Pastors vs Podcast

0:02 Looking at our world from a theological perspective. This is the Theology Central podcast, making Theology Central. What is the very first thing that comes to your mind when you hear the phrase pastoral authority or pastor authority, pastoral authority, the authority of a pastor. What is the very first thing that comes to your mind when you hear that phrase, depending on how you want to say it, pastoral authority, pastor authority, the authority of a pastor. What comes to your mind? I mean, honestly, what comes to your mind? Do you go, absolutely, I believe in the authority of a pastor. I submit to the authority of a pastor.

0:46 Pastors have more authority to do? What to interpret the Bible? Like, what does it mean to you? I really want you to think about that when it comes down to church authority. What comes to your mind if you hear the phrase church authority or the authority of the church. Do you believe the church has any authority? Do you really believe a pastor has any authority? Well, we're going to talk about that. We're going to talk about that in light of kind of contrasting with this thing called podcast, because well, I'm a podcaster I do a podcast, and well, there are these things in conflict and what does this ultimately does this lead back to the Protestant Reformation. We're going to talk about all of these things, and we're going to do that right after I say well, good afternoon everyone.

1:38 It is Monday, December the ninth, twenty twenty four. It is currently one twenty eight pm Central time, and I am coming to you live from the Theology Central Studio located right here in Abilene, Texas. Now, my initial thought today was okay, if I do a broadcast, asked, well, I know, we need to kind of finish up the sermon's two point oh app sermon challenge. We need to keep moving forward because before we know it, December is going to be over, and then this year's challenge is over, and then we'll figure out what to do next year. I also felt like, well, yesterday I only got to do one hour of teaching on Isaiah forty. We did finish our observational outline. There's still some things I could talk about. There's some things I could add to that discussion that maybe I didn't get to. There's other things we need to work on, There's other things we need to finish up, just kind of trying to figure out.

2:37 You know, I had lots of different ideas. I guess I can say that. But when I finally walked up the steps to the studio and I sat down, all of a sudden, I found myself going, well, I think I know where we're going today. In fact, this maybe began a week long focus. I know that's going to take away from the sermon's two point oh app sermon challenge, but this may become our focus for this week. I don't know, maybe it will not. Maybe we can cover it all in one broadcast. But I let me explain what happened. I opened my iPad and I had the Gospel Coalition dot oorg open on the iPad. The Gospel Coalition dot org. You can open that right now if you would like to follow along the Gospel Coalition dot org.

3:29 And I see a headline pastoral pastoral authority, and I'm like, oh, pastoral authority, Okay, all right, now that's a topic that I have strong feelings about when it comes to this concept of pastoral authority. Let me just get it out of the way. I think the concept of pastoral authority is a fraud I think it's an illusion. I think people like to pretend that pastors have authority. They don't have any. It's a joke, it's a complete fraud, an illusion. It's any of these, this concept pastoral authority. Look, I'm sorry, and the Protestant world, there is no pastoral authority. You can pretend all day. You can have the structure, you can have the hierarchy, you can do it, but when it comes down to it, you don't have any And that's that's I'm just gonna get that idea out of the way right now because I have strong feelings about it.

4:24 So that caught my attention, pastoral authority. But then what really caught my attention was pastoral authority. Let me read the rest of the headline, pastoral authority in the Age of Podcast, and I'm like, oh, you've you're speaking my language all right, pastoral authority. I have strong feelings about it. Podcast Obviously, I have strong feelings about that because I'm a podcaster, So oh, let's talk about this and I and I don't know, I haven't even read all of the article yet. I haven't even read all of the article. I've just looked at it just a little bit. So I'm going to have have certain assumptions, some predictions. I will say my prediction is it's going to be basically an article that says, hey, podcast undermine pastoral authority. Those mean bad podcasts, they undermine pastoral authority. We need to be careful with these podcasts, because what I have seen is many church leaders, many pastors, are not so warm to podcasters. They don't like bloggers. They don't like podcasters because sometimes bloggers and podcasters are in a sense outside of that church structure, offers criticism, offers critique. Maybe sometimes

5:55 the podcasters can say things that say things that no one within the church structure can say, and the pastors don't like it. They don't like the criticism. They don't like it, so they get very upset all these podcasters out there saying this, these pody They almost whenever they talk about podcasters or bloggers, it's almost very derogatory. It's almost like those podcasters, those bloggers, as if if you're not a pastor, you have no right to offer a critique of the institutionalized church. But I think when it looks at the institutionalized church, I think there's some things that people can point out and going I have a problem with this. I have a problem with this, And I know that that kind of creates us versus them mentality, and I'm not saying that that's the way it should be, but there is Look, there's grounds to critique the church. Look, you can you can critique the church, just on a very pragmatic level, like on the most pragmatic level possible.

6:57 I think there's grounds for critique. Critique. Some people don't like this because they say it's too fleshly. But if we just get very practical, let me explain, and I say this all the time. If you go to church, you typically have access to the monthlier yearly budget report, and you can look or you can ask your pastor for a one, because on most all cases the church will provide someone who asks right, especially a member, and it will show you the operating costs, how much it costs to operate the church, and it'll break that down. How much money goes to the building, how much money goes to the pastor, how much money goes to curriculum, how much money goes to activities, how much money goes to programs, and you can add it all up and say Okay, it costs this much per year for my church to operate. Anyone can figure that out. You don't even need all the specifics. Just what is the annual amount of money required to keep the church operating, just to keep it breaking even how much is required. Now you take that and then you look at exactly how much teaching and preaching the church is actually producing for that amount of money, and then look at the quality of that preaching and teaching for that amount of money.

8:14 Sometimes from just a purely practical level, you're like, wait, it cost us almost a million dollars to operate per year, and this is what we get from it for it. It costs US five hundred thousand dollars a year and we're lucky to get three, you know, in depth sermons per week. Now, you can take that step back to anyone with a microphone and a computer, with a desire and a willingness and a love to teach and study the Bible. They can produce, in many cases, one hundred times the amount of content, sometimes far more in depth, for basically a fraction of the cost. Even if the podcaster was trying to make some honey and make a living, if the people were actually able to support it. The podcaster can make a living and be able to broadcast, and I guarantee you provide deeper content more uh far more.

9:15 They can far a great let me state it this way, a greater quality and a greater quantity. I stand by that, and we I mean, how many sermons do we have to review that? Sometimes you're just like, wait that that? What was that? What was that? And it's not even about disagreement. It's not about what well they hold to this illological position. It's just an I hold to a different philological position. Sometimes it's just like you didn't even really deal with the text, or you so mishandled the text that it should be you know, malpractice suit Like what was that? I mean, come on, now, that's just a Now I see, it's easy for the podcaster to say that we're inside the church. You can't say that because you gotta you gotta keep support, you gotta keep promoting the whole structure. We need people, we need money, and we gotta play it. Pay for this program and this, and we gotta pay for this building, and we gotta pay for this and this and this and this and this and this. You you can't be criticizing the structure.

10:16 You gotta keep you gotta keep supporting it and bringing in the money to prop it up. So sometimes the criticism, people don't like the criticism, but sometimes it needs to be made. I'm not saying that that. I'm not saying that that proves one thing or another. I'm saying from a purely pragmatic perspective, podcasters may say this, where pastors are gonna be like, no, no, no, no, keep coming, keep giving. We need more money, give more money. We need a stewardship month, we need a stewardship week. We need a giving this, we need a giving that. We need this, we need a we need a love offering. We need this, we need this, we need this, we need a building fund. We need it because you gotta keep the whole, you know, industrial complex operating. So that immediately right there you can just see that there can be some criticism. So I'm assuming this article is going to kind of go after that concept. But they're going after it not from they're going after from the perspective of on one side, or at least this is the way it looks like. Again I'm being predictive here. I could be very wrong. They're looking at it from pastoral authority on one side and those pesky podcasters on the others. We would have gotten away with it it wasn't for these pesky kids, right, and that how Scooby Doo used to how all at the end whenever they capture the bad guy. I would have gotten away from this if wouldn't for your pesky kids and that ridiculous dog. Okay, well, I think in

11:46 many times pastors will like pastoral authority would be great if it wouldn't for these pesky podcasters causing all of these problems. That's the way I think this is going to go. I could be very wrong now I'm trying. The reason I've spent twelve minutes saying a lot of these things is I want to be very transparent with my feelings and thoughts. And the reason I want to be is because then you're going to I'm obviously going to come at this and you're gonna hear some of those feelings. So I want to be transparent, meaning I could be somewhat biased here, So I'm gonna try to recognize that I could have a bias here and try to be fair. I'm going to try to be so are you ready? Here we go? This was published on December the ninth, twenty twenty four, so it's published today.

12:39 Hot off the I mean paper, Hot off the presses. Okay, here we go, Hot off the presses, Hot off the presses. I'm not actually reading an article on paper, but I can't do anything with the iPad. I could just go just slap. That doesn't so I just keep this paper here just so I can do this. I just printed this, all right, but I didn't print it. I didn't and I don't know all the printers at the bottom of the steps and hasn't been hooked up in thirty five years. Okay, all right, but all right, that's a little hyperbole. But yeah, it's at the bottom of the steps. I don't even know why we have a printer. Okay, but are you ready?

13:19 Here we go? Published today Pastoral Authority and the Age of Podcasts. Now, I'm predicting that the article is going to be like podcast undermine pastoral Authority's that's the direction I think I'm going to go. I could be wrong. Let's find out. First paragraph. Have you noticed the subtle shift and how congregations seek spiritual guidance? Where where consurgations? Okay, yeah, well, let's talk about how podcasters can't correctly. Let me try this again. Have you noticed a subtle shift in how congregations seek spiritual guidance? Where congregants once began with My grandmother always said they now regularly began with I was listening to this podcast or I saw on YouTube. All right, I gotta stop right here. This is I don't even know what this person is talking about. When when did congregations ever begin? My grandmother always said, did I miss that? Like, where's maybe there's some congregants who said my grandmother always said, I never said that, because I don't think. I don't even I don't even know. I didn't know any of my relatives, so I would have never said that. And

14:50 even if they were, if I ever would have spoken to them, I doubt they would have ever given me any spiritual advice. So I don't even know what that means. Well from my experience, and I came into the church as a teenager, so way before podcasts ever existed, way before the internet, way before people had cell phones, I still never heard people in the congregation said, Well, my grandmother always said, no, I would hear did you hear on Christian radio? This? Did you hear on Christian radio? This? Did I read in this commentary? This I read in this Christian book? This? So how is that any different than when people today say I was listening to a podcast or I saw on YouTube. I so this is already creating Like back in the olden days, people would just begin with my grandmother always said two oh, no, Now things have gotten really bad because now they say podcasts and YouTube. I don't understand what the difference. People have always listened and gathered spiritual information, knowledge and perspectives from a wide range of sources that were available to them.

16:11 I guess we could go back to where they maybe didn't have all these other sources available to them. But I mean, come on, I mean, so, I don't know has there been a subtle shift, But just think about it. Whether the congregants are saying my grandmother always said, or whether the congregation is saying, I was listening to a podcast or YouTube, let's just go ahead and get this out of the way. Neither one of the No matter whether you go podcast, YouTube, or grandmother, none of that is my pastor always said, nobody is quoting pastoral authority. They're always quote. They're all are quoting outside the church authorities or church voices. Let's see what the next paragraph reads.

16:58 As pastors, we increasingly need to address not just scriptures teaching, but an expanding universe of digital voices shaping our congregants understanding of faith and an error where every sermon point can be instantly fact checked and every piece of council compared against countless online sources. We must reconsider how pastoral authority functions effectively. All right, So he's saying that the church needs to relook at how pastoral authority functions effectively. Again, I'm going to say, you don't have any authority. Any authority you think you have, it's in your own mind.

17:42 It's a figment of your imagination. You have not had any pastoral authority since the Protestant Reformation. The entire Protestant system says no to church authority, yes to individual authority. What So we gotta figure out now it is true that now anything in a sermon can be instantaneously fact checked about time. Maybe they wouldn't have to be fact checked if we didn't have you know, hundreds of years of pastors saying absolutely ridiculous and fraudulent and crazy things from the pulpit that just are just was never true.

18:27 I'm sorry that you don't like being fact checked, but maybe we wouldn't have to fact check you if the pulpit was a place that wasn't so full of absolute fraud. I mean, I've done plenty of sermon reviews where you're like, that's not true, that's not true, that's not true, that's not true. Okay, and guess what, There's been times I've said things that are probably not accurate as well, and there's no excuse no matter who's doing it. Now. We may not like that we're gonna be fact checked in an instant, but that's just the way it works. And it is true that in modern times, any council given from the pulpit can immediately be compared to counsel anywhere else.

19:13 But let me make it very clear. This all started way before the internet. People will use it looking at their study bibles and going well, MacArthur doesn't say that people were looking at commentaries. People were comparing what was said to other pastors on radio or television. So this stuff has been going on forever. So I don't think it's I don't think it's really changed much. I think it's just maybe the speed we can get to other information. But everyone's already always had access, at least in modern day, to something else. Christian radio, books, commentaries, study Bibles. They've had other things to compare to anyway. So I again, I'm not seeing this. Oh oh, back in the olden days where nobody could fact check us, back in the olden days, where nobody had any other access to any other information. Oh, I'm not saying this is what the author is doing, but I don't think it was ever this cutting this black and white. Let's go to the third paragraph. The challenge extends beyond mere technological change or increased skepticism. It reflects a fundamental transformation and how people discover, evaluate, and accept truth claims. Today's pastoral council no longer competes

20:45 simply with contrary opinions. It competes with an entire ecosystem ecosystem of digital influences, each offering its interpretation of faith, life and truth. Understanding this shift is a sin for fulfilling our calling in the digital age. Well, I do agree that pastors and churches now need to acknowledge there's an entire ecosystem out there. There's an entire system out there offering thoughts and opinions and providing teaching and biblical counsel and perspectives and doctrine and everything else. The church does have to come to an understanding a you're not the only game in town. Now. You haven't been the only game in town really in a very very, very very long time. But now it's even quicker for people to get that other information again. I mean, just think about it, Just think about it. You have your church, right, how many church Just think just we're at the end of the year. Should be easy for you to calculate how many sermons has your church produced in calendar year twenty twenty four? How many sermons? All right, you got the number right now? How many sermons are available on the sermons two point oh app you're talking millions versus

22:16 maybe fifty forty nine, forty eight, forty seven, not that many sermons from your millions. How many Christian podcasts are there out there, and how many episodes have been produced justin calendar year twenty twenty four? Millions? Have millions and millions of sermons, millions and millions of podcasts, like, I don't know if the church is ever gonna go Well, what are we gonna do? I mean, what do you? I don't even know what you do with that. I mean, it's a reality. I'm not trying. I know some people are gonna get mad at me. I'm just pointing out a reality. But I agree. Pastoral council no longer competes simply with ordinate contrary opinions. It competes with an entire ecosystem of digital influences, each offering its interpretation of faith, life and truth. Understanding this shift is essential for fulfilling our calling in this digital age. Well, I do believe the under you need to understand the shift. But again, I think that's still minimizing that the shift has already been in place for a very long time. Historically, Western society recognize religious leaders as a primary source of truth.

23:42 Let me stop right there. Historically Western society has recognized religious leaders as primary sources. It's plural, I said it, just a source, but primary sources of truth? Ah? Now maybe historically all right, So let's consider this. I will argue, prior to the Protestant Reformation. Maybe one could argue that it was seen that religious leaders were a primary source or primary sources of truth. After the Reformation, I will argue that that was no longer the case, whether intended or unintended, because basically, Luther said, the Church is no longer the primary source of truth because the Church is wrong.

24:45 The church is wrong on this point. The church is wrong on this point. The Church is wrong on this point. The Church is wrong on this point, and I am not going to listen to the church because the Bible is the source of truth, not the Church. Now, I know he may not have stated it in such an emphatic way, but that's clearly the implication. The Church is wrong. The Church can be wrong. The Church is wrong, can be wrong. So the Church has to be checked with something else. Now it's the Bible. So guess what After the Protestant Reformation, the source of truth is not the Church, it's the Bible. And now me as an individual must study the Bible so that I can check the church to see whether it's being what is being preached is true or false. So the Church now is just the institution that I must correct, that I must challenge as an individual. That's what the Protestant Reformation gave us, whether people like to admit that or not. And you may hear me repeat that a number of times over the next thirty minutes. But that's a very important point. The article goes on to say, these leaders served as what philosophers called epistemic authorities. So there was a time that the religious leaders with the epistemic authorities, they were the trusted experts, granted the power to make authoritative claims about what's true and real within their domain of expertise. But

26:20 at the Protestant Reformation blew this all up again. I'm not seeing Luther. This was his intended, his intended, you know, thought, this is what he was attending to do. This was his intention, was this, But the all the unintended consequence of this was Hey, no, no, no, the church is not the trusted expert. The pastor is not the trusted expert. The priests are not the trusted expert. They don't have power to make authoritative claims. The Bible has the power to make authoritative claims. My job now, as an individual, it's any authoritative claim that the Church says, I'm supposed to now interpret the Bible, and then I determine if their authoritative claim is true or false. So then who's the authority. Is it the one making the claim or the one judging the claim to be whether it's true or false. Well, it's the one judging. They become the authority.

27:14 And are pastors seen as having some domain of expertise, You know they're not. Look, you can post any article on the Christian Post about something a pastor says. Within seconds, the comment section will be like, he's wrong, he's wrong, he's wrong, he's wrong. They don't say, well, he's an expert. Pastors have no expertise in the eyes of the people sitting in the pew unless they agree with the pastor. Then the pastor is an expert. He's a genius, he's amazing, until they disagree with him. Pastors were included among those trusted to provide reliable knowledge about reality, meaning about reality, about knowledge about reality, and about meaning. So there was a time pastors were included among those trusted to provide reliable knowledge about reality, meaning, and proper conduct. Again, I say that is that that blew up? It may not have it may not have shown up in a practical way, but the unintended consequences that in theory this became just not true. Pastors now were people who gave their thoughts about knowledge, about reality, and about meaning, and about proper conduct.

28:31 But the people would then go to the Bible and say, sorry, you're you're wrong about your knowledge, You're wrong about reality, you're wrong about meaning, you're wrong about conduct. They quote, as Arnold Kling notes, between the time of Christ and about fifteen hundred, the Western world's epistemic authorities were religious leaders. Now, I please note that between the time of Christ and about fifteen hundred, see we get into the fifteen hundreds, we get to the Reformation. The Reformation utterly annihilated that system.

29:13 The Enlightenment. Now they blame the Enlightenment undermine their epistemic authority and the authority of science arose or scientists. So they're saying, when it came to the Enlightenment, the Enlightenment undermined the authority. Now some will argue it was the Enlightenment that led to the Reformation. The Enlightenment began to call in to question the authority of religious leaders and the authority of the church. And then Luther just really kicked the door down and said the church is wrong, and everybody's like, yes, the church is wrong. Down with the church. And while Luther was saying down with the church, exalt the scripture, everyone was like, down with the church, exalt me, because now I'll take the scriptures and I'll determine what's right and wrong. And then I'll say down with Luther. And then it was down with Calvin, and then it was down with Wingley, and then it was you just nay. No matter which group arose, someone would then take their Bible and say that group is wrong, and then someone would take a Bible and say that group is wrong. And then someone else would take a Bible and say that group is wrong. And then someone else would take a Bible and say, but you're wrong.

30:33 Before the fifteen hundreds, yes, the pastors were the experts. They gave authoritative interpretation, authoritative explanation, authoritative doctrine. And then in the fifteen hundred it was like no scientists. Within the general public, scientists became the authority. Pastors lost their authority, and within Christian dumb the church lost its authority. Even though it was supposed to be an exaltation of scripture. In an actual practice. It became the authority of the individual.

31:14 The Enlightenment dramatically altered the authoritative or the authority landscape. Scientific rationalism rose to prominence, and religious authority was increasingly regulated to matters of private faith rather than public truth. But another profound shift has occurred in recent decades. Now here's what's so weird. It looks at the Enlightenment, but it ignores the Reformation. Within society, the church lost its power and science rose to the authoritative level. But what was going on. That's the Enlightenment going on outside of the church. Inside the church, it was to down take down the authority of the church, and take down the authority of the pastor and elevate the authority supposedly of scripture, which ultimately led to the rising of the authority of the individual. The article completely ignores the Reformation. Here it goes from the Enlightenment to modern times. You can't skip the Reformation. Everything that happened in Christiandom that leads us to this issue of today started in the Reformation. The article jumps from the Enlightenment to while another profound shift has occurred in recent decades, as basically, you now have information that's kind of become you know, it's no longer controlled by one source. The information has become spread to

32:44 anyone and everyone, and this has happened through digital technology has basically this has largely displaced traditional experts, both religious and scientific, as societies trusted truth sources. So what is happened is religious leaders are no longer seen as truth sources, scientists are no longer seeing as truth sources, and the individual has well. So you can take the Enlightenment, that's what leads to where we are today in society. You can take the Reformation, and that's where we ended up today in the church, and it's the exact same place. The individual is God, the individual is the Pope, the individual is the magisterium, the individual is the scientists, the individual is everything. Today's epistemic authority increasingly resides not with pastors or scientists and institutional settings, but with influential voices on social media, popular podcasters, and online content creator. People are more likely to trust someone they feel they know through regular online consumption than traditional authorities they encounter only formally or institutionally. This shift presents unique challenges for pastoral ministry.

34:19 Hey now see now the problem is this information just get anybody everybody. So so now there's challenges for us in ministry. How are pastors going to respond to this? It goes on to offer an example, consider, for example, counseling for a couple struggling in their marriage. And previous decades, they might have primarily sought guidance from their pastor and perhaps a few trusted books on Christian marriage. Now it does acknowledge, See, they still would have been looking for outside sources. Okay, but all right, today that couple likely arrives having already consumed hours of relationship advice from social media influencers, relationship coaches on Instagram, and popular psychology podcasts.

35:08 They may reference concepts from these sources more readily than scripture, and they might evaluate their pastor's counsel against these other voices rather than the other way around. Okay, that may be true, all right, what is he gonna take with this? He says, this new reality fundamentally transforms how we provide pastoral care. Our authority again, you don't have any authority, all right, but okay, continue to pretend like you do. Oh drives me crazy. Our authority now stems not from the position alone, but from our ability to help our flock navigate different sources of knowledge while staying anchored in Scripture's truth. You don't have any authority. You never had any authority. It's an illusion. It's made up. You have authority until the person's like you're wrong. Then you no longer have authority. They can just walk out of your door.

36:02 They can go to another church. They can start another church that can seek to get you fired. They can split the church, split the denomination. Nobody has any stinking authority. Stop pretending to understand the contemporary challenge and opportunity for pastoral authority, we must first grasp the concept of meta epistemic authority, a term that describes individuals or institutions trusted to identify and interpret reliable sources of truth for others. While an epistemic authority directly provides knowledge, a meta epistemic authority helps people determine which sources of knowledge they should trust. Now, oh, my goodness, gracious, there's nothing new. This has nothing to do with technology. This goes way back to the day when pastors would say, don't read that book, don't listen to that Christian broadcaster, don't go to that conference, don't.

37:06 The church has always tried to serve as this meta epistemic authority, telling you which things are, which sources are good, and which sources are bad. And some people would buy into that. Then we go to a pastor going tell me which commentary to get, tell me which book I should read. Well, they're only going to give you book and commentaries that agree with him. So then when you look at the outside source, you're going to have now reinforcement that the pastor is right. The pastor is not going to say, well, go look at this, and go look at this, and go look at this, because those things are going to say that he is wrong. So no, no, no, the pastor is only going to tell you to read well what already agrees with him, which reinforces him being right. I mean, how do you not fall for that? I mean I don't get it. So I guess now pastors should like, don't listen to that podcast, don't watch that YouTube channel, don't watch this, don't read the only watch and read what I tell you to. Come on now.

38:05 As Klings explains, a meta epistemic authority is someone who is trusted to tell you who the epistemic authorities are and who and what they are saying. He uses the example of The New York Times as a meta epistemic authority that tells you to believe Anthony Falci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, the epistemic authority. Most pastors, particularly in the modern area, have implicitly understood their role this way. As servants we point people to scripture rather than as direct sources of truth, as direct sources of truth themselves. When Paul describes pastors as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God, he's describing precisely this kind of derivative authority. However, this distinction often remains unclear to church members who may have a muddled view of pastoral authority. Understanding pastoral authority through meta epistemic lenses offers a compelling way forward. And our digital age, church members will inevitably encounter numerous spiritual influences online, and this position pastors to help them discern more wisely, you know what this is saying, Hey, pastors get to determine what you should and shouldn't listen to. Oh yeah, and there's possibly no, no conflict of interest here, because pastors are going to tell you to listen to the people he agrees with, so that you're going to hear that which agrees with what he says. He's not going to say, go listen to someone who disagrees with him, of course not so. So does that mean now wait aute,

39:38 and this just just just blows up the whole Protestant system anyway. Now I'm going to go back to I'm going to go to the bottom paragraph. It gives the steps that churches are supposed to take. I just have issues with all of it. Let's go to the end of this. The digital revolution has diminished pastoral ministry. Instead, it has forced us to clarify and refine our essential role. Our calling remains unchanged even as the context evolves. We will shepherd God's people towards truth and wisdom, but now we do so by helping them navigate an increasingly complex information landscape. As we as we fulfilled this role faithfully, we demonstrate that pastoral authority doesn't rest an institutional position, but in the persistent, patient, personal, and persistent work of guiding people towards biblical wisdom. So basically, the pastor's role now is to help people say, you shouldn't listen to this, don't listen to this, don't listen to this, listen to these things. I look, I don't. I h I have so many issues with all of this. All right, So there's the article. Now you can go read everything they have to say. But I had I had some issues with this. I had some issues with this. Right. So

41:14 the writer's analysis seems to reflect a concern that the readily availability of philological content through digital platform seems to dilute the influence of local church leader leadership. If I can speak correctly, I think that that's I think that's a fair analysis, right. The article seems to reflect a concern that the availability of philological content on all of these different digital platforms can dilute the influence of local church leadership. The author seems to emphasize the importance of personal pastoral care and the unique role of pastors and guiding their congregation, a role that supposedly cannot be replicated by distant or in personal online content. Hey, the pastor can do. The pastor is present, the pastor is there, So I guess that makes it all right. So I did ask AI to critique the article. I said, hey, hey, Ai, here's this article. Critique it Ai gave me this critique.

42:23 While the while, the while the article offers and raises valid concerns about the potential undermining a pastoral authority, the perspective may underappreciate the positive aspects of digital media. Podcasts and online sermons can supplement local teaching, provide access to diverse viewpoints. Now please note offer access to diverse viewpoints. It sounds like the article is saying the pastor's job is to stop people from getting to these diverse viewpoints and get to a more unified only listen to these and so yeah, the pastors don't want them, those diverse points. They don't want that. Podcasts may reach individuals who might not attend church on a regular basis. The challenge lies in integrating integrating these resources in a way that compliments, rather than competes with local pastoral leadership. Moreover, the article could delve deeper into practical strategies for pastors engage with digital media, constructively, encouraging pastors to develop their own online presence or to curate recommend resources. Further, congregation could bridge the gap between traditional pastoral roles and the digital age.

43:35 But so the pastor is going to become the curator. Hey, I put together, I put together this week's playlist, listen to these sermons, listen to these podcasts. I guess now the pastor could do that, So try to keep the people away from anything that may disagree. But I don't know. But I then said, Okay, as you've already heard me offer my criticism. First, I think the article just completely forgets how it's always been. There's always been these outside sources. There's always been people weren't talking about what grandmother said. They were talking about this or this or this or this or this or this, this person said, this person said.

44:18 On Christian radio, and some areas you have three four Christian radio stations. When I was in Omaha, Nebraska, I think there was like I think maybe two or three FM Christian radio stations, maybe two. There probably was like almost five or six Christian radio stations just in the Omaha area. And then Family Radio was broadcasting from Iowa and which people in Omaha could pick up. I mean, you had plenty. And I can't remember how many times in church people be like, well did you hear what so and so said? Did you hear what so? I didn't know they were doing this on KGBI that was the station from Grace University. Or Harold Camping said this or this, and they were always talking about outside sor or I read this in a Christian book, and that pastor was constantly getting frustrated. Don't listen to him. Don't listen to him, don't listen to him, don't read his story. Yeah, only listen to you. I got it. I got it because you are the pope. Oh wait, you're not. So.

45:18 The article seems to forget the way it's always been. But to me, what bothered me most about the article is it mentions the Enlightenment and it leaves out the entire Protestant Reformation. I will argue that fragmentation and philological division has been the whole mark feature of the Protestant Reformation. This fragmented everyone believes something different, this philological division. If you say, what is the what is the fruit of the Protestant Reformation, It's been a fragmentation and philological division.

46:04 I know people don't want to hear that, but it's true. The Reformation, which began in the sixteenth century challenged the centralized authority of the Roman Catholic Church. It emphasized this is key to remember in the Protestant Reformation. It emphasized the priesthood of all believers. It emphasized that we are all priests, all of us, and Scripture is the authority. And so basically, you are a priest. Scripture is the authority, and you need to consider your individual conscience, what you feel, and what you think. Now, this opened the door for significant philological some may say renewal, but it also opened the door for very much theological diversity, and it led to inevitable divisions as this person interpreted the scriptures one way and this person interpreted the scriptures the other way. Well, why could they offer an interpretation, Well, because scripture. They've got access to the scriptures. Oh, and they are a priest.

47:28 They the priesthood of all believers. They are a priest. They have the spiritual authority to read, study, and interpret. So they would interpret it one way, this group would interpret it another way, and then well, the damn burst, it was over. There was nothing holding it back. The church no longer had the authority. The individuals had the authority. When we consider the Protestant Reformation and philological fragmentation. We could consider some specific points the multiplicity of interpretations. One of the primary outcomes of the Reformation was the rejection of a single centralized authority, the Pope in favor of that became the scripture, supposedly being the ultimate authority. However, this meant that individuals could and did interpret those scriptures.

48:41 So it wasn't no longer the Pope, wasn't no longer the Church, wasn't no longer the magisterium. Now it was the Bible in the individual. The individual could interpret that scripture and guess what this led to. This led to a creation of numerous denominations and different groups and different thiological streams. This individual could interpret it this way, this individual could interpret another way. This individual would say that individual is wrong, and they would create denominations and create churches, and create groups and create systematic theologies that would reflect their interpretation, which would say that interpretation is wrong. So what came out of the Protestant Reformation and multiplicity of interpretations A multiplicity of voices no different than in the podcast age, but these state remained institutionalized. You had the multiplicity of interpretations. But everybody would then take that interpretation and make their own group and their own church. They would institutionalize it. The podcasting world can deinstitutionalize it. Now the voice may not be connected to a church, but it's the same concept. So the fragmentation or the Reformation led to theological fragmentation. The first idea is the multiplicity of interpretations. No one can deny that, and second denomination splits. Initially, the Protestant movement was marked by key streams such as Lutheranism, Calvinism, and Anglicanism, if I could speak correctly. But guess what.

50:10 Over time, these major branches fragmented further into hundreds and even thousands of denominations and independent churches, each with distinct theological emphasis. See the Reformation happened, and they were like, well, we got this stream, you got the Anglicans, you got the Lutherans, You've got you got the Calvinists. Okay, you got these, you got kind of specific groups. Oh don't forget the Anabaptist is still thrown in there and all of this. Okay, So you already had these these different streams, these different and then it just broke down. Hundreds thousands just split, split, split, split, split split. So you had a multiplicity of interpretations, you had denominational splits, and then you end up with theological pluralism. Well, the Roman Catholic Church maintained relatively some form of doctrinal uniformity, not all perfect, but at least some. Protestantism became marked by its diversity.

51:05 Debates over baptism, communion, predestination, ecclesiology, eschatology created theological pluralism, often leading to division not unity. So how does all of that relate to Well, the digital age. Those podcasters that seem to undermine pastoral authority, I want you to note all of that other stuff underminded pastoral authority because a pastor would have authority until the people disagreed with him. They would either get rid of him or just go start another group. Now, when it comes to the proliferation of podcasts, online sermons, and theological resources, if you really think about it, it's just a modern extension of the Reformation's individualistic approach to faith and theology. If you want to, if you want to complain about podcasts undermining pastoral authority, I'm sorry. Podcast is the fruit of the Reformation. The Reformation basically said, you are a priest, you have conscience, you have the word of God. Figure it out. Individualistic. Well, now, podcast is just the fruit of that individualistic approach. In the Reformation time, they didn't have podcasts, but they had

52:38 something else, started with a p They didn't have podcasts, but they had the printing press, and that printing press was used to facilitate the spread of diverse theological ideas during the Reformation. Oh, let's put out a catechism, let's put out this, let's put out a pamphlet, let's put out there, and then more people got into hands these divers days. It was just the podcast of its day. The printing press, which was instrumental to the Reformation, was the podcast of its day. Don't criticize podcasts. It has been going on since the Reformation. Now the information or now the information today may be spread quicker and maybe more of it, but it's just the fruit of the Reformation. Now.

53:28 This may raise questions about how pastoral authority and church unity can coexist with the accessibility in the variety of digital resources. But I will argue the printing press raised questions about how pastoral authority and church unity can coexist with the accessibility of printed resources now again. At that time, though, people were much more likely to take their new found theology and institutionalize it, create a church, create a denomination. So there was much more of a desire to take your ideas into an institution, where maybe in twenty twenty four it's more I'm going to take my ideas and leave the institution. That may be the only difference. The fragmentation of theological understanding may be critiqued, but it has been it. But it also it has also been defended as a natural consequence of the quest for theological integrity and a refusal to compromise on matters of conscience. This tension between unity and diversity has always been present in Christianity, with the Reformation merely intensifying this dynamic. I will see the Reformation blow it up. So I asked Ai about all of this. AI gave me a reflection. AI said that my observations that I've shared some of them with you and gave them to AI, ties into our broader conversation about the tension between authority and individualism and the

54:59 Protestant tradition. If philological fragmentation and division are intrinsic to Protestantism's DNA. The current digital age might not be a wholly new challenge, but rather a continuation of the historical trajectory. The key question is how local pastors and congregations adapt to these realities without losing the essence of community and accountability. So Ai agrees with me that this is just a trajectory of where Protestantism has been headed since the beginning. It was using the printing press, now uses the internet. It's still individualism run amok. It's still every individual with the Bible, making their own interpretation, determining what is true or false. So I asked Ai, well, does the article ignore the historical reality? And it says the article's critique of podcast appears to overlook the historical realities and the philological consensus of the Reformation. The Protestant Reformation champions like Sola Scriptorrah and the priesthood of all believers, which inherently encouraged individual engagement with scripture and diversillological interpretations. These principles laid the groundwork for the decentralization of ecclesiastical authority and the proliferation of theological voices precisely the dynamic the article critiques and the age of podcasts. Yeah, the article completely ignored the history the Reformation. So AI goes on and gives me pages of things here to look at, and

56:32 I'm just gonna skip all of it. But then I asked Ai this question. I'm like, okay, Ai, because I like to bounce off my ideas to Ai to see if it agrees or disagrees. But AI seems to think my historical analysis here is accurate, because I don't think. I don't think there's any way to debate my historical analysis. The Protestant Reformation blew this all all to pieces, and there's no way to put it back together. Right, the Humpty Dumpty fell off the wall, broke into a million pieces, and we're never putting it back together never ever. Okay, it's done. So then I asked Ai, but isn't it true that within the Protestant tradition, the pastor doesn't have any real meaningful authority since each individual is called to study, interpret the Bible and decide if what a pastor is preaching or what a church is teaching is true or not.

57:27 So AI said, you are correct. I'm like well, thank you. That's it. That concludes this podcast. AI said, I am correct. That's it. We're done. Okay, Ai has spoken, this is the way, all right, all right, okay, okay. Maybe I'm being a little dramatic there, but AI acknowledges yeah. Within the Protestant Reformation, the pastor has no real meaningful authority. We can all pretend he can stand behind the curtain and say I'm the mighty Wizard of Oz, but someone's gonna go back to curtain and go, no, you're not. You're just a little guy pulling levers. All right, you don't have any authority pastoral. Now, Ai tries to be more diplomatic and politically correct. Pastoral authority is often limited by the principle that each individual believer has a right and a responsibility to study and interpret the scriptures for themselves.

58:26 This belief flows directly from key Reformation doctrines such as Sola scriptorra the priesthood of all believers with the emphasis which emphasizes the sufficiency of scripture and the believers direct access to God without needing clerical mediation. So you don't need to go to a period priest, you can go directly to God. You got the Bible. It is sufficient for everything, and you have the right and the authority to interpret it. I mean all that flows from the Reformation, because it was a move away from church ecclesiastical authority to individual authority. So consequently, what happens while a pastor's authority is not intrinsic, it is conditional. It derives from the pastor's ability to faithfully teach scripture. But this is judged by whom who gets to say if the pastor is faithfully teaching scripture the individual yes to see. The pastor can say I'm faithfully teaching scripture, and the person in the pew can be like, no, you are not.

59:36 I stand on the word of God. I can do no other. My mind and my will is captured by the word of God. My conscience is captured by the word of God. All I can do is stand and you are wrong, pastor. This church is wrong. You're all wrong, and I'm right because I get to interpret the Bible. That's exactly what the Protestant Reformation led to. I know this. I can't be much more. It doesn't I Look, there was a time in my christianof I thought, well, if I go to this school and I get an associate's degree. Then I'll get a bachelor's degree. Then I'll get a master's degree. I want another associate's degree. Wait, I want another bachelor's degree. I want another I'm gonna go back and get another bachelor's degree. And I kept getting this diploma and this degree and go from this school to this school. And you know what it matters. In the end, I can sit here and say whatever, and someone will be like, you're wrong, You're wrong, you're wrong. Okay, Well then so my education doesn't matter, position doesn't matter. The individual gets to say you're wrong, you're wrong. I haven't studied it, I haven't gone to school for it, but you're wrong. It's just a facade. It's not a podcast issue.

1:00:50 This is a reformation issue. The authority. This is what AI says about pastoral authority. The authority is only meaningful in so far as congregants agree with the that the teaching alliance with scripture. If a congregation believes a pastor's interpretation is incorrect, they're free, according to Protestant principles, to disagree or even leave the church, or drive out the pastor remove the pastor and it doesn't matter if it's elder elders can try to. I've seen I've seen the splits happen in every kind of congregational led, pastoral led elder led The things fall apart. There's infighting, backbiting, gossip, slander, division, because everyone is the authority, even though we try to pretend. No, no, now the past who see authority until you disagree. The Reformation principle asserts that the idea of the priesthood of all believers. This Reformation principle asserts that every Christian has the right and ability to interpret scripture. It basically takes still logical understanding. It says anyone can have it. It breaks it up. It democratizes. If we want to use the word AI uses, it democratizes. Theyllo logical understanding, placing ultimate authority in the Bible itself rather than a pastor or ecclesiastical structure. Hey, the Bible is the authority. Now

1:02:24 you have the authority to interpret it. And once you interpret the authority then of the Bible, then you by the authority given to you because you're a priest. Because of the priest of all believers, you can now judge the ecclesiastical structure, just as Luther did. In practice, this means the congregants are expected to evaluate whether a pastor's teaching is biblically sound, effectively limiting the pastor's ability to assert unquestioned authority. The people are supposed to listen and determine right or wrong. Protestants are often encouraged to follow passages like Acts seventeen eleven, which commends the Bahreans for examining the scriptures to see if Paul's teachings was true.

1:03:10 This mindset reinforces the idea that individuals, not pastors, have the final responsibility for discerning truth. This dynamic often creates a basically a relationship between pastors and congregants where pastors guide, but individuals remain the ultimate authority over their own beliefs. Who's the ultimate authority the people in the church, not the pastor. So pastoral authority is a figment of everyone's imagination. Podcasts are not undermining it. It was undermined in the Protestant Reformation when Luther looked at the Catholic Church and said you're wrong. That gave everyone else the right to look to Luther and say you're wrong. And that it gave everyone else the right to tell those people who told Luther wrong that they were wrong, and then the people after them could tell them that they were wrong, and you're wrong, and you're wrong, and you're wrong, and you're wrong, and everyone's wrong but me. Oh wait, I'm going to find a couple of people who agree with me.

1:04:05 But now we'll make a church. We are right and everyone else is wrong. So if you take all of that and now apply it to the article, if pastors do not have inherent authority but derive it from their biblical teaching, then podcasts and other digital resources merely extend the range of voices believers are evaluating. This is not a new challenge, but a modern manifestation of the Protestant emphasis on individual discernment. So you don't have any inherent authority, So the whole article just is missing the entire point.

1:04:51 Congregants have always been free to compare their pastor's teachings with those of others, whether through books, conferences, and now podcasts. The podcast is just the fruit of what started. The digital age intensifies the plurality of voices available, but it doesn't fundamentally change the Protestant approach to authority. Believers are already accustomed to weighing and deciding between competing theological views. Podcasts simply make this process more accessible and varied. And the Protestant tradition, pastors have never had absolute authority and said their authority is contingent on their ability to teach scripture in a way that congregants find convincing. The proliferation of podcasts does not undermine this system. It simply provides more voices for believers to consider, which is consistent with Protestant emphasis on individual discernment. While pastors can and maybe even should, play a vital role and their congregants spiritual lives, their authority is always subject to the believer's ultimate responsibility to study and interpret the scriptures for themselves elves. So the bottom line is podcasts don't undermine pastoral authority because pastors never really had any authority, because the Protestant Reformation destroyed that entire concept. And in a Protestant system where the individual is supposed to not only has the right and the authority to do so, but has the responsibility

1:06:21 to read, study, and then judge whether what is preached is true, or false. Then the authority rest with the individual, not with the church, not with the pastor, and we should just stop playing games and just admit what it is and what is the hallmark? What is the fruit of the Protestant Reformation? Division, disagreement, division, that's the fruit of it. You say, are you against the Protestant Reformation. I'm not saying that. I'm being honest about what happened. See, you're not allowed to be honest about it because people think, oh, you're you want us to go back to the Catholic Church.

1:07:01 I'm just saying that the result of the Reformation, that's the fruit of it. Division, disagreement, dispute, debate, And you can have pastors and and everybody can like, oh, pastoral authority. I'm going to submit to my pastor until you don't like what they say, or until and then what you'll say is this is what the game church members play. It's not that I don't like what the pastor says. I just have concluded that what the pastor is saying is not biblical because of my extensive study of scripture.

1:07:42 Oh you have determined the pastor is wrong? Yeah, your extensive study of scripture. I bet you really spent a lot of time. All you got to say is I don't believe the Bible. The pastor is right with according to scripture, and then you can just say I don't have to agree with the pastor, and you can go to another church, start another church, or do whatever you want, because you're ultimately the authority. And any game you played, you just played a game. Man. You just allowed the wizard to be the Wizard of Oz until you got tired, and then you pulled the curtain back, going, ah, you're nothing, because ultimately you're in charge in the first place. And who are you going to listen to online? The people who agree with you? That's what you kind of do.

1:08:26 What are the books you're gonna read? The ones that agree with you? All you're gonna do is just find out, whether it's a church or whether it's online. You're just going to surround yourself with stuff that you agree with, and then everyone thinks that they're right, and nothing's supposed to ever enter into that echo chamber to say, guys, maybe you're all wrong. Sh silence him away with him, how heretic we are right. We are the ones who have the truth. I know that's a pessimistic and very cynical view. But the article is just completely misrepresent It's not dealing with history. The Enlightenment was the problem. The Enlightenment, some would argue, led to the Reformation. Some would say without the Enlightenment, you don't get the Reformation. Some will say without the rights of humanism, you don't really get the right because humanism was like, hey, the individual, not the institution. The Enlightenment, all of those states, all of those philosophies came together to give us the Protestant Reformation.

1:09:29 It's not so simple as we always want to make it, like, oh, one man stood against the heretics, one man the righteous one. Yeah, until then everyone else then said, oh he's wrong. Becau. I mean, not all of us are Lutherans, so we all obviously, if you're not a Lutheran, you think the Lutherans are wrong, and then you thuck the And if you're not a Calvinist, you think the calvin Is is wrong. But if you're a Calvinist, you think the other people are wrong. I mean, goes on. If you're not a Presbyterian, you think the Presbyterians are wrong. If you're just say everyone thinks they're stinking right. Everyone does. Truth is whatever the individual says. It is, like people like, no, it's the Bible. It's your interpretation of the Bible. Because the person sitting next to you, using the exact same Bible you're using, says that you're wrong. And you say, well, they don't know how to read. And they'll say you don't know how to read. You say, well, they don't know how to interpret. You don't know how to interpret. Well, because we don't even agree on what the hermeneutical principles are and how to I'll just forget it all, just call it a day, and this all be done with it.

1:10:35 Just the article just blew my mind that, oh, those podcasters are undermining our authority. Give me a break. It's been going on forever. It's not podcasters, it's not bloggers. It's been books, it's been pamphlets, it's been everything. Now some people say, well, what do we do? I've only said it about a million times. The only thing we can really do is first acknowledge the reality. And nobody wants to acknowledge that reality because it's very uncomfortable. It really is, and it can lead you to want to just throw your hands up and say I got better things to do. I'm just going to go sell everything I have and go live on a beach somewhere until I die and just watch the sun rises and sunsets come up over the water and wait till my life to end. Because there's no point in all of this.

1:11:25 I understand that. That's, you know, but we got to acknowledge it. I'm not saying we should go sell everything and sit on a beach, but okay, you can go sit on the beach. I'll probably go to Salem or somewhere. Okay, but you get the idea. But the second thing we can do is we can at least try say, hmm, maybe we just get back to the Bible, try to set aside all of our theological presuppositions and try to learn and read and handle the Bible and it's historical context. Now everyone says that, but as we've seen over and over and over, I know if we ever really just get to the scriptures, because we have great difficulty in letting the scriptures say what they say we want. We all have these things we oh, it's just very difficult.

1:12:18 And you hear how many sermon reviews we do, and I'm like, oh my goodness, once again, we've just left what the scriptures actually say. We're reading into the scripture, we're adding to the scripture. That's the whole reason we're doing the Isaiah forty through fifty five thing. It's because I got tired of how Isaiah forty, forty one, forty two, and forty three is being utilized in sermons. That's why we did the whole First Samuel twenty sixth thing, the James one nineteen to twenty seventh thing. And it's not because it's my theology versus their theology. It's because I'm just saying what does the text actually say based on the context on which it's found, and not worry whether it agrees with any philological team. The article raises an issue, but it raises an issue by ignoring the real issue, which is the unintended consequences of the Protestant Reformation. They are clear, they are evident, and they have been severe.

1:13:32 Thanks for listening, God bless