Experiment Results

Young at Heart Message

Imagine, for a moment, that our sanctuary has been transformed.

Instead of sitting in comfortable seats, we are standing in the Garden of Eden.

If we take a look around, we can imagine that we see beauty and wonder all around us – trees, plants, flowers, butterflies… maybe even a rainbow in the distance.
​
The instructions we’ve been given are simply to care for this amazing world.
 
Looking around, however, you realize that in order to do that, you’re going to need to dig into the earth with your hands.
 
That’s OK, it sounds like a wonderful way to ground yourself and be one with God and God’s creation.
 
So you begin to harvest seeds from the plants around you, and dig holes with your bare hands.
 
This works well – you’re able to plant enough seeds to sustain yourself and your partner.
 
Imagine, now, that it’s no longer just you and your partner here in the Garden. You now have a family – let’s say, six kids.
 
You need to plant a lot more seeds to grow enough food for yourselves and six children.
 
The grounding you felt when you first started planting and harvesting now feels onerous in between caring for and raising children, sheltering, and trying to survive.
 
Looking around again, you see that there are some things you could use for tools to help dig and then harvest faster and more efficiently.
 
Yes, you lose that grounding connection to God’s earth, but you gain time to care for your family.
 
Now let’s fast-forward in time. Imagine you are Noah, and you’ve been asked to build an ark so that you can weather a mighty storm. You certainly can’t do that with just your bare hands.
 
Luckily, humans have developed tools since Adam and Eve were alone in the Garden of Eden, so you have hammers, nails, tables, saws, and a myriad other tools at your disposal to help you build such a large ark.

---

​Let’s fast-forward once more to the era of Christian history when John Hus and Martin Luther were living.
 
Individual, non-clergy people were not allowed to have their own Bible, and especially not one written in their own language.
 
These reformers were intent on changing that. And, with the development of the printing press, the Bible was rapidly made available to average people in their own language.
 
Church leaders were not able to keep up with how quickly people were able to get access to the Bible. I can only imagine how many of them thought the world was going to be destroyed.
 
Likewise, with the development of steamboats, steam engines, airplanes, and other vehicular technologies, Christians were suddenly able to travel far and wide preaching the Word of God as missionaries.
 
Similarly, medical and public health technologies have since made it possible for faith-based organizations like the Moravian mission in Ahuas, Honduras to provide life-saving medical care.
 
And, of course, in our own sanctuary today, we have access to screens that allow our worship services to be more accessible to those with hearing or visual impairments.
 
Additionally, we have access to microphones and musical instruments to amplify our worship services. We have a coffee maker that makes fellowship time more enjoyable.
 
We have a contraption that easily boils water so we don’t need to use pots for hot water for tea.
 
I could go on and on about the technological developments that have propelled ministries around the world forward into our current time.
 
And, of course, it is hard to imagine going back to a world which doesn’t have all of the technology that we have today.
 
At the same time, we all acknowledge that all of these technologies that we have access to are simultaneously helpful, but also leave complicated legacies.
 
I preach every Sunday using my cell phone as my “index cards.” It would take me much longer to prepare for Sunday worship if I had to write out actual index cards every week.
 
I mention all of this because, “from antiquity, Christianity has provided a theological framework that embraces the complexity of technology.” (Timothy Dalrymple, “Made in Our Image,” Christianity Today, July/August 2025)
 
Two weeks ago, those of you who were here got to listen to two short sermons – one written by me, and one written by ChatGPT.
 
I asked those of you who were present to fill out a feedback form stating which sermon I wrote, and which one ChatGPT wrote.
 
We talked a little bit about Artificial Intelligence (AI) last week, but I think it’s worth discussing the results of that experiment and exploring these concepts a little more deeply, especially as they relate to our faith and our daily lives.
 
So, without further ado, here are the results of the experiment:
 
The Message
 
14 people, or 39% believed that I wrote the first sermon on Hebrews 13: 1-8, 15-16.
 
21 people, or 58% believed that I wrote the second sermon on Luke 14: 1, 7-14.
 
And one person couldn’t tell the difference and checked both sermon 1 and 2.
 
Interestingly, the people who believed that I wrote the first sermon mostly weren’t really sure which one to choose – they couldn’t really tell for sure.
 
Some people said they just thought the first one reflected my style more. These people also were, in general, more gracious about the use of AI for worship services.
 
Several believed there are useful applications for it, and some of these people expressed that they in fact have used it themselves on occasion.
 
The people who believed I wrote the second sermon were FAR more certain that AI wrote the first one, and had far stronger opinions and assumptions about the use of AI in sermon writing and worship services.
 
Some people in this group said they prefer the more personal, human touch that AI can’t provide.
 
Some in this group were gracious about the use of AI as well, but most were pretty adamant it should not be used.
 
The people in this group chose sermon number two as the one I wrote because it felt like it went deeper, it was more geared toward the congregation or your individual needs, and because it seemed to have a more distinct message.
 
A few people simply said they don’t believe AI is appropriate for a sermon. Sermon number two was more compassionate from this group’s perspective.
 
So, which one did I write?
 
I wrote the first sermon on Hebrews 13, and AI wrote the second one.
 
This experiment was incredibly interesting to me. I’ll share my own experience and thoughts on it with you because I think this is an extremely important conversation.
 
First of all, it was hard for me to write a shortened sermon that felt complete and got to the heart of the matter.
Secondly, I did have to eliminate any personal stories that might give away which one I wrote.
 
Third, it was frustrating that I spent probably an hour writing my short sermon, and ChapGPT took 30 seconds to write its sermon.
 
As I mentioned last week, I didn’t change anything about the ChatGPT sermon. I copied and pasted it directly.
 
So, all of that said, it produced what seems to have been an actually quite well-written, applicable, even compassionate sermon in 30 seconds with no editing, and the majority of people believed I wrote it.
 
Mine took significantly longer, wasn’t perhaps as robust or “compassionate” feeling, and to many people, it felt disjointed.
 
And truthfully, it felt disjointed to me, too, especially compared to the one AI wrote. But I wasn’t sure how to fix it. And, I was surprised at how well-written the AI sermon was.
 
Peaching each of these sermons was also hard. The first one was easier for me to preach because I had written it. The second one was harder because it used verbiage I wouldn’t normally use.
 
And because I didn’t write it myself, I had to focus harder on the words I was saying so I didn’t lose track or make mistakes.
 
But, that’s still the sermon most of you thought I wrote. And those of you who said sermon 1 weren’t really sure, which tells me that the ChatGPT sermon was not all that bad of a sermon.
 
Now, that said, if I were to use ChatGPT to write a sermon again, I would do some editing to make it fit with my own style, to add my own flourishes, etc.
 
But, I can understand the appeal of using it at least as a starting point. It could save tremendous amounts of time, leaving pastors open to do more of the human-facing work that we never seem to have enough time to do.
 
I’m admittedly surprised by my own experience using this. I’m not going to say I’ll use it all the time, or perhaps even ever again. I did not use it at all today, for example.
 
But, what if I actually am doing you a disservice by not at least considering the possibilities?
 
How is using AI to research and compile data for a sermon different than the sometimes hours or even days that I spend reading, researching, and looking for information that’s on the internet or in books so that I can create an informed sermon?
 
I am still using information created by other people, but I have to do the leg work of finding the information, reading it, compiling it, sifting it, etc. What if AI could do that for me, saving me hours of work each week?
 
Is it not a disservice to you all to potentially create more time to do the human-facing work that I need to do and love to do as a pastor?
 
In the same article by Timothy Dalrymple that I referenced earlier, he states, “As with many other technologies, the power [AI] possesses for good is proportionate to the power it possesses for destruction.”
 
As with any tool or new technology, we have a responsibility to learn how to use it responsibly.
 
As Christians, we must factor this responsibility into everything we use.
 
Social media, as we know, can be destructive, but it can also help connect people across the world. Families that have moved cross-country or globally can easily stay connected through social media.
 
Zoom allowed us to connect during COVID when people were mostly staying at home.
 
For my part, I think I need to continue to better understand this new technology.
 
I think that like all new technology, it has the potential to do some amazing things. And it also has the potential to be incredibly harmful.
 
It is up to us to determine if and how we might use it responsibly.
 
In our reading today, Paul acknowledges our very human tendency to assume things, confirm our own biases, and dig our heels in on certain issues only to realize later that perhaps we were mistaken, or didn’t fully understand.
 
Paul, as we know, before he became “Paul” was “Saul,” a passionate and even aggressive opposer of Jesus Christ and the movement he was part of.
 
Paul could have hidden this fact from people. He could have been ashamed of his prior behavior or embarrassed that he had denied Jesus previously.
 
But instead he says “I used to say terrible and insulting things about him, and I was cruel.”
 
He admitted that he was wrong – as difficult and painful as that is.
 
Paul modeled for us incredible humility. And, more importantly, he reminds us of the grace that Christ offers all of us.
 
That grace that Christ offers is with us no matter what.
 
We receive Christ’s grace whether we are aggressively, staunchly opposed to something, or whether we are open to embracing something.
 
Paul says, “God had mercy on me and let me be an example of the endless patience of Christ Jesus.”
 
Based on the results of this experiment, I wonder how many of us need to re-evaluate our assumptions about AI’s ability, or even its potential value in contributing to a decent sermon?
 
Many of us, myself included, have clear biases and assumptions that AI is bad, or that a sermon written by AI could not possibly be compassionate, individualized, or flow well.
 
I suspect that most of you who thought I wrote the second sermon had these biases going into the experiment, thus causing you to assume that AI’s sermon would sound robotic, unfeeling, or uncaring.
 
In reality, the one I actually wrote is the one that many of you thought was less compassionate, more disjointed, and less cohesive.
 
I went into this experiment with the exact same biases and assumptions. I assumed that AI’s would have a less “human” feel, too.
 
So when it produced that sermon, I was surprised, too. And humbled, because I realized that it was likely people would guess the wrong sermon.
 
In what ways do we need to humble ourselves like Paul? In what ways do we need to gently open ourselves to possibilities?
 
These questions apply to me as much as to any of you.
 
I am not sure how I feel about this new technology. I have my own hesitations, my own uncertainties, and, clearly, my own negative biases.
 
And yet, I am willing to humble myself and open myself to Spirit’s movement, in all the ways that happens.
 
So, may we humble ourselves before God.
 
May we avoid assumptions and certainties and instead soften, bow, and let God lead.
 
The only way to move forward in any aspect of life – whether that’s new technology, educational opportunities, embracing new spiritual practices, or any number of other things – is to humble ourselves and trust that God will lead.
 
We acknowledge that this is true in other ways, and I don’t see why it wouldn’t also be true now.
 
May we move forward together in community, in loving kindness, with open hearts and open minds, and with cautious optimism.
 
And may we continue to help each other see new ways of thinking and being in the world, as Christians throughout history have always done and will continue to do in perpetuity.
 
Amen.
 
Let us pray:
 
God, forgive us when, like Paul, we dig our heels in when we are faced with something we do not yet understand, or something that is pushing against our own assumptions and biases. Help us to open our hearts and minds to new possibilities and evaluate these things in an open and honest way. Perhaps we will come to the same conclusion, but help us do it in prayer so we can listen for your guidance and support. In your holy name, we pray. Amen.