Finding all the places an evil spirit spoke
I was trying to find all the places in the Bible where an evil spirit is speaking. I found items like Demoniac and Evil Supernatural Beings, Legion that I could use with Reported Speech (in Bible Browser) but no umbrella term that would include all evil spirits.
ChatGPT did a great job in getting me the information I was looking for but I am curious to know if there is a search or tool in Logos that would give me a comprehensive answer.
Comments
-
Not that I have found. The ability to search on a group sharing a characteristic is a weakness of Logos/Verbum. I have reason to believe that they are looking at the issue but not necessarily in the way I wish they would. See AI Searches on the Bible? Will this be added at some stage - Logos Forums. This would be nice but I would find exposing more of the characteristics information to a precise search more useful given that AI is currently being used to aggregate others' works rather than doing creative analysis. I have found the chatbots great at producing examples but poor at providing exhaustive lists.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
This is a great search idea. Sometimes we have to outsource to go to other sources. I agree it is best to streamline in one source if possible.
0 -
Thank you for the feedback!
0 -
Jerry T said:
... I am curious to know if there is a search or tool in Logos that would give me a comprehensive answer.
I cannot do it, but I was hoping someone would show you how. I have seen some very complex searches posted here on the forum before. I am pretty sure there are some experts on here who could put together a search string.
Unfortunately, AI is the new "easy way". whether its results are comprehensive or complete requires faith that I do not have [:|]
0 -
We're in the early stages of working on an AI-powered "Smart Bible Search" that does a pretty good job with this query:
1 -
That is very nice and will be appreciated by many. However, for the scholar who needs accurate results it simply adds another uncheckable level of uncertainty to the data. So I hope that in parallel you are making the unexposed personal data such as gender, roles, natural/supernatural, single/group, etc. available in a precise search. Then I would get really excited at having AI for rough estimates and the precise search for actual results.
The sort of thing, I'd like to be able to ask:
- list everyone whose name was changed or assigned by God
- list everyone whose name in the Bible is given in at least two languages
- list every unnamed person who is an agent in at least one clause in a Biblical event
- list everyone whose name was changed by another human
- list everyone who is explicitly stated to be in a specific clan
- list everyone who is explicitly stated to be a shepherd
- list every prayer using shepherd imagery that is prayed by a shepherd
- list all priests mentioned in the context of the red heifer rite
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Very interesting… without giving away how the sausages are being made, how much does this draw on the tagging? Before I even read @MJ. Smith 's post, I wondered if building out some of the gaps in tagging would super charge this both from a precise search point of view, but also AI.
Regardless, thanks for sharing this. I am excited to see what emerges around this technology.
1 -
This post is interesting, visa viz an 'AI' > Bible search.
- The question itself has 'timing' inherent in its word usage (demons were not inherently evil, unless explicitly described, until later usage)
- A tag'er might know that, and tag relative to 'written' (versus later usage). Old Testament usage vs apocrypha/NT vs later church.
- An 'AI' usage would almost inherently be dependent on its learning-base. As much as that's been ballyhoo'd as improving reliability, it can't possibly pick up quite a few of the lesser-knowns (something someone else commented on)
We shall see, I suppose.
"If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.
0
