Thanks to my typical habit of going back to the very first entry of a site when I review it, I was able to immediately find out the purpose behind this blog. To quote one of the authors of this two-writer blog: “The purpose for this blog is to inform you the reader how we as Christians have allowed Satan to distort our understanding of these institutions and how we can seek God’s face to reclaim them as tools for building His kingdom.”
The Two Institutions Mike Hall (the author of the previous quote) mentions are Family and Church, and their the basis of this blog that’s been up and running since April of this year. The authors average about a dozen lengthy posts a month on this topic, which often feature links or quotes that back up the general idea of the a particular point. I kept getting tripped up by the “Read More” links at the bottom of each entry, because there was never anything additional to read when clicking on it in each entry.
The layout looks like a typical Blogger-style design, even though it’s hosted on its own domain. It’s a two-column layout, with the bigger of the two columns containing the blog entries. The sidebar, like nearly every other blog in the world, is full of archive links, other blogs, bible study tools, and other various external websites the authors wanted to share.
Blogs like Two Institutions are tricky to review. Not everyone will agree with what’s being written and some will have very adverse opinions about each topic. Both of those phrases describe my feelings towards this blog. Posts with subjects like “Bad Girls Come From Bad Dad’s” (punctuation not altered from text on blog) did nothing but infuriate me and assure me that the Constitution lists “freedom of religion” for a reason.
The 3.5 rating isn’t because I disagreed with the content of the site, but because the site is just better than average. It doesn’t engage readers, but informs them. This blog has the potential to involve random readers that might come across it on accident, but the entries, in my opinion, take on too much of a lecturing tone to encourage any feedback.NULL