A Milestone

Not to make a huge deal out of it, but this blog passed 500,000 hits sometime last night before 6 PM. I am humbled that so many people think there is something worthwhile here, and may God receive all the praise.


  1. William Hill said,

    November 28, 2007 at 10:16 am

    500,000 hits or 500,000 page views or 500,000 unique visits? All are very different stats and mean different things. In otherwords, 500,000 hits can be one person hitting the site 500,000 times. It also includes search engines that crawl the net as well as other things.

    A good analytical program for tracking website useage is Google Analytics.

  2. greenbaggins said,

    November 28, 2007 at 10:18 am

    Page views, according to my stats page.

  3. Keith LaMothe said,

    November 28, 2007 at 11:27 am

    He’s right, Lane, about 100,000 of those are probably me.

    Still, it is a milestone.

  4. Jon said,

    November 28, 2007 at 11:44 am


    What’s your point? I’m sorry if I don’t take you at face value.


  5. November 28, 2007 at 11:54 am

    I was going to say it is probably me, but someone beat me to that line. 500,000 page views are nothing to sneeze at even factoring repeats and spiders. It took 8 years for my old church’s website to get over a million page views.

  6. November 28, 2007 at 1:42 pm

    May God continue to richly bless and grow your web ministry, Lane.

  7. November 28, 2007 at 2:31 pm

    Lane, it would be fair to say that you have provided a focal point for discussion and information on the FV. Perhaps what would otherwise have been a more disparate discussion across many blogs has benefitted from you well organised, and well maintained efforts. Had you stuck to sermons and general book reviews I doubt very much whether the stat counter would have had as many miles on the clock. Controversy always draws a crowd. That is an observation and not a criticism.

  8. jm said,

    November 28, 2007 at 2:59 pm

    I am trying to learn about the FV and its opponents but would like to see what both sides say for themselves without name calling and claims of heresy. May be that some one could post a short topic and let both sides respond – of course it would be beneficial to politely ask some FVrs to respond without praying for their lost souls after every post. As one fellow said, one group is Presbyterian and the other group used to be, and I am not sure who is.

  9. greenbaggins said,

    November 28, 2007 at 3:01 pm

    JM (what is your full name? I do not allow anonymous posting), please go under the tag Federal Vision, and you will find over 100 posts on the FV, most of which have vigorous debate in the comments. In other words, I would think it is fair to say that some of the kind of debate you are looking for has happened on this blog.

  10. its.reed said,

    November 28, 2007 at 3:06 pm

    Ref. #8:

    JM, after you fix the annonymous problem Lane referenced in no. 9 (your name will only be visible to editors of the blog), maybe you could start at this link, where are the FV threads are located:


    A month or so of reading these will give you a lot of appropriate first hand interaction on the FV.

  11. tim prussic said,

    November 28, 2007 at 5:49 pm

    Congrats, Pastor Lane. I’ve found your blog to be among the most edifying & informative. May God richly bless your continued ministries.

    With love, Tim

  12. jm said,

    November 28, 2007 at 5:54 pm

    So where do I go to submit my full name?

    Thanks so much for the info on the FV etc, it looks like I have a lot of reading to catch up on and I really appreciate your response.

    Thanks again.

  13. greenbaggins said,

    November 28, 2007 at 6:14 pm

    Thanks much, Tim. I have appreciated your posts as well.

  14. greenbaggins said,

    November 28, 2007 at 6:22 pm

    How about submitting it right on this thread? If you don’t want to tell absolutely everyone, then email me at pastorlane AT juno DOT com.

  15. jm said,

    November 28, 2007 at 6:38 pm

    Thanks, my name is Jerry Mills.

  16. William Hill said,

    November 29, 2007 at 5:08 am

    “What’s your point? I’m sorry if I don’t take you at face value.”

    My point is what I stated. I have three domains and when I first started looking at stats I got an over-inflated sense of attention becasue I didn’t understand the meanings of “hits”; “page-views”; “unique visitors” etc. I was curious as to which actual state Lane was referring to. I also wanted to point him to Google Analytics that will really break down this blog into very interesting pieces for examination.

    So, why don’t you take what I said at “face value”?

  17. Jon said,

    November 29, 2007 at 11:20 am

    Thanks for the clarification William.

    My reason is that for quite a while you posted in different forums claiming to be objective and unbiased (or undecided) about the FV while all along, or so it appeared to me, you have been an advocate. I suppose I just take issue with pretended neutrality. If I am mistaken then accept my apologies. Perhaps my judgment has been to rash.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: