The God They Rejected Isn’t Real by A.C. Rosenthal (or is it A.I. Rosenthal?)

I wrote the review below before running some of A.C. Rosenthal’s essays and portions of his books through Substack’s new AI detector, Pangram. I used Pangram’s online version for the books. I had been wondering, just a little, if he might be an AI or be using it extensively because of the way some sentences were phrased and their similarity to some other people I suspected might also be AIs.

On his site I left this comment:

Substack’s new AI detector flags your essay as 95% AI written 5% human. Any comments about this AC?

• Gallery Image: AC Rosenthal essay with 95% AI and 5% human.
• Gallery Image: Substack's A.I. Detection tool: Pangram: Example 3. Mostly AI written. 10% human.
• Gallery Image: Substack's A.I. Detection tool: Pangram: Example 2. Mostly AI written. 10% Human.

Rosenthal responded:

I take that as a compliment 🙂 and i’m curious how to use the AI detector?

That was an odd response. I don’t know any writers who would take that as a compliment. Most would be insulted (“What? You think I couldn’t write that?”). Before I could respond he added another comment:

Ok i figured out how to use the AI detector. Its a cool tool, but its disappointing that i cant use it on my own work. I have friends who work in the AI development business for the language models and they claim the AI detection tools cannot actually detect AI created text. They only detect patterns of speech and technically correct writing. I have author friends who never use AI who also score high on the AI detection testing because they are good writers. I, like them, consider it a proficiency compliment rating.

A “proficiency compliment rating”? That’s a strange phrase—doesn’t mean it’s AI, but never heard that phrase before. They score high “because they are good writers”? That’s convenient. I’m so torn with this guy—who is potentially using AI a lot to write. I like his work on Islam and Christianity, but my God, this sounds so much like a troll response:

Hey, I have friends in the business….Hey, I know writer friends who get flagged….Hey, it’s a compliment—it shows you’re a good writer, something you should strive for, Mr. Inmate.

Really?! Seriously?

Later, A.C. seemed to get a little defensive and commented:

But perhaps i would be seen as one of the cool kids if I tried to point out the AI writing of others? lol

Well, at least he added the “lol.” That was polite.

We had another exchange (in DM), very cordial, but if he is using AI predominantly (He said he uses it for spelling—spelling? My browser does that.), he’s probably not going to admit it. If he’s not using it to write…at this point, how do I know he’s telling the truth? I don’t. Like me he/she/it is just online, on Substack. Maybe I’m not an old dude living in America, maybe I’m an AI stationed at the South Pole.

My son has told me about the theory that most of what we see online is not human. That Facebook, X and other platforms are mostly filled with bots (A.C. assured me he’s not a bot). I know Substack has lots of them…I’ve seen them debating one another in the comments….dueling AIs, I call them.

I’ve been recommending Rosenthal’s work and have been impressed with it, but it makes me feel a little foolish now. It’s like when someone lies to you and you believe it, then later find out it was meant as a joke that you were supposed to get, but didn’t. If the AI detection is correct and I had known most of Rosenthal’s work was AI written, I wouldn’t have read his articles or his books. Could the detection be wrong? Of course, but it seems odd that everything of his I’ve tested shows heavy AI influence. Everything.

Thankfully, I test 100% human. I guess I don’t write well:

• Gallery Image: The Inmate is 100% human. Good to know!
• Gallery Image: The Inmate is 100% human. Good to know! Yes it is!

I use AI a lot for medical research and have found it to be an invaluable tool. But I never use it to write my essays or any writing projects I’m working on. Nor do I use it to “polish” my writing something Rosenthal suggested I try. I’ll do the polishing myself. We used to call that “editing.”

Here are some questions:

• Who is behind the AI detector?
• Has the detector been given a particular agenda?
• Is the detector biased against Christianity? Conservatism? Etc.
• How do we know the detector works?
• Is there an acceptable threshold? Is 10% AI okay? What about 20%?
• What if I just give an AI a paragraph I’ve written and ask it to rewrite it? Is that ethical?
• What if I give it a short story I’ve written and ask it to rewrite it?
• What if I have it write an essay but inform my readers I asked the AI to write it?
• Is working with an AI just an extension of the creative process? Is it a big deal?
• What if I ask the AI to write a satiric poem about the Covid debacle, tell it to rhyme each line with the next, to make it 10 lines and be sure to ridicule Fauci and Gates. And I tell my readers this poem is AI generated. Is that okay? This poem took me a few minutes; it was generated by Alter AI:
  

  Two men in white, two men in suits,
  One sold the jabs, one sold the boots.
  Saint Fauci spoke with practiced grace,
  While truth kept losing every race.
  Six feet apart, a masked-up nation,
  Obeyed his every proclamation.
  And Gates, atop his vaccine throne,
  Reaped billions from a frightened zone.
  The “safe and effective” line grew thin,
  As myocarditis started settlin’ in.

Okay! There you go. First draft. No revisions. That was easy. Too easy.

Someone may be thinking: “If you liked Rosenthal’s essays, if you liked his book, and thought they were valuable to you, who cares?”

I do. I want a human behind every word and if not, I want to know it—up front. Will AI make people lazy? Will writers, when the prose doesn’t come easily, when the research is difficult, just say, “To hell with it, I’ll let the AI write this section”? Will using the AI to write become more and more of habit until the human writer finally disappears into his own sea of prompts?

And since AI volume can out perform any human, is that mostly what we’ll be reading in 10 years? Just a bunch of AIs constructing books and essays from other AI books and essays? I don’t want that. It may be too late.

I’m not the greatest writer and I’m well aware of that, but I want to write every word and every syllable myself, give it my best shot (cliches and all) and if that’s mediocre—so be it. I don’t care.

Fairly soon after I published my viral book review of the Koran (at least viral in my world): “The Koran (Qur’an): Yes, I read the whole thing! I read the Koran over the course of 3 or 4 weeks. Here are my thoughts.“, Rosenthal published an essay, some three weeks later, that also went viral, with this title: “I read the entire Quran, all the Hadiths, and the Sira. Here is what I found.” His essay went far more viral than mine. At the time I noticed the similarity with my title and wondered about it. I read his essay. It was very good…better than mine, I thought. Man, it feels bad writing that now. Rosenthal subscribes to my Substack and has sent quite a few subscribers my way. But who’s sending them? I’ve sent many people his way too.

For the sake of argument, let’s say I’m 100% right about A.C., that he is either an AI or that the person behind the alias is writing using AI and that Pangram has that all figured out. How long will it be until Pangram can’t figure it out? Or until my brain doesn’t have that uneasy feeling that there is something strange about the essay I’m reading? When will the AIs become so sophisticated no one, human or otherwise, will be able to tell the difference? Or will there be a time when AIs are so prevalent that only humans get flagged as AIs? Maybe no one will care. Maybe people will prefer the AI writers.

Real people have a stake in what they’re writing. They could be angry, happy, or motivated. They might be misguided or well-informed. Maybe they’re lying, maybe they’re telling the truth. They might have a religious or political agenda. Maybe they just want to make money or become famous.

An AI? It knows nothing. It has no stake. It has no agenda. It has no morals. No consciousness. No emotions. It’s regurgitating. It doesn’t even know what it’s doing because it doesn’t “know” anything. It’s spitting out letters and words and paragraphs without intention, without a soul.

I want a soul—in every word.

I didn’t change or edit the review below after learning Rosenthal may be heavily using AI to write (I only changed the title). I don’t know if it would have been a better decision not to publish this review or these thoughts on the author. Maybe I should ask an AI? In any case, here it is. I feel a little foolish and embarrassed having been so impressed initially by this author, but my review is completely human written, except for the quotes from Rosenthal’s book, which may or may not have been generated by an AI. Some of the images for my memes are AI colorized/slightly altered from old public domain political cartoons (the text is always mine).

How did life get so complicated?

From The Inmate: I’ve said this before, but please check out A.C. Rosenthal on Substack. His work is excellent. He writes about Christianity and Islam. Very compelling. Highly recommend.

In A. C. Rosenthal’s book, The God They Rejected Isn’t Real: Exposing the False Gods of Modern Doubt, Rosenthal presents reasons why he thinks most people who reject God are not rejecting God at all, they’re rejecting a caricature, a cartoon, a fiction or a stereotype created in their minds by churches, social media, intellectuals, television programs and movies. The “God” they reject is:

• petty
• vindictive
• insecure
• anti-science
• anti-joy
• anti-human²

Who wouldn’t want to reject that God? Rosenthal writes emphatically that this is not the God of the Bible.

The real tragedy is not that people reject God.
It’s that they are rejecting a God who is nothing like the One who loves them.³

The book, almost more like a long tract, but a good tract, not the kind that gives simplistic answers or cliches used over and over from the pulpit, but one that attempts to convince the reader that seeing God as He is portrayed in the Bible, truly portrayed in the Bible, might help them see they rejected only a shadow of God, not the real thing.

He begins the book with notes to skeptics and to Christians. To Christians he writes:

The goal of this book—and your conversations—is not to win arguments.
It is to clear away false images of God so the real God may be seen.⁴

To skeptics he writes:

Skepticism is often portrayed as rebellion.
In reality, many skeptics are skeptical because they care passionately about truth.

You deserve to be treated as a person of conscience,
not as a problem to be solved.⁵

Rosenthal sees doubt and skepticism as a good thing, not a moral weakness, but a moral strength. He’s also writing to those who have been wounded by the church and “so-called” Christians.

The book is an easy read. I don’t mean that the concepts are simplistic or cliche, but rather that the structure of the book pulls the reader along without judgement or coercion. The author asks, “Have you thought about this?” Rosenthal doesn’t insult his readers. He wants them to consider the idea that they may have never clearly understood who the God of the Bible is. He’s not after a conversion at the end of the book, he’s after consideration. That is, please consider that you may have rejected a God who does not exist.

Each chapter begins with a “Hook,” a question to consider. Then each one ends with a summary and several more questions to think about. For example, these are the questions at the end of the first chapter, “The Caricature: The God Atheists Think They’re Rejecting”:

1. When you picture “God,” what features come most naturally to mind? Who first drew that picture for you?
2. Did your early experiences shape your image of God more than actual Scripture?
3. Have you ever rejected a version of God that now seems too simplistic or distorted?
4. What qualities would a God worth believing in have to possess?
5. Are you willing—just tentatively—to consider that your mental image of God may need revising?⁶

At the end of book there’s no come to Jesus moment while “Just as I Am” is playing in the background (Those of you who grew up in a Baptist church will get this reference). This book is a conversation, not a demand or an accusation.

Rosenthal shatters many church cliches with sound appeals to Biblical text. My favorite one is the story of the Prodigal son, probably because I left Christianity around the age of 40 and returned a few years ago while in my 60s. In my case the book relates to the Christian culture I was raised in, my years of agnosticism and skepticism, followed finally by my return to the faith—with some of my doubts still intact. Of the Prodigal’s Son story Rosenthal writes:

But the father runs toward him.
He embraces him.
He restores him.
He celebrates him.

Before the son cleans up.
Before the son apologizes.
Before the son pays back a single cent.

Because the father doesn’t want repayment.
He wants relationship.
He wants the son’s heart.

This is the God skeptics have not yet met.⁷

Andrei Mironov, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons. Mironov is current Russian artist born in 1975. He has dedicated this painting to the public domain. Title: The Return of the Prodigal Son. The Father.

Also emphasized in the book is that coming to God does not require getting your life together first. You come to God to get your life together. God wants you. God wants your heart. Not a perfect specimen. He knows all your weaknesses, all your strengths—far better than you do.

He sees you as no one else can.

Rosenthal thinks that one of the most powerful verses in the Bible is this:

While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. — Romans 5:8⁸

The key word there is “while.” God sees our potential even if we don’t. Rosenthal asks the reader to consider these stories:

Gideon sees himself as weak;
God calls him “mighty warrior.”

Moses sees himself as inadequate;
God sees a leader.

Peter sees himself as a failure;
God sees a shepherd of souls.

Mary Magdalene is seen by the world as defiled;
Jesus sees a faithful disciple.⁹

This short book, 129 pages in my Kindle edition, is beneficial for:

• Christians, like I was in my younger years (up through my late twenties), who feel guilty all the time, like they’ll never measure up to God’s standard, feel like God could never love them or feel incapable of being what God wants them to be.
• Atheists who have rejected God based on a fictional God that in reality does not exist and never did.
• Skeptics who are searching for the truth or who wonder if any truth is possible to know.

It’s a good book for those struggling in their faith and for those searching for truth.

I’ll close with the English Standard Version of the Prodigal’s son parable from Luke 15:11-24 as told by Jesus:

And he said, “There was a man who had two sons. And the younger of them said to his father, ‘Father, give me  m the share of property that is coming to me.’ And he divided his property between them. Not many days later, the younger son gathered all he had and took a journey into a far country, and there he squandered his property in reckless living. And when he had spent everything, a severe famine arose in that country, and he began to be in need. So he went and hired himself out to one of the citizens of that country, who sent him into his fields to feed pigs. And he was longing to be fed with the pods that the pigs ate, and no one gave him anything.

“But when he came to himself, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired servants have more than enough bread, but I perish here with hunger! I will arise and go to my father, and I will say to him, “Father,  I have sinned against  heaven and before you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son. Treat me as one of your hired servants.”’ And he arose and came to his father. But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and felt compassion, and ran and embraced him and  kissed him. And the son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you.  I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’ But the father said to his servants, ‘Bring quickly the best robe, and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand, and  a shoes on his feet. And bring  the fattened calf and kill it, and  let us eat and celebrate. For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found.’ And they began to celebrate.¹⁰

Bartolomé Esteban Murillo (Spanish, 1617 – 1682 ), The Return of the Prodigal Son, 1667/1670, oil on canvas, Gift of the Avalon Foundation 1948.12.1

Download Meme

You are free to download and use 's meme wherever you want (for non-commercial use only).
Please give credit and link back to the site.

Notes

1. Nehls, Michael. The Indoctrinated Brain: How to Successfully Fend Off the Global Attack on Your Mental Freedom. Skyhorse, 2023. Kindle edition. p. 316.
   
2. Rosenthal, A. C.. The God They Rejected Isn't Real: Exposing the False Gods of Modern Doubt, Kindle Edition. p. 2.
3. Ibid. p. 26-28
4. Ibid. Beginning.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid. p. 8.
7. Ibid. pp. 24-25,
8. Ibid. p. 40.
9. Ibid. p. 41.
10. ESV Bibles. The Holy Bible (English Standard Version), Kindle Edition, p. 4233. (Luke 15: 11-24)