feedback I get from chatgpt is true, when I don't even remotely think that is the case every single time? I'm basically using chatgpt as a research tool, except it has an added feature, it can actually reason with you via these things. I know that for a fact since I have submitted things to it where it entirely disagreed with what I submitted, where I then submitted some of my arguments as to why I am correct but it isn't. It then actually considered my arguments and then went in an entirely different direction, where it was eventually admitting that my arguments are supporting what I was alleging.

Initially it was basing it's opinions on what all it gleaned from the web. But once I started providing arguments, it then went into it's own thinking rather than countering my arguments via what it was gleaning from the web. It even said my arguments were compelling and convincing. Imagine an Amil saying that to me? Well it aint gonna happen ever. Meaning in regards to Premil vs Amil. Therefore, it's refreshing to know that at least something finds my arguments compelling and convincing.

But this is another reason why we cannot trust it. Because there's no absolutes with it. It is all back and forth with a computer.

It cannot truly reason. Only a human can do that. A human has ultimately fed this information to a website or websites. They're taking that from a website or websites.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You seem to think you can speak for me even though you are not even me.

I said how it seems to me, so it was just an opinion and not an attempt to speak for you.

So now I think whatever feedback I get from chatgpt is true, when I don't even remotely think that is the case every single time? I'm basically using chatgpt as a research tool, except it has an added feature, it can actually reason with you via these things. I know that for a fact since I have submitted things to it where it entirely disagreed with what I submitted, where I then submitted some of my arguments as to why I am correct but it isn't. It then actually considered my arguments and then went in an entirely different direction, where it was eventually admitting that my arguments are supporting what I was alleging.

Initially it was basing it's opinions on what all it gleaned from the web. But once I started providing arguments, it then went into it's own thinking rather than countering my arguments via what it was gleaning from the web. It even said my arguments were compelling and convincing. Imagine an Amil saying that to me? Well it aint gonna happen ever. Meaning in regards to Premil vs Amil. Therefore, it's refreshing to know that at least something finds my arguments compelling and convincing.

If you find ChatGPT to be useful, so be it. I don't find it to be of any use in debates like we have on this forum and I certainly am not going to be convinced by any arguments that are based on info retrieved by ChatGPT. So, we'll just have to agree to disagree on whether AI is useful in these discussions. I don't believe so.