Review of “Christianity 2.0” by John Dorsey

Score: 83/100 (8.3 out of 10)

Christianity 2.0 is a mind-bending, thought-provoking perspective of the Christian religion by John Dorsey. We'd also call this a “mind-trip”/“pseudo-psychedelic” perspective because it's really bizarre and out there at times, relying heavily on some pseudo-scientific concepts like muscle testing (borrowed from kinesiology), Iboga (medicinal shrub), Radical Truth, Stacking, Clearing, Course in Miracles, and Letting Go.

Ultimately, the author is presenting a new form of Christianity, one that is more focused on unconditional love and less focused on the eternal damnation of hell and judgment that many Christians concern themselves with. In turn, the author seeks to make Christianity more accessible to a wider audience, including those living in parts of Asia where the religion isn't widely followed. That's an admirable goal! The question is: are your arguments fundamentally sound and supported by enough evidence to come across as legitimate and convincing? We wrestled with that last bit.

Though the author denies this being a New Age or Progressive form of Christianity, that's probably how it's going to come across to most Christians or casual readers.

This book is sure to divide and/or offend people on either side of the spectrum—from devout, orthodox, conservative Christians to adamant atheists, agnostics, and liberals. Christians may be offended by the idea of Jesus not being God, The Bible “calibrates” around “400” for truthfulness (with 1000 being absolutely truthful), the idea that The Bible has bad or “negative books” that need to be removed (like Revelations), the idea that only ten verses in the Old Testament “calibrate” a “1000” according to the author; the idea that karma and reincarnation are aspects of this form of Christianity, and the idea that Buddha, Krishna, and Jesus are all “calibrated” at “1000” as righteous teachers who can all offer a way to heaven.

Atheists, agnostics, and liberals may be offended by the idea that climate change is viewed as a fallacy if not completely false; socialism, feminism, transgenderism, and environmentalism are viewed as flawed or destructive ideologies; women are called to be feminine and subservient to men again while men are called to be dominant again; homosexuality is frowned upon, and abortions are vilified, especially late-term ones. Somehow, someway, the author claims that the soul only enters the womb in the third month.

They cite a man named Dr. David Hawkins, a philosopher who was the author's inspiration and mentor. Hawkins had multiple doctorates and became the father of the idea of “consciousness.” Well, all know that being a doctor doesn't make you right or correct. Doctors say and do ridiculous things all the time. Just because a doctor makes quasi-scientific/pseudo-scientific claims that sound cool and interesting doesn't make it scientific, correct, or right. Sounding cool and sounding interesting don't prove a point. They might be convincing, enticing, or tantalizing, but they don't prove a point. Only evidence proves a point.

And that's probably the biggest thing that frustrated us about this book: it says a lot, it presents a lot of “calibrated” numbers that are supposed to mean or tell us something, but none of this is evidence or proof. Let's talk about these “calibrated” numbers for a bit. So, these numbers are apparently energy fields or ratings determined by muscle testing, a concept in kinesiology. So here's our question: who is being muscle tested and how? And how does this determine whether something is more true or less true? How does this determine a person's level of consciousness (LOC)?

For example, what if you're muscle testing Eddie Hall or Brian Shaw and ask them what the word “Lincoln” means to them? How is that equal to or equivalent to muscle testing Machine Gun Kelly or Justin Bieber in the same way? What if “Lincoln” rates a 29, lower than King Herod, the dude who slaughtered kids? Does that make Lincoln somehow worse than Herod? What if we're talking about Lincoln Park and not Abraham Lincoln? There are just too many uncontrolled variables to draw any kind of definitive conclusion from this. And going back to our Eddie Hall example... he's British, so Abraham Lincoln would probably be further from his mind than it would be for Shaw or even Bieber. Again, too many variables, too many unknowns.

The author says that what separates Christianity 2.0 from New Age or Progressive Christianity is that it doesn't include “magic tricks” but rather “tools.” However, so much of this reads like Dianetics, which similarly champions a type of mindfulness and thoughtfulness that can lead to the individual healing themselves. The book tells us:

“Whenever you are in any kind of pain, don’t try to understand why. Don’t try to reason your way out of it. Just focus on releasing the pain which can be done with the Letting Go method. It offers a way to alleviate mental anguish and also quickly heal physical pain and physical injury.”

So, the Letting Go method in this example isn't magic, according to the author, but a tool.

There were just too many red flags in this book, several involving Dr. Hawkins and others with an individual who is called Elsa. These people may be great people, but they come across as really sketchy and questionable. The huge red flag that we saw was when Elsa went from running a free practice to charging top-dollar for her services. Another red flag to us was all the talk about Iboga, a shamanic medicinal shrub from Africa that's supposed to give you benefits.

Now, we digress. This book has some good things about it. For example, the goal of making Christianity more adaptable and accessible is an admirable one. And, let's face it, traditional Christianity has a ton of problems that linger to this day:

1. The threat and fear of eternal damnation in hell
2. The idea that people who may have never heard about Jesus (because of their age or the part of the world they live in) may be destined for this hell
3. The off-putting nature of Christianity as a religion of exclusivity
4. The guilt and shame that Christians often experience whenever they perceive they've done something wrong or are sinful

And these are serious issues that Christians are still wrestling with to this day. Some Christians have friends or even loved ones who haven't converted or who may never convert. Are these people damned? It's troubling to think!

So, this book makes a valiant effort in trying to rectify those issues.

Check it out on Amazon