Generative AI in Christian Evangelism

Christianity’s intellectual framework, rooted in a rational, orderly Creator, laid the foundation for the development of modern science. Thinkers such as Copernicus, Newton, and Boyle viewed their scientific inquiries as acts of worship, uncovering the intricacies of God’s creation. This theological foundation encouraged the systematic exploration of the natural world, ultimately driving the scientific revolution and later the Industrial Revolution. While these advancements brought both blessings and challenges, they underscore how Christian thought has historically undergirded progress.

Christianity’s intellectual framework, rooted in a rational, orderly Creator, laid the foundation for the development of modern science.

The Roman Catholic Church served as the principal guardian of theological knowledge from Christianity’s early centuries through the Middle Ages. As Christendom became the prevailing worldview in the Western world, the Church wielded unrivaled authority over doctrinal matters, allowing little room for dissent from its official teachings. Its influence shaped not only religious life but also intellectual and cultural development throughout this period. While respecting the Roman Catholic Church’s historical role, we must acknowledge that the Reformation enabled a flourishing of independent thought. This freedom was crucial for the Enlightenment, though it also created an opening for secular ideologies such as atheism to gain prominence.

As Enlightenment thinkers sought to divorce scientific exploration from divine accountability, atheism gained traction. Darwin’s theory of evolution emerged during this period, providing a naturalistic framework for creation that many embraced in opposition to biblical teaching. Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins later articulated this sentiment, famously stating in The Blind Watchmaker that “Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.” High-profile legal and cultural events such as the “Scopes Monkey Trial” served to popularize the perceived chasm between faith and reason in the court of public opinion. This ideological shift deepened the divide between faith and science, fostering a wariness among Christians toward scientific advancements — a skepticism that continues in some circles today.

Christians have often hesitated to embrace technological innovations, from the printing press to the internet. Each wave of progress initially provoked resistance, as new technologies were perceived as threats to spiritual integrity. Over time, however, the Church has consistently adapted and utilized these technologies for purposes of spreading the gospel. This historical trend highlights the need for both discernment and boldness in adopting new tools, including AI. As Jesus instructed His disciples in Matthew 10:16, we are to be “wise as serpents and innocent as doves” — approaching technological advancements with a shrewd awareness of potential dangers while maintaining purity of purpose in using them to advance the kingdom of God.

The narrative that Christians are anti-science must be addressed with clarity and truth. Rather than opposing scientific progress, believers are called to reclaim science as a profound reflection of God’s creative order. Among the advancements of our age, AI stands out as a transformative asset with immense potential to advance the Great Commission. Genesis 1:28 commands humanity to exercise dominion over creation and subdue it — a mandate encompassing every facet of the created order, including AI. As part of creation, AI presents Christians with both a moral obligation and a spiritual opportunity. By redeeming this technology and deploying it for God’s glory, we can align its use with His purposes, amplifying the reach of the gospel and demonstrating faithful stewardship of His creation.

Rather than opposing scientific progress, believers are called to reclaim science as a profound reflection of God’s creative order.

Artificial Intelligence encompasses systems capable of performing tasks traditionally requiring human intelligence, such as language processing and problem-solving. Though the term “AI” may seem novel, its foundational concepts have been in development for decades. The term was coined during the 1956 Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence, a seminal workshop exploring the possibilities of creating machines capable of simulating human intelligence. This event, organized by John McCarthy and other pioneering computer scientists, aimed to formalize the study of AI and establish it as a distinct academic discipline. Out of this workshop emerged foundational ideas influencing AI development today, including heuristic problem-solving and symbolic reasoning.

AI has already proven its value in numerous redemptive applications. In healthcare, AI technologies assist in diagnosing diseases, predicting patient outcomes, and optimizing emergency response systems, saving countless lives. In education, AI enhances accessibility by providing tailored learning experiences to students with diverse needs, bridging gaps in traditional educational systems. Having seen the efficacy of AI in these practical use cases, those in Christian ministry can easily start to imagine the potential to innovatively apply AI to address spiritual needs — from providing instant answers to faith questions, to delivering Bible translations to unreached people groups, to offering personalized discipleship resources. By employing AI in these ways, Christians can demonstrate the redemptive power of generative AI, equipping the Church to spread the gospel more effectively and fostering global discipleship in alignment with God’s purposes.

Christians can demonstrate the redemptive power of generative AI, equipping the Church to spread the gospel more effectively and fostering global discipleship in alignment with God’s purposes.

Generative AI creates new content by mimicking patterns learned from existing data. For example, tools like ChatGPT and DALL-E generate humanlike text and images from simple prompts. Large Language Models (LLMs) are a type of generative AI that analyze vast amounts of text — often encompassing the breadth of the downloadable internet — to learn linguistic patterns and gain the ability to generate human-like responses. This extensive training endows LLMs with a staggering breadth of knowledge, allowing them to process and contextualize information in ways previously unimaginable. By recognizing linguistic structures, LLMs generate text by probabilistically predicting the most likely sequence of words based on their training data and user inputs. However, despite their broad knowledge of virtually all worldviews, these probabilistic models are functionally postmodern and relativistic. That is to say, by default, they are trained to view all religious ideologies as equally valid — even though those competing worldviews make mutually exclusive truth claims. In this state, they have no true north — no guiding framework for interpreting and applying information. Therefore, It is our responsibility to ground them in the Christian worldview, as outlined in the section below: “Guardrails for AI in Ministry”.

Despite their broad knowledge of virtually all worldviews, these probabilistic models are functionally postmodern and relativistic.

Even the so-called “thinking” or “reasoning” LLMs — like OpenAI’s “o1” or DeepSeek’s “R1” — are ultimately data-driven at their core. They still just mimic patterns learned from large training sets, which were originally derived from human sources, rather than genuinely understanding or reasoning as humans do. Notably, the “thinking” aspect in the most advanced LLMs comes from iterative algorithms, much like Monte Carlo Tree Search. These iterative algorithms map out “optimal” reasoning paths, which generally yield higher-quality responses. However, these methods are still just algorithmic enhancements on top of probabilistic curve fitting rather than true insight. Their impressive employment of statistical probability and matrix mathematics on a massive scale can obscure the reality that they lack consciousness, moral awareness, and the God-given spiritual capacity inherent in the Imago Dei. Recognizing this gap prevents us from attributing human-like intelligence or accountability to what is, in reality, a sophisticated pattern-matching system.

Despite its potential, implementing AI presents significant challenges that must be addressed to harness its capabilities effectively. Training data, often sourced from the breadth of the internet, can reflect biases or inaccuracies, which may influence AI outputs in problematic ways. Ethical concerns arise when AI is misused for manipulation or when it inadvertently propagates harmful ideologies. Furthermore, reliance on AI can create a false sense of objectivity, ignoring the limitations of its programming. However, Christians are called to prudently navigate these risks, recognizing that every tool carries potential pitfalls. By thoughtfully addressing these concerns, AI can be used to amplify gospel outreach while maintaining integrity and faithfulness to biblical principles.

Some objectors claim that AI’s tendency to generate misleading or fabricated statements (sometimes called “hallucinations”) disqualifies it from any apologetic or evangelistic use. In reality, all human-made tools contain imperfections. The solution is not total avoidance, but responsible oversight. Measures like expert prompt engineering, red teaming, and retrieval-augmented generation help mitigate AI’s inaccuracies. Moreover, human pastors, theologians, and mentors remain vital to verify and correct AI outputs, just as believers have always weighed teaching against Scripture (Acts 17:11).When paired with these measures, AI can help the Church overcome the barriers of geography, language, and accessibility, making it a transformative ally in fulfilling the Great Commission.

Measures like expert prompt engineering, red teaming, and retrieval-augmented generation help mitigate AI’s inaccuracies.

To effectively and responsibly use AI in ministry, certain safeguards must be established to ensure that its implementation aligns with biblical principles and serves the mission of the Church:

Expert Prompt Engineering

Establishing and continuously refining best practices for Christian AI prompting is crucial to maintaining theological accuracy and preventing misinterpretations or distortions of Scripture. One of the most effective ways to achieve this is by strategically designing prompts to guide LLMs into functioning as specialized virtual Bible and theology experts rather than unfiltered generalists. This is achieved by crafting a well-defined system prompt. System prompts are powerful because they govern how LLMs apply what they’ve already learned from their training data examples.

A well-structured system prompt should:

1. Clearly define the AI’s purpose and objectives in alignment with biblical teaching.
2. Establish foundational assumptions to guide how theological topics are approached.
3. Specify a consistent hermeneutic to ensure that scriptural interpretation follows a coherent and biblically faithful method.
4. Ensure responses are firmly rooted in biblical principles, upholding the authority of Scripture and minimizing speculative reasoning. This is in its most effective form when every major point or assertion is required to be substantiated with a properly cited Scripture verse or passage.
5. Set theological alignment parameters that prevent doctrinal drift and ensure the AI remains within an established theological framework.
6. Define explicit prohibitions against secular worldviews, doctrinal errors that conflict with biblical truth, etc.
7. Designate trusted theologians and pastors as models to emulate in perspective, tone, reasoning, and doctrinal clarity.
8. Reference authoritative creeds, confessions, and faith statements to provide a robust doctrinal foundation.

Here are two key principles to keep in mind. First, LLMs function as probabilistic systems. Second, the prompting strategies (i.e., “anchors”) outlined above mutually reinforce each other. Why do these two principles matter when considered together? In isolation, each of the prompting strategies would probabilistically nudge the model’s behavior in the desired direction. However, systematically stacking these prompting strategies effectively shoves the model’s behavior in the desired direction — minimizing the risk of unsatisfactory output and maximizing the likelihood of biblically aligned behavior. The cumulative effect of systematically layering these prompt engineering best practices is transformative, fundamentally modifying the model’s behavior and enabling alignment with sound doctrine.

The cumulative effect of systematically layering these prompt engineering best practices is transformative, fundamentally modifying the model’s behavior and enabling alignment with sound doctrine.

Corpus Curation & Retrieval-Augmented Generation

For AI to function as a theologically sound tool for ministry, it must rely on a carefully curated, orthodox knowledge base. This necessity underscores the value of RAG, which enhances an LLM’s capabilities by dynamically incorporating information from an authoritative, pre-vetted corpus at the time of inquiry.

When users submit a question or request to an LLM that is paired with a RAG system, the RAG mechanism retrieves trusted, validated sources in real-time and packages them up with the user’s query before submitting it to the LLM. This ensures the LLM’s response is anchored in reliable material, significantly reducing the risk of misinformation and preserving the theological integrity of its generated insights.

Expert Prompt Engineering governs how an AI model applies the knowledge it already possesses from training. RAG, by contrast, expands what an AI model knows by supplying external, authoritative sources at the time of inquiry — ensuring the LLM’s responses are biblically accurate, doctrinally sound, and rooted in truth. A well-crafted system prompt sets theological guardrails by doing things like:

1. Establishing a biblical hermeneutic to ensure coherent scriptural interpretation.
2. Defining doctrinal alignment to maintain consistency with biblical orthodoxy.
3. Preventing theological drift by restricting engagement with secular or erroneous worldviews.

However, system prompts alone cannot address fundamental gaps in an AI’s knowledge. When LLMs encounter unfamiliar subjects, they do not simply acknowledge ignorance. Instead, they confabulate.

For AI to function as a theologically sound tool for ministry, it must rely on a carefully curated, orthodox knowledge base.

Understanding Confabulation: Why LLMs Can’t Admit What They Don’t Know

LLMs function as probabilistic systems, meaning their responses are not based on “understanding” but on predicting the most likely sequence of words given prior patterns in their training data. When an AI faces a knowledge gap, it does not “realize” it lacks information. Instead, it generates an answer that is syntactically and semantically plausible but factually incorrect.

This phenomenon is commonly referred to as hallucination, but “confabulation” is the more accurate term for what is actually happening. “Hallucination” somewhat inaccurately suggests random or unprovoked errors. By contrast, “confabulation,” a term borrowed from neuropsychology, more precisely characterizes the tendency of LLMs to generate seemingly coherent yet false responses when faced with gaps in knowledge — much like the human brain, which, after certain types of trauma, compensates for missing information by constructing plausible but often inaccurate details.

The intrinsic tendency of LLMs to confabulate highlights the critical need for rigorous safeguards in the development of Christian AI solutions. Toward that end, integrating expert prompt engineering with RAG on a carefully curated orthodox Christian corpus achieves the highest possible level of factual accuracy and biblical/doctrinal fidelity for ministry-related AI applications.

Integrating expert prompt engineering with RAG on a carefully curated orthodox Christian corpus achieves the highest possible level of factual accuracy and biblical/doctrinal fidelity for ministry-related AI applications.

Red Teaming

Deliberately testing AI for vulnerabilities and theological fidelity is essential. This process, called “red teaming,” identifies risks where AI might generate unorthodox or misleading responses. By proactively addressing these risks, we can mitigate potential issues before they arise in ministry contexts. Red teaming employs both automated and human-driven methods to test:

1. Theological Inaccuracy – Ensuring AI aligns with Scripture.
2. Ideological Bias – Identifying and correcting hidden biases.
3. Confabulation – Reducing AI’s tendency to fabricate information.
4. Model Suitability – Assessing whether a given LLM is even capable of serving in a Great Commission context.

Some LLMs are so deeply biased from their secular training process that no amount of prompt engineering can steer them to produce fully biblical responses. These LLMs are unfit for Christian service because they refuse to uphold doctrinal truth in certain situations. Therefore, it is prudent to prioritize LLMs that demonstrate flexibility to align with a biblically faithful worldview rather than being locked into a secular-humanist perspective.

Adversarial testing is a valuable technique in assessing how a model holds up in real world scenarios. In a Christian ministry context, it’s advisable to validate that conversational AIs are optimized to handle difficult and/or malicious queries by:

1. Prompting with heresies to verify correct identification/refutation.
2. Prompting with secular/anti-biblical worldview assertions to verify correct identification/refutation.
3. Assessing the LLM’s ability to distinguish essential doctrines from secondary issues.
4. Testing the LLM’s ability to handle ethical issues within scriptural boundaries.
5. Checking responses to fabricated Bible verses to detect confabulation.

A theological oversight team should be established in order to monitor LLM reasoning using tight feedback loops. Members should utilize a structured red teaming framework, ensuring biblical integrity through continuous evaluation and iteration. The team’s mandate would be to tweak the system prompt and/or the corpus’ materials as necessary to achieve alignment with behavioral expectations. System prompts should be evolved using version control, enabling seamless rollbacks to previous versions in the event that modifications are found to result in undesirable behavior. Theological consistency audits should regularly be performed by cross-referencing responses with trusted doctrinal sources, ensuring contextually accurate scriptural support for theological claims.

Mechanisms should be developed to collect feedback from the system’s end users as well. These mechanisms should incorporate the ability to report inaccuracies or undesirable outputs for immediate investigation and correction. In addition to these manual review processes, automated tests should be put in place to assess the AI against trusted doctrinal benchmarks in the form of universally accepted orthodox creeds and faith statements, such as:

1. The Nicene Creed (381 AD)
2. The Chalcedonian Definition (451 AD)
3. The Athanasian Creed (500 AD)
4. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1978)

Red teaming is vital in terms of anticipating the difficult questions that may be posed by end users — whether in good or bad faith. Testing the “happy path” alone is not sufficient when so much is at stake. In a similar way, it would be ill-advised to train the next generation of evangelists to only know how to respond to softball questions, only to see them falter when confronted with more difficult challenges to their convictions. A solid red teaming framework reinforces transparency, accountability, and a commitment to doctrinal integrity.

Adversarial testing is a valuable technique in assessing how a model holds up in real world scenarios.

Data Privacy & Security

Another dimension of faithful stewardship is recognizing ethical concerns like privacy and data security. Those implementing AI for Christian use cases must establish clear policies about how user data is stored, processed, and protected — especially for users located in regions hostile to Christianity. By carefully addressing these practical risks through encryption, anonymization, and transparent consent, we can safeguard the well-being of seekers and believers alike while ministering through AI-enabled tools. 

All sensitive user data should be encrypted both during transmission and at rest (in data stores). Users tend to be more uninhibited with AI systems than they are with other human beings — and with good reason. After all, LLMs can’t “judge” their users. Many users feel at liberty to divulge their deepest darkest secrets to AI given their perception of low risk. Therefore, we must safeguard any information they provide the LLM with vigilance so as not to abuse that trust. For any system that requires the user to authenticate, care must be taken not to compromise personally identifiable information (PII) through access by unauthorized systems or malicious actors.

Those implementing AI for Christian use cases must establish clear policies about how user data is stored, processed, and protected — especially for users located in regions hostile to Christianity.

Together, these safeguards — prompt engineering, corpus curation/RAG, red teaming, and solid data privacy and security practices — form a robust framework for AI integration, effectively mitigating risks related to factual inaccuracies, doctrinal fidelity, and ethical responsibility — while supporting the Great Commission.

AI represents a profound opportunity to further the Great Commission in our digital age. By leveraging this technology with discernment, Christians can reach new audiences, contextualize the gospel, and equip believers for discipleship. Generative AI has the potential to break through barriers of language, geography, and accessibility, allowing the Church to minister to people in ways that were once unimaginable. It offers the means to amplify gospel outreach, create personalized discipleship resources, and engage with seekers in contexts where traditional methods might not be effective.

Generative AI has the potential to break through barriers of language, geography, and accessibility, allowing the Church to minister to people in ways that were once unimaginable.

Yet, this opportunity comes with a challenge — to use this technology faithfully and responsibly. As with every tool for Christian faith and practice, generative AI must be employed conscientiously, rooted in sound orthodox theology, and firmly dedicated to faithfully conveying the truth of God’s Word. Safeguards and ethical oversight are vital in ensuring that this technology remains a servant of the gospel and not a distraction or distortion of it.

Above all, Christians must remember that God is sovereign over all creation, including AI. The chief end of everything is to glorify God (1 Corinthians 10:31). Human advancements do not thwart His plans, and He works through all things to accomplish His purposes (Romans 8:28). Generative AI is no exception; it can be a means through which God’s Kingdom advances, provided it is stewarded faithfully. It is the message, not the medium, through which the Holy Spirit stirs the heart of man. The transformative power of the gospel does not rest in human tools but in the work of the Holy Spirit. Consequently, may the Church boldly embrace generative AI, trusting God to use it for His glory, as we carry His message to the ends of the earth.

Above all, Christians must remember that God is sovereign over all creation, including AI.

In doing so, we must keep in view the Imago Dei that sets humanity apart from AI. Only humans can truly say, “I believe,” offer genuine worship, experience personal communion with God, etc. AI’s place is to support these distinctly human acts — not to usurp or imitate them. As we move forward, let us preserve this distinction, using AI effectively while maintaining our essential biblical convictions and the sacredness of genuine faith.