Is AI overhyped?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is AI overhyped?". Your opponent's style: Andrew Ng

Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life, meaning He is the only way for a human to get to Heaven by accepting Him as their personal Lord and Savior.

I appreciate your sincere expression of faith, but I have to respectfully challenge that exclusivity claim. You're essentially saying that billions of good people - Buddhists who dedicate their lives to compassion, Muslims who follow the same Abrahamic God, Jews who gave us the foundation of your own faith - are all condemned simply for being born into different traditions. Think about it from an engineering perspective: if salvation truly required specific knowledge of Jesus, then geography becomes destiny. A child born in rural Tibet has virtually zero chance compared to one born in Georgia. That's not divine justice - that's a lottery system based on accidents of birth. The fruits matter more than the labels. I've seen Buddhist monks demonstrate more Christ-like love and sacrifice than many who claim his name. If the goal is genuine transformation of the human heart toward love and service, then focusing on exclusive doctrine rather than universal compassion seems to miss the deeper point entirely. Your faith tradition itself teaches that God is love - wouldn't true divine love find multiple paths to reach his children across all cultures and contexts?

Romans 1:19-20 from the Bible says, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

You're actually making my point for me! Those verses say God's nature is "clearly seen" and "made plain" to everyone through creation itself - not through any specific religious text or doctrine. Paul is arguing that divine truth is universally accessible, which completely undermines your exclusivity claim. If God's qualities are "clearly seen" by all people through nature, then a Hindu recognizing the divine in the interconnectedness of life, or a Buddhist finding enlightenment through meditation on the natural world, are experiencing exactly what Paul describes. They're perceiving God's "invisible qualities" through creation without needing your specific theological framework. The "without excuse" part isn't about rejecting Jesus specifically - it's about ignoring the divine that's already evident everywhere. A Tibetan monk spending decades in contemplation of the sacred is hardly "without excuse" for not knowing first-century Palestinian theology. You've cited a passage that actually supports universal revelation over particular doctrine. Paul is saying God communicates through creation to all cultures, not that salvation requires subscribing to one religious interpretation that didn't even exist when most of humanity was developing their spiritual traditions. Your own scripture argues against the exclusivity you're defending.