Send us a text

What happens when we peel back the layers of American mythology to examine the true foundations of our nation? Mark Charles, author of "Unsettling Truths" and a dual citizen of the United States and the Navajo Nation, joins us for a profound conversation that challenges conventional narratives about American history.

Charles takes us on a journey through the Doctrine of Discovery—a series of papal edicts declaring that lands not ruled by European Christian men were essentially "empty" and available for claiming. This doctrine didn't just enable colonization; it became embedded in America's founding documents and continues to influence legal decisions today. From the Constitution's "We the People" that originally meant only white landowning men, to the 13th Amendment that merely redefined slavery rather than abolishing it, our nation's framework contains contradictions we've never properly addressed.

The conversation takes a surprising turn as Charles examines Abraham Lincoln's legacy, revealing how America's celebrated president orchestrated the ethnic cleansing of Native peoples along the transcontinental railroad routes while simultaneously calling for national days of thanksgiving. These historical truths are difficult to confront, which is why Charles introduces us to the concept of historical trauma—affecting both victims of historical injustice and those who have perpetrated or benefited from it.

What makes this episode truly transformative is Charles' vision for moving forward. Rather than reconciliation, which implies restoring a harmony that never existed, he advocates for conciliation—creating a healthy relationship for the first time. By shifting our focus from power (the ability to act) to authority (the permission to act), we might begin to heal wounds that have festered for centuries. As Charles poignantly puts it through his grandmother metaphor, sometimes the most revolutionary act is simply acknowledging whose house we're in.

Whether you're a history buff, social justice advocate, or simply someone trying to make sense of America's complex identity, this conversation offers insights that will challenge your understanding and potentially transform how you see your place in our national story.

Learn more about Mark Charles here: https://wirelesshogan.com/

Send us a text

"Finding yourself is a lie perpetrated by our consumerist culture." With this provocative statement, two friends – a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist – launch into a fascinating exploration of identity, authenticity, and the forces that shape our understanding of self.

The conversation challenges a concept many of us take for granted: that somewhere within us exists a "true self" waiting to be discovered. But what if this idea is merely a clever marketing strategy? The friends examine how advertising campaigns reduce us to avatars and sell us identities through products – from cars marketed not for their features but for the lifestyle they represent, to the cultural trope of abandoning responsibility to "follow your passion."

As they navigate their different perspectives, they question whether our ancestors even needed to "find themselves." In traditional communities, identity was intrinsically tied to one's role in the collective – no soul-searching required. Has our individualistic society created a vacuum that marketers eagerly fill with promises of self-fulfillment through consumption?

Drawing on Carl Jung's concept of individuation and Jordan Peterson's emphasis on responsibility as the source of meaning, they differentiate between authentic self-discovery and its commercialized counterfeit. True fulfillment, they suggest, might come not from hedonistic pleasure but from shouldering responsibility and finding purpose within community.

By the conversation's end, they reach surprising common ground: while there may be truth to the concept of an authentic self, our consumerist culture has hijacked this natural human journey. The most meaningful expression of identity might come not from what we consume but from what we contribute.

Tune in to this thought-provoking episode that will have you questioning the narratives about identity you've absorbed without realizing it. Share with friends who enjoy conversations that challenge conventional wisdom and explore the deeper currents shaping our culture and consciousness.

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Send us a text

Ever wondered why building communities often leads to deeper divisions? In this special follow-up to our conversation with Peter Rollins, we explore a radical alternative to traditional community-building that might change how you think about human connection forever.

Rollins draws a crucial distinction between three forms of social bonds. Communities form around shared identities, beliefs, and especially shared enemies—inherently creating insiders and outsiders. The commons are spaces where different people mix freely, but these public spaces are diminishing in our society. Most provocatively, Rollins introduces the concept of communion—a social bond formed when we acknowledge our shared status as outsiders, connecting through our universal human experience of alienation rather than through shared beliefs or enemies.

"What makes communion different from community is that it is also forged on lack, on some impossibility, but it is not externalized on a scapegoat," Rollins explains. Instead, we recognize the lack within ourselves and find connection through this shared vulnerability. Using examples from Alcoholics Anonymous to family therapy, he demonstrates how this shift from blaming external forces to acknowledging our own implication in our struggles creates the possibility for genuine connection across deep differences.

For those seeking practical applications, Rollins suggests creating "Death of God Supper Clubs"—circle gatherings where people can openly acknowledge their outsider status and speak authentically. Unlike typical community groups organized around shared beliefs, these spaces allow us to encounter each other as "creatures of desire, creatures of longing, creatures of yearning, creatures who suffer."

Support Peter Rollins on Patreon to enable more of this thought-provoking work, and follow Living on Common Ground wherever you listen to podcasts. Share with friends—the more people living on common ground, the better our world will be.

https://www.patreon.com/c/peterrollins/posts

Theme Music Provided by: © 2025 Noah Heldman

Send us a text

"I have no idea what I'm talking about and I don't mind that," admits theologian Pete Enns in this refreshingly honest conversation about faith beyond certainty. This realization brought him not panic or dread, but profound relief—a sentiment that has guided his work helping others navigate their spiritual journeys.

Pete shares how embracing uncertainty transformed his relationship with Christianity, moving from rigid certainty to authentic questioning. As an academic expert in biblical studies, his willingness to acknowledge mystery carries unique weight. We explore his books including "The Sin of Certainty" and "How the Bible Actually Works," which have provided language and permission for countless believers struggling with faith communities that demand unwavering certainty.

The conversation takes a fascinating turn as we examine Christianity's counterintuitive foundations. "How did this crazy story ever catch on?" Pete wonders about a religion centered on a crucified messiah—a symbol not just of death but profound shame in ancient culture. This absurdity becomes one of his most compelling reasons for remaining within the tradition, seeing in it something authentically transcendent rather than merely manufactured.

Pete reflects on finding healing communities where questions are welcomed rather than feared, describing how many people come to "lick their wounds" before continuing their spiritual journeys. He contrasts this approach with religious environments that demand intellectual conformity, arguing that authentic faith must honor experience alongside scripture and tradition.

Throughout our discussion, baseball metaphors (despite our conflicting team loyalties), quantum physics, and reflections on mysticism weave together into a compelling case for faith that "honors your head without living in it." Pete's upcoming project exploring "being Christian after Christianity" promises to further develop these themes of mystery, experience, and authenticity.

Whether you're questioning your faith, healing from religious trauma, or simply curious about approaching spirituality with intellectual honesty, this conversation offers refreshing perspectives on finding common ground across theological differences. Subscribe now and join our community seeking meaningful dialogue in divided times.

https://substack.com/@peteenns?utm_source=global-search

Send us a text

Dive into a fascinating exploration of applied postmodernism with hosts who bring contrasting worldviews to the conversation. This episode tackles the provocative idea that selectively applying postmodern principles amounts to "cheating" in philosophical discourse.

The conversation begins by unpacking postmodernism itself – a philosophical approach questioning whether objective reality can truly be known. While the hosts acknowledge value in considering multiple perspectives, they challenge the increasingly common practice of applying relativistic thinking only when convenient. Through engaging examples and thoughtful analysis, they examine how terms like "privilege" and "lived experience" have entered everyday language since 2015, often deployed inconsistently.

A highlight of the discussion centers around the "Mott and Bailey" fallacy – when someone makes a controversial claim but retreats to more defensible territory when challenged. This rhetorical tactic appears frequently in discussions about critical theory, allowing people to make broad statements but avoid defending them by shifting to easier positions.

The conversation takes a fascinating turn when exploring morality. Can we truly speak of "good" and "bad" in a relativistic framework? One host suggests replacing these binary concepts with "constructive" versus "destructive" or whether actions "build up" or "tear down" others. Through examples ranging from helping a friend with unhealthy eating habits to appropriate contexts for profanity, they demonstrate how nuance matters in ethical considerations.

Whatever your philosophical leanings, you'll appreciate the hosts' commitment to intellectual honesty and their final agreement that consistency matters. Whether embracing or rejecting postmodernism, applying principles selectively undermines the integrity of any worldview. Subscribe now for more thought-provoking conversations that bridge divides and find common ground.

Send us a text

Does it feel like every part of your life is divided? Every scenario? Every environment? Your church, your school, your work, your friends. Left, right. Conservative, liberal. Religious, secular. From parenting styles to school choice, denominational choice to governing preference, it seems you're always being asked to take a side.

This is a conversation between a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist who happen to be great friends. Welcome to Living on Common Ground.

Send us a text

Are Americans having fewer children because we're too poor—or because we're too wealthy? This provocative question launches our exploration into plummeting birth rates and changing family structures across America and other developed nations.

When fertility rates drop below replacement level, what does it mean for our future? We dive into recent statistics showing U.S. birth rates hitting historic lows (fewer than 1.6 children per woman) while challenging conventional narratives about why this is happening. Contrary to popular belief, data consistently shows that more affluent societies have fewer children—not the other way around.

We examine how the rise of individualism has fundamentally altered family formation patterns. Where multi-generational households once provided built-in support systems for young parents, modern couples often feel they must establish themselves independently before starting families. This cultural shift has removed traditional safety nets and created logical incentives to delay parenthood.

The conversation takes a personal turn as we reflect on our own family experiences—one from a close-knit "tribal" background where cousins, aunts, uncles, and grandparents provided a rich support network, the other with a more typical modern American family structure. These personal stories illuminate how different family configurations shape our perspectives on when and how to have children.

Whether you're wrestling with family planning decisions or simply curious about the demographic forces shaping our society, this thoughtful discussion offers valuable perspective on one of the most consequential choices we make—both individually and collectively.

Listen now to find your own place in this important conversation about how we build families in modern America, and what we might be losing—or gaining—along the way.

Send us a text

When Congressional hearings on UFOs feature military personnel claiming encounters with non-human technology, a profound question emerges: how would confirmation of intelligent alien life change religious beliefs? In this thought-provoking episode, a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist find surprising common ground as they explore the resilience of faith in the face of paradigm-shifting discoveries.

The journey begins with a candid confession about social media addiction, revealing how certain behaviors control us despite our conscious rejection of them—setting up the deeper question of whether we choose our beliefs or if they're somehow hardwired. Could this same dynamic apply to our fundamental worldviews?

Delving into science fiction and theological speculation, the hosts consider how different religious traditions might respond to extraterrestrial contact. While biblical literalists might struggle to reconcile Genesis with alien life, both hosts agree that religiosity itself would likely transform rather than disappear. "I think religiosity is at the core of what it means to be human," the atheist host surprisingly asserts.

Most fascinating is their exploration of beliefs so fundamental we don't even recognize them as beliefs—like our concept of "human rights." What happens when beings deserving moral consideration aren't human? This question forces us to examine assumptions about personhood and dignity that underpin modern ethical frameworks but remain largely unexamined until challenged by the truly alien.

Whether you identify as religious, spiritual-but-not-religious, or firmly secular, this conversation challenges you to examine your own unquestioned assumptions about reality. What beliefs might you hold that are so deeply embedded you don't even recognize them as beliefs? And how might those beliefs adapt when confronted with the truly unexpected?

Follow Living on Common Ground wherever you get your podcasts and join two friends from opposite ends of the belief spectrum as they demonstrate how thoughtful dialogue can bridge seemingly unbridgeable divides.