Talk Heathen 08.46 with Richard Gilliver and @godlessengineer

have no existential dread about it. I accept it. But I'm really interested in those people who don't. I'm interested in those people who believe that there is an eternal afterlife. I'm interested in those people who think they'll be going to heaven to kiss God's toes and make him a very happy man. I'm interested in those people who think that they will be reborn again and again and again in some endless cycle until enlightenment is eventually achieved in

a release from that rebirth comes. If you are one of these people who thinks that there is utility in believing in an eternal you, please give us a call, because the show is about to begin. Welcome, Welcome, Hello, everybody, Today is November the seventeenth, twenty twenty four. I'm your host, Richard Gilliver. I'm joining me today. It's a very very wonderful Godless engineer. How are you, Godless Engineer.

But it really gives people a great perspective if you are a believer in the afterlife, or if you're a religious person from any tradition and you really are convinced and you think the scholarship is convincing for your position, today is the day you need to call and give us a call, because you know you are talking to the two people here who are really really on the same wave length as you. So are are you excited about this.

on like Christian origins and things of that nature. I know, the chat pol is actually on slavery, which is another interesting aspect because that plays a lot into the scholarship concerning Christianity and like how we interpret it, like the scriptures and all this other stuff, and so like there's a lot of different I guess avenues that we could go down on that particular topic.

legal stuff out of the way first. TOKI then, is a product of the Earthist Community of Austin, a five h one c three nonprofit organization which is dedicated to the promotion of atheism, critical thinking, secular humanism and the separation the separation of religion and government at Tolkiden is a live calling show and we have open lines, so get your calls in at five one two nine nine two four to two or from your computer at tiny dot c c slash call th and as I said,

those phone lines are filling up. So if you do want to talk to us, if you want to get in on this show where you've got myself and John hosting together, really now is the time to do it. Get your call in quickly so we can give you the time that you deserve. Before we take calls. We do our weekly segment talk Heathen to me which and last week we asked you it was a petty move when God blank And here are our top three answers. Number three, Colin Mattz, it was a petty move when

God psyched Abraham. John, what do you think of that one?

or what they Go and look them. Go and look the four skins stories over. You might want to be careful how you phrase it when you're doing the Google search for that, but go and look up those four skins stories from the Middle Ages. There were some huntingers out there. There really really are.

week we will reveal the top three answers. But of course we don't let the guest get off scot free as usual, So I'm going to ask the co host, without lying market the Bible to drive sales, do you have an answer for that one?

I really really am. I love this show. I loved doing this show, and you know, I think it's time we got in to those calls. We have Matt from Illinois who is a church organist and wants to know how to talk to a pastor about their response to the threat of Christian nationalism. Matt, Hello, thanks for calling the show.

So I've appreciated that, but I've I've just felt that lately, especially in the last couple of weeks, as I pay attention to sermons, I feel like there's just this is a Lutheran e LCA Lutheran church, and they're very nice people.

a similar kind of vent to it of speaking like, hey, this is all a bunch of nonsense that people have. Some people think this, people have thought this for years, kind of debunking it, and then at the same time using that as a springboard to then talk about how much God loves us. So that's kind of where I'm at. It's not the biggest emergency. You know, I'm not going to quit tomorrow. I do like these people quite a bit, but at the same time, I feel like it weighs

on me. I kinn't want to just ambush anybody out of nowhere if I were to have a conversation.

But I don't accept and I don't want to. I don't want to put anyone in a position where they feel like they need to legitimately convert me either, right.

everybody has equal treatment under the law. They're seeking to make sure that people are taking care of you know when they can't necessarily do it for themselves, you know, and alleviating a lot of the financial ills of the lower middle class. And then the other side just wants to milk the working class and the lower class for all that their work. They're wanting to destroy the economy and all this other stuff. And that's even on top of all the social issues that this side has and

you know, persecuting minorities and all this stuff. So I mean, like, sure, maybe there's good people on both sides, but the topics that we're actually talking about here are not like a both sides kind of issue. Like it's it's a very clear decision between both sides. And I would think that if you're truly wanting to embody what most people think of as the Christian ethics I guess, or the Christian way of life, I feel like you would want to

err on the side of the non conservatives. I mean, there are several different passages you could think of in the Gospels alone that portray Jesus as this woke person that doesn't care about like monetary value of things in their life, and they care Jesus cares way more about providing you know, social safety nets for the lower and middle class people, while at the same time not like bucking your responsibilities to like pay your taxes and stuff.

I feel like it's it's Christian nationalism at its heart, seeks to twist what people have become to associate as the Christian narrative. They're twisting it into this whole conservative type of mindset, thereby weaponizing their religion and against them to make them understand like that kind of rhetoric as being purely like basically being a conservative Jesus when in reality, uh, you could easily portray Jesus as being like one of

those woke leftists. It's just it's really kind of weird, and it's very contextually sensitive as far as like what you're wanting to talk about, So like, uh, I don't know, maybe if you could give me like one or two more topics that you feel like you want to talk about with you know, people in your congregation or people in your life in general, and I can tell you how I might tackle it, but that would purely just be like how I would handle those conversations.

Is just that it that that that I would start a sentence with how do I reconcile and then length, you know, and that if that these are almost fantasy conversations that I that I have because I guess and this is the the maybe the thing I'm realizing as we're talking is that, you know, it's there is a fear of sort of uttering myself, and I feel like there's like I I increasingly I'm the one who is very acutely aware that that I see myself as sort

of apart from a congregation. And and I guess that that makes me feel shy about asking any questions about theology because I'm going to expose myself in some way too.

have this conversation. You can't always do that. It's not always appropriate to do that. And I think if you're friends with these people, you take it, as John said, on an individual basis, how these conversations run. And I think making yourself available is a really good way to do that, you know, to say, you know, I don't necessarily agree with you on all this stuff. If you ever want to have that discussion, my door is open, you know, come to me, and you know, I'm more

than happy to talk about that with you. I think one thing we should avoid doing, and you know this is me speaking from experience in those kinds of situation is putting yourself forward as kind of not necessarily aggressive, but as being pushy to try and say, well, you know, why do you believe this, why do you believe that, Let's talk about it. Let's you know, that's not necessarily

the best way of going about having these conversations. When you're doing it with your friends, you're doing it with your peers, you're doing it in an environment that you enjoy being in. You know, you want to keep those relationships, you know, open. I've just read literally and I have. I'm not making this up. I was just saying before the show to Kelly, who's back up host and Godless engineer. I'm in a band. I'm in a jazz band, Jets,

and the drummer in that band I've found out this week. Yeah, I found out this week that the drummer for that band is a very new band. We've only met a couple of times, and it transpires that the drummer actually trains priests to be priests. And we had a brief conversation about you know, you know, just different aspects of things. Nothing too heavy, you know, just saying, you know, our

talk we're talking mostly about religious scholarship. And you know that has opened the door now for any future con sas that guy wants to have. He knows I'm interested in the subject. He knows that if he raises it, I'm happy to talk about it. And where that goes in the future, we don't know it will be. You know, what transpires will transpire from that. But the door is open, and it you know, I didn't approach him. I was, you know, I was just saying that I had not

learned I've been lazy. I've not learned a couple of songs because i'd actually been writing a paper about religious scholarship. And I just said, off the cuff, you know, I've not learned this song because I've been writing this paper. He said, Oh, that's very interesting. My job is training priests. It was as simple as that. But it has opened the door for kind of future dialogue. And I think that's the way for me. That's the way. That's always been the best approach. Just be open, not force it

on anyone. Let people understand that you are there and you are interested if they want to have those conversations. But don't don't jump down the throats because inevitably, if you jump down someone's throat with it, they're going to back off and the not going to want to talk to you, especially and in that environment when you're there week after week and you're talking to them consistently, it can cause problems for really wider relationships as well. So i'd be very cautious about that.

I do feel like I've been pure enough in my atheism for long enough that it actually, aside from the many ways that I that it makes me angry in reality in real one on one conversations, it's it's not something that I can't whether if it's if it's you know, launched at me. And also I don't need to be aggressive with it.

using the Bible in various ways. So like if you wanted to ease into the conversation, like for instance, if somebody's talking about, you know, being pro choice or or being pro life or whatnot, and you wanted to bring up scriptures in the Bible. There's actually more scriptures in the Bible that support life beginning at first breath rather

than at conception. And you actually have to sort of priss the Bible's words about, you know, certain verses about you know, God knowing somebody at the moment of conception and all this other stuff, when in actuality, at every point, life is not acknowledged until the breath of life has entered into you, and that is something that's given by God. And so like, you could go that route talking about

those particular topics with the social safety nets topics. You could also go the route, you know, using the Gospels and the social safety nets. You could talk about how, you know, Jesus was there to provide for the lower middle income families and he regularly spoke against the richest one percent, and you know how they valued money and all this other stuff. You could bring up that whole camel through the or I cameled through the eye of

a needle sort of thing. There's that on like on the diversity of genders that we understand now about human sexuality. There's this one verse I believe it's maybe Matthew nineteen or something. It's in one of the gospels where Jesus and his burros are compared to eunuchs, and Jesus speaks favorably about unix and like, you know, speaks favorably about

abstinence and all this other stuff. And you know, you could definitely use that as an argument for the LGBTQ plus community because of how unis were treated at that time. They were, you know, well regarded at that point in time, and they were also not as gender binary, like they didn't strictly adhere to a gender binary and Jesus seemed

to be pretty fine with them. So, like, for a lot of these social issues that you're talking about, you can definitely find scriptural verses that you can bring to the table and at least get them to think along the lines that they are willing to accept as opposed to like directly coming out and challenging like why should we believe in this you know, nearly two thousand year old book that you know has chattel slavery and sexual slavery and all these other different things that it endorses

and has God endorsing, and that we shouldn't necessarily you know, take as good moral a good world foundation to build upon. So I mean, like you, there's definitely ways in which you can attack it without directly offending their sensibilities.

I can guarantee you he's listening to these conversations and he he's answering the questions in his mind as though he's actually having the conversation saying this is how I would respond to this. And you know, I read the comments every week because I'm sad. I read the YouTube comments every week, and every week we get people saying, well, the host should have said this, the host should have said that, and like, you know, when you're a fucking host,

you can say what you want. Mate. But at the minute, I'm in this chair and John's in this chair, so we're going to say what we're saying. And you know, you know, Foisier displeasure with it in the cap and the fucking comments, so I can just ignore you anyway.

on this subject. May I recommend you look at such and such and because they have a different opinion to you on this, and that might give them, you know, open their eyes that this isn't a Christian versus atheist kind of discussion. This is a wider discussion where people you know, even within their own faith, have different opinions to them. So it might open their eyes that, you know, it might not be you don't have to be a Christian and be conservative or an atheist and be liberal.

Thinks the world isn't simply that black and white. There are lots of different spectrums on both sides of the argument. So maybe point them in the direction of people on their own side of the wall who disagree with them, and kind of say and go and have a look at what this person thinks, you know, have a think about it, and come back and let's have a conversation about that about the differences of opinion within Christianity.

or didn't write the Gospels, then you know. But but I can I can accept that for being something that's that it could be far worse. There could be far more dogmatic views that I'm that I'm hearing. These are just things that people are really intrigued. Then they they they have a faith and they have an understanding of it. But that's that does seem to be open and and there there are those discussions.

like that. But I do appreciate your call. Please call back and let us know how these conversations go if you do end up having them. I would love to follow your journey on this and you know, especially if you're talking to a range of different people and on a range of different subjects. I would love to follow your story on this, so please Matt give us a callback. I do appreciate your calling us, John. That was a great call to start off.

bit of kindness. Thank you for your purchase, Joseph, and you too can get your brick at tiny dot cc slash Acea Bricks. I'm not going to lie. I've had an idea for a brick for a long time and I don't know whether they'd let me do it, so I've not put it forward because it is a bit naughty. So anyway, brushing swiftly moving on. If we get ten dollars, that's real US dollars plus worth of superchats, godless Engineer will channel the spirit of Jesus Christ into a puppet

for the world to enjoy. That's ten ten dollars plus superchats. So if we get one hundred dollars in superchats, we are going to get John channeling uh and I almost came over came over himself then, because I'm and of course available on tiny dot cc slash ACA, flyers are principal calling flyers post these with permission. Of course, we don't want anybody getting into trouble, so community bulletin boards so people know they should call our show and defend

their faith. If you do post any flyers, make sure to snap a picture of it and place it of it in place and send it to TV at Atheist Hyphencommunity dot org, and we may feature your photo on an upcoming show. And as always we have merch you can get your talk he then merch at tiny dot cc slash slash merch aca, where you can get teas, hoodies, crop tops, hats, tumblers, mugs, all sorts of things. If you like one of our hosts, Sophia, who has just had a brand new little baby, you can get little

baby clothes on there and everything. So you get yourself over there and proudly represent and I will be very very happy if I see see In fact, I will make this pledge now if I see any person in real life, if I bump into any of you in real life. This largely applied to British fans of the show. But if I bump into you in any of you in real life wearing Talk Heathen merch I will personally buy you a second item of merchandise. I promise you.

I will have a selfie with you, we will post it on the Talk Heathen Facebook page, and I will personally buy you a second item of merchandise and send it to you. So get representing people, especially if you're over on my side of the pond. Like the video and subscribe to the channel. Enable notifications and comment below on your favorite caller. We have calls lining up. I am going to take. I'm going to take because I asked Dee to call in on this subject and we

love d on this show. Anyway, But I kind of I challenged a little bit something I heard D say to another couple of hosts a couple of weeks ago. So I wanted to just bring that D. Hello, how are you.

This is how I understood it, and you know, you were kind of saying you shouldn't, we shouldn't kind of challenge them so hard because they're in a transitional phase. So they might have come out of an orthodox religion and be going through some kind of spiritual phase, still holding on to supernatural beliefs, and when they're in that stage, we shouldn't challenge people as hard. Am I on the right lines there generally yes, right, So this is this is this is kind of what my objection was to that,

And I'd love to hear your response to this. I don't know when I'm talking to somebody whether you know, unless they specifically state I have come out of a religion and I now believe this, And even then, I do not know for certain that that is a transitional phase. Somebody could have left mainstream religion, somebody might have always held onto this supernatural belief and I think making the assumption that's a transitional stages is quite dangerous thing to do.

And to say, then, well, I'm not going to challenge this person as hard as I would if they were within religion. I think that's doing the disservice to kind of educating and education using critical thinking and skepticism and things. You know. I want to I want people to have a better toolbox, regardless of whether they're in a transitional phase or what their beliefs are. You know, if they don't believe in a god, but they believe in some kind of expirit ghosts, things like that, I think those

people still should be challenged on those beliefs. And in fact, in my experience, and I can only talk from my own experience here, I've found much more pushback from people who hold those kind of vague supernatural beliefs than I have from people who hold on to kind of orthodox religious beliefs. I've found people with orthodox religious beliefs are much more open to talk about it, whereas people with kind of vague supernatural beliefs tend to really really kind

of not want to have the conversation. They kind of really reluctant to have the conversation. And I don't know whether that is because, you know, the kind of inner head space where they kind of maybe know that it's all bullshit, that they don't really want to acknowledge that. So I'm going to ask you as a person who

is you know, self identified being in that space. Is it possible the reason you think that we should not be as hard on people in this transitional stage or hold these beliefs because you think within yourself that you might have to acknowledge that they are irrational.

I'm talking about people who aren't interested in educating so much as they are in having gotcha moments.

they believe. That's that's really what my bag is. And you know, atheists are as guilty of needing that as many theists are in a lot of respects. And you know, so I appreciate that clarification from you, I really really do, because a lot of atheists are out there to give gotcha moments to people, So I completely understand where you're coming from that. On that, Having said that, I want to hear from John because this isn't the Richard Gilliver Show.

It's the Talk Ethen and we have two horse on here, so I'm gonna let John kind of take over for a while give his opinion on the matter. Yeah.

out strong. I usually try. I don't I don't try to give any quarter I guess to somebody in a conversation, but that that's real, that really is depending on the topic that's being discussed, you know, because if it's if it's a conversation over like whether or not women should have bodily autonomy, and they're basing their whole argument on God, I'm less likely to you know, give somebody an e time on that particular topic as opposed to like a

topic about Christian origins. Yeah, and so like, it is very context sensitive for me as to when I'm more understanding and more accepting of people going through a transitional phase, either coming out of religion or whether they're still in religion and they're just questioning their beliefs. It really kind of depends, like general conversation about God. You know, I'm

gonna be a lot easier on people. But if we're talking about God in a moral aspect or like why or like you know, how you have to be a Christian or some kind of religious person in order to

really be able to ground your morality. You know, in reality, I feel like I'm less likely in those situations to be understanding of those things because like my mind immediately goes to how immoral the Bible is and how that causes people on a number of different topics to just say horrible things and they think that it's just normal, like it's because it's normalized to them, so they don't

understand the depravity of what they're saying. And so I guess I feel like, in the conversation, my goal is to really highlight the depravity of their statements. And if I have to be a little forceful or a little maybe bombastic or you know, harsh, if you will, in that conversation in order to get them to understand the depravity of their statements, then I don't have a problem

with doing that. I know, on a call in show recently, we were talking about sexual slavery in the Old Testament, how God commanded it and everything like that, and I phrased it in a very uncomfortable way because I, you know, I was talking about how God commanded Israelite men to

fluck children, because that's what it was. It was a grown ass man that we're you know, having sex with children, and so I phrased it in a very uncomfortable way for the caller, and so the caller was like, can we not talk about it in this kind of way? And so I just asked them, I was like, Okay,

in what way can we talk about fucking children? That would placate your sensibilities because I feel like there's no way that we can talk about that particular subject and how that subject exists in the Bible in a way that's nice, in a way that makes them not feel icky about it, because it should make you feel icky. You know, it should be a disgusting conversation to have.

But the fact that somebody wants to make the conversation easier to have, I feel like it just shows how they don't actually want to talk about the harsh realities of the Bible. They just you know, they're used to the Bible giving them comfort and everything like that. And I totally agree. I totally understand that, not trying to take that away from anybody, but at the same time, you have to acknowledge these harsh realities that are portrayed

in the Bible. And so I guess all to bring this all back together and so I can stop talking, is that, you know, it depends on the context, and it depends on what topic is being discussed as to whether or not I'm harsh or if I'm more understanding. And so I think having a good gauge of that in the conversation you're having is key.

talk about Buddhism on this show. So I'm going to gosh darn it, grab it with both hands while I do have the opportunity. What what what does secular Buddhism mean to you? And how do you view Buddhism on the whole. Do you think secular Buddhism is a good representation of Buddhism on the whole.

transport themselves through walls. It says that they you know, he himself claims to and have outstretched his arms and traveled to one of the Brahma heavens to talk to God. He claims to have the psychic powers of being able to read them people's minds and see the future. You know, he has all these mystical powers, all these supernatural powers that many people who kind of come to Buddhism from

the Western or secular perspective. And I'm certainly not criticizing that, by the way, because you know, the secular perspective of looking at Buddhism is a legitimate way of looking at it. So I'm not saying that, you know, you are not a true Buddhist by any stretch of the imagination. What I'm saying is there is a wider perspective. And you know, in religious studies, and I was talking about this before

the show with the other guys. You know, when you've got a religion, whether you've got Christianity or Islam or Buddhism, what we say is that there are Buddhisms or Christianities because you don't have the whole scope of a religion is so wide that you don't have a one size fits all kind of thing. And whereas secular Buddhism is perfectly legitimate to practice and not accept those supernatural beliefs.

You know, I don't accept the supernatural beliefs of Buddhism, and I've been practicing Buddhist meditation for over twenty years, so I certainly get it, as I certainly do get it. But that is not to say that Buddhism or Buddhisms

are devoid of those beliefs. And certainly, if you're coming from a scriptural point of view, whether that's the terra Vada, which is the kind of oldest school of Buddhism we have, or the Mahayana, which is the other major school of Buddhism, and Vadriana, which is sometimes classed as a separate school, but it's a subset of Mahaiana. All of those traditions

contain significant supernatural elements. When you're looking at the scripture, and the scripture, you know, the tippy Taka, especially the you know, the section of it that deals with the Buddha's direct teachings and the teachings of his disciples, they contain lots and lots and lots of examples of the supernatural. So I would really really encourage you to kind of go out and look at those scriptural references, to have a look at the wider perspective of Buddhism and kind

of just have a look and like educate yourself. I guess a little bit more on the religion as a whole, because I think you'll find some of the stuff in there very very interesting.

And you know, he's you know, from being very very young, he has developed a good relationship with the West and communicating Buddhist ideas to the West. What it doesn't necessarily do very clearly is put forward these, you know, the more supernatural claims. I mean, in Tibetan Buddhism, for example, you have you have stupas which they burn. I can't remember what planet is, but it sends he's fragrant, you know,

plumes of smoke into the skies. And you know, from the religion perspective, they are there to help people who have died and are going to be reborn to kind of climb up into the heavens and achieve a good rebirth and the like. And you know the Dalai Lama talks himself about you know, the dial Lama is supposed to be a reborn figure himself, a body satva, reborn from a figure called Avalog Savara and or kwan Yin if you want the simpler name. That's another aspect of

that figure is supposed to have been born from. And yeah, yeah, and when when it is better, monkey is reborn. In fact, there's a there's a film out from then. I think it's from the nineties with starring Keanu Reeves. Now I will warn you because this is not it's very unacceptable. This Reeves does do blackface in the film, so you know,

it's something to be aware of before watching it. But in that that film actually talks about this reincarnation pro that all the alarmers go through, that all significantly high ranked larmers go through of demonstrating that they have been reborn, that they are the reincarnation of a particular figure. So when this current Diali Lama dies, his successor will be

chosen because they believe it is his. It's not a soul, because there is no soul in Buddhism, but the five candors, which are the things that are reborn in Buddhism, goes

on into a new body. And when that body it comes to fruition, and that that child is born, they will put them to a test and give personal items of the current ally Lama so that child to see if he can pick out his items, and if he can't do so, it will be called the you know, it will be announced as the reincarnation of the fourteenth current Ali Lama and be announced the fifteenth dial Lama. So even though the Dalai Lama is a spokesperson for Yeah, so we go on.

do appreciate the call. I always enjoy it when people call up and want to talk to me directly about, you know, either something I've said or something I'm challenging them on personally. So I really really do appreciate that. And we'll see you again soon.

as an excuse for their hate. Absolutely, Miranda, I'm totally behind that, and in fact, not just religious people, because there are many many non religious people will have this weird, fucking I thing against trans people which I don't get or to go out and read the fucking science. So onic people, please, Daniel show a shower. I'm going to get this wrong because I always do with pronunciation. So in nineteen ninety nine, thank you for that who said

I want to hear from puppet Jesus. Well, maybe you will get to hear from puppet Jesus. We just needed a few more people to throw us some ten dollars super chats and le's let's go down that route. We have the patrons, John, can you see those? Do you want to read those out?

of that. So if you can't join us live, join the patreon and you can get all of those recorded after shows and sometimes we get some great insights We get to see a little bit more into the host's kind of personal lives, and it's all there for you on that Patreon for you to get. So I'm going to jump into another call. We have calls up on calls on calls, and we're to take Stephen from Florida, who wondering why is lamotophobia it is called is lamophobia.

Steven took us through it. Well, ye're asking us.

a phobia. Simply being for the separation of church and state is not any kind of phobia because we're I mean, while we are afraid of, you know, what would happen if religion takes over our government, that's not the main driving force behind it. And it's also we're not also making these statements because of like vast generalizations about you know, religious people in general. It's about the mixture of state and religion that we're fighting against because we already know

what the problems are there. So there's a number of different nuances that we're talking about here when we're speaking about those things. I do think that just assuming somebody, you know, if you do perceive them to be a Christian, assuming that they're homophobic or transphobic or racist or something like that is not warranted. So I would similarly speak

out against that. But at the same time, I feel like if you dig down deep enough, either the person, if they're not transphobic, homophobic, and racist as part of their uh uh, as part of Christianity, then they're they're better than their own religion. Because there you can definitely uh you know, use Christianity, the Christian scriptures in order to justify all of those things, and they have been

done in the past to justify those things. And so I feel like that just highlights how the person is way better than the religion that they claim to practice. And so, yeah, So to answer your question, Islamophobias called Islamophobia because of the vast generalizations people make just because they perceive someone to be a Muslim or they know about somebody being a Muslim, and so they automatically think, uh, some prejudicial things about.

that person. If I just simply say I don't believe in Zeus, that doesn't mean that I'm afraid of somebody that practices the ways of the Greek or Roman pantheon, which I believe in the Roman pantheon Zeus is actually Jupiter. But in any case, however you want to portray that, it's not that I'm afraid of somebody that practices the Greek pantheon. I just don't believe in those gods. So there's a vast difference in in our terminology here and how we're using these words.

to infect our government or our way of life. Somebody can practice their religion as long as it doesn't negatively affect other people. That is not the same thing as like prejudicially generalizing somebody in a particular kind of mindset just because they practice a certain kind of religion.

part of it. And this is what I think you're kind of missing. You're brushing this very very important part aside to say, well, why are we calling it this instead of this? Well, who fucking cares what we call it.

Let's address the actual issue. The actual issue at hand is that these people have been treated unfairly because of you know, and you know this isn't defender Muslim This is talk key then, but you know, when we get calls like this, I feel is very very important to say, you know, we shouldn't be, you know, mistreating people unfairly, being unfairly prejudiced against people because of an aspect of their lives in which they choose to identify. And it can go across the board. It doesn't have to be

a religious person. We can pluck any any person out of any minority group and say, well, this person is being unfairly treated because of this aspect of their life. What we call it is largely irrelevant that we address that. Unfairness is the important part. It's what John's trying to get across to you. It's what I'm trying to get across to you, and you've seem hung up on what it's called rather than the action of this unfair treatment.

focusing on the irrational generalizations that occur. Because like if you, let's say, if we can run through this real quick there, Steven, if you meet a person who says that they are a Muslim and their name is Mohammad, do you automatically think that they have like a bomb or something like? Is that something that you would naturally think?

particular religion. Just don't believe in that do you understand the stark contrast that I've kind of highlighted here in in in you know, one way is islamophobic, the other way is not. Do you understand the difference.

I'm autistic. So maybe I'm just like missing a social cu somewhere. But is it not just axiology? Is it not just you have all the same axioms as me, but I have one more, which is God must exist. Like at that point, like you can't debate someone out of an axiom, right.

with you at all. But I typically like to have these kinds of conversations, and that's primarily just because I'm hoping to sort of pull them out of the precept mindset is what I generally want to try to do, and that's just by highlighting like the disconnection, you know, between you know, what they're hoping to prove and what's actually being proved in the conversation. Because you're right, they

just have to tack on one more axiom. But I mean, as we understand from like Oukham's razor, the more ad hoc stuff that you have to tag tap onto or ta tack onto your argument, the weaker your argument becomes. And so I feel like highlighting that to them and being like, oh, well, that's just ad hoc stating that God is necessary for logic, or that's just ad hoc stating one thing or another and trying to get them

to justify it. That either highlights that you know, they're they're dogmatically adhering to their position, or if they're actually trying to figure things out, and if they're actually trying to figure things out and they're just so happen to be convinced by this argument, maybe you can highlight the problems with the argument, and you know, maybe they can be become better for it, for the conversation that you

have with them. But at the same time, I don't think that you should really stress yourself out over presuppositionalist because you can basically run the same script on them, because they always have the exact same script. And so like anytime you encounter one it, you know, you just run through the basic talking points and if they're still not you know, listening to you, or they're still adhering to it, then I mean I would say, just get out of the conversation, stop talking to them.

long or longer. And I guess I understand, like if someone's coming in and they feel like they've been partially convinced. But I guess like frequent callers, I can't think of any names on top of my head or whether that would be okay to name them. But just like you know, you get frequent callers like uh oh, like Darth Dawkins, you.

out the flaws in their argument. And it doesn't matter because whether I disagree with you someone, it matters what other people who are you know, we were talking to an earlier caller about, you know, people from their own religion or from you know, when your people from a religious perspective have different opinion to other people within that

same religion. And that's really important to bear in mind when we're doing these shows, is that when we get these callers that are throwing out really bad arguments, and we have a regular one on here who does it quite often, when we have callers who were throwing out these bad arguments, that there are other people from their religious background who are watching these shows and who are listening to them, and when we challenge them, they get

to listen to both sides of the story. And very often, and I know this for a fact because I have had these people contact me and tell me this. I you know, we get religious people saying thank you for breaking it down because that's actually given me a different perspective. You know, I would have been in the same shoes as this, you know, as that call and making these bad arguments, but having listened to both sides of the conversation,

I've now got a different viewpoint to it. So I think it's important to bear that in mind that we have an audience when we're doing it. Talking to freezeups in general, I think is difficult. It really really is, and I totally get where you're coming from, and it

can seem pointless. If you come from the perspective of, well, I'm going to start with my worldview and you've got your worldview, these conversations can be non starters and you cannot be having a conversation for half an hour and get nowhere because you're constantly trying to say, well, these worldview against your worldview. And it's why these people always lead with worldview comparisons. You will notice that they always

lead with worldview comparisons. And it's why when I have a conversation with them, what I try and do is break that down. And what I talk about is reality. What is real reality? What is a reality that we can agree on? Now, let's take that shared reality? Please, so and so.

with the shared reality. We start with the things we do agree on, we do have axiomic beliefs on that we agree exist in or as reality. And from there what we do is we then look at what John was saying, those extra suppositions, so those extra layers, So we agree on all of these things that exist that are real. This is our starting point. Now let's look at additional claims. Let's look at those additional claims, because what that does is it avoids falling back to this

pre supposition, well God gives you this. Well, if we're going if you're just going to insist God gives you that, then we don't need to have this conversation at all. That it's pointless because we're going to be talking about nothing for half an hour. Goodbye. But let's talk about the things we do agree on. Let's talk about the things we do agree are real and build from there.

That is, it's a really really important method and and I maybe condenting it too much to be like really understandable here because it's you know, I've I've really wrote a lot on this subject before, about subject to reality and all that kind of stuff. It's really really interesting, but it takes a lot to get through. But yeah, what we need to do in J Mike does it

in a really really good way as well. J Mike says, Look, you're saying that this is our starting point, that God is our starting point, but how are you getting to God? And that's essentially what I'm saying. It's the same thing, it's just phrased in a different way. We have a shared reality, we agree with, we agree on, we agree all these things in reality real Let's look at those

additional claims. And because what pre supposition that is do by definition is they pre suppose something exists, and they never ever show they're working out. They take it as axiomic. Now you need to show the working out, show your work. If you don't show your work, then there's no point in having the conversation. And it is so important to get that across. And it's why people like like dark Talkings or you mentioned earlier. I won't even entertain him.

I have no interest in talking to that person. Whatsoever, because and he has tried to talk to me, but I'll just simply won't talk to him because he doesn't want a conversation. What he wants to do is throw verbal garbage out and try and prove himself right. That's all he wants to do. I'm right, I'm right, I'm right, I'm right. Well, that's fantastic, Go and fucking suck on an orange. I'm not interested in that. I'm interested in people who want genuine conversations, who want to explore these

subjects genuinely. And you know, I've had great conversations. I've had conversations with people who have degrees in philosophy, you know, both online and my peers who are into this stuff, who are religious, and I've had fantastic, fantastic conversations because we're both interested in having an honest conversation. And if you want an honest conversation, whether you're a preet up or not, then we can talk about we can find

common ground. But when you're talking to kind of online internet personality prease ups, you know, don't even bother, that's not even worth having that conversation. From my mind, Please respond, and then I'll John jump in, and I say, I.

we agree on. Let's not talk about the axiology bit of it because it's just whatever, Let's talk about what we agree on. But I feel like, at least for me, at the point where someone's calling into one of these shows with presuppositional apologetics instead of some other thing, they don't want to have a conversation about that. They they want to have the Dark Dawkins. I'm right, I'm right, I'm right. And I feel like like instead of taking thirty minutes to try to go down this lane of well,

what do we agree on? What you know and then they're just like, oh, well, could you prove hard solidsism? No, we'll go suck an egg like why, Like, I guess it just feels like that thirty minute segment could be cut down to like a ten or even five minute segment of Okay, So like you have these actiums, I have these axioms. You just have an unproven axiom that

you are saying is essential to all thought. And any time I bring up any of the other axioms, you just say, you can't have that axiom without this axiom. I disagree, you disagree. We're not going to get anywhere.

you know these kinds of people were talking about. You know, they'll say, well, how do you know you're not a brain in a A I don't but but and this is vitally important you share your opinion. That opinion with me. You don't think we're a braining avt either. And I know this for a fact because if you genuinely believed you were a braining of art, you wouldn't spend time eating or drinking or having stupid philosophical conversations with an aspect of yourself on a made up internet that is

an aspect of yourself. So just fucking throw that out of the ballpark altogether. We don't need to talk about brain in vats because we're starting from a position, both of us that we exist. So let's talk about the reality that appears to be the case in which we exist.

That is where we're starting from. And if you're going to come with, well what about you know, if we're all brains in vats, cooled, wonderful, You know you're contradicting your own belief if you genuinely believe that by having a conversation with an aspect of yourself, you know, what's the point You're wasting your time. I don't exist, so it doesn't matter to me, John, Do you want to jump in?

But but that's because I know, I really value people that engage those types of arguments, and because then I can understand, you know, how to respond to those arguments or like why those arguments don't make sense or why they shouldn't make sense, and so like that just gives me the ability to actually understand, you know, why I'm not convinced by those arguments or why I should be

convinced by those arguments. So, I mean, that's where the value that I see it coming in at is the diving deep into the conversations, even with pre suppositionalists that might get you into a certain area of argumentation that a lot of people either are encountering and they need to know how to respond to it, or they haven't encountered it yet and they may need to know about

it in the future. I just feel like it's it's a great way to arm people that are watching your content because they genuinely want to understand, like why theists are wrong about these things, or why one side is wrong and the other side is right. So that's where I kind of focus my conversation, or at least the value of the conversation at And I do want.

you do not have. You have to have that axiom, And it's it's like I feel like, like, I agree, like learning to combat these people is sorry combat that liked that idea is important, But I feel like the I guess, for me, uh, the way I look at it, the best way to go about that would be, like, you know, you know, you shine the spotlight on what it is. It is just an extra axiom. It is playing tag. But you are always it. I'm never it. If you touch me, I touched you back, you didn't

feel it, but you're it. It's like, I'm not saying that that axiom is wrong.

them control the conversation. Say to them, look, we're going we're going to put this aside, and we're going to put this aside, and we're going to put this aside, so there's no point even going there. If we're going to have the conversation, we're going to have it honestly, and we're going to have it in on an even keel. And I think most genuine pre so genuine like academic presups, the people I tend to talk to one this stuff,

are absolutely fine with that. It's like I say, it's the internet celebrity ones that want to make a name for themselves by you know, taking down the atheists that on and fuck those guys anyway. Who cares what they think because I don't. And on that note, thanks Connor for your call. I am going to let you go. We do have other callers I'm going to take, but we do have another super chat. Did you do where

our we? Oh? We are getting there through six six six, A member for one year sent ten dollars and says, when does a human life logically begin at conception or at first breathing interesting question. Give the show a call next week and let's have the conversation. Jimmie Julia member six months, four ninety nine. Thank you, Jimmy says, Hey Richard and hey fat fuck with a pH. I apologize godless engineer. If people start calling you a do it please it says, please spell it with a pH. If

you do, in fact change your name, that would be sick. Heyl, Satan and Nero sent ten dollars and says Boltzmann Brain's total solidism or just part trick hypotheticals of their respective fields, the conclusions necessity that the logical foundations they are built upon are assumed and worthless. We are five out of ten for the superchat challenge people. If you want to see John challenge Jesus through his puppet, we need five more ten dollars superchats, just saying let's have a look

we have. I'm going to take Troy next. We do have two calls left. I'm going to try and get to both of them. So stay on the line, and Troy wants to know if the hello, to tell us what you want to talk about.

I understand what JW's. It's the governing body. They tell you what it is, and that's what it is. But where the Seventh day Adventists are technically a Protestant thing, and they're like the twelfth biggest Protestant faction in America. So where do they get the eschatology that, like, you know, me reading the Bible as a Protestant, I'm thinking Jesus never came into the apostles lifetimes that he said was going to so two thousand years later, I'm not really

holding my breath. Well, yeah, so it's this, It's going to be over.

and all this other stuff. So I don't know if it's just preparing or just like preparing them to think, oh, it could be anytime, it could be later this week, just like it's definitely portrayed as an immediate thing like in the Bible, And so I think that for their purposes, like always acting like it is upon them, like it could happen directly after dinner, it could happen later this week, it could happen next year. Like it just throws a

bit of uncertainty into the mix. And I feel like that's part of the whole fear mongering thing, trying to get people to fear it so that they you know, clean and hold on to the faith.

don't actually seems to have done any study whatsoever. One thing I see and challenge a lot, especially on that wonderful social media platform called TikTok is this which if you want, if it is like a kind of a shitty ladder rung above X, is you get this kind of this idea that you get all these videos made saying Jesus is coming and this is important part, Jesus is coming back soon. And I always ask the same question when I see that, what do you mean by soon?

Because when you're saying the word soon, you are talking as if you have a quantified period in mind and without exception when I have asked this question without exception. If I do get an answer, the answer is, well, we don't know the exact day and the time. We're told that we're not to know. So why the fuck are you using soon? Then? Why why are you using that word? Because that gives soon's very indication of a quantity, So we go on, please.

is there really? I mean, you have Seven day Adventists, you have Jova's Witnesses, you have some flavors of Pentecostal and some flavors of like these new charismatic uh you know, prophecy churches. Like how many times can you count the hits and not the missus? I mean, like how many times? I just don't understand. I wonder, I wonder if there was a Bible a verse in a chapter and verse

it's like, Yep, this is when it's gonna happen. Other than the whole I'll be back before you're dead thing that you said, Yeah.

about end time. So I mean it's literally like fear mongering this very religious base, trying to convince them that, you know, they are going to be experiencing the end times and they either are grifting or they're just totally believing it, so like they truly believe in this, They truly believe that the end times are coming, and so they're doing their best to like warn people. But at the same time, like I get what you're saying, like how many times can you actually expect them to buy

this whole end times or coming thing? And I think that it's as long as people are holding on to this idea of the end times coming or the end of the world coming, which seems to have been forever that people have held onto these kinds of things, I think they will continue to hold onto those things.

blood moon, the moon turn into blood. And you see these kind of and for the Christians who believe this who are watching now and need to spell this out for you, you know, you see these posts put upen these you know, these sinks said that the moon is turning to blood exactly as it was prophecied in the Bible. Let me spell out to you what is actually happening. Okay, so the moon isn't turning to blood in small areas

of the moon. They have found that oxydization takes place in very very small areas, So it appears that small areas on the moon are turning red. That's it. That's what the scientists have actually found. So if you see anybody saying that scientists have confirmed that the moon is turning to blood. Please dismiss them out of hand. Sorry, Troy, go on.

have had some great calls. I think we've got some more superchats and the superchat progress it's ten out of ten. So I will be waiting for Godless engineer while while he prepares himself to channel Jesus through his puppet. I'm going to read out the rest of these superchats some kind of Dickay a member for two months and one of our wonderful hosts no less tender dollars, saying Hayley

Mary Annette, bring on puppet Jesus king off strings. David Hackso member for six months has sent us fourteen or nine dollars. What CA mean? I don't know what that means. It's a CAA fourteen or nine. I don't know if that's a normal Canadian. I've got it. See this brain's not as slow as it first appears. Canadian dollars fourteen or nine, Thank you very much. I don't know the difference between them and American money, so it's all the

same to me. We need three more superchats people, and David Axo, helping himself out no less a member of six months, sends another Canadian dollars fourteen oh nine, saying could you imagine being a lifelong Christian and then die suddenly without asking for forgiveness and spending eternity in hell while Jeffrey Doma is in heaven? And another super chat from David Hackso, Thank you very much. David Hackso sent another fourteen or nine Canadian and say Jesus gonna lick

you with his sword tongue. Revelations nineteen fifteen. I'm sold Miranda Nsburger member for six months and twenty dollars, and says every time someone calculates the date of the rapture, God says me. Damn it, those little shits keep figuring out the day and the hour. I'm going to have to reschedule the rapture again, and I already booked the trumpeters. Thank you all for your superchats. I am going to pass it over to Godless engineer who is going to channel Jesus Sus poppet.

who are appreciative of what we do. And you know, I'm really do enjoy when you guys call in, when you listen to the show week after week, and you know you take on board the conversations that we're having and you put them into practice in your own lives and you give us a call to tell us how that's going. I love that shit, so please please do it. Don't feel put off by calling. Don't think arm an atheist.

I haven't really got anything to say. If you have gained something from watching the show, please do feel free to give us a call and let us know. Do appreciate those calls. If you do believe, if you're Muslims, if it is Lamists, you know we weren't defending you earlier. You are wrong. God doesn't exist. However, nobody has the right to be abusive towards you, to denigrate you just because of that aspect of your personality. You know you

are welcome here too. Religious people are welcome in this community. Let's have good conversations. We are here for everybody. And on that note, we don't hate you. We're just not convinced. We want the truth. So watch Truth Wanted live Friday at seven pm Central. Visit tiny dot cc slash y t tw and call into the show at five one two four two, or connect to the show online at tiny dot cc slash call tw