> General Discussions

Artificial Intellegence

(1/3) > >>

Bob:
I have been dabbling into A-I lately, (Artificial intelligence) and decided to ask CHAT GPT what it thought about Ray's teaching. I typed the following into the " ask any Question" and found this very interesting. It bolsters my opinion of Ray's teaching, Any comments.

"Can you give me your opinion of L Ray Smith from bible truths .com"

Dave in Tenn:
Could you share the "answer".  There is more than one AI and more than one answers each might give.

I've had conversations with it, and had to practically convince/beg it to help me with "translating".  It really was most comfortable with typical theology-based understanding.

Dave in Tenn:
After a few generic questions and answers and invitations to get more specific, I asked if he believed in hell.  This was spit back out.

L. Ray Smith, associated with (link unavailable), likely held traditional Christian views on Hell, seeing it as a place of punishment for those who reject God's salvation. His teachings probably emphasized biblical descriptions of Hell as a real place of suffering, but I'd need more context to be sure.

Bob:
Hi Dave,
Once again, I repeated the question to Chat GPT and will copy and paste its reply. It’s a bit long. The only difference from my first request is that this time it mentioned it couldn’t access the internet. I don’t consider Chat GPT perfect—just interesting. I’ve used its help for things like my 65th wedding anniversary speech, emails, etc. As you can tell I have too much time on my hands.

I asked,
"Can you give me your opinion of L Ray Smith from bible truths .com"
Chat GPT said:

I can’t access the website directly right now, but I can give you a summary and balanced opinion based on what’s generally known about L. Ray Smith and his site Bible-Truths.com.

Overview:
L. Ray Smith (1942–2012) was a Christian writer known for his unconventional and often controversial interpretations of the Bible. His website, Bible-Truths.com, contains extensive writings that challenge traditional Christian doctrines such as eternal hell, the Trinity, and tithing. He argued that all people will eventually be saved — a belief known as Christian Universalism.

Strengths:

    Smith was deeply committed to studying Scripture and encouraged readers to think critically about church traditions.

    His writing style is passionate and thorough, often filled with Scripture references.

    Many readers found his work refreshing or thought-provoking, especially those dissatisfied with mainstream church teachings.

Criticism and Concerns:

    His views are outside orthodox Christian teaching; most denominations would label some of his beliefs as heretical (particularly his rejection of eternal damnation and some views on Jesus’ divinity).

    His tone could be confrontational and dismissive toward traditional pastors or theologians.

    He had no formal theological training, which sometimes led to interpretive errors or oversimplifications.

Summary opinion:
L. Ray Smith was a passionate and intelligent Bible student who challenged mainstream doctrines with sincerity, but his teachings should be approached carefully and compared directly with Scripture and historical Christian interpretations. His writings can spark deep reflection, but they are not representative of traditional Christian theology.

Would you like me to summarize some of his key teachings or controversies in more detail?
You said:
Yes
Chat GPT said:

Sure — here’s a breakdown of L. Ray Smith’s key teachings and the main controversies surrounding them, organized clearly so you can see both sides.
🔑 1. Salvation for All (Universal Reconciliation)

What he taught:
Smith believed everyone will ultimately be saved, including the devil and fallen angels. He argued that “God’s judgments” are corrective, not eternal punishments.
He used verses like 1 Corinthians 15:22 (“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive”) and Philippians 2:10–11 to claim that “all” means literally everyone.

Why it’s controversial:
Most Christian denominations teach that salvation is conditional—only through repentance and faith in Christ during this life. Smith’s view aligns with Christian Universalism, which mainstream theology rejects as contradicting passages about eternal punishment (e.g., Matthew 25:46, Revelation 20:10).
📖 2. Rejection of “Eternal Hell”

What he taught:
He insisted the Greek words translated as “eternal” (αἰώνιος / aionios) actually mean “age-lasting,” not “forever.” He said “hell” is a mistranslation, arguing that God’s fire purifies and refines rather than torments eternally.

Why it’s controversial:
Most Christian traditions view eternal punishment as a central doctrine. Critics say Smith selectively interpreted language to fit his conclusion, ignoring the broader biblical context.
💰 3. Opposition to Tithing

What he taught:
Smith wrote an extensive paper titled “The Truth About Tithing” claiming the tithe was an Old Testament agricultural law meant for Israel only, not for the Church.
He said modern pastors use tithing to manipulate and profit from believers.

Why it’s controversial:
While some agree with his view that tithing isn’t a New Testament command, others felt his tone toward pastors was overly harsh and accusatory.
✝️ 4. The Nature of Christ and God

What he taught:
He rejected the traditional doctrine of the Trinity. Smith believed Jesus was divine but not God the Father, interpreting verses like John 14:28 (“The Father is greater than I”) literally.

Why it’s controversial:
This places him outside orthodox Christianity, which since the early Church councils (Nicene and Chalcedonian) affirms the full divinity of Jesus and the unity of the Trinity.
🕊️ 5. The Purpose of Judgment

What he taught:
Smith said judgment is not punishment but correction leading to restoration. He often compared it to a father disciplining his child.
He believed God’s love will eventually bring every being into submission through understanding, not force.

Why it’s controversial:
Critics argue this minimizes God’s justice and holiness, making sin seem less serious.
🧠 6. Approach and Tone

Strengths:

    His writings show deep personal conviction and extensive scriptural cross-referencing.

    He encouraged readers to think for themselves instead of blindly following clergy.

Weaknesses:

    His style was combative, often calling mainstream pastors “liars” or “blind guides.”

    Many found his writings intellectually rigid — he believed his interpretations were the only true ones.

⚖️ Overall Assessment

    Positive: Thought-provoking, challenges complacency, emphasizes God’s mercy and purpose in suffering.

    Negative: Theologically unbalanced, rejects key Christian doctrines, and occasionally misuses Greek terms to support preconceived ideas.

Would you like me to show how his interpretation of “eternal” (aionios) differs from mainstream Bible scholarship? That’s one of the biggest foundations of his teaching.
You said:
Yes
Chat GPT said:

Excellent — that’s a key area to understand, because L. Ray Smith’s entire theology of universal salvation rests heavily on how he interpreted the Greek word αἰώνιος (aionios), usually translated as eternal or everlasting in English Bibles.

Let’s unpack this carefully and fairly 👇
⚙️ 1. What “Aion” and “Aionios” Mean in Greek
🧩 Root words

    αἰών (aion) — means an age, a period of time, or a lifetime.

    αἰώνιος (aionios) — adjective form, meaning pertaining to an age or age-lasting.

These words can describe anything from a temporary period to something indefinite or timeless — depending on context.

📜 Examples in the Bible:

    Romans 16:25 — “...kept secret since the world began (chronois aioniois — long ages).”

    Philemon 1:15 — “...that you might have him forever (aionion),” clearly not meaning eternal since Paul speaks of a human servant.

    Matthew 25:46 — “And these shall go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

📖 2. L. Ray Smith’s Argument

Smith claimed that translators wrongly rendered aionios as “eternal” to support doctrines like eternal hell.
He argued instead that:

    Aionios kolasis (in Matthew 25:46) should mean “age-lasting correction” — temporary, purifying punishment.

    Aionios zoe (eternal life) means “life of the age to come,” not unending life — though he still believed that once purified, everyone would live forever with God.

His conclusion:

    “God’s judgments last for ages, but mercy triumphs at the end — no one will suffer eternally.”

⚖️ 3. Mainstream Biblical Scholarship

Most Greek scholars disagree with Smith’s sweeping reinterpretation.

They point out that:

    Context determines meaning. When aionios describes God (eternal God in Romans 16:26) or the life of believers, it clearly implies unending duration.

    Early Jewish and Christian writings (e.g., the Septuagint and Church Fathers) used aionios to mean eternal in spiritual contexts.

    Translating it as “age-lasting” in all cases oversimplifies the word’s range and distorts verses where permanence is intended.

Example:
Matthew 25:46 uses aionios twice — once for punishment, once for life.
Most theologians say it must carry the same duration in both phrases:

    “If eternal life is everlasting, so is eternal punishment.”

💬 4. Balanced Evaluation

Smith’s Strengths:

    He was right that aionios doesn’t always mean “forever.”

    He encouraged believers to reexamine how translation choices shape doctrine.

Where He Went Too Far:

    He treated “age-lasting” as if it never means “eternal,” which isn’t supported by linguistic evidence.

    His entire theology (no eternal hell, universal salvation) depends on that limited interpretation.

🧭 5. Summary
Aspect   L. Ray Smith’s View   Mainstream Christian View
Meaning of aionios   “Age-lasting,” temporary   “Eternal,” depending on context
Hell   Temporary purification   Permanent separation from God
Salvation   Universal (all will be saved)   Conditional on faith and repentance
Translation bias   Human corruption of truth   Text reflects consistent ancient usage

Would you like me to show how early Christian writers (like Origen, Augustine, etc.) used aionios and what they believed about hell and universal salvation? That’s where the historical background really gets interesting.  I ended chat here, Bob

Bob:
As an example Dave, I asked it to change my reply to make it little more humorous. This is how it changed.

Hi Dave,
Well, I asked Chat GPT the same question again, just to see if it would change its mind. I’ll copy and paste its reply—it’s a bit on the long side (apparently, it likes to hear itself talk). The only real difference this time is that it admitted it couldn’t access the internet—honesty counts for something, I guess! I don’t think Chat GPT is perfect, just entertaining. I’ve even used it to help with my 65th wedding anniversary speech, emails, and now this reply—so if it sounds too clever, you’ll know who to blame!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page