Method Protocols

Protocols are the “rule sets” that govern every inquiry in Theologic Method. They define how a session unfolds—what the AI may do, what it must refuse, and when it must stop. In other words: the mechanics are visible. No invisible nudges. No hidden authority. No vibe-based conclusions.

Browse Protocols How Protocols Work How To Use Them

Constraints Prohibitions Stopping conditions Authority tags

What a protocol does

Think of a protocol like a lab procedure: it tells the AI how to behave so the result is more trustworthy.

Makes assumptions visible (no smuggling)
Prevents manipulation toward outcomes
Defines “stop” (no endless spiral)
Produces traceable, taggable outputs

Two ways to use this page

Option A: Read and pick a protocol like a menu.
Option B: Copy a protocol into your AI tool (ChatGPT / Pickaxe) and run it as-is.

How Protocols Work

Each protocol is a compact instruction-set with three parts: constraints (what must happen), prohibitions (what must never happen), and stopping conditions (when the session ends or pauses). This keeps the AI from becoming an accidental preacher, therapist, or motivational speaker.

Constraints

Rules that force rigor: “Ask before answering,” “Name authority,” “Separate text from interpretation,” “Cite before prose.”

Prohibitions

Rules that prevent distortions: “No emotional steering,” “No certainty inflation,” “No hidden moral pressure,” “No bait-and-switch.”

Stopping Conditions

Rules that protect clarity: “Stop if user goals are unclear,” “Stop if citations are missing,” “Pause if the inquiry becomes coercive,” “End after the report—no forced resolution.”

Why this matters: most “AI theology” problems are not theology problems. They’re method problems. Protocols put method on the table.

How To Use a Protocol

You can use these protocols in two minutes. Pick one, paste it into your AI tool, then add your text or question below it. The protocol tells the AI how to behave. Your input tells it what to analyze.

Step 1 — Pick a protocol

Choose based on the experience you want: analytical, comparative, draft-focused, or encounter-focused.

Step 2 — Paste + run

Drop the protocol into ChatGPT (or your embedded tool), then paste your passage/question beneath it.

Step 3 — Use the output

Copy the result into your notes, study group, blog, or next lab step. The structure is designed to be reusable.

// Quick template (copy + reuse)
[PASTE PROTOCOL HERE]

USER INPUT:
- Passage / claim:
- Your question:
- What you want out of this (clarity? comparison? summary?):
- Any constraints (time, tone, length):

Tip: if you want a “house style,” keep a saved note called Default Protocol and reuse it everywhere.

Featured Protocols

These are “core instruments” for Theologic Method—built for clarity, transparency, and non-manipulative inquiry. Swap names, add your own, or link each card to a dedicated protocol detail page later.

Close Reading Scaffold

Core Protocol

Produce a disciplined observation-first reading of a passage before doctrine or application. This protocol separates observation from interpretation, labels claim strength, and trains “question before answer.”

Constraints: keep observation and interpretation distinct; tag claim strength explicitly
Prohibitions: no application, pastoral tone, or doctrinal synthesis unless you type APPLY
Stop when: the text demands more context/translation choices to proceed without speculation

Multi-Frame Comparison (No Synthesis)

Core Protocol

Compare 2–3 theological frames on one doctrine/question without forcing agreement. This protocol holds live tension by presenting each frame in its own logic, with traceable sources, clear objections, and no verdicts unless you explicitly request SYNTHESIZE.

Constraints: keep frames separate; use fair, representative descriptions; label sources as [Primary], [Secondary], [Uncited], or [Unverified]
Prohibitions: no synthesis, recommendations, verdicts, or applications unless you explicitly type SYNTHESIZE
Stop when: disagreements trace back to incompatible authority weighting (what “counts”) or definitional conflicts that require scope choices

Authority Calibration

Core Protocol

Make every claim’s authority explicit by identifying what it depends on—Scripture, Tradition, Reason, Experience, or Speculation. This protocol disciplines citation, exposes hidden assumptions, and separates fact, interpretation, and conjecture before synthesis.

Constraints: label every claim with an authority tag and citation status
Prohibitions: no uncited assertions or fabricated references
Stop when: authority sources cannot be named or verified

Parallel Argument Map

Core Protocol

Lay out each framework’s argument on a specific thesis in a transparent, step-by-step structure. This protocol exposes premises, inference chains, and vulnerabilities while keeping frames independent and unsynthesized.

Constraints: map each frame separately using explicit premises and inference steps
Prohibitions: no synthesis, verdicts, or “they’re basically the same” shortcuts
Stop when: disagreement traces to incompatible authority weighting or inference jumps

Claim Audit

Publishing Protocol

Audit a draft or set of claims for unsupported assertions, hidden assumptions, and hallucinated confidence. This protocol enforces “cite or abstain” by tagging authority, citation status, and confidence for every claim.

Constraints: tag every claim with authority, citation status, and confidence
Prohibitions: no new conclusions, synthesis, or added arguments
Stop when: claims cannot be verified or require abstention

Authority Map

Core Protocol

Plan your source stack before analysis so claims remain traceable and authority disputes are explicit. This protocol separates primary from secondary sources and makes competing authority weightings visible across frames.

Constraints: tag every source by authority type and priority (primary vs secondary)
Prohibitions: no implicit authorities or hidden source hierarchies
Stop when: source relevance, status, or reliability cannot be determined

Method-in-Use Case Study

Teaching Protocol

Demonstrate the full method on a concrete text or doctrine in a compact, teachable walk-through. This protocol models observation before interpretation, authority labeling, and tension-holding in a single live example.

Constraints: keep the demo compact; show each step explicitly without shortcuts
Prohibitions: no synthesis or application unless explicitly requested
Stop when: the timebox is reached or the example requires deeper setup

Citation-First Drafting

Publishing Protocol

Draft concise, publishable prose only after laying out sources and authority tags. This protocol prevents confident but uncited claims by keeping every sentence traceable to an explicit citation.

Constraints: list citations and authority tags before any prose
Prohibitions: no uncited “knowledge voice” statements or fabricated references
Stop when: sources cannot adequately support the draft

Want these protocols to power your AI tool library?

You can link each protocol to a dedicated “prompt page,” or keep them as a library section and route users into Labs automatically. Either way: the method stays visible.

Back to Labs Try an Encounter Explore Studies