2026, Vol., No.65

The Korean Journal of Chiristian Social Ethics 2025 KCI Impact Factor : 0.64

pISSN : 1229-8387 / eISSN : 2713-749X
https://journal.kci.go.kr/csethics

This paper redefines theological writing in an era in which generative AI has transformed academic writing. Beyond asking whether AI may be used, it asks what writing theology now means. The crisis lies in the offloading of higher-order cognition (comparison, evaluation, and structuring) and the consequent erasure of the writing process. Writing is reconceived not as knowledge production but as a performative practice through which the theologian is formed, articulated as a cycle: appropriation passes external resources through one’s own thinking and grounds authorship; authorship is completed as theological utterance through responsibility; responsibility deepens appropriation. Prayer is not a fourth element but the performative ground of this cycle, locating the writer coram Deo. So understood, theological formation is distinguished from general scholarly formation by its locus before God, its passage through faith, and its ecclesial confession.

This study aims to clarify the key points of Pope Leo XIV’s encyclical “Magnifica humanitas”, which addresses the problems associated with the development of artificial intelligence and how to overcome them. Furthermore, it is important to clarify the perspective of the Protestant Church and its legal ethical approaches. Humans are different from artificial intelligence and are dignified beings. However, AI technology threatens this dignity with regard to truth, work, and freedom. Therefore, personal and communal efforts to uphold human dignity are necessary. The Protestant Church must address issues related to artificial intelligence using its own insights and methods. The church must reflect seriously on human sinfulness and understand human dignity based on the image of God and the doctrine of justification. Furthermore, it should avoid an overly optimistic view of humanity and acknowledge the impact of law. Specifically, the church should determine the direction of legal improvement through love and the Kingdom of God. With these unique perspectives and efforts, the Protestant Church can contribute to preserving human dignity in relation to artificial intelligence issues.

This study examines bizarre and hybrid bodies in AI-generated short-form videos as a form of the grotesque, focusing on their cultural-political ambivalence and Christian ethical implications. Drawing on theories of the grotesque by Mikhail Bakhtin and others, it analyzes cases featuring hybrid bodies, bodily mutilation, and narratives of family, success, betrayal, and punishment. Although these bodies destabilize established boundaries and norms of normality, they may also reproduce norms. Through Harvey Cox’s theology of festivity and fantasy and Jürgen Moltmann’s theology of the cross, this study proposes a ‘feast of becoming’ that relativizes orders, remembers suffering, and imagines alternative relationships. It thereby reflects on and reframes ‘technological generation’ of grotesque AI short-form content as ‘relational becoming’ through which ‘historical beings’ reconstitute themselves and their worlds in relation to others.