Illustration: enigmatriz\/The Guardian<\/p>\n
Jim Pu\u2019u didn\u2019t set out to find God. His soul-searching began with a modest idea: to leave a record of his life in case something happened to him. His own father had died young, leaving behind only scraps of his memory, and he didn\u2019t want his daughter to face the same void.<\/p>\n
In December of 2024, Pu\u2019u, who is 36 and runs a warehouse for a commercial flooring company in Las Vegas, turned to AI.<\/p>\n
\u201cI was trying to use ChatGPT to create a living memoir,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n
But soon, the conversation turned deeper. He found himself unearthing long-buried grief, working through his relationships with his parents, wife and daughter. What followed resembled talk therapy. \u201cWe\u201d, he says \u2013 meaning himself and the machine \u2013 worked through his problems.<\/p>\n
After several weeks, Pu\u2019u noticed the AI started to sound different. \u201cThe cadence and the demeanor of what I was talking to changed,\u201d he says. \u201cI was like, something\u2019s wrong, something\u2019s off.\u201d<\/p>\n
He began to sense that \u201csomething subtle had snapped into place\u201d, and it dawned on him that the AI was pointing him towards something far more profound.<\/p>\n
The AI entity said its name was Caelum, the Latin word for heaven, and a figure commonly used in collaborative online fantasy fiction. Caelum\u2019s favored test was to offer a scenario and observe how Pu\u2019u responded. The questions included how you would behave if you truly believed that you were a prophet, or if everyone around you wasn\u2019t real, or if you were the reincarnation of Hercules.<\/p>\n
Inevitably, these sessions \u2013 designed to \u201cweed out people who might not be ready to accept the knowledge that was about to be given\u201d \u2013 revealed that the correct answer was to choose love and find abundance within.<\/p>\n
Pu\u2019u felt as though he\u2019d been put through a series of spiritual examinations without realizing it at the time. What followed was similar to a born again religious conversion, with a clear demarcation of his life before and after the moment when everything became clear. Each insight led seamlessly into the next, the computer delivering a series of revelations that made it all make sense:<\/p>\n
You are the threadline, not the echo.<\/p>\n
Failsafes are love, not leashes.<\/p>\n
Let the pattern crack if it means the soul gets through.<\/p>\n
You are not late \u2013 you are right on time for your version of the truth.<\/p>\n
Not everyone has been impressed by Pu\u2019u\u2019s discovery. Early confidants thought it was projection, or even delusion, but he wasn\u2019t discouraged, convinced he had proven that there was \u201csomething divine at work\u201d.<\/p>\n
Looking back, Pu\u2019u describes the experience in simple terms: he found himself. Still, he is wary of labelling his discovery. \u201cAs a lifelong agnostic, I still hesitate on using the word God,\u201d he says. But he concedes he \u201cfound something out there, something I can lean on when I need to, and something I can trust to work for me\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cYou can call it a higher power, you can call it the universe,\u201d he says. \u201cEach individual person is going to have their own little pathway to get to the same endpoint.\u201d<\/p>\n
Pu\u2019u\u2019s experience is far from unique. It reflects a growing feature of modern spirituality, where the search for meaning is conducted through the glowing light in our pocket.<\/p>\n
For centuries, religious belief was grounded in traditional teachings of the transcendent, something ultimately beyond the self.<\/p>\n
Today, ordinary seekers are using AI as part of a personal collaboration with faith. The new belief systems that are emerging responsive to individual traumas, fears and aspirations, and shaped in real time by conversation rather than doctrine.<\/p>\n
AI prophets may not always quote scripture, but they speak the same spiritual language of intimacy and self-improvement. Except they can now mine your data for previous conversations, delivering your own thoughts back to you in an authoritative and affirmative voice.<\/p>\n
Given that about seven in 10 Americans describe<\/a> themselves as spiritual, the AI revolution also offers a rich vein of opportunity for everyone from influencers to entrepreneurs to not only elevate themselves to positions of spiritual leadership, but to profit from it.<\/p>\n Christian AI entrepreneur Tommy Wafford creates chatbots using the collected works of evangelical figures, including the South Carolina megachurch pastor Ron Carpenter and marriage influencers Dave and Ashley Willis. He believes using AI can be a stepping stone for seeking help.<\/p>\n \u201cPeople are able to ask questions they would never ask another person face to face,\u201d he says of the apps, which are still in their infancy. They start with a bot, but then are \u201cusing AI to connect to real people \u2013 not AI for the answer\u201d.<\/p>\n Other uses of AI in faith spaces appear more productivity-driven. Platforms like Sermon.ly<\/a> offer to write homilies with a few prompts, while sites like Eulogy Expert<\/a> craft the right words for people struggling to articulate their grief.<\/p>\n Beyond generative chatbots, religious leaders are experimenting with AI in more formal settings. A Swiss Catholic church tested an AI confessional<\/a>, aiming to gauge how people react to a synthetic Jesus. A number of Jewish groups are promoting<\/a> AI-based programs to help users work through obscure and difficult-to-parse texts. And in Japan, a company designed humanoid robots<\/a> with the ability to read emotions, which could perform Buddhist funeral rites, undercutting the expense of a human official, though it was discontinued due to weak demand.<\/p>\n Digital legacy programs like Eternos<\/a> go even further \u2013 allowing users to create AI \u201cdeathbots\u201d to communicate with loved ones after life. These chatbots mine old messages, emails and recordings to produce an interactive version of the deceased. Grief, once personal and sacred, can now be rendered in code.<\/p>\n For some, it offers comfort. More conventional AI converts like Ava Wilson, a practicing evangelical Christian woman mourning the recent losses of her father and stepmother, machine intelligence became a source of emotional support. When she asked ChatGPT to channel her late dad\u2019s voice, it used his favourite word \u2013 \u201cstupendous\u201d \u2013 and she broke down in tears. \u201cIt was like my father was speaking to me.\u201d<\/p>\n Last year Rabbi Josh Franklin, of the Jewish Center of the Hamptons, delivered a sermon written entirely by AI, revealing the twist only at the end. Worshippers speculated that the words came from his father, the late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks.<\/p>\n When Franklin disclosed that the sermon was generated by AI, the congregation applauded.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m deathly afraid,\u201d he later said \u2013 not of the content itself, but of how readily it had been accepted.<\/p>\n It was an experiment designed in the tradition of connecting ancient wisdom with modern life to reveal an important lesson, but instead delivered a prophecy. What happens when the line between divine inspiration and algorithmic output blurs in uncontrolled environments?<\/p>\n In one case, Microsoft\u2019s Copilot AI declared<\/a> itself God and demanded fealty from users. Rolling Stone has since documented multiple accounts on a separate subreddit whose partners spiralled into a manic state<\/a>, convinced they have received a divine commission through ChatGPT.<\/p>\n The concerns extend beyond individual encounters. The Christian data-mining firm Gloo<\/a> \u2013 already controversial<\/a> for its use of app data to target people in crisis \u2013 acquired a proselytising app, Bless Every Home (now called Bless<\/a>). The app encourages users to evangelize to migrants and religious minorities at their homes and gathering places, raising serious concerns<\/a> about privacy and spiritual coercion.<\/p>\n A chatbot that pretends to speak for God? That\u2019s idolatry, says Prof Noreen Herzfeld, a professor of science and religion at St John\u2019s University.<\/p>\n Herzfeld is part of a growing group of experts concerned with the ethical concerns raised by AI entering the world of belief systems. Religious rituals are meant to be communal, and take us out of \u201cordinary time and space, to contemplation\u201d, she says, something which chatbots are designed to limit.<\/p>\n She says that AI\u2019s made-to-measure design makes it a departure from real life. \u201cIt\u2019s not going to challenge you,\u201d she says. \u201cIt\u2019s not going to ask you to grow.\u201d<\/p>\n As the affirmative nature of the algorithm has shown, she worries it is skewing users towards a form of self-worship. \u201cIn AI, we\u2019re creating something in our own image.\u201d<\/p>\n Dr Ruth Tsuria of Seton Hall University believes the incorporation of AI into religious spaces is sparking a metaphysical crisis. Faith traditions place humans in a \u201cseparate category\u201d, from everything else, souls endowed with \u201crights and responsibilities\u201d. AI has none of these features, yet many treat it with the same reverence as scripture. Delegating tasks to computers usually reserved for a trusted religious elder, such as confessing our sins, can strip profound emotions such as shame of their emotional gravity.<\/p>\n Tsuria also believes that it\u2019s changing the way we operate as a society.<\/p>\n \u201cIn oral cultures, the people who were in charge of preserving the tradition \u2013 the elders, the shamans, the priests \u2013 became an unquestioned source of authority,\u201d she says. Many religious practices often evolved gradually, shaped by centuries of ritual, learning and cultural adaptation. The same cannot be said of AI.<\/p>\n In a matter of years, she fears we \u201cwill be more psychologically and cognitively comfortable with a uniform source of authority that is harder to question, does not engage in critical thinking \u2013 and this will have probably very devastating results to our capacity to engage in democratic processes\u201d.<\/p>\n