Skip to main content.
« Previous entry: Church Times cartoons | Main page | Next entry: Fathers 4 Justice target the Church of England »

September 19th, 2005

Ten reasons to add your blog to the new Blogs4God site

I remember when I was young and blogging was new I signed up for the ‘Blogs4God’ website. It had lists of Christian blogs, and did a good job of listing them in a list-like fashion. Gosh, those were the days. I did drift away from the site a bit, partly because there is just so much on the internet to look at and partly because I did feel it represented a brand of Christianity which wasn’t quite to my particular leaning. Whatever that means.

But now Blogs4God is back in a new shiny feature-filled form, and I like the look of it.

Why, if you have a blog and would describe yourself as a Christian, you should sign up and register at Blogs4God:
1) It uses Aggregators rather than lists of sites. This means it tells you which blogs have been updated.
2) Users can have a far greater input this time around. Any user can, I think, write articles for the front page. A moderator has to check them over, but that’s just to make sure they’re not rubbish.
3) The whole thing about it not being ‘my type of Christianity’ is a poor reason to not get involved in something. What was I thinking? If you feel it doesn’t represent you then joining in and contributing is a good way to give a different point of view an airing.
4) There seems to be less emphasis on ‘top ranked’ sites than the previous Blogs4God site or certain other blog listings. Trying to get to the top of a ranking is no way to live your life let me tell you.
5) Dean, who runs it sent me a very nice e-mail.
6) There is a special box you can tick if you write a Wiblog.
7) It wouldn’t hurt.
8) You might get some new readers as your blog will be listed and people might click your link.
9) It’s just launched. Today I think. So it’s nice and new and the crowds haven’t found it yet.
10) Nope. Really can’t think of a 10th. The signup page is here.

16 Comments »



Share this on Facebook:

If you enjoyed this post you might also enjoy these (possibly) related articles:

If you liked this post why not send it to someone else by e-mail? Click here to do so.

This is a single post on the Cartoon Blog by Dave posted on Monday, September 19th, 2005 at 7:22 pm. Click here to read all of the latest posts. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Other things technologically advanced people may like to do: trackback from another site, follow responses via the comments feed, bookmark on del.icio.us or digg.

16 Responses to “Ten reasons to add your blog to the new Blogs4God site”


  1. Mean Dean says:

    Thanks so much for the kind words — in return, here is reason #10

    … that little [tick box] … yeah, it means later on we can build an aggregator just for you guyz/galz

    … not a good enough reason, okay, here’s one … we enjoy parodies and good natured-ribbing at our expense. It drives in hits for all parties and I personally enjoy the laugh.

    We’ll be adding other features later, but we’re breaking enough as it is …

    … again, THANKS!

    September 19th, 2005 at 7:39 pm
  2. Sarah H says:

    10) Cos Dave said it was a good idea – there’s a reason!

    September 19th, 2005 at 9:39 pm
  3. Wood says:

    I’ve done the sign-up bit, right… but I’ve noticed there’s the bit in the T&C about “affirming lifestyles contrary to Historic Christianity”, right, in the list of things that aren’t acceptable.

    Now I very rarely do politics, but I do fiction… and, well. I was wondering exactly what that constituted…

    September 19th, 2005 at 10:12 pm
  4. Mean Dean says:

    Wood – here is an example that might help you figure out what indeed is constituted:

    Though Scriptures are clear about coveting thy neighbor’s wife, there are those who would change the Church to accomodate their lifestyle of ‘swinging.’

    Likewise, I’ve had to deal with in the past for those making a case that the Church should change to assuage their guilt regarding stealing from and/or abandoning one’s aged parents.

    Hence the clause – while there are gray areas for debate, in those instances where I need to chose between what God has penned in black and white (e.g. written in stone) versus the current cause celeb or social fad du’jour … I tend to stick with the former.

    So will blogs4God.

    September 20th, 2005 at 12:14 am
  5. joeturner says:

    No room for my blog*, which investigates the spiritual conundrums of being a shellfish farmer, who regularly works on the sabbath, and grows carrots and cabbages in his back garden.

    Oh well, I’ll go back to being a blogs4sinners* contributer.

    *made up to make a point.

    September 20th, 2005 at 10:30 am
  6. Dave says:

    Dean,

    I think the question I have, and I suspect the one hinted at by Wood and Joe, is who decides what is grey and what is black and white? (Leaving aside the fact that black and white make grey…) I suspect that Christians coming from diverse theological viewpoints would differ vastly on what is clear in the Scriptures and what isn’t.

    I’m not trying to be difficlt here – I do think it could be a very real problem.

    Joe – don’t be sho shelfish. (Sorry.)

    September 20th, 2005 at 10:43 am
  7. joeturner says:

    I suspect what is really meant is that there is no space of sexually titillating material. Which is fair enough.

    Quite why they have to use such ‘spiritual’ language to say that they ‘won’t publicise sexually titillating material’ is beyond my understanding.

    Are they going to sieve blogs by their use of biblical references (Isaiah 51:3 ‘And the LORD did say – I’m off to get a custard cream’), the number of hallelujahs or something? If you pass the test you get in, otherwise you are cast into the obscurity of ‘blogs4god’ hell?

    Doesn’t the very existance of such a website constitute another attempt by politicially/spiritually ‘correct’ christians to encourage other politically/spiritually ‘correct’ christians to move in ever smaller circles so even whilst wasting their precious employers work-time, they spend time on websites on the prescribed list of ‘acceptable’ ones?

    Not that I do that, of course. Is this a christian website? Gosh I never even noticed. I was just here… um… looking for woodworm. Nasty stuff that internet woodworm, y’know.

    September 20th, 2005 at 11:12 am
  8. Dave says:

    Doesn’t the very existance of such a website constitute another attempt by politicially/spiritually ‘correct’ christians to encourage other politically/spiritually ‘correct’ christians to move in ever smaller circles so even whilst wasting their precious employers work-time, they spend time on websites on the prescribed list of ‘acceptable’ ones?

    I don’t think that’s entirely fair Joe. The employers time thing is a red herring as you know. I don’t think anyone is encouraging anyone to move in ever smaller circles. Why shouldn’t Christian blogs be linked up in some way in the same way that knitting blogs (or woodworm blogs) might do? People with common interests link up, it’s just what happens. No-one is suggesting not reading lots of other things as well.

    I also don’t think this is an attempt to enforce ‘spiritual correctness’. After all, the site does include some fairly diverse viewpoints – there are lots of places the evangelicals and catholics don’t get along as they do on Blogs4God for instance.

    I think there does need to be some ‘condition’ of entry, otherwise the site becomes fairly meaningless with anyone who wants a link to their site signing up. I think my view is that the bar has been set slightly too high for the reasons given in my last comment. I don’t really see why anyone who might describe themselves as a ‘Christian who blogs’ shouldn’t be allowed in without having to make sure they tick a lot of boxes about affirming various lifestyles or not.

    Didn’t they have this dicussion in the Bible? I forget.

    September 20th, 2005 at 12:44 pm
  9. Mean Dean says:

    Man, you guys make this too hard.

    In the past, we had situations where people demanded that blogs4God post, publish and support their beliefs and/or lifestyles that are contrary to the ‘black-n-white’ issues defined by Scripture.

    For example, I simply will not allow aggregation or posts by and from Fred Phelps or his Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kansas as these folks clearly have missed the boat on the finer points of Grace.

    Yes, it is an arbitrary decision. Yes, it is arbitrarily made by me. That said, it is a big blogosphere with plenty of other places such folks can get listed, aggregated and heard.

    September 20th, 2005 at 5:17 pm
  10. Dave K says:

    I decided not to go for it myself. Just don’t think it would attract the sort of people who would be interested in the sort of things I blog about, i.e., mainly rubbish.

    Boy do they!

    DK.

    September 20th, 2005 at 5:32 pm
  11. Mean Dean says:

    One other note – regarding who controls or says what.

    At some point, someone has to make a decision. I’m that someone when it comes to blogs4God. That said, I’ve invited a diverse group of moderators (a couple of them are even registered Democrats of all things!-) …

    … and have always had a standing policy of being willing to discuss any decision … to the point I’ve said “well hey, guess I was wrong” and rectified it.

    I mean, can you ask for anything more than that … well you probably could but I’m not buying!-)

    September 20th, 2005 at 5:39 pm
  12. Dave K says:

    Oops, a quote from Joe got missed out of my last comment. Sorry. So I’ll quote Mean Dean instead.

    (a couple of them are even registered Democrats of all things!-)

    Is that the voice of cultural entrapment I hear?

    DK.

    September 20th, 2005 at 9:16 pm
  13. Mean Dean says:

    Is that the voice of cultural entrapment I hear?
    Choose the response that best suits ya:
    Why I never! … Well okay I have a few times.No, but seriously, some of my best friends are Democrats.Did I say Democrats? I meant to say demi-cats, as in people who blog about their petsCurses – foiled again!

    September 20th, 2005 at 10:42 pm
  14. Dave says:

    Dean – thanks for your answers. Speaking for myself I’m not trying to make things difficult – I’m just genuinely concerned that a lot of the bloggers I know who I’d like to get involved may not because they don’t like to sign up to anything where the meaning of the terms and conditions are ambiguous. But hopefully your answers will have gone some way to making things clearer.

    One other small thing – just wondered whether Mr Boyink might have a good point about the aggregators being a bit hidden, particularly for the not-signed-in visitor. Could the aggregator be one of the links along the top for intance?

    September 21st, 2005 at 9:28 am
  15. Wood says:

    Dean’s answer is good enough for me, anyway. Since I never, ever post on those issues in that way, it’s not going to be a problem, although my blog is more a Blog Written by a Christian rather than a Christian Blog…

    September 21st, 2005 at 10:41 am
  16. Mean Dean says:

    Wood – have you noted our slogan? ‘A semi-definitive list of Christians who blog’

    Dave – Boyink is always right, and the aggregator is still a work in progress. Hopefully in a week we’ll have public XML files of aggregations by category that are updated in a semi-regularly.

    September 21st, 2005 at 2:41 pm