MennoNet.com

I’ve started using AI to help me reflect before I hit the Submit key. Sometimes it helps me notice what someone else might have been feeling—things I might’ve missed. Other times, it helps me see whether my tone is coming across as patient and kind or just adding fuel to the fire.

That’s helped me write posts that actually recognize what the other person said before jumping in, and to speak more gently—even when I disagree.

Here's a prompt I have used:

Christian Reflection Prompt: Speak with Grace, Seek the Kingdom

I’m about to respond to a post. Before I do, help me reflect on my draft. Don’t rewrite it—just give me bullet-point feedback that helps me speak with wisdom, grace, and integrity, staying rooted in the Bible and the way of Jesus.

Please include:

• Common Ground: What truth or shared concern does the original post express that I can recognize and name?
• Kingdom Focus: How can I stay centered on seeking first the Kingdom of God (Matthew 6:33), instead of getting pulled into political or tribal sides?
• Tone Check: How might my tone come across—especially to someone who disagrees? Am I reflecting the fruit of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22–23) or drifting toward the works of the flesh (Gal. 5:19–21)?
• Blind Spots or Unintended Harm: Are there assumptions, dismissiveness, or overgeneralizations that could wound or alienate others?
• What to Emphasize: Which parts of my message are most Christlike, constructive, or helpful to highlight?
• What to Reconsider: Any parts that sound snarky, self-righteous, or just not helpful to say?

I applied that prompt to one of my posts that was moved to Briar Patch, a post that I was not particularly proud of. Here's what it said:

Christian Reflection: Before You Post Further

Using the “Speak with Grace, Seek the Kingdom” prompt to reflect on the exchange:

Common Ground

• You and the other poster both care deeply about truth, meaning, and how conversations unfold. There’s shared concern over misrepresentation and respectful engagement.
• Both of you are reacting to feeling misunderstood or unfairly portrayed. There’s an opportunity to name that mutual vulnerability.

Kingdom Focus

• The exchange is caught in a cycle of accusation and defense. Neither side seems to be pointing to Kingdom values like truth in love, humility, or reconciliation.
• Consider re-centering: What would it look like to model the Sermon on the Mount here (Matt. 5–7)? Can this be a place where peace-making takes priority over point-scoring?

Tone Check

• Your tone feels sharp, especially in phrases like “Isn’t this the very definition…?” and “Would you like other examples…?” These may feel like zingers rather than bridge-building.
• The phrase “Look at what you just did there” can sound condescending or accusatory, even if your intent was observational.
• You maintain composure and avoid profanity or overt insults, which is commendable in a heated thread.

Blind Spots or Unintended Harm

• You may come across as emotionally dismissive or controlling—especially in calling out others for defining your thoughts and feelings, while doing something similar in return.
• There’s a real risk of escalation here. Others reading this might be provoked rather than persuaded, regardless of who is “right.”

What to Emphasize

• Emphasize your desire to be heard accurately and to clarify your intent. That’s a valid goal if expressed calmly.
• You clearly value meaningful language—lean into that by modeling respectful definition and dialogue instead of making the thread a semantic tug-of-war.

What to Reconsider

• Consider stepping back and asking a clarifying question instead of responding tit-for-tat.
• Rephrase emotionally loaded terms (like “gaslighting”) unless you're inviting a mutual, constructive definition—especially since you both seem to be using it differently.
• Rather than trying to expose hypocrisy, try expressing how something made you feel and why—without assuming intent. ("When I hear X, I feel Y...")

Bootstrap wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 9:37 am

Grace wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 7:16 amTake that mirror, turn it around and look at yourself first.

A good reminder for all of us—it's important to live up to our own standards, and it's easy to spot others' hypocrisy while overlooking our own.

That said, the "mirror" metaphor can sometimes feel like a cliché, and at times it's used to deflect from real accountability. Maybe it would carry more weight if we shared how we’re applying it to ourselves before turning it on others.

I think this use of AI is definitely a "mirror". The prompt is not designed to tell me what I want to hear - perhaps you can see that in the previous post, it gives feedback that makes me reconsider what I am going to say, to ask if I am really seeking first the Kingdom in what I post.

Can AI understand the "way of Jesus?"

Robert wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 11:30 am Can AI understand the "way of Jesus?"

I don't know if AI actually "understands" anything at all. But I do think it gives me helpful feedback on posts before I hit [SUBMIT], and I think that has helped get me out of unhealthy dynamics in some conversations.

For me, I think the more practical question is this: can reviewing my posts with this prompt help ME walk in the way of Jesus? Can it make my posts look more like the fruit of the Spirit and less like the works of the flesh?

Have you found other things that help you pause and reflect before posting?

Bootstrap wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 1:08 pm

Robert wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 11:30 am Can AI understand the "way of Jesus?"

I don't know if AI actually "understands" anything at all. But I do think it gives me helpful feedback on posts before I hit [SUBMIT], and I think that has helped get me out of unhealthy dynamics in some conversations.

For me, I think the more practical question is this: can reviewing my posts with this prompt help ME walk in the way of Jesus? Can it make my posts look more like the fruit of the Spirit and less like the works of the flesh?

Have you found other things that help you pause and reflect before posting?

Yeah, AI doesn’t think. It doesn’t “know” anything, but it’s good at recognizing patterns.

I sometimes check my posts against the board guidelines and have used it to change my posts to fit better.

Szdfan wrote: ↑Sat Jul 26, 2025 2:08 pm I sometimes check my posts against the board guidelines and have used it to change my posts to fit better.

Let's give that a try. Here's a prompt that implements it.

Forum Conduct Reminder

Red text is for Mods only. Do not argue with Moderators.

Current Mods: Appleman2002, Country Boy, Justme, Ohio Jones, Mike, Robert

When posting:

• Use I statements. Speak for yourself.
• Do not say others are “wrong.” Share your own view instead.
• Avoid extreme sarcasm aimed at others.
• Do not distort or exaggerate someone else’s post.
• Do not try to redefine someone else’s thread with "what we're really talking about is..."
• You may request clarification or supporting info, but do not make demands of others.

Content rules:

• No profanity, vulgarity, or off-color language
• No pornography
• No posts solely for advertising
• External links are allowed only if related to the topic
• No quoting or video clips from CNN or MSNBC
• You may link to videos or articles hosted on those sites

Warnings & Bans:

• Any infraction may result in a warning
• 3 warnings = 3-day ban
• Continued issues will lead to longer bans
• Each warning ages out after 30 days

We may update these rules as needed. Thank you for helping keep the forum respectful and focused.

Let me apply that prompt to the same post I applied the other prompt to. Here's what it says:

Critique of the Original Post

Tone: Reflective, edifying, and educational
Goal: Maintain your position without ceding ground
Focus: Help the writer communicate more effectively while preserving the core message

---

What You Did Well:
You raised an important concern—being misrepresented by someone who insists on reading their own meaning into your words. That’s a legitimate frustration. You also named a deeper dynamic: when someone tells you what you think or feel, and then treats your clarification as dishonest or manipulative, that can feel like gaslighting. These are real and worth exploring.

Where the Tone Could Improve:
Your post opens with repeated rhetorical phrases like "Fascinating. Look at what you just did there," which come across as more confrontational than constructive. While you’re making a strong point, the tone may feel like a scolding or a trap, which could shut down the conversation rather than invite engagement.

Statements such as "Would you like other examples from that thread?" or "Here’s a tell" can sound like cross-examination. They imply motive in your conversation partner rather than seeking to understand or clarify. Ironically, that mirrors the kind of projection you’re critiquing—assigning internal motives rather than asking questions.

Your Strongest Insights (That Deserve More Spotlight):
- That people often interpret disagreement as offense, and build blame on that misreading.
- That asserting control over another person’s inner life (“what you really meant was...”) can feel like gaslighting.
- That some discussions are more about fixing blame than resolving misunderstanding.

These are insightful observations—but they risk being lost when the tone becomes too sharp or accusatory.

Suggestions to Strengthen Your Message:

• Start by affirming your shared goal: honest, respectful discussion.
• Use emotionally neutral language to describe what happened.
• Frame your critique as a pattern you've noticed rather than as a personal accusation.
• Ask clarifying questions instead of assuming motives.
• Use more “I” statements—e.g., “I felt misunderstood when…” rather than “You’re gaslighting me.”

Conclusion:
Your post is grounded in valid concerns and real insight. With a shift in tone—from confrontation to reflection—you can keep your message clear and firm while also making it easier for others to hear and respond well. You don’t need to back down. But sometimes a gentler posture makes truth more persuasive.

Let me know if you'd like help rewording or refining the post itself!

If I say "yes", it rewrites my post as follows. I am deleting one paragraph because I don't think any of us need to relive the original exchange.

---

Here is a revised version of your post in a more reflective, edifying, and educational tone—still clear and firm, but inviting reflection rather than escalating conflict

---

That’s a thoughtful question—thank you for asking it. Let me clarify what I meant and why I chose the word “gaslighting.”

When I said you were projecting, I did mean *you*—I sensed that you were attributing thoughts or motives to me that I don’t hold. For instance, I wasn’t thinking or saying that anyone was being “super-touchy,” yet that interpretation was attributed to me. That felt like a misreading of what I actually said, and then treating that misreading as if it were offensive. That pattern happened more than once in that thread.

From my perspective, this is where the term “gaslighting” fits: it’s the experience of being told what I think or feel, in ways that don’t match my actual thoughts or emotions, and then being treated as if I’m denying reality when I try to clarify. I do know my own intentions, and it can be disorienting when they’re redefined by someone else—especially when blame or offense is being built on that redefinition.

[ Paragraph Deleted ]

So when I used the word “gaslighting,” I was referring to this broader dynamic—not just disagreement, but the erosion of trust in someone’s ability to accurately represent their own thoughts and intentions.

I’d also be genuinely curious—when you used the word “gaslighting,” what did *you* mean by it? Do you have an example in mind? Maybe if we both lay out our understandings, we can make this a more constructive exchange.

Here's another prompt - a prompt for looking at someone else's post, seeing what gotchas might be there, but also seeing what legitimate concerns might be there.

PLEASE DO NOT POST THE OUTPUT FOR SOMEONE ELSE'S POST TO THE FORUM - that would almost certainly start a food fight. But it can be useful for reflection before responding.

Prompt: Identify Traps, Fears, and Constructive Ground in a Post

Instructions for ChatGPT:
I’m trying to reflect deeply before responding to this post. Please help me do the following:

1. Spot the Traps
Look for rhetorical devices, phrases, or tones that:

• Are designed to provoke, corner, or shame the other person (e.g., "look at what you just did")
• Contain sarcasm, loaded language, or mockery
• Assume bad motives without asking clarifying questions
• Shut down the conversation using platitudes, slogans, or moral superiority
• Create cycles of resentment rather than offering clarity or resolution
• Make it unsafe or hard to respond with vulnerability or nuance

Highlight and explain these briefly.

---

2. Discern the Real Concerns
Underneath the tone or framing, what legitimate concerns, frustrations, or fears might this person be expressing?

• Identify any explicitly stated concerns.
• Identify implied concerns or unspoken fears that may be beneath the surface (even if not consciously expressed).

---

3. Find Constructive Common Ground
Help me discern:

• What values or goals we might both care about (truth, respect, understanding, fairness, etc.)
• What shared experiences or emotions may be present (feeling misunderstood, hurt, frustrated, etc.)
• Any points, however small, where I can affirm something sincerely without compromising my own convictions

---

4. Acknowledge the Best Possible Reading
How might I read this post in the most generous light, assuming this person is trying (perhaps awkwardly or defensively) to express something important or truthful?

---

5. Optional: Draft a Grounded, Peaceable Response
If you think it would be helpful, write a short, emotionally grounded draft response that:

• Avoids responding to provocation
• Names and affirms shared values or concerns
• Gently clarifies misunderstandings or mischaracterizations
• Keeps the door open for further respectful conversation—even if we still disagree