Ok, you're probably wondering what Santa has to do with Christianity? bear with me here....
The topic of Santa was brought up in the thread "Everyone should be agnostic?, and with it brought some interesting topics to do with belief systems, well worthy of a new thread.
Now why is this in a Christianity forum? I think it has some rich insights into Christian epistemology - why they believe in some things and not others. I was pondering putting this in the philosophy sub-forum, but I feel it’s more relating to pure Christian thought (though if moderators feel otherwise then that's ok).
So, let the debate begin! I do not intend the question to be demeaning or disrespectful, but merely a candid enquiry. So with no further ado - Do Christians believe in Santa? If not, why not.
Santa, do Christians believe in him? If not, why not.
Moderator: Moderators
Post #241
These lame apologetics are proof of nothing. Have you ever read a history of the gospels that wasn't produced by some ministry or other? Maybe something written by an actual historian? Your mischaracterization of the historicity of the gospels suggests that you have not.foshizzle wrote:Now that the subject of the historical proof is out of the way...
And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto His people. Exodus 32:14
Post #242
Actually, yes, I have. Have /you/ read a completely unbiased analysis?
Instead of questioning my previous study, why not have a point to your post?
What have I said that is incorrect? Instead of saying "they're lame", tell me why.
Instead of questioning my previous study, why not have a point to your post?
What have I said that is incorrect? Instead of saying "they're lame", tell me why.
Post #243
Nothing is completely unbiased. I've read a lot of good stuff though.foshizzle wrote:Actually, yes, I have. Have /you/ read a completely unbiased analysis?
Instead of ranting about the existence of Jesus, why didn't you just answer my original question?foshizzle wrote:Instead of questioning my previous study, why not have a point to your post?
foshizzle wrote:I'm not sure if the point of this thread was to compare God to Santa, or Jesus to Santa.
Which was it?Lotan wrote:I thought Jesus and God were supposed to be the same guy. Have you changed your mythology?
This is the 'Santa' thread. The 'historicity of the gospels' thing has been done to death on other threads.foshizzle wrote:What have I said that is incorrect? Instead of saying "they're lame", tell me why.
And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto His people. Exodus 32:14
Post #245
Sure I do. I just don't believe everything that was ever written about them. Do you think that Vespasian could heal the blind or that Alexander had a golden leg?foshizzle wrote:I posed the question earlier, do you believe the likes of Caeser, Aristotle, Socrates, etc. existed?
Because professional historians, whose business it is to know such things, say that they existed. I am fairly confident that Jesus of Nazareth existed for the same reason.foshizzle wrote:If so, why?
Now can you please explain why you said "compare God to Santa, or Jesus to Santa"? Are they not the same to you?
And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do unto His people. Exodus 32:14
Post #246
King of a confusing subject (There are entire books written about it).
While yes, Jesus /is/ God, he's also the Son of God that was placed on Earth. It was because of his earthly travels and teachigns that we can verify his existance so easily.
While yes, Jesus /is/ God, he's also the Son of God that was placed on Earth. It was because of his earthly travels and teachigns that we can verify his existance so easily.
Post #249
Sheesh, did it get awfully hostile over here or is that just me? 
Silly work has got me doing…work, which means no time for the fertile debates and mental exercise of DC&R. Bummer.
Now, getting into the crux of the debate, you seem to be quite convinced that a person named Jesus once lived and went about the place, and you believe there is ample historical evidence to back this up. Fair enough. It seems to me quite likely that a historical man called Jesus did get about the place, and did good deeds, and became the basis of some interesting stories. Then am I right in assuming you believe Jesus obtained supernatural powers, later in life, and performed all manner of miracles, because they were recorded in the bible? (correct me if I’m wrong).
Now, if I can make a parallel and try to link it back to the subject of the thread –
There seems to be quite a great deal of evidence supporting the existence of a historical man, called St Nicholas, who lived long ago in Europe. Then there seems to be many stories about St Nicholas / Santa appearing to people on Christmas delivering presents. In fact the stories seem to be worldwide. Surely if you reason that Jesus was once a normal man, who later in life obtained supernatural powers (including the ability to walk on water), is it not just as reasonable to believe there was a fellow named St Nicholas, who did good deeds and handed out presents, and then obtained supernatural powers, including (among other things) the ability to defy gravity, much like Jesus?
To ask an honest question, why do you find one story more reasonable than the other?
Silly work has got me doing…work, which means no time for the fertile debates and mental exercise of DC&R. Bummer.
Foshizzle, for starters, your name rocks dude.foshizzle wrote:Well, I believe his words to be true, and he called himself the Son of God as well as God.
Now, getting into the crux of the debate, you seem to be quite convinced that a person named Jesus once lived and went about the place, and you believe there is ample historical evidence to back this up. Fair enough. It seems to me quite likely that a historical man called Jesus did get about the place, and did good deeds, and became the basis of some interesting stories. Then am I right in assuming you believe Jesus obtained supernatural powers, later in life, and performed all manner of miracles, because they were recorded in the bible? (correct me if I’m wrong).
Now, if I can make a parallel and try to link it back to the subject of the thread –
There seems to be quite a great deal of evidence supporting the existence of a historical man, called St Nicholas, who lived long ago in Europe. Then there seems to be many stories about St Nicholas / Santa appearing to people on Christmas delivering presents. In fact the stories seem to be worldwide. Surely if you reason that Jesus was once a normal man, who later in life obtained supernatural powers (including the ability to walk on water), is it not just as reasonable to believe there was a fellow named St Nicholas, who did good deeds and handed out presents, and then obtained supernatural powers, including (among other things) the ability to defy gravity, much like Jesus?
To ask an honest question, why do you find one story more reasonable than the other?
Post #250
I must say, Socrates is a perfect example here. Four different people refer to him, yet, their is still no actual "proof" of his existence. (we do have sculptures) I would on the other hand give Plato higher credit for mentioning then any other writer. But i think its a good example of existence versus none existence.I posed the question earlier, do you believe the likes of Caeser, Aristotle, Socrates, etc. existed?
The difference here is, ofcourse, that Socrates never claimed to be the Son of God/Being a God, and so its not very hard to believe this, whiles Jesus on the other hand, claimed to be a God, and the only thing he did was to walk on water, ´heal´ some people osv. Not very impressive....
I believe Socrates to have been in existence, and Jesus, the son of God, not.
