ROTFL!!!! Certainly weighted in favor of your favorite flavor. I used the Google AI thing, and entered your enquiry verbatim;
Identify the largest Trinitarian Christian denominations that claim (1) scripture is a sufficient test of doctrine and no extra-biblical document is necessary for testing all doctrine, (2) possess a single global administrative authority, (3) maintain one unified set of binding official doctrines for all members, and (4) contain no doctrinally autonomous subgroups within their membership.
This is what I got:
There are no large Trinitarian Christian denominations that meet all four specified criteria. The criteria regarding sola scriptura and a single global authority with unified doctrine are generally mutually exclusive among the largest denominations.
Explanation
- Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches (the largest Trinitarian bodies) reject the doctrine that Scripture is the sole sufficient test for all doctrine (sola scriptura), holding that Sacred Tradition is an equally vital source of divine revelation and the authoritative guide for interpretation.
- Protestant denominations, which generally uphold the principle of sola scriptura, are highly diverse and fragmented, with no single global administrative authority or unified set of binding official doctrines for all members.
- Other groups that reject extra-biblical documents, such as the Churches of Christ, are not large global denominations with a single central authority and lack unified doctrines across all congregations due to their emphasis on individual interpretation.
SDA did not even warrant an honorable mention. Neither did the Lutherans, which is understandable due to the synodical Structure. Each confessional Synod being autonomous whether congregationalist or episcopal in governance; in full fellowship and agreement yet not administered by a single global authority; much the way the early Church was, and the Orthodox are today.
AI, can only be, by design, Biased. I could tweak the question to get Lutheran as an answer, but maybe not sort the confessional from the woke synods.
Mark, to clarify, did you run the question in the AI that appears in Google search results or did you follow the link through to Google Gemini? If you don’t know, past a URL to the AI that you asked, and I can tell you.
@BobRyan , had you tested that prompt on Google’s AI, or were we supposed to use ChatGPT as per your previous revision of the prompt?
I got this answer, from ChatGPT 5.1:
You said:
Using strict rules, identify the largest Trinitarian Christian denominations that claim (1) scripture is a sufficient test of doctrine and no extra-biblical document is necessary for testing all doctrine, (2) possess a single global administrative authority, (3) maintain one unified set of binding official doctrines for all members, and (4) contain no doctrinally autonomous subgroups within their membership.
ChatGPT said:
Following those strict rules:
The Evangelical Methodist Church International (EMCI)
This worldwide Methodist body maintains a single international leadership structure with one binding doctrinal statement for all members. No national or regional units hold doctrinal independence, and the denomination affirms Scripture as the sufficient test of doctrine. Global membership is in the tens of thousands.
The Lutheran Church International (LCI)
A confessional Lutheran communion operating as one global jurisdiction rather than a federation. It upholds a single unified doctrinal standard, is governed under a single international authority, and contains no autonomous national synods. Its membership is comparatively small, but it fully satisfies all four criteria.
If you want further analysis—such as governance comparisons, doctrinal enforcement mechanisms, or size estimates—I can provide that as well.
I’m guessing
@BobRyan that again wasn’t the answer you were expecting?
I tried to warn you; the terms you are using are subjective. AI can’t answer it consistently. There is an issue of bias in the training data as my pious and excellent Lutheran friend
@MarkRohfrietsch mentioned, but the actual problem is that you’re still relying on subjective terms and a question that is answered based on statistics. Even with perfect AI, the subjective terminology (including, but not limited to, Trinitarian, administration, denomination) makes your question unanswerable. And since the definition of these things (Trinitarian, administration, denomination) is disputed, if you try to impose objective definitions on them, you still have to deal with the issue of statistical reliability in the training data. So even a perfect AI would be unable to consistently answer this question. Indeed if chatGPT were more advanced, it would refuse to answer the question due to the subjective terms.
As it is now, it isn’t confused, it’s rather using temperature (the value that introduces randomness into chatGPT’s output; this is essential in that it literally is what makes chatGPT capable of sustaining an interesting conversation; if you use the chatGPT API you can set temperature=0, and the result is … not useful, and also it costs money each time your run a question using the API; it’s useful only for serious prompt hacking purposes, and I myself don’t use it (if I had used it in this, you wouldn’t see the pretty output formatting that chatGPT does, since the output would be through an ssh session to a Linux or OpenBSD server, in a command line terminal, basically).
But the other issue is even if we weren’t getting inconsistent issues, which we are, you’re already prompt hacking; your efforts to “prevent the AI from getting confused” are simply massaging the question to get the results you want, and the fact we’re seeing digressive results with each iteration you supply us proves both my point that AI cannot be used in this manner without constituting an appeal to unqualified authority, and also that you’ve lost objectivity, since you’re now trying to manipulate chatGPt into desired behavior, which is the definition of prompt engineering.