Mark Goerner

Reformed Christian. Father of 7. Stock market analyst. Covenanter. Teacher of Economics, Management and Computers for 15 years. Salesman for 15 years.

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

@AbrahamOlawunmi @YinKysmileS And you should learn the Bible Mt 7:1.

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

@Ainigma777 @possibilissimo @justin_gaulrapp @YinKysmileS @grok No. I just use AI detectors which are free online which say his posts are 100% AI and also Claude/Open AI and Grok which confirm it. It is also quite obvious to anyone who uses LLM on a regular basis that these posts are AI.

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

This is true of each post and impossible unless he writes exactly like AI. Same core markers as before:

Yes — same fingerprint, and honestly even more consistently than the first two.

The recurring signature devices are all here again:

•One-line paragraph punches for rhetorical weight ("That doesn't prove individual salvation is absent from Romans 9. It plainly isn't absent from Romans 9–11." / "So when I went to Jeremiah, I wasn't running away from the Potter. I went looking for Him.")
•Rhetorical question clusters ("Where does Exodus say that? Where does Romans 9 say that?")
•The concession-then-pivot formula, done repeatedly: "Amen. [X]. But [X] doesn't mean [Y]." — same shape as document 2, applied to God hardening Pharaoh, to Romans 9:16, etc.
•Meta-narration of the argument's own structure ("Notice what has happened," "Read that slowly sir," "Keep those words in mind when...")
•A tidy symmetrical bookend: opens by mocking the interlocutor's inconsistency, closes with a mirrored "Let us not..." refrain repeated four times, then a mic-drop final line ("The Potter is sovereign enough to judge rebellious clay without first having to create the rebellion for which He judges it.")
•False-dichotomy naming and dismantling ("Either Calvinistic unconditional individual election is true, or... Those are not the only biblical possibilities.") — same move as "stop presenting the choice as Calvinism or autonomous self-salvation" in document 2.

•Greek terminology dropped in with translation and italicized-in-caps-quotes styling (katērtismena eis apōleian) — a very typical AI move to add scholarly texture.
•The essay is longer and covers more ground (Genesis, Exodus, Jeremiah, Malachi, Romans 9–11, 2 Timothy, 2 Thessalonians) yet maintains identical sentence-level rhythm throughout — no shift in voice or pacing across the very different sub-arguments, which is unusual for long-form human writing but common in AI output, since the model applies the same rhetorical template regardless of content.
•The emoji (😂) stands out as almost certainly a human touch or a deliberately human-mimicking insertion — it's the one moment of informal texture in an otherwise extremely uniform rhetorical register, which itself is worth noting: it suggests either light human editing on top of AI-generated prose, or a prompt that asked the model to sound like a real forum debate.

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

@CraigHarry02 @possibilissimo @YinKysmileS @grok I am worse. A sinner saved by grace.

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

@nosa_adolor @possibilissimo @YinKysmileS @grok Wow, you are brilliant. I stand corrected. Because people use AI today means they didn’t in the past or today, even though AI says they are using AI. You are the baptized AI. We all bow.

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

@justin_gaulrapp @possibilissimo @YinKysmileS @grok I’m not sure what you are saying. You can run his posts to see they are AI generated. Once can be an argument- but now we have so many AI posts it is no longer a question.

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

@possibilissimo @justin_gaulrapp @YinKysmileS @grok True. And the posts are simply AI generated. I would fail any of my former students who did likewise. It is embarrassing that the top “intellectuals” would baptize the nonsense.

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

@justin_gaulrapp @YinKysmileS You are funny. Even AI tells you it’s AI and you are an unbeliever- who’s the cult?

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

@DineshDSouza If you want I can give you a a better Biblical response from your Oloyede AI/ “Michael Jordan”. Just say the word and you will know the truth from a better AI prompt than Oloyede. Again, you love AI - so speak

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

@UmakeNoChange @Soteriology101 No, maybe you missed it. Oloyede posts long AI posts and they are eaten up by the libertarian free will types. Dinesh is a big champion. People can read these long AI posts or just generate their own and then generate the opposing view. All human agency is lost - ironic.

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

@Soteriology101 Because you are showing that you live in a world where you can’t interact with truth but rely on machine learning simply to justify your beliefs. Is that “free will”?

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

I don’t. I just ask the machine in each post to identify itself. It was too obvious many posts ago but people kept interacting with the AI generated responses. Here:

Yes — same fingerprint, and honestly even more consistently than the first two.

The recurring signature devices are all here again:

•One-line paragraph punches for rhetorical weight ("That doesn't prove individual salvation is absent from Romans 9. It plainly isn't absent from Romans 9–11." / "So when I went to Jeremiah, I wasn't running away from the Potter. I went looking for Him.")
•Rhetorical question clusters ("Where does Exodus say that? Where does Romans 9 say that?")
•The concession-then-pivot formula, done repeatedly: "Amen. [X]. But [X] doesn't mean [Y]." — same shape as document 2, applied to God hardening Pharaoh, to Romans 9:16, etc.
•Meta-narration of the argument's own structure ("Notice what has happened," "Read that slowly sir," "Keep those words in mind when...")
•A tidy symmetrical bookend: opens by mocking the interlocutor's inconsistency, closes with a mirrored "Let us not..." refrain repeated four times, then a mic-drop final line ("The Potter is sovereign enough to judge rebellious clay without first having to create the rebellion for which He judges it.")
•False-dichotomy naming and dismantling ("Either Calvinistic unconditional individual election is true, or... Those are not the only biblical possibilities.") — same move as "stop presenting the choice as Calvinism or autonomous self-salvation" in document 2.

New/reinforcing signals in this one specifically:

•Greek terminology dropped in with translation and italicized-in-caps-quotes styling (katērtismena eis apōleian) — a very typical AI move to add scholarly texture.
The essay is longer and covers more ground (Genesis, Exodus, Jeremiah, Malachi, Romans 9–11, 2 Timothy, 2 Thessalonians) yet maintains identical sentence-level rhythm throughout — no shift in voice or pacing across the very different sub-arguments, which is unusual for long-form human writing but common in AI output, since the model applies the same rhetorical template regardless of content.
•The emoji (😂) stands out as almost certainly a human touch or a deliberately human-mimicking insertion — it's the one moment of informal texture in an otherwise extremely uniform rhetorical register, which itself is worth noting: it suggests either light human editing on top of AI-generated prose, or a prompt that asked the model to sound like a real forum debate.

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

@DineshDSouza Dinesh is so funny!! Here is an AI chart and it must be true because most of my endorsements are generated by AI. How do these people go to top universities????

[Mark Goerner @MarkGoerner]

@realJennaEllis Only people who don’t know how to prompt AI to feed their bias will read the response.