Kent Shaffer has recently updated his listing of the Top 100 Church Blogs and has included an addition 30 or so above for those that are curious.
I’ll be honest and admit I was, at first, a bit hesitant to report on this updated version because of my general distaste for rankings; they can be too subjective (Kent, you should release specifically how you calculate, your formula).
But, I decided to anyways.
Here’s the point I suppose: If it helps at least one person find some valuable resources via some of the blogs listed then it’s worth it.
Right?
Take a look and just remember that it’s just one angle and perspective of just a few blogs among 1,000’s.
Robin Curry says
If you want to see how the rankings are calculated, Kent includes the method used at the bottom of the list…
John Saddington says
yes, but it’s not the exact formula bro. i’d like to know how it is “averaged” when the base of each metric isn’t even close to being the same.
i’m no pro at math… but…
John Saddington says
like……. what does “composite” rank really mean?
John Saddington says
oh, and… how do you grant “weight” to each metric. I personally believe some of the metrics have more “weight” than others. and, of course, the “why” for each one.
Jim says
out of the “top ten” i read #5 and sometimes #9…
Stephen Bateman says
same.
Nick Shoemaker says
I’m with Jim here as well.
Stuart says
I’m no rank whore either – but then one look at my blog and you’ll know that 😉
However, I’d love to know where in his rankinds I’d come but he’d need a much (much x 10) list to get me in there.
Stephen Bateman says
I think the value of “top blogs” lists is to realize how diverse and big the niche is…I read a lot of blogs, and it’s amazing to see how much I *don’t* read.
Kyle Reed says
Great point, you are exactly right.
Brandon Cox says
I must agree with your first instinct – I think it’s crazy to claim these are the “top 100.” When you look at step 1 of how they were arrived at… “start with 200…”
So, out of thousands or even tens of thousands, let me just pick 200 and decide that half of them are the “top 100” on the entire internet…
What I’m not hearing is, “I took the top 1,000 in Alexa and the top 1,000 from… so on… and then did some cross-referencing, etc.
Nonetheless, I am glad you report on the list for the same reason – they’re all worthy of attention.
Scott Magdalein says
I think the value isn’t in the “rank” but rather in the overview of what people are reading in Christian circles. But that’s just me.
JayCaruso says
What defines what a “church blog” is? I read Michael Hyatt’s blog all the time, but a cursory review of his blog shows that most of his entries revolve around business, leadership and publishing. So how is it a “church blog” other than knowing Michael is a Christian?
Stuart says
Good shout – I read lots of blogs where if you didn’t know who was behind it you’d be hard pushed to pin it down as an “XYZ” type of blog.
Jeff Sieble says
I don’t mean to be a wiener about the whole rankings thing but it seems that most Christian blogs these days are in competition with each in regards to rank. John i have to admit that after reading a few of your posts here once in a while you talk an awful lot about where you’re placed in the ranking world, how many followers you have and site growth. That’s great and all but it just seems as though you yourself are in competition with others alike.
I also get a bad taste of this site when i see “advertise here” all over the place. I understand it’s part of your business but as a Christian site it seems you have agendas bro just like the others.
just my two cents.
John Saddington says
hey jeff, thanks for your thoughts.
have you ever read our disclosure policy? we lay out pretty clearly what we’re about: https://churchm.ag/disclosure-policy/
yes, we make money and yes we do constantly evaluate how we’re doing and yes we do “competitive” research but i’d like to think that the vast majority of our posts are about providing valuable content to people and not about where we’re ranked. in fact, i think we can prove that your comment “awful lot” is numerically wrong.
but, that might just be a subjective call.
we share our site growth because it’s exciting but we don’t do it in a way that puts others down. in fact, we do it in a way that invites others to learn from us (and sometimes) even challenge others to beat us.
love your thoughts jeff.
Kyle Reed says
I am not going to speak for John or 8bit here
I am purely going to speak from someone who has been apart of the ChurchCrunch community for over a year now.
Though their are advertising spots available as well as a list of stats and followers these all have a purpose. One of the things I love about ChurchCrunch is all the giveaways that happen. There has been a ton of things given away here and on the other properties as well their has been constant development and refinement which cost money. Therefore the advertising helps in these areas and really gives back to the community.
As well, it is good to see the stats because as a community here we are able to see what is happening, how things are growing, and how the community is developing.
Mitch Ebie says
I can see your side, BUT keeping up a site like takes more time that some may think. With that being the case it is perfectly reasonable to try to make money while providing a service…Luke 10:7 says that the worker deserves his wages. Those behind this site are doing the work, and they deserve the wages via “advertise here.”
David Knapp says
I just ran across this last week and now it is updated. I found some good sites in there but I probably already have my favorites. I would like to know how he ranks these blogs also.
PhillipGibb says
In that list of 130 – I actively read 5
Mitch Ebie says
Thanks for posting the link to the top 130 list. True it is just one angle, but it is a good angle. I book marked this page for future reference. Some of them I already agree should be high on the list…desiring God and Michael Hyatt for example.
Nick Shoemaker says
I’m going to go on a bit of a territorial stretch here:
A lot of these blogs are in the Bible-belt. As a guy just trying to make it in the Northwest (Idaho) I compare blogs written, mostly, in communities in or near the bible-belt the same way I do churches there: it’s different. Not better. Not worse. Different.
This may be some new knowledge for my BB brethren, but here in the Pacific NW, people don’t just go to church- nor do they just believe in God. This isn’t Dallas. This isn’t Oklahoma City. This isn’t Nashville. This isn’t Atlanta. This isn’t Jacksonville. This isn’t New Orleans. Et cetera.
Here, a lot of people not only don’t believe in God- they really don’t believe in anything. Period.
I’m not complaining, and I’m certainly not bragging. Just putting some perspective out for all of us.
My point is that it’s a bigger party when you’re with your people. Now I’m not throwing all of the Bible-belt into the evangelical-go-to-the-next-Billy-Graham-crusade basket, but I am saying that church in the Bible-belt is vastly different than church in the Pacific NW (just like church in New York is way different than church in Kampala, Uganda, Africa- but possibly without so extreme a difference).
I am NOT saying that ministries in these areas have only been successful because they’re there. The successful ministries (LifeChurch.tv, The Village Church, North Point Ministries, et cetera) have been successful because they are excellent at what they do. So is Mars Hill in Seattle- a Pacific NW church (not the Bible belt).
Back to the blogs: Content is King- yes. But I would be curious to see how many of these blogs have become successful because of the circle. How many people go to their church and know about their blog and consequently read it? There are so many variables that effect this, I know.
Are these blogs rated on online engagement or just cool factor? Yeah- what are the metrics Kent!?
OK- I’m done. Sorry about the post within a post. 🙂