Blogging: Posts that have received over 500 views

I blog mostly because I want to say something, whether anyone reads it or not. I hope that I am also blogging for God's glory. Sometimes I wonder if it's worth the effort, but a recent experience indicates that at least some of it is. The experience is that Blogger, which I have used since beginning this blog, keeps track of the number of views, and comments, on each post. I was posting on a biography of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and looked up some previous posts on him, and was amazed to note that those two posts had received over 400 views each. Those posts are here and here. (In case you are wondering, there are over 2,000 posts on this blog. Most of them have received a few dozen views.)

What is a view? I'm not sure, but suppose that, at minimum, someone clicked on the blog post's page. 400 views does NOT mean that 400 people actually read the post, or even glanced at it.

So what posts have received over 500 views? Here's an annotated list, including:

A post on what's wrong with the political left, and the right, is here.

A number of "Sunspots" posts have received over 500 views. Some of these are here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here here and here.

A post on "Homosexual Activism and Public Opinion" has received over 500 views. So has one on "Sexual Sins not Mentioned in the Bible."

A post on the moral universe of Game of Thrones has also received over 500 views.

One of my posts (number 65 of such) quoting G. K. Chesterton's Orthodoxy has received over 800 views. 

A post on "What is a Christian novel," made the cut.

The Sunspots post of January 11, 2017, has received over 500 views. I'm not sure why. So has the Sunspots for May 3, 2017.

A post on "Farewell Speeches from Bible Characters" has received over 500 views.

A post on Jehoshaphat's prayer, in 2 Chronicles 20, which is almost entirely a quotation from the World English Bible, a public domain modern version, has received over 900 views. 

Scriptural Principles that Relate to Science has more than 500 views. 

A post on computers and the mind-body problem (and soul uploading) has more than 500 views.

A post on whether animals ate meat before the Flood has had over 500 views.

A post on whether it rained before the Flood has received over 500 views.

A post pointing out that everyone interprets the Bible, especially Genesis 1, (or depends on the interpretations of other people) rather than just reading it, met the criterion.

A post on whether a Christian must be a Young-Earth Creationist, about a dialogue between Karl Giberson and Albert Mohler, has had over 500 views.

My review of Soul Surfer, the movie, has received over 1300 views.

A rehash of a post from The BioLogos foundation, on whether natural selection can produce new genetic information, has received over  500 views. (It can.)

Musings on the color, green, covering a lot of topics briefly, has had over 1490 views.

A poster, based on Philippians 4:8, one of my favorite verses, made the list.

Here's a poster, showing pattern for prayer, based on the ACTS acronym, which has received over 1400 views. A similar post (I shouldn't have done this twice!) has received 750 views so far.

An essay on Tolkien's writing, entitled Galadriel, Fëanor, and the Silmarils, has gotten over 1000 posts.

An essay on whether Elizabeth Moon's The Deed of Paksenarrion novels, which are fantastic literature, are Christian or not, meets the criterion. An essay on these novels, themselves, was at 497 views on July 5, 2015.

An essay on sword and sorcery fiction -- Tolkien's work is an example, but my no means the only one -- and why there is such, and why it is popular (at least with some people).

An essay on Grass, a science fiction work by Sherri S. Tepper, made the list.

A post entitled "Abortion - Some Thoughts for Christians" made the list.

So did a poster on what photosynthesis does, which has been viewed nearly 900 times.

So did a poster on How Computers Work.

A list of the ways that God reveals Himself to us, with Bible references, has been viewed over 1800 times.

A discussion of cases, in the Bible, where the woman was the spiritual head of the family, has received about 700 views.

I copied one of the hymns of Charles Wesley, which are in the public domain. It's about repentance. The post has received over 900 views. I've never heard that song used in church.

A post on what I see as a Christ-figure, in Watership Down, by Richard Adams, made the list.

There was a post that took an anti-abortion organization to task for claiming that a human embryo has a heartbeat at 18 days of development (it doesn't) that has received over 2000 views.

A post on the question of whether there was rain before the Flood has gotten over 2600 views.

This post, with discussion, and a poster, suggesting that we should be very careful as to what we say about end times, has received over 1100 views.

A post acknowledging the death of Norman Borlaug, Nobel-prize-winning botanist, met the criterion.

A post considering some speculation about how many people died in the Flood has received over 3400 views.

I invented what I call the 90% rule for marriage. It met the criterion.

A post on the Resurrection, Superstition, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics met the criterion.

A meditation on the "Hallelujah Chorus" from Beethoven's Christ on the Mount of Olives has been viewed over 500 times.

Two posts on homosexuality have been viewed many times. One is on the question of whether homosexuality is innate or acquired. The other looks at what the Bible says about homosexuality.

A post from my teaching days, on biological ethics, and the concepts of moral agency and moral considerability, has received over 700 views.

A post with a song I wrote, on the Golden Rule, met the criterion.

A post on passages where memorial stones are mentioned in the Bible has been viewed over 1300 times.

A compilation of places, in the book of Acts, where a church engaged in prayer together, has been viewed over 1200 times.

"What's Wrong with Young-Earth Creationism" -- there are problems with all views of origins -- has been viewed over 1600 times, and received over 20 comments by others.

A post on what I believe about origins has been viewed over 800 times.

A book review of a book about questions of enhancing humans, for athletic competitions and other reasons, met the criterion.

A compilation of the prophet Hosea's references to Ephraim has been viewed over 1400 times.

A post on what the Bible says about light has been viewed over 2800 times.

A discussion of the dwarves in The Last Battle, by C. S. Lewis, has been viewed over 600 times.

A compilation of what the Bible says about figs has been seen over 1600 times.

A one-sentence quotation, on what sin is, from Susanna Wesley, mother of John and Charles (and others) has been viewed over 700 times.

A post on the sea as a symbol of evil in the Bible, based on a book by David Snoke, has been viewed over 1500 times. Another discussion of this topic, without references to Snoke, has been viewed over 1600 times.

A discussion of what the Bible says about tattoos is my most popular post, as it has been viewed over 36,000 times, and has received at least 50 comments by others.

I pointed out a candidate for the "most sexist verse in the Old Testament," and that post has met the criterion.

A post that says that "I believe that the universe was designed intelligently" has been viewed over 2000 times.

A post highlighting quotations on joy, from C. S. Lewis, Tolkien, Ursula K. Le Guin, and George MacDonald, all authors of fantastic literature, has met the criterion.

A discussion of religion in The Left Hand of Darkness, an award-winning science fiction novel by Ursula K. Le Guin, has received over 700 views.

A post considering the question of whether Louis Pasteur disproved abiogenesis (sometimes known as spontaneous generation) has been viewed over 2100 times.

I claim that Christ didn't come as a baby -- be careful about throwing rocks my way! Read the post first. It has been viewed over 1000 times.

A post agreeing that The Golden Compass, by Philip Pullman, is openly atheistic, but saying that there are worse dangers than blatant atheism, has been viewed over 600 times.

Charles Wesley's hymn, "I Know that My Redeemer Lives," has been viewed nearly 1200 times.

A post on the occurrences of the fruit, pomegranate, in the Bible, has been viewed 1000 times.

A post on the occurrences of the word, basket, in the Bible has been viewed nearly 1900 times.

A post on Athaliah, one of the most wicked women in the Bible, perhaps the wickedest, has received over 600 views.

One of my Sunspots, for no reason that I know of, has gotten over 500 views.

A brief criticism of Al Mohler's argument for YEC, from He Lives, has gotten over 500 views. 

Some thoughts by Antonin Scalia, US Supreme Court justice, on gun regulation, met the criterion.

A post, mostly quoting 2 Corinthians 1:1-4, has also met the criterion.

A post on the idea of play, in the Bible, has been viewed over 2700 times.

Two posts, here and here, on the agnosticism of Christopher Paolini, author of Eragon, and related works, have accumulated over 2000 total views.

A post on why living things have cells has received over 2600 views.

The post that has received more views than any other, save one, is on what the Bible says about light. It has gotten over 15,700 views.

A post on trees in the Bible has been viewed nearly 2000 times.

A musing on the subject of whether I am earnestly seeking God, which is mostly a quotation of the first four verses of Psalm 63, has been viewed 1000 times.

A comparison of Young-Earth Creationism and Intelligent Design has received nearly 600 views.

I have asked the question, "Isn't God a great artist?" with a photo of lichens, and that brief musing has received over 700 views.

An important post on environmental stewardship in the Bible has received 5486 views, as of November 25, 2014.

A post on what John Wesley had to say about the idea of the image of God has met the criterion.

A post on almond flowers in the Bible, and what they looked like (with a photo, not by me) has received nearly 4000 views.

A post on Joseph's cup, and divination (telling the future) has met the criterion.

A post on "Looking for Something," using a parable in Luke 15, has been viewed over 900 times.

"I believe in evolution: so do you" has met the criterion.

A bible study on what the New Testament church actually prayed for has been viewed over 1000 times.

To my amazement, a photograph of mimosa flowers has been viewed over 1200 times.

"Confessions of a Freecell Addict" has received over 700 views.

One of an occasional series, on women in the Old Testament, is on five sisters - Mahlah, Noah, Milcah, Hoglah and Tirzah - has been seen over 500 times.

A post on the Christianity -- or not -- of Star Wars, has been viewed over 2700 times.

A post on Tamar, a woman of the Old Testament, has been viewed over 600 times.

A description of travel from Greenwood, South Carolina, to North Augusta, South Carolina, has been viewed over 900 times.

A post on inbreeding in the Old Testament has been viewed over 3600 times.

A free scan of a public domain woodcut of the Last Supper has had over 600 views.

"Technology: some Biblical basics" has met the criterion.

A post on the colors purple, scarlet and crimson has met the criterion.

Abishag: beauty contestant and bedwarmer received over 3000 views.

Hathach: lessons from a eunuch has been viewed over 600 times.

A post, showing a chart giving the Biblical evidence for being a Christian has been viewed over 500 times. 

"How to treat aliens, foreigners and strangers" has been viewed over 500 times. 

A post on "God's creativity" has been viewed over 800 times. 

A post on the (they say) 7 C's of history, by Answers in Genesis, has been viewed over 500 times.

"What's with all the talk about religion? I thought this was a scientific web site?"

The title of this post is taken from a comment posted a day or so ago, on a post on why living things have cells. You can see the comment following that post.

The title poses two fair questions. I attempted a brief answer in my response to that comment, but let me muse further.

Why all the talk about religion?

I believe in a Creator, a powerful God who created the universe, after an amazing divine plan, and who still is involved in the universe today. (Colossians 1:16 For by him all things were created, in the heavens and on the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things are held together. St. Paul used the present tense in verse 17.)

Although it is not possible to prove God's existence scientifically -- see the verse in the graphic at the top of the page, which tells us that we understand God's creative power by faith -- it is not possible to disprove it, either. Prominent atheists, such as Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawking, have tried, but have not done so, and Dawkins has not claimed to have presented a knock-down proof for God's non-existence. If there is even a possibility that the universe, and we ourselves, are the result of a divine plan of some sort, that possibility must be taken seriously.

Like great scientists of the past (and present) such as Johannes Kepler, Robert Boyle, Francis Collins, and others, lots of them, I believe that all the things scientists can study are present because of a Creator, who initially began the universe, probably with the Big Bang, or just before the Big Bang, and established it with the processes, laws and physical constants that scientists have been finding out about for centuries, and which processes, laws and constants make the earth a place where we can live. I also believe, as indicated in the verses quoted above, that God the Son is presently involved in maintaining the universe. Like those great scientists, responsible for much of the foundations of astronomy, chemistry, and sequencing the human genome, respectively, I believe that God is important, and doing or studying science without acknowledging Him is like building a house without a foundation.

I thought this was a scientific web site?

Well, yes and no. It's a blog, wherein I discuss all sorts of things that have been, or are of interest to me, such as, for example, why living things have cells, or the color green, or whether there are signs that one is, or is not a believer, or the writing of Connie Willis, award-winning science fiction author.

Some of the posts relate to science, some do not.

Thanks for reading.

This blog is available through twitterfeed

This blog is now available through twitterfeed, as "Sun and Shield blog." Someone asked for this. I hope it works.

What makes a blog Christian?

I received this comment recently (on this post) from another blogger. I am pleased to read her work on a regular basis, and often comment on it, and I suspect that she is my most faithful reader and commenter.

Weekend Fisher wrote... I've found myself wondering: What are the criteria for a Christian blog? And, What are the criteria for a Christian sermon?

I have some thoughts on it myself, but my question to you is: Would you have parallel criteria for those, compared to the ones you have for novels? Would the requirements be higher / lower for blogs? Sermons?

For example, I consider your blog a Christian blog -- and I've read blogs by pastors and theology professors that I do not consider Christian blogs.

I'd be much obliged if you'd share your thoughts.

Take care & God bless

Anne / WF

First, I am grateful for the question, and the assessment. I try to produce a Christian blog. But "what makes it one?" is a good question. (I'll try to deal with sermons in a separate post, later.)

One aspect of being a Christian blog is, I hope, found in my "Guidelines for this Blog," published nearly seven years ago. I hadn't read that in quite a while, but I still think I'm trying to follow these guidelines. The first one is the most important: "I hope to glorify God with this blog." That is the most important criterion. A Christian blog must glorify God. I understand that no objective measure of whether or not I do so is possible. God knows, and understands, my motives, and what, if anything, is accomplished by a blog, or a blog post. A Christian blog should have, as its fundamental purpose, to glorify God. Does every post need to do that? No. An occasional political post, recipe, photos of the family dog, or setting forth the blogger's side of an academic, theological, or philosophical dispute would also be acceptable, and need not take away from the main purpose, it seems to me. A personal blog -- one that's about aspects of the blogger's daily life -- can glorify God, and I have seen some that do.

Conversely, a blog that is mostly about selling something, glorifying the blog owner, seeking redress for actions that the blogger perceives as hurts to her, or to put forth some partisan political view* is not Christian. A blog that isn't written from a Biblical world view cannot glorify God, as I see it.
*What do you get when you mix religion and politics? Politics."

Do you have to testify or preach in a blog, for it to glorify God? No. Instruction on what the Bible says, for example (Anne does this very well.) glorifies God.

Glorifying God need not be done explicitly. For example, in posting excellent poetry or photographs, a Christian blogger need not say that she is doing this for God's glory. If it's good enough, and has a Biblical world-view, it will do that without having to tell any one that you are doing it. As C. S. Lewis wrote: "What we want is not more little books about Christianity, but more little books by Christians about other subjects--with their Christianity latent." (God in the Dock: Essays on Theology and Ethics, edited by Walter Hooper. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970, pp. 89-103. Quote is from p. 93.) Lewis never saw a blog, but I think this statement applies, if anything, more to blogs than to books. I thus propose a second criterion, namely that a Christian blog should be excellent. It should use language well, use graphics that are appropriate and well-done, and, where appropriate, refer to pertinent recognized sources. It should mostly stay clear of subjects that in which the blogger has no real expertise, or at least it should steer clear of pontification on such subjects.

Excellence, of course, is also subjective. I'm not proposing that every Christian who blogs should try to emulate C. S. Lewis, Oswald Chambers, or Billy Graham, but that every Christian who blogs should try to do her best.

I would propose a third guideline, which is important, but especially on posts on controversial matters, namely that the blogger observe the golden rule: treat readers, commenters, and the authors of source material, as you would want to be treated yourself, in the same manner that Christ would treat them. A Christian blogger, then, should answer comments courteously, treat the views of others with respect, and have a humble attitude. Again, this is subjective.

A commenter, who disagreed with me on a particular issue, demanded that I remove a post. I didn't do it, and I suggested that further comments on this particular post, by this person (who says he is a Christian, but had made several long comments, most of them claiming that I must not have read the Bible) would not be welcome. I did not delete any of his comments. I hope I treated the commenter with more respect than he used in treating with me. I saw caving in on this matter as forsaking excellence.

Thanks for asking, Anne!