Credo
20 July 2026

Shortly after ChatGPT made its grand appearance in November 2022 in the US, the 168-year-old magazine with a good reputation, The Atlantic, declared a week later, “The College Essay Is Dead.” The New York Post (26 Dec 2022) even went as far as to announce, “Welcome to the new age of academic dishonesty,” in its report of a philosophy professor’s discovery of a student using the chatbot to generate his assignment.

ChatGPT’s ability to enhance learning is significant, sparking anxiety and excitement in many sectors. Seminaries, too, are not exempt from its impact. As someone who occasionally addresses plagiarism issues, I find myself in a new role, constantly reminding students about academic ethics and integrity in the digital age.

If educators are honest enough, we may be unable to identify academic infractions in students’ work since new technology appears on the horizon in the second. Thanks to our age-related cognitive changes, we can be made to feel like medieval relics and lament the gulf in the “digital divide.”

As a Christian educator with a keen interest in technology, my view on using AI in seminary students’ work is not one of avoidance but of responsible and ethical use. We must maintain academic and spiritual integrity in our use of these tools.

Distinction and declaration

I once held a class session on using ChatGPT-4 and other academic writing tools. My purpose and emphasis were clear: it is not just what tools we use but also how we use them with Christian integrity.

The final telos is truthfulness and accountability first to God and then to one another in a seminary community; so that we (faculty included) can strike an instructive balance between benefiting from technological help versus suffering from excessive dependence on machines. After all, it is when we offer our research as worship to God in His presence that we inhabit joy. (Ps. 16:11)

Ethical use of any technology requires a sensible approach. We must declare any use of aids in the footnotes of our work and use them only when necessary. Timing and efficacy are crucial: when and how do AI tools enhance students’ learning without compromising academic integrity?

It is indisputable that we uphold academic integrity, even in the face of technological advancements. Software tools that provide grammar checking, for example, can be a valuable resource for non-native English students, helping them to improve the quality of their work while providing, to some extent, a form of language training.

In cases such as writing a sermon where no formal citing is necessary, I would urge students to craft engaging rhetoric and sort through different exegetical viewpoints, storytelling skills, and applications in ways that will help them become better Christian communicators, pastors, and leaders. In this case, using technology tools to gather resources such as commentaries quickly is helpful.

Students must internalize the virtue of careful reading and the value of meticulously evaluating the content of these resources. Honest and hard work that requires time and effort must not be sacrificed or circumvented. Otherwise, we forego opportunities to be more like Christ, our moral par excellence. Perhaps we can at least be like Nathaniel, whom Jesus Christ praised as one who has “no guile” (Jn. 1:47)

It is essential to draw a clear line between effective use and overreliance on technology tools. Effective use means using a tool for its intended purpose and gaining new skills. In contrast, overreliance implies an unhealthy dependence on something to the extent that one’s own capabilities and talents are cast aside. Does anyone want to be called a “brilliant person with lazy brains”?

The Danger of Over-reliance

Seminarians may intentionally or inadvertently use chatbots to replace necessary cognitive exercises. For instance, a paper assignment written by a student using technology does not accurately reflect the student’s comprehension of the subject matter. How can the grader accurately evaluate the students’ competence and maturity in the work submitted?

Any overreliance or even utter dependence on AI to generate papers impedes the student’s academic and spiritual growth because they have not engaged in the rigorous exercise of the assignment. Academically, we must encourage individuals to remain mentally active and engaged in robust cognitive tasks. Spiritually, each person must embrace truthfulness and seek to experience the joy of learning. This is our responsibility (2 Tim 2:15) Whether it is the academic or faith aspect, seminarians contribute to cultivating an environment of joyful learning.

Seen from another perspective, the relational dimension of spirituality demonstrates, among many ways, servanthood to others. If we understand Christlikeness is formed through faith practices, then as Stanley Grenz illumines, Christlike character (Gal. 5:22) also results in us our “faithfulness in relationship with others” for human faithfulness is first anchored in God, the faithful One (Ps. 36:5)

However, the temptation to let chatbots fulfil our tasks remains.

We are immersed in a techno world. Just look at how we display “wearable technology” products on our bodies as fashion accessories. As some of my students in their 20s quipped, “Our generation is raised on technology.” The conventional rationality is that technological resources are tools to make their lives easier.

Little do they know that, as a result, they have lost a unique sense of God-given autonomy. Health and exercise trackers are on the go; there are endless QR codes to scan in restaurants, shops, and churches, digital assistance and sensors at home and so on. Everywhere, anywhere, by the second. Have we not surrendered our creative thinking capacities in exchange for being part of the impersonal mega algorithm?

Plutarch’s words in On Listening provide the appropriate conclusion to this article. That is, “the mind does not require filling like a bottle, but rather, like wood, it only requires kindling to create in it an impulse to think independently and an ardent desire for the truth.”

Independent thinking and a burning desire for the truth remind us of how our God has empowered us—we are creative beings with the power of reason and reflection in the face of stark existential catastrophes. We have the power to reject becoming subservient to our technological society.

Use technology appropriately, but do not permit any chatbot with neither virtue nor soul to do all the thinking for us. That undermines our Imago Dei (Gen. 1:27) as our creative capacity in problem-solving, the arts, or moral reasoning is diminished. Additionally, we are in danger of losing the opportunity to experience the joy of critical thinking and theological reflection that lead to “ah ha” moments. Those split seconds of dynamic shifts from exasperation to enlightenment hold so much delight, too good to be missed.

Kris H.K. Chong (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary; MPhil, Cambridge University) currently teaches at Baptist Theological Seminary. She has a prose column 《海角一方》in the Lianhe Zaobao newspaper. Recent academic publications include: Transcendence and Spirituality in Chinese Cinema: A Theological Exploration (Routledge, 2020) and “(Not) the End: From Death to Life in East Asian Films” (Concilium: International Journal for Theology, Dec. 2021). Kris worships at Paya Lebar Chinese Methodist Church.