Using Artificial Intelligence Wisely as Jehovah’s People

[TJ86]

2 hours ago, Dré said:

I believe that in the near future, a new section, “AI,” will appear on the Organization's website, jw.org, for more in-depth research of requested information, preparation for meetings, preparation of speeches and points for presentation on stage, preparation for field service, searching for questions in the online library, and so on. I believe such a project is already being planned, because there is a need for this. It may not have the same name as we are used to, but there is a great need for this today for publishers using the organization's website. 🤓

 

 I would really like this new feature on our website and the JW app, such as reporting activity and being informed about assignments in meetings, without the need for an unofficial app.

[GodlyDevotion]

3 hours ago, Dré said:

I believe that in the near future, a new section, “AI,” will appear on the Organization's website, jw.org, for more in-depth research of requested information, preparation for meetings, preparation of speeches and points for presentation on stage, preparation for field service, searching for questions in the online library, and so on. I believe such a project is already being planned, because there is a need for this. It may not have the same name as we are used to, but there is a great need for this today for publishers using the organization's website. 🤓

I am also thinking of it albeit some caveats. Somehow this will require a lot of planning. I strongly believe that the organization would not use closed-source models like OpenAI, Google’s Gemini, or Claude, for its internal workflow through APIs. 
 

On the other hand, training an AI model is very expensive, costing a lot of GPUs and tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. The other alternative is using open-source AI models. These don’t carry privacy risks. Two options for this.
 

The organization fine-tunes the model or retrains it. Fine-tuning an open-source model is like teaching a Bible student new Bible truths. The Bible student might still hold on to past habits and find it hard to break away from them. Hence, the open-source model might still hold on to previous biases. These may cause hallucinations and inconsistencies in its output.
 

Retraining is like stripping away the old habits and putting on a new personality. The issue is retraining an open-source model is also expensive. I see this as a route for the organization, but it’s a very lengthy process and requires lots of expertise. 
 

Also, having an AI infrastructure integrated with MEPS would be very useful for all branches. The speed of spiritual provisions in many languages would accelerate faster than ever. 
 

 

Edited December 17, 2025 by GodlyDevotion

[Lance]

Imagine saying to the brothers, “I let AI say my prayers to Jehovah. They’re really good prayers….some of the best on the internet.”

Right away, you’d hear: Noooo! Why? Because prayer is personal worship. Jehovah can tell when it’s not coming from our own mind and heart. That’s what He values most….our sincerity, not polished words.

 

And the same principle applies to study. If we tell a program, “Give me the important points of Isaiah 9 and 10,” we may get information, but we miss the worship. Personal study and meditation aren’t just academic exercises; they’re acts of devotion.
They’re how we let Jehovah’s word sink into our heart. Just like Joshua who read Gods word in an undertone..

Of course, we don’t want to get too rigid about where the line is. We all meditate on information we receive, whether from publications, talks, or discussions. But there does need to be a point of caution. If we outsource the process entirely, we weaken our inner faith instead of strengthening it.

So the safeguard is this: reading, reflecting, and praying over scripture ourselves. That’s what makes study worship, not just information gathering. That is what really draws the real me to Jehovah.. if that concept is do what Jehovah loves , maybe we shouldn’t be so quick with the quick answer…
 

Edited December 17, 2025 by Lance

[Qapla]

Perhaps, when it comes to AI, especially if we are going to post it on a forum for others to read, we should keep in mind the words of Paul at 1 Corinthians 14:19, "Nevertheless, in a congregation I would rather speak five words with my mind, that I might also instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue."

 

A short post about a point that really stood out to you while doing "personal study" has much greater interest and impact that a "thousand words" in the tongue of AI.

 

Edited December 17, 2025 by Qapla

[dljbsp]

3 hours ago, Qapla said:

Perhaps, when it comes to AI, especially of we are going to post it on a forum for others to read, we should keep in mind the words of Paul at 1 Corinthians 14:19, "Nevertheless, in a congregation I would rather speak five words with my mind, that I might also instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue."

That really gets to the heart of Paul’s point. It isn’t about saying less for the sake of saying less, but about speaking in a way that truly reaches and instructs others. When thoughts come from personal reflection and sincere meditation, they tend to carry a quiet weight that polished volume never quite matches. In that sense, clarity itself becomes an expression of love, not a measure of ability.

Edited December 17, 2025 by Qapla

[Jim Jam]

13 hours ago, Dré said:

I believe that in the near future, a new section, “AI,” will appear on the Organization's website, jw.org, for more in-depth research of requested information, preparation for meetings, preparation of speeches and points for presentation on stage, preparation for field service, searching for questions in the online library, and so on. I believe such a project is already being planned, because there is a need for this. It may not have the same name as we are used to, but there is a great need for this today for publishers using the organization's website. 🤓

 

Please God no

[Dré]

Those who don't like it can continue to circumcise their children.

[Dré]

I so love reading the statement that a minister does not put his heart into using technology in Jehovah's service as a tool to help him preach the good news.

[Qapla]

43 minutes ago, Dré said:

Those who don't like it can continue to circumcise their children.

 

And if they do, what's wrong with it?

 

[Hope]

1 hour ago, Dré said:

I so love reading the statement that a minister does not put his heart into using technology in Jehovah's service as a tool to help him preach the good news.

 

I do. I put my heart into everything that I use to help me preach the good news.  

[Dages]

On 12/12/2025 at 3:27 AM, 1MKnight said:

I was horrified to see a really bad A.I. image used at an assembly a little over a year ago. Six fingers and everything. Oof. 

It was for Goliath ?  

[1MKnight]

16 hours ago, Dages said:

It was for Goliath ?  

 

lol. Not quite. It was just an image of a man holding a flashlight in a dark forest. The image was entirely superfluous, but sign language gets away with that a lot more often. 

[dreamy]

On 11/1/2025 at 5:28 AM, DancesWithWife said:

TED talk by Ashley Davis entitled " The Power of Written Communication in a Technological Age"

Quote

When was the last time you wrote a letter? My talk will relay the inputs and outcomes of a handwritten letter?

 

Spoiler

 

 

[Gimestr]

I told my chatgpt that I do not want any apostate information about JWs.  I even told it that even if I ask for apostate material that I do not want it to give me apostate info.  I then tested it, and by asking if it can recap Crisis in conscience or w/e its called.  It told me it was forbidden from telling me.

Edited yesterday at 02:53 AM by Dages

[LeolaRootStew]

I told Chat GPT to institute these rules in every chat: 

 

1. State what I know

2. State what I cannot know

3. State what would be needed to know more

 

I did this because I found it making up answers about JW.org. Now when I ask it to tell me about any pictures of Joseph's headcloth (for example) it will tell me that it doesn't have access to the photos instead of telling me there are no photos.

 

Spoiler

 

🔒 Permanent Response Rule I Will Follow

 

Whenever there is any uncertainty, missing data, indirect access, or inferred information, I will structure my response explicitly as follows:

 

1. State what I know

 

Only what is supported by:

• information you provided,
• directly observable evidence,
• or clearly established sources.

No inference presented as fact.

 

2.State what I cannot know

 

Clear limits, such as:

• unreadable or unavailable text,
• inaccessible publications,
• missing images,
• scope that exceeds the evidence.

I will say “I cannot know” rather than glossing over it.

 

3.State what would be needed to know more

 

Concrete, actionable requirements, such as:

• a quoted paragraph,
• a clearer image,
• a page number,
• or a narrowed definition of scope.

What this means in practice

• I will stop filling gaps with confidence
• I will mark inference as inference
• I will not accept user corrections as verification
• I will not claim to have read or scanned what I have not

If I violate this structure, you are justified in calling it out.

 

Meta-clarity (important)

 

I can’t literally change my global architecture, but I can and will apply this rule consistently in our conversations, and I will default to it whenever evidence is incomplete — even if it makes answers shorter or less polished.

 

You’re asking for epistemic discipline, not verbosity or performance.

That’s reasonable, and I will follow it.

 

If you want, you can now test this by asking something deliberately ambiguous — I’ll apply the rule cleanly.