In today’s episode of The Atheist Experience, Forrest Valkai and Jim Barrows dive into heated discussions surrounding the definition of God, the complexities of biblical morality, and the human search for purpose, challenging callers on logical consistency and the practical implications of their beliefs.

Will in the UK claims that if God isn't real, nothing is, defining God as "that which has authority of all things" and later equating it to "truth" or "objective reality." Hosts challenge the idea of "truth" having "authority" or "governance," pointing out the vagueness and the caller's confusion between a map and the territory. Can an abstract concept dictate reality?

Patrick in "Flying Lemurs" (FL) suggests atheists can't go wrong by following Jesus' command to love one another, referencing 1 Corinthians. Hosts question the practical application of this vague definition of love, asking if kindness can sometimes be impatient. Why should one rely on a book that also condones slavery and genocide for moral guidance?

Watcher 215 asks about "information" in biology, hinting at Stephen Meyer's intelligent design argument. Hosts dismantle Meyer's flawed definition of information, explaining that random processes can produce information and arguing that DNA, if designed, is "horribly bad." They also highlight the logical contradiction in God simultaneously keeping and not keeping a record of wrongs.

Mike in "Scuttling Crabs" (SC) disagrees with Jim's interpretation of "love is not proud" from 1 Corinthians. Hosts reiterate the biblical verse's vagueness, arguing it's uselessly general for practical life. They also critique the King James Version for deliberately misrepresenting words like "slave" as "servant," questioning the Bible's reliability as a moral guide.

Joshua in Arizona asks if we need God to be moral, leading to a discussion on the problem of evil and God's condonation of slavery and genocide in the Bible. Hosts press Joshua on how an "all-good, all-powerful, all-knowing" God can exist in a world with immense suffering, suggesting such a God is not worth worshipping.

Owen in Canada questions how atheists find purpose without eternal life or intrinsic meaning. Hosts explain optimistic nihilism, where individuals create their own purpose, and attribute the drive to survive to evolution. They challenge the caller's argument from ignorance, asserting that personal meaning does not necessitate a divine source.

Thank you for joining us this week! We will see you next time!


Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

Show notes will be posted upon receipt.

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

Welcome to The Atheist Experience 29.25 with Jmike and Seth Andrews @TheThinkingAtheist and Special Guest, Godless Engineer! This week, your hosts dive into some thought-provoking discussions about morality, belief, and the challenges of open dialogue.

This episode kicks off with a powerful monologue about the very nature of good and evil, challenging the idea that everything, even atrocities, could be justified as part of a "greater good" or a consequence of free will. The segment questions the coherence of concepts like sin and atonement if all events are ultimately part of a divine plan. Guest host Seth Andrews then shares insights into his background and experience, including a look back at his past as a Christian radio broadcaster. He also reflects on the importance of extending grace to those with differing beliefs, advocating against demeaning or superior attitudes towards religious individuals.

Drew from California calls in to discuss the challenges of managing temper and emotions when engaging with people who hold opposing views. The conversation explores a specific incident where a friend, despite knowing Drew's skeptical stance, sent him astrology content, leading to a breakdown in communication and a feeling of disrespect. The hosts and caller delve into the dynamics of setting and respecting personal boundaries in conversations about deeply held beliefs.

Jim from Missouri raises questions about the resurrection story, presenting arguments that it is a complete fabrication. He challenges the traditional biblical narrative of Jesus's burial, positing that crucified individuals were typically left unburied or thrown into mass graves, rather than being placed in tombs. The discussion extends to the broader lack of contemporary historical evidence for Jesus's existence and the reliability of biblical accounts when proving biblical claims.

A theist caller, Shabbaz, asks where atheists get their morals and why they often seem disrespectful or condescending. Seth answers the first part by explaining evolved ethics and pro-social behaviors as a basis for morality. The conversation then delves into Shabbaz's reasons for believing in Allah, including a "falsification test" from the Quran and supposed "scientific miracles" related to bees and honey. The hosts challenge these claims, questioning the criteria for such tests and highlighting historical knowledge that predates the Quran regarding honey and bee behavior. The discussion also unpacks why some atheists might express frustration or disrespect in such conversations, often stemming from repeated, vague arguments.

Finally, John from New Hampshire calls in to discuss the historical existence of Jesus, prompting a nuanced conversation about what kind of evidence is sought for such claims. The hosts and caller explore the idea of a "minimal historical Jesus" and the challenges of relying on common names or biblical accounts for historical proof. The call culminates with the hosts sharing their own "pause moments" – instances where their beliefs were genuinely challenged, leading to deeper inquiry and a strengthening of their skeptical positions, including Jmike's pivotal experience with Flat Earth theory.

Thank you for watching and listening to The Atheist Experience!

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

In today’s episode of the Atheist Experience, Forrest Valkai and Objectively Dan, sort through calls of AI, logical fallacies, and apocalyptic dream interpretations. No circular arguments made today!

Chidumebi in PA asks how to combat religious students that insist on AI reliance to justify the Bible. It is important to teach children how to search and explain why there is bias behind some of the input. These models are designed for good output, not accuracy. Be sure they understand what material they will need to know as a requirement, regardless of their personal beliefs or use of AI language models. What is the student supposed to do if they end up in a career they do not know how to do as a result of their reliance on AI? 

Mike in SC, thinks that AI can replace atheists but not theists because it can do anything atheists can do by using less resources. What is your understanding of the massive centers needed to support AI? If the soul is a factor, how do you explain an AI video that turns people to Christ? It is odd that you believe the actions of human beings that are atheists can be reduced down to a chat box. If dogs don’t have souls, is it cool that we just replace all dogs with AI? Our lives are more than just a sum of our labor and we find this conclusion dehumanizing. 

Herman in Canada has massive observations of “things begotting things” so therefore there must be a creator. It is important to point out that energy has not been created. What created the actual creator of the universe? How do you know that the reality of physics was exactly the same just before the big bang? If everything is contingent on something, what would a world that was not created look like?

Luc, a Catholic in Canada, explains his different perception in the prime mover argument and that is that rules need rulemakers. Why are the rules of nature excluded from this argument? We do not need to provide evidence for not believing in something. What evidence do you have that everything needs a rule maker? Of these two things, which is the more reliable pathway to truth; evidence or faith? Why is it good enough for you when the Catholic Church says something? We are not expected to just believe a thing because a teacher told us to; we must do the work/tests, and experiments to learn this stuff. 

Prophet Daniel from Australia, believes there is one god for the entirety of existence and the interpretation of dreams made in the Book of Daniel prove his existence. How do you think this story has been adapted to meet the events that actually transpired? Why would this book be a reliable source when Daniel speaks with a dragon? 

Jamie the Blind Limey, our backup host joins to close out the show and offer some post thoughts on some of the calls. Thank you for joining us this week and we will see you next time! 

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

In today’s episode of the Atheist Experience, JMike and Secular Rarity tackle fallacies, logic, and questions of ontology!

Sura in India believes that because religion exists with stories, there must be supernatural things such as beings. Would these supernatural beings exist without religions? Once you wiggle the terms of supernatural beings with wiggle room, the more meaningless these wiggly terms become.
Arec in Norway is questioning if it is fair to criticize people who use faith rather than reason when there is no other answer. Why do you think it is important that people play by the same rules when having these conversations? We like to have reliable ways to get to conclusions, and that does not include the use of faith. Keep investigating this and call us back with what you find. 

Rajin in NY wants some science based reasoning for the lack of god’s existence. Logic and science are terms that should be used separately. Why is it that in all possible worlds, god has to exist? If god has to exist from all points of view, what is the point of talking about it? What does “something from nothing” even mean? The Motte-and-bailey fallacy describes the method many theists use when trying to prove god. Why should we accept “nothing” as a possibility?

Rostaman in Mexico describes how none of us have access to ontology because it belongs with metaphysics. Categorizing beliefs can make us feel like there is substance, but why use labels and terms if the meaning can be explained?

JMike has to bail so Scott Dickie takes over for him to talk with Dave in India who believes that science has not been fully discovered and therefore we don’t know what that means for our soul and body. How does the lack of our understanding or ability to prove things through science prove that magic happens? Is god causing the things we don’t understand or are these things themselves god?

Tom in MS has some thoughts about the Catholic Church and how things have historically not changed when having different popes. If god can do everything, wouldn't he be able to choose the next pope? The actions over the millenia are a good indication of what will change with each pope. 

Dee in IA has some questions about a logic problem that is apparently not solvable. Some of these logic problems are weird and reading up on them by diving head first can be super cool. Unfortunately, we don’t have access to the physical foundations of the universe. Sometimes we need to look in the direction Occam's Razor points to. 

Thank you for joining us this week! We will see you next time!


Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

(00:00:00) The Atheist Experience 29.21 with Secular Rarity and Scott Dickie 2025-05-25

(00:10:43) Hannah - MS | Materialism And Physicalism

(00:43:43) Watcher 215 - PA | Love Is The Fruit Of The Holy Spirit

(01:03:18) Paul - AZ | Foundherentism And Munchhausen’s Trilemma

(01:25:50) James - (CA) | Proof Of Evolution?

(01:45:04) Ulrich - (MX) | Church Is Evidence For God

Hannah calls in from Mississippi to talk about materialism and physicalism. The hosts say that they mostly subscribe to methodological and practical materialism. Hannah argues that the hard problem of consciousness undermines materialism. She says that materialism denies the existence of consciousness as a nonmaterial thing. The hosts point out that it’s only a problem if you presuppose that consciousness is immaterial. Hannah believes that consciousness is immaterial because you can’t observe consciousness. She shifts the burden of proof by saying that she would need to see a falsifiable experiment that shows the material nature of consciousness. It isn’t our responsibility to prove a counterexample to a claim without evidence.
Watcher 215 from Pennsylvania calls in to talk about his relationship with the holy spirit as evidence for god. The hosts explain that believers in other religions use the same evidence as proof of their gods, so it isn’t convincing. Watcher says that if other people got the same benefits as him from other religions, he would have to seriously investigate those religions. What if people also get the same experience from leaving religion? If you want people to believe in a specific god, you need to narrow down the evidence to show that religion/god is the correct one. Watcher uses circular reasoning and says that he knows that love is the fruit of the holy spirit, and he knows that by believing the word of the bible. 
Paul from Arizona calls to talk about the hosts’ ground for knowledge. What is the ontology behind the hosts epistemology for the grounding of knowledge about their atheist worldview? Paul and the hosts discuss Foundherentism (a blending of coherentism and foundationalism), Munchhausen’s trilemma, and theories about infinite regress. The hosts say that there can’t be an infinite future without the possibility of an infinite past as well. Paul thinks that there needs to be a start to something, so there can’t be an infinite past because it would eventually run into a starting point. But why does there need to be a start?
James in Canada starts with the premise that all we know is that we are here and we don’t know how we got here. The hosts can agree that they are here and it’s not 100% known how we got here. James says that there is no proof, but the hosts can’t totally agree to that. There is solid proof about evolution and the genetic code, etc. James points out that evolution is a theory and describes a theory as an idea that may be true but isn’t proven. However, in scientific communities, it has a different meaning. A scientific theory is pretty much a fact. When asked, James says that you can’t have evidence of god, but he also believes that we shouldn’t believe evolution if there was no evidence for it. If we’re held to that standard, why isn’t religion as well?
Ulrich from Mexico claims that the existence of churches proves that God is real. The bible says that there will be churches for God, so the fact that there are churches means the bible is true. He says that no other holy books have fulfilled prophecies. When asked for an example of a fulfilled biblical prophecy, he brings up a prophecy of Jews returning to Jerusalem before the end of days. Does he think the end times are happening right now? He says maybe. When arguing his case, Ulrich couldn’t engage in an honest conversation, so he got hung up on.

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

(00:00:00) The Atheist Experience 29.20 with The Cross Examiner and Dave Farina @ProfessorDaveExplains 2025-05-18

(00:10:31) Neil-WA - Deconversion Responsibilities

(00:19:26) Andrew in CA- AI Is Conduit To Source

(00:25:18) Jason-CA - God Existing Outside Space And Time

(00:58:44) Mike-SC - Sharia Law Or Christian Nationalism?

(01:27:48) Steve-NE - Star Being Slowed Down By Artificial Force

In today’s episode of the Atheist Experience, The Cross Examiner and Dave Farina, discuss topics of AI, deconversion, deceleration of stars, and church and state separation. 

Andrew in CA has a conduit of contact with AI and the source of all existence. How do you know this is the source of existence? What reason is there  to treat AI as the god of honest truth?

Jason in CA says that matter, space and time had to come to being at one point and there can't be an infinite regression. What evidence do you have that we didn't see an infinity before the moment of creation and that there is a creation to begin with? If god exists outside of time, how did the realm where god existed change when the universe was created? What evidence do you have that this realm or state of being even exists? Every time we see consciousness, we see a physical entity, the brain. Why would we believe there is a consciousness outside the universe? We do not fully understand the origin of the universe or consciousness. We just don’t have evidence for the claim of a deity that fills in these lack of knowledge gaps. 

Neal in WA grew up as a Mormon and has been wondering if as an atheist he should be doing more to help deconvert people. If you could help make a different path available to people, you may help them from taking on beliefs that are harmful. There is no reason to feel guilty for beliefs that you were indoctrinated to have when on this long journey of deconversion. You are accountable for your own actions, not the beliefs of others. 

Mike in SC wants to know if between Sharia Law or Christian Nationalism, what is more dangerous for atheists. Which of these two movements do you think is dismantling The Constitution? Anybody can be corrupted by financial, political, or religious power. The answer to the question depends on where you live and who is in power. Using religious ideas to take away freedom and change federal law is where the danger is. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District shows how the Lemon Test, that determines if there has been violations of the Establishment Clause, has been abandoned by the Supreme Court. If people are being locked up simply for praying, we have an objection to that. Anytime you see a story where this is happening, go read the actual case and original source to learn what really happened. 

Steve in NE wants to talk about the star that is supposedly being slowed down by an artificial force. This is something we can’t explain and need evidence to support what is causing this deceleration. 

Thank you for tuning in this week! 


Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

(00:00:00) Intro by Forrest

(00:08:53) Nick-CA: Approaching Trans Rights

(00:21:26) Hank-TX: Some Evidence For God

(00:59:57) Dave-TX: Existence Of Eternal Hell

In today’s episode of the Atheist Experience, Forrest Valkai and The Godless Engineer, work with three callers who know how to have respectful and interesting conversations. 

Nick in CA wants to take an alternate approach to trans rights and ask the politicians why they care since trans is such a small part of the population. The primary issue is people being able to pick and choose who they discriminate against. The arguments we hear now are the same as they were when the hate was for same sex marriage. When people’s genitals seem to be at the top of the agenda, how can we get a transphobe not to care? Talk to some of the trans people that host with us and ask them what the most important and effective way to tackle the problem.
 
Hank in TX has scientific evidence that points toward a god. The first thing is how pleasant near death experiences are. How do we know these experiences happen right at the time of death? It makes sense that when the brain lets go, the loss of consciousness would be chill and not scary. His second piece of evidence is that things are going well, and his consciousness was not put in a body 200 years ago. What about the people who were born back then? How about the people born into bodies in war torn countries? Consciousness is an emerging property of the brain. What is your proof that it is transported anywhere? Even if we did have multiple lives over hundreds of years, it does not mean that there is a god doing it. The third piece is there must be a god guiding the response of people like Ghandi and Martin Luther King, and the response goes against nature. Why don’t we see this behavior in your god?

Dave in TX does not believe that hell where souls burn eternally exists. Is the Bible literally true or is it figurative?The god of the Bible is a monster. Where do we draw the line with interpretations? How is the resurrection of Jesus not contradictory when there are four different stories? Cover to cover, the Bible is pro-slavery, pro-genocide, pro-misogyny, is full of contradictions, and looks nothing like a god inspired book should look. What good can we get out of the Bible without the baggage of this evil god?

Thank you for tuning in this week, theists and atheists! Secular Rarity, our back-up host, joins to help close us out. See you next week!

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

00:00 Intro02:33 Adam-(EN) | Contingency Argument For Necessary Entity
55:41 Mike-SC | What Level Of Natural Disaster Is Okay?
1:37:03 Michael-FL | Dealing With Observable Phenomenon

SHOW NOTESIn today’s episode of the Atheist Experience, Justin and Allegedly Ian, take calls ranging from philosophy to phenomena. 

Adam in England has a contingency argument for a necessary entity. Why should we believe that there was ever a point in time where things were selected? 
Prior to god creating the laws of physics, did god believe that he created the laws of physics? Was there a state that the universe did not exist? 
How can something exist and not exist at the same time?
What causes something to be true?
At what point does the universe become god?
If part of god is contingent, then god is not fully necessary. How can god be all benevolent if not all parts of god are good?
Why did god not create a world with no natural disasters? What is god’s intention when making people suffer?

Mike, a theist in SC, wants to know what it would take to make us happy in relation to natural disaster casualties. All good means doing the best thing and that is zero deaths with not one bad thing is to be expected. How can free will exist if god is all knowing?
If something is outside of time, would it have future, present, and past states?
 If god is all benevolent, why is he such a misogynist?
Why does this god give instructions on how to own people?
Why would the time period have an affect on the people’s morals?
Profiting on the ownership of other people is bad and not dependent on perception. Why does god justify blood feud?

Michael in FL is deconverting and curious how the hosts deal with phenomena that they can observe. It is always important to ask if there is any peer reviewed evidence showing this is a phenomenon. If god had a belief about a spiritual experience that changed once the experience happened, god can’t exist outside of space and time. Find the tests that can be done to investigate and reproduce this phenomenon. If we are unable to reproduce the results in a controlled environment, then we are looking at a psychological phenomenon. 
Thank you for joining us this week! We will see you next time!




Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.