2-Minute Christianity

Bob Seidensticker is a long-time atheist blogger, first at the Christian website apologetics.com, then Galileo Unchained, then with Cross Examined on Patheos, and now under his own byline on OnlySky: onlysky.media/bob-seidensticker/. And he’s taken the highlights of those many years of blogging and boiled them down into an intentionally slim hundred-page book called 2-Minute Christianity: 50 Big Ideas Every Christian Should Understand. Each of its 50 chapters deals with a particular issue in Christianity, on 2 facing pages, intended to be read in about 2 minutes. The book’s unusual layout — with little notes, definitions, cross-references, and quotations off to the side of each page — is part of its appeal.

Here’s how Bob explains the book:

= = = = = =

It’s aimed at open-minded Christians who think that, if Christianity is true, it can stand a little critique. Here are some of the big ideas explored in it:
• #30: God gave Moses two very different versions of the Ten Commandments.
• #14: God defined the rules for indentured servitude and chattel slavery, the same two forms of slavery found in the early United States.
• #35: The Bible documents its own evolution from polytheism to monotheism.
• #36: The “virgin-birth prophecy” referred to in Matthew wasn’t about Jesus and wasn’t even about a virgin birth.
• #46: The God of the Bible was once defeated by another Canaanite god.

The ideas are significant; they aren’t trivial Bible contradictions or copying errors. Each is a fundamental puzzle that questions Christian claims, and each can be read in a few minutes.

The book is in the middle of a slow-motion release. The book and ebook are available now ...
amazon.com/dp/0578937123
... and I’m giving away the content, one chapter per week for 50 weeks, through the book’s blog ...
2minutechristianity.com/
... podcast ...
twominutechristianity.podbean.com/
... and YouTube channel ...
youtube.com/channel/UCCEbRLejMQapm1ikB0ilwCg

You can sign up for email notification of each new chapter’s posting on the blog, which also answers common questions in the FAQ.

= = = = = =

What do we Madison Skeptics think? Successful approach? Or just another attempt to reason with the unreasonable, therefore doomed to failure?