Late May Letters Late in May

The catch in all of this AI business is that the bots will be demanding minimum wage and then some in short order.
You see, these bots, they have owners, who have investors, who have poured many many billions in and would kindly like many trillions out, thank you very much. And all this while they are busy losing copyright lawsuits, fighting for tight water/electricity resources, and arguing with everyone and their mother about where to put another million data centers.
Right now, there’s a massive land grab for market happening that is keeping costs preposterously low. But it can’t last. And while I imagine the tech will improve and the costs will come down, but it’s going to get a lot more expensive before it comes back down to current costs. And even then, well, there’s those owners and investors who will surely have a keen sense of the value of all that labor they’re replacing. You think they’re going to let you use their latest LLM in the monster data center for less than that? Nah . . .
So, no, AI isn’t going anywhere, and yeah, it will compete for jobs with some humans. But don’t fall for the presumption that it will get those jobs as easily as the AI salesmen are claiming. Economically, that’s a very dubious claim.

NB

Only been reading your blogs for a few months, since no quarter November (thanks for all the free books!). Been attending Trinity Church Denver (CREC) since the great 2020 reset, and am really grateful for that church and for your hand in helping sponsor and encourage people there!
I’ve been a web/software/data engineer for the last 13 years, mostly in the government space as a contractor (you can see some of my work here on data.gov, see ).
I’ve been struggling to explain to people what is happening to my industry and why I’m not afraid of my job because of AI. This blog is why. Every mediocre developer I’ve worked with has created some AI slop. This slop creates documentation that isn’t true, makes the code almost impossible to read. There’s no thought or iterating, just volume output.
However, the good developers I work with are super-powered. They can fill in all their missing gaps quickly of new languages, new technologies, debug problems faster. And the business leaders are noticing. People may not need a team of 5 developers, they just need these 100 issues solved.
Everyone in my industry is using AI, but the cream is rising to the top, and if you are diligent you’ll keep your job because you’re too valuable to lose. There will always be more problems to solve…

James

First time writer, long time listener! I have always enjoyed your writing and have often found it both illuminating and challenging, which are both good things.
After reading “AI and the Cream Rising”, I think your position could use a sharper focus. This technology is on par with the printing press—perhaps even greater in its potential impact. I think you are right to express some trepidation. The printing press disrupted established institutions, uprooted honorable professions, and contributed to enormous social conflict. But it also unleashed a wave of change that spread the kingdom of Christ far and wide. AI may carry a similar kind of potential.
Walking through your article in order, I strongly agree that the chief spiritual danger of AI is the temptation to imbue it with consciousness or authority it does not possess and to elevate it into a kind of false god. Christians should resist that temptation completely.
I also think the economic argument deserves more nuance. The elimination of mediocrity through AI may ultimately be a net benefit, even if it causes painful short-term disruption. Like other transformative technologies, AI will displace certain forms of labor while increasing productivity and raising standards of living over time. That pattern has played out repeatedly over the last two centuries. The alternatives to that economic system have not produced better outcomes.
I also agree with your concern that widespread dislocation could lead to a dystopian temptation: pacifying displaced populations with endless entertainment and dependency. That is a real danger.
My main issue with the article is that you spend most of it giving airtime to dystopian possibilities while limiting the constructive Christian response to the final paragraph.
I think the American church often has a reflexive suspicion toward new technologies. In many cases, that instinct has contributed to Christians surrendering cultural influence rather than shaping culture faithfully.
So what is the Christian vision of a world with AI?
It is people working diligently with the gifts God has given them while using tools that increase the reach and effectiveness of their faithfulness. It is families recovering time and attention that have been consumed by unnecessary labor. It is the possibility of single-income households becoming more attainable again. It is making private Christian education more affordable and accessible. It is opening the door to high-quality news, art, and entertainment that reflect truth rather than being filtered through corrupt gatekeepers.
Those are the kinds of possibilities that may emerge in a world where Christ is King and the church refuses to abdicate its responsibility.
I wish you had spent more time articulating that vision rather than primarily encouraging suspicion and fear toward the technology itself.

Clayton

AI can’t replace meaningful work. To be sure, they are trying to create humanoid robots that can fry a skillet of eggs, but even that basic task is too much. I’ve seen utopian videos—produced by AI—espousing a scenario where these same robots are independently picking cotton . . . or carrots, as it was in the video. No slips, trips, and falls, no spastic flailing about, just clean, efficient taking care of business.
But even if that happens, Christians must be, as we always have been, cultural leaders, which typically means being counter-cultural. When the pagans flock to college with their lame-brained diplomas because COLLEGE!—we should remember the trades and work hard to make things. When AI threatens to plasticize our novels, songs, and movies, we should pull out a good-ol’ Underwood and pound away. When robots line our factories, restaurants, and stores, we should calmly look to our brethren who are laboring to produce goods and services the right way . . . from the sweat of our brows. And when the world laughs and calls us neo-Amish or some other such things, we should smile and say, “Maybe they weren’t wrong.”
And now I’m going to click the little box that says, “I’m not a robot”

Andy

In your latest blog post on AI you said, “God created man for meaningful work.” And that right there is why I just don’t understand the panic that everyone is going to lose their jobs. I’ve seen this from folks in Christian circles too who I wouldn’t have expected to panic in this way.
My logic is this, God made us for work. If that is so, he will give us that work. This is not to say there won’t be disruptions, but I see it more like the transition of horse buggies to vehicles. If there is a disruption it’ll be due to the many similar transitions occurring at once. The disruption will be the speed at which it occurs, not that it is occurring. We’ve always transitioned from one way of living to another. I think for anyone with a Biblical view of work, there will always be plenty to do.
Do you view the concern about job loss as more significant than I am proposing?

Ted

Really sad to see Thomas Massie lose his primary today. He was one of the few people in Congress who seemed like he always voted his conscience. Guess he paid for it in the end.
Are you at all concerned that people like Massie who consistently disagree with Trump, but do so in a principled way, get relentlessly attacked? It doesn’t seem healthy that Trump requires almost absolute fealty and can’t seem to tolerate any criticism from within his own party.

Graeme

I’d love to hear your thoughts on what Trump and Hegseth are doing to Thomas Massie.

Steve

You mention queen Esther as “not so much a type of Christ . . . ” in Eather-queen of the persians#3
As a happily married wife and mother reading Scripture, I would put the wording in the strongest sense possible. Not at all a type of Christ.
That is what distinguishes good storytelling—the narrative always follows the proclamation of the Gospel and God’s good order in creation.
In Scripture we don’t find dear witches, no female priests, apostles, disciples, and also no female Saviour.
The more we distinguish between men, woman, sons and daughters, children, servants, slaves, kings and queens etc, the better we can learn to imitate God in die roles He has written for each of us and see the good works that He has prepared for us in advance.
Feminism would very much like to wipe out all of that..
Thank you—your theology is truly what is coming out of your finger tips! We can’t get enough of reading and listening!

Lucille

Re “A Diamond-Studded Turd:” Yes. Thank you.
And remember concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, our King, who is in some ways our example (man among men, not merely [!} Savior), that he did what was right when people around him ranged from friendly and loyal, but not perfect, to hostile and evil. Sometimes when he did right, he was the only one. I’ve found this encouraging in my last couple of years or so.

Andrew

Do you agree with these points below? If no, could you please help me understand where I’m going wrong?
Ontology: Women are the weaker vessel in all aspects of humanity: physical, mental, emotional. There are some women who are smarter and stronger than some men, but that’s only cause those men haven’t actualized their potency. Some of those men may never actualise their potency, and some potencies may take a lifetime to actualise. But Calvin and the other greats were unashamed to say that women are the inferior sex. So not only are women prohibited from preaching or having authority over men, but they cannot. In some sense, sure they can; but only in the sense that a child can have authority over his parents (bordering on child abuse), and a slave can rule over the master (big mess and an unbecoming sight). Those who deny this truth are essentially saying God’s a kill-joy. He gave women an ability but forbids them from ever using it. And this precisely is why Isaiah says for women (or children or foreigners) to rule is for the nation to be under God’s severe judgment. In sum, the sexes share the same essence, but not the accidents. So, yes, the bell curve applies: some women are smarter and stronger than some men, but that’s only because the passive potency in those men haven’t been actualised.
Disposition: This God-given weakness makes women naturally adverserial to the man. She has a dormant desire to subvert any authority figure in her life. In her greatest perfection, she wanted to be like God. Being weaker, she was deceived. But this God-given weakness gives women a natural, non-sinful, tendency to create chaos, and be in some sense a natural adversary to the man. Just as vine suffering produces better fruit, the woman tends to be as a difficult, barren ground for man to work with, producing as a result a stronger man or, in the vine analogy, a sweeter man. This natural, adverserial tendency was heightened in them to a sinful level after the Fall. Godly woman acknowledge this truth and mortify that sin. But the natural adverserial bent, they can do nothing about. God made them that way.
This means for men, they shouldn’t get frustrated with women. They will at one point or another have occasion, due to this God-given weakness, feel frustrated, even with godly women; but they must be careful to not get bitter and live with them in an understanding way. They must however prohibit their women from having authority over men. For women, this means they must imbibe this truth of their weakness, which wasn’t a result of the Fall. They must also beware of their sinful tendency, which could spring up due to their weakness, to dominate the man; they must mortify that tendency, and resolve to be like Sarah, lowly and quiet.
Telos: The woman was made for the man, not the other way around. Not all women are to serve all men. But the wife ought to as you have said orient herself to the gardener, live to serve him. The woman was created for the sole reason of being a helpmate to the man. And a big portion of being a helpmate is childbearing and childrearing.
So if one had to order priorities, for the man it would be tend the garden, i.e. his career, wash your wife with the word, raise children up in the Lord; for the women it would tend to the husband, raise children up in the Lord. Many Christian women today think that serving the husband should be reciprocated by husband serving the wife with her career, forgetting that Paul explicitly said the woman was made for the man and not the other way around.
I believe that rejecting one or more of these biblical truths makes one a feminist. Agree?

Judah

I hope you’re enjoying your last week of May! My husband and I listened to our pastors talk about Romans 9-11 (a dangerous conversation in these here times, I know), and we were curious about the part in Rom 11:25 where Paul mentions the “fullness of the Gentiles.” We already asked our pastors about their thoughts, so we aren’t looking for pastoral advice on the matter, but we wanted to know your thoughts regarding what this means. Just so you know where we are in the matter, we think that it generally means that the “Fullness” does not necessarily refer solely to a “set number” of the elect Gentiles; it also refers to the maturity/ripeness/full finishing of Gentile inclusion, or that the Gentile world has been successfully and sufficiently evangelized/Christianized/discipled. This, then, brings the Jews (according to your definition in “American Milk and Honey”) at that time to inclusion within the finalized project, which greatly expands the Christianization of the world. I would argue that, even now, that is coming to fruition, as many more Orthodox Jewish practitioners are, in my opinion, copying Christian ethics and morals, without noticing. I realize this might seem foolhardy and, perhaps, “Pollyanna-ish” to believe, but I have come to the belief that, rather than the Jewish people(s) influencing the world’s morality, I think they unconsciously copy Christian morality because it works. Also, faithful Christianized societies are usually the ones in which Jewish people flourish, and, eventually, their line converts to Christianity over time.
I’ve also taken the liberty of using this tool on your website, but I did not see any direct reference to your thoughts on this matter through this tool:
Thank you for taking the time to look at my letter!

ON

With Satan being bound and in the pit, are we dealing with his lieutenants and minions but not him?
When Peter says the devil goes about as a roaring lion, was that then but not now?
Thank you,

Thomas

I am reaching out to discuss the month of June.
An organization is working to make June Responsible Fatherhood Month. Two other states have already declared it.
Citizens Defending Freedom has already done all the work. They have a toolkit that provides all the resources. Scripts, social media posts, proclamations, and mailing addresses are ready to be signed and mailed to the city and state.
I wanted to see if you could help us make June Responsible Fatherhood Month.
We need men to go to local council meetings to highlight this desperate need for men to take responsibility for their children.
I’m looking at local meetings to plan and give public testimony. I am in Houston TX, so you guys would have to muster the gumption over there.
Hope you are well. Bless you, and thank you for taking the time to read.
The link for all of the resources to do this, start to finish, are in free download Tookkit.
P.S. Also, so you can see what I’ve been up to, here is my new ministry page!

Ethan

The long and the short of it is this: I am a young student (18) who is very interested in the intersection of art and theology, and how stories can be used to present the true, good, and beautiful to a people who have lost It. I feel intuitively that stories with true themes are powerful tools in helping people think about the real world straight. That being so, I feel a great need to hear older wisdom than mine on the subject. I wondered if you might have any reading recommendations for me which might be along these lines. In any event, thank you Mr. Wilson, and Mr. Editor, for your time.
With respect,

Zachary

I am writing this question in regard to a couple of your last few blog posts. I would love an exposition on how God raising Jesus vindicated His claims. I am a Christian and love the Lord Jesus. I would just love to know how to discuss with Orthodox Jews that if God rose Jesus from the grave it means that all of His claims logically have to be true, and God validated it. I write this in light of what Orthodox Jewish Rabi Pinchas Lapide believed regarding the resurrection. He believed that it happened but did not logically conclude that Jesus is The Messiah (Lapide did not affirm all that the Gospels said Jesus said which might make the difference). I would love an in depth explanation with the argument grounded in the Old Testament. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for your faithful ministry.

Kellon

I was watching your 21 theses on marital submission again and found myself especially attentive at the point where you mentioned the desire to look for excuses, reasons, and qualifications not to obey. Given the clear biblical wisdom of making sure a woman is likely a good partner before tying the knot, lest we find ourselves sleeping on the roof, I wanted to know, how would one probe for the underlying attitude of exception-seeking in a woman? It is a pervasive attitude, and one that I myself am frequently guilty of (any advice on how to get out of such a mindset would also be good). Thanks.

Aidan