The Atheist Experience

In today's episode of the Atheist Experience, Secular Rarity and Jim Barrows put the God of the Bible and Quran on trial for war crimes under international law!

Tron Uprising on TikTok wants to debate whether God is a war criminal. After extensive back-and-forth, Tron eventually concedes that God's command violated the Rome Statute but refuses to engage honestly on the definition of genocide or morality. Why grant that God broke international law but then refuse to call it what it is? If you're willing to admit the statute was violated, why the resistance to the word genocide? The hosts systematically walk through each element of the Rome Statute's definition, and Tron grants every single point yet still won't connect the dots. Is this intellectual honesty or motivated reasoning?

Ad on TikTok, a Muslim caller, attempts to deflect the genocide charge against God by claiming context of war justifies the commands. The hosts confront him with Surah 9:5 and other Quranic passages that explicitly command killing. Ad insists these verses are taken out of context, but when pressed on what context makes genocide acceptable, he struggles to provide a coherent answer. If your holy book commands the killing of entire groups of people, does adding historical context really make it better? The call ends contentiously when Ad refuses to engage with the actual text and runs away.

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, Godless Engineer, Secular Rarity, and Scott Dickie dissect biblical slavery, divine command theory, and the moral gymnastics required to defend scripture's darkest passages.

Mark in NE, a progressive Christian, insists slavery laws in the Bible are human cultural assumptions, not God's perfect morality. How do you distinguish divine commands from human insertions without an objective method? If God inspired the text, why include immoral laws at all? Your methodology seems designed to rescue God from accountability rather than discover truth.

Papo in Puerto Rico claims whatever God ordains is objectively good. When asked if he'd kill a baby if God commanded it, he says yes. This chilling admission exposes divine command theory's moral bankruptcy. If morality is just "whatever God says," then the word "good" becomes meaningless. Why call God good if good means nothing beyond obedience?

Kelly in MN presents verses she believes oppose slavery but can't reconcile them with explicit pro-slavery passages. She filters scripture through John 10:10 yet lacks consistent criteria for determining God's intent. If the Bible requires external moral standards to interpret it, why trust it as a moral guide at all?

Kell in FL questions why gold appears in Genesis, suggesting the Bible reflects existing values rather than divine revelation. The conversation shifts to his extreme views on militarizing atheism. The hosts recommend therapy resources and emphasize that violence isn't the answer to ideological disagreements.

Thank you for joining us this week! We'll 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, Thinker, Fe, and The Beard of Empathy examine whether Christianity is a scam, the problem of divine attribution, and when beliefs become harmful.

Andrew argues Christianity isn't a scam because there are no customers or payments. But believers do pay costs: tithes, sacrifices, obedience, all in exchange for salvation. That's a transaction. When you promise eternal reward for compliance and eternal punishment for refusal, how is that not a protection racket? What makes this different from any other pay-to-play scheme?

Yolanda in MD credits God's voice for saving her life during a brain aneurysm, telling her not to lie down and to call 911. Why didn't God just heal the aneurysm? Why give cryptic instructions instead of preventing the crisis? If God intervened, why did you still need surgery? How do you distinguish God's voice from your own survival instinct?

Heresy in Canada asks whether we should respect comforting beliefs or prioritize knowledge. Personal beliefs are fine if kept private, but they become harmful when imposed on others or used to shape policy. Comfort doesn't make something true. When does your right to believe what you want end and someone else's right to live free from those beliefs begin?

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, Secular Rarity, Godless Engineer, and Kelley Laughlin tackle biblical gender equality, Quranic slavery, and the emotional aftermath of deconversion.

Loveisthewayfr on TikTok insists Genesis isn't a dating tool and the Bible teaches gender equality. The hosts point to Leviticus 12, where a woman's purification after birthing a daughter takes twice as long as for a son. If men and women are equal in the Bible, why does childbirth gender determine ritual impurity duration? What other passages might reveal this claimed equality isn't quite so equal?

Salahuddin Ayyubi on TikTok argues Quranic slavery differs from American chattel slavery and compares Islamic prisoner treatment to modern secular systems. The hosts counter that the Quran explicitly permits owning people as property. If you can own, buy, sell, and inherit a person, how is that fundamentally different from chattel slavery? Does rebranding ownership make it moral?

David in the USA shares he misses the comfort of belief, especially about death and the afterlife, even knowing it's not real. The hosts suggest death cafes and therapy to process these feelings. Is it possible to find peace with mortality without supernatural promises? Can secular communities offer the same emotional support religion once did?

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, Godless Engineer, Jim Barrows, and Jamie The Blind Limey confront the uncomfortable truth about Jesus and Old Testament atrocities!

Albert in MA argues the Bible should be read allegorically, not literally. The hosts challenge him on Old Testament violence and slavery laws, pointing to Matthew 5:18 where Jesus explicitly affirms all Old Testament law remains valid. If it's all allegory, why did Jesus say not one letter of the law would pass away? What moral lesson justifies selling your daughter?

Emanuel in Sweden questions whether Jesus actually taught Mosaic law. The hosts walk through Matthew 5:17-18, Leviticus slavery laws, and dietary contradictions, demonstrating Jesus affirmed Old Testament law including morally problematic commands. If Jesus fulfilled the law, why does he say it all still applies? How do you reconcile loving Jesus with endorsing genocide?

Jock from Earth claims the Bible has esoteric or inner spiritual value beyond the literal text. The hosts press him to provide biblical support for his mystical interpretations. He cannot cite chapter and verse, only vague spiritual concepts. If the Bible requires secret knowledge to understand, how is anyone supposed to know what it actually means?

Quincy in TX accuses the hosts of sending themselves to hell. When confronted with God's command to beat children in 2 Samuel 7:14, he admits it's wrong but says he'd obey God anyway, then references The Chosen TV show as his Bible source. If you'd beat a child because God commanded it, what does that say about your morality?

Milton from Earth argues the Orthodox Church, not the Bible itself, is the ultimate authority. The hosts point out this doesn't address biblical commands like selling daughters. Milton becomes circular and confrontational, unable to explain his position clearly. If the church is the authority, why appeal to the Bible at all?

Parker in VA, an atheist, seeks advice on handling presuppositional apologists on campus who claim logic requires God. The hosts and Jamie suggest slowing the conversation, demanding definitions, and asking how God actually grounds logic rather than accepting assertions. What would a world without logic even look like?

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.