Send us a text

Homelessness is one of America's most divisive issues, with battle lines seemingly drawn between compassion and accountability. But what happens when a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist sit down to tackle this thorny topic? Surprisingly, they find significant common ground.

Our conversation explores whether public assistance should come with obligations, and how government incentives might actually worsen the problem they're meant to solve. Drawing from personal experiences working with homeless populations, we examine the "homeless industrial complex" - a system where nonprofits and agencies secure massive funding while homelessness continues to rise. Are these organizations more focused on maintaining their existence than solving the underlying issues?

We challenge simplistic narratives from both political perspectives. The right-wing notion that homeless people "just need to get a job" ignores complex realities of mental illness, addiction, and economic hardship. Meanwhile, progressive narratives often highlight exceptional cases while minimizing factors like substance abuse that affect many experiencing homelessness. The truth, as always, lies somewhere in between.

Our most compelling insights emerge when discussing effective approaches. Incentive-based assistance works best when individuals view their situation as temporary. Shelter rules requiring sobriety create powerful motivation for behavioral change, while "housing first" models may inadvertently remove these constructive incentives. Programs like Habitat for Humanity demonstrate how ownership and personal investment create sustainable solutions that preserve dignity.

Beyond policy debates, we arrive at a fundamental truth: our personal responsibility to help others shouldn't depend on our political beliefs. As one host's grandfather wisely said, "The big take care of the small and the strong take care of the weak." Whether through community organizations or individual actions, we all share an obligation to our neighbors in need.

Join us for this thought-provoking conversation that moves beyond partisan talking points to find practical, compassionate solutions to one of our most pressing social challenges. Subscribe now and help us build a world where we're all living on common ground.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

The line between faith and politics has always been contested ground, but in today's hyper-polarized climate, the question burns more intensely than ever: Should churches that promote political messages maintain their tax-exempt status?

This episode brings together two unlikely friends – a progressive Christian pastor and a conservative atheist – who begin with surprising agreement before diving into the nuanced reality. They challenge the very definition of "political," acknowledging that virtually any topic of significance can become politicized. When everything from human rights to immigration becomes a partisan issue, how can religious communities meaningfully engage with the world without crossing into forbidden territory?

The conversation takes a fascinating turn as they explore a radical reinterpretation of the Good Samaritan parable. Rather than simply being about helping those in need, they suggest its core message addresses our relationship with ideological enemies – perhaps the most relevant teaching for our divided times. The Samaritan wasn't just a kind stranger; he represented the despised "other" to Jesus's audience, challenging listeners to recognize their neighbor in those they've been taught to hate.

This insight frames their approach to controversial issues. We hear about a remarkable sermon series where topics like abortion, capital punishment, and war were addressed not through political posturing, but by creating spaces for real conversation and bringing in people with lived experiences of these issues. The goal wasn't to push a particular position but to humanize complex topics and demonstrate that behind every political talking point are real human beings experiencing pain.

The friends ultimately arrive at a powerful challenge: Can we overcome our deeply-held opinions to show genuine compassion? While most of us instinctively answer "no," perhaps the path to healing our divided world lies precisely in this difficult spiritual work – even if it leads to a metaphorical crucifixion.

Whether you're wrestling with how your faith community navigates political waters or simply looking for ways to maintain relationships across ideological divides, this episode offers both practical wisdom and profound insight. Subscribe now and join the conversation about living on common ground in an increasingly uncommon world.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

When violence enters our political landscape, can meaningful conversation still survive? In this timely episode, recorded just hours after a high-profile political shooting, two friends from opposite sides of the ideological spectrum wrestle with one of America's most divisive topics: gun rights and the Second Amendment.

The heart of their discussion centers on a fundamental question: Does the right to bear arms truly serve as a check against government tyranny in modern America? The libertarian perspective argues that an armed citizenry provides crucial protection against potential overreach, while the progressive viewpoint suggests this reasoning has become dangerously outdated in an era of advanced military technology.

Their conversation ventures into fascinating psychological territory as they explore how moral barriers to violence function differently when confronting armed versus unarmed populations. Drawing on historical examples from Nazi Germany to Afghanistan, they examine how the human mind processes and justifies violence – and what this means for our understanding of self-defense, both personal and political.

What makes this episode particularly powerful is its context. Recorded immediately following a politically-motivated shooting, these friends must navigate their theoretical debate while acknowledging the very real tragedy unfolding in the news. Rather than retreating to partisan talking points, they find their way toward shared grief and common ground – not by compromising their principles, but by maintaining their commitment to authentic dialogue even when it's uncomfortable.

The conversation ultimately transforms into a meditation on friendship itself and how sustained dialogue across dividing lines might be our best defense against political violence. As one friend poignantly observes: "When you stop talking, you start fighting." Their example reminds us that finding common ground isn't about agreeing on everything, but about continuing the conversation even when – especially when – it's difficult.

Join us in creating ripples of understanding in a divided world. Follow and share this podcast with someone who thinks differently than you do – the conversation might surprise you both.

© NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

What happens when we question the stories nations tell themselves? In this thought-provoking episode, we tackle the complex question of whether American military operations worldwide ultimately help or harm US interests.

The conversation begins with an examination of historical context, specifically addressing covert operations like the CIA's Project Ajax in 1953, where America overthrew a democratically elected government. This launches us into an exploration of how official narratives often mask economic motivations behind military interventions.

We dive deep into uncomfortable truths about America's shifting alliances, exploring how we've sometimes supported groups we previously fought against based on changing geopolitical calculations. The discussion reveals how our fiat monetary system enables ongoing military spending without directly raising taxes - creating a disconnect between the true costs of war and public perception.

Perhaps most fascinating is our exploration of how personal identity becomes entangled with political narratives. We confront the psychological reality that we often resist certain ideas not because they lack merit, but because accepting them would challenge our sense of self or align us with groups we've defined ourselves against.

As we contemplate the potential "deglobalization" of the world economy, we wrestle with America's responsibility to other nations and how honest conversations might help us navigate an uncertain future. The episode concludes with practical insights on maintaining curiosity and intellectual humility when engaging with perspectives that challenge our worldview.

Join us for this challenging conversation that moves beyond partisan talking points to find genuine common ground on one of the most consequential questions facing our nation. Share your thoughts with us on social media - we believe that difficult conversations, handled with care, are exactly what our divided world needs most.

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

© NoahHeldmanMusic 

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

What happens when we peel back the layers of American mythology to examine the true foundations of our nation? Mark Charles, author of "Unsettling Truths" and a dual citizen of the United States and the Navajo Nation, joins us for a profound conversation that challenges conventional narratives about American history.

Charles takes us on a journey through the Doctrine of Discovery—a series of papal edicts declaring that lands not ruled by European Christian men were essentially "empty" and available for claiming. This doctrine didn't just enable colonization; it became embedded in America's founding documents and continues to influence legal decisions today. From the Constitution's "We the People" that originally meant only white landowning men, to the 13th Amendment that merely redefined slavery rather than abolishing it, our nation's framework contains contradictions we've never properly addressed.

The conversation takes a surprising turn as Charles examines Abraham Lincoln's legacy, revealing how America's celebrated president orchestrated the ethnic cleansing of Native peoples along the transcontinental railroad routes while simultaneously calling for national days of thanksgiving. These historical truths are difficult to confront, which is why Charles introduces us to the concept of historical trauma—affecting both victims of historical injustice and those who have perpetrated or benefited from it.

What makes this episode truly transformative is Charles' vision for moving forward. Rather than reconciliation, which implies restoring a harmony that never existed, he advocates for conciliation—creating a healthy relationship for the first time. By shifting our focus from power (the ability to act) to authority (the permission to act), we might begin to heal wounds that have festered for centuries. As Charles poignantly puts it through his grandmother metaphor, sometimes the most revolutionary act is simply acknowledging whose house we're in.

Whether you're a history buff, social justice advocate, or simply someone trying to make sense of America's complex identity, this conversation offers insights that will challenge your understanding and potentially transform how you see your place in our national story.

Learn more about Mark Charles here: https://wirelesshogan.com/

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

"Finding yourself is a lie perpetrated by our consumerist culture." With this provocative statement, two friends – a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist – launch into a fascinating exploration of identity, authenticity, and the forces that shape our understanding of self.

The conversation challenges a concept many of us take for granted: that somewhere within us exists a "true self" waiting to be discovered. But what if this idea is merely a clever marketing strategy? The friends examine how advertising campaigns reduce us to avatars and sell us identities through products – from cars marketed not for their features but for the lifestyle they represent, to the cultural trope of abandoning responsibility to "follow your passion."

As they navigate their different perspectives, they question whether our ancestors even needed to "find themselves." In traditional communities, identity was intrinsically tied to one's role in the collective – no soul-searching required. Has our individualistic society created a vacuum that marketers eagerly fill with promises of self-fulfillment through consumption?

Drawing on Carl Jung's concept of individuation and Jordan Peterson's emphasis on responsibility as the source of meaning, they differentiate between authentic self-discovery and its commercialized counterfeit. True fulfillment, they suggest, might come not from hedonistic pleasure but from shouldering responsibility and finding purpose within community.

By the conversation's end, they reach surprising common ground: while there may be truth to the concept of an authentic self, our consumerist culture has hijacked this natural human journey. The most meaningful expression of identity might come not from what we consume but from what we contribute.

Tune in to this thought-provoking episode that will have you questioning the narratives about identity you've absorbed without realizing it. Share with friends who enjoy conversations that challenge conventional wisdom and explore the deeper currents shaping our culture and consciousness.

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

Ever wondered why building communities often leads to deeper divisions? In this special follow-up to our conversation with Peter Rollins, we explore a radical alternative to traditional community-building that might change how you think about human connection forever.

Rollins draws a crucial distinction between three forms of social bonds. Communities form around shared identities, beliefs, and especially shared enemies—inherently creating insiders and outsiders. The commons are spaces where different people mix freely, but these public spaces are diminishing in our society. Most provocatively, Rollins introduces the concept of communion—a social bond formed when we acknowledge our shared status as outsiders, connecting through our universal human experience of alienation rather than through shared beliefs or enemies.

"What makes communion different from community is that it is also forged on lack, on some impossibility, but it is not externalized on a scapegoat," Rollins explains. Instead, we recognize the lack within ourselves and find connection through this shared vulnerability. Using examples from Alcoholics Anonymous to family therapy, he demonstrates how this shift from blaming external forces to acknowledging our own implication in our struggles creates the possibility for genuine connection across deep differences.

For those seeking practical applications, Rollins suggests creating "Death of God Supper Clubs"—circle gatherings where people can openly acknowledge their outsider status and speak authentically. Unlike typical community groups organized around shared beliefs, these spaces allow us to encounter each other as "creatures of desire, creatures of longing, creatures of yearning, creatures who suffer."

Support Peter Rollins on Patreon to enable more of this thought-provoking work, and follow Living on Common Ground wherever you listen to podcasts. Share with friends—the more people living on common ground, the better our world will be.

https://www.patreon.com/c/peterrollins/posts

Theme Music Provided by: © 2025 Noah Heldman

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

"I have no idea what I'm talking about and I don't mind that," admits theologian Pete Enns in this refreshingly honest conversation about faith beyond certainty. This realization brought him not panic or dread, but profound relief—a sentiment that has guided his work helping others navigate their spiritual journeys.

Pete shares how embracing uncertainty transformed his relationship with Christianity, moving from rigid certainty to authentic questioning. As an academic expert in biblical studies, his willingness to acknowledge mystery carries unique weight. We explore his books including "The Sin of Certainty" and "How the Bible Actually Works," which have provided language and permission for countless believers struggling with faith communities that demand unwavering certainty.

The conversation takes a fascinating turn as we examine Christianity's counterintuitive foundations. "How did this crazy story ever catch on?" Pete wonders about a religion centered on a crucified messiah—a symbol not just of death but profound shame in ancient culture. This absurdity becomes one of his most compelling reasons for remaining within the tradition, seeing in it something authentically transcendent rather than merely manufactured.

Pete reflects on finding healing communities where questions are welcomed rather than feared, describing how many people come to "lick their wounds" before continuing their spiritual journeys. He contrasts this approach with religious environments that demand intellectual conformity, arguing that authentic faith must honor experience alongside scripture and tradition.

Throughout our discussion, baseball metaphors (despite our conflicting team loyalties), quantum physics, and reflections on mysticism weave together into a compelling case for faith that "honors your head without living in it." Pete's upcoming project exploring "being Christian after Christianity" promises to further develop these themes of mystery, experience, and authenticity.

Whether you're questioning your faith, healing from religious trauma, or simply curious about approaching spirituality with intellectual honesty, this conversation offers refreshing perspectives on finding common ground across theological differences. Subscribe now and join our community seeking meaningful dialogue in divided times.

https://substack.com/@peteenns?utm_source=global-search

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

Dive into a fascinating exploration of applied postmodernism with hosts who bring contrasting worldviews to the conversation. This episode tackles the provocative idea that selectively applying postmodern principles amounts to "cheating" in philosophical discourse.

The conversation begins by unpacking postmodernism itself – a philosophical approach questioning whether objective reality can truly be known. While the hosts acknowledge value in considering multiple perspectives, they challenge the increasingly common practice of applying relativistic thinking only when convenient. Through engaging examples and thoughtful analysis, they examine how terms like "privilege" and "lived experience" have entered everyday language since 2015, often deployed inconsistently.

A highlight of the discussion centers around the "Mott and Bailey" fallacy – when someone makes a controversial claim but retreats to more defensible territory when challenged. This rhetorical tactic appears frequently in discussions about critical theory, allowing people to make broad statements but avoid defending them by shifting to easier positions.

The conversation takes a fascinating turn when exploring morality. Can we truly speak of "good" and "bad" in a relativistic framework? One host suggests replacing these binary concepts with "constructive" versus "destructive" or whether actions "build up" or "tear down" others. Through examples ranging from helping a friend with unhealthy eating habits to appropriate contexts for profanity, they demonstrate how nuance matters in ethical considerations.

Whatever your philosophical leanings, you'll appreciate the hosts' commitment to intellectual honesty and their final agreement that consistency matters. Whether embracing or rejecting postmodernism, applying principles selectively undermines the integrity of any worldview. Subscribe now for more thought-provoking conversations that bridge divides and find common ground.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

Does it feel like every part of your life is divided? Every scenario? Every environment? Your church, your school, your work, your friends. Left, right. Conservative, liberal. Religious, secular. From parenting styles to school choice, denominational choice to governing preference, it seems you're always being asked to take a side.

This is a conversation between a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist who happen to be great friends. Welcome to Living on Common Ground.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com