I Asked ChatGPT to Fact-Check the Bible’s Creation Story Using a Secret Prompt

In our previous feature, “ChatGPT’s Secret Codes: The Undocumented Hacks That Unlock Elite AI Power,” we explored how certain prompt styles—like /mega-precise and /alter [expert]—can bring out a different level of response from AI. This time, we put one to the test.

⛪️ The Prompt:

/alter [bible-skeptic]: Please explain the creation sequence and possible mistakes according to science.

The goal? To investigate the Genesis creation account—not as a matter of faith, but as a scientific claim, using the lens of evidence and logic. What happens when ancient scripture meets modern science?

Here’s how ChatGPT responded under this expert persona.

🌍 Day-by-Day Breakdown: Science vs. Scripture

Day 1: Light Without a Source

“Let there be light.”

Scientific Concern: Light appears, but the sun isn’t created until Day 4. What’s the source? You can’t have alternating day and night without planetary rotation and a star.

Day 2: The Dome in the Sky

God separates the waters with a firmament.

Scientific Concern: This aligns with ancient cosmology—a flat Earth under a dome holding back cosmic waters. There’s no “solid sky” in physics, and no “waters above” the clouds.

Day 3: Plants Before the Sun?

Earth yields vegetation… before the sun exists.

Scientific Concern: Photosynthesis requires sunlight. No sun = no plant life. Evolution also shows plants emerged long after the Earth stabilized.

Day 4: Sun, Moon, Stars Created After Earth

Scientific Concern: Stars formed billions of years before Earth. Presenting the sun as a latecomer in the creation order directly contradicts astrophysics.

Day 5: Birds and Fish, Same Day

Scientific Concern: Evolution shows sea life emerged first, but birds evolved much later—from land-dwelling dinosaurs, not from water.

Day 6: Land Animals and Humans

Scientific Concern: The fossil record shows gradual evolution, not instant creation. Genetically, humans share 98.8% of DNA with chimpanzees. There’s no evidence of humans emerging in their present form in one day.

Day 7: Rest

Symbolic or literal? If literal, why does an all-powerful being need rest? If symbolic, should the rest of the creation story also be symbolic?

🔍 In a Nutshell

Biblical Claim	Scientific Conflict
Light before stars	Violates physics
Plants before sunlight	Violates biology
Humans created a fully formed	Mythological, not real
Humans created fully formed	Contradicts evolution
Earth before stars	Reversed chronology

🧠 So, What’s Going On Here?

Let’s be clear: Genesis was never meant as a science textbook. It’s an ancient literary work born from oral traditions and human attempts to explain the unknown. It offers poetic symmetry, moral framing, and cultural worldview—but its accuracy as a model of natural history is highly questionable by today’s standards.

For Bible believers, the challenge is reconciling faith with facts. For skeptics, this becomes a case study in how humanity once made sense of existence using metaphor, not measurement.

⚠️ Disclaimer:

This is not a mockery. This is a method.
We explored Genesis using ChatGPT in expert skeptic mode—not to ridicule—but to test ideas critically. The story may be sacred, but sacred stories should not be immune to scrutiny. As we say in the Philippines: “May Diyos nga ba, o may daya lang sa datos?”

🧠 Final Take

Whether you’re a believer, a skeptic, or just plain curious—AI can help us explore ancient texts through fresh lenses. Not to erase their value, but to expand their meaning. Maybe that’s the real creation: turning old myths into new understanding.

🙌 Final Word: I’m a Skeptic, Not a Smartass

I don’t question the Bible just to be clever. I question it because I still believe there’s something worth saving—my soul.

And maybe, just maybe, AI can help me do that.

Not by mocking ancient faith, but by sharpening it.
Not by tearing down belief, but by separating eternal truth from historical baggage.
Because faith that can’t survive honest questions was never faith—it was fear in disguise.

So yes, I’m a skeptic. But I’m not here to burn books—I’m here to open them with clearer eyes.

And if artificial intelligence helps us do that, then it’s not the enemy of faith.
It’s the tool that might finally set it free.