Awesome atheist advert taken out in The South Bend Tribune

Awesome atheist advert taken out in The South Bend Tribune December 17, 2014

This is the advert that someone I know took out in the newspaper, The South Bend Tribune,which is in South Bend, Indiana. It is the home of Notre Dame University, a Catholic stronghold.

It has certainly been well received by local skeptics, though it is a shame that no Catholics from the University have so far reacted. It is good to see atheist activism takes on many guises. Changing people’s minds can be horses for courses.

142217 JHaydon_Southbend Trib_Ad2_final


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Pingback: Awesome atheist advert taken out in Indiana new...()

  • D Rizdek

    It is interesting how apologists have risen to the challenge of defending/explaining the atrocities attributed to the god of the OT. Craig does, many websites do and books have been written. At most it places the morality of their god squarely in the center of the barbaric culture of the day. They seem to happily find solace in the idea that god advised the Israelites to wipe out enemies brutally and completely because apparently anything becomes right if god told ’em to.

    And they wonder why atheists cringe when they claim their god (which in our opinion is something they created in their minds) is the objective source of all morality and when this god gives folks ideas to do things, even what appear to be atrocities, it becomes morally necessary and morally superior to do it.

    I also find it interesting that with the Midianites, the reason their god instructs them to wipe them out is because the horny Israelite men were “lured” by the Midianite women. So they killed them NOT out of self defense but simply out of revenge. Numbers 31: 1-2 ” The Lord said to Moses, 2 ‘Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people.’” And there are websites (http://www.enduringword.com/commentaries/0431.htm) that specifically call this revenge a good thing…because it becomes a good thing when ordered by god…again, it is cringeworthy that when their god tells them to do something, even take revenge in a brutal way, it becomes a good thing. But that is the outcome of believing a god is the objective basis for morality. They can no longer extract themselves from the web of deceit and are compelled to call atrocities good…essentially call evil good.

    • It is interesting, though, that when Craig is questioned on this in debate, other than deferring to Copan’s book, he often claims, “Well, the first thing that could go is inerrancy in the OT” such that he admits that you could quite easily drop the notion that the recorded events in the OT are 100% accurate. Of course, he never goes as far as to admit that HE would drop that, because he would lose a bunch of followers. He covers all bases without committing explicitly to them all.

      • D Rizdek

        The thing I note is that IF the Christian accepts the OT as part of the holy scriptures giving us guidance on how to deal with others…especially those who believe in other gods or displease god, they begin to have similarities with Islam. Their “out” is that Jesus at times talked of treating others with kindness…but Jesus, whoever they made him out to be apparently felt the OT was reliable. So it would seem that whatever Jesus preached, he did not repudiate the stories in the OT.

  • Marcus Ashes

    It makes more sense to say god has complete freedom to do what he wants be it good and evil because a god who can only do good is limited and would just be a being that is more powerful than us but not necessarily infinitely capable. I mean there is only so much good you can do in a situation before you run out of ideas logically. Besides if god makes the most perfect decision in every situation then there can only be one decision that is most perfect. Although then what does it mean to say it is infinitely perfect when it is being applied in a finite context? Especially when considering that god wont interfere with humans in modern times. What is good if it is of no benefit to anyone? Look at the OT. God kills people mostly and if he’s not doing that he’s interacting in limited and unimaginative ways like talking to people and showing off dangerously and unhelpfully, not respecting the free will of people. I mean he can appear as a burning bush and talk but to me this is neutral behaviour at best because it compromises free will and does not improve moses’ situation. For instance god could have given moses supernatural abilities like jesus and superhuman strength. Or appeared to the pharaoh as well. You could argue that the pharaoh would dismiss it but then moses didn’t so why should the pharaoh. Plus if god can’t convince someone of his existence why bother appearing at all if that is his goal?

  • Pingback: Divine Hate: Fellow Feather’s Original Book | A Tippling Philosopher()