World's Okayest Pastor

Building a Bible Study on AI (With the Help of AI): What I Learned as a Pastor

When I sat down to build a Bible study on Artificial Intelligence for LCMS pastors, I expected the hardest part to be the tech—definitions, tools, risks, and ethics. It turns out the deeper challenge was the process itself: learning how to think with an AI tool without letting it think for me; grounding modern questions in Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions; and setting wise boundaries that honor the pastoral vocation.

This post is my reflection on that journey—what I learned, where I drew lines, and how I now approach AI as a pastor seeking to serve Christ and His Church.

How I Frame AI for Ministry

I’ve found a simple metaphor that lowers anxiety and raises clarity:

AI is like a super‑powered graduate research assistant—fast and tireless, but not wise, not human, and not spiritual.

That framing helps me separate capability from authority. AI can accelerate research, spark ideas, and organize content. But it carries no theological conviction and makes no promises. It’s a tool—nothing more, nothing less.

Key distinction: AI belongs in my thought‑exercise phase (brainstorming and organizing), not the proclamation phase (preaching, absolution, pastoral counsel).

The Questions I Had to Wrestle With

1) How do I talk about AI in a way that is pastoral, calm, and clear?

Most pastors have heard the hype and the fear; fewer have received a clear, grounded, non‑technical explanation. I try to set a non‑anxious tone, invite honest questions, and make space for real concerns around privacy, misinformation, and trust (themes LCMS has raised for digital life more broadly).¹ ²

2) How do I root this in Scripture and our Lutheran theology?

I kept returning to these anchors:

  • Imago Dei: Humans—not machines—bear God’s image (Gen. 1:26–28).
  • Wisdom: True wisdom comes from the Lord (Prov. 2:6).
  • Discernment: We’re called to be transformed by renewal of the mind (Rom. 12:2).
  • Vocation: Whatever we do, we do unto the Lord (Col. 3:23).

These Scriptures became the theological backbone of my study.

3) How do I keep ethics simple and pastoral?

Rather than abstract frameworks, I used Christian‑life anchors:

  • Truth (honesty, transparency)
  • Justice (protecting the vulnerable)
  • Love of neighbor (privacy, dignity, trust)

These categories also reflect broader LCMS guidance for Christian engagement online—truth‑telling, responsibility, and community.¹

4) How do I use AI without letting it replace my vocation?

This became the heart of the matter. I asked:

  • Am I using AI to shortcut the spiritual work God has called me to—prayer, study, discernment?
  • Or am I using it to support that calling so I can serve people better?

My guardrails:

  • AI may assist, but it may not author.
  • I remain the author and theological editor; the tool remains a scaffold.
  • If I couldn’t disclose AI’s role without undermining trust, I’ve crossed a line.

5) How do I help congregations prepare wisely?

I drafted a staff & leadership AI use agreement with simple principles: confessional alignment, transparency, privacy, accuracy, and boundaries (e.g., AI may support admin and brainstorming; it does not replace preaching or pastoral care). LCMS resources encourage this kind of careful, pastoral approach to new technologies.²

Is Using AI Any Different Than Using Commentaries or Books?

Similarities:
Like trusted resources and collegial conversation, AI can spark ideas, surface angles I might miss, and help me organize. I’m still the preacher; I still do the exegesis; I still pray, test, and discern.

Differences:

  • No confessional identity: AI isn’t Lutheran, Christian, or doctrinal. It must be filtered more carefully than Chemnitz, Walther, or a CTCR report.
  • Speed and polish: AI can produce fluent text so quickly that I might be tempted to outsource the hard work of wrestling with the text.
  • Prediction, not interpretation: AI doesn’t understand Scripture; it predicts likely language. That’s not the same as theology.

My conclusion:

AI belongs in my brainstorming, not in my proclamation.
It can help me think, but it must not do my thinking for me.

Does the Holy Spirit Work “Through AI”? A Lutheran Answer

As a Lutheran, I need precise categories here:

  • The Holy Spirit works through the Means of Grace—the Word, Baptism, the Lord’s Supper, and Absolution—instituted by God and carrying His promises.
  • The Spirit also works through vocation—through people (pastors, parents, teachers, neighbors).
  • AI is a tool, not a means of grace. It offers no promises, creates no faith, forgives no sins, and cannot preach Christ faithfully.

So can God use this tool in my calling? Yes—not because AI is Spirit‑filled, but because the Spirit works through the Word on me as I study, reflect, and write, even when I’m using ordinary tools (books, software, AI) to support that calling. The Spirit speaks through the Word, not through the machine.

The better question isn’t, “Does the Spirit work through AI?”
The better question is:

“Does the Spirit work through me as I work with this tool in faith and vocation?”
By God’s grace, yes.

How Much AI Is “Too Much”? A Pastoral Framework

Here’s the grid I now use:

  1. Vocation over outsourcing
    • AI should assist my calling, not replace it (especially preaching and pastoral care).
  2. I remain the author
    • If my pastoral voice, theology, and judgments are shaping the outcome, I’m using the tool rightly. If AI starts sounding like the author, I’ve gone too far.
  3. Transparent without scandal
    • If I told my elders, “I brainstormed with an AI tool, then wrote and shaped the final piece,” would that build trust? If not, I’ve crossed a line.
  4. Scripture and confession at the center
    • The Word forms the work; AI only organizes the scaffolding around it.

Practical Boundaries I’m Committing To

  • Yes to AI for brainstorming, outlining, research prompts, summarizing long sources, clarifying language, and admin templates.
  • No to AI drafting sermons, generating pastoral counsel, or making doctrinal claims.
  • Yes to verifying sources and facts (AI can err or fabricate).
  • Yes to protecting privacy; I won’t paste sensitive pastoral or member data into AI tools.
  • Yes to transparency in public‑facing content when AI was substantially involved.
  • Yes to periodic review of our staff agreement as tools evolve.

These boundaries echo the tone of LCMS guidance on digital tools and the church’s ongoing reflection on online technology.¹ ²

Where I Landed

  • AI is a helpful thought exercise, not a theological authority.
  • The Spirit works through the Word and my vocation; AI is a tool I must steward.
  • Integrity, discernment, and pastoral voice matter more than ever.

If this reflection helps you—even a little—to engage AI with wisdom, calm, and fidelity to Christ, then the exercise has already served its purpose.

Further Reading & Resources

Notes

  1. LCMS CTCR, Christians and Social Media (2019): guidance on truth, community, and responsibility in digital contexts.
  2. LCMS CTCR, Online Technology in the Church: Study Document (Adopted Dec 2024): study framework for evaluating emerging tech in church life.
  3. The Unstuck Group (Tony Morgan & team), ministry leadership insights on AI’s implications.
  4. Barna Group, trend data on AI and the church’s response.
  5. Photo by Edwin Cruz on Unsplash
Garet Ellis Avatar

Published by

Garet Ellis
I am a husband, father, and an ok pastor.
Categories:
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment