Enough of his content has been posted here that Ernie presumed familiarity.
OK, looking at the transcripts and his substack, there's a lot of useful, serious content here. And Bootstrap has some crow to eat.
Still not a fan of the video in the original post of this thread, but he makes up for that in other things he writes and posts.
0 x
1. Are we discussing the topic? Good.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
I’m thinking that’s right. I thought the video was really interesting and he made some good points.
I noticed that not many churches call themselves Holiness Pentecostals or even just Pentecostals anymore. They change their names or put the Pentecostal in small print. It’s still the same group of people just calling themselves a different name. I guess they’re trying to distance themselves from those PBS programs that showed people flopping on floors and handling snakes.
Every now and then I come across younger folks who don’t want guitars and drums in church anymore. They want preaching from the Bible but they don’t want the fire and brimstone shouting preachers. They want sermons seasoned with reason as I’ve heard them say.
Many appear to have come to the conclusion that the “Toronto Blessing” was in reality no blessing at all. Wherever do you go when you’re convinced that it came not from God but from self (or someplace even darker).
What is the Toronto Blessing? I’ve never heard of that one.
This from Wikipedia’s:
The Toronto Blessing has become synonymous within charismatic Christian circles for terms and actions that include an increased awareness of God's love, religious ecstasy, external observances of ecstatic worship, being slain in the Spirit, uncontrollable laughter, emotional and/or physical euphoria, crying, healing from emotional wounds, healing of damaged relationships, and electric waves of the spirit.[1][2] "Holy laughter", as a result of overwhelming joy, was a hallmark manifestation,[3] and there were also some reports of instances of participants roaring like lions or making other animal noises.[4][5] Leaders and participants present in these services claim that most of these manifestations, including some people roaring like lions, were physical manifestations of the Holy Spirit's presence and power, while some Pentecostal and charismatic leaders believe these were the counterfeits of the Spirit as is mentioned in the biblical passage of 2 Thessalonians 2:9.[6][7] In December, 1994, Toronto Life Magazine declared TAV as Toronto's most notable tourist attraction for the year.[8]
Many appear to have come to the conclusion that the “Toronto Blessing” was in reality no blessing at all. Wherever do you go when you’re convinced that it came not from God but from self (or someplace even darker).
What is the Toronto Blessing? I’ve never heard of that one.
This from Wikipedia’s:
The Toronto Blessing has become synonymous within charismatic Christian circles for terms and actions that include an increased awareness of God's love, religious ecstasy, external observances of ecstatic worship, being slain in the Spirit, uncontrollable laughter, emotional and/or physical euphoria, crying, healing from emotional wounds, healing of damaged relationships, and electric waves of the spirit.[1][2] "Holy laughter", as a result of overwhelming joy, was a hallmark manifestation,[3] and there were also some reports of instances of participants roaring like lions or making other animal noises.[4][5] Leaders and participants present in these services claim that most of these manifestations, including some people roaring like lions, were physical manifestations of the Holy Spirit's presence and power, while some Pentecostal and charismatic leaders believe these were the counterfeits of the Spirit as is mentioned in the biblical passage of 2 Thessalonians 2:9.[6][7] In December, 1994, Toronto Life Magazine declared TAV as Toronto's most notable tourist attraction for the year.[8]
Well now that’s a whole new set of worship I’ve never heard of before. Thanks for the explanation.
0 x
Free Will Baptist <-> Anabaptist
”Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.” Robert Martz
barnhart wrote: ↑Sun Jun 14, 2026 8:49 am
Tim Keller planted a network of churches in NYC over the last 30 years appealing to this demographic.
This sounds accurate. Though I and most young people I know prefer stern preachers, but like you said "seasoned with reason". Fire and brimstone preachers are amusing, but provide awful church atmospheres imo
We try to get as many young men who are members as possible to bring an occasional message. Some are better thought out and better presented than others but without fail the congregation get more from them than messages from old heads like me. I wonder if the protestant (over?) emphasis on preaching may lead churches to look past what actually feeds the flock.
How are you measuring what the congregation is getting from the messages?
Do you have any opinions on why the congregations is getting better fed from poorly thought preaching by a young man that from preaching by a more spiritually seasoned, more mature older man?
barnhart wrote: ↑Sun Jun 14, 2026 2:25 pmWe try to get as many young men who are members as possible to bring an occasional message. Some are better thought out and better presented than others but without fail the congregation get more from them than messages from old heads like me. I wonder if the protestant (over?) emphasis on preaching may lead churches to look past what actually feeds the flock.
Do you do anything to mentor them over time?
In our church, 4 members preach, each of us has a completely different style.
0 x
1. Are we discussing the topic? Good.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
This sounds accurate. Though I and most young people I know prefer stern preachers, but like you said "seasoned with reason". Fire and brimstone preachers are amusing, but provide awful church atmospheres imo
We try to get as many young men who are members as possible to bring an occasional message. Some are better thought out and better presented than others but without fail the congregation get more from them than messages from old heads like me. I wonder if the protestant (over?) emphasis on preaching may lead churches to look past what actually feeds the flock.
How are you measuring what the congregation is getting from the messages?
Do you have any opinions on why the congregations is getting better fed from poorly thought preaching by a young man that from preaching by a more spiritually seasoned, more mature older man?
I think part of preaching is testimonial and people respond to that aspect just as much as to the theological content.
barnhart wrote: ↑Sun Jun 14, 2026 2:25 pmWe try to get as many young men who are members as possible to bring an occasional message. Some are better thought out and better presented than others but without fail the congregation get more from them than messages from old heads like me. I wonder if the protestant (over?) emphasis on preaching may lead churches to look past what actually feeds the flock.
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Mon Jun 15, 2026 4:12 pmDo you do anything to mentor them over time?
Yes.
Such as?
0 x
1. Are we discussing the topic? Good.
2. Are we going around and around in a fight? Let's stop doing that.
3. Is there some serious wrongdoing or relational injury? Let's address that, probably not in public and certainly not for show.
barnhart wrote: ↑Sun Jun 14, 2026 2:25 pm
We try to get as many young men who are members as possible to bring an occasional message. Some are better thought out and better presented than others but without fail the congregation get more from them than messages from old heads like me. I wonder if the protestant (over?) emphasis on preaching may lead churches to look past what actually feeds the flock.
How are you measuring what the congregation is getting from the messages?
Do you have any opinions on why the congregations is getting better fed from poorly thought preaching by a young man that from preaching by a more spiritually seasoned, more mature older man?
I think part of preaching is testimonial and people respond to that aspect just as much as to the theological content.
Do the young men have a more vibrant testimony than the old men?