AI Book Report/Interview: St. John's Mystery (An End Times study for sure!)

[ScottA]

Paul said, “For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake” (2 Corinthians 4:5, KJV). Paul did not make himself the standard. He pointed people to Christ. You keep doing the opposite. You keep using Scripture in a way that places your own claims on the same level as the voice of Christ.

That is a lie.

 

[ScottA]

So do not act as though your claims are somehow beyond examination.

Another lie. You have twisted what I said. I said, He who sent me is not judged by you.

 

[ScottA]

Stop using Scripture to protect yourself from Scripture.

Another lie. You are projecting.

 

[Scott Downey]

I asked Gemini to evaluate the other AI's responses, worth a read!

AI Book Report/Interview: St. John's Mystery (An End Times study for sure!) Can you evaluate the posted chat about a modern book written claiming to be little scroll of revelation

An evaluation of the forum thread posted by user ScottA (who appears to be Scott Allen Taylor, promoting his book St. John’s Mystery - Revealed) reveals several notable dynamics regarding the interaction between the user and the AI, as well as the theological nature of the claims being made.

Key Takeaways & Structure of the Dialogue​

1. The Core Claim Being Analyzed
   • The author claims that his book (St. John’s Mystery - Revealed) is the actual physical manifestation of the "little scroll" mentioned in Revelation 10, which John was commanded to eat.
   • He puts forward a framework called "Twice Rejected Messiah," asserting that Christ was rejected first by Israel and subsequently by the modern Christian Church.
2. How the Dialogue Operates (Socratic/Leading Framing)
   • The thread follows a classic "push-back and adjust" sequence where the user repeatedly reframes their premises whenever the AI identifies a theological conflict:
     • First Prompt: Asks for general awareness/evaluation of the book. The AI highlights that claiming a 21st-century published book is a biblical artifact breaks sharply with orthodox Christian theology (canonical closure and Revelation 22:18–19).
     • Second Prompt: The user counters by shifting the definition: "What if it does not present anything new, but is a revealing of what was only written in heaven...?" The AI adapts, explaining how extra-biblical heavenly libraries or sealed texts work in apocalyptic literature (e.g., Daniel 12), but notes that Galatians 1:8 testing still applies.
     • Third Prompt: The user pushes further into philosophical abstraction: "What if... time has no bearing on when what things sealed are written, according to... 'time no longer'?" The AI then analyzes how non-linear time and non-delay idioms (chronos) function in apocalyptic genre studies while pointing out the risk of "chronological anarchy" (removing historical anchors for testing true vs. false prophecy).

Evaluation of the AI's Analysis​

• Balanced & Nuanced: The AI does a strong job maintaining analytical neutrality. Rather than outright dismissing the author's premise or blindly validating it, it categorizes where the author's worldview aligns with historical apocalyptic literature (e.g., reluctance of the messenger, bitter warnings, heavenly scroll motifs) and where it directly conflicts with orthodox Christianity.
• Hermeneutical Accuracy: The AI correctly identifies the linguistic nuance of Revelation 10:6. The phrase chronos ouketi estai is widely understood by Greek scholars to mean "there shall be no more delay" (i.e., execution of judgment is immediate) rather than a metaphysical abolition of linear time itself.
• Theological Guardrails: The AI correctly identifies that claims of modern texts fulfilling ancient sealed scrolls violate the core Protestant/Classical Christian doctrine of Sola Scriptura and the finality of the Biblical canon.

Summary Assessment​

The posted conversation represents an attempt to use an AI as an objective sounding board to validate a novel prophetic claim. While the user repeatedly nudges the AI with hypothetical "what if" scenarios to get a more favorable theological breakdown, the AI consistently returns to the same core boundary: while the narrative style matches ancient apocalyptic literature, claiming a modern book is an unsealed addition to Revelation places it outside mainstream Christian orthodoxy.

 

[ScottA]

stop claiming that rejecting your words is rejecting Jesus Christ.

Another lie.

On the contrary, I have been very clear that what I have said is not my own but His who sent me.

 

[bdavidc]

Another lie.

On the contrary, I have been very clear that what I have said is not my own but His who sent me.

You just confirmed exactly what I accused you of. I told you to stop treating rejection of your words as rejection of Jesus Christ, and your answer is that your words are not really yours, but belong to “His who sent me.” That is not a denial, Scott. That is you claiming divine authority for your own words. You are putting your words in God's mouth and then calling anyone who rejects them a liar.

Jesus could say, “My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me” (John 7:16, KJV), because He is the Son sent by the Father. Jesus could say, “the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak” (John 12:49, KJV). You do not get to take that authority upon yourself simply because you say God sent you. You are not Christ, and your claim that God gave you these words does not make them the Word of God.

In fact, God gives a terrifying warning against exactly this kind of claim: “Behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that use their tongues, and say, He saith” (Jeremiah 23:31, KJV). Read that carefully. God is against men who take their own words and attach His authority to them. Deuteronomy 18:20 says, “the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak... even that prophet shall die.” God does not treat falsely claiming His authority as some small doctrinal disagreement.

You have been asked over and over to show from Scripture where God appointed you, where He authorized your private revelation, and where He identified your book as the fulfillment of Revelation 10. Instead of producing the Scripture, you keep telling us that what you say comes from the One who sent you. That is presumption, not proof. “Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar” (Proverbs 30:6, KJV).

And stop hiding behind “My sheep hear my voice.” Christ's sheep hear CHRIST'S voice. John 10:27 does not say Christ's sheep must recognize ScottA's voice as the voice of Christ. Your words are to be tested like anyone else's: “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1, KJV).

So no, calling your claim a lie was not a lie. Your own answer proved the accusation. You are claiming that God sent you with words that Christians are supposed to recognize as His, while you still cannot establish that authority from the written Word of God. Stop putting your words in God's mouth. Repent of this self-appointed authority and submit yourself to what God has actually written.