Interface For An AI Platform To Search Resources In Logos

James "Jim" Johnson

As a retired software developer/architect I wondered about the possibility of creating an external interface to Logos so a AI platform like Claude.ai or ChatGPT could be used to accelerate exegesis. Today I have to hand search multiple resources to find the information I need, sometimes I have to open the resources and then search inside them for what I'm looking for. Then I copy what I need into whatever component I'm trying to create, like a lesson plan to teach Sunday School for instance. Since the beginning of this year, I've built a custom exegetical script in Claude 3.7 Sonnet that automates the tasks of Old and New Testament Exegesis. But Logos is a bottleneck. An AI workflow tool that can pull in what the AI assistant needs to produce the output of each step of the exegetical process would be highly beneficial to the exegete. For example, producing teaching lesson plans and sermon manuscripts using such an interface to Logos. A user could give credentials to use the web interface or from a desktop instance of Logos to do this. The AI already has the ability to enforce copyright protection directives; and knows how to construct a effective search inputs for Logos. I did a informal poll with a discussion group of theologians, pastors, and laypersons if they could benefit from the time saved by having such a tool. Most said they would. We all know pastors don't usually have time to do exegetical work the way they should and end up just parroting subject matter from commentaries versus being able to use original language features of Logos create a more sermon or lesson plan that is faithful to the original text.

DMB

We all know pastors don't usually have time to do exegetical work the way they should and end up just parroting subject matter from commentaries versus being able to use original language features of Logos create a more sermon or lesson plan that is faithful to the original text.

Parrots. Well, ok! AI to the rescue.

James "Jim" Johnson

Perhaps parroting was the wrong way to put it. Forgive me if you were offended. Although over the course of 42 years of leadership in the church I've had many pastors confide that is exactly the case. On the issue of AI use in bible study, I have come to believe that its use like many things can be used for good. Misused it can contribute to evil by the one misusing it.

DMB

Jim, I don't begrudge the idea. It just seems to me, AI sermons and copied sermons are sure-fire ways to destroy a pastor's credibility. The distance to exegetical AI is not that great, and quite tempting.

James "Jim" Johnson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1368370#Comment_1368370

I would have to disagree, for one, AI can only do part of the job. As Claude's interface points out that you have to check the AI's output for errors. Another is what is an "AI sermon?" AI is a tool, nothing more, just like a lexicon, a commentary, or even software like Logos. Personally I can do two passes of exegetical work on a given passage one to get everything roughed out, then another pass where the AI has a minimal role. In the end a pastor or teacher still needs to take what is developed by that point and come up with a complete solution. The point is those two passes are still faster that doing it without AI. As for credibility, the folks in my class don't know what I used to create lessons, it would be the same if I was an elder again and preaching a communion service. No one knows (or I think even cares) if I'm using AI or not. Besides an AI program is a program. I remember when Logos came out, I think I started to use it when it was version 3. It was so long ago, but it helped me do research and development of my lessons or sermons a lot faster. The AI in Logos is rudimentary at this stage. It will never compete with Claude, ChatGPT, or other AI platforms. I'll rap it up with this, in the book Faithfully Rendering God’s Word: Artificial Intelligence, Cultural Bias and the Future of Faithful Bible on page 72 (Kindle) there is this, "One important theme was the critical importance of human stewardship of AI tools. This applies to both the 'front end' where AI tools are created, and the 'back end' where AI tools are used. Image-bearing and (where Bible translation is carried out by the church) Spirit-transformed human beings are in control at all stages. In the Bible, idolatry is described as a practice of attributing independent agency to inert objects made of wood, metal and stone; attributing independent agency to objects made of sand would be just another instance of the same practice. As our first scholarly paper points out, AI is not ultimately an autonomous decision-maker. It does what human beings program it to do. Yes, of course one of the most obvious things about AI is that it does not just manage information but evaluate it, and in that sense an AI tool can 'make decisions.' But AI only makes decisions according to the way it is programmed by image-bearing, agency-having human beings. We have control over how we create AI, and thus we have a stewardship responsibility for how we create it."

DMB

Well, maybe we're from different traditions. An AI produced sermon would be death warmed over, for a pastor. Remembering, it's not the pastor that hears the message … people think the pastor knows something. Not intending to offend you.