2 Comments

1. 

   Bob on Thursday March 2, 2006 at 8:52 am

   There’s irony in the juxtaposition of these two statements (on page 3 and in reverse order in the article):

   Indeed, house churching in itself can be an economically beneficial proposition. Golden Gate Seminary’s Karr reckons that building and staff consume 75% of a standard church’s budget, with little left for good works. House churches can often dedicate up to 90% of their offerings. Karr notes that traditional church is fine “if you like buildings. But I think the reason house churches are becoming more popular is that their resources are going into something more meaningful.”

   in the case of a group in the Northwest that reportedly yearned to do social outreach but found that every member had heavy credit-card debt.

   Hmmm… I wonder what “more meaningful” things were represented in the credit card debt of those folks. But have no fear, it sounds like they conducted an “austerity campaign” (is that a word for a fund-raiser…special offering…?) and came up with some money to give away.

   It isn’t about a different kind of church, it’s about a different way of life.

2. 

   sean on Sunday July 2, 2006 at 5:26 pm

   Hello,
   Great site! We’ve done home church for a while and its been good. Relationships are some of the most precious things God can give us. Real ones! But like anything else, the more religion you let into it, the more dead it becomes. We try to let Jesus instigate everything.

   I am a musician, and I would be honored if you would check out my music. All of the music is free for download. Anyway, just thought that I’d share.

   Thanks,
   -Sean
   ___________________
   http://www.SeanDietrich.com
   “All my music is free for download.”