In today’s episode of The Atheist Experience, hosts Justin (Deconstruction Zone) and Richard Gilliver seek evidence for God, diving into philosophical arguments, biblical contradictions, and the flaws in theological defenses. The hosts challenge callers to step up their game, urging them to drop the evasions and present solid justification for their faith.

Joe in OR, an atheist, asks how to debate various denominations about unfalsifiable claims without being antagonistic. Richard stresses the importance of gaining experience and being humble enough to say "I don't know" rather than risking incorrect biblical arguments. The hosts agree that avoiding errors maintains trust for future dialogue. Is experience the only way to refine the subtle skills needed for secular discourse?

Jim in MO, an agnostic, presents Homer Simpson's classic rebuttal to Pascal’s Wager. The argument fails because it ignores all other gods, potentially sending the wagerer to an Islamic or Greek Hell instead of the Christian one. The hosts agree this standard counter-apologetic is effective for exposing theological hypocrisy. Why do theists assume everyone defaults to the Christian god concept?

Adam in NC, an agnostic, asks why Stephen was martyred for the same ideas Paul later preached, noting that Paul was at Stephen's execution. Justin explains Paul’s ministry focused on Gentiles outside Jewish strongholds, minimizing conflict with elites. Adam also questions Paul’s conversion story due to contradictory accounts in Acts. Do internal biblical contradictions undermine Paul as a reliable source?

Good Question in WA contends atheists incorrectly concede that all morality is subjective, arguing objective morals are based on objective causes. Justin pushes back, arguing that morals are mind-dependent; if all minds ceased to exist, so would morals. Objective means and measures for adhering to a subjective framework do not make the framework itself objective. Why insist on transcendental objective morality if the system relies on conscious receivers?

Patrick in FL claims atheism is nihilism and just another faith, as atheists cannot define what evidence for God would be. Richard challenges Patrick on why he uses a different name every week and dismisses his assertion that he neither believes nor disbelieves as dishonest. The hosts demand Patrick present evidence for his God-belief, which he fails to produce before the call is abruptly ended. Why do some theists conflate atheism with nihilism?

The Supreme Leader in CO asks, hypothetically, if God's existence (the first mover) was proven, why atheists wouldn't follow him, citing his tyrannical nature. Justin focuses on failed biblical prophecies, demonstrating how quotes are taken out of context (e.g., Isaiah 7's "virgin birth"). Richard applauds the caller’s maturity for listening to the context. Does belief in a God compel moral submission to that God? 

Thank you for tuning in this week! We will see you next time!

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

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

In today's episode of The Atheist Experience, Justin (Deconstruction Zone) and Mike Briggs (Geology Daddy) tackle the nature of morality outside of religion, cosmological origins, and deep critiques of biblical literalism and theological consistency.

Sam in FL promotes the "cult of X," defined by hedonism and lack of morality, claiming it is his faith. Recognizing him as a troll, the hosts insist on a clear argument for his specific God, noting he provides no philosophical substance. 

Larry in TX discusses secular humanism and theists' misperceptions of atheist morality. Mike stresses morality is internal, based on introspection and empathy, not divine authority. Justin suggests critiquing supposedly "objective" God-given morals using internal biblical examples (slavery, genocide). 

Hollis in WA, who is deconstructing, questions why God did not reconcile the fallen angels. Justin explains this is an ancient, widespread archetypal theme across Near Eastern mythologies. The hosts clarify that the Satan-as-fallen-angel idea developed much later, noting the biblical inconsistency that other fallen angels are imprisoned. 

Ahmed in Germany questions the cause of the Big Bang and the need for a creator, citing suffering as a potential test. Mike explains that quantum fluctuations in a vacuum might spontaneously produce universes, noting the Big Bang may not be the beginning. The hosts challenge the test premise and expose the God of the Gaps fallacy. 

Marilyn argues "we're all gods" because we are the image of God and claims atheists are closer to the truth than Christians who require a master. Mike challenges her ambiguous definition of "God" and points out the contradiction in her simultaneous belief in Jesus as *the* son of God. Justin criticizes her "perfect design" concept using common physical flaws (choking, needing glasses). 

Ulrich in Mexico claims veganism is wrong and that lacking connection to God "messes up your mind." Justin demands substantive evidence for his God rather than mere complaint. Using internal biblical critique, Justin pressures O Rick on the moral acceptability of Deuteronomy 22 (stoning non-virgins) and 1 Samuel 15:3 (killing Amalekite babies). O Rick repeatedly evades the questions, exposing his theological inconsistency. 

Des in Jamaica, who is deconstructing, asks what prevents atheists from being evil, arguing fear of eternal consequence keeps Christians moral. Mike explains morality is an evolutionary adaptation driven by empathy and social cooperation. Justin argues Christian theology offers no moral consequence, as sins are forgiven solely by accepting Jesus, meaning moral behavior is irrelevant to destination. 

Billy in KY, an older atheist living in the Bible Belt, expresses his struggles with the chastisement and ridicule he faces in his community after deconstructing his Christian faith. Justin validates his position, noting that reading the Bible is often the key to deconverting believers. 

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.

In today’s episode of The Atheist Experience, Forrest Valkai and Godless Engineer dismantle claims regarding prerequisites for end-times prophecy and critically analyze an English teacher's grammatical objections to using singular "they/them" pronouns.
Anson in gerrymandered anuses asserts end times prophecy required the 1948 rebirth of Israel, arguing Paul was mistaken about Christ's imminent return. Hosts critique this "going out of business" scheme, asking why God is constrained by geopolitics and human evil. They reject the claim that atrocities like the Holocaust could be "worth it" for salvation. Why must suffering precede divine intervention?
Jason in misanthropic orangutans, an English teacher, objects to singular "they/them" usage on rigid grammatical grounds, preferring "one" or "we." Hosts note that singular "they" has been standard since the 1300s, citing the Oxford English Dictionary. They argue that refusing a requested pronoun in favor of using a person's name is unnecessarily difficult, dismissive of their identity, and driven by personal comfort. Is linguistic conformity more important than human respect?
Thank you for watching this chaotic episode. We are back next week, Sundays at 4:30 p.m. Central Standard 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, Secular Rarity and Godless Engineer tackle the pervasive threat of Christian nationalism and the historical evidence (or lack thereof) for Jesus. They also dive into challenging calls questioning whether intellectual inquiry is necessary for belief and celebrate a caller's successful deconstruction into secular community.
Robert in WI argued intellectual inquiry is useless for finding God, claiming belief is primarily emotional and universal. The hosts questioned why objective truth regarding God's existence should exclude rational methods used everywhere else. Is intellectual honesty only reserved for non-religious claims?
Mary in NC updated the hosts on her long deconstruction, noting that realizing the creation story was a myth finally clinched her atheism, ending 17 years of guilt. She now enjoys freedom and thriving secular community through painting classes and events. Does community without indoctrination offer a better foundation for life?
Gigi in NC questioned why preachers avoid discussing harmful Bible content, asking if they are ignorant or intentionally deceitful. SR and GE explained that many religious authorities lack deep theological knowledge, sticking only to scripted, surface-level narratives about Jesus. Are preachers equipped to address difficult biblical passages truthfully?
Thank you for joining us this week! The Atheist Experience will be back next Sunday at 4:30 p.m. Central Time.


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

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

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

In today's highly charged episode of The Atheist Experience, Forrest Valkai and Jimmy Jr. dive into the concept of learned helplessness and the vital need for resistance and defiance against systemic injustice and trauma. They challenge callers on the evolutionary origin of meaning and morality, and wrestle with the difficulties of engaging in rational debate with those who redefine terms to avoid definitive answers.

Jeff in LA believes human curiosity is an evolved trait that explains the search for meaning and the rise of religion. The hosts agree that early religion was a "first attempt at science," offering quick answers and evolving into a societal "domestication tool" for control. Can curiosity drive meaning without dogma?

Anatoly in NY posits that people leave religion due to misunderstanding biblical definitions. The hosts found it impossible to debate, as he offered confusing, constantly shifting definitions of God (e.g., "social structure" plus "physical world"). They challenged him on God's immorality, specifically citing biblical commands for slavery. Forrest criticized his profound inability to answer simple, direct questions. Why does he avoid defining his belief clearly?

Thank you for tuning in this week! Jimmy Jr. encourages believers to "do better" and challenge them with substantive arguments next time. Thank you to the crew, producers, and mods who make the show possible. 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, Dr. Ben and Scott Dickie of Talk Heathen stage a friendly takeover, fielding calls on the nature of reality, mathematics, and divine revelation! From philosophical deep dives into *a priori* knowledge to the challenges of grappling with infinity, this episode puts logic and the burden of proof center stage.

Zeno from the International Space Station begins by mentioning intelligent design but quickly pivots to telling the hosts they have faith. Identifying as agnostic, he insists atheists claim God's non-existence. Dr. Ben and Scott challenge him to state his own beliefs rather than misrepresenting theirs, but when he fails to engage productively, what will become of the conversation?

Donald in LA presents a complex philosophical argument for God, blending concepts from Aristotle, Plato, and others, suggesting that the effectiveness of mathematics points to a prescriptive cosmic consciousness. Scott counters that math is merely a descriptive language humans created to model observed universal patterns. With the conversation delving into *a priori* knowledge, can Donald defend his premise without relying on observation?

Ken in MI struggles to comprehend an infinite past and future, and the concept of a universe without time. Scott simplifies infinity as the consistent existence of a "yesterday" and a "tomorrow." Ken then asks if it is wrong for an atheist to find comfort in reading religious texts, leading to a discussion about appreciating literature without accepting its claims. Where does one draw the line?

Jim in MO proposes that the atheist's burden of proof is analogous to a defense attorney's: simply demonstrating reasonable doubt in the theist's claim. The hosts largely agree but refine the analogy, emphasizing that the burden lies solely with the claimant, and the non-believer has no obligation at all. If the prosecution fails to meet its burden, what is the correct verdict to reach?

Miller in MI expresses that religion can lead down a dark path and shares a personal conflict: he holds a belief against having children before marriage, a value from his religious past that now causes friction in his dating life. The hosts differentiate between personal boundaries for a partner and imposing universal moral rules on others. How can one navigate personal values rooted in past dogma?

Sheldon in NY shares his personal testimony that Jesus is God, based on a voice he claims has spoken to him for over 50 years, providing guidance and predictions. The hosts challenge the reliability of this subjective experience, highlighting auditory hallucinations and conflicting claims from other religions. Faced with a contradiction between his claim to value truth and his unfalsifiable belief, what will he choose?

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.

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