More often it starts with a deep burden God places on the heart of a leader, often a pioneering leader. It is a deep sense that something new needs to happen so more people can experience the love of God and a relationship with Jesus.

At Exponential, one of the ways we create space for those ideas to be identified and grow is through NEXT Ventures. NEXT Ventures is an initiative designed to identify, encourage, and accelerate innovative ministry projects that have the potential to multiply Gospel impact.

NEXT Ventures exists to come alongside pioneer leaders who are building new expressions of the church, experimenting with new ministry models, or responding creatively to emerging challenges in their community and our world. Our goal is not to simply celebrate innovation, but to help it take root, grow, and eventually multiply. 

NEXT Ventures is a growing portfolio of 70+ ministry projects that is also a family. We are friends on mission. Through this community, peer coaching, and catalytic resources we seek to intentionally help leaders clarify their vision and take their next bold steps toward even greater Kingdom impact. 

One of the key on-ramps into our family is the NEXT Ventures Pitching Deck, which takes place each year at Exponential Global in Orlando, Florida. During each of the four breakout sessions at the conference, we give three to four ministry leaders the opportunity to pitch their ideas, models, and early progress to a panel of leaders and peers. 

In many ways, Pitching Deck functions like an incubator moment – an opportunity for pioneer leaders to share the vision God has given them, the problem they are trying to solve, and how they believe their project could serve the mission of Jesus in a fresh way. These seven minute pitches must clearly articulate the impact God is having through their ministry.

Beyond that, these project leaders are pitching for the opportunity to apply for NEXT Ventures Shark Tank which will be held in Jacksonville, Florida on Sept. 28 and 29.  Only 12 ministry projects will be invited to pitch at Shark Tank, where micro-grants and an expanded partnership with Next Ventures will be extended. 

During the 2026 Exponential Global Conference, we hosted the latest version of Pitching Deck. We heard from 15 projects representing a wide range of contexts and innovative ministry approaches. These presentations were heard by a panel of judges, and they were scored on the following criteria:

• Innovative – Is it a creative and/or unique approach to ministry? 
• Impacting – Are there measurable and reproducible results?
• Sustainable – Does it have the infrastructure to support its staff and ministry? 
• Scalable – Is there a reproducible model to support exponential growth?
• Diverse – Does this represent diversity of age, gender, ethnicity?
• Transferable – Is it possible to replicate these practices in the church?

What follows is a summary of each session and the leaders who stepped forward to share their bold pitches. 

Pitching Deck Session #1

Session one kicked off with Aidan Britnell pitching Kaleo AI. Kaleo AI is reimagining what it means for the Gospel to be heard by removing language as a barrier. By combining custom-trained AI with a radically simple user experience, they have equipped 500+ churches to instantly translate entire worship gatherings without the need for costly infrastructure or personnel. 

Estuary Go!, founded by Joey Tomassoni, is igniting a movement of everyday missionaries by equipping churches to move beyond their walls and into the lives of people in the places where they work, live, and play. Through their GO! Ecosystem and AWAKEN model, they are uniting churches within cities for collective, disciple making impact that multipliers leaders and transforms communities. With 26 partnerships already in motion and vision to add 100 more each year, they are helping the church rediscover its calling as a sent people. 

Liminal founder Aaron Barnett is stepping boldly into the “in-between” spaces of young adulthood – those defining transition moments where identity, calling, and faith are forged. Anchored in a commitment to stay on the wall until the work is done, Liminal is cultivating environments where young leaders co-create with God through service, community, calling, and worship. What began as a Spirit-led vision in late 2024 is quickly taking shape into a movement, forming and sending a generation who will not drift through transition, but be discipled and deployed through it. 

Academy Training, led by Lance Frickle, is scaling accessible, high-impact training for church planters around the world. They are equipping leaders not just with knowledge, but with actionable plans and coaching support to multiply. Through a unique blend of on-demand content and live cohort-based coaching, they are forming practitioners who can immediately implement and reproduce what they’ve learned. With six completed tracks and a vision to expand into Spanish, French, and beyond, they are lowering barriers and accelerating a global movement of disciple-makers and church planters.

Pitching Deck Session #2

Session two was kicked off with a pitch from Peyton Jones and Kris Langham. They are the founders of Disciplology. Disciplology is a disciple-making platform for a digital age—placing a daily, relational pathway into the hands of everyday believers. Co-developed by NewBreed Training and Through the Word, the platform guides users through Scripture, clear actionable next steps, and real-time voice interaction with disciple-making partners, turning formation into practice! Disciplology is poised to equip a new wave of disciples who don’t just consume content – but actively reproduce. They currently have 4,500 users and are dreaming about 1 million more by 2030.

Come to the River (C2TR) founder Andy Krajewski enthusiastically pitched next. Andy is calling the church back to the water, positioning baptism as a bold, public, and celebratory gateway from the world to the water to the church. Their first C2TR event saw over 500 attendees and 68 people baptized! He has a dream to scale this to a national movement where C2TR events are held across the nation. 

Project 3|26, founded by Brian Cooper, is inviting people into a daily, life-changing encounter with the Bible — one chapter a day, over 3 years and 26 days. By pairing each passage with clear study guides and companion podcasts, and equipping leaders to multiply the journey in small groups.

Grace Bomb, started by Patrick Linnell in 2019, is helping believers break out of their “Christian bubbles” with a simple, Spirit-led practice that turns everyday moments into opportunities for unexpected kindness and Gospel conversation. By equipping people to build the habit of “grace bombing,” they are activating ordinary Christians to live on mission in natural, relational ways. In 2025 alone, they put 92,390 grace bomb cards in the hands of believers around the world. Last year they received almost 1,100 impact stories. 

Pitching Deck Session #3

Session three of the Pitching Deck was kicked off by Holy Health, founded by Justin Roethlingshoefer. Holy Health is reframing health as a discipleship issue – aligning habits, rhythms, and lifestyle with God’s design for whole-person transformation. Through a fully integrated ecosystem of app, curriculum, and community, they are equipping believers to steward their bodies with intentionality and accountability. Already piloted in 20 churches, this movement is poised to scale – helping people experience not just better health, but a more holistic, embodied faith.

Break Free Ministries founder Michael Swalley pitched their dynamic ministry to Hip-Hop culture next. They are boldly stepping into the heart of that culture to see gospel-centered micro-churches launched! By mobilizing everyday missionaries – artists, dancers, and cultural influencers – they are forming “Fire Teams” that live on mission, make disciples, and start micro-churches embedded in their existing Hip-Hop networks around the world. What has emerged over the past two years is a reproducible movement, redefining church planting as something that flows through culture, not just into it.

OneChurch.io, founded by James Donley, is building digital infrastructure for a more unified Church – connecting leaders, churches, and communities beyond denominational lines within a shared local ecosystem. What began as a grassroots experiment in Florida is now evolving into a scalable platform, empowering cities like Lincoln, Nebraska to collaborate, communicate, and move together as friends on mission. As this model replicates, it holds the potential to reimagine how the Church shows up – locally unified, digitally connected, and collectively on mission.

Seeds of Change founder Doug Beutler pitched to end session three. Seeds of Change is investing in the often-overlooked pastors of smaller churches. They are cultivating a relational network where encouragement, coaching, and practical training help them thrive again. They are doing this by helping these churches who are declining or plateaued become disciple making churches. What started with a single church has quickly grown into a multiplying network, revealing the powerful impact that can emerge when small church leaders are seen and supported as they discover how to become places where disciple are made to multiple generations.

Pitching Deck Session #4

Session four was kicked off by Mark Wurtz who is the founder of 3E Internship. The 3E Internship is identifying and investing in young adults through a deeply immersive, year-long journey that integrates work, community, learning, and global missions. Rooted in a rhythm of shared life and real responsibility – from farm-based community living to international ministry experiences – the program is raising up young leaders with spiritual depth and a missional imagination.

The final pitch was from Michael Hewitt and his team from Pool Church. Pool Church is stepping into billiards culture with a creative and compelling expression of the gospel – turning pool tables into platforms for disciple-making. Through trick shots, digital content reaching millions, and relational micro-gatherings, they are reaching people in the billiards culture. What they hope emerges are micro-expressions of the church that gather around pool tables. 

If you have read this far. Stop and celebrate with the NEXT Ventures team. Wow, 14 innovative projects and 14 wonderful pitches!

NEXT Ventures Pitching Deck is more than a selection process – it offers a glimpse into the future of the church. Each project represented a leader who sees an opportunity where others might see a challenge. Some of these projects were invited to apply for Shark Tank this fall where they will have the opportunity to pitch for a micro-grant and a deeper partnership with Next Ventures. 

But regardless of the outcome of this year’s Pitching Deck or Shark Tank event this fall, the real win is a growing community of leaders who are willing to boldly step forward. And with those steps, they are courageously experimenting and pursuing new ways to multiply the mission of Jesus.

We are grateful for their courage, creativity, and bold faith these leaders bring to the frontline of their Kingdom ventures. We look forward to seeing how God continues to use their ideas to spark new expressions of ministry and church in the years ahead!

Exponential NEXT Podcast Episode 100

Series: Thinking Ahead: Pastors and AI

Description:

AI is here, and your congregation has questions. Is it a sin to use it? Will AI replace jobs? And what about your kids using it?

Nils Smith, VP of Marketing for Faith Driven Entrepreneur and founder of Amplify Social Media, walks through the top 10 questions pastors are being asked about artificial intelligence.

Learn how AI can be a tool for organizational efficiency and an “incredible tool” for spreading the Gospel, without replacing the essential human connection and worship the church is built on.

Don’t miss Nils’ answers to the deepest question your members are asking: What makes humans special if AI can do what we do, perhaps even better than we can?

This episode is part of the Exponential AI NEXT podcast series. Learn more about how to get up to speed with AI for church at exponential.org/ai-next.

Guest:

Nils Smith, Faith Driven Entrepreneur, Vice President and Amplify Social Media, Founder

Category: AI NEXT

Most pastors I know don’t lack vision. They see the needs in their communities clearly. They feel the weight of the Great Commission personally. They long to see more leaders raised up, more churches planted, and more people encounter Jesus. Yet even with that clarity, many leaders feel stuck at the starting line.

Where do you begin? Who do you invite? What if you try – and nothing comes of it?

That tension is often where church multiplication networks are born.

Why Networks Matter Now

Church multiplication networks exist because no single church, no matter how healthy or resourced, can carry the mission alone. The work of reaching cities and regions requires collaboration – pastors and churches moving together as friends on mission.

At their simplest, church multiplication networks are small groups of churches who are friends on mission, collaborating together to start new churches that reach more people. They are not programs, denominations, or funding mechanisms. They are relationships organized around a shared commitment to multiplication.

And increasingly, they are becoming one of the most effective ways churches are engaging in reaching more people and starting new churches today.

When you look at passages like Nehemiah 3, where each family rebuilt their section of the wall in coordinated mission, or 1 Corinthians 3:6-9, where Paul reminds us that one plants, another waters, but God gives the growth. Scripture consistently pushes us beyond our silos. The Great Commission in Matthew 28 was never meant to be carried by isolated congregations. It requires the collective strength of the body of Christ working together.

The Myth of the Big Start

One of the most common reasons pastors hesitate to start a network is the assumption that it must begin large and fully formed. They imagine a complex structure, a polished strategy, and a significant budget. That assumption alone can keep the idea from ever leaving the ground.

In practice, the healthiest networks rarely start that way.

We often say: Dream Big. Start Small. Execute Like Crazy. The dream may be bold – seeing dozens of churches planted over time, or entire communities transformed. But the start is often modest. Two pastors meeting for coffee. A shared prayer burden. A conversation that begins with curiosity rather than certainty.

One network I know began when a pastor simply asked another, “Would you be open to praying together once a month about raising up future leaders?” There was no agenda beyond that. A year later, those same leaders were apprenticing church planters and dreaming about their first church plant together.

Momentum doesn’t come from scale at the beginning. It comes from faithfulness and the courage to take that first step toward collaboration.

Networks Move at the Speed of Trust

Networks are relational before they are strategic. This is not incidental – it is essential. Networks move at the speed of trust, and trust takes time to build. It is formed through shared experiences, honest conversations, and consistency over time.

Before talking about how many churches we can plant or how the funding models could work, healthy networks focus on building friendships. They pray together. They share stories of success and failure. They listen well. They learn how each other leads, how each other processes conflict, and how each other hears from God. They learn how to carry each other’s burdens.

This relational foundation determines whether a network will merely exist in name only – or endure in long-term fruitfulness.

This is what we call the “R” in RNA – the Relational foundation. Without it, everything else crumbles.

I’ve seen too many “tables” – gatherings of pastors and leaders – that are really good at connection and encouragement. They’re great at sharing prayer requests and swapping stories. But when it comes to actual impact? They fall short. Not because the relationships aren’t real, but because they never move beyond conversation into coordinated action.

The Power of an ICNU Conversation

Many networks begin with what we call an ICNU conversation – short for “I see in you.” It is a simple moment of intentional affirmation. One leader names the gifts, character, and calling they see in another and invites them into something shared. It often sounds simple, but it is surprisingly rare.

I’ve watched networks begin when one leader said to another, “I see how you develop young leaders, and I think God wants us to build something together that multiplies that gift.” That conversation changed the trajectory of their ministry – not because it came with a plan, but because it came with belief.

ICNU conversations create clarity, courage, and connection. They remind leaders that they are not alone – and that their gifts matter beyond their own church walls.

Naming the Obstacles Early

While collaboration is compelling, it is not easy. Healthy networks don’t pretend otherwise. They name the obstacles early and deal with them honestly. Two of the most common challenges are ego and economics.

Ego shows up when leaders subtly would rather build their own brand than share leadership or credit for a job well done. Economics surfaces when collaboration is welcomed – but only if credit, control, or return on investment is clearly defined. Both dynamics quietly erode trust if left unaddressed.

The most common obstacles I hear when talking about shared initiatives include fear, control issues, scheduling conflicts, and even theological differences. But here’s what I’ve learned: networks that move through these obstacles do so by addressing them head-on, not by pretending they don’t exist.

Healthy networks create cultures where generosity is celebrated, credit is shared, and fruit is measured in lives changed rather than logos displayed. They remind one another that the Kingdom is larger than any single church.

From Relational to Network Design

Once trust is established, networks need structure. This is the “N” in RNA – Network design. Without intentional design, even the best relationships drift into casual friendships that never produce Kingdom fruit.

Network design answers critical questions:

What is our shared purpose?

Who is truly committed to this work?

What are our rhythms and patterns of gathering?

What is our first shared win?

In the first year of a network, the goal is not rapid expansion – it is relational and structural strength. Rather than rushing toward outcomes, healthy networks invest time in building lasting friendships and shared rhythms. They commit to learning how to work together well before asking the network to produce results.

A major focus during this season is leader development within your own church. Networks hold one another accountable to apprenticing emerging leaders within their churches. They help each other identify and develop repeatable leadership pathways – simple, transferable processes that can produce leaders consistently over time.

One network I worked with realized early on that while several churches were passionate about church planting, none had a clear process for developing future planters. Together, they committed to apprenticing at least one potential planter per year in each church. That shared commitment reshaped their ministries – and created a pipeline for future multiplication.

Shared Action vs. Parallel Action

Here’s the critical distinction: shared action is fundamentally different from parallel action.

Parallel action is when multiple churches in a city are all doing good things – planting churches, serving their communities, developing leaders – but they’re doing it independently. There’s no coordination, no shared resources, no collective learning.

Shared action is when churches tackle something together that’s clearly bigger than any one church could accomplish alone. It’s coordinated mission. It’s pooled resources. It’s collective celebration of wins that belong to the Kingdom, not to any single congregation.

One of the tensions in moving to shared action is avoiding the trap where a network becomes “the same three people doing everything.” How do you create real ownership across multiple churches so that everyone is engaged, not just cheering from the sidelines?

The answer lies in clarity around roles and ownership from the beginning. When you launch a collaborative initiative, you need to be explicit about:

Who is leading which aspect?

What is each church contributing?

How will we measure success together?

How will we celebrate and debrief as a collective?

From Friendship to Fruitfulness: The Action Phase

Over time, networks naturally move from friendship to fruitfulness. This is the “A” in RNA – shared Action. As trust deepens and structure clarifies, shared initiatives emerge organically. Churches begin to share resources. Leaders collaborate on training environments. Church plants are launched with broader support and healthier teams.

The fruit often surprises even the leaders involved.

One network that began as a monthly prayer gathering eventually planted multiple churches – not because planting was forced, but because leaders were ready when the opportunity came. Their relationships had already done the hard work.

When you’re choosing your first initiative, here’s my advice: pick something that’s small enough to be doable, but big enough to matter. You want a win that builds momentum, not a project so ambitious that it crushes the emerging trust in your network.

Maybe it’s a joint outreach to an underserved neighborhood. Maybe it’s a shared leadership development cohort. Maybe it’s co-funding a church plant. Whatever it is, make sure you can:

Clarify the goal clearly

Name ownership roles explicitly

Measure impact honestly

Celebrate wins collectively

Action without relationship burns out. Relationship without structure drifts. But when all three elements – Relational foundation, Network design, and shared Action – work together, networks become unstoppable forces for Kingdom multiplication.

Measuring Impact Without Vanity Metrics

One question I get asked frequently is: “How do we measure impact without turning this into a vanity project or a scoreboard between churches?”

The answer is to measure what matters to the Kingdom, not what matters to our egos. Count lives changed, not logos displayed. Celebrate leaders developed, not credit claimed. Track churches planted, not which church gets the most recognition.

When you measure collectively and celebrate generously, you create a culture where multiplication becomes contagious.

An Invitation to Take the First Step

Starting a new network does not begin with a launch plan or a formal proposal. It begins with a willingness to take a first step.

A conversation.

A moment of prayer together.

An invitation to walk together and “see what God might do.”

An acknowledgement that our calling is as big as our city, not just our church.

If you sense a longing to see more leaders raised up, more churches planted, and more people reached, perhaps the next step is not doing more on your own – but doing something together.

The hardest part is often just getting started. But you don’t have to start alone.

For the leader who’s been at a lot of good tables and had a lot of good conversations – but you’re tired of talking and hungry to actually do something together – here’s my word to you: Name one issue in your city that’s too big for your church alone. Then invite two or three other leaders to dream about a shared initiative. Give yourself 90 days to launch something small but significant.

When leaders choose to move together – humbly, relationally, and faithfully – the impact often extends far beyond what any one church could imagine.

The question is not whether networks are the future of church multiplication. The question is: Will you be part of building one?

Because you were never meant to lead alone – and you don’t have to stay at talk-only tables either.

They are sometimes seen as “fragile” and addicted to screens, but the older generations can be characterized as much by those descriptions (it does not take much to trigger adults on Facebook on both sides of the political aisle). 

They are seen to be immature. But is that a characteristic of Gen Z or simply a function of the fact that they are young? Much of what can be said about Gen Z now could have been said about Boomers when they were the same age (so we need to distinguish between life stages vs. what are truly generational characteristics). 

Or this: Gen Z’s mental health struggles (anxiety, depression, suicide) is well documented. But does that mean previous generations did not struggle with mental health, or was it simply that it was culturally unacceptable to talk about it and they thereby repressed it? If that’s the case, maybe Gen Z does not have the most mental health struggles, but they are simply the most honest about them. 

In addition, Gen Z is seen as the most diverse generation – so, as such, can we actually generalize about them with any meaningful certainty? But they are also called the most homogeneous generation ever, because they have shared experiences across the board, like ubiquitous internet connectivity in the palms of their hands, plus global crises affecting them like the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID pandemic. So which are they: extremely diverse or globally similar to each other? 

Finally, there has been much made of them being called “the Nones” (no religion). But also there have been so many recent reports of revival among them.

Two of these will be addressed in this article: diversity/homogeneity and religion, as well as how these two aspects are linked. 

First, their demographic: Gen Z is indeed the most diverse generation ever. However, they are what is seemingly paradoxically “diverse collectivists.”1 In reality, they are not more diverse than previous generations (at least not globally). But they have grown up with diverse others and therefore are more comfortable navigating differences. Their values, not their demographics, are different. Because of social media, they are collectivists. The word “social” is the giveaway: Though they are characterized as loners who just sit in their rooms alone with screens, what they are doing online is far from being alone – it is social. They are networking with people near and far, engaging with people (sometimes personally like their friends, sometimes impersonally like YouTube influencers). 

They desire to be with others, and as such they have developed something akin to Majority World cultures which are more collectivistic in nature. So, Western Gen Zers understand the idea of honor/shame2 more than older Westerners do. Perhaps understanding this is a key to reaching them. George Hunter posits that in Medieval Europe, there were at least two major Christian worldviews and concomitant ways of evangelism: the Roman way and the Celtic way. The former is presentation, decision, assimilation; the latter is fellowship, ministry, and conversation, then belief/invitation to commitment.3 In other words, the Roman way is “believing before belonging,” whereas the Celtic Way was the opposite: “belonging before believing.” Both are Western models, but one is individualistic while the other is collectivistic. Boomers will try to win over Gen Z with apologetics, but perhaps authenticity, hospitality, and invitation are much more effective.

At least one other major aspect of diversity and homogeneity needs to be explored: how screens and global crises affect Gen Z. Regarding screens, because Gen Z grew up along with the advent of the iPhone (invented 2007), not only do they hardly remember a time without smartphones, but they were parented by smartphones. Although some say that screens are the #1 influence on Gen Z,4 others argue that it’s actually parenting.5 In reality, it’s a combination of both: parents used screens to parent their kids, before the research was well-known of how it would affect them.6 However, just because Gen Z grew up with screens does not mean that they are necessarily homogeneous. 

The algorithm (i.e. whatever you click on, your feed shows you more of) is well-known and an insidious aspect of the internet.7 Therefore, men and women will have different experiences on screens, and different racial groups will have different experiences on screens, and Republicans and Democrats will have different experiences on screens. But the irony of such diversity is that the algorithm creates silos, as people’s online worlds become more and more narrow with each click. Soon, they only see people on their feed who agree with them and then they do not know how to navigate differences. So then it becomes the opposite of diverse collectivists: the algorithm makes them homogeneous individualists. Regarding global crises, how people experienced COVID varied greatly across different socioeconomic classes and racial lines.8 To put it another way, Gen Z did not all have the same experience even though they experienced the same thing. The diverse homogeneity seems to be a characteristic of this generation.

The second characteristic of Gen Z that will be addressed in this is religion. Although much has been made of this being the most irreligious generation, there is a difference between opposition and absence. Just as darkness is not opposed to light but rather is an absence of light (a crucial distinction), Gen Z may not be as opposed to religion as we previously thought but perhaps are simply unexposed to religion. While labels like “the Nones”9 makes them come across as rabidly atheist, the reality is that  “Young people are not leaving the Church in droves because they have first been convinced of bad arguments, but because the truth, beauty, and goodness of Christianity were never imprinted on their imagination in the first place.”10 That is, they are not anti-Christianity, they are just unchurched (and that is a crucial distinction as well). Part of the problem is that older generations frequently mix up Millennials and Gen Z, characterizing the latter with things that are more descriptive of the former. Millennials have more Nones; Gen Z are more of a tabula rasa.

However, caution also needs to be had about the much-ballyhooed recent revivals apparently sweeping Gen Z. Yes, there was an amazing Asbury revival in 2023. But – to misquote a popular phrase by Mark Twain – “the reports about Gen Z’s overall revival are greatly exaggerated.” Almost all of the literature about the gains in Christianity by young people have been coming out of the UK11 (or at least Europe: Norway and France, for example, have also contributed some data). And that is something to be thankful for! But it does not indicate that there is a parallel trend sweeping the United States. Not to mention, perhaps the data coming out of Britain is not being read wholly accurately either.12 Gen Z is not as religiously atheist as we thought. However, nor is it as religiously abundant as we are being led to currently believe.

Similarly, there has been much made about the return of men to church. This was first reported by the New York Times in 2024(13) and has been repeated in numerous media outlets. This phenomenon – that men, who historically and globally have lagged behind women in numbers in Christianity – are now trending in American Christianity, is well attested and the data does not need to be under suspicion. However, what does need to be called into question is the reasoning behind the swelling numbers. Are men outpacing women because they are growing more, or because women are leaving the church in historical fashion?14 (It’s probably both, but a disproportionate amount of attention has been on the male trend. Why aren’t more people concerned about female attrition and trying to do something about it?) Another major question is, of course, why are men returning to church and why are women fleeing? Some have suggested that perhaps it is not entirely for spiritual reasons, noting that it divides more along political lines. The Charlie Kirk effect15 is a clear example of this: Young men are becoming more politically conservative and young women are becoming more politically liberal.16 Ironically, in a country like the U.S. which prides itself on separation of church and state, it seems that politics and Christian faith have become “strange bedfellows.”  

Given that politics may be the reason for driving one group toward church and the other away from church, a third question that needs to be asked is, “Is that a good thing or not?” And finally, the question underlying it all is: why are men becoming more politically conservative, and why are women becoming more politically liberal? Is it because what the church was offering in years past was seen as anemic and young men are now finding Christianity in politics to be a more “muscular” version which is more appealing?17 And are women being turned off by the very same reason: what they liked about Christianity in the church (its relationality, its warmth) is now being co-opted by politics? Should America embrace a new Constantinianism or reject it?

What does all this mean? It is easy to want to have a “silver bullet” for ministering to Gen Z, but perhaps there is none. Gen Z is neither demonic nor angelic; they are – similar to all other generations – trying to find their way, and they need the hope that is offered by Christ. Some have found it, and others are perhaps still journeying. We need strategies, yes. However, strategies based on stereotypes are unhelpful. 

Gen Z is a complicated, wild, wonderful, amazing generation, and they deserve our prayers, our love, our attention, and our best efforts at discipling them in the Jesus way. Because they are – quite literally – our future. And they are our primary means of carrying the baton of faith forward.

NOTES

1. Corey Seemiller and Meghan Grace, Generation Z Goes to College (Jossey-Bass, 2016), 120.
2.  Jolene Erlacher and Katy White, Mobilizing Gen Z (William Carey, 2019), 130.
3.  George G. Hunter III, The Celtic Way of Evangelism (Abingdon: 2010), 42-43.
4.  Jean M. Twenge, iGen (Atria, 2017).
5.  Jason Dorsey, Center for Generational Kinetics
6.  Jonathan Haidt, The Anxious Generation (Penguin, 2024).
7.  Netflix, “The Social Dilemma” (2020). As the adage goes, “if you are not paying for an online product, then you yourself are the product”!
8.  CDC report, “Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Exposure, Disease Susceptibility, and Clinical Outcomes during COVID-19 Pandemic in National Cohort of Adults, United States (November 2022), https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/28/11/22-0072_article 
9.  Ryan P. Burge, The Nones (Fortress, 2021).
10.  Phil Davignon, “Misunderstanding the Rise of the Nones” (September 16, 2022): https://churchlifejournal.nd.edu/articles/misunderstanding-the-rise-of-the-nones/ 
11.  For example, from the Bible Society UK, “The Quiet Revival” (April 7, 2025): https://www.biblesociety.org.uk/research/quiet-revival 
12.  Pew Research Center, “Has there been a Christian revival among young adults in the U.K.? Recent surveys may be misleading” (January 23, 2026): https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/01/23/has-there-been-a-christian-revival-among-young-adults-in-the-uk-recent-surveys-may-be-misleading/ 
13.  Ruth Graham, “With Gen Z, Men Are Now More Religious than Women” in The New York Times (September 25, 2024): https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/23/us/young-men-religion-gen-z.html 
14.  Ryan P. Burge, “Are young men really returning to church? The data says not so fast” in American Institute for Boys and Men: https://aibm.org/commentary/are-young-men-really-returning-to-church-the-data-says-not-so-fast/ 
15.  Barna, “New Survey Reveals Spiritual Impact of Charlie Kirk’s Death” (December 4, 2025): https://www.barna.com/research/impact-charlie-kirk/ 
16.  The 19th, “Gen Z women are the most liberal group in the country”: https://19thnews.org/2025/10/gen-z-women-politics/ 
17.  Kristin Kobes Du Mez, Jesus and John Wayne (Liveright, 2020).

Exponential NEXT Podcast Episode 99

Series: Thinking Ahead: Pastors and AI

Description: Jay Owen, Chief of Ministry Staff at Church of Eleven22, shares how his team builds custom ministry apps in hours using AI-powered tools. His church now creates software solutions for under $3 that used to cost tens of thousands of dollars and take weeks to develop.

In this practical episode, Jay walks through real examples including:

• A personalized wallpaper creator built in 45 minutes the night before a major presentation
• A baptism registration system that served nearly 2,000 people
• A sermon search tool that indexes 890 hours of content
• Landing pages created for $0.50 in 2 minutes

You’ll learn about vibe coding with tools like Replit, where ideas become working applications through simple descriptions. Jay walks through actual builds, shows troubleshooting in real time, and explains which projects work best for this approach.

Whether you’re tech-savvy or someone who barely likes being on the computer, you’ll discover specific tools and workflows that reduce costs, improve user experience, and create stronger discipleship pathways.

This episode is part of the Exponential AI NEXT podcast series. Learn more about how to get up to speed with AI for church at exponential.org/ai-next.

Guest:

Jay Owen, Church of Eleven22, Chief of Ministry Staff

Category: AI NEXT

Presently Hope consists of three locations across Manhattan, each of them growing and serving across the city in beautiful ways. But it wasn’t always that way. And it almost never happened.

Hope’s multisite origin story is an unusual one. More often than not, multisites happen because there is a clear plan in place, existing leadership and culture to bring into a new space, and organizational scaffolding to support this new structure. This was not the case with Hope though. 

For many years, Hope had been active in planting churches across New York City and beyond. There was both an incredible need and an incredible opportunity for healthy, Christ-centered communities across the Five Boroughs. (Not that Pastor Drew would ever plant in Staten Island though….) 

Over the course of 10 years, from 2012 to 2022, 14 Hope Churches or daughter churches had been planted around the city. These were all independent churches, but joined together through the Hope Church NYC Family of Churches and the New City Network (the church planting arm of Hope). 

However, some significant shifts happened. Like many church planting networks, the dream did not match the reality. The Family of Churches grew distant relationally and the Network hosted less gatherings. Then the pandemic swept in, which was a hardship on every church, but especially on church plants, and especially in cities like New York, which saw a substantial exodus during that time. 

Two of the Hope church plants closed. Additionally, the founding pastors of two longer-standing plants – Hope East Village and Hope West Side – decided to step down from their roles. These pastors approached Drew about these congregations coming under Drew’s leadership directly, rather than having the churches find a new Lead Pastor on their own. 

Drew, who was now pastoring Hope Midtown, was left with a difficult decision – leave these two churches to an uncertain future during a very challenging time for churches, or adopt them back into Hope Midtown and essentially reverse-engineer a multisite model. It would have been easier to stay independent. Yet Drew and the rest of the Hope leadership ultimately determined that their love for these communities they had once birthed and the missional opportunities provided would make the challenge worth it. In 2022, Hope Church NYC became one church worshipping in three locations (while each of the remaining church plants remained independent, with some of them taking on different names).

Over the past three years there has been no shortage of complexity, confusion, and even conflict. But there has also been an abundance of laughter, joy, shared wins, transformation, new life, and more. Our multisite story has been one of messiness and movement. Here are three ways that we have navigated the former for the sake of the latter. 

Getting Healthy Together

This new structure felt much more akin to a blended family than a traditional, cookie-cutter, or plug-and-play multisite model. There was excitement, but there were also significant expectations and assumptions that everyone was bringing to the table, many of which weren’t aligned, spoken, or even conscious. Differing ideas around where there would be uniformity, and where there would be uniqueness. Who was empowered to make what decisions. How staff and financial resources were distributed. The list could go on. In any bringing together of two (or three!) parties, there is going to be some level of conflict and confusion, and we were no different. 

However, Hope also has a clear commitment to emotional and relational health. Rather than let these assumptions, misaligned expectations, and conflicts gradually erode our trust with one another, we have worked hard to create a culture that navigates conflict in a respectful, humble, and timely manner. We also strive for a culture of celebration and appreciation so that our staff and leaders know they are valued and that their contributions are meaningful. As it says in 1 Peter 4:8, “Love covers a multitude of sins.” 

What matters most to us, before any of our thinking around systems and strategies and multisite dynamics, is that we become more loving, more Christ-like. If we are growing in that way, then we can wade into these messy waters without worrying that we’ll drown or take someone else down with us.

A central part in this culture-shaping process has been our investment in Emotionally Healthy Discipleship, in which Drew recently began serving as president. All of our pastors and many of our staff have participated in the School of Emotionally Healthy Leadership. This has given us a shared language for how to offer critical feedback, how to navigate conflict in healthy ways, how to avoid assumptions and clarify expectations, and how to love team members more than we love the work they do for the church. Even junior members of our staff team are equipped to initiate difficult conversations with more senior leaders, and those senior leaders are equipped to receive them non-defensively and non-reactively. These resources also provide a framework for how our entire team can practice Sabbath, lead out of our singleness or marriage, embrace our limits, and slow down for stillness and silence in an otherwise hurried and frenetic city. 

It is very difficult for me to imagine how this multisite plan would have worked without utilizing these tools and practices. However, they have become a trellis that has allowed our culture and mission to grow in healthy, sustainable, and enjoyable ways.

Going Deeper Together

One of the challenges of reverse-engineering a multisite is that staff are often accustomed to focusing on their own area of influence. This can lead to silos, inflexibility, territoriality, and a lack of new ideas for how to innovate and improve. It was important to us to cultivate a culture where staff and leaders loved our shared mission more than they loved their particular part of it. We’ve worked towards that in a few ways.

First, we make it a point to celebrate testimonies and wins together as much as possible. Each Monday our staff team gathers, including staff from each location as well as staff who serve centrally. We begin each of those meetings by celebrating what we’ve seen God do over the course of the week across our gatherings. More often than not this would take up the whole meeting if we let it! And then we conclude our meetings by spending an hour in prayer together. 

These rhythms and practices have created a shared sense of ownership over our communities and the neighbors they serve. We cheer for the stories of growth and transformation happening across our locations- marriages restored and strengthened, new small groups starting up, baptisms, physical healings, spiritually curious friends leaning in. And we mourn together for the stories of loss and pain we also see transpiring. It has helped us truly live as one church in three locations, not just three churches who share a name and website. 

Second, we try to collaborate as much as possible. An obvious benefit of the multisite model is that we can punch above our weight by leveraging the people and resources of three locations while still offering our members more localized, personal relationships in their specific location. We try to ensure that our staff do as little redundant work as possible. We collaborate on shared resources for our small group leaders. Our All-Church Retreat is the highlight of the year for many families. We run a number of centralized courses and events throughout the year, such as Emotionally Healthy Spirituality and Relationships, marriage investment courses, family workshops, Biblical and theological development, spiritual practices, and more. Members from all locations participate in and are enriched by these. They allow them access to Hope members and staff from across the church so that our community knows they are a part of something bigger than what they might regularly see. 

The pulpit is another prominent place where this happens. We have live preaching at each location. We have developed a team of preachers that collaborate on each sermon series, offer feedback to one another, and contribute unique perspectives and experiences. Even though we might primarily serve and preach at one location, we will also preach at other locations. This allows our community to get a healthy diet of diverse, but unified, voices across differing backgrounds, ethnicities, and gender. 

It has not been easy, but as time has gone by we’ve reaped the benefits of these shared experiences and diverse leadership, and we celebrate the transformational impact they have had on our church.

Going Further Together

Growing in emotional and relational health and offering our church multiple discipleship pathways has allowed us to engage dynamically with the needs of our city as well. New York City is massive and its needs are similarly massive. Jesus calls us to love our neighbor, and we have millions of them. Many are under-resourced, and lacking adequate access to medical care, food, and affordable housing. Many are over-resourced, having become wildly successful but are losing their soul along the way. Having multiple locations across the city gives us the opportunity to serve these neighbors in diverse, holistic ways.

Hope partners with a number of organizations engaged in justice and mercy work around the city. Examples include St Paul’s House, which provides warm meals and an even warmer community to youth in Hell’s Kitchen. The New Life Community Health Center in Queens, where those with limited means are able to receive free dental and medical care. Do For One combats the isolation faced by many with social and emotional disabilities through community gatherings and mentorship relationships. Hope East Village operates a free store throughout the week to provide assistance to the migrant community in their neighborhood. 

Members from Hope are invested in all of these ministries. Because we share and celebrate their stories together, not only does it give us a bigger sense of what God is doing across NYC, but it also gives our community members greater opportunities to serve out of their unique gifts and passions. Someone from Hope West Side who has a heart for the immigrant community can take the subway down to Hope East Village each week and serve at the free store alongside other Hope members. Likewise, a Hope East Village member studying medicine at NYU can connect with the Health Center in Queens. This kind of movement happens all the time, and it has created a web of service, fellowship, and mission all over the city.

We also host Alpha twice a year, which is a series of dinner parties and spiritual conversations designed to extend hospitality to the spiritually curious. A strength of our multisite structure is that we are able to host one large central Alpha gathering each semester. We have a dedicated staff to lead it, and a team of cooks, greeters, and table hosts that pull from each location. Many hands make light work, and this team hosts some truly special dinners for spiritually interested friends from up and down Manhattan and beyond. A recent Alpha guest commented, “Alpha has been a deeply meaningful experience for me…Through Alpha, I not only began to understand Christianity more personally, but I also experienced it through the people I encountered.”

Three years into this unexpected multisite adventure we have learned a lot. Some of these lessons were learned the hard way. At times there has been confusion, frustration, and conflict. There’s been plenty of messiness. Yet because of our commitment to cultivating a healthy culture, there’s been beautiful movement as well. We’ve gone deeper in discipleship, further in mission, and have seen God do amazing things in and through us. We’re all excited to see what the next three years hold. But ultimately our prayer is that we would partner with God to build a great city, not just a great church. 

A risk to the ministry.
A risk to your reputation.
A risk to the people you’re trying to serve and develop well.

If you’ve ever thought, It’s just easier if I do it myself, you’re not alone. Most female church leaders I work with are deeply committed, highly capable, and profoundly relational. We care about outcomes, yes, but even more about people. And that’s exactly why delegation can feel so fraught.

But what if delegation isn’t about letting go of control?

What if it’s actually one of the clearest ways we form leaders, steward trust, and build ministries that last?

Why Delegation Feels Especially Complicated for Women

In many ministry contexts, women have learned – implicitly or explicitly – that their leadership position must be continually earned. Doing more, carrying more, and covering gaps often feels safer than risking mistakes or disappointment.

Layer onto that our relational wiring. Many women naturally lead with empathy, care deeply about how others experience us, and feel the emotional weight of letting someone struggle. When a volunteer is overwhelmed or a staff member fumbles, our instinct is often to step in, smooth it over, and make sure no one feels exposed.

That instinct comes from love.
But left unchecked, it quietly caps leadership growth – both theirs and ours.

The truth is this: People don’t grow by being protected from responsibility; they grow by being trusted with it.

A Framework That Changes the Way You Delegate

One of the most helpful tools I’ve found for delegation – especially when leading capable adults and emerging leaders – is what I call the 10–80–10 framework.

It brings clarity to who owns what in a way that protects mission, develops people, and reduces anxiety for everyone involved.

Here’s how it works.

The First 10%: Vision, Guardrails, and Clarity

As the leader, you own the first 10%.

This includes:

• Defining the goal
• Naming the win
• Setting boundaries and expectations
• Clarifying budget, timeline, and non-negotiables
  

This is where many delegation breakdowns actually occur. Not because leaders are controlling, but because they rush this part. When vision isn’t clear, people fill in the gaps with their own assumptions. That’s not empowerment; that’s confusion.

Strong delegation begins with thoughtful preparation, not vague handoffs.

The Middle 80%: Ownership, Learning, and Leadership

This is the part that stretches us.

The middle 80% belongs to the person you’re delegating to. They plan. They execute. They problem-solve. They lead.

And yes, they may do it differently than you would.

That’s the point.

This is where development happens. This is where leaders learn how to make decisions, recover from missteps, and build confidence through practice… not perfection.

Your role in the middle 80% isn’t to hover or rescue. It’s to stay available, ask good questions, and offer strategic guidance without taking the work back.

Support is not control. Availability is not interference.

The Final 10%: Alignment and Accountability

You also own the last 10%.

This is the final review. The moment to ensure alignment before something launches, communicates, or goes live. Not because you don’t trust the person, but because mission drift is real.

A lot can change between the start and the finish of a project. The final 10% protects the integrity of the work and the person leading it.

‘But What If They Fail?’

This is the question underneath almost every delegation struggle.

And the honest answer is: They might.

But failure isn’t the opposite of leadership development, it’s often the pathway to it.

Early in my own ministry leadership, I remember sitting in meetings feeling frozen. Not because I lacked calling or ability, but because I hadn’t been taught the skills that mattered at that level. The moments that changed everything weren’t pep talks. They were leaders who said, “Try this. I’m here if you need help. And we’ll talk afterward.”

That’s not abandonment.
That’s formation.

Delegation Is About People, Not Just Tasks

In the church, we don’t use people to get ministry done.
We use ministry to develop people.

That’s a fundamentally different posture than most organizational leadership, and it’s deeply biblical. Jesus didn’t protect His disciples from responsibility; He entrusted them with it, corrected them, and sent them out again.

Delegation, when done well, communicates:

• I see leadership potential in you.

• I trust you with real responsibility.

• I’m committed to your long-term growth, not just the short-term outcome.

That kind of leadership builds cultures where people don’t just show up, they grow and mature.

Why This Matters for Sustainability

Ministry will always be demanding. There will always be more needs than resources, more opportunities than time.

But leaders burn out fastest when they carry responsibility that was never meant to be carried alone.

Delegation isn’t a sign that you’re doing less.
It’s a sign that you’re leading more.

When we refuse to delegate, we unintentionally communicate that leadership is about capacity rather than multiplication. When we delegate well, we create space for others to step into who God is forming them to be.

A Simple Place to Start

You don’t need to overhaul your leadership approach overnight.

Start small.

Delegate one meaningful task this week using the 10–80–10 framework:

• Clarify the win.
• Release ownership.
• Schedule a final check-in.

Notice what happens – not just in the work, but in you. The urge to take it back. The discomfort of watching someone learn. The quiet relief when leadership is shared instead of hoarded.

That tension isn’t a failure signal.
It’s a growth signal.

Leadership that develops others always feels a little uncomfortable at first.

But it’s also the kind that lasts.

And that kind of leadership blesses everyone… especially you!

Yet many congregations remain among the most segregated institutions in their communities. 

The question is no longer whether diversity will shape our neighborhoods. The question is whether local churches will reflect the reconciling power of the gospel within that reality.

Over the past 25 years, leaders across the United States and increasingly around the world have rediscovered a biblical vision that speaks directly to this moment. The multiethnic church – more specifically local churches that are intentionally multiethnic – has not emerged from sociological observation or contemporary cultural pressure. Rather, it emerges from the teaching of Jesus, the narrative of the early church, and the theological instruction of the apostles.

To be clear, it is a mistake to conflate the multiethnic church with other legitimate expressions of the local Christian ecclesia. For example, immigrant churches (that is, congregations established by and primarily serving one specific people group) and other ethnic-specific but otherwise culturally homogeneous congregations have historically played an essential and honorable role in the mission of God, particularly in providing linguistically accessible and culturally familiar evangelism, discipleship, leadership development, and pastoral care. Yet by definition, these congregations are not multiethnic. Rather, they are culturally or ethnically homogeneous because they gather primarily around a shared language, culture, or identity. 

A multiethnic church, by contrast, intentionally gathers people of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds into shared worship, leadership, community, and mission within the same local body.1

Since the multiethnic church is indeed rooted in Scripture and modeled in the New Testament, church leaders today must wrestle with two essential questions:

• Why should we plant or otherwise establish healthy multiethnic churches?
• How can we do so?2

Why: The Biblical Mandate

From Genesis to Revelation, scripture reveals God’s heart for the nations. The promise to Abraham in Genesis 12 declares that all peoples of the earth will be blessed through Him. The prophets envision nations streaming toward God. And the apostle John’s vision in Revelation portrays a multitude from every tribe, language, people, and nation worshiping together before the throne.

Despite this sweeping narrative, the development of local churches has not always reflected this biblical reality. Yet the New Testament clearly presents unity across ethnic, economic, and cultural lines as central to the credibility of the gospel.

Three theological insights help clarify the New Testament mandate for the multiethnic church.

Envisioned by Christ (John 17:20-23)
On the night before He died, Christ prayed specifically that future generations of believers would be united as one so that the world would know God’s love and believe. In this way and by this means, Christ stated that His mission would be accomplished through others and, ultimately, that His Father would be glorified. What Jesus intends for us (the local church) is clear: we have been called to be one for the sake of the gospel. It may not be easy, but it is biblical and right. Therefore, we are to “walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which (we) have been called” (Eph. 4:1 NASB).3

Described by Luke (Acts 11:19-26a; 13:1)
In Acts 11:20, for the first time men of diverse cultural backgrounds intentionally preach the gospel to both Jews and Gentiles. Luke contrasts them with others who spoke “the word to no one except to Jews alone” (Acts 11:19). It should come as no surprise that “the hand of the Lord was with them,” and considerable numbers came to Christ and into the church. Its leadership team included two men from Africa, one from the Mediterranean, one from Asia Minor, and one from the Middle East (Acts 4:36; 9:11; 13:1). Antioch also became the first church to send missionaries into the world. Significantly, it was here that the disciples were first called Christians (Acts 11:26). It is the multiethnic church at Antioch, then, and not the ethnic-specific congregation in Jerusalem, that should serve as our primary model for local church development in the 21st century.

Prescribed by Paul (Romans, Ephesians, etc.)
Throughout his ministry and letters, the Apostle Paul consistently established and instructed churches composed of both Jewish and Gentile believers. These congregations were therefore multiethnic by their very nature. With this in mind, the theme of Paul’s life and much of his writing can be summarized as the unity of the church for the sake of the gospel. For example, in Ephesians 3:6 Paul explains that the “mystery of Christ” is the revelation that Gentiles and Jews would become “fellow heirs… members together of one body” (see also Romans 16:25–27 and Colossians 1:24–27). In Christ, former divisions are dismantled and a new humanity is formed. The church becomes the place where reconciliation is not only proclaimed but embodied (Ephesians 2:11–4:6).

So, Christ envisioned, Luke described, and Paul prescribed. This is the biblical why – the New Testament’s theological foundation for the multiethnic church.

How: Seven Core Commitments

Understanding that the multiethnic church is not just nice but necessary for advancing a credible gospel witness in an increasingly diverse and cynical society, how can healthy multiethnic churches be established? Experience and scripture point to seven core commitments that are intrinsic to building healthy, multiethnic congregations.

Embrace Dependence
Building a multiethnic church is fundamentally a spiritual endeavor. Human strategies alone cannot produce the deep reconciliation required. Jesus reminded His disciples that some challenges require prayer and fasting. In the same way, cultivating unity across cultural lines requires dependence on the Holy Spirit. Prayer, patience, and persistence must define both the process and one’s pastoral calling.

Take Intentional Steps
While the work is spiritual, it is not accidental. Multiethnic churches do not emerge by chance. Intentionality must shape every aspect of church life. Many congregations say they welcome diversity, but often what they mean is that others are welcome as long as they adopt existing cultural patterns. The difference between assimilation and accommodation becomes critical here. Assimilation asks people to minimize their cultural distinctives. Accommodation asks the majority culture to adjust in order to welcome others fully. Healthy multiethnic churches practice accommodation.

Empower Diverse Leadership
What is expected of the body must be modeled by its leadership. From the boardroom to the pulpit, from paid staff to volunteers, it is essential to credibility that leadership throughout the church should reflect the diversity of the congregation being united in spirit, intent on one purpose. Intentionality again matters. Churches must actively cultivate relationships beyond their usual networks. Otherwise, leadership pipelines tend to reproduce monocultural norms and expectations. Diverse leadership communicates belonging in ways words alone cannot. 

Develop Cross-Cultural Relationships
Programs do not build unity. Relationships do. Trust grows through genuine friendships formed across cultural lines. These relationships cannot be rushed or manipulated. They develop over time through shared experiences, honest conversations, and mutual respect. In environments where people carry different histories and experiences, such relationships become the foundation of unity.

Pursue Cross-Cultural Competence
Working effectively across cultures requires learning. Leaders and congregations must develop the ability to understand and navigate cultural differences. Cross-cultural competence involves humility, self-awareness, and curiosity. It requires listening carefully and learning from others’ experiences. Much of this competence is learned not through classrooms but through relationships and shared life.

Promote a Spirit of Inclusion
Small details communicate powerful messages. Signage, language, music, and imagery can either signal belonging or reinforce distance. Inclusive environments intentionally communicate that people from many backgrounds are valued and welcomed. At the same time, inclusion does not mean abandoning biblical truth. Rather, it means extending grace and patience to those exploring faith and reconnecting with the church.

Mobilize for Impact
The goal of the multiethnic church is not diversity for its own sake. Nor is it merely symbolic unity. The goal is gospel credibility and mission advancement. When diverse believers unite around Christ, the church becomes a powerful witness to the surrounding community. This unity fuels evangelism, it strengthens the broader body of Christ, and it advances the Great Commission.

A Credible Witness for Our Time

It is no secret that the world today is marked by increasing polarization and division. Ethnic, cultural, and political conflicts often dominate public life. In such a climate, the church has a unique opportunity to display an alternative reality.

When believers from diverse backgrounds choose to walk, work, and worship God together as one, despite the distinctions that often divide the world, they demonstrate the reconciling power of Christ. In doing so, they give visible expression to the unity for which Jesus prayed in John 17 and reflect God’s Kingdom on earth as it is in heaven. In a divided world, then, the multiethnic church becomes one of the most compelling witnesses to the reconciling power of the gospel.

NOTES

1. For a fuller definition of a multiethnic church, visit https://mosaix.info/learn-more.

2. The biblical mandate and seven core commitments of a healthy multiethnic church were first explained in Mark DeYmaz, Building a Healthy Multi-Ethnic Church: Mandate, Commitments, and Practices of a Diverse Congregation (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2007). 

3. Mark DeYmaz, Leading a Healthy Multi-Ethnic Church: Seven Common Challenges and How to Overcome Them (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2010, 2013), 27.

Exponential NEXT Podcast Episode 98

Series: Thinking Ahead: Pastors and AI

Description: AI is a “force multiplier” for the Kingdom, but instead of being a friend or an enemy, you should make AI your frenemy. In this episode, Jason Morris introduces the “Art of AI Jiu-Jitsu”, teaching pastors how to use AI as an “adversarial network” to leverage its power while avoiding its weaknesses.

Since the average church cannot afford to “own the compute” or “own the model,” the speaker argues that the greatest opportunity for pastors to use AI without becoming a commodity is to own the data.

Some of the critical issues to discuss internally with church leadership are:

1. Own the Prompts: The question of “who owns the prompts” is becoming more valuable than ever, and pastors should reuse and share them among staff to create efficiency and save time.
2. Build Contextual Equity: Create a knowledge base of best practices around prompts to help onboard new staff and volunteers quickly.
3. Leverage Context: Since “content is no longer the king… context is”, your unique human context with your church is your “superpower” that AI will never have.
4. Focus on the Human Element: AI is designed for “dopamine, not truth” and excels at “sycophancy”. Pastors should prioritize relationships, care, and speaking the “cold hard truth”, actions AI cannot produce.

Jason leads the conversation by showing how AI can be used to handle the “grunt work” like administration and research, freeing you to focus on the relationships and community that only humans can provide.

This episode is part of the Exponential AI NEXT podcast series. Learn more about how to get up to speed with AI for church at exponential.org/ai-next.

Guest:

Jason Morris, thechurch.digital, Director of Equipping & Mobilization

Category: AI NEXT

What is emerging across healthy ministries is not panic or blind enthusiasm. Many pastors are intentionally broadening their perspective by engaging resources that explore major cultural and technological disruptions so they can think ahead rather than react late. It is a grounded approach that treats AI as a tool that reduces friction in ministry work so leaders can spend more time with people.

AI is not a ministry philosophy. It is a tool, similar to a wrench in a toolbox. A wrench does not design the house or decide where walls go. It speeds up specific tasks when used by someone who understands the work.

How Churches Are Using AI to Recover Pastoral Time

The clearest pattern across churches experimenting with AI is time recovery. Teams use AI to handle first passes and structural work so staff energy can shift toward conversations, care, and leadership.

Church teams use AI to draft weekly emails, organize sermon research notes, clean up volunteer communication, prepare early versions of social posts, and summarize long-form feedback from surveys. These tasks still require review and editing, but they no longer start from a blank page.

When staff recover even small pockets of time each week, the effect compounds. Meetings feel less rushed. Follow-up happens faster. Leaders arrive better prepared. Presence increases because mental load decreases.

A Simple Mental Model Pastors Understand

The healthiest teams share the same working definition. AI functions like a fast intern. It produces work quickly. It lacks judgment. It cannot read context. It does not carry responsibility.

Because of that, churches that use AI well never skip review. AI provides structure and starting points. Humans supply discernment, theology, tone, and accountability. This keeps ownership clear and trust intact.

This model lowers anxiety for pastors who worry about losing control. Nothing leaves the building without a human deciding it is ready.

Where Churches Get Into Trouble

Problems appear when AI output bypasses discernment. That usually happens under pressure, when speed becomes more important than care.

Across ministries, leaders draw a clear line. This is also where formal AI policies are starting to matter more. Clear policies help staff understand expectations, limits, and responsibilities before problems surface. No staff member can blame a tool for errors, miscommunication, or theological drift. If content goes out under the church’s name, a person owns it.

A common internal filter used by teams asks four questions before anything is shared. Is it accurate? Does it sound like us? Is the timing wise? Does it align with our theology? This applies to emails, curriculum, social posts, and internal documents.

The Strongest Guardrail Churches Are Setting

Privacy has become the firmest boundary. Churches using AI responsibly avoid placing personally identifiable information into public tools.

That includes names combined with pastoral notes, giving history, counseling details, or sensitive life circumstances. Even when tools claim strong safeguards, leaders recognize that trust with congregants carries more weight than convenience.

Instead, churches use AI for structure, summaries, and drafts while keeping private data inside secure church systems. More churches are formalizing this posture through written AI policies that outline acceptable use, privacy boundaries, and accountability. Resources focused on creating clear and workable AI policies are helping churches define boundaries that are practical rather than technical or restrictive. When AI integrates with church software, identifiers are removed and access is tightly controlled.

A Quiet Shift in How Churches Handle Follow-Up

One of the most effective uses of AI in the future that will be normalized, IMHO, is using AI to support pastoral follow-up. Church databases already hold attendance patterns, involvement history, and spiritual milestones. AI can turn that scattered information into a short narrative summary that helps leaders prepare for conversations.

Rather than clicking through multiple screens, when using an AI agent, a pastor can quickly understand someone’s journey and ask better questions. And the in person conversation can remain human in a deeper way.

This approach reframes church data. Information stops being something collected for reports and becomes something used for care.

Preparing for Economic Pressure Inside Congregations

AI is changing how people apply for jobs, how companies evaluate candidates, and how roles evolve. Churches are beginning to see downstream effects.

Some congregants experience longer job searches. Others face role changes or income uncertainty. Churches paying attention will hopefully respond by strengthening financial readiness to be the church in a diversity of ways for this changing dynamic.

That preparation will show up in budgeting that is more accurate and real-time based on actual receipts vs quarterly or worse – annual snapshots without recent updates on what’s really available, building reserves, clarifying benevolence processes, and discipling generosity in a more personalized and tailored manner amd practical ways. These steps create stability when individuals or families feel pressure.

What Technology Cannot Replace in the Church

AI can do a lot! It generates content quickly.  It can simulate conversation. It can organize information.

But it really cannot form people on its own. Because AI cannot sit in grief. It cannot pray with someone in crisis in an authentic way. It cannot walk with someone through repentance or restoration.

Churches that remain healthy will double down on embodied community, relational discipleship, and pastoral presence. You must be diligent in using tech to support that kind of humanity in ministry work or you risk undermining it when AI-solutions replace human connection.

A Realistic Way to Start

Pastors do not need task forces or complex policies to begin. Most churches start with a single experiment.

Teams identify one repetitive task that drains energy. Two rules are set. No personal data goes into AI tools. Human review is required. The team runs the experiment for thirty days and measures time saved and quality maintained. When you do this, your team will definitely be ready to create a basic AI policy that serves your staff, volunteers, and your congregation with transparency, guidance, and biblical wisdom.

The recovered time must be intentionally redirected toward people-to-people investment. That final choice in outcomes and behavior determines whether AI becomes a gift or a distraction.

Leadership Capacity Already Exists in Your Church

Many congregations include people who work with AI, data, and technology every day. Too often, their gifts are limited to operational tasks. Why not tap them for helping you lead the way regarding AI usage in your ministry?

Churches making progress will invite these people into discussions about real ministry challenges. Then, they can ask them to think, design, and build solutions that support the mission.  “How might we use AI?” is the question to ask.  Innovation then becomes service. Expertise being applied to ministry can become discipleship for those that may be sitting on the sidelines in your church. All of this might be a totally new concept for many church leaders, but it can be an energizing one for everyone involved.

Final Thoughts

As AI becomes more common in everyday life, churches will continue to face decisions that extend beyond efficiency and productivity. Ongoing learning around major shifts in culture and technology is becoming important as leaders process these changes together rather than in isolation. Questions around trust, formation, authority, and dependence will surface in new ways. Leaders will need to think carefully about how technology shapes expectations, habits, and relationships inside their communities.

Some consequences will be intended. Others will not. The most important work may be noticing those second-order effects early and responding with wisdom. The churches that navigate this season well will likely be the ones that stay curious, listen closely, and remain anchored in the slow, relational work that technology can never speed up.