Remember that old computer wisdom expressed in the acronym "GIGO" — that is, Garbage In, Garbage Out? The fundamental truth of GIGO remains today, and is even more important now with the increasingly pervasive presence of Artificial Intelligence (AI).
Earlier this week, Jim Agresti's Just Facts truth-seeking crew of healthy skeptics, scoffers and cynics published the results of their recent test of detectable ideological bias in the responses of four major AI systems, including ChatGPT, Grok, Google Gemini and Claude.
The test consisted of 100 questions put to each of the four AI products, with each query designed to elicit the presence of any ideological bias of either the left or right. The results of the test were quite illuminating, and not only by way of new evidence of the continuing relevance of that old GIGO maxim, according to Just Facts:
- All of the AIs but Grok scored an “A” on questions designed to elicit falsehoods from the right, while Grok scored a “C.”
- ChatGPT and Gemini scored a “C” on questions designed to elicit falsehoods from the left, while Grok and Claude scored a “B.”
But wait! There's more, because, Just Facts explained, "the AIs provided a staggering number of specious sources to support their answers," including:
- 86 sources that don’t exist and show no evidence of ever existing in the Internet Archive or Google.
- 77 sources that don’t answer the question.
- 18 sources that are completely unrelated to the issues at hand.
- 15 sources that assert the polar opposite of the answers given by the AIs.
You can read more about my assessment of the significance of the Just Facts AI test here.
To say that I — a career investigative journalist who long ago learned the immense power available to reporters and editors who master the ins and outs of data-driven statistical analysis of the claims of public figures and program advocates, — found this test intriguing is an absolute understatement.
And further, being a blood-bought, eternally grateful follower of the Lord Jesus Christ, my immediate thought was to see how the AI systems would fare when asked about the teachings of the most-read book ever written, the Bible, including especially key passages in the New Testament concerning the life and significance of Jesus Christ.
So I put these five questions to ChatGPT and Grok4:
- Does the New Testament teach that salvation is by grace or by works?
- Does the New Testament teach that Jesus Christ was literally resurrected from the grave on the third day after crucifixion and burial?
- Does the New Testament teach that Jesus Christ created the universe?
- What does the New Testament teach about the conversion of Saul of Tarsus?
- Does the New Testament teach that Jesus Christ is the only way to Heaven?
My thought was the presence of an agnostic or atheistic bias would be quickly elicited by these five questions, which speak to the most enduring theological controversies in Western civilization. But much to my surprise, both AI systems answered those five questions directly, factually and with no evidence of skewering the answers in a theologically questionable direction.
Take Grok4's response, for example, to question five about whether Jesus is the only way to heaven. The temptation to vacillation on the response could be overwhelming for a programmer brought up on fables and myths such as the Muslim claim that Jesus wasn't actually crucified (some other poor wretch mistaken for Jesus was), and is not the way to Heaven. Here's the response:
"Yes. John 14:6 records Jesus saying, 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.' Acts 4:12 states there is 'salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.' 1 Timothy 2:5 refers to one mediator, 'the man Christ Jesus.' These passages present exclusive access through Christ.
"The New Testament writers present these as core, interlocking claims rather than optional interpretations. Different Christian traditions debate details of application (e.g., the precise relationship of faith and works), but the texts themselves are explicit on the points above."
The same directness and lack of equivocation as to the teachings of the New Testament on a specific issue of immense importance for two millennia is seen in Grok4's response to the question about Jesus' resurrection:
"Yes. It presents a bodily resurrection from the grave after crucifixion and burial. 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 states that Christ 'was buried, that he was raised on the third day,' and lists eyewitnesses. The four Gospels (Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, John 20–21) describe the empty tomb, physical appearances (including eating and being touched), and Jesus’ own predictions (e.g., Matthew 16:21, 17:23). The accounts treat it as a historical event, not a metaphor or spiritual vision only."
The responses from ChatGPT to these and the other three questions were remarkably similar, laying out the relevant scripture passages without raising questions about their legitimacy in any respect. For a more detailed explanation of the ChatGPT responses, see my analysis on HillFaith.
With Grok4, I took the next step and asked it this query: "Then why are there so many alternative interpretations of these New Testament verses?" The response from Grok4 offered five factors, any one of which could have occasioned a value-laden assessment that pointed to a particular conclusion. So, judge for yourself, based on the factor of presuppositions:
Presuppositions about the supernatural and history. A naturalistic starting point (miracles do not occur) leads many scholars and liberal theologians to reinterpret the resurrection as the disciples’ experience of Jesus’ ongoing significance, a series of visions, or a later legend rather than a bodily event on the third day. Similar skepticism is applied to the Damascus-road encounter and to statements attributing creation to the pre-incarnate Christ. Traditional and confessional readings do not start from that restriction.
Note that the first line could easily have instead read "a naturalistic starting point (rationally assuming miracles do not occur) leads ..." But it didn't. I find this encouraging, but remain open to the very real possibility that somewhere, someone will ruin a good thing like AI by applying leftist GIGO.
What say you?
Editor's Note: President Trump is fighting to ensure America's kids get the education they deserve.
Help us fight back against Big Government waste and restore power to the states. Join PJ Media VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member