My husband and I were recently approved to become adoptive parents, and we now wait for a long-expected phone call from our case worker that a child will become part of our family. During our approval process (what’s referred to as the “home study” phase), we were required to read multiple articles, listen to many podcast interviews, write a summary of each assignment, and then write our thoughts about how the assignment might help us in parenting.
These written responses went into a folder for the adoption agency and the state’s approval. We felt as though we were back in school with the number of assignments to complete in less than a semester’s length of time. We had to squeeze in podcasts about complex topics while on a vacation, and had to say “no” to many opportunities because of the time it took to write. What if we could have been more efficient?
What if we had fed the articles and podcast audio into an Artificial Intelligence (AI) communication tool, and then asked the tool to write out a summary for us? We could have also fed an AI tool our general parenting techniques via audio or in typed format, and then told the tool to write our response based on all the data from the assignments. It all could have been easier. We could have had our assignments done more quickly, enjoyed our vacation, and said “yes” to those missed opportunities.
If we chose to use an AI tool for our home study (which we did not), not only would it have been bordering on dishonesty, but my husband and I would have missed out on the formation from the assignments. Listening to and reading these assignments, taking time to think through them, and then writing my response actually started to shape the way I thought about parenting and becoming a mother.
It opened a way for my husband and me to talk about the nuances of what we both found helpful or silly in the assignments. It prepared us for where we are today and hopefully for where we will be when we finally have the opportunity to parent. Taking our time with these assignments affected us in ways we didn’t expect and drew us closer in our marriage.
The Rise of LLMs
Since 2024, we internet users have been given a steady upgrade to our software and search engines as we now have access to an endless source of knowledge and outsourced communication abilities due to the rise of AI. The specific type of AI used for communication purposes is known as a Large Language Model (LLM).
For clarity, Deb Tennen of Zapier defines an LLM as a form of AI that “takes a prompt and generates a response. . . it predicts what text should come next based on patterns it’s learned from massive datasets that include books, articles, code, and basically the entirety of the internet. That’s what makes it flexible enough to handle all kinds of writing, editing, and communication tasks.”1
With all the opinions of AI, whether it’s helpful or harmful, progress or the destruction of humanity as we know it, I wish to add a nuanced take to the discussion. Below, I seek to address the dilemma of human communication enhanced by AI LLMs. This is not an attempt to criticize the tool, but to challenge our use of it. I leave many questions purposefully unanswered for you to ponder and seek discussion with others.
Theology of Communication
It’s fitting to first define communication from a Biblical and Reformed perspective. In his debut monograph, A Word Fitly Spoken: A Theology of Communication, Aaron Garriott states that communication is “inherently theological because God is a communicative Being who has created human beings in His image to commune with Him and with one another. Simply put, we communicate because God communicates.”2
God has communicated Himself to us in many ways: through creation, through the written Word, through the means of grace, and through His Son. We are privileged to share in this attribute of communication.
Stewardship of Communication
Garriott challenges his readers that communication is a gift that should be stewarded well, stating, “Reframing our mindset regarding communication and speech will help us properly and faithfully steward these gifts to the glory of God.”3 What does it look like to faithfully steward the gift of communication toward one another when we have the option to outsource it?
Some see the writing of emails or social media content as neutral. Make ChatGPT, Claude AI, or Gemini write your email or company social post, then make a few tweaks by a human. It can save time and bring more efficiency to daily work.
But let’s say you want to write an email to your grandmother or write a thoughtful note in a card to your spouse. Perhaps you only want to use an LLM to get you started on the writing. Or maybe your writer’s block has gotten worse lately, so you allow the LLM to write half of the personal note for you. Instead of investing time and thoughtfulness toward our fellow man, we are tempted to resort to what’s most productive and easy.
If communication is a gift, should there be more care even in the writing of a company email? After all, as Nathan W. Bingham says, “Pixels are people.”4 Garriott continues on that thought, “whether on social media, via email, or on some other platform — we’re interacting with flesh-and-blood divine image bearers, people who will spend eternity in one of two places.”5
Challenging Efficiency
Most of what Garriott puts forth has to do with communication when physically present, but he devotes one powerful chapter to digital communication. He states, “Technology shapes us and our culture in more ways than we realize. And it may be shaping us after an image that we don’t truly desire.”
“Too often we have an idea of what we want our lives to look like but then we fail to ask whether a new technology will help us lead that kind of life or not. As a result, we’re being catechized by technology itself…Technology, in a sense, disciples us.”6
The broad cultural adoption of LLMs has obviously changed current communication. It has discipled some of us to elevate efficiency and productivity, much like the World does. Living in a fast-paced culture that elevates instant pleasure and efficient processes is difficult to combat. For some of us, our daily work is judged by these measurements. To that, Garriott gives a challenge and a hope to reorient our understanding of efficiency:
“Not every time-saving device helps us make the best use of the time (Eph. 5:15-16). We need to see time from God’s perspective…redemptive-historically…Peter reminds us that ‘with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness’ (2 Peter 3:8-9). Since we are acclimatized to assume that the quick is the certain, we, too, can unwittingly misinterpret God’s providential timing. But ‘the coming of the Lord is at hand,’ James tells us (5:8). Therefore, we are to be patient and establish our hearts…As the Spirit tunes our watches to see time and this life from the perspective of eternity, we are animated to live for the Lord with courage and strength (Ps. 27:14), as those who ‘shall mount up with wings like eagles’ and ‘shall run and not be weary’ and ‘shall walk and not faint’ (Isa. 40:31)…Christians need to be aware of where much of their catechesis is coming from as we seek to make the best use of the time and the tools that God has given us (Eph. 5:15-16).”7
Nathan W. Bingham as quoted in Aaron L. Garriott, A Word Fitly Spoken: A Theology of Communication
I understand that for some, the use of LLMs is embedded in your vocation, whether you like it or not. To that, my hope is that you can leave work at work, challenge it if you can, and reorient at home.
What Will a New Technology Undo?
Outside of the theological perspective, there is a good amount of research being done (from MIT, Harvard, and others) on what these digital AI exchanges are doing to us mentally. The late Neil Postman gave great wisdom when he stated, “The question, ‘What will a new technology do?’ is no more important than the question ‘What will a new technology undo?'”8
Authors Robin Phillips and Joshua Paulding, in their magnum opus on technology, Are We All Cyborgs Now? Reclaiming Our Humanity from the Machine, confront the dangers of the heavy use of LLMs by claiming that a lack of writing leads to a lack of critical thinking. Phillips states, “I would suggest that the post-writing movement, if not counteracted and thoroughly refuted, will usher us headlong into a deeper and more dangerous crisis where not just writing, but critical thinking, could be threatened.”9
“The ability to use language skillfully is fundamentally tied to clarity of thought and artistic expression, both of which are connected to human flourishing.”10 These are heavy statements, but important to consider as we grapple with the use of AI technology.
Have you ever marveled at well-crafted communication? A poem that took your breath away, a well-executed speech, or a novel that shifted your perspective on life? Even a thoughtfully written email? No doubt, those works of communication took time and were stewarded well.
I’m thankful that my pastor takes hours to read, critically think, pray, and then write his sermons out for worship each Lord’s Day. I’m thankful that my husband takes thoughtful time to write me a card on our anniversary. I hope to be thankful one day for my child to communicate with me in broken words and write to me in scribbles.
To conclude, I leave you with six questions that Neil Postman asked in his book, Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology. I pray they are helpful as you consider the use of LLMs in communication:
- What problem is this technology seeking to solve?
- Whose problem is it?
- What new problem might be created by seeking to solve this problem?
- Which people and institutions will be harmed by this new technology?
- What changes in language are being forced by this new technology?
- Which people and institutions gain economic and political power with the introduction of this technology?11
Footnotes
- Deb Tennen, “Large language models (LLMs) vs. generative AI: What’s the difference?” Zapier, accessed December 29, 2025, https://zapier.com/blog/llm-vs-generative-ai. ↩︎
- Aaron L. Garriott, A Word Fitly Spoken: A Theology of Communication (Sanford, FL: Ligonier Ministries, 2025), 7. ↩︎
- Ibid., 62-63. ↩︎
- Nathan W. Bingham, as quoted in Aaron L. Garriott, A Word Fitly Spoken: A Theology of Communication (Sanford, FL: Ligonier Ministries, 2025), 173. ↩︎
- Ibid. ↩︎
- Ibid., 168-169. ↩︎
- Ibid., 169-170. ↩︎
- Ibid., 166. ↩︎
- Robin Phillips and Joshua Paulding, Are We All Cyborgs Now? Reclaiming Our Humanity from the Machine (USA: Basilian Media & Publishing, 2024), 319. ↩︎
- Ibid., 317. ↩︎
- Garriott, A Word Fitly Spoken, 172. ↩︎
