Can you prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist?

[BNR32FAN]

It's that time of year again! Merry Christmas, one and all.

In my experience of debating Christians - stretching back over a good few years - I have often encountered the argument (either stated directly indirectly) that I have to disprove God's existence in order to maintain my atheist stance. As in, "Can you prove that God doesn't exist? No? Then how can you say you're an atheist?"

In this festive season, I think it's worth revisiting the character of Father Christmas, and considering what he has to teach us.

So here's my question. Can you prove that Santa Claus does not exist?
And as a follow-up: if you can't disprove his existence, is it therefore logical of me to maintain my belief that he does exist?

(Disclaimer - for the purposes of this thread only, I shall be a believer in Santa Claus).

I think these two ideas are not entirely the same because while we do have inconclusive evidence of God’s existence we don’t have any evidence of Saint Nicolas’ existence in this present time. We have evidence of his existence in the past but not evidence that he still exists today and we’ve never had any actual evidence of him riding a flying sleigh pulled by reindeer or entering houses through a chimney delivering gifts on Christmas Day. So I think this comparison doesn’t quite match the situation in the debate of God’s existence.

 

[cvanwey]

we do have inconclusive evidence of God’s existence

Such as?

We have evidence of his existence in the past but not evidence that he still exists today

Couldn't the same case be made, by a deist, about god?

and we’ve never had any actual evidence of him riding a flying sleigh pulled by reindeer or entering houses through a chimney delivering gifts on Christmas Day.

What evidence exists to support the 'miraculous' claims, for which you believe?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Such as?



Couldn't the same case be made, by a deist, about god?



What evidence exists to support the 'miraculous' claims, for which you believe?

Intelligent design is evidence supporting the existence of God.

 

[cvanwey]

Intelligent design is evidence supporting the existence of God.

You seemed to have side-stepped some of your own stuff said, after some further inquiry...

Couldn't the exact same case be made, by any run-o-da-mill deist? (i.e.) "We were 'created' by something that maybe no longer exists today"

What evidence exists to support the 'miraculous' claims, for which you believe? "I would assume or imagine you believe the miraculous claims, as presented from your believed Holy Book". Above and beyond this ancient second-hand and re-translated Book of claims itself, how are your beliefs in these claims more substantiated than any other claims of the miraculous?

And please elaborate on "intelligent design" a bit? To just make this blanket statement does not necessarily steer us in any one given direction.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Couldn't the exact same case be made, by any run-o-da-mill deist? (i.e.) "We were 'created' by something that maybe no longer exists today"

This wasn’t a topic in the OP and seems irrelevant to the discussion. I never said I can prove anything. I simply said there’s evidence to support God’s existence. Evidence and proof are two entirely different things.

 

[BNR32FAN]

What evidence exists to support the 'miraculous' claims, for which you believe? "I would assume or imagine you believe the miraculous claims, as presented from your believed Holy Book". Above and beyond this ancient second-hand and re-translated Book of claims itself, how are your beliefs in these claims more substantiated than any other claims of the miraculous?

Well I’ve had many first hand experiences but by far the most significant experience was when I was at a trampoline park with my family and I was playing in a ball pit with my daughter when my wedding ring flew off my finger into the ball pit. The pit was about 20’x30’ and about waist deep. It was impossible to see the bottom of the pit so I had to comb the bottom with my hands sliding them on the floor back & forth scanning the floor with my hands. I did this for about 45 minutes and found a cell phone and another ring which I gave to the attendant. After about 45 minutes of searching my arms were getting sore and my wife & kids were hungry so I went & ordered a pizza and we sat down & ate. After eating I prayed and asked the Lord to please help me find my wedding ring. When I went back in the ball pit as soon as my hand touched the floor my ring was right in the center of my hand. I didn’t have to slide it or anything. I know this isn’t convincing to you and I don’t expect it to be, but it is just one of the many experiences I’ve encountered that was very convincing to me. I could’ve placed my hand in over a thousand different places in that ball pit but I placed it where it was exactly in the middle of my hand as soon as it touched the floor and my heart soared knowing that God had not only heard my prayer but He granted me a personal miracle just to strengthen my faith. So I’ll praise him forever.

And please elaborate on "intelligent design" a bit? To just make this blanket statement does not necessarily steer us in any one given direction.

I think intelligent design pretty much speaks for itself. Creation is the result of an intelligent being’s involvement not simply by random chance.

 

[cvanwey]

This wasn’t a topic in the OP and seems irrelevant to the discussion. I never said I can prove anything. I simply said there’s evidence to support God’s existence. Evidence and proof are two entirely different things.

The title asks if you can prove that Santa Claus does not exist. Your initial post #121 stated:

"I think these two ideas are not entirely the same because while we do have inconclusive evidence of God’s existence we don’t have any evidence of Saint Nicolas’ existence in this present time."

I say we have just as much 'evidence' for St. Nicolas, as we do for the claims of Jesus.

- They both existed in the past? (check)
- They are both claimed to do the impossible (check)
- We cannot actually prove that either both exist or do not exist today (check)
- Countless miraculous claims have been made about both (check)

Assuming we can agree up to here, let us proceed...

In post #121, you also said "We have evidence of his existence in the past but not evidence that he still exists today".

Well, this seems to hold true for anyone, after they die. So I guess your above statement doesn't really lead us anywhere further, thus far... And your argument can be just as well supported for deism alone, for which you do not subscribe - (based upon your avatar).

You then stated "we’ve never had any actual evidence of him riding a flying sleigh pulled by reindeer or entering houses through a chimney delivering gifts on Christmas Day."

Do we have better evidence of any other said claims of the miraculous?

You then said "So I think this comparison doesn’t quite match the situation in the debate of God’s existence."

Care to retract what you said now? Maybe we can start with the topic of 'intelligent design'?.?.?.?.?.?.?.?.? You know, the short response you gave me, from the jump

 

[cvanwey]

I know this isn’t convincing

Is this your best reason? If not, can you provide the best one?

Creation is the result of an intelligent being’s involvement not simply by random chance.

Who created this intelligent Being? Or, are we going to jump straight to special pleading?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Countless miraculous claims have been made about both (check)

What’s your source pertaining to these miraculous claims regarding Saint Nicolas? Keep in mind that children’s fictional books don’t count as evidence supporting the claims typically associated with Saint Nick.

 

[cvanwey]

What’s your source pertaining to these miraculous claims regarding Saint Nicolas? Keep in mind that children’s fictional books don’t count as evidence supporting the claims typically associated with Saint Nick.

I responded with quite a lot. I hope this is not your only reply

And to answer your question, it's the same as yours given, about the ring.... Anecdotal.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I say we have just as much 'evidence' for St. Nicolas, as we do for the claims of Jesus.

- They both existed in the past? (check)
- They are both claimed to do the impossible (check)
- We cannot actually prove that either both exist or do not exist today (check)
- Countless miraculous claims have been made about both (check)

Assuming we can agree up to here, let us proceed...

Your comparing fictional children’s stories to actual eyewitness accounts documented in the Bible dating from 1400BC (3,400 years ago) to 65 AD (roughly 2,000 years ago) giving us a time span of roughly 3,500 years with multiple authors and eyewitness testimonies. So your basically comparing peaches to schnauzberries. One is completely fictional while the other is actually plausible.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Is this your best reason? If not, can you provide the best one?

No, intelligent design is my original reason. This particular event just strengthened what I already knew and it wasn’t intended to be sufficient evidence for you, just for me and other believers.

Who created this intelligent Being? Or, are we going to jump straight to special pleading?

No one created God but I’m sure you already knew that.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I responded with quite a lot. I hope this is not your only reply

And to answer your question, it's the same as yours given, about the ring.... Anecdotal.

No, I just wanted to address this portion separately. I responded on the other comments you made as well. So your source for Saint Nick’s “miraculous claims”?

 

[cvanwey]

Your comparing fictional children’s stories to actual eyewitness accounts documented in the Bible dating from 1400BC (3,400 years ago) to 65 AD (roughly 2,000 years ago) giving us a time span of roughly 3,500 years with multiple authors and eyewitness testimonies. So your basically comparing peaches to schnauzberries. One is completely fictional while the other is actually plausible.

Though what you just asserted may take much more to unpack, verses what I first provide here in this response, I'll try to start light...

Let's assume we agree about the following, all mundane stuff. Meaning, I do not want to quibble over whether any of these bullet points below are actually verifiable, or not; as they are really mundane in nature (i.e.):

- Jesus was born
- Jesus was a carpenter
- Jesus performed speeches and made claims
- Jesus was followed by some
- Jesus was later killed

Putting that all aside, let's now get to what you stated above.

1. Can you please start by telling me what you consider an 'eyewitness' please?
2. Does there exist multiple anecdotal testimonials, for any supernatural claims you actually reject; even though you believe they existed all-the-same? Or, is that fact there's many claims, is what makes it true?
3. Don't many also claim god speaks to them, but are speaking about a different god(s)? Why are they wrong?
4. Does the amount of lapse in time, in which something is told, is what makes it true?

I'll stop here...

 

[cvanwey]

No one created God but I’m sure you already knew that.

How do I know God could not have been created? Please explain?

 

[cvanwey]

No, I just wanted to address this portion separately. I responded on the other comments you made as well. So your source for Saint Nick’s “miraculous claims”?

Anecdotal, just like yours

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Proverbs 19:29
New King James Version

29 Judgments are prepared for scoffers,
And beatings for the backs of fools.

You said:
"I'm sure you know we laugh at you for the lame attempts. Be truthful and tell us all what your goal is.
I think you do believe but don't want to follow. It is your choice."

In other words, you accused me of being a liar. That's impolite, and being impolite is against forum rules. Please try better in future.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Thank you, BNR32FAN. That was a reasonable answer, to which I shall respond as a Santaist. In doing so, please note that I am using the same type of arguments that Christians present for God's existence.

I think these two ideas are not entirely the same because while we do have inconclusive evidence of God’s existence we don’t have any evidence of Saint Nicolas’ existence in this present time.

I have plenty of evidence of Santa's existence. Presents get delivered, appearing in the night. We see Santa all over the place at Christmas - on TV and in person. I've seen plenty of reindeer, and while I've never actually seen one fly myself I have many friends who have. Also, I know that Santa uses magic, so it's quite reasonable his reindeer are able to fly. After all, why should one presuppose that magic is impossible?

We have evidence of his existence in the past but not evidence that he still exists today and we’ve never had any actual evidence of him riding a flying sleigh pulled by reindeer or entering houses through a chimney delivering gifts on Christmas Day.

Do we have evidence that Saint Nicholas stopped existing? After all, he's magical. Why shouldn't he be able to live forever, or have flying reindeer, or deliver presents through what we might call supernatural means?

So I think this comparison doesn’t quite match the situation in the debate of God’s existence.

While the stories are very much different, the reasons we believe in them, and the arguments we make on their behalf, are remarkably similar.
I believe in Santa Claus. Can you prove to me that he does not exist?

 

[InterestedAtheist]

No, intelligent design is my original reason. This particular event just strengthened what I already knew and it wasn’t intended to be sufficient evidence for you, just for me and other believers.

I think you should know something. "Intelligent Design" is just another iteration of creationism. It has been very carefully examined by scientists who have concluded that it is not convincing at all. Are you familiar with the Dover Trial of 2005 in which the proponents of Intelligent Design were found by the judge to be untrustworthy and deceptive in the extreme, and their book, Of Pandas and People, to be a rewrite of a creationist book, with the words "scientific creationism" simply replaced by "intelligent design"?

Are you aware of the history and context of the intelligent design movement?

 

[George95]

MOD HAT ON

The thread is being permanently closed after Staff Review due to the nature of this thread.

MOD HAT OFF​