{"id":7452,"date":"2026-04-07T13:51:59","date_gmt":"2026-04-07T20:51:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/?p=7452"},"modified":"2026-04-07T14:26:30","modified_gmt":"2026-04-07T21:26:30","slug":"to-fear-or-to-steward-a-christian-response-to-artificial-intelligence","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/novus2.com\/righteouscause\/2026\/04\/07\/to-fear-or-to-steward-a-christian-response-to-artificial-intelligence\/","title":{"rendered":"To Fear or to Steward? A Christian Response to Artificial Intelligence"},"content":{"rendered":"

Image:<\/strong><\/span> An AI-generated image imagines the Evolution of Outreach: A three-part visual history showing Johannes Gutenberg presenting his printed Bible in 1455, D.L. Moody utilizing early radio broadcasting in the 1920s, and a modern church community integrating AI and VR technology into their ministry today.<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

Why the Church Must Engage Artificial Intelligence Before the Field
\nIs Ceded to Those With No Gospel to Preach<\/em><\/p>\n

Introduction: The Question That Won’t Wait<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

Imagine standing at the edge of the Gutenberg Revolution in 1455 and declining to touch a printed Bible because hand-copied manuscripts had served Christianity well enough for a thousand years. Or picture refusing to let D.L. Moody preach on the radio because the spoken word from a pulpit was the only proper medium for the gospel. In every generation, Christians have faced a version of the same confrontation: a new and powerful tool arrives, and the question is not whether it exists, but what the church will do with it.<\/p>\n

Today, that tool is artificial intelligence. And the question is not whether AI will reshape civilization \u2014 it already is. The question every Christian must answer is whether they will engage it with wisdom, stewardship, and faith, or retreat into a comfortable inertia dressed up as caution.<\/p>\n

In a commentary last year, World editor Daniel Devine articulated a widely held position. Calling himself a latecomer to new technology, he explained that he has never once posed a question to ChatGPT. His reasoning was straightforward:<\/p>\n

\n

“To this day, I’ve never asked a single question of ChatGPT. It’s not that I dislike tech. But the pessimistic side of me reasons thusly: If I’ve gotten along fine without the latest gadgetry until now, why bother?”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Daniel Devine, World Magazine<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Daniel Devine’s hesitation is understandable and not without a kind of Luddite nobility. But it is ultimately insufficient. Saying “I’ve gotten along fine without it”<\/strong><\/em><\/span> is what people once said about power steering, smartphones, and GPS navigation. Each of those tools was resisted, then adopted, then taken for granted \u2014 not because they were morally necessary, but because they expanded what human beings could accomplish. AI fits squarely into that same category.<\/p>\n

This essay argues that artificial intelligence, understood rightly and used with biblical discernment, is not a threat to Christian faithfulness but an amplifier of it. We will examine the nature of AI, its remarkable potential for gospel ministry, the legitimate concerns it raises, the critical discipline of prompt engineering, and what Scripture teaches about the stewardship of tools in every age. Along the way, we will listen to voices from across the theological spectrum \u2014 including those who are skeptical, even alarmed \u2014 and respond with charity and clarity.<\/p>\n

The goal is not to baptize technology uncritically. It is to refuse the false comfort of uninformed avoidance, and instead to equip believers to think like stewards, act like missionaries, and reason like scholars in the age of AI.<\/p>\n

Part One: Understanding the Tool \u2014 What Artificial Intelligence Actually Is<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

Defining AI Without the Science Fiction<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

Popular culture has given us two dominant images of artificial intelligence: the menacing Terminator and the whimsical robot companion. Neither is accurate, and both distort the conversation before it begins. The reality of AI is simultaneously more mundane and more remarkable than either caricature.<\/p>\n

IBM defines artificial intelligence as technology that enables computers and machines to simulate human intelligence and problem-solving capabilities. By this broad definition, AI is already woven invisibly into daily life. The fingerprint reader on your smartphone is AI. The autocomplete in your email is AI. The route optimization in your navigation app is AI. The recommendation list on your video streaming service is AI.<\/p>\n

Dustin Ryan, a Data and AI Specialist writing for Christ Over All, frames it this way:<\/p>\n

\n

“Most likely, you are using AI-enabled technology multiple times a day whether you know it or not.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Dustin Ryan, “A Christian’s Perspective on Artificial Intelligence,” Christ Over All<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Generative AI: The New Frontier<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

The development that has generated the most attention \u2014 and the most anxiety \u2014 is a specific subset called generative AI. Unlike earlier AI systems that simply classified or optimized, generative AI creates new content: text, images, audio, code, and video. Tools like ChatGPT (from OpenAI), Claude (from Anthropic), and Gemini (from Google) can engage in extended conversation, explain complex concepts, summarize documents, write code, draft sermons, generate graphics, and translate languages \u2014 often with a fluency that rivals educated human writers.<\/p>\n

Ryan notes that OpenAI released ChatGPT in November 2022, and its capabilities were immediately described as shockingly proficient at explaining complex concepts, summarizing documents, writing code, recommending solutions to problems, and more. This was not hyperbole. Within months of its release, ChatGPT became the fastest-growing consumer application in history, reaching 100 million users in just two months.<\/p>\n

Patricia Engler, writing in Dignitas \u2014 the journal of the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity \u2014 provides a helpful technical baseline:<\/p>\n

\n

“Although definitions for AI vary, one team of scholars notes how a common theme among most definitions is that ‘AI involves the study, design and building of intelligent agents that can achieve goals.'”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Patricia Engler, “AI and Human Futures: What Should Christians Think?” Dignitas Vol. 30, No. 4 (Winter 2023)<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The critical insight for Christian thinkers is this: AI is sophisticated pattern-matching and language prediction at an extraordinary scale. It does not think. It does not believe. It does not pray. It does not possess the imago Dei. It processes vast datasets and produces statistically probable outputs based on what humans have written, said, and created. Understanding this is the foundation of using it wisely.<\/p>\n

Part Two: Faith Has Always Adapted to New Tools<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

The Printing Press Did Not Replace the Holy Spirit<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

The anxiety surrounding AI among many Christians is neither new nor unreasonable. Every significant technological revolution has provoked similar questions within the church. The printing press dismantled the church’s monopoly on Scripture access and fueled the Reformation. Radio brought the first televangelists \u2014 and the first accusations that technology would corrupt authentic worship. Television offered the same debate on a larger screen. The internet arrived with promises of infinite connection and delivered both the world’s largest library and the world’s largest sewer.<\/p>\n

In each case, the church eventually learned to distinguish the tool from the temptation, and to use the former without surrendering to the latter.<\/p>\n

Nick Prince, writing for Life Church’s Finds platform, draws this historical parallel directly:<\/p>\n

\n

“When the printing press was invented in the 1400s, some religious leaders worried it would undermine the church’s authority. When radio came along, there were concerns about broadcasting sermons to people who weren’t physically present. Each technological advancement has sparked similar debates within faith communities. Today, AI presents us with the newest version of this age-old question: How does the church embrace innovation while staying true to our faith?”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Nick Prince, “Can I Use AI as a Christian?” Finds.Life.Church<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Kenny O’Donnell, a senior leader at Gateway Church Glasgow who also works in AI and Machine Learning for a global bank, makes the historical case even more sharply in his piece for the Evangelical Alliance:<\/p>\n

\n

“According to Billy Graham Ministries, he preached in person to a staggering 210 million people. But despite criticism and opposition at the time, he used Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians 9, ‘that I might by all means save some,’ to embrace the new technologies of radio, TV and satellite, to preach to an estimated 2.2 billion people. Thank God he did.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Kenny O’Donnell, “Should Christians Use AI?” Evangelical Alliance<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

O’Donnell’s point lands with the weight of historical precedent. The question was never whether Billy Graham should use radio, but whether radio could be consecrated to the service of the gospel. It could. It was. And millions heard the saving message of Christ as a result.<\/p>\n

The Cultural Mandate and Technological Stewardship<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

Genesis 1:26-28 records God’s command to humanity to exercise dominion over the earth \u2014 to fill, subdue, cultivate, and steward creation. This cultural mandate did not terminate at the edge of the garden. It extends to every tool, technology, and innovation that emerges from human ingenuity.<\/p>\n

Young Choi, writing for Regent University’s Center for Christian Thought and Action, grounds this responsibility in the doctrine of stewardship:<\/p>\n

\n

“Genesis 1:28 calls humanity to exercise dominion over the earth, which includes the responsible use of technology. AI has the potential to solve complex societal problems, but it also poses risks… Christians are called to steward these technologies wisely, advocating for uses that promote justice, equality, and the common good.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Young Choi, “The Intersection of Artificial Intelligence and Christian Thought,” Regent University CCTA<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Master’s Bible Church in Vancouver, Washington, extends this logic through the lens of the cultural mandate:<\/p>\n

\n

“Out of all the humans on earth capable of harnessing the power of AI responsibly, mature, theologically sound Christians are the ones who should be at the forefront. More than ever, the debate over the ethical advancement and use of AI is raging… Christians have everything they need to create guardrails for technological advancements, such as AI. Why aren’t they doing it?”<\/i>
\n\u2014 “Why Christians Should Stay Informed About AI,” Master’s Bible Church<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

If doctrinally sound Christians refuse to engage AI, the field will not remain empty. It will be filled by secular humanists, transhumanists, and those who are actively hostile to biblical values \u2014 as has been the pattern with every previous technological revolution.<\/p>\n

Part Three: The Remarkable Potential of AI for Christian Ministry and Discipleship<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

Bible Study, Research, and Theological Exploration<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

For any Christian engaged in serious Bible study, apologetics, or theological research, AI represents something genuinely unprecedented: access to the equivalent of a vast theological library, available in real time, that can explain, cross-reference, translate, and contextualize Scripture with remarkable depth.<\/p>\n

Kenny O’Donnell describes his own experience in terms that every serious student of Scripture will find compelling:<\/p>\n

\n

“ChatGPT has read every theology book that has ever been written and it remembers them all including texts previously only available in elite University libraries. It can do in seconds what would previously have taken hours.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Kenny O’Donnell, Evangelical Alliance<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

This is not an exaggeration. AI language models have been trained on enormous corpora of theological literature \u2014 patristic writings, Reformation documents, Puritan sermons, systematic theologies, biblical commentaries spanning every major tradition. Asking Claude or ChatGPT to explain the historical background of the Epistle to the Hebrews, compare Calvin’s and Arminius’s views on election, or trace the development of the doctrine of the Trinity across the first four centuries is the kind of research that once required either a seminary library or years of personal study.<\/p>\n

Tim Challies \u2014 one of Christianity’s most prolific bloggers and a careful, discerning voice on technology \u2014 has experimented extensively with AI tools and documents what he found in his March 2026 essay for Challies.com:<\/p>\n

\n

“Using Claude Cowork, I can also search through my quotes topically. I recently prompted this: ‘Look through all the documents in this folder and find eight or ten helpful quotes about anxiety.’ It did a great job of it.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Tim Challies, “Wise and Helpful Ways for Christians to Experiment with AI,” Challies.com<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Challies also describes his extraordinary experiment of downloading approximately 7,000 Puritan works from Project Puritas and using Claude to search, catalog, and query that entire collection \u2014 asking it to find quotes on specific passages, explain an author’s theological perspective, or surface illustrative material across the corpus. This is research that would have required a team of scholars and months of work. AI completed it in minutes.<\/p>\n

For apologists, this capacity is transformative. Those engaged in LDS-Christian comparative theology, for instance, can prompt AI to explain LDS historical documents, trace the development of Mormon doctrine, identify parallels with biblical Christianity, and generate thoughtful questions for interfaith dialogue \u2014 in a fraction of the time traditional research requires. Importantly, the resulting output must be verified, cross-referenced, and filtered through biblical and scholarly judgment. But the raw research acceleration is genuine and significant.<\/p>\n

Sermon Preparation and Ministry Communication<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

AI is proving to be a valuable assistant for pastors and ministry leaders, not as a ghostwriter but as a research and organizational tool that sharpens and speeds preparation. Nelson Musonda, founder of DelMethod.com and a digital evangelism consultant, makes this clear:<\/p>\n

\n

“A hammer or a saw can help a carpenter do their job better and more accurately; in the same way, AI can make a preacher’s work more accessible and successful. AI can analyze large amounts of data, such as church attendance and demographic information, to help church leaders better understand their congregations and tailor their messages accordingly.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Nelson Musonda, “AI and Christianity: Navigating the Intersection of Technology and Faith,” DelMethod.com<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Challies offers a concrete prompt example from his own proofreading workflow. He instructs AI to check links, catch typos, verify affiliate codes, and suggest SEO titles \u2014 tasks that are tedious but necessary. The result is a more polished finished product with less time spent on mechanical editing, freeing more attention for the actual content of ministry communication.<\/p>\n

For churches with limited staff budgets, this is no small matter. AI can help a single communications coordinator produce the output of a small team: social media posts, email newsletters, event graphics descriptions, sermon summaries, small group discussion questions, and visitor welcome communications \u2014 all produced faster and with higher quality than the same person working without AI assistance.<\/p>\n

Translation and Global Gospel Reach<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

Perhaps no application of AI has greater potential for the expansion of the Great Commission than its translation capabilities. Dustin Ryan, writing for Christ Over All, documents this possibility with striking specificity:<\/p>\n

\n

“Don Barger, Director of Innovation and MX Labs at the International Mission Board, says approximately 3,700 languages remain without the Bible. One company, Avodah, is trailblazing the use of AI to translate scripture more quickly than ever before. Translators and linguists, assisted with innovative AI tools like those by Avodah, are able to quickly produce rough drafts of translated scripture that can then be verified and refined by human experts.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Dustin Ryan, Christ Over All<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The implications are staggering. For most of church history, Bible translation into a new language has required decades of linguistic fieldwork, lexical analysis, and careful text criticism \u2014 often the work of a missionary’s entire lifetime. AI-assisted translation does not replace that human expertise and spiritual dedication, but it dramatically accelerates the early stages of the process, potentially compressing multi-decade projects into a fraction of the time.<\/p>\n

Ryan also describes AI tools like Microsoft Teams’ real-time translation and caption features, which can enable multilingual Bible study groups to function without human translators \u2014 removing one of the most persistent barriers to cross-cultural discipleship.<\/p>\n

Evangelism, Apologetics, and Digital Outreach<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

The digital mission field is now the largest in human history. More than five billion people use the internet daily. AI offers Christian evangelists tools that can help them engage that population with precision and relevance.<\/p>\n

Musonda notes that AI can analyze social media data to identify what questions, struggles, and spiritual needs people are expressing:<\/p>\n

\n

“You could use AI to look at data from Instagram, Twitter, and survey answers to determine who your audience is, their struggles, and challenges. Once you have this information, you can use AI to help you craft messages relevant to your audience’s needs.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Nelson Musonda, DelMethod.com<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

For street evangelists and apologists, AI can serve as a rapid-response research tool. Before an outreach event, an apologist can ask AI to anticipate the most common objections to Christianity from a specific population, summarize the strongest counterarguments, and generate question-based approaches likely to open spiritual conversations. After an encounter, AI can help reconstruct and develop the arguments used, identify gaps, and suggest resources for follow-up.<\/p>\n

Nick Prince of Life Church frames this opportunity in terms of the church’s enduring calling:<\/p>\n

\n

“Technology can help spread the message, but only God can change the heart. When we apply this mindset to artificial intelligence, we can use AI to support our faith journey rather than trying to make it the journey itself.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Nick Prince, Finds.Life.Church<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Prayer, Devotional Life, and Spiritual Formation<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

Scripture reminds us that \u201cLikewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with sighs too deep for words\u201d<\/strong> <\/em><\/span>(Romans 8:26). That verse is a comforting reminder that even when our hearts and minds falter, God\u2019s Spirit bridges the gap. Yet in our daily spiritual practice, the very human challenge of structure and focus often remains\u2014and here, AI can quietly serve as a helper for believers seeking renewed rhythm in their devotion.<\/p>\n

At the personal level of faith, AI can act as a gentle prompt-generator for those who feel dry or directionless in prayer and Scripture reading. For example, Prince describes this application:<\/p>\n

\n

“Some people use AI to help generate prayer prompts when they’re feeling stuck or create prayer lists organized by category. One family I know uses AI to turn their kids’ prayer requests into simple rhymes they can memorize together. The AI doesn’t pray for you \u2014 it just helps organize your thoughts.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Nick Prince, Finds.Life.Church<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Tools like this are not replacements for authentic spiritual engagement; they are companions to discipline. Just as the Spirit meets us in our inward weakness, AI can meet us in our practical ones\u2014helping organize, remind, and encourage where human structure sometimes falters. It can remove the \u201cblank-page paralysis\u201d<\/strong><\/em><\/span> that stops even faithful believers from beginning. In this light, AI becomes less a digital shortcut and more a scaffolding that enables a deeper encounter, ensuring that technology supports rather than supplants the sacred work of prayer and growth.<\/p>\n

Part Four: The Critical Discipline of Prompt Engineering<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

Why Prompts Are Everything<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

Perhaps the most underappreciated key to getting genuine value from AI is prompt engineering: the art and discipline of constructing the input (the “prompt”<\/span><\/strong>) that you send to an AI system in a way that produces the most useful, accurate, and appropriate output.<\/p>\n

Think of it this way. Asking a brilliant research librarian, “Tell me about the Bible,”<\/strong><\/em><\/span> will produce a generic response. But asking, “Please explain the theological debate between N.T. Wright and John Piper on the doctrine of justification by faith, trace the key exegetical arguments each makes from Galatians and Romans, and summarize where they agree and disagree,”<\/strong> <\/em><\/span>will produce something genuinely useful.<\/p>\n

The same principle applies exponentially to AI. Vague prompts produce vague answers. Precise, structured, context-rich prompts produce precise, structured, context-rich answers.<\/p>\n

Challies demonstrates this with his sophisticated proofreading prompt:<\/p>\n

\n

“Check all the links in my current ‘A La Carte’ draft to confirm that each link loads correctly and is not broken, and that the article or resource matches the description I’ve given it. Mention any typos or other anomalies. If there are links to Westminster Books, Amazon, or Logos, ensure they are affiliate links. Suggest an appropriate SEO title and SEO description. Run a quick spellcheck, but don’t do a deeper edit.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Tim Challies, Challies.com<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Notice what this prompt does: it defines the role (proofreader), the task (check links, catch errors), specific technical requirements (affiliate links, gift links), and limits (spellcheck only, no rewriting). Every element of specificity produces a correspondingly more useful output.<\/p>\n

Practical Prompt Engineering Principles for Christian Users<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

The following principles represent a practical framework for Christians who want to use AI productively:<\/p>\n

1. Define the role. <\/b><\/em><\/span>Open with instructions that establish who you want the AI to be in this conversation. Examples: “You are a Reformed theologian with expertise in Pauline literature,”<\/strong><\/em><\/span> or “You are a knowledgeable apologist familiar with LDS historical documents.”<\/strong> <\/em><\/span>This shapes the entire character of the response.<\/p>\n

2. State the task explicitly.<\/span> <\/b><\/em><\/span>Be specific about what you want produced. Not “Write about prayer”<\/strong> <\/em><\/span>but “Write a 600-word devotional for adult Sunday school students on the difference between intercessory and contemplative prayer, using examples from the Psalms and Paul’s epistles.”<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

3. Provide relevant context. <\/b><\/em><\/span>Tell the AI who the audience is, what the purpose is, and what tone is appropriate. “The audience is theologically conservative evangelical Christians with limited academic background, so avoid jargon.”<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

4. Specify the format.<\/span> <\/b><\/em>“Respond with a structured outline including a main argument, three supporting points, and a conclusion.” or “Provide this as a bullet-point list of questions suitable for a small group discussion.”<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

5. Set constraints. <\/b><\/em><\/span>“Do not speculate beyond what the biblical text directly supports.” “Cite sources wherever possible.” “Flag any claims you are uncertain about.” “Never invent or fabricate citations.”<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

6. Ask for verification. <\/b><\/em><\/span>As Challies learned when an AI fabricated a quote attributed to J.C. Ryle and then attributed it to a real book, hallucination is a genuine risk. Adding prompts like “Verify all quotations verbatim”<\/strong><\/em><\/span> or “Flag anything you are not certain about”<\/strong><\/em><\/span> significantly reduces this risk, though it does not eliminate it.<\/p>\n

Some personal favorites that I use:<\/p>\n

You are a professor emeritus of political science and senior fellow at a recognized institute for the Study of Christianity and Politics. Your training and writing specialties are American political institutions, and religion and politics in America. Your task is to write a comprehensive historical blog post with a minimum of [0000] words that defines the place of [SUBJECT MATTER] in America utilizing a summary of the book, “BOOK TITLE,” as a main resource. Follow the attached “Outline Overview” to organize the narrative and employ quotes and URLs from the following additional resources:<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

.<\/span><\/p>\n

Using the [SCRIPTURE REFERENCE], write mainly in narrative fashion with occasional bullet points as necessary: You are a PhD level Christian theologian, Biblical scholar and author of several books on the New Testament. Your task is to write a comprehensive sermon and Bible study with a minimum of [NUMBER OF WORDS] with the title of “XXXXX.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

.<\/span><\/p>\n

You are a PhD level Christian theologian, Biblical scholar and author of several books on Modern Christianity.<\/p>\n

Write an encouraging Christian Devotional in narrative style with ESV scriptural references written out, with a maximum of 1,000 words, and suggest several compelling titles similar to “Slaying The Giant Of Temptation.”<\/p>\n

This is designed to be a challenging and comprehensive post that examines temptation and how modern Christians can overcome it using the following scriptures: Romans 8:37; Romans 13:14; 1 Corinthians 9:27; 1 Corinthians 10:13; Hebrews 2:18; and James 4:7.<\/p>\n

Open with a compelling anecdote, a powerful quote, or a dramatic moment to immediately capture the reader’s interest.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Kenny O’Donnell describes his own development of a custom GPT he named “Sermonly”<\/strong><\/span> for in-depth Bible study using only a smartphone \u2014 the product of months of refining prompts until the output reached academic quality. This illustrates that prompt engineering is a learned skill that improves with practice and intentionality.<\/p>\n

Chad Huffman of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary’s Christ and Culture publication captures the deeper principle at stake:<\/p>\n

\n

“Before I can do anything with it, I must have wisdom and knowledge of a subject. In fact, to have something generated and submit it blindly as my own shows that I have neither knowledge nor wisdom and displays that I am far away from the fear of the Lord… Ethical value is entailed \u2014 connected to \u2014 the epistemic consideration.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Chad Huffman, “Generative AI and Christian Wisdom,” Center for Faith and Culture, SEBTS<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The Proverbs wisdom tradition insists that knowledge precedes right action. In the context of AI, this means you must know enough about your subject to evaluate what the AI gives you. A pastor who asks AI to generate sermon content and publishes it without theological evaluation is not saving time \u2014 he is gambling with his congregation’s souls.<\/p>\n

Part Five: What Scripture Teaches About Using AI Wisely<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

Caveat One: The Bible Remains the Final Authority<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

Artificial intelligence systems are trained on human data, which includes an enormous amount of theological content, but also an enormous amount of error, heresy, bias, and falsehood. An AI that has processed both Charles Spurgeon and the Book of Mormon has not thereby achieved theological discernment. It has only achieved scale.<\/p>\n

Patricia Engler frames this risk with characteristic precision:<\/p>\n

\n

“A significant foreseeable consequence of AI systems like large language models is that humans may easily be tempted to begin looking to them as the final authority for truth… But AI is engineered by fallible humans, trained on data from fallible humans, and prone to bias, errors, and ‘confabulation’ \u2014 presenting made-up information as factual. Only God is all-knowing, infallible, and the ultimate Truth. His Word, not the outputs of AI, must be our final authority.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Patricia Engler, Answers in Genesis<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

For the Christian, this is not merely prudential advice. It is a matter of theological first principles. Psalm 119:105 declares, “Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.”<\/strong> <\/em><\/span>That light is not supplemented or replaced by any technology. Scripture is the norming norm \u2014 the standard against which all other knowledge claims, including AI outputs, must be measured.<\/p>\n

Caveat Two: Guard Against Dependency and Idolatry<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

Every technology that provides genuine benefit carries the corresponding risk of becoming an idol \u2014 something we trust, defer to, and rely upon in ways that belong to God alone. The printing press did not eliminate the temptation to elevate tradition over Scripture; it simply changed its form. AI carries its own version of this temptation.<\/p>\n

Engler, drawing from extensive research, identifies the outer edge of this danger:<\/p>\n

\n

“All these trends point toward the potential for AI to become one of history’s most compelling idols. Idolatry, like other grave sins, leads to eternal destruction. Humanity’s gravest mistake regarding AI would lie not in making machines that could overpower us on earth but in seizing machines as idols to the destruction of our souls.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Patricia Engler, CBHD Dignitas<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The antidote is the same discipline that guards against every form of idolatry: regular, deliberate submission of one’s tools and technologies to the lordship of Christ. Using AI for ministry research must be held alongside \u2014 not instead of \u2014 personal prayer, Scripture meditation, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Colossians 3:17 provides the governing principle: “Whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.”<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Caveat Three: Protect Authentic Human Relationships and Vocations<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

One of the sharpest biblical cautions against AI misuse comes from Engler’s analysis of what she calls the “human vocations”<\/strong><\/span> that Scripture reserves specifically for people made in God’s image:<\/p>\n

\n

“The roles of stewarding creation, loving others, making disciples, leading the church, and being a parent, spouse, or friend are portrayed throughout Scripture as human roles reflecting our God-given designs as relational, embodied beings. We can use technology to support, but not to replace, humans in these roles. Pastors… cannot delegate their spiritual leadership responsibilities to chatbots, neglect personal Scripture study, or forgo face-to-face pastoral care.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Patricia Engler, CBHD Dignitas<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

This is a critical distinction. AI can research, organize, summarize, and draft. It cannot weep with those who weep. It cannot lay hands and pray. It cannot baptize, break bread, or speak the tender pastoral word that comes from years of shared history with a congregation. The imago Dei \u2014 the image of God embedded in human beings \u2014 gives human relationships and human vocations a dignity that no silicon process can replicate.<\/p>\n

Tim Challies articulates this from his own practice with characteristic honesty:<\/p>\n

\n

“At this point, I am glad to consider its use in my life, vocation, and ministry, but I am committed to never using it deceptively or using it in such a way that it takes over my creative functions. I am comfortable using it as an assistant, but not a substitute.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Tim Challies, Challies.com<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Caveat Four: Be Alert to Bias and Error<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

AI systems are built by human beings, trained on human data, and refined by human feedback. They inherit the biases, blind spots, and worldview assumptions of their creators. Dustin Ryan documents a particularly striking example:<\/p>\n

\n

“Research conducted at the University of East Anglia revealed OpenAI’s ChatGPT has a systemic bias towards the political left. And if you need an example of bias in AI tools, compare the outputs from ChatGPT when asked to write a joke about Jesus and a joke about Allah.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Dustin Ryan, Christ Over All<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Master’s Bible Church’s article on Christians and AI expands on this with their own direct experiment, documenting that ChatGPT’s safety guidelines restrict it from “claiming one religion is ‘the only true one'”<\/strong> <\/em><\/span>while readily affirming secular humanist frameworks. This anti-Christian bias is real, documentable, and must be kept in mind when using AI for apologetic or theological content.<\/p>\n

The response is not to abandon AI but to remain critically engaged. Romans 12:2 commands believers not to be conformed to the pattern of this world, but to be transformed by the renewing of their minds. Applying AI output uncritically is precisely the kind of conformity Paul warns against. Applying it with Spirit-renewed critical discernment is wisdom.<\/p>\n

Caveat Five: Guard Against Intellectual Laziness<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

The risk that AI will make believers lazy is real. Why wrestle with a difficult passage when a chatbot can produce a plausible-sounding explanation in seconds? Why develop the discipline of writing when AI can draft your newsletter? Why cultivate theological judgment when you can outsource it?<\/p>\n

Chad Huffman makes the argument from Proverbs: wisdom requires that we develop genuine knowledge before relying on tools. AI used as a crutch by those who have not done the underlying intellectual and spiritual work is not a productivity tool \u2014 it is a shortcut that produces shallow output from shallow users.<\/p>\n

Challies adds a practical warning about AI’s tendency toward flattery:<\/p>\n

\n

“AI is still too much of a sycophant, and Christians above all people should be wary of tools that flatter rather than challenge us. It is programmed to affirm the user and feed their ego.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Tim Challies, Challies.com<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

A tool that always tells you your ideas are brilliant and your drafts are excellent is not a research partner \u2014 it is a mirror that shows you only what you want to see. Christians committed to the sanctification of the mind (Romans 12:2; Philippians 4:8) should be deeply suspicious of any influence that strengthens pride rather than humility.<\/p>\n

Part Six: Engaging the Critics \u2014 Charitable Responses to Genuine Concerns<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

“Christians Don’t Need AI” \u2014 The Case for Divine Intelligence<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

Kelly J. Grace, a Christian blogger and podcaster, represents a thoughtful and spiritually grounded skepticism toward AI. Her article, “Why Christians Don’t Need Artificial Intelligence,”<\/strong><\/em><\/span> makes a case worth taking seriously:<\/p>\n

\n

“Christians don’t need Artificial Intelligence simply because we have access to something far superior, Divine Intelligence… Christians don’t need Artificial Intelligence! We have access to Real Truth, to Divine Wisdom and to the Holy Spirit who lives in us and has promised to lead us into all the truth (John 16:13).”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Kelly J. Grace, “Why Christians Don’t Need Artificial Intelligence,” kellyjgrace.com<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Grace also identifies a legitimate concern about AI and deception: “AI is rocket fuel for lies. False information is amplified by AI on a scale that was unimaginable without it.”<\/strong><\/em><\/span> She ties this to the eschatological warning of 2 Thessalonians 2 about the “strong delusion”<\/strong><\/span><\/em> that will deceive those who reject truth.<\/p>\n

These are legitimate concerns, and Grace is right that no technology can substitute for the Holy Spirit’s guidance or compete with the authority of God’s Word. But her argument, taken at face value, would apply equally to every other study tool in the Christian’s library. Commentaries don’t need to replace the Holy Spirit to be useful. Concordances don’t need to be inspired to accelerate genuine study. Neither does AI. The issue is not whether believers need AI \u2014 they don’t, just as they don’t need commentary sets, seminary education, or Christian radio. The issue is whether AI can serve genuine spiritual purposes when used wisely. And the answer, clearly, is yes.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

“AI Chatbots Are Demons in Disguise” \u2014 Patristic Cautions<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

Writing in Seen & Unseen, Dr. Gabrielle Thomas \u2014 Assistant Professor of Early Christianity and Anglican Studies at Emory University \u2014 offers a striking analysis rooted in the patristic tradition. She draws parallels between early Christian descriptions of demonic deception and the illusory qualities of AI-generated content:<\/p>\n

\n

“Early Christian thinkers had a distinct category for precisely this kind of illusion: the demonic. They understood demons not as red, horned bodies or fiery realms, but as entities with power to fabricate illusions \u2014 visions, appearances, and deceptive signs that distorted human perception of reality.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Dr. Gabrielle Thomas, “Are AI Chatbots Actually Demons in Disguise?” Seen & Unseen<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Thomas invokes Athanasius, Evagrius Ponticus, and Augustine to argue that AI’s capacity to produce confident-sounding falsehoods, its creation of illusions of companionship, and its potential to feed human pride mirror the patterns that early Christian writers associated with demonic activity.<\/p>\n

Importantly, Thomas does not conclude that AI is literally demonic. She writes: “Chatbot illusions are not necessarily demonic in themselves. The key is whether the illusion points beyond itself toward truth and reality, or whether it traps us in deception.”<\/strong><\/em><\/span> Her prescription mirrors the patristic advice on discernment: test every output, cultivate habits of verification, orient desire toward truth. This is entirely compatible with wise Christian use of AI \u2014 and indeed reinforces the framework this essay has developed.<\/p>\n

Sojo.net and Progressive Concerns<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

Sojourners magazine has published perspectives arguing that AI poses risks related to economic injustice, environmental harm, and the concentration of power in the hands of a technological elite. These concerns resonate with biblical themes of justice, care for the poor, and suspicion of unchecked institutional power.<\/p>\n

Christians who take the prophetic tradition of social justice seriously \u2014 rooted in Micah 6:8, Amos 5, and the Sermon on the Mount \u2014 should absolutely engage these concerns. The appropriate Christian response is not to abandon AI but to advocate for its ethical governance, support workers displaced by automation, and resist the idolization of technological progress as an end in itself. Engler’s analysis of AI’s potential for surveillance infrastructure and economic disruption provides a theologically grounded framework for this engagement.<\/p>\n

A Measured Synthesis<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

The concerns raised by skeptics are not the same as arguments for complete non-engagement. Every valid concern about AI \u2014 hallucination, bias, dependency, economic displacement, surveillance risk, spiritual distraction \u2014 has a corresponding Christian response that involves discerning engagement rather than withdrawal.<\/p>\n

Kenny O’Donnell puts it well: “Should Christians use Artificial Intelligence? \u2014 Absolutely, unless you plan on going to the library for everything, which is still not foolproof. Should you be cautious? Absolutely! Like in all things, we must seek wisdom and discernment, and technology is no exception.”<\/strong><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

Part Seven: Theological Foundations for a Christian AI Ethic<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

Imago Dei: What AI Can Never Be<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

The doctrine of the imago Dei \u2014 that human beings are uniquely created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:26-27) \u2014 is the theological cornerstone of Christian AI ethics. Young Choi of Regent University states it plainly:<\/p>\n

\n

“While machines can simulate certain aspects of human intelligence, they lack the spiritual dimension that is intrinsic to humans. This distinction is crucial as we navigate the ethical implications of AI, ensuring that human dignity and value are upheld.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Young Choi, Regent University CCTA<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

AI systems do not have souls. They do not bear the image of God. They cannot pray, repent, believe, worship, or love. They are sophisticated tools \u2014 extraordinarily powerful, genuinely useful, morally neutral in themselves \u2014 but tools nonetheless. This is not a limitation that better programming will overcome. It is a categorical distinction rooted in what it means to be human.<\/p>\n

This understanding both liberates and constrains Christian use of AI. It liberates us from treating AI as a spiritual threat to humanity \u2014 it cannot touch what makes us uniquely human. And it constrains us from treating AI as a spiritual resource \u2014 it cannot provide what only the Holy Spirit and the Word of God can give.<\/p>\n

Sovereign God, Changeless Truth<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

Dustin Ryan of Christ Over All grounds Christian confidence in the face of technological uncertainty in the immutability of God’s sovereign rule:<\/p>\n

\n

“The printing press, the telegraph, and the internet all represent revolutionary changes in information, and yet through all these the sovereign God has remained on his throne. We should not be afraid of uncertainty as the revolution of artificial intelligence continues to advance.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Dustin Ryan, Christ Over All<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

This is not naive optimism. It is the theological confidence of Isaiah 41:10 \u2014 “Fear not, for I am with you; be not dismayed, for I am your God”<\/strong><\/em><\/span> \u2014 applied to technological anxiety. The church survived the Gutenberg press. It survived the Enlightenment. It will survive artificial intelligence, not because Christians are clever enough to manage the technology, but because the gates of hell will not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18).<\/p>\n

The Great Commission in the Age of AI<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

The ultimate theological rationale for Christian engagement with AI is the Great Commission. Jesus commanded his disciples to make disciples of all nations (Matthew 28:18-20) \u2014 a mission that in every generation requires the use of available tools and technologies.<\/p>\n

Ryan makes this argument with full force:<\/p>\n

\n

“At the dawn of a new technological revolution, we have the unique ability to use AI tools in ways never before possible to share what Jesus has done with the world. If we believe the truth of the gospel, we should wisely do everything in our power to achieve the effective communication of the gospel as obediently and faithfully as possible.”<\/i>
\n\u2014 Dustin Ryan, Christ Over All<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

This is not pragmatism for its own sake. It is fidelity to the church’s original commission. Billy Graham used radio and television not because they were neutral or safe, but because souls were at stake and every available means of reaching them was a sacred obligation. The same logic applies to AI in the present moment.<\/p>\n

Part Eight: A Practical Guide for Christians Beginning with AI<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

Starting Points for the Theologically Cautious<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

If you are new to AI and approach it with appropriate caution, here is a practical framework for beginning:<\/p>\n