What A.I. Says I Am, Part II: I Reason From Scripture

What AI Says I Am, Part 2: I Reason From Bible

I reason from Scripture to defend my faith, defend my worldview and also to show that my worldview and belief system's logic sticks together as a coherent logically reasoned whole. I do it the exact same way Paul the Apostle did. It's called Presuppositional Apologetics. I've been doing it this way for over a decade. I have won more people to the faith this way than bashing someone over the head with their sins and a 3lb Bible.

Acts 17:1-2 When Paul and his companions had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a Jewish synagogue. As was his custom, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures

The atheist's circular reasoning in the "God wrote the Bible so it can't be wrong because He's technically omnipotent" accusation can only be invoked if in fact God is not the perfect objective truth/law giver. The atheist or non-believer has the burden of proof on them to prove this is not true if I first make the claim. When I declare that God is the source of perfect objective truth, I am putting forth a worldview that accounts for the "laws of logic" themselves. The very one's the atheist is attempting to hijack with this absurd accusation.

In other words, atheistic materialism itself fails to explain logic: If the universe is purely material and accidental, there is no logical basis for why immaterial (metaphysical) laws of logic should exist or remain consistent…or even math and language for that matter. The Non-Believer has to borrow the Christian worldview every time they attempt to use "sound reason" or "logic" to dismantle Scripture. They are actually borrowing the Christian worldview—which accounts for absolute, objective laws—to argue against it.

When I adopt this stance, I am engaging with the world on its own terms linguistically (like Paul) while refusing to compromise on the foundational authority of Scripture. In so doing I have identified the crucial philosophical reality that: Every worldview (including atheism) rests upon axioms (ultimate assumptions) that cannot be proven by outside standards without resulting in circular logic. God is the ultimate lawgiver and the source of logic itself. To judge God by an outside standard of logic would mean that standard is higher than God, which is a contradiction.

A Christian essentially has to outsmart the antagonistic atheist argument by showing its incoherence. They are throwing stones in a glass house.

1. Apologetics is a Major Pillar

Logic-Epistemology-Science-Origins-Physics-Mathematics-Consciousness-Quantum Mechanics-Technology-Artificial Intelligence
His 2013 “Nexus of the Future” begins with Colossians 1:15–20 and treats Christ as the organizing center of creation. That produces an interesting characteristic of the blog: Pierson doesn't generally separate “theology” from science and technology. He tries to construct a unified worldview not unlike theoretical physicists have for a century since Albert Einstein, Paul Dirac and others.

2. He Has a Strong Interest in Science/Technology

This becomes particularly pronounced in the later archive. His writings discuss things such as:

Quantum entanglement-AI-Technological Development-Scientific Methodology-Information-Information Theory-Human/Machine Relationships-Technological Dependence

A.I. quickly surmised that when I defend my faith or attempt to make people understand that what I am saying is soundly reasoned logical truth, I do so in the manner that Paul the Apostle did. I speak in the language of the world but the backbone of my discussion is always undergirded with the Scripture. This method is called presuppositional apologetics. I do this for the same reason Paul did. It is the only source of objective truth that doesn't require circular reasoning regardless of how many times it is accused of doing so. 

The blog repeatedly attempts to bridge Christian theology, logic, science and philosophy. For example, Pierson's writings on general revelation argue that the natural world provides evidence of God while Scripture provides the special revelation necessary for understanding God more clearly. He explicitly connects scientific investigation with examination of the natural world. He also wrote extensively about:

His 2026 writings are particularly interesting because AI becomes almost a theological issue. He argues that AI can reproduce errors and biases at enormous scale and worries about humans increasingly outsourcing knowledge and judgment to technological systems including theological ideas. He frames this through biblical themes involving knowledge, wisdom, deception and dependence upon God. That represents an evolution from his earlier science-versus-faith apologetics toward a broader technology-and-humanity critique.

3. His View of Christianity is Doctrinal

The archive isn't simply generic spirituality. In 2011 he explicitly identifies several doctrines as Christian essentials, including:
Trinity-Christ's Divinity and Humanity-Human Sinfulness-Salvation through Christ
He distinguishes those essentials from secondary theological disagreements and argues that Christians should not treat every doctrinal disagreement as grounds for attacking fellow believers.

At the same time, he has written strongly against theological positions he regards as outside orthodox Christianity. For example, his 2012 series on “Counterfeit Religions” discusses Mormonism and Scientology from a strongly evangelical/orthodox Christian perspective. This will be more thoroughly addressed in a later post.