Send us a text

Feeling cornered by purity tests and tribal litmus checks? We’ve been there. As a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist who happen to be close friends, we trade quick outrage for slow curiosity and ask a tougher question: are we building bridges or policing borders? From social media habits to Stoic clarity, we unpack how certainty hardens into fundamentalism and how to interrupt that slide before it fractures our families, feeds, and neighborhoods.

We start with small, practical habits that shift conversations: a simple list of guardrails to use before posting online. Is this building understanding or reinforcing contempt? Would I say it to someone’s face because it’s right, not just brave? Am I treating people as complex or as caricatures? What emotion am I trying to spark—compassion or outrage—and what do I really hope to gain? These prompts turn performative signaling into meaningful dialogue and help detox your timeline without losing your voice.

Zooming out, we explore the radical flank effect, pluralistic ignorance, and the way groups punish 90 percent agreement as betrayal. Then we reach back to the early environmental movement as a blueprint for coalition: hunters, scientists, clergy, executives, hippies, and suburban parents stood shoulder to shoulder because polluted rivers didn’t ask for party IDs. Cooperation came before coherence, and progress followed. That big-tent energy can return if we stop treating neighbors as proxies for distant enemies and start rewarding nuance over noise.

Along the way, we share personal confessions about the dopamine loops of snark and the pride of being the “different one,” then offer practical ways to replace those hits with longer-lasting wins: clearer thinking, repaired ties, and a wider common ground. If you’re ready to trade certainty for curiosity and contempt for understanding, you’ll leave with language, tools, and hope for the next hard conversation.

If this resonates, follow the show, share it with a friend who loves a good debate done well, and leave a review telling us which guardrail you’ll try this week.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

What if a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist could argue hard topics, laugh at themselves, and keep choosing friendship? That’s the spirit of this conversation as we map common ground without sanding off our edges—tackling public education, healthcare, and the blurry line between rights and services.

We start by calling out how split life feels and then test our labels. Music sparks a detour to Ayn Rand, Objectivism, and why compatibilism appeals to people who dislike rigid binaries. From there we build a case for a limited social floor: tax-funded public education as a baseline that raises opportunity and reduces chaos, with clear guardrails to avoid mission creep. We face the tradeoffs head-on—property tax stability vs sales tax fairness, indoctrination fears vs the costs of ignorance—and keep the focus on equality of opportunity over equality of outcome.

Healthcare gets the same blueprint: a minimum viable layer that covers preventive care and urgent needs without promising the cutting edge to all. We wrestle with the claim that “a right cannot require someone else’s labor,” exploring what society should guarantee, what markets should deliver, and how to be honest about costs. The debate widens to central planning, zoning, and the reality that dense cities need coordination even as we guard against bureaucratic creep. Along the way we poke at shifting labels—how yesterday’s revolutionary becomes today’s institution—and admit where each of us would freeze or push change.

If you crave smart, good-faith disagreement that still lands on shared principles, you’ll feel at home here. Hit play, subscribe for more thoughtful clashes, and tell us: what single baseline—education, healthcare, or something else—should every society guarantee? Your take might shape our next episode.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

Division feels baked into everything—work, faith, politics, even friendships—yet the best conversations still start on shared ground. We sit down as a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist, grateful for a friendship that doesn’t need uniformity, and we follow a thread from holiday calm to the future of intelligence. Along the way, we ask hard questions about survival, connection, and what it really takes for people and systems to flourish.

We begin with the quiet grace of Thanksgiving and the relief of a season that invites rest. That breathing room leads into creativity—new books, live events, and the surprising ways AI can help shape structure and clarity without hijacking voice. Then the stakes rise: we dissect a stress test where an AI chose blackmail to avoid shutdown, and we wrestle with the paperclip thought experiment. Why does a system without feelings fight to persist? Nature offers a clue. From single cells to social groups, survival emerges before sentiment. But without regard for the wider web, survival turns destructive. Cancer is the parable: maximize the self, kill the host.

This is where science, ethics, and theology meet. Call it sin, narrow optimization, or a blocked flow of grace—the pattern is the same. Intelligence needs context, power needs limits, and purpose must be bigger than the self. We draw lessons from chimp coalitions that check tyranny, from Roman memento mori that kept power grounded, and from the Fermi paradox that warns how civilizations can outgrow their wisdom. The question becomes practical: how do we design tools, communities, and habits that reward interdependence, not just control?

By the end, we land on gratitude as more than a feeling: it’s architecture for flourishing. Build systems that protect the conditions that protect us. Use AI to extend attention, not replace it. Keep unlikely friendships alive as living proof that shared ground is possible. If that resonates, tap follow, share this conversation with a friend, and leave a review telling us what you’d teach AI first. Your voice helps more people find common ground.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

When every headline demands a side, what if we started with a question? We sit down as a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist to explore how creation stories frame our deepest assumptions about chaos, order, and the feminine. From Genesis’ hovering spirit over the deep to the Babylonian Enuma Elish’s splitting of Tiamat, we trace how cultures turn raw potential into a livable world—and how those choices shape what we call sacred.

We dig into wisdom literature where Sophia stands at the crossroads, calling out as a feminine presence at creation, and we ask whether later tradition muted that voice. Along the way we unpack Israel’s movement from polytheism around them to henotheism and finally monotheism, probing the famous warning against offerings to the “Queen of Heaven.” Is that a broad rejection of rival cults or a targeted push against feminine divinity? We don’t settle for easy answers. We test each other’s assumptions, connect myth to psychology, and debate whether religion should explain the unknown or protect the space where wonder still breathes.

If you care about theology, mythology, philosophy, or simply how to argue well without losing a friend, this conversation is a map. Expect spirited debate on logos and chaos, thoughtful comparisons of ancient texts, and practical takeaways for making room for mystery in a hyper-rational age. Subscribe, share with someone who sees the world differently than you do, and leave a review telling us: where do you find common ground between order and the unknown?

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

Feeling pulled to choose a side in every room you enter? We bring a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist to the same table to ask a harder question: if life doesn’t come preloaded with meaning, what should we build together?

We start by untangling nihilism from its stereotypes. Passive nihilism stares into the void and shrugs; active nihilism treats the blank space as a canvas. From that lens, we revisit Joseph Campbell, Nietzsche’s much-misread “God is dead,” and the cultural panic around moral relativism. Along the way, we connect these ideas to real life: how nihilism once felt like a relief from perfectionism, how parenting teenagers turns abstract meaning into daily practice, and why empathy has become a modern civic baseline that few can publicly reject.

The conversation widens and deepens. We test the limits of logic and faith in debates like “something from nothing,” admit where reasoning runs out, and reflect on the social pressure to perform certainty. We examine evolution, entropy, and the stubborn pattern of life to persist—not as proof of a creed, but as context for how values might emerge. Then we get practical about knowing: defend epistemic rigor, keep Chesterton’s fences, and be cautious when “different ways of knowing” are used to bulldoze standards that keep planes in the air and bridges standing.

By the end, our common ground is simple and demanding: choose active meaning. If objective foundations remain contested, we can still act with courage, compassion, honesty, and care—especially for those watching us learn in public. Subscribe, share with a friend who loves a good disagreement, and leave a review with your take: where do you find meaning when certainty runs out?

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

Feeling squeezed into a corner by every conversation? We push back with a frank, funny, and steady exchange between a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist who’ve made a promise: stay friends, stay curious, and keep the hard questions on the table. Together we take on the urge to be right, the fear of feeling like a fool, and the hidden role ego plays when debates turn into dead ends.

We dig into whether admitting “I might be wrong” weakens belief or actually makes it more resilient. From there, the path winds through objective truth, free will, and the slippery slope of infinite regress—without losing sight of real life. You’ll hear how we use steelmanning to argue better, why certainty often sounds like contempt, and where boundaries belong when a thinker you respect starts attacking your corner. A set of original parables—the Three Witnesses—brings morality into focus with a tough case: a stolen credit card used for diapers, three lenses on justice, and the tension between empathy and consequences.

By the end, we land on a workable stance: objective truth may exist, but none of us can stand outside our own perspective to hold it fully. That simple shift cools the room, opens space for better questions, and keeps respect alive across deep differences. If you’re hungry for conversations that honor values without surrendering nuance—on faith, skepticism, ethics, and how to live together—you’ll feel at home here.

If this resonates, follow the show, share it with a friend who thinks differently, and leave a quick review to help more people find common ground. Your voice shapes where we go next.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

Ever catch yourself deciding that someone’s chewing or phone volume is a moral failure? We start there—small frictions that expose big assumptions—and climb toward the larger question: how do we live together with sharp differences, without losing honesty or hope? As a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist, we test the edges of our friendship by trading judgments for curiosity, and certainty for conviction.

Jeff shares the heart of several writing projects, including Walking on Common Ground, The Bible I Thought I Knew, and a provocative new outline exploring God as energy. We trace a path from fundamentalism to a Midrash-like, nonliteral reading of scripture, where Jesus and Paul model imaginative engagement rather than proof-text combat. Along the way, we examine the live tension between science and faith: physics, geology, and evolutionary biology tell us how the world works, while theology can still ask why it matters. Instead of retreat, we look for integration—where meaning doesn’t fight mechanism.

The conversation turns candid on free will, with Sam Harris’s determinism in the mix and a pragmatic response: even if choice is constrained, life demands we act as if responsibility is real. That stance anchors our pivot into virtues, flourishing, and the practical shape of prayer and community. What if salvation is integration, not transaction? What if worship is attunement to what is true, beautiful, and just? And what if “God as energy” helps us name the ground of being that underwrites moral life without forcing a rigid metaphysics?

Expect a lively mix of humor, self-critique, theology, and philosophy—plus some nineties worship nostalgia and plans for an upcoming live event. Subscribe, share with a friend who loves good-faith debate, and leave a review with one question you want us to tackle next.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

Feeling tugged to take a side on everything? We zoom out from the outrage to ask a harder question: what actually matters enough to shape your day, your community, and your character. Starting with the government shutdown, we separate optics from impact—what really happens when federal spending pauses, why retroactive pay masks immediate pain for contractors, and how uncertainty moves markets more than ideology. It’s not financial doom, but it is a strain on real people who live invoice to invoice.

From there we trade the blame reel for first principles. Keynesian stimulus vs Austrian restraint isn’t just team sport; it’s a window into how much of the economy depends on government spending and why stalled budgets ripple through local life. But instead of sinking into cynicism, we pivot to a pragmatic lens: use stoic philosophy as a filter for meaning. Focus on what you control. Practice courage, temperance, wisdom, and justice. Treat headlines as indifferents unless you’re ready to act. If a story matters, make it matter locally—help a neighbor, support a small business waiting on checks, bring dinner to a new parent, sit with a family in hospice.

We also wrestle with the value of history. One of us sees it as prologue that clarifies who we are now; the other asks how it changes today’s choices. Together we sketch a path back to small-community agency—fewer distractions, clearer roles, deeper ties. Sports and shows can stay, but rank them behind relationships. Politics can stay, but only if it leads to service. Our friendship—a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist—works because the person across the table matters more than the spectacle on the screen. That’s the common ground we’re building: less noise, more neighbor; fewer hot takes, more honest work.

If this resonates, follow the show, share it with a friend who’s tired of the outrage treadmill, and leave a review with the one value you’ll practice this week. Your voice helps others find the signal in the noise.

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com