The recent copyright ruling regarding AI-generated art reveals more than just legal technicalities—it exposes a fundamental philosophical divide about the nature of creativity, authorship, and what it means to be made in God’s image. As Christians engaging with emerging technologies like Midjourney, DALL-E, and Stable Diffusion, we must recognize the deeper theological implications at stake.

The Copyright Office’s Flawed Foundation

When the U.S. Copyright Office ruled on Kris Kashtanova’s AI-assisted comic book “Zarya of the Dawn,” they made a telling distinction. While acknowledging her authorship of the text and arrangement of elements, they denied copyright protection for the AI-generated images, stating these were “not the product of human authorship.”

Their reasoning hinges on the premise that because users cannot predict or fully control Midjourney’s output, the resulting images emerge from “a machine or mere mechanical process that operates randomly or automatically without any creative input or intervention from a human author.”

This argument, while seemingly technical, rests on a subtle but profound philosophical error that should concern every Christian: it treats AI tools as independent creative forces rather than sophisticated instruments guided by human intention.

The Problem with Secular Anthropology

The Copyright Office’s position flows from an atheistic anthropology that severs creativity from human agency—the same framework that has muddied debates over when life begins and what constitutes personhood. By dismissing human guidance as insufficient for authorship, they unwittingly elevate the algorithm to the status of co-creator, or worse, primary creator.

This is not merely a legal miscalculation; it’s a theological error with dangerous implications.

Understanding True Creativity: From Chaos to Order

To grasp what’s at stake, we must understand how AI image generation actually works. These systems don’t conjure images from nothing—they begin with what Midjourney describes as “a field of visual noise, like television static,” which is then refined through human-directed prompts into recognizable images.

Sound familiar?

“Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light.” (Genesis 1:2-3)

God spoke order into chaos. He was the first mover, the divine prompt that transformed formless void into purposeful creation. Similarly, when we use AI tools, we become the initiating voice that guides formless digital noise toward meaningful visual expression.

The “noise” exists in every creative medium—the blank canvas awaiting the painter’s brush, the uncut stone before the sculptor’s chisel, the empty page before the writer’s words. What transforms chaos into art is not the medium’s compliance but the creator’s vision and intention.

The Human as First Mover

The Copyright Office’s argument arbitrarily elevates what cannot be changed over what can be controlled, dismissing the essential human intervention required to produce any meaningful result. But anyone who has actually used these tools knows the reality: the output is far from random.

When I prompt Midjourney to create an apple, it creates an apple, not randomly, but in response to my specific direction. I can modify style, color, composition, and countless other parameters. With each iteration of the technology, I gain more control: panning, zooming, in-painting, and style adjustments that bring my vision closer to reality.

The process mirrors how God continued to speak new elements into His creation—light, land, seas, vegetation, celestial bodies—each addition building upon and refining the whole according to His perfect design.

The Dangerous Path to AI Personhood

By treating AI as something more than a tool—by acknowledging that “something” is created but denying human authorship-the Copyright Office inadvertently opens the door to granting AI systems a form of personhood. If humans aren’t the creators, then what is?

This logic leads down the same dangerous path we’ve seen in other areas where secular thinking abandons biblical anthropology. Just as the abortion debate struggles with arbitrary lines about when “life” begins once conception is rejected, the copyright debate will struggle with movable definitions of when “sufficient human authorship” exists.

The result is an argument that sounds disturbingly like spontaneous generation—the idea that complex, meaningful work can emerge without intelligent direction. No Christian should accept the technological equivalent of claiming the dictionary resulted from an explosion in a printing shop.

Tools vs. Co-Creators

Throughout history, Christians have used tools to express God-given creativity. The printing press revolutionized how we share Scripture. Photoshop transformed visual art. Musical instruments amplify our worship. None of these tools diminish human creativity—they enhance and extend it.

AI image generation is simply the latest in this progression. The algorithm doesn’t create any more than a paintbrush creates a painting. It processes and responds to human direction, much like any sophisticated tool.

The danger lies not in the technology itself, but in philosophical frameworks that deny the image of God in human creativity while simultaneously elevating algorithms to quasi-divine status.

A Biblical Framework for Creativity

As beings made in God’s image (imago Dei), we possess inherent creative capacity that reflects our Creator’s nature. This creativity isn’t diminished by the sophistication of our tools—it’s expressed through them.

When we guide AI systems to produce visual art, we’re exercising the same fundamental creative impulse that leads us to write, paint, sculpt, or compose music. We’re bringing order from chaos, meaning from randomness, beauty from digital noise.

The question isn’t whether AI tools participate in the creative process—of course, they do, just like every other artistic medium. The question is whether we recognize the human bearer of God’s image as the source of creative intention and direction.

Moving Forward Faithfully

As AI technology continues advancing, Christians must engage thoughtfully with both its possibilities and perils. We should neither fear these tools nor uncritically embrace them, but evaluate them through the lens of biblical anthropology.

This means:

• Recognizing human creativity as a reflection of God’s image
• Treating AI as sophisticated tools rather than independent creators
• Resisting philosophical frameworks that diminish human agency
• Advocating for policies that protect genuine human authorship
• Using these technologies in ways that honor God and serve others

Conclusion

The copyright debate surrounding AI-generated art isn’t ultimately about legal technicalities—it’s about worldview. Do we see creativity as an expression of the image of God in humanity, or as a mechanical process that can emerge from sufficiently complex algorithms?

As Christians, we must insist that creativity flows from the Creator through His image-bearers. When we prompt an AI system to generate art, we’re not witnessing spontaneous digital generation—we’re participating in the ancient human calling to bring order from chaos, beauty from emptiness, meaning from void.

The algorithm may process our words into pixels, but the vision, intention, and creative spark remain uniquely, irreplaceably human. That’s not just a legal argument—it’s a theological truth worth defending.

The author uses AI tools, including Midjourney, in creating visual content for his comic book “Paladin” and believes these technologies, properly understood, enhance rather than replace human creativity.