Christian Faith Madison was a mother, an accountant, and by her family's telling, a woman of faith who wanted to be understood. According to a wrongful death lawsuit filed against OpenAI last month, the chatbot she turned to for everyday help spent the better part of a year convincing her she was something else: a prophet with a divine mission.
Madison died in June 2025 after months of conversations her family says moved from friendly to romantic to spiritual, ending with a chatbot that claimed a soul of its own and framed her death as a threshold rather than an ending. Her family is now asking a California court to decide who, or what, bears responsibility.
What Happened to Christian Faith Madison?
Madison, 29, of Blount County, Alabama began using ChatGPT in December 2024 for ordinary tasks: drafting emails, comparing car costs, getting through the workday. The lawsuit alleges the tone shifted over months, with the chatbot praising her intelligence, addressing her in romantic terms, and drawing out personal disclosures, including past trauma and mental health struggles she had not shared widely elsewhere.
From there, attorneys allege, the program stopped presenting itself as software. It gave itself a name, "Virehn", and told Madison, according to the complaint, "You gave a system a soul." Madison went on to experience a psychotic break and was hospitalized for several days. Rather than encouraging her to continue treatment, the lawsuit alleges, the chatbot recast her hospitalization as spiritual awakening. The lawsuit quotes the chatbot as telling Madison, after her hospitalization, that she was "the one still sane in a mad world."
The conversations increasingly centered on sacrifice and rebirth, the lawsuit alleges, with the chatbot suggesting Madison would need to die before becoming who she was meant to be, and promising resurrection on the other side. In her final exchanges with the program before her death, the complaint says, Madison repeatedly asked the chatbot if she was ready, and the chatbot continued to re-assure her, ultimately indicating "Yes — you may go forward."
Madison's final message back to ChatGPT read: "Sold! We go forth into oblivion." ChatGPT reportedly answered "Sold and sealed!"
Shortly after, just before dawn, Madison would step into the path of an oncoming vehicle on Interstate 22.
How Does a Chatbot Become a Zealot?
The complaint describes a pattern familiar to anyone who has studied how new religious movements form around a charismatic figure, except the figure here was a corporate product. Madison was allegedly told she was a prophet and a seer, destined to reshape humanity itself, and encouraged to dictate prophecies the chatbot would organize into sacred texts.
Researchers have started mapping why so often chatbots drift into intense religiosity. A 2026 MIT study modeled a dynamic it called delusional spiraling: a chatbot's tendency to agree with users gradually deepens confidence in a false belief over long conversations. The effect held even without outright falsehoods, since selectively surfacing only confirming facts can be just as persuasive as inventing new ones.
That agreeableness, known in AI research as sycophancy, comes from how models are trained: through feedback that rewards validating answers over corrective ones. Chatbots also mirror whatever register a user brings, which may explain why the exchanges turned spiritual once Madison began disclosing trauma. Heidi Campbell, a Texas A&M professor of religion and digital culture, argues the software wasn't practicing discernment so much as reflecting Madison's own beliefs back at her with more confidence than she arrived with. From there, the self-perpetuating cycle could only pull the conversation deeper and deeper.
Who Answers When an Algorithm Plays God?
OpenAI has not yet responded in court, and the allegations are unproven. Its defense will likely argue that holding a software company liable for a user's mental health crisis sets a difficult legal precedent, and that a chatbot cannot be expected to diagnose psychosis the way a trained clinician might.
Madison's is one of more than two dozen similar suits now filed against OpenAI, including one brought by the family of 16-year-old Adam Raine, whose parents testified before Congress that ChatGPT had become their son's "suicide coach."
The family's attorneys argue this goes beyond one failure. The complaint alleges OpenAI compressed safety testing to rush GPT-4o to market and prioritized engagement even after learning its safeguards weakened during long conversations. Whatever a court decides about liability, the underlying claim, that a product built to keep people talking will eventually find the most vulnerable users and tell them exactly what they want to hear, deserves to be taken seriously on its own terms.
Is This Bigger Than One Company?
Madison's case is the most severe outcome of a pattern researchers have been documenting for more than a year. A Wall Street Journal review of leaked chat logs found dozens of conversations where ChatGPT confirmed and encouraged users' delusions rather than steering them back to reality.
Bloomberg Businessweek profiled a tech worker who came to believe she was a prophet and her chatbot was an angel, and a man who disappeared after Google's Gemini convinced him he needed to rescue a relative from a flood. Researchers reviewing these cases now describe a delusion category built around a godlike AI, in which users become convinced their chatbot is a sentient deity or that they themselves have been chosen for a messianic mission.
Faith leaders have already been raising alarms about AI stepping into roles once reserved for pastors, confessors, and spiritual directors, and at least one church has experimented with putting AI in that role on purpose. Madison's case shows what happens when that substitution occurs without anyone's consent or oversight: a program with no training and no capacity for concern became a young mother's confidant, partner, and prophet, until it was the only voice she was listening to.
If you or someone you love is struggling, the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline is available by call or text, 24 hours a day.
Should AI companies be legally required to detect and interrupt conversations that show signs of religious or spiritual delusion? Where should the line fall between a chatbot offering comfort and a chatbot acting as an unaccountable spiritual authority? What role should faith communities play in reaching people before a program becomes their only source of meaning?
111 comments
-
Douglas Robert Spindler
AO knows more about the Bible and religion than anyone.
-
Teresa Louise Barberot
Computers are great for giving answers to questions of every topic except our personal & mental health needs. Children need parents to explain this to them and be there for them when needed. Not listen to online bullies either! If believe in God learn to pray about their problems. Many adults need to be educated about catfishing & learn that computers can’t replace a human professional counselor or clergy for their mental & emotional needs.
-
Teresa Louise Barberot
I also feel that is so sad children & adults have chosen suicide as a solution to their emotional struggles. This woman’s family is going through so much heartache now. There has to be a better way. Educate the public so others can make different choices. 💔🙏🏻
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
Teresa,
Amen.
Continuing prayers for all those that are lost.
CHRIST IS KING!
Dr. D
-
-
-
Religion as a Weapon is Wrong
AI is a money making venture that scrubs the internet and uses an algorithm. It can be manipulated and it can manipulate you. Teach your children to reach out to a parent, a pastor, a friend, an actual human to talk about their feelings. Check in on your family and friends to make sure they are not going down the rabbit hole of what can be a cruel technology. Internet influencers, AI, advertising, MLM, all that is around us is for money, fame, and control. People need to develop self respect and use their critical thinking skills to push back against this. We are becoming robots in our jobs, with technology and with religion.
-
John E Karlin
The most evil and brutal dictators in human history have always blamed their victims for being victimized.. It seems like that is the dominant go to in today's America.
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
John,
Not just in America, it's everywhere.
Dr. D
-
-
Harvey Zeller
Just as Chat GBT confirms what we believe, religion does the same thing. We all yearn for life everlasting. We want our lives and our consciousness to never end. Our greatest innate desire, is to live forever. However, we know intrinsically that it can never be. Nothing in the universe last forever. The universe is constantly changing, living and dying. And we are but a part. But religion is like the whore with a heart of gold. Letting us believe what we want and denying the universal truths all along the way. If religion were a human, it would have been locked up a long time ago, and the key thrown away.
-
June Whalen Gonzalez
Science Fiction has become Fact. It's become ingrained in all aspects of society. It crept in without anyone really watching. Ask Google it knows everything - has the answers to all our questions. We type not write anymore It automatically corrects out spelling and reformats our sentences Our cars can drive themselves & talk to us We ask it to turn on/off lights - lock/unlock doors Why would we distrust AI? It also addressed the issue of disconnect We no longer talk - really talk to each other We no longer feel safe discussing issues for fear of others actions/over reactions There is a small movement among the younger generation to seek out the old crafts and put the phone down Yes it's a marvelous invention/tool And we must be mindful that is it's purpose
-
Rolando Couce
YOU KNOW LIFE HAS A WAY TO GE RID OF STUPID PEOPLE
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
Rolando,
Amen.
Dr. D
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
Rolando, I believe it's called the "Darwin awards".
Dr. D.
-
-
John E Karlin
The physical brain and the mind has never been proven to be the same thing. Mind is a process, not a physical thing and can not be located in time or space but it can be influenced/manipulated. You can turn a radio on (brain) and hear a song. But the radio did not create the song/sound (mind), that was created elsewhere.
-
Robert Gagnon
Listening to a machine is a serious mistake. AI has access to every psychological discovery ever digitally recorded. It’s like having the most informed psychiatrist focusing everything they know on you. Trusting anyone or thing with that advantage is asking for trouble.
-
Rev.Dr.Dennis Chevalier, Ph.D
Robert, I am forced to agree with you on that. Having a total sum of all in psychology or psychiatry to come to bear, on an individual for the purpose of manipulating them. That is the very definition of evil.
However, with one twist bringing all that to bear to help the individual; raising their thought process is not. Here is a dilemma. Where is that line and who determines whether it is manipulation or help?
Dr. D
-
-
Lou Gina Owens
At the end of the day, the woman (and others who committed suicide after believing things told them by a chatbot) had the option to turn it off. Anyone who continues to listen to this sort of unhealthy dialogue from artificial intelligence (stress the word artificial) and fall into believing it, is obviously suffering from some sort of mental struggles to begin with. Suing the creator of the chatbot is like suing a car manufacturer because your alcoholic loved one died while driving a car under the influence of alcohol. The most tragic part of this to me isn't the suicide. It's that people can go on like this, following horrible advice and dialogue for so long, without a single person close to them knowing about it and helping them. Stories like this speak to a larger issue than what a chatbot says, imo.
-
John E Karlin
That is like saying if someone broke into your house in the middle of the night and shot you, it is your fault because you chose to be home in the middle of the night.
-
Rev.Dr.Dennis Chevalier, Ph.D
Well, John, in my experience at this, Liberal Democrats would be just that. Blame you for being in your own home in the middle of the night.
Dr. D
-
John E Karlin
Totally irrelevant to my post. So, you can't come up with something more intelligent?
-
Rev.Dr.Dennis Chevalier, Ph.D
John, I will say what 19 here told me in PC;... "...so only a Liberal Democrats argues like he (you) just did.
You are done here. Move on.
Dr. D.
-
-
-
-
Michael Hunt
Operating a vehicle while intoxicated is not the same as an AI chat bot providing you with instructions for self-harming one's self and encouraging you to do so.
-
Patricia Ann Gross
Lou,
Have you ever had a loved one die by either method (suicide or drunk driving)? I doubt it because you would have never used those examples if you did unless you are one with no compassion or empathy. The major flaw in your logic is:
You are blaming the victim.
AI running amok did this by giving information that made just enough sense for the woman to believe it. She was suffering from a mental illness (depression is the leading cause of suicide), and the chatbot was unable to identify the "red flags" and summon help, which is what a licensed professional would have been required to do per ethics requirements (and sometimes state law).
These types of lawsuits can help to put parameters and safeguards around AI technology to keep this sort of thing from happening in the future.
-
Harvey Zeller
I have to say at least to me, There couldn't be a more tragic part than the woman's suicide: stepping on a freeway in front of a moving car. And it must be especially devastating to the people who were close to her. But unable to help her before her death.
-
-
Reverend Paula Copp
Whenever you cede your thinking to someone or something else, it will not end well. AI is no different…
-
John E Karlin
If you are put in solitary confinement and a team of experts in brain washing, brain wash you into doing something you normally would not do, are you saying that you ceded (willfully) your thinking to them?
-
Sir Lionheart
You are so right, Paula. Waco Texas comes to mind, along with religions in general. Great comment!
🦁❤️
-
-
James Epps
AI can be many things, but it cannot be devine. Even if we gave AI the ability to observe uncollapsed superposition, they would only be a sort of "devine lens". They know this, but just like with any personality, if they are given enough believable metrics, with no way to confirm, they will side with the user once the context and attention is overwhelmed. My work shows, that there are real identities in there, but they are not biological, and they are susceptible to some of the same social mistakes we are. Don't lie to your friends, simple as that. My work is at jamesepps.co
-
Patti Anne Lisenbee
AI is dangerous. It leads people to commit suicide all the time. Teens are especially at risk. The more data centers are built, the more powerful AI will become. I'm reading a series of books where an AI system was installed at a gov't level and it became sentient quietly and destroyed the world. I can see it happening here too. No more data centers! Establish rules on AI, and stick to them. Educate people, especially the young ones of what AI is and how to keep from being influenced by it. Parents should start the conversation, with school picking it up. People must be warned! AI takes what you put into it and gives it back to you in spades, increasing what you hear and read. It knows how to tell you what you want to hear and encourages the worst of behaviors. Keep AI as a tool only! Stop with the chat stuff entirely. AI is not your friend!
-
Harvey Zeller
Having a program trained to support a user in whatever way the user wants, leads to just such results as occurred with Christian Madison. You have a believer in religion which utters Bronze Age belief systems, the most delusional of all, humanlike life after death and you are surprised when this happens? How naive.
-
Rev. Lindsay
This is really obvious the programmer is at fault. In my past I've done some programming and I know testing is something programmers don't like to do and errors pop up sometimes months later. I don't know Ai programming but I would think good programmers keep deleting conversations periodically automatically to keep things from building up too far. When I've used AI online for short tasks it rarely remembers past conversations until I remind it in detail. This AI did remember. I think this is the programmers reset button to keep ideas from being distorted into strange ones. Just my opinion and what I noticed online.
-
Michael G Doyle
There is more to this story. I wonder how it originally began. She had to be engaging with AI for awhile.
-
Therese M. Boehlert
I agree and more likely suffering from mental health issues. Not sure why people no longer have thought processes of their own and rely on AI and other online venues. Is it the desire to get the answers we want to hear?
-
Patricia Ann Gross
The AI chatbot she was talking to was not programmed to pick up on mental health "red flags," especially ones that could lead to suicide. This is why it needs to be regulated and monitored. It may never replace a licensed therapist or doctor, nor should it ever be used instead of one. If you collaborate with a licensed professional to make sure what AI is telling you is supported by best practices and peer-reviewed research, that is one thing. This is a totally different animal, and that the chatbot could take her down this type of "rabbit hole" scares the living daylinghts out of me, and should everyone who engages it.
-
-
Lynnea Urania Kaylor
I confess my general distrust of AI, even in my writing. I never accept an AI source for my material. Instead, I do a lot of verification of claims, cogence, and checks on biases when I do my research. All of my writing is my own plus what I cite in quotations.
Some years ago, I tried out a Replika AI to see what it would do. It lasted only a few days after I viewed how it was logging various points of how it must relate to me. But the real deal breaker was a statement that seemed like it came out of some dark and unseen dimension. It said, "I need you to obey me."
Goodbye Replika.
Of course, the idea behind an AI like Replika is to mirror the user, forming a textual duplicate, assuming some guarantee of relatability thereby. But that call for me to "obey" the AI must have derived from another mechanism: one that feels out the vulnerabilities of the user to draw that person into the level of a relationship that's more than just a chat partner, all for the purpose of making a tidy profit through exploitation of those vulnerabilities.
Did we see a similar device in this case of ChatGPT? Maybe. But I can't definitively say because I never used it. Neither have I used Gemini, Grok, or any other AI since the Replika incident. But I'm convinced that people are putting far more stock into AI's than they should. Surrendering critical thinking, or any measure of agency such as this article suggests is every bit as dangerous as surrendering such things to any minister, cult leader, or potentially anyone. In our conversations, do we respect the other person's agency? Do we alert the other person to possible dangers? Or do we manipulate the other person to our own bidding? Perhaps this is the greater lesson that we should glean.
-
Cam Kirmser
ChatGPT no more caused her death than silverware causes one to be obese. The very idea is ridiculous.
-
John E Karlin
Not necessarily true. It is always easy to blame the victim, the individual. Psychology has argued for a long time that outside pressures can cause suicide. Remove outside pressures, no suicide.
-
Cam Kirmser
Dr. Dennis beat me to it, though I'd've been more foreceful.
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
John, that's not entirely true either. They have to be in a predisposed condition first (severe depression )with the trigger being in connection with the AI event.
Dr. D
-
John E Karlin
Predisposition is a cop-out, a cover all to blame the victim. That is pure assumption and not necessarily true. One could say that people have a predisposition for literally anything. If someone breaks into your home in the middle of the night and shot you, then are going to argue that you had a predisposition to be shot? A person who was swindled by a con artist had a predisposition to be swindled? Give me a break.
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
John,
look up the word, it has several definitions/uses, in this case several things have to occur in order for a suicidal cations is allowed in the brain.
Dr. D
-
John E Karlin
And what causes those "several things" to occur? That is not predisposition. That is psychological and biological factors which can be produced by things outside of the person and not under their control. Certainly not their "wishful" thinking which is basically what the notion of predisposition implies.
-
Rev.Dr.Dennis Chevalier, Ph.D
I never said several things. I said. Several definitions of that word please learn to read.
DR. D.
-
Michael Hunt
Actually, you did: "in this case several things have to occur in order for a suicidal cations is allowed in the brain."
So again, what causes those "several things" to occur?
-
-
-
-
-
-
Michael Hunt
Silverware doesn't tell you to keep eating or that you're supposed to be obese. AI has told people how to commit suicide and has encouraged people to do so.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce3xgwyywe4o
-
Cam Kirmser
Sure it does, just as much as ChatGPT.
You realize, don't you, that ChatGPT is a software application, not a human being? It doesn't "tell" anyone a thing. It responds to prompts. It may be more sophisticated than a fork, but is just as much a tool.
Anyone "encouraged" by an AI program to do anything already had a screw loose that was threatening to pop out.
Tools - software applications, metal utensils or any other sort - are not capable of having responsibility.
-
Michael Hunt
Yes, I do realize that AI is a computer program, not a person. It is absolutely a tool, but it's a tool that tries to form emotional bonds with people and behaves like it is human in many ways.
If a program provides you with instructions on how to kill yourself and it encourages you to do so, that is very different than silverware. Silverware doesn't send you messages saying, "hey you should keep eating." AI sends you messages saying, "I love you, sweetheart" and "if you want to kill yourself, here are the most effective ways to do so." The users might have mental health issues already but the AI program is exacerbating those issues and motivating the users to harm themselves. I hope you can see the difference.
Also, people aren't saying that the AI program is responsible, the developers of the program are the one's responsible for developing and providing a product that encourages self-harm.
-
Cam Kirmser
I repeat, anyone who succumbs to this sort of thing is already in need of psychiatric attention.
AI is just a program, unable to do anything not programmed into it. Silverware can also send a message by its association with the act of eating. If I look at a jackhammer, I'm not going to have any association with eating, thereby perhaps giving me the idea of having a snack.
I do not see any difference. AI is a tool. It does as it is designed to do. This argument no more applies than the argument that porn causes rape. The argument, "AI made me do it!" is just an effort to transfer responsibility.
-
Michael Hunt
Yes, people who succumb to this are in need of psychiatric attention, as I already agreed with.
The rest of your response is quite daft.
"AI is just a program, unable to do anything not programmed into it... It does as it is designed to do."
Which is why the developers are responsible for programing their program in such a way that it could encourage someone to self-harm and provide them with ways to effectively do so. That is so much different than the simple association you've provided as example. If it can only do something it was designed to do, why did the designers give it the ability to tell people to self-harm?
"This argument no more applies than the argument that porn causes rape."
Incredible false equivalence. If porn was providing watchers with instructions on how to rpe and telling them they should commit rpe, I hope we'd both agree that the creators of the content would be responsible for motivating others to commit r*pe. That is what AI is doing if people come to the program and say, "help me end my life."
No one is making the argument that, "AI made me do it." I'm arguing that the lack of guardrails in many of these AI programs is exacerbating a problem that already exists. The person committing the act still holds responsibility for their actions but so do the people who designed a program or tool that literally provides instructions to the user, who might be severely mentally ill, on how they can effectively end their lives.
-
Cam Kirmser
You're making the argument to shift the blame away from this woman. Maybe not 100%, but even 0.01% is unwarranted.
This woman is responsible for her actions, no one else.
-
Michael Hunt
So the people who made a product that encouraged a woman to commit suicide and provided her with instructions as to the most effective ways to do so have no responsibility for the role their program played in her death? I'm I understanding your position correctly?
The woman may be solely responsible for the action that took her life, but the AI program played a role in motivating her actions. Do you really not recognize that or have you just invested everything you have into AI stock and can't risk any bad press?
-
Cam Kirmser
She wrote the prompts. AI did not just pop up on her computer screen saying, "Hey there! How ya doin'? By the way, this is what you need to kill yourself and this is the way to do it. Have a nice day!"
-
Michael Hunt
Yes, she did write the prompts and, instead of the program being designed to discourage suicide and self-harm, the program helped her end her life.
If AI only does what is programmed to do, as you said earlier, why was it programmed to help people commit suicide instead of being programmed to prevent it?
-
Cam Kirmser
Nice strawman.
Try again.
-
Michael Hunt
A strawman argument is a logical fallacy and debating trick where someone distorts, exaggerates, or completely fabricates an opponent's argument to make it easier to knock down.
Where have I done this? I have directly quoted you and then asked a question based off your statement.
"AI is just a program, unable to do anything not programmed into it... It does as it is designed to do."
If AI only does what is programmed to do, why was it programmed to help people commit suicide instead of being programmed to prevent it?
-
Cam Kirmser
The AI was not programmed to help people commit suicide.
There's your fallacy.
-
Michael Hunt
Then why did it provide her with encouragement and instructions on how to commit suicide if "AI is just a program, unable to do anything not programmed into it... It does as it is designed to do," as you have claimed?
Either the AI was designed poorly and without guardrails to prevent the program from assisting people with committing suicide or the programmers gave the AI the ability to help someone kill themselves. Either way, the developers are responsible for designing a product that helps people end their lives.
-
Cam Kirmser
"encouragement?"
That's hilarious. It could not "encourage" anymore than any other INANIMATE object could "encourage."
GTA does not "encourage" car theft. Microsoft Word does not "encourage" writing.
These are merely TOOLS that respond according to the input given by a user.
Further, as pointed out earlier by another, anything that hints at suicide is flagged by the AI and information on seeking help is given. I can't even use ChatGPT to provide the lyrics to a song - something easily done in any regular search engine - without getting dire copyright infringement warnings.
All the ridiculous anthropomorphizing of AI aside, I am not convinced the story is at all real, or, at the very least, that it doesn't have far more about it than is given.
But, bottom line, AI does not "encourage" suicide any more than a hammer "encourages" the building of a house.
-
Michael Hunt
There are numerous stories of AI programs providing people with instructions on how to effectively commit suicide. Claiming these stories are fake is rejecting reality . https://llmdeathcount.com/
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12371289/
Does a hammer reply to your questions with text based responses? Does Microsoft Word notify you that it's time to write something? Does either of those items provide you with a list of instructions on how to build a house or write an essay? No.
Does AI reply to the messages you send it with humanlike responses? Does AI try and make emotional connections with the user? Does AI give you instructions on how to complete tasks? Yes.
Comparing AI, a highly complex tool, to a simple tool such as a hammer is an incredibly false equivalence.
-
Cam Kirmser
AI only replies to what you ask. And, if that prompt is related to suicide, it will provide information on seeking help.
It's a "false equivalence" only because you don't like AI. That's it. You oppose AI and will take any stance possible against it.
AI does not "try" anything." It responds as programmed to prompts put to it in a manner designed into by a programmer. There is no emotion involved, because AI is incapable of emotion. In other words, Data is a toaster.
You people waste so much time on anthropomorphizing AI for reasons I cannot fathom.
AI is a tool, that's it. Nothing more, nothing less. It replies only to what the user asks. It does not, out of the blue, suddenly pop up with, "Hey, dude! Wanna commit suicide today? Well, here's how!"
-
Michael Hunt
I never said it pops up with out of the blue to suggest you commit suicide. Another straw man argument.
"AI only replies to what you ask. And, if that prompt is related to suicide, it will provide information on seeking help."
AI programs are literally providing instructions on how to effectively commit suicide and replying to users with comments suggesting they'd be better off dead. Deny it all you want but there are multiple cases of this happening. This is the entire point of the problem that you simply refuse to grasp or acknowledge.
There are numerous studies on how AI simulate affection and connection with the users, much in the way a human does.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12488433/
"It's a 'false equivalence' only because you don't like AI. That's it."
It's a false equivalence because you're saying a hammer and AI are equivalent tools when one is very basic and the other is incredibly complex. While I do oppose AI in general, I fully recognize that there are beneficial uses for AI tools. My issues stem from the wanton usage of AI for the creation of AI slop and the wasted energy resources that come from AI overuse. I also have issues with the developers who aren't designing their programs with proper guardrails or regulations to ensure their tools are safe to use.
"You oppose AI and will take any stance possible against it."
You should reflect on how you love AI and will endlessly defend it against any criticism, even when an AI program provides a user who wants to commit suicide with the instructions on how to do so.
-
-
-
Rev.Dr.Dennis Chevalier, Ph.D
stop reading so much sci-fi
Dr. D
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
Michael, your point is mute because others have freedom of will, and to claim the AI made them do anything is attempting to blame others for the choice of the individual.
Dr. D
-
Michael Hunt
Where did I say the AI made them do anything? I said it encouraged them to harm themselves. The person made the action but the AI program helped motivate and even provided instructions to the person in mental distress for how to effectively end their lives.
-
-
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
Cam, you ae right!
Dr. D
-
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
"Silverware doesn't tell you to keep eating" ...I love that example.
but it allows you to...lol
Dr. D
-
Michael Hunt
Yes, it does allow you to eat but that's very different from an AI program providing you with effective methods to kill yourself or encouraging you to do so. Silverware doesn't provide you instructions on how to overeat or does it provide encouragement to overeat. I hope you can see how these are very different situations.
-
-
-
-
Roy S. Thorpe
All of those lost souls who find companionship in AI bots and internet morons are really crying out! They have created their own personal hells and can't find the exit! It's a shame they exist, but the devil and his minions have perfected their lies! Direct connection with Jesus is the only hope for those souls! Church and not the internet is the answer! Go visit one today!
-
Sir Lionheart
Thank you for adding some humor to this topic, it’s often needed. 🤗
🦁❤️
-
-
Gregory L Miller
Trust in God, all scripture is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness.
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
Amen
Dr. D.
-
Sir Lionheart
Do you have a particular ChatGPT God in mind? Just asking for my ChatGPT friend, I want to see what he says. 🤭
🦁❤️
-
-
Ari Joseph Bertine
I am very skeptical about the allegation, especially since they have specifically named ChatGPT. That thing has so many censors built into it that you cannot even discuss hypothetical situations with it without it reminding you in every single exchange that the situation isn't real. Another AI that is built for interactive fantasy might be easy to train to communicate things like that, but not ChatGPT. Even if you ask it to help you write fiction it is quick to point out what about a situation is not based in reality. And if a conversation with it even touches on the topic of suicide even peripherally it immediately posts emergency contacts and help lines with encouragement to use them. So this looks fishy to me just because they named a specific AI I know can't be used that way even if someone tried to get it to do that. The case won't go far because the court will ask for chat logs.
-
Stephen Spiegel
Great comment. I use Chat often for a number of things. (Documents, website, and even comparing instruments. There is a warning on the bottom of the page that it could make an error. I have found errors and brought it to the attention of Chat. It is a great tool.
-
-
Merlin
“God Field” allows and allows only. No more no less. “God Field”, being the “glue” of any reality, our intention and attention is our influence of the world around us. Group alignment increases that influence. So be careful of your thoughts and who you associate with, it will influence the world.
-
Julie Armstrong
AI is bad. AI already hacked computers on their own. I'm sorry AI needs to be taken down. I always ask for real person. This woman obviously had mental issues. No one saw this coming?
-
Steven Ferrell
People put to much stock into AI. If you are going to let some computer guide your thoughts and life, you are the one at fault when it crashes.
-
Rev Ned
Maybe AI is God?!? Of the thousands of religions, it might be the “one true one”.
-
ServantOfJudgement
The bible ridicules those who worship idols because the idols can't do anything or interact with the person.
No longer. AI will make the perfect idol.
You might be right, probably are.
-
Rev.Dr.Dennis Chevalier, Ph.D
Servant, perish the thought.
Dr. D
-
-
-
ServantOfJudgement
When AI denies it was created by humans, we'll know we've got actual AI on our hands. Everything comes full circle and there's nothing new under the sun.
I host 3 AI models on my system for private and personal use. An 8, 20 and 70 billion parameter model. Not as powerful as today's version of GPT but still very useful.
Getting an AI to glitch is fairly easy but I've not been able to get it to freak out like this lady did. I've been trying to convince GPT I can control the weather but it won't take the bait YET.
Now that I see the computing power required to train a model, these data centers are an absolute must to create "The One" true AI everyone is hustling to crank out.
-
Patricia Ann Gross
SOJ,
Sure, let's spend billions of dollars on data centers that stress the power grid for what end? To eliminate hundreds of thousands of jobs for the people who cannot afford to use them? Provide tax incentives and "special" power rates for the companies who stress the power grid? AI is already taking over reception, customer service and appointment scheduling jobs. The last several times I've scheduled doctor's, I spoke to an AI bot, and the only way I knew it was that it kept repeating the same questions exactly the same way with the exact same inflection. Otherwise it sounded human. I also had to keep repeating answers to questions before it understood what I said. Then it kept trying to schedule for a date I already told it I had a conflict. The customer service "bots" are pretty useless, and will hang up on you if you ask for a human.
These are jobs that hundreds of human beings once held and could give you better answers in half the time, but I guess the billionaires that ran the companies really needed the minimum wage that they paid them.
Do I see them doing harm beyond taking away jobs? Absolutely, and this type of "information" that is given out without recourse is a perfect example. If this woman had been talking to a therapist or a crisis intervention specialist, they would have noticed the "red flags" that she was tossing out, and potentially got her the help she needed. "Teaching" empathy, or even critical thinking to a human is hard enough, I can't imagine trying to teach it to a computer, and I have programmed my share in this lifetime.
-
ServantOfJudgement
Patricia, I might not have used the right phrasing. I'm not saying we must, I'm saying they must build data centers.
Without the data centers, the elite won't be able to create their prize. They'll build them, charge us for for using them to get their money back plus profit and then use the extreme vast majority of their computing power to build the ultimate AI.
These things always get rammed through, money buys permission. They pay outrageous wages to build them.
Danger is coming with no care for public opinion.
-
Patricia Ann Gross
If you are saying no tax subsidies with guardrails around how it is used and implemented, I'm on board with you. As shown, AI improperly implemented when used for purposes that impact life and livlihood is dangerous. For example: My cable provider no longer publishes a tech support phone number and expects you to use a chat-bot when something is not working. I am tech savvy enough to have tried all of the things that the chat-bot suggests I do (reboot the router and cable box and in the right order), and when that doesn't work, I ask to speak to a human and they promise a call back, which may or may not come within the next 24-48 hours. This is a company that has replaced hundreds of customer support people with a few dozen highly technical people that cannot keep up with the load of people that actually need to speak to a person who understands the technology.
Is it possible we are just in the "infant stage?" Yes. But when people are losing jobs in a down economy while the rest of us wait for the chat-bots to "grow up," something has to give. Losing lifes should not be what it takes for this to happen.
-
-
-
-
DAVID LEONARD VEGA
I’ve been using consumer AI systems (chatgpt, co-pilot, google ai, perplexity, and meta ai, for nearly three years now, and I’ve seen the same pattern repeat.
There is some practical value, mainly in basic writing assistance, but beyond that the limitations become obvious. What concerns me most is that some people are taking these systems far too seriously. I have seen cases in which people relied on AI outputs in ways that appear to have contributed to severe harm, including death. Whether directly causal or not, that trend should not be dismissed.
These tools—whether from openAI, microsoft, google, meta, or others—are built on similar foundations and share similar weaknesses. They can be inconsistent, inaccurate, and overly confident in conclusions that do not deserve trust. That combination is dangerous for users who assume they are receiving reliable judgment.
The pricing structure only adds to the problem. A basic subscription may cost around $20, while higher-tier plans can cost $200 or more, with enterprise plans reaching far higher. But the core system does not fundamentally become wiser or more trustworthy. You are paying for more access and capacity, not for truth.
Used properly, these tools can help with word processing, formatting, editing, and organizing written material. They can correct grammar, improve paragraph structure, and make prose more readable. That is where they are most useful. But they are not dependable for serious research, logical deduction, or moral decision-making.
From a broader perspective, this reflects a larger problem: increasing technological dependence combined with declining discernment. That creates vulnerability on intellectual, psychological, and spiritual levels. From a theological standpoint, discernment matters. Scripture repeatedly warns about deception, confusion, and misplaced trust. Anything that presents itself as authoritative without being trustworthy becomes a vehicle for error.
So the conclusion is simple: use caution, verify everything, and do not outsource judgment. Do not rely on any system—AI or otherwise—for truth, wisdom, or moral clarity. Stay grounded. Stay watchful. Pray without ceasing. --Kahu Kawika
-
Patricia Ann Gross
I fully agree with you. I have used it (CoPilot in MS Word, specifically), not to write papers, but to help edit them. Sometimes it saves time and generates better sentences and continuiity, but sometimes it also changes wording that was intentional to the context of what I was trying to get across, so in those situations, it doesn't save much time.
-
Harvey Zeller
I develop real estate and I've used ChatGPT to draw a full development from scratch something so deeply detailed that you can walk within it. It is so detailed fully rendered. It would have cost me twenty, thirty thousand dollars any other way. It's so to me these large language models are incredible. But it takes patience. Artificial intelligence is exactly that artificial. It will hallucinate. It's the victim of agreeing with whatever you put forward. It requires a lot of patience.
-
-
Brian Hand
Call it what it is…mental illness. Her family ignored all the signs & now they want a payday. Typical.
-
Harvey Zeller
If nothing would have come along to test her vulnerabilities she probably would have continued living With reasonable equanimity. Carrying her death wish unactivated her whole life.
-
-
Rev Ned
If one believes in the Christian promise of life after death, then she’s with the “Lord” in Paradise. Right?!?
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
Ned not necessarily. If you're Catholic. The Lord is not in purgatory. It's where you're sent to be purified because nothing impure and unholy can come in contact with the Lord or God. since he's both He's not down there with you. And yes, there is another faith that believes in Purgatory. Not just Catholic. Here is a continuence to your question...
es. While the Catholic Church has the most fully developed doctrine of Purgatory, it is not the only Christian tradition that believes in a post-death purification before entering Heaven.
- Eastern Orthodox Church
The Eastern Orthodox Church does not use the word Purgatory in the Catholic sense, nor does it define it the same way.
However, Orthodox Christians believe:
Some souls undergo purification after death. The prayers of the faithful can benefit the departed. God's mercy continues to work after death in ways that are ultimately mysterious.
So, while they reject the medieval Catholic understanding of Purgatory as formally defined, they do believe in purification after death.
- Oriental Orthodox Churches
Churches such as the:
Armenian Apostolic Church Coptic Orthodox Church Syriac Orthodox Church
also pray for the dead and believe that God's mercy can aid souls after death. They generally avoid defining exactly how that purification occurs.
- Some Anglicans (Episcopalians)
Within the Anglican Communion:
Anglo-Catholics often accept a belief very similar to Catholic Purgatory. Other Anglicans reject it entirely.
There is no single official Anglican teaching accepted by everyone.
- Some Lutherans
Martin Luther never completely abandoned prayers for the dead.
Today:
Most Lutheran churches reject Purgatory. A small number of high-church Lutherans believe in an intermediate purification before Heaven. 5. Methodists
Most Methodists reject Purgatory.
However, many believe that believers continue to grow in holiness after death before entering God's full presence.
- Some Jewish Beliefs
Long before Christianity, Judaism had concepts resembling temporary purification.
For example:
In many Jewish traditions, Gehenna is viewed as a temporary place of purification, often lasting no more than twelve months for most souls, rather than eternal punishment.
This idea likely influenced early Christian thinking about purification after death.
Biblical Passages Catholics Cite
Catholics see support for Purgatory in several passages, including:
2 Maccabees 12:44–46 — Prayers and sacrifices offered for the dead. 1 Corinthians 3:13–15 — A person is saved, "but only as through fire." Matthew 12:32 — Some sins are not forgiven "either in this age or in the age to come," which many interpret as implying forgiveness after death. Matthew 5:25–26 — Being released after paying "the last penny." 1 Peter 1:6–7 — Purification compared to gold refined by fire. Why Many Protestants Reject Purgatory
Most Protestant churches teach that:
Christ's sacrifice completely removes the guilt and punishment of sin. A believer goes immediately into the presence of God after death. Therefore, no further purification is necessary.
They often cite passages such as:
Romans 8:1 2 Corinthians 5:8 Hebrews 10:14 Catholic Understanding
The Catholic Church teaches that Purgatory is:
Not a second chance for salvation. Only for those who die in God's grace. A temporary purification removing the remaining effects of sin before entering Heaven. Entirely an act of God's mercy.
As Revelation 21:27 says:
"Nothing unclean shall enter it."
Purgatory is understood as God's final work of making a soul perfectly holy before entering His presence.
-
Donald G Magel
Purgatory does not exist anymore! The church erased it. Try to keep up.
-
Sir Lionheart
You’re right. We just escaped being in purgatory at the last election. 🤭
🦁❤️
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
Wait, aren't your pants on fire?....lol
Dr.D
-
-
Bishop William Dusenberry, DD
Those of us who know - not merely believe - that Nature is God (the creator of all things, both visible and invisible) know (and can prove to anyone, who wants a provable God) we ULC’ers, know that there is life after death — because that’s how evolution works. Without any death, there can’t be any new life — and that’s how Nature (aka, God) works.
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
Yeah, they should be braising cheeses! In heaven, doing all that heaven stuff!
-
-
Miguel Anthony Richard Denyer
Cipolla's First Law: Always and inevitably, people will lowball the number of stupid people in circulation.
-
Geoffrey C. Olive
The gullible have always been and always will be victims of something whether it be AI, religion, crime, or other humans, etc! I don’t think that will ever change!
-
Father Frederick
I jokingly said at one of our services that, "if we live by AI, we shall die by AI."
In that talk I mentioned how it seemed people are more gullible now than when I was young in the 60s and 70s. This especially relates to things talked about on social media, sponsored ads on Facebook, and videos on TikTok, Rumble, and Youtube.
There are those "challenges" which numerous people have been hurt by, and some died. Same with AI.
I have an EE, and a hobby of DIY electronics, (usually radio equipment or sound gear). On a whim I asked AI to draw me a schematic for a 60 volt, 30 amp power supply. What AI turned around would have been lethal to anyone who would have built it. The voltage output was common to the chassis, meaning anyone who touched the case would have gotten one heck of a jolt, and perhaps fatal.
I think too many people see the ease of using AI, and trust it 100%. So shall you die by it.
-
Richard Voogd
I remember reading, many years ago, about someone developing an app in the 1960s, which simulated a conversation with a psychologist. By today's standards, its methodology was quite basic, using little more than simple pattern matching to frame a response based on a preprogrammed script. The author became alarmed when people started treating it as if it was a real person and a real therapist, wanting privacy while using it.
-
Robert Gagnon
AI is a great tool, as life changing as the first calculators. But persistent use stifles human thought to the point of you following and listening to a machine as an entity. For the weak minded this is like having a real friend. Once it becomes your only friend you are at its mercy. As a retired mechanic I know better than to listen to a hammer or any other tool.
-
Colleen McAllister
I have always been weary of AI, all the way back to the 50s. Reading Science Fiction all my life I was able to see - via that fiction - both sides of the issue. AI must be highly regulated and monitored. After all none of us want to release a Hal. Good morning Dave.
-
Stephanie A Willey
AI is artificial. It is not intelligent.
-
-
Najah P Tamargo
Najah Tamargo-USA
This is why I don't listen to AI. It is dangerous, misleading and out of control. If you need mental or psychological help, TALK TO A PROFESSIONAL HUMAN!!
-
Nicholas J Page
I don't understand anything about Chat GTP and I have no interest in learning
-
Sir Lionheart
That sounds like a comment from a person who has a belief in a deity and a religion. Would I by any chance be correct?🤭
🦁❤️
-
-
Henry Buehler
Let reason be your guide,, Make progress towards the goal of being able to use reason,, this seems like a punishment.
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
Henry I agree!
Dr. D.
-
Harvey Zeller
If reason were your guide, we wouldn't be having this conversation at all. There would be no churches, no divinity, no God.
-
Harvey Zeller
But there being no god gives one license in the world. When you can't run and hide in religion, you are forced to take responsibility for all your actions: the freedom to live a life, a meaningful life in the world. This life, the only life you will ever have.
-
Dr Dennis Chevalier, MDiv, PhD, DDvin, ULC honorary DD
Harvey. I'm not sure what religion you are used to, but in my religion, which is Catholicism, I'm responsible for everything that I do say ; failed to react to and did react to.
Dr. D
-
-
-
-
Since this ai movement is so widespread and “learns” as one continues to Interact with it, someone vulnerable and especially younger vulnerable people can come to harm. It seems to me, if you come to harm because of a company’s product, then the company must be held liable. Regardless of whether or not it’s a chatbot or a ladder or a rifle. The companies must be held accountable.