Beta Sermon Assistant: Outlines

MJ. Smith said:

Initial reaction: I would like to see it take into account the notes I have gathered in my study for the sermon. Without that, it is too close to a machine driven sermon rather than a Holy Spirit driven sermon.

Amen.

I tried it for a morally ambiguous figure, Ehud, in Judges 3:11-31. Based on that alone I was given the most bland "God raises up deliverers" outline imaginable.

However, when I supplemented it with the theme "God hates deceit" it was much more on target for how I read Ehud. If I was able to integrate all the notes I have that support my reading of the text I would find this much more helpful. I'm not sure if the simple Sermon Theme prompt will be enough for different passages. Something like Google's NotebookLM in Logos would get me to go pro.

Justin Gatlin said:

I think that, as is, the sermon assistant doesn't do anything that chatGPT and Gemini don't do. Why not lean into what makes Logos unique and prioritize finding the high quality resources we already have?

[Y]

What we already have is pretty good. 

Elivando Carvalho de Mesquita said:

Hi,

Using the Portuguese version of Logos, only: Application, Teaching are suggested, but nothing else is suggested. Even with several attempts, the Points do not appear as a suggestion.

I was able to duplicate this bug. Bizarrely, mine also puts the content of what it does display in English (maybe because the sermon title is in English?):

[quote]

I'm worried about this tool the way it's built. What would be the point of making a preacher do the work that is his to do and for which most receive a salary from the church? And within that, to discourage good research and meditation by creating a personal sermon for real people? 

I can't agree that it's right to preach a sermon designed for one audience and preach to a totally different one, let alone preach a machine-made sermon. I'm worried about this being misused by bad preachers. The damage to churches would be enormous.

I agree with everyone who has expressed the opinion that at most the assistant should take the research notes I have already actively collected and suggest possible structures to me, but never prepare a sermon for me from scratch.

MJ. Smith said:

Initial reaction: I would like to see it take into account the notes I have gathered in my study for the sermon. Without that, it is too close to a machine driven sermon rather than a Holy Spirit driven sermon.

I'm sure staff foresaw what the comments would be (though Logos and Holy Spirit do seem opposites ironically). But I've listened to pastor sermons and guessed the  commentary used (true), or which sermons book used (also true), as a favorite stay-awake technique (confessing). I really 'rue the day' folks chat about which AI tool was used, (and worse), what badly averaged theology was presented.

David Cosand (Logos) said:

The title of the sample AI-generated sermon outline is extremely ironic. AI-generated text is quite the opposite of a creative work that is "empowered by the Holy Spirit." Perhaps this is an example of AI humor!

DAL said:

The point is to make the job faster so you can get out there and evangelize instead of being an “office preacher” who all he does is prepare lessons and sermons under a roof with air conditioning.  You worry me because you come across as if you think all you have to do is study to prepare lessons and evangelism and other tasks are not even in your “to do” list.

Use the tool responsibly and do more than just sit on an office chair preparing lessons.  That’s how I see this.  Instead of spending 10 hours on a lesson, now I can spend only 4 and still present a great spiritual feast for those who are starving for truth.  And I also get to go out and visit and talk to people so I don’t gain weight by just sitting inside an office taking longer than I should prepping lessons.

From your posts I understand that you didn't understand my point and that of others in this post. Besides, we seem to have different visions of what preaching is.

I also have visits and counseling to do weekly and most pastors are like that. And Logos and other software have been around for decades to save me time in preparation. If I hadn't used Logos and other software in these 17 years of ministry, I would have spent a lot more time on my classes and preaching in church. I don't think anyone here is advocating that we need to do everything from scratch without the help of something that is already ready as a starting point. Nobody dispenses with dictionaries, encyclopedias, commentaries etc and advocates that we should do everything from scratch and on our own. Just as no one today advocates that every family should plow, plant, harvest, cook, weave clothes, etc. and be completely autonomous and self-sufficient.

By using Logos we can shorten the path and time for many things and we should make good use of this.
The problem with this AI sermon builder is the same as taking a ready-made sermon from a book, or from a preacher on YouTube, or taking a commentary and simply preaching that to your church, although there may be rare exceptions where this can be beneficial if done well.

And here we come to what I said about having different visions of what preaching is.

And here we come to what I said about having different visions of what preaching is. Preaching is also about shepherding and caring for my flock in a collective but still personalized way, just as much as it is about visiting and counseling on an individual basis. These attitudes add up and don't compete with each other.

So, when preparing a sermon, I should think about how to communicate and apply that specific truth from the text to the particular reality of my community instead of taking a ready-made sermon/commentary/AI made by a third party that was good for another reality, but is not necessary and sufficient for the reality of my church. I need something designed for my church and not for another church. I know it's a lofty ideal and that we often fail even when we make a sermon designed for our church, but that's still my goal even when I fail.

Think about how a while ago I asked myself why we don't simply project a video of an excellent preacher in the church, with so many excellent preachers out there who are much better than us? Wouldn't that be easier and more practical? The answer is “yes”, if we think that preaching is just passing on information or moral lessons. But the answer is “no” if we understand that preaching is a message prepared by me, a flesh and blood pastor, for specific flesh and blood sheep with their own peculiarities in my church. My church doesn't merely want to know what John Piper thinks and believes! My church wants to know what I think and believe because they know me, because I walk with them, because they trust me even though I am an imperfect sinner.

A sermon made by AI and not based on what I have thought or on the parts I have collected from others, and which I have also judged to be pertinent for my church, goes against my vision of stewardship of my work as a teacher and as pastor of a specific flock entrusted to me.

MJ and Anderson,

The problem is you guys are assuming that people will actually use AI outlines that are obviously raw and need reworking.  You guys are acting as if you’ve never used someone else’s outlines in your preaching either.  The tool, when used responsibly, can generate great ideas and better outlines if and when you put work into them.  That’s the purpose of this tool.  Whatever your assumptions are that’s all they “Assumptions!”

And whatever the Dominicans or the Puerto Ricans decide to do is very subjective and is not the norm to follow.  😂😂😁😁 You can still let the word of God permeate your soul in different ways.  Besides, the longer you preach the easier it should be to let that happen and to build your lessons, whether you use AI tools or not.

Don’t let your assumptions rob you of taking advantage of a tool that can help you come up with ideas quicker and help you utilize your time more efficiently!

DAL

Sure, AI can be misused - in the same way as a commentary or book can be quoted verbatim without credit or much thought. There's not much new here. People can cut and paste from any source. 

Specifically on AI, a lot comes down to prompting. I've used ChatGPT on occasion, and I only come to it after some study, prayer and reflection. The prompt I provide is very specifically not just around the Scripture but what I think the Holy Spirit is compelling me to address. The AI outline can suggest areas of further study (or can be rejected completely as being not useful - in the same way as I sometimes shake my head at commentaries.)

It's not so different to discussing a sermon with a colleague to gain new insights or release a mental block. The content AIs have been trained on has all been human generated at some point. Every preacher does not have to have a completely original take on Scripture each Sunday (indeed, it would be worrying if they did) - although the presentation of the message should be originally tailored.

I hope I serve up a three course dinner, with mints and coffee to follow, and often it is with great emotion and concern... and love... that I do so. AI is just a tool, to be used with care. 

I'm not sure I'm going to use the Logos product simply because it doesn't tailor around the resources I own and therefore just seems like a more expensive AI. As someone pointed out, Google's NotebooksLM seems like a better approach (albeit limited at the moment).

David S said:

Sure, AI can be misused - in the same way as a commentary or book can be quoted verbatim without credit or much thought. There's not much new here. People can cut and paste from any source. 

I totally agree with you. The problem is not the source or the medium, but the heart of the user.

David S said:

It's not so different to discussing a sermon with a colleague to gain new insights or release a mental block. The content AIs have been trained on has all been human generated at some point.

We talk to colleagues (or our spouse) to get better insights to illustrate or apply an idea. Nowadays, when I can't get an illustration, I type in a personalized prompt with a copy of the part I want to illustrate and ChatGPT has helped me a lot with ideas. Often, I have to discard it and keep trying until it gives me what I really want and need. I usually need to improve the initial idea presented. I don't see a problem with that.

David S said:

I'm not sure I'm going to use the Logos product simply because it doesn't tailor around the resources I own and therefore just seems like a more expensive AI. As someone pointed out, Google's NotebooksLM seems like a better approach (albeit limited at the moment).

I imagine that your point here is the same as mine and that of several colleagues I talk to.
The intelligent sermon assistant doesn't allow you to make specific requests like we were able to do in ChatGPT, Gemini, NotebookLM etc. In these others we can ask for a specific illustration about a paragraph you've written. You can send a draft of your sermon and ask it to improve the wording, logical order, enunciation of points, etc.

Logos is still tied down compared to these chatbots. In fact, to date I haven't used the sermon builder for any of my sermons, and I've been subscribing to Logos Pro/Max since the initial launch. But I have been using ChatGPT on a weekly basis when I need it. But I think Logos will find a way to do that over time (don't know when). On the other hand, Logos' intelligent search has been very good for me and I've used it a lot.

However, returning to the original subject, my concern with the current format of the sermon assistant is that it offers a “ready-made” work without you having provided even the slightest outline based on your meditation and study of the text. This is tempting from the outset. But it should be the final work, and be guided by what the preacher has provided him with in a preliminary way.