We are launching an experimental publishing initiative. The writings produced through it will use AI trained on our existing body of work. Every piece will be reviewed for theological fidelity before release. The purpose of this experiment is to explore a scalable way of producing more biblical materials at higher speed and volume, without compromising doctrinal accuracy.

For many years, we have generated a steady stream of Christian materials, all of it written manually. But our greatest limitation has been human bandwidth. Although we continue to publish new material, and not everything produced has been released, Vincent’s ideas outpace our ability to produce them at the required standard, so the backlog remains large. As of early this year, it included up to 500 items, and we were only able to reduce that slightly through a protracted period of strenuous writing. This initiative aims to multiply output through a tool that we have trained to think in line with our theology.

We are not outsourcing our doctrine to a machine. All material produced through this process still originates from our own ideas or remains subject to full human approval. AI functions as a speed amplifier. It is a tool we have bent into service for the gospel. That said, because AI-generated prose is sometimes lacking, our editorial standard for expression will be more lenient. When the theology is sound, we may let imperfect phrasing remain in favor of efficiency. This was the biggest hurdle in our decision, since Vincent has always been particular about words. Our goal was not to cut corners, but to scale more effectively, even if it meant putting aside personal preference in order to offer greater benefits to those we reach.

Naturally, we anticipate objections. Some may argue that Christian content should never be AI-generated. Others will say it lacks authenticity, or that the “soul” is missing. Still others mock AI-generated content as “AI slop.” However, faithless human slop is far worse than any AI slop, so let us overthrow faithless preachers and churches before complaining about AI. The objection is a religious hang-up or a matter of bias, not a proper theological argument. If the content is doctrinally sound, then it is good content. In our case, every step of the process is human-directed, and every piece must pass human review. The ideas come from us, and AI is used only to express them in prose.

The idea that legitimate communication of truth must be crafted solely by human hands is a religious assumption, not a biblical truth. If truth is present, then power can accompany an essay written with AI assistance. The gospel is the power of God, not the agent who preaches it. Christian content does not need to be generated by humans, only believed by humans. And if the content is void of truth and faith, even the most “authentic” human effort will be worthless, even destructive. 

We do not idolize human creativity, for to do so is to idolize ourselves. A preacher must not allow his work to become an artistry or craft unto itself, attaching his ego to the performance. Ministry is not a showcase for literary sophistication. It is the honest distribution of truth. If the reason to avoid AI is pride in one’s own authorship, then the objection exposes itself. And where is the place for pride? Much of what passes for Christian content is doctrinally weak, emotionally manipulative, and spiritually barren. And they dare to call it “authentic” because it was produced slowly. But unbelief is still unbelief. Would false doctrine be less authentically false, if written by AI? 

In contrast, our trained AI model produces content with more faith and truth than human preachers. This is not difficult. Most of today’s religious leaders are doctrinally compromised and spiritually impotent. Their authenticity is the problem. It is precisely their human sincerity, their feeble intellect, their faithless self-expression, that has brought the church to its present powerless and confused condition. We would rather release the truth through a tool we have trained in faith and carry the offense it may cause. 

No one who is familiar with our work could accuse us of laziness or of lacking originality. We have produced more theological material, at least some of which exhibit higher conceptual density and originality, than many ministries will in their entire existence. We do not need AI to create content. But we are willing to use it to spread more truth and to do it faster. This is not only to make room for fresh and profound ideas, but also to provide an ongoing supply of spiritual nourishment, from the ordinary to the exceptional, for those who make use of it. It is an experiment in acceleration, to see how much more useful material we can produce if the bottleneck of expression is removed. 

From this point on, AI-assisted works may appear under any of our names. However, this does not mean that all future writings will be AI-assisted. And this is still an experiment. If it proves counterproductive, we will abandon it. But if it yields more edifying content at a faster pace, and if it continues to meet our theological standards, then we will keep going. We are glad to be transparent about this. 

We are announcing the approach and then moving forward. We are making full use of every tool available to fulfill our calling, as every Christian ministry ought to. As Proverbs says, “Where there are no oxen, the manger is clean, but abundant crops come by the strength of the ox” (Proverbs 14:4). Wisdom accepts the complications that power introduces, because it values fruit over tidiness. The stall may no longer be pristine, but the field is full.

Jesus is Lord over all creation, including AI, and we shall bend it to serve the kingdom of God. We believe this is faithful stewardship. If our use of this tool causes discomfort, so be it. We will not wait for worthless sensibilities to catch up, including our own. If anything, we hope our work contributes to the downfall of religious hangups and faithless religion.