In a recent interview, Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari sparked controversy within Christian circles by discussing the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to write holy books, including a new Bible.

Harari highlighted the unique decision-making capabilities of AI, contrasting it with other technologies. He mentioned that AI can create its own ideas and even make decisions about humans.

These remarks raised concerns among Christians, who value divine inspiration in the creation of their holy texts. Harari’s comments led to critical reactions from Christian media outlets, challenging millennia of claims about divine inspiration.

However, Harari’s perspective also ignited discussions about the role of AI and the need for education in research and technology. Ultimately, the debate raises questions about the future intersection of religion, artificial intelligence, and the evolving nature of sacred texts.

Hence, Real Research, an online survey app, launched a survey on AI rewriting the Bible to gauge public opinion on the validity of AI-written religious texts.


  • 61.35% believed in Harari’s claim of AI’s ability to generate new ideas, including religious texts like the Bible.
  • 40.6% neutral about AI writing religious texts.
  • 47.54% said the potential of AI writing religious texts raises ethical concerns.

The idea of artificial intelligence (AI) rewriting the Bible has sparked a significant amount of discussion and controversy. According to our survey results, a notable percentage of respondents (65.15%) were aware of Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari’s remarks on this topic, while 34.85% were unaware.

According to sources, Harari stated, “In a few years, there may be religions that are actually correct. Think of holy books written by AI. That could be a reality in a few years.”

When we asked our respondents whether they believed in Harari’s claims, 61.35% believed Harar’s claims of AI’s ability to generate new ideas and concepts could extend to creating religious texts like the Bible and 38.65% said otherwise.

Figure 1: Respondents’ belief in Harari’s claims.

Varied Reactions Emerge in Response to AI-Written Religious Texts Claiming Superhuman Intelligence

The next survey poll revealed reactions to the prospect of an AI-written religious text claiming to possess superhuman intelligence. Some respondents (15.04%) expressed skepticism, considering it a human invention, while others (14.92%) rejected it and maintained faith in traditional religious texts.

Another group (14.63%) expressed curiosity and intrigue, while some (12.44%) remained open-minded, willing to subject it to critical evaluation.

Read Also: The Majority of 84% Believe That AI Would Surpass Human Intelligence

Ethical Concerns Arise as AI’s Potential to Create Religious Texts Challenges Traditional Claims of Divine Inspiration

The next survey poll findings shed light on the deep ethical questions and concerns that individuals have regarding the possibility of AI generating new religious texts. This notion raises a myriad of ethical considerations that respondents recognized and contemplated.

The concept of AI taking an active role in religious text creation challenges long-held beliefs and traditions surrounding the divine inspiration behind sacred scriptures. The emergence of AI-written religious texts prompts reflections on such works’ authenticity, authority, and legitimacy.

Many respondents acknowledged the ethical questions and concerns that could arise from AI’s potential to create new religious texts. Nearly half of the respondents (42.66%) believed that developing AI-written religious texts could challenge or undermine the claims of divine inspiration made by traditional religious texts. In addition, 32.35% remained uncertain, and 24.99% denied the statement.

Subsequently, 47.54% stated AI’s potential to create religious texts raises ethical concerns, such as authority and legitimacy, 32.06% remained uncertain, and 20.4% said otherwise.

Figure 2: Respondents’ belief in AI’s potential to create new religious texts raises ethical concerns.

Similarly, when it comes to restricting AI from modifying established religious scriptures, there were varied opinions. A notable percentage agreed or strongly agreed (72.58%) that AI should be restricted due to concerns about potential errors and lack of legitimacy.

On the other hand, a minority percentage (7.37%) disagreed or strongly disagreed.

Read Also: Majority (55%) Strongly Support Legal Requirements for Responsible Development and Use of AI Systems

Respondents’ Stance on AI-written Religious Texts

Overall, the survey indicated that public opinion on AI rewriting religious texts is divided. 40.6% of respondents maintained a neutral stance, while 31.4% opposed the idea, and 28% supported it.

Figure 3: Respondents’ stance on religious texts written by AI.

These findings highlight the complexity of the debate surrounding AI and its intersection with religion. The prospect of AI writing religious texts raises fundamental questions about the nature of divine inspiration, the role of human creativity, and the evolving dynamics between technology and faith.

As the development of AI continues to advance, these discussions are likely to become even more significant in shaping the future relationship between religion and emerging technologies.


Survey TitleSurvey on AI Rewriting the Bible
DurationJuly 8, 2023 – July 15, 2023
Number of Participants10,000
DemographicsMales and females, aged 21 to 99
Participating Countries Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Benin, Bolivia, Brazil, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, China, China (Hong Kong) China (Macao), China (Taiwan), Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Czech Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Greanada, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Libya, Lithuania, Malaysia, Maldives, Maluritania, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar [Burma], Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Vietnam, Yemen, Zimbabwe.