Now on ScienceBlogs: The Galaxy's Biggest Valentine
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
The story of the Roman soldiers falling alseep is too feeble and clumsy to merit serious refutation; and that the soldiers were bribed to say they slept is, if possible, more preposterous still. The penalty while doing sentry work would be death, and it requires a rather liberal bribe to induce a man to offer himself for instant execution. If there be any such bravo on record, I have not heard of him, and I cannot quite see what use the bribe for which he gave his life would be to him, even if he took it with him into his coffin.
W.S. Ross, "Did Jesus Christ Rise from the Dead?" An Anthology of Atheism and Rationalism (ed. Gordon Stein, Buffalo, NY: Prometheus, 1980), p. 210.
« There are still people like this roaming about | Main | At least they admit it »
More articles by PZ Myers can be found on Freethoughtblogs at the new Pharyngula!
Category: Humor
Posted on: December 15, 2008 9:38 AM, by PZ Myers
I must object to this list!
The differences are obvious. If you're good, Santa brings you toys every year, and if you're bad, you get a lump of coal. Jesus, on the other hand, offers nothing but vague promises that will only be redeemed after you're dead, and neither alternative (hovering about in the clouds with a harp vs. crackling fiercely in a hellish fire) sound particularly attractive.
If you really must believe in some magic man flying through the sky, I recommend Santa.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/88008
HTML commands: <i>italic</i>, <b>bold</b>, <a href="url">link</a>, <blockquote>quote</blockquote>
Tim Lambert 02.01.2012
Orac 02.13.2012
Orac 02.09.2012
Tim Lambert 09.12.2011
ERV 11.26.2011
Comments
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | December 15, 2008 9:40 AM
What about Superman?
Posted by: Elliott Grasett | December 15, 2008 9:46 AM
The greatest difference between Santa and God is that no one was ever burned alive for denying the triune nature of Santa.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | December 15, 2008 9:47 AM
No instead Santa send his hitman Black Peter who forces you to listen to terrible Christmas music for eternity.
Posted by: 2-D Man | December 15, 2008 9:50 AM
Pfft! Superman is a kryptonian, not magical!On a more serious note,
is wrong. Ken Miller immediately comes to mind. Intelligent people are better at coming up with rationalizations but are no more immune to thinking disorders. The exercise of critical thinking skills is really what's important.Posted by: Ouchimoo | December 15, 2008 9:55 AM
No I think it's right. Said to reward/punish. Believe you me, some of the wackaloons are all about the reward/punish system.
"He'll reward me because I believe in Jesus, but you're going to hell, everyone who believes in Jesus will go to heaven."
Me: "Even if a child raping mass-murder believes in Jesus, he'll go to heaven, but I'll go to hell because I don't believe that some guy with magic powers 2,000 years ago suicided himself for his sky daddy because daddy was angry at his own mistake, I'm going to hell?"
His response: "Yep, that's right."
To this day I still don't know how he said that with a straight face.
Posted by: rijkswaanvijand | December 15, 2008 9:57 AM
I flew through the sky once.. Back in the days when I used to be a magic man.
Aaah those where the days!
Posted by: breadmaker | December 15, 2008 9:58 AM
"said to reward virtue and punish evil"
The problem with this is that according to the bible all people are bad therefore not one gets rewarded.
Therefore Jesus had to live and die on people's account so that his chosen people would get rewarded based on his good behavior.
With Jesus reward being given to people, in some sense God unlike Santa Claus, gives gifts to the naughty.
The check list is flawed...
Posted by: Fiat Lex | December 15, 2008 9:58 AM
Yeah, Florien's forgetting the most important parts! People don't build huge temples to Santa, use his alleged favor to justify their political and social power, or extort massive funds from the weak-willed in order to allegedly carry out instructions he personally gave them.
Bah. How come folks always have to believe their magic friends live in the sky? I'd rather have one that lives in the sea, like Cthulhu. THEN we'd have a religious reason to stop polluting and overfishing. So as not to wake up our wrathful squidly overlord!
Posted by: Ted Dahlberg | December 15, 2008 10:04 AM
And one of Superman's other weaknesses besides kryptonite is magic. Obviously, the only sensible choice here is Doctor Fate.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | December 15, 2008 10:07 AM
Oh yeah. Tell that to the Santaists. Have you ever heard of the Nogromnicon?
Posted by: Stephen Wells | December 15, 2008 10:09 AM
There's a clear difference. God is omniscient and omnipotent and rewards good and punishes evil. On the other hand, Santa knows when you are sleeping and knows when you're awake, he knows when you've been bad or good, so be good for goodness' sake. Nobody could possible confuse the two.
Posted by: Pastafarian | December 15, 2008 10:10 AM
Oh come on, every right-thinking, Noodly Appendage-fearing person recommends the Flying Spaghetti Monster!
Posted by: Longstreet63 | December 15, 2008 10:11 AM
The one time my all-but-invisible-and-seldom-updated blog ever got national attention was when a line from one of my Christmas posts made Google quotes a few years back:
He's a clearly what Jesus would be if he was real. Nobody would ever consider nailing this omnibenevolent deity to anything, would they? Nor does he hold anything against you longer than a year.
I even got a troll, numerous quote postings on Myspace pages and people cancelling their Google quotes feeds for it. And because I wasn't paying attention, six months went by before I realized it.
Should anyone care to read it, it's here:
http://www.unscrewingtheinscrutable.com/node/1078
Steve "It's the most atheist time of the year" James
Posted by: brent | December 15, 2008 10:11 AM
Well actually the one difference is not acknowledged on their list and its the one that perhaps makes the most difference. Right around the middle of the list it includes:"Not believed in by intelligent adults." Intelligent adults do not believe in Santa Claus but we know that intelligent adults do believe in God. Atheists would probably agree that their reasons for believing such are not particularly intelligent but that does not mean that the people who do so can be described as broadly unintelligent. In fact, I suspect that most atheists would concede that one of the problems with lessening the predominance of religion in our culture is that so many relatively intelligent and influential people either ignore or actively promote the pervasiveness of religious belief.
Posted by: Rik G | December 15, 2008 10:11 AM
OK, I don't mind being the sentimental sap here: I'm not a christian, and I don't believe in their god or any other, but I DO believe in Santa! Metaphorically speaking, of course! If you want to see Santa, BE Santa; just commit one o' them random acts of kindness and senseless acts of beauty sometime--it feels great, and there's your Santa, in real life and real time. (OK so I'm not just a sentimental sap, I'm a megalomaniacal sentimental sap!) Ho, ho, ho, Merry Chri-----nope, can't bring myself to do that---Ho, ho, ho, Happy Holi---no, too bland---aw screw it, Ho, ho, ho, Y'all keep warm and be nice!
"Santa"
P.S. The cookies and milk are appreciated, but a little 4/20 and a cuppa joe would make the trip go reallllllllly nice!
Posted by: GPPlascencia | December 15, 2008 10:15 AM
Santa is to children what Jesus is to grown-ups.
Posted by: woody | December 15, 2008 10:15 AM
Santa?
Satan?
Can this be a coincidence?
Posted by: woody | December 15, 2008 10:23 AM
Optimism is the secular equivalent of religious faith. Both are 'acceptable' delusions, but delusions nonetheless...
Posted by: mayhempix | December 15, 2008 10:26 AM
I too must object!
At least Santa ate and drank the cookies and milk I left for him.
All Jebus did was turn the milk into wine and God condemned me to Hell for eternity for drinking it. They didn't give a shit about the cookies.
Posted by: Jeff Flowers | December 15, 2008 10:27 AM
So are cookies the body of Santa?
Posted by: ennui | December 15, 2008 10:27 AM
I wish that I could believe things about stuff.
*sigh*
Posted by: Darth Wader | December 15, 2008 10:31 AM
I know Santa is real. The Night Before Christmas proves it. If you believe in Santa and your right, you get presents. But if you don't believe and your wrong, you get switches, coal and ashes.
Posted by: J | December 15, 2008 10:31 AM
*Intelligent adults do not believe in Santa Claus but we know that intelligent adults do believe in God.*
I "know" no such thing.
*Atheists would probably agree that their reasons for believing such are not particularly intelligent but that does not mean that the people who do so can be described as broadly unintelligent.*
Actually it does mean that.
*In fact, I suspect that most atheists would concede that one of the problems with lessening the predominance of religion in our culture is that so many relatively intelligent and influential people either ignore or actively promote the pervasiveness of religious belief.*
I would concede no such thing.
Posted by: Philip P. | December 15, 2008 10:35 AM
@15 "If you want to see Santa, BE Santa; just commit one o' them random acts of kindness and senseless acts of beauty sometime--it feels great, and there's your Santa, in real life and real time."
Oh, an explanation for Santa that doesn't involve looking through a telescope. How convenient. Get back to work!
Posted by: Tim Fuller | December 15, 2008 10:35 AM
All hail Santa.
I'm up early since I woke with the squirrels this morning.
http://tinyurl.com/6ewek9
On that Wasilla Church fire?
I've got some suspects for the cops to check out. You'll want to visit if only to find out the NAME of the church's youth group! I try not to disappoint.
http://thetimchannel.com/?p=310
Enjoy.
Posted by: mayhempix | December 15, 2008 10:37 AM
"So are cookies the body of Santa?"
No wonder Jebus and God didn't give a shit about the cookies.
They only care about fleshy Jebus wafers and would never be caught dead eating Santa.
Posted by: CrypticLife | December 15, 2008 10:39 AM
Many public school teachers believe in Santa Claus. Or, at least, they claim to believe to schoolchildren.
Note that one of their favorite quotes to doubters is, "If you don't believe, you don't receive". I don't consider this supporting religion exactly, since Santa's not actually a religious figure, but it's pretty obnoxious.
Posted by: lauram | December 15, 2008 10:39 AM
Yeah, but god beats santa big time in the old "holy literature" department. Never seen Santa's tome. Don't think we can use any of Santa's holy word to justify killing each other or taking away each other's rights.
Sorry Santa, you lose to the other bearded dude. You gotsa getta book. Get it ghost written it if you have to.
Posted by: CrypticLife | December 15, 2008 10:44 AM
And Santa's not actually omnipresent. He just moves really fast.
This is another point in Santa's favor. We know of things that have the quality of moving fast (cheetahs, sound, light), so we know moving very fast is possible (maybe not for a physical entity, but whatever...). We know of nothing that's omnipresent (with the possible exception of time? not sure of this), so we do not know that omnipresence is a possible characteristic.
Posted by: Bill Dauphin | December 15, 2008 10:46 AM
Woody (@17) beat me too it, sorta'. Obviously he's channeling his inner Church Lady!
Posted by: brent | December 15, 2008 10:53 AM
I "know" no such thing.
Well it goes without saying that there are those who believe that belief in God defines one as stupid. My point was that most reasonable people, atheists or otherwise, do not think so. I suspect, for instance, that most atheists would concede that Barack Obama or Bill Clinton are intelligent people despite their God Belief. In general regardless of what they believe, most people would acknowledge that intelligent people can believe unintelligent things. I guess, J, that you are the exception to that.
So since I would assume that you would acknowledge that not all atheists are intelligent and it is your assertion that all non-atheists are, by definition, unintelligent, then there is a very, very small percentage of people on the entire Earth that you would describe as intelligent. You are, of course, entitled to believe as you wish. You are not who I was addressing when I referred to most athiests who, I do not believe, walk around thinking that every single person who disagrees with their atheism is stupid.
Posted by: The Science Pundit | December 15, 2008 10:53 AM
Back when I was in Catholic school and bought into the whole story, the question What's the real difference between God and Santa Claus? was posed to me. It wasn't until I was an atheist that I had a satisfactory answer.
The perpetuators of the Santa Claus myth don't actually believe the lies they're spreading.
Posted by: Christophe Thill | December 15, 2008 10:54 AM
Another difference:
- Santa brings presents to children who are not even his (well, most of them, I mean...)
- When God is displeased with his own, rebellious children, he either drowns them, burns them, starves them or sends them horrible diseases.
And whenever Santa is depicted, he has a wide, joyful and friendly grin. The same can't be said of the other guy.
Posted by: Timothy Wood | December 15, 2008 10:55 AM
yeah... psychedelics... i remember those.
Posted by: E.V. | December 15, 2008 10:56 AM
See:"A Visit from St. Nicholas" (also known as "The Night Before Christmas" and "'Twas the Night Before Christmas". Evidently, he's just not a hell-fire and brimstone kind o' guy.Posted by: Mrs Tilton | December 15, 2008 10:58 AM
If you really must believe in some magic man flying through the sky, I recommend Santa
What, no love for Mr. Mxyzptlk?
Posted by: Randy | December 15, 2008 11:08 AM
Huh; Gawd just addressed this issue a few days ago.
http://deusexeverriculum.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/dear-santa-claus/
Posted by: Tim Fuller | December 15, 2008 11:10 AM
What if Jesus had died on the electric chair?
http://fora.tv/2008/12/05/Dan_Piraro_What_if_Jesus_Had_Died_in_the_Electric_Chair
Enjoy.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | December 15, 2008 11:14 AM
Or for that matter, the Great Gazoo.
"Hello, dumb dumb."
Posted by: Timothy | December 15, 2008 11:15 AM
Santa: Kid tested, PZ approved.
Posted by: kryth | December 15, 2008 11:18 AM
Let's explain what happens if you're on either one's naughty list.
Santa= you get a lump of charcoal, which you can burn.
God= you become a lump of charcoal, which in this can your the one burning.
Posted by: IST | December 15, 2008 11:18 AM
If forced to "believe" in a bearded guy in the sky, I'd prefer Jerry Garcia to either of them... I'm not sure about what the rewards and punishments might be, but I'll bet he'd loveo for you to leave him "brownies".
Posted by: Dana Eccles | December 15, 2008 11:21 AM
I was thinking just the other day that there may actually be more evidence that Santa Claus exists than god. Every year there are millions of photos & gifts under trees. At the very least there actually IS a north pole.
Posted by: JStein | December 15, 2008 11:32 AM
@43, I'm with you. I see Santa all the time (department stores, street corners, etc) and Santa manifests himself by giving presents to children. Much better than the whole "prayer answering" thing.
Posted by: Peter Ashby | December 15, 2008 11:32 AM
Our eldest when aged just about 6 decided that Santa did not exist, but she could not explain the presents from the hirsute gentleman, or the evidence of the eaten/nibbled comestibles (in our house Santa liked a warming malt whisky, a mince pie and a carrot for Rudolf). That xmas she though she had us since we were going to Cornwall for xmas with friends (we had rented a cottage). She would see the presents go into the car and know we had provided them. But her twisted parents arranged with the afforesaid friends to come round one night after the sprogs were asleep and we loaded their car with presents. It was unloaded at the destination after they had gone to bed. Job done.
She had twigged next xmas though. Santa is real because without young children xmas has much less magic.
Posted by: Bjørn Østman | December 15, 2008 11:33 AM
Other differences:
One of them is based on fear, the other is based on joy.One is all the time, while the other is just in December.Posted by: Axe Diesel Palin | December 15, 2008 11:34 AM
I never thought it was intentional, but the Santa myth for children (along with Easter Bunny, tooth fairy, etc.) always struck me as a way to soften a child's thinking to make them more accepting of religious dogma. As if belief in Santa was a "start drug" to prepare you for the real commitment you would have to accept without questioning or logic.
Posted by: Kay | December 15, 2008 11:37 AM
Could someone explain this to me? Because even when I had to go to church as a kid I could never understand the correlation between Jesus "dying for us" and how this somehow meant that we could now be "forgiven for our sins" and go to heaven. What's the correlation between the horrible death and the upside for the followers?
Posted by: Stanton | December 15, 2008 11:39 AM
Well, do remember that Santa Claus was a bishop from what's now Turkey, and is patron saint of pawnbrokers, sailors and anonymous gift-givers.
Posted by: Steve_C | December 15, 2008 11:42 AM
Yeah I never got the "he died for your sins" thing either. It's twisted.
Posted by: BobC | December 15, 2008 11:43 AM
The differences are obvious.
Thanks to the belief in Jebus there has been child abuse (also known as religious brainwashing), genocide, ignorance, and incurable stupidity.
The Santa Claus belief doesn't have any of those problems.
Look at what the Jebus belief did to this asshole.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | December 15, 2008 11:48 AM
Died for your sins that his dad made up to use to torture the people he says he loves.
Posted by: IST | December 15, 2008 11:50 AM
@BobC> Thanks for posting that link... I think I'll let my students play "spot the logical fallacy" and send the better versions to the paper for publication.
Posted by: Maple | December 15, 2008 11:52 AM
Santa does return calls, just write to:
Santa Claus
North Pole
H0H 0H0
Canada
Posted by: AnthonyK | December 15, 2008 11:53 AM
The real reason to prefer Santa is that it's a hell of a lot more fun, for kids and adults too. One of my nicest memories is dressing up as Santa (as a stranger) to connvince some older kids that he wasn't their parents, and walking in to a beautiful Christmas scene as the god of presents. It was brilliant...
But seriously, kind of, did any of you not let your children believe in Santa Claus?
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | December 15, 2008 11:54 AM
Jesus BobC. That guy is an asshole.
this in particular.
Posted by: SOCR-4735 | December 15, 2008 12:01 PM
St. Nicholas is the patron saint of:
Children, sailors, fishermen, merchants, the falsely accused, pawnbrokers, prostitutes, repentant thieves, many cities.
According to wikipedia.
Posted by: Bourgeois_Rage | December 15, 2008 12:02 PM
Screw the harp, I'm bringing my accordion.
Posted by: Vic | December 15, 2008 12:10 PM
It's one imaginary thing making up for another imaginary thing. Works real well. Don't have to prove the cause or the effect.
Posted by: Dinosaur Teacher | December 15, 2008 12:20 PM
"Parenting Beyond Belief" has an excellent chapter of the pro/cons of atheist parents and Santa. I like the idea that its training wheels to get kids to critically analyze weird stuff.
Posted by: lurker42 | December 15, 2008 12:22 PM
I thought Black Peter put you in his sack and took you to Spain if you were bad.
Too bad I'm an atheist, so no free trip.
Posted by: breadmaker | December 15, 2008 12:25 PM
@kay #48
i wonder:
is "sin" referring to a substance?
is "sin" referring t0 a legal debt?
is "sin" referring to offense to the conscience of another?
---
many philosophical issues to wrastle with on the definition of "sin"
i still have not found a definition that I find immediately satisfying as reasonable.
---
i'm sure anyone with (angst/bitterness/ignorance/hate/etc) would give one answer, but it seems to me that if someone is clanging their gong at me about a term, i should investigate from their schema what a term means, ex. "sin"
with that said, i am not a fan of modern day shallow religion, nor the blighted history of the Roman Catholic Church Empire. But what I have found tucked in between all the mess is a product of Martin Luther's reformation. I can't seem to ask a question that fails to return a consistent and comprehensive answer with regard to what is commonly called "Reformed Theology."
Try this: http://monergism.com/
Posted by: David Ratnasabapathy | December 15, 2008 12:35 PM
breakmaker:
Perhaps you should read your bible? Or Bart Ehrman's God's Problem (Highly recommended). You will find in the Old Testament clear statements by God that he rewards virtue and punishes wrongdoing. When God preserved Noah and his family but slaughtered everyone else, wasn't He rewarding virtue and punishing evil?
Certainly the New Testament supports your view... but not the Bible.
Posted by: Ubi Dubius | December 15, 2008 12:40 PM
"God and Santa Claus are coming to town.
One gives you presents and the other smites you down.
I'll leave cookies for Santa, but not for God,
'Cause he seems to think that I'm a human lightening rod."
- Dan Hart, "Santa God"
Posted by: J.D. Hutton | December 15, 2008 12:49 PM
If you write to Santa, he writes back! Santa: 1 God: 0
Posted by: Benjamin Geiger | December 15, 2008 1:02 PM
David Ramalamadingdong @ #63:
So, when God saved Lot (who offered to let a mob rape his virgin daughters, and then went on to impregnate both of them himself), was he rewarding virtue?
Even if you look at Noah, there's a problem: Noah's son Ham saw his father naked, and in return, Noah cursed... not Ham... but Ham's *son*. How is that virtuous?
Posted by: Randy | December 15, 2008 1:22 PM
Axe @47:
Exactly. Santa is a gateway drug to deism. He is the dimebag of weed to God's brand of Jesus-Crack, if you will.
Posted by: chancelikely | December 15, 2008 1:27 PM
Not "Gateway Drug", but rather "Training Bra".
Posted by: Steve_C | December 15, 2008 1:30 PM
I've been kind of ambivalent about Santa and my son. He's 4 and a half and has a pretty good BS detector. I haven't really tried to sell him on Santa being real and having magical powers and basically extorting good behavior from him.
He knows the Santa story, but he knows lots of stories, so I don't think he's all that impressed. I also feel like I'm lying to him if I do try to sell it to him. I'm uncomfortable with that. So Santa is just a Christmas time story about how the presents get under the tree.
I think he would believe that Jedis and the force were real before he bought into Santa.
Posted by: Damian | December 15, 2008 1:56 PM
Perhaps #6 should be:
"disbelief correlates with education"
The sad fact of the matter is that there are plenty of intelligent adults who believe in a god but we do have the stats to show that the more education you have the less likely you are to believe in a god.
Posted by: AnthonyK | December 15, 2008 2:15 PM
If Santa is the patron saint of the falsely accused, does that mean he is Jesus' patron saint?
Hey, is that how theology works?
Posted by: facilis | December 15, 2008 2:17 PM
The sad fact of the matter is that there are plenty of intelligent adults who believe in a god but we do have the stats to show that the more education you have the less likely you are to believe in a god.
I guess this is partially true but the correlation isn't that simple. The plot for wealthiness vs. religion is virtually the same. (Is it just that richer people tend to be more greedy and sinful and tend to reject religion because of that?)
But what about MENSA? On about 5% of their members are atheists or agnostic?
Posted by: blf | December 15, 2008 2:38 PM
I prefer the hogfather. Not only does he fly though the air, give presents/coal, and is generally jolly (and other things ending in -olly), he's also a demi(?- quasi?-)god: It's been proven that if he doesn't exist then the sun doesn't rise.
The turtle moves!
Posted by: cervantes | December 15, 2008 2:40 PM
Work all day
Live on hay.
You'll get pie
In the sky
When you die.
Posted by: Mathi Lusch | December 15, 2008 2:54 PM
Another inaccurate poll? The picture is of the Coca-cola Santa Claus. Thereby, inaccurate. Proper comparison: Santa Claus, from the Polish Saint Nicholas. Existence is proven. Songs, servants, naughty/nice is also an invention of Coca-cola so those have no influence. God, that is a matter of personal faith. If there are going to be polls, lets have something a bit more realistic and serious. I can see how this poll is being used in jest and to make mockery, but since it is not historically accurate, it makes it mute.
Posted by: Damian | December 15, 2008 3:08 PM
Facilis, it's true that correlation is not necessarily causation but as this list is a comparison between God and Santa it's a better and more justifiable point to make than "Not believed by intelligent adults". I'm picking that the less exposure you have to knowledge of the world around you the more likely you are to swallow religious dogma as fact.
As for MENSA, that's even more problematic as it is voluntary membership rather than a sampling of the general population but even so, I looked around for stats and, if anything, it further supports the idea that there is a positive correlation between "intelligence" and non-belief.
Posted by: Brandon P. | December 15, 2008 3:40 PM
Where did this notion that God was a white man with a long white beard come from, anyway? Why can't God be, say, a hot black woman?
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | December 15, 2008 3:42 PM
Or a crippled aboriginal Australian with one eye and really bad breath?
Posted by: Martin | December 15, 2008 3:47 PM
I have much more evidence for the existence of Santa than the existence of god. There are some xmas presents I got as a kid that to this day - I cannot figure out who gave them to me. It could have been Santa. No such possibilities with god.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | December 15, 2008 3:52 PM
Suits me. I've been worshiping Lark Voorhies since Saved By The Bell premiered in 1989.
Plus, I'll bet these Edmonton winters wouldn't seem so cold if I was earning a few bucks on the side guiding pilgrims to Rae Dawn Chong's birthplace. Can anybody here work Quest for Fire and Commando into a Gregorian chant?
Posted by: Steve | December 15, 2008 4:22 PM
Hey, let's not forget. In this economy, some of us might prefer to get coal. It's like free heating this winter!
Posted by: windy | December 15, 2008 4:26 PM
Polish?? Wasn't he from what is now Turkey?
Although we Europeans like to argue about which country has the most "authentic" Santa, why not consider them all aspects of the same being like the "Our Lady of this-or-that" tradition. So there's Our Sinterklaas of the Netherlands, Our Tomte of Sweden and Our Yule Goat of Finland (the Goat with a Thousand Presents. Iä! Iä!)
Posted by: Benjamin Geiger | December 15, 2008 4:35 PM
windy @ #82:
Shouldn't that be "Bä! Bä!"?
Posted by: BobbyEarle | December 15, 2008 5:25 PM
Tim Fuller @25...
Do tell...
"Demands sacrifices, tithes, or cookies."
This sort of describes most of us here: We demand cookies.
Posted by: frog | December 15, 2008 5:55 PM
Generally believed in by children??
Your average six-year old knows that Santa is a game played between adults and children. But "everybody" deludes themselves into believing in El --- it's much easier to disprove the light-speed breaking old man in a sleigh, as opposed to the untestable, unverifiable old man in the sky.
Speak in complete gibberish, and no one can claim you're wrong -- but speak in partial gibberish, and everyone can laugh at you.
Posted by: HidariMak | December 15, 2008 5:55 PM
To Woody at #17...
You may as well have a third column for Satan though, since the only difference would be the lack of a beard. If religion can have so many different lists as to what's evil or virtuous, what's one more?
Posted by: Malcolm | December 15, 2008 6:07 PM
Brandon#77
If they are going to go with a guy, shouldn't he at least look Jewish?
Posted by: Rey Fox | December 15, 2008 6:42 PM
"If you're good, Santa brings you toys every year"
Well no, plenty of eyewitness reports show that the parents are actually the giftgivers. But I'll spot you a point in that the assorted clergy at my church never gave me a bicycle for believing in Jesus and being good.
Posted by: PeteK | December 15, 2008 7:11 PM
God = old man flying through the sky. Ultimate straw man version of God! Would that it were that simple!
Posted by: Mariana | December 15, 2008 10:06 PM
OT, sort of:
Man wants to put up Festivus pole at State Capitol.
http://www.kirotv.com/news/18207510/detail.html#-
Watch the video.
This is hilarious, can't stop laughing.
Posted by: Brandon P. | December 15, 2008 10:53 PM
If they are going to go with a guy, shouldn't he at least look Jewish?
Do followers of Judaism have a particular look now?
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | December 16, 2008 10:57 AM
Another reason Santa is better than God
Posted by: paradoctor | December 16, 2008 12:11 PM
Santa's a god that you're _supposed_ to outgrow; it's _expected_. In fact I say that outgrowing Santa is the whole point of Santa. Apparently in our culture we make a point of putting our children through an initiation into skepticism. He's sort of like a vaccine; a myth immunization.
Only the Tooth Fairy (and maybe the Easter Bunny) can compare.
Posted by: Jim A. | December 16, 2008 1:07 PM
Greatest miracle attributed to each:
Santa: Raised children from the dead after they had been killed, butchered, and salted away in barrels.
Jesus: Got up and left town after being playing dead for three days.
Posted by: breadmaker | December 17, 2008 12:16 PM
#63 David Ratnasabapathy
1. the comments that i posted were in the context of a brand of theology called "reformed theology", some of my background education has been steeped in this.
2. you assume to much, as to what i believe.
3. in fact you will find by reading and studying in an exegetical manner, that Noah's righteousness is credited to him on the basis of faith, that faith comes from God, that man does nothing come from the heart of man but sin etc.
thus my previous comments stand as consistent with both testaments of the jewish and christian scriptures
4. i should have been clearer in my comment that,
Santa Claus makes you earn your good gift whereas according to reformed theology, Jesus died so that the good gift could be imparted to you without you having to earn it.
apologies for any confusion, did i refute your objections with sufficient brevity and comprhensivness?
Posted by: Nick Gotts | December 17, 2008 12:42 PM
The problem with this is that according to the bible all people are bad therefore not one gets rewarded.
Therefore Jesus had to live and die on people's account so that his chosen people would get rewarded based on his good behavior. - breadmaker
Which is utterly absurd, and morally repugnant.
Posted by: Nick Gotts | December 17, 2008 1:02 PM
i am not a fan of modern day shallow religion, nor the blighted history of the Roman Catholic Church Empire. But what I have found tucked in between all the mess is a product of Martin Luther's reformation. - breadmaker
Martin Luther? Ah, yes, the well known author of On the Jews and their Lies, and Against the Murdering, Thieving Hordes of Peasants. A man with all the moral integrity of Jeffrey Dahmer.