I think the reason people move on from the targeted idea is that in hindsight, by now, after almost 7 years, police would have investigated everyone closest to the victim. Therefore, it must have been a stranger and a non-targeted crime.
I think this was a targeted crime, either against the church or Missy Bevers specifically. I am not going to go into all the reasons I think this because I have already posted them, but this is either a targeted crime, in my opinion, or a very strange burglar. In my opinion, there is no urgency by the burglar in the church video to go directly to the church office to try to find the money. We have no idea, as far as I know, as to what the burglar was driving.
For example, if the plan had been to steal objects that needed to be moved, having their vehicle closer to the entrance of the building would have helped. Maybe the police have the vehicle on surveillance tape, but I doubt it.
The possibility remains that this could have been a very clever person who made a murder look like a burglary. Or the circumstances surrounding the case make it appear that way to people like me. For example, the actual murder is not on video. Did the murderer get lucky where they stood when they encountered Missy Bevers? That is a possibility. Having that interaction on video would have given us a lot more insight into the reaction of Missy Bevers and the burglar when they crossed paths in the church.
The reason this is such a clever crime, or looks that way, is that till this day it leaves open the likely possibility that it could have just been some strange burglar who was caught by surprise inside Creekside Church in the early morning hours of April 18th, 2016.