How do we know Santa Claus doesn't exist?

[BigV]

You see, that's the pointlessness of this kind of discussion. You know virtually nothing about the question beyond what happens to go on inside your own head about it. What would be the point of discussing that? Honestly, what do you think the actual point of that would be?

I understand there is no point in arguing with the religious about their religion. There is absolutely nothing that would convince you Christianity is false. Your beliefs are unfalsifiable. Therefore, there is no point for you in even 'challenging' your beliefs. In your mind, you win.

Some parts of the bible make claims of some level of historical accuracy, as that was understood at the time, none claim to meet the criteria of some future notion about historical writing.If you don't even have a basic idea of what the bible actually is or claims to be, what do you think can be gained by writing posts about your random notions about it, and why would you expect anyone to take you seriously?

Some parts of the Bible...some level of historical accuracy? Every fiction has "some level of historical accuracy". So, a talking snake and a talking donkey have "some level of historical accuracy", that level being there probably was at least one historical snake and probably was at least one historical donkey.

And yet, you are taken seriously by other religious. Because this is the best you can do to defend what's in it.

 

[BigV]

Has anyone mention that Santa Clause with the red suit and white beard was a marketing creation of the coca cola company in the 1930s? Kinda hard to be real when you have a confirmed origins in a marketing campaign.

That still doesn't mean Santa doesn't exist. God is portrayed as old man with beard in the sky, but that doesn't make God not real to you, right? So why would Santa's portrayal as old man in red suit and white beard make it any less real?

 

[Tom 1]

I understand there is no point in arguing with the religious about their religion. There is absolutely nothing that would convince you Christianity is false. Your beliefs are unfalsifiable. Therefore, there is no point for you in even 'challenging' your beliefs. In your mind, you win.



Some parts of the Bible...some level of historical accuracy? Every fiction has "some level of historical accuracy". So, a talking snake and a talking donkey have "some level of historical accuracy", that level being there probably was at least one historical snake and probably was at least one historical donkey.

And yet, you are taken seriously by other religious. Because this is the best you can do to defend what's in it.

You aren’t challenging anything, just saying some stuff you read or that occurred to you. Of course there are all kinds of interesting questions about the bible, but putting together meaningful questions takes some effort.

 

[BigV]

You aren’t challenging anything, just saying some stuff you read or that occurred to you. Of course there are all kinds of interesting questions about the bible, but putting together meaningful questions takes some effort.

Well, ...Some parts of the bible make claims of some level of historical accuracy,...

Impossible to challenge, I agree with you.

 

[Tom 1]

Well, ...Some parts of the bible make claims of some level of historical accuracy,...

Impossible to challenge, I agree with you.

Nope. It’s pretty straightforward, when you know what something is you can pose questions about it. Otherwise you are just asking yourself questions about some random stuff that you happen to think.

 

[drich0150]

That still doesn't mean Santa doesn't exist. God is portrayed as old man with beard in the sky, but that doesn't make God not real to you, right? So why would Santa's portrayal as old man in red suit and white beard make it any less real?

Kinda Does when the advertising department for coke (specifically Hadden Sunbloom in 1931) takes credit for creating his likeness and his trade mark look. Ever wonder why he wore white and red suit? It's because that is the corporate colors of coca cola.

Before this ever heard of krampus? he was the evil embodiment of the winter solstice where he took bad children and punished them, Sinterklaas was not much better looking as he was an elvish being who rewarded good boys and girls with gifts and trinkets.

But Santa Claus.. All coca cola!

So how do we know Santa is not real because Coca cola owns all rights to his personage an likness as he was created for their winter marketing campaign in 1931.
The True History of the Modern Day Santa Claus

 

[BigV]

Kinda Does when the advertising department for coke (specifically Hadden Sunbloom in 1931) takes credit for creating his likeness and his trade mark look. Ever wonder why he wore white and red suit? It's because that is the corporate colors of coca cola.

Before this ever heard of krampus? he was the evil embodiment of the winter solstice where he took bad children and punished them, Sinterklaas was not much better looking as he was an elvish being who rewarded good boys and girls with gifts and trinkets.

But Santa Claus.. All coca cola!

So how do we know Santa is not real because Coca cola owns all rights to his personage an likness as he was created for their winter marketing campaign in 1931.

what you say is true, but you can’t prove that the real Santa didn’t inspire Coca Cola to market his likeness and make him known.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

what you say is true, but you can’t prove that the real Santa didn’t inspire Coca Cola to market his likeness and make him known.

but, but,

'santa' was GOOD........ not bad ....... santa did not CAUSE DISEASE in millions of children...... (not that I ever heard anyway)

 

[Silmarien]

Do you have their evidence to present? What you're "sure" of doesn't count, I'm afraid.
And by the way, of course Santa can circle the whole planet delivering presents in 24 hours. He's magical. He can fly on reindeer. He can read children's minds. Given his levels of power, what makes you think 24 hours is a problem for him? Or, for that matter, making any children who happen to be watching go to sleep and then wake up, not remembering that they had done so?

I don't know what you think you're demonstrating. If someone really approached me with this sort of argument, I'd do the same thing I do with the Flat Earthers: walk away.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

First off, what KIND of question is "Does Santa exist?"

The wrong one. I'm not asking if Santa exists. I know he does. But it seems there are some people, strange as it may seem, who think I'm mistaken. And yet they can't - or won't - say why.
You keep missing the mark, Philo. All you have to do is explain why you think Santa doesn't exist. With the exception of a few trifling remarks, you haven't even attempted this, leaving me rather confused why you think he doesn't.

I asked first Bruce. Not that I would take on a broken absolute epistemology like yours in the first place, least of all to tell a grown man that santa doesn't put the presents under the tree.

I'm sorry, Sanoy. If you're going to enter a debate forum, "It's just obviously wrong" doesn't cut it.
I'll just say: obviously Santa exists, and if he really didn't, you'd be interested in demonstrating that fact.

Has anyone mention that Santa Clause with the red suit and white beard was a marketing creation of the coca cola company in the 1930s? Kinda hard to be real when you have a confirmed origins in a marketing campaign.

and

So how do we know Santa is not real because Coca cola owns all rights to his personage an likeness as he was created for their winter marketing campaign in 1931.

No problem at all. Perhaps it was Santa that inspired them to do so?

I don't know what you think you're demonstrating. If someone really approached me with this sort of argument, I'd do the same thing I do with the Flat Earthers: walk away.

And why would you do that? Are you suggesting that I'm arguing in bad faith?
And as to what I think I'm demonstrating, I'm puzzled you'd ask. Have you not seen the title of this thread? As @BigV said, "It's a serious question about the methodology used to determine the difference between a real person and a fiction."

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Sorry, Dave G, I came to this thread after a few pages and missed your response. I have to say, I'm glad I found it.

You can look in most any shopping center at some point during the Christmas season and see the real Santa Clause. That's right, the guy with the red suit and fake beard. That's Santa Clause just about as real as he gets to those who sit on his lap till old enough to not be fooled anymore.

The fact that there are people dressed up as Santa in no way proves that Santa himself does not exist.

Christ on the other hand comes into the heart of the born again believer and you are changed. Your desires change, your talk and actions changes, your thoughts change. Your life changes. The proof of God lives in us, the fruit of it is the changed life. It's not a change you can produce on your own and have last, our self change is a temporary and failed effort. It's observable what comes from Christ and some around us don't like what they see but it's real.

That's very sweet. Let's break it down.

Christ on the other hand comes into the heart of the born again believer and you are changed.

Unproven assertion.

Your desires change, your talk and actions changes, your thoughts change. Your life changes.

People change their lives all the time.

The proof of God lives in us, the fruit of it is the changed life.

That's not actually proof at all, I'm afraid.

It's not a change you can produce on your own and have last, our self change is a temporary and failed effort.

While it's true that some people try to change and fail, some people try to change and succeed. Have you never met a non-Christian who successfully gave up smoking, drinking or drugs, for example? And of course it's amazing what strong community support can do for you, plus the belief that the Creator of the Universe is telling you what to do.
And let's not let the idea that Christianity makes people better go unchallenged. I'm sure we've all met and heard of some thoroughly nasty Christians.

It's observable what comes from Christ and some around us don't like what they see but it's real.

No, I'm sorry, it's not observable. It's just your opinion.

You won't disprove God by tricky comparisons with Santa Clause. And you can't disprove God to those who know him, in fact you can't prove He doesn't exist at all. But we who are changed are changed at the heart level forever and the gift of it is all we did is stopped fighting and agreed.

I like how you say "you can't disprove God to people who know him." Have you tried disproving Santa to me? If you do, perhaps you'll see that God and Santa are more similar than you think.

 

[Sanoy]

I'm sorry, Sanoy. If you're going to enter a debate forum, "It's just obviously wrong" doesn't cut it.
I'll just say: obviously Santa exists, and if he really didn't, you'd be interested in demonstrating that fact.

Did you just make a claim about what should or should not be in a debate forum by making a strawman? ...You did, you actually - wow. This is some serious cringe Bruce.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Did you just make a claim about what should or should not be in a debate forum by making a strawman? ...You did, you actually - wow. This some serious cringe Bruce.

Did I? I'm sorry. How did I do that?

 

[Sanoy]

Did I? I'm sorry. How did I do that?

Have you been making strawmen so long that you can no longer recognize them? Show me where I said what you quoted of me.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Have you been making strawmen so long that you can no longer recognize them? Show me where I said what you quoted of me.

How do we know Santa Claus doesn't exist?
You said:
"I asked first Bruce."
No, you didn't. I did. I asked if you could prove to me that I am wrong about Santa existing.
Then you said:
"Not that I would take on a broken absolute epistemology like yours in the first place, least of all to tell a grown man that santa doesn't put the presents under the tree."
If you think there's something wrong with my believing in Santa, please feel free to explain what it is.
So far, the Hulk hasn't seen anything worth coming out for.

 

[Sanoy]

How do we know Santa Claus doesn't exist?
You said:
"I asked first Bruce."
No, you didn't. I did. I asked if you could prove to me that I am wrong about Santa existing.
Then you said:
"Not that I would take on a broken absolute epistemology like yours in the first place, least of all to tell a grown man that santa doesn't put the presents under the tree."
If you think there's something wrong with my believing in Santa, please feel free to explain what it is.
So far, the Hulk hasn't seen anything worth coming out for.

Did you not understand those instructions? Let me repeat them - Show me where I said what you quoted of me.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Did you not understand those instructions? Let me repeat them - Show me where I said what you quoted of me.

I just did. You said you wouldn't bother to tell a grown man that santa doesn't put presents under trees. I interpreted this as your meaning that my belief in Santa was so obviously wrong that it wasn't worth correcting.
Was I wrong to think that? Is that not what you meant? If so, I apologise fully and freely. I would, however, be interested in hearing exactly what you did mean, because I obviously missed it the first time.

What does "Not that I would take on a broken absolute epistemology like yours in the first place, least of all to tell a grown man that santa doesn't put the presents under the tree," mean, if not that my belief in Santa is "just obviously wrong" and so you can't be bothered to correct it?

 

[Sanoy]

I just did. You said you wouldn't bother to tell a grown man that santa doesn't put presents under trees. I interpreted this as your meaning that my belief in Santa was so obviously wrong that it wasn't worth correcting.
Was I wrong to think that? Is that not what you meant? If so, I apologise fully and freely. I would, however, be interested in hearing exactly what you did mean, because I obviously missed it the first time.

What does "Not that I would take on a broken absolute epistemology like yours in the first place, least of all to tell a grown man that santa doesn't put the presents under the tree," mean, if not that my belief in Santa is "just obviously wrong" and so you can't be bothered to correct it?

Apparently you can't follow instructions. Show me where I said what you quoted of me.

What you quoted of me.

"It's just obviously wrong"

Blank to be filled in by you showing where I said that.

We're all waiting on you Bruce. Credible hulk is fake news, no one believes that but you.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Apparently you can't follow instructions. Show me where I said what you quoted of me.

What you quoted of me.

Blank to be filled in by your of where I said that.

Fair enough, Sanoy.
You didn't say that. I apologise if you thought that I meant that you did say that. When I said those words, I was giving you my interpretation of your words, my understanding of what you meant.
Perhaps you can explain to me exactly what the thing you did say means:

Not that I would take on a broken absolute epistemology like yours in the first place, least of all to tell a grown man that santa doesn't put the presents under the tree.

And how its meaning differs in any significant way from "It's just obviously wrong".

 

[Sanoy]

Fair enough, Sanoy.
You didn't say that. I apologise if you thought that I meant that you did say that. When I said those words, I was giving you my interpretation of your words, my understanding of what you meant.
Perhaps you can explain to me exactly what the thing you did say means:

And how its meaning differs in any significant way from "It's just obviously wrong".

Don't apologize as if you care anything about what you just did. You knowingly did it, you intentionally tried to hide it. You are a complete fraud. And all this about you turning into the credible hulk is a mockery upon yourself.