How do we know Santa Claus doesn't exist?

[2PhiloVoid]

My response was irrespective of whether you assumed I was a troll or not. You sounded like you were wavering. Makes no difference to me what you actually assumed.

Another thing you might want to realize in your ex-Christian stance is that I'm not here to attempt to make fools out of atheists. I'm actually here at CF in the attempt to help other people come to faith in Christ through both the partial means that God has provided for everyone through the collective use of our God given intellects and by affirming that there is only so much that any one Christian will be able to do in the department of Apologetics.

Besides, if it were possible for Christians to "prove" through epistemological justification that faith comes by acquiring and amassing a bunch of justified true beliefs, then we'd have to be suspicious since the Epistemological Indices within the Bible tell us that won't be the way, in total, that coming to faith works.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I think he's saying you made one out of yourself, Philo.

That's fine. It wouldn't be the first time nor the last, I'm sure.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Ok, bed for me now. See you all later!
Oh, and @BigV ? Thanks for this thread!

 

[Sanoy]

Look at my post history, if you can, and going back to 2007 when I originally registered I was posting as a Christian, who was a Baptist. In fact, I needed to have the Mods change Baptist to Atheist.

I'm going through and reading your posts, and I'm floored. You were such a kind and loving person, a testament to the work of the Holy Spirit. And now you are being called a troll. I wouldn't use that word, but you come off as bitter, angry, somewhat virulent. What have you become man? Between these two "you's" I see the work of the Holy Spirit, and what becomes of mans heart in His absence, and the latter is not a good thing. You were drinking living water, and it showed, you radiated life, but now that part of you is shriveling up because it starves for a lack of living water.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Ok, bed for me now. See you all later!
Oh, and @BigV ? Thanks for this thread!

And you enjoy a good slumber and maybe mull over the possibility that I may very well address your two cited articles. But I think that might it be a group project good for a different thread altogether.

 

[drich0150]

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.

Actually you can if you just read the reference material that I left in the last post. The artist took the likeness from his neighbor, then later himself. They even said he dressed up like santa and in one of the painting painted his belt buckle backwards because he was looking at himself in the mirror as a model.

So the reason santa looks like santa is because the artist was a old bearded fat guy wear a mandated red and white suit as it was coca cola's colors.

Dude just admit you got this one wrong or rather the youtube video you watch was not challenged by anyone with access to a google search or has been through the coca cola experience in atlanta.

 

[drich0150]

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'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.

and

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

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."

see above

 

[BigV]

Actually you can if you just read the reference material that I left in the last post. The artist took the likeness from his neighbor, then later himself. They even said he dressed up like santa and in one of the painting painted his belt buckle backwards because he was looking at himself in the mirror as a model.

Does a picture of Jesus that is obviously made up prove that Jesus doesn't exist? If it were possible, if we could trace who came up with the first portrait/drawing/etc... of Jesus, if it could be shown that the person just painted themselves or their relatives, would you accept that Jesus is wholly made up?

So the reason santa looks like santa is because the artist was a old bearded fat guy wear a mandated red and white suit as it was coca cola's colors.

Maybe the artist was supernaturally inspired by the real Santa. You see, Santa works in mysterious ways. Sort of like Jesus. With Jesus, he is an eternal God, but decided to show up only 2,000 years ago. Same with Santa. He had his own reasons for remaining silent and unknown but then decided to inspire the artist who drew his likeness.

Maybe the artist was Santa's son?

Dude just admit you got this one wrong or rather the youtube video you watch was not challenged by anyone with access to a google search or has been through the coca cola experience in atlanta.

Come on, why let go of one's belief when there could always be reasons for keeping it? At best, may be I should modify what we know about Santa but to throw out the whole belief? That's just too much.

Come on, think about it. How can Santa be imaginary if Christmas makes absolutely no sense without him.

 

[BigV]

The wrong one. I'm not asking if Santa exists. I know he does.

Yes. I wish more people could KNOW Santa exists. Christians KNOW that Jesus is real. When backed into a corner all they have is FAITH or belief that he exists, but, if one keeps saying.. "I KNOW.." it definitely makes whatever they know more real.

After a few decades/centuries/milenia, of saying.. "I KNOW Santa is real" it becomes part of the "..Evidence that Demands a Verdict". Santa is either lunatic, liar or real being!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Yes. I wish more people could KNOW Santa exists. Christians KNOW that Jesus is real. When backed into a corner all they have is FAITH or belief that he exists, but, if one keeps saying.. "I KNOW.." it definitely makes whatever they know more real.

After a few decades/centuries/milenia, of saying.. "I KNOW Santa is real" it becomes part of the "..Evidence that Demands a Verdict". Santa is either lunatic, liar or real being!

You forgot "Legend." There's a fourth option in there, too. Not that it helps really, but if we're going to be skeptical, we might as well be well-rounded in doing so. No Hodge-podging!

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Actually you can if you just read the reference material that I left in the last post. The artist took the likeness from his neighbor, then later himself. They even said he dressed up like santa and in one of the painting painted his belt buckle backwards because he was looking at himself in the mirror as a model.

So the reason santa looks like santa is because the artist was a old bearded fat guy wear a mandated red and white suit as it was coca cola's colors.

BigV is perfectly correct, of course. A true believer will demand absolute, 100% cast iron proof before giving an inch. Of course Santa would choose the right person to inspire when sharing his image with the world!
Drich, we're roleplaying Christian arguments here. Yes, if you were talking to reasonable people your common sense would work. But we're acting like Christians. Do you think, in all our experience of talking with Creationists about evolution, or apologists about the Cosmological argument, that common sense worked on them?

Come on, why let go of one's belief when there could always be reasons for keeping it? At best, may be I should modify what we know about Santa but to throw out the whole belief? That's just too much.

Exactly!

Come on, think about it. How can Santa be imaginary if Christmas makes absolutely no sense without him.

Big V, would you mind if I added that to my signature? I think that one kind of sums up this thread!

You forgot "Legend." There's a fourth option in there, too. Not that it helps really, but if we're going to be skeptical, we might as well be well-rounded in doing so. No Hodge-podging!

Philo, this thread is starting to do its work perfectly.
Because that is exactly what atheists say when confronted by C.S. Lewis' "Trilemma" argument.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

And you enjoy a good slumber and maybe mull over the possibility that I may very well address your two cited articles. But I think that might it be a group project good for a different thread altogether.

Thank you, I did sleep quite well. I think it might be a good idea not to throw this discussion off on a tangent. I shall look forward to such a thread, whenever you have the time to start it.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Does a picture of Jesus that is obviously made up prove that Jesus doesn't exist? If it were possible, if we could trace who came up with the first portrait/drawing/etc... of Jesus, if it could be shown that the person just painted themselves or their relatives, would you accept that Jesus is wholly made up?

Which brings us to an interesting phenomenon:
If Jesus Had Been Korean: 20 Rare Paintings of the Life of Christ |

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Thank you, I did sleep quite well. I think it might be a good idea not to throw this discussion off on a tangent. I shall look forward to such a thread, whenever you have the time to start it.

I already did, Boss!

 

[InterestedAtheist]

I already did, Boss!

OK, thanks! Just going off to work now (it's 6.44 am in China). Will have a look and address later.
(Sorry, can't find it. Link?)

 

[cvanwey]

Does a picture of Jesus that is obviously made up prove that Jesus doesn't exist? If it were possible, if we could trace who came up with the first portrait/drawing/etc... of Jesus, if it could be shown that the person just painted themselves or their relatives, would you accept that Jesus is wholly made up?


Maybe the artist was supernaturally inspired by the real Santa. You see, Santa works in mysterious ways. Sort of like Jesus. With Jesus, he is an eternal God, but decided to show up only 2,000 years ago. Same with Santa. He had his own reasons for remaining silent and unknown but then decided to inspire the artist who drew his likeness.

Maybe the artist was Santa's son?


Come on, why let go of one's belief when there could always be reasons for keeping it? At best, may be I should modify what we know about Santa but to throw out the whole belief? That's just too much.

Come on, think about it. How can Santa be imaginary if Christmas makes absolutely no sense without him.

Hey @BigV it's quite easy, when 'the shoe is on the other foot', isn't it? This reminds me of a thread I started a while back....

Does Lucifer Have Free Will?

Unfalsifiable claims are a dime a dozen. And when you argue (for) such claims, you can't loose.

As I've stated to others here, it must be nice to be on the 'winning' side of the discussion.

 

[Silmarien]

Silmarien, let's not argue about this. This is just a little harmless mental exercise, only a discussion on a forum. In fact, I am not arguing in bad faith. As I have said, more than once, I am presenting an exercise; I was challenged by a Christian who said that Santa and God were not comparable, because there were good grounds to believe in God, while Santa was easily disproven. In response, I asked Christians to do just that: disprove Santa.
Perhaps you'd care to try to?

You're the one who asked if I thought you were arguing in bad faith. I thought it was a strange question, given that this was merely a hypothetical, but if you're going to ask a question, you ought to expect an answer in return.

Interesting, but I'm afraid I'm not seeing the point. What do you mean? Are you suggesting that there is direct evidence that Santa is a created figure?

There is overwhelming historical evidence, given the fact that the Santa Claus legend stems from veneration of Saint Nicholas. It's not that hard to find a whole historical rundown on the development of the Santa Claus figure. For example: https://www.history.com/topics/christmas/santa-claus

On the contrary. I find it fascinating the way Christians, confronted by a comparison between a mythical figure they believe in and a mythical figure they don't, tie themselves in knots refusing to see the obvious similarities between them.

What obvious similarities? So far all you guys have demonstrated is an inability to conduct the most basic of historical analyses. That's not encouraging.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

You're the one who asked if I thought you were arguing in bad faith. I thought it was a strange question, given that this was merely a hypothetical, but if you're going to ask a question, you ought to expect an answer in return.

You just misunderstood me, that's all.
Back at How do we know Santa Claus doesn't exist?
you said:
"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 I asked you why you'd walk away. Here I am, a person who says they believe in Santa, asking why you think I'm wrong. To "just walk away" from me implies you think I'm acting in bad faith, that I'm not sincere in my clearly stated desire to know the truth, as I have said that I am several times in this thread. I'm sure you wouldn't do anything so dishonourable, Silmarien!

There is overwhelming historical evidence, given the fact that the Santa Claus legend stems from veneration of Saint Nicholas. It's not that hard to find a whole historical rundown on the development of the Santa Claus figure. For example: https://www.history.com/topics/christmas/santa-claus

I'm going to explain myself carefully here, because I don't want you to misunderstand.
Silmarien, I am playing the part on this thread of a person who believes in Santa Claus. It's not a secret, nor a trick. I've announced several times that I'm just roleplaying.
Now, in character as a person who believes in Santa Claus, how much do you think your history of Santa impresses me? Thinking on my past experiences of creationists presented with evidence about evolution, for example, or trying to persuade Christians that God is no more real than any other deity neither of us believe in, the answer is obvious:
"Thank you for your website," I would say. "It's a very interesting account of how people think about Santa Claus and how they "worship" him in popular culture (please don't miss the quotation marks). But I don't see any evidence at all in there that the real Santa doesn't exist."
That's how Christians talk. And that's how we "Santaists" talk as well.

What obvious similarities? So far all you guys have demonstrated is an inability to conduct the most basic of historical analyses. That's not encouraging.

Reread the last couple of pages, and you may see the similarities we've been highlighting.

 

[drich0150]

BigV is perfectly correct, of course. A true believer will demand absolute, 100% cast iron proof before giving an inch. Of course Santa would choose the right person to inspire when sharing his image with the world!
Drich, we're roleplaying Christian arguments here. Yes, if you were talking to reasonable people your common sense would work. But we're acting like Christians. Do you think, in all our experience of talking with Creationists about evolution, or apologists about the Cosmological argument, that common sense worked on them?

you are doing a very crappy job of it as nothing confronting Jesus or God is so absolute as being able to point to nov of 1933 to an advertising department creation, more specifically to a man who painted his neighbor in company colors. Then later himself. As being the source of santa clause.
what's more the man/artist/company never claimed santa was real. He/artist clearly did not assume the role and yet he later on represented himself in the role.

What you fail to understand is this is a very poor analogy in trying to troll mock and or feign christian response. This is indicated by the fact you are having to constantly move the goal posts to try and stay ahead of the narrative. You might claim christians do the same, but when and if they do it has to be with in the cannon of Christianity. they can't just add story to the religion because there backs are against the wall like you've done here; santa influenced the artist."

Nothing in canon ever suggests that santa had this power. in fact history shows santa was not considered to even be human till the late 19th century.
you are moving the goal posts and stepping out side of the cannon of the story to do so!

For instance The Op's challenge here was to prove santa was not real.

or more specifically how can we know the truth. That was the challenge. The truth in this case can be known through verified documented historical fact. And what is written about santa for instance nothing in the mythos says santa was omnipresent, meaning nothing says he existed or influenced anyone before he was born.

But what you have done is claim that santa had powers before... he was created. show me a canonical source that supports this assertion... IE give me book chapter and verse please.

otherwise know what you are doing here is not even close to what christians do when providing exegetical support for their beliefs. (by working with in the confines of scripture)

Exactly!

Big V, would you mind if I added that to my signature? I think that one kind of sums up this thread!

Philo, this thread is starting to do its work perfectly.
Because that is exactly what atheists say when confronted by C.S. Lewis' "Trilemma" argument.

doing your victory lap a little prematurely aren't you? You've got a gaping hole in the side of your battleship and I cant see a way out for you here beside trying to destroy the messenger rather than try and fix your broken message in that you had to make up your own narrative/move the goal posts to make your intellectually dishonest point.

Furthermore you claim Christian obtusely an blindly defend God in the way you are trying to defend santa... here's the biggest problem with that. I am a christian and I took apart your whole argument in the way you pretend only a non christian mind can work. But again I am Christian and I used all of the tools you claim to have, yet I still believe.

This is where basic intelligence fails you and your proud assumption that only people such as yourselves has the only rights to objective thinking. I and many others have and can demonstrate the objectivity you mockingly claim is absent from Christianity. yet we believe and you can not grasp why... Perhaps for some of us who can objectively scrutinise data have spent the last 20 or 25 years combing over the bible with this gift, and have found what the scriptures promised.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

you are doing a very crappy job of it as nothing confronting Jesus or God is so absolute as being able to point to nov of 1933 to an advertising department creation, more specifically to a man who painted his neighbor in company colors. Then later himself. As being the source of santa clause.
what's more the man/artist/company never claimed santa was real. He/artist clearly did not assume the role and yet he later on represented himself in the role.

What you fail to understand is this is a very poor analogy in trying to troll mock and or feign christian response. This is indicated by the fact you are having to constantly move the goal posts to try and stay ahead of the narrative. You might claim christians do the same, but when and if they do it has to be with in the cannon of Christianity. they can't just add story to the religion because there backs are against the wall like you've done here; santa influenced the artist."

Nothing in canon ever suggests that santa had this power. in fact history shows santa was not considered to even be human till the late 19th century.
you are moving the goal posts and stepping out side of the cannon of the story to do so!

For instance The Op's challenge here was to prove santa was not real.

or more specifically how can we know the truth. That was the challenge. The truth in this case can be known through verified documented historical fact. And what is written about santa for instance nothing in the mythos says santa was omnipresent, meaning nothing says he existed or influenced anyone before he was born.

But what you have done is claim that santa had powers before... he was created. show me a canonical source that supports this assertion... IE give me book chapter and verse please.

otherwise know what you are doing here is not even close to what christians do when providing exegetical support for their beliefs. (by working with in the confines of scripture)


doing your victory lap a little prematurely aren't you? You've got a gaping hole in the side of your battleship and I cant see a way out for you here beside trying to destroy the messenger rather than try and fix your broken message in that you had to make up your own narrative/move the goal posts to make your intellectually dishonest point.

Furthermore you claim Christian obtusely an blindly defend God in the way you are trying to defend santa... here's the biggest problem with that. I am a christian and I took apart your whole argument in the way you pretend only a non christian mind can work. But again I am Christian and I used all of the tools you claim to have, yet I still believe.

This is where basic intelligence fails you and your proud assumption that only people such as yourselves has the only rights to objective thinking. I and many others have and can demonstrate the objectivity you mockingly claim is absent from Christianity. yet we believe and you can not grasp why... Perhaps for some of us who can objectively scrutinise data have spent the last 20 or 25 years combing over the bible with this gift, and have found what the scriptures promised.

Excuse me, Drich. going to bed now. I will be happy to answer you tomorrow.
Perhaps in the meantime you might want to reread your post and...clear up a few bits? Including the bad language, I'm sorry to say.