Sunday’s a good day to take it easy.
I’ve decided that on Sundays I’m not going to do any blogging except for a very simple post series called “The Sunday Special” where you get to ask me anything you’d like.
You can ask about me about web technology, WordPress, blogging, what I ate for breakfast… whatever.
I can’t promise that I’ll answer all of your questions, but feel free to answer each other’s questions as well.
I’ll try to answer all the questions throughout the coming week.
Simple enough, right? Go.
Mikes says
First, I have a friend from BlogCatalog by the name of Tom Usher. He posted in his blog that you actually deleted his comments and that this site is actually anti-christian. What was his comments about? I know you have the right to delete, but I really want to know why?
thanks! God bless you!
human3rror says
Untrue. I'd like to see some proof that I did delete a comment. I delete only spam and bots.
Adam_S says
I have been reading through “Fresh Wind, Fresh Fire” about the Brooklyn Tabernacle. One of the central features of their church, and of this book is their church’s focus on prayer. I have read a couple other books on this as well. And while I don’t think this is an optimal solution, I was wondering if you had heard of a church that had a live virtual prayer room (preferably with video option like tokbox.) My thought is not so much for people to dropby and ask for prayer, as a focus on a 24/7 prayer room for prayer for the church, staff and related ministries. I would think it would need to be protected and there would need to be some type of application and approval process to let people in it, but then throughout the day people could drop in and pray for the church as they were free. I am locked to my house because I am a nanny, but I could be praying for the church during naps or other down times. Ideally there would be something for prayer requests that staff or others could update and a way for those that are praying to indicate that they had prayed for something. There could even be focus times when you ask people to stop by so that there would be people praying together.
Just thinking and wondering if you or anyone else had seen a church that did something like this.
human3rror says
Adam,
I would love to talk to you about this. There is an opportunity here big time.. and i want your thoughts.
john
Daniel_Berman says
A very interesting concept, which I believe needs to be investigated further….
Daniel_Berman says
Any thoughts about adding a ChurchCrunch Amazon store for recommended books and such….?
human3rror says
Hmm. I've added a few that I'm reading. Perhaps i should look into that.
Jim says
sometimes i feel like this sunday q and a thing is like the 8 ball…i've got nothing for you today.
TomUsher says
John,
I supplied a link in a reply comment on your post: https://churchm.ag/2009/05/20/one-of-the-top…
In addition, I understand how Mikes is using the term "anti-christian"; however, I wrote on the RLCC post about this issue as follows, "…has another agenda and is not simply confused in the mundane on this issue…." That was about you. That's leaving the door open to an "honest" mistake (confused somehow about the technology involved as one possibility) and/or that only this incident might be anti-Christian as opposed to your being anti-Christian all the time or something akin to it. I also wrote, "I don't want to assign too much in the way of error to that author, as I require some benefit of the doubt, especially at first, else I'd be banned and censored more often than I already am, which is all too often." That, as well, is leaving the door open and indicates that I am not saying that you are antichrist — that others might take wrong (read too much in here; use the worst connotation). At any rate, the whole incident must be taken within full context. The issue for me, as a professing Christian, is one of supportiveness for ultimate truth, which necessitates that we bring forth as Jesus said. That's where I place the line.
Lastly, I don't want to beat this incident to death.
Thank you for allowing my comment.
Peace,
TomUsher says
John,
I supplied a link in a reply comment on your post: https://churchm.ag/2009/05/20/one-of-the-top…
In addition, I understand how Mikes is using the term "anti-christian"; however, I wrote on the RLCC post about this issue as follows, "…has another agenda and is not simply confused in the mundane on this issue…." That was about you. That's leaving the door open to an "honest" mistake (confused somehow about the technology involved as one possibility) and/or that only this incident might be anti-Christian as opposed to your being anti-Christian all the time or something akin to it. I also wrote, "I don't want to assign too much in the way of error to that author, as I require some benefit of the doubt, especially at first, else I'd be banned and censored more often than I already am, which is all too often." That, as well, is leaving the door open and indicates that I am not saying that you are antichrist — that others might take wrong (read too much in here; use the worst connotation). At any rate, the whole incident must be taken within full context. The issue for me, as a professing Christian, is one of supportiveness for ultimate truth, which necessitates that we bring forth as Jesus said. That's where I place the line.
Lastly, I don't want to beat this incident to death.
Thank you for allowing my comment.
Peace,
human3rror says
Tom,
What is the most unfortunate is that you didn't even try to reach me directly, even when I have my directly contact information and email right on my blog.
Instead, you took another route and made a blanket assumption instead of seeking truth out directly.
I find that discomforting and disappointing. I never attempt to "smear" or "make accusations" without knowing as much detail as possible, and I always goto the source directly.
John