In recent years, the evangelical landscape has undergone a seismic shift no longer confined to North America. We have moved from an era of large, stable institutions toward a decentralized, digital-first world of individual content creators. Although this phenomenon is often discussed in an American context, it has become a global crisis, accelerated by the borderless nature of the digital age. Across the world, the center of gravity is shifting from the objective life of the church to the subjective personality of the leader.
As Carl Trueman has frequently diagnosed, this trend is the ecclesiastical manifestation of expressive individualism.1 The church is no longer seen as a covenant community into which we are brought but is treated as a platform for the pastor’s self-expression. The pastor is no longer a servant of the Word under the authority of a session; he becomes an influencer and brand manager whose platform exists independently of, and often at the expense of, the local church. This model promises authenticity, but it is a house of cards. For those of us in the Reformed tradition, it represents a spiritual crisis because it dismantles the biblical definition of the church as the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:27).
I offer these reflections on what I will call the “Gig-Eva” church. I have counseled several people who considered joining churches shaped by a Gig-Eva pastor’s platform. Over time, they recognized serious problems and sought counsel about what they were experiencing. In such moments, the call is not merely to criticize but to “test the spirits” with sobriety and charity (1 John 4:1). At the same time, I do not claim that every Gig-Eva pastor fits this pattern. My aim is caution rather than condemnation since any of us can drift in similar directions when we begin to desire the place that belongs to God alone.
The Architecture of a Private Kingdom
The primary drive of this influencer model is the expansion of the pastor’s reach. He is not building the kingdom of God, which is not of this world (John 18:36), but a kingdom tailored to his tastes, aesthetics, and sociopolitical leanings. To sustain this private kingdom, he does not gather the mixed company of saints, including the poor, the broken, the elderly, and the difficult. He curates an audience, gathering those who fit his brand and mirror his image.
This is market segmentation disguised as “vision casting.” By gathering a demographic and often a political community rather than a congregation, he rejects the catholicity of the church, the reality that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, but all are one in him (Gal 3:28). He also resists meaningful accountability, whether to a denomination, a presbytery, or even a trusted friend. When one man becomes the load-bearing wall, the structure is fragile by design. Scripture warns against unaccountable power: “In an abundance of counselors there is safety” (Prov 11:14).
Preaching and teaching can also become preoccupied with criticizing individuals, organizations, doctrines, or cultural phenomena. The irony is that some pastors end up mirroring what they condemn, positioning their words as uniquely authoritative and their vision as determinative for the people of God. This contradicts the apostolic warning not to go “beyond what is written” (1 Cor 4:6).
The Erasure of Office and the Transformation of the Church into a Business
One of the greatest dangers in some Gig-Eva churches is the erosion or removal of biblical office. The Reformed tradition has emphasized ministers, elders, and deacons to provide wise oversight and healthy checks and balances. This is not mere tradition. The New Testament describes qualified overseers and deacons as Christ’s provision for the care of his church (1 Tim 3:1–13).
The influencer-pastor often treats these offices as red tape that slows his agility. In many such churches, offices are either absent or functionally hollow, filled with followers who behave as fans rather than overseers of the pastor’s soul. I have encountered churches without meaningful officers that still claim to be biblical, or even Reformed. This does not make sense. Officers exist to foster, guard, and deepen fellowship. The church is called to “obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls” (Heb 13:17). This command assumes real shepherds, real accountability, and real watchfulness.
When biblical structure is dismantled, the pastor becomes a law unto himself. He may then weaponize pastoral authority to initiate discipline, or even excommunication, against those who question his vision. Church discipline, intended for the restoration of the soul (Matt 18:15–17), becomes a tool of fear used to maintain power. At this point, the organization functions less like a church and more like a private enterprise, where the bottom line is the leader’s success rather than the glory of God.
The Invisible Manipulation of the Sheep
Perhaps the most insidious aspect of this model is manipulation through financial, emotional, and religious pressure. Members are urged to give sacrificially, not chiefly for the relief of the poor but to fund the pastor’s vision, often translated into higher production values that polish his image. Scripture draws a sharp line here, warning against leaders who “in their greed” exploit God’s people (2 Pet 2:3).
Christians rightly devote their lives, time, energy, wealth, and emotions to the church. Attending church is not merely attending or viewing a service; it involves immersion in the fellowship of the body of Christ. We are built together through the ordinary rhythms of congregational life as believers devote themselves to apostolic teaching, fellowship, and prayers (Acts 2:42).
Yet in a church shaped by Gig-Eva patterns, devotion can quietly shift into devotion to the pastor. For instance, members may begin to meditate more on the pastor’s words than on Scripture. Fellowship may also become confined within the boundaries of that particular congregation, so that members grow critical or cynical toward brothers and sisters who do not belong to the same church. Such members may come to regard their association with a well-known pastor’s community as a mark of spiritual superiority. Further, the pastor may repeatedly hold up certain members as examples of true faithfulness, and others may then strive to receive similar acknowledgment from the pastor and the congregation. Over time, the member’s longing for the pastor’s approval can displace the desire to seek God himself. This can become a subtle form of spiritual gaslighting: The pastor’s approval is treated as the measure of one’s faithfulness, and the member’s pride becomes bound to being recognized by him. Spiritual growth is equated with an emotionally charged atmosphere, and the pastor’s “vision” is treated as synonymous with God’s will. The implication follows that to question the man is to question God. Instead of the perfect love that casts out fear, the environment is defined by apprehension (1 John 4:18). Members are praised when they comply and marginalized when they do not.
A Global Delusion: The Illusion of Proximity to Fame
This is not merely an American issue but a global phenomenon. Christians from Seoul to Los Angeles and from Manila to New York can fall under the same spell. A particularly dangerous delusion in the digital age is the belief that membership in a famous pastor’s church or participation in a global social-media community is equivalent to spiritual health. I have even witnessed churches pressuring members to write positive reviews and comments online.
Many confuse the exhilaration of belonging to a large, trendy, influential community with actual growth in Christ. Yet faith does not become healthy through proximity to a famous pulpit or the buzz of a celebrity platform. True spiritual health is found in quiet, daily obedience and in participation in the ordinary means of grace. It is found in the life Christ describes: Hearing his words and doing them is like building on the rock (Matt 7:24–25). The foundation of our faith is not the glow of an influencer but the person and work of Christ (2 Cor 4:6).
The Narcissistic Pulpit and the Usurpation of Scripture
Preaching in these churches often functions as a mirror rather than a window. Instead of preaching Christ and him crucified (1 Cor 2:2), the pastor centers messages on health, wealth, and psychological comfort to elicit a blessing-oriented response. The danger deepens when he demands, explicitly or implicitly, that followers heed his words rather than the clear teaching of Scripture. One of the clearest red flags is when a leader implies that his insights, prophecies, or visions should be followed over the written Word of God. Pastors are called to be servants of the Word, not masters over it. Any shepherd who replaces “Thus says the Lord” with “Listen to my words” or “I will let you know” is not shepherding but asserting control. Scripture calls elders to shepherd God’s flock, “not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples” (1 Pet 5:2–3).
In such settings, the preacher is celebrated as “the preacher of the age,” the “true preacher” who hears God’s voice directly and receives unique messages from him. This redirects trust from Christ to the pastor. People begin to commit their lives to the leader rather than to the true Lord, Jesus Christ. The pastor promises success, implying that following him will deliver the life they desire, and the end is often disillusionment.
The church exists to point people to the love of Jesus Christ through the Scriptures. When a pastor demands the praise or total intellectual submission that belongs only to Christ, not only does he commit a form of spiritual idolatry he also teaches the congregation to participate in it. Like Israel before the golden calf, the people may begin to seek visible religious security in something God has not appointed. Members can come to treat the pastor’s word as their safety, assuming their faith is secure because they belong to a particular community. In an age overwhelmed by misinformation, the church needs wisdom to discern what is true, and this begins with seeking wisdom from the Lord, who “gives generously to all without reproach” (Jas 1:5).
This dynamic also explains why the influencer-pastor often resists correction. When confronted, he reframes criticism as persecution, casting opponents as enemies of Christ. Yet the pattern can be more subtle than this. He may cloak his conduct in the language of “shepherding,” “spiritual care,” or “pastoral concern,” telling those who raise concerns that they are resisting pastoral care or misunderstanding his gifts. In such cases, the language of care becomes a shield against accountability.
A true shepherd must be correctable because he remains a sheep under the Chief Shepherd. Spiritual authority should produce softness of heart, not defensiveness; receptivity, not suspicion; humility, not self-protection. A pastor who cannot receive correction without turning critics into enemies has already confused his own reputation with the cause of Christ. Genuine repentance bears visible fruit (Matt 3:8).
Recovering the Church as a Community of Love
True recovery of the church begins when we remember that the church is a fellowship of love intended to magnify Christ, not celebrate a man. Jesus gave his disciples a new commandment, that they love one another as he loved them (John 13:34–35). This love is not vague sentiment but sacrificial love that bears burdens and seeks the neighbor’s good.
In the influencer-driven church, love is replaced by loyalty to the brand. In a biblical church, love is the air we breathe. We need pastors willing to be forgotten so that Christ may be remembered. The pastor is called to be a window through which the congregation sees the glory of Christ, not a mirror that reflects his own style. The goal of the church is to know the love of Christ, and to idolize a human being is a direct offense to that sacred mission.
Conclusion: Looking to the Good Shepherd
Pastors are called to look to the Good Shepherd as their model. The influencer-driven approach is a global mirage that promises impact but often delivers isolation. The church’s strength is not in digital reach but in faithfulness to the historic confession and the ordinary means of grace. Jesus Christ did not curate an audience. He called the messy, the poor, and the sinful, and he loved them to the end.
He is the Good Shepherd who knows his sheep by name and laid down his life for them (John 10:11, 14–15). Pastors are called to stop trying to be famous and start trying to be faithful. Yet even faithfulness can be corrupted when it becomes a ground for boasting. A man can take noxious pride in being “ordinary,” “confessional,” “countercultural,” or committed to the simple means of grace. He can wear anticelebrity as a badge of honor and still draw attention to himself. The ordinary means of grace are not grounds for self-congratulation; they are Christ’s appointed means for feeding his sheep. Pastors are called to display his glory, not their own. They must reject not only the self-glory of the influencer but also the quieter self-glory that can hide beneath the language of faithful ministry. In the end, we must all remember the pastoral maxim and the pattern of the Christian life: “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30).
Note
- Carl R. Trueman, “Goodbye ‘Big Eva,’ Hello ‘Gig Eva,’” First Things, October 23, 2025.
©Sam Hyeong Rae Jo. All Rights Reserved.
RESOURCES
- Subscribe To The Heidelblog!
- Download the HeidelApp on Apple App Store or Google Play
- Browse the Heidelshop!
- The Heidelblog Resource Page
- Heidelmedia Resources
- The Ecumenical Creeds
- The Reformed Confessions
- The Heidelberg Catechism
- The Heidelberg Catechism: A Historical, Theological, & Pastoral Commentary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2025)
- Recovering the Reformed Confession (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2008)
- Why I Am A Christian
- What Must A Christian Believe?
- Heidelblog Contributors
- Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to
Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization
Sam Hyeong Rae Jo
Sam Hyeong Rae Jo (PhD, VU Amsterdam, 2023) is a pastor-theologian with a special interest in John Owen and the theology of the affections. He earned a BA in Theology from Moody Bible Institute, an MDiv and an MA in Historical Theology from Westminster Seminary California, and a PhD in Systematic Theology from Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. His work explores how the Spirit transforms the believer’s heart in union with Christ. He writes and speaks on Reformed theology, Christian spirituality, and human flourishing. Sam is married to Miran, and they live in Seoul, South Korea.
More by Sam Hyeong Rae Jo ›