Santa, do Christians believe in him? If not, why not.

[dangerdan]

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.

[Gaunt]

Ok, instead of nature, let's use a more accurate word...HABIT.

No, I do not accept your word replacement. It was not HABIT that caused "original sin," it was not HABIT that got Adam and Eve kicked out of Paradise.

Just because He can do something does not mean He must do that thing.

You are quite correct. Likewise, just because humans can do something does not mean we must. However, his ability to have both free will and be sinless means he possesses a quality that humans do not, whatever it may be.

Adam and Eve were created sinless. They still ahd the ability to sin, and they did.

Just because they were sinless does not mean they were perfect. They lacked a key ingredient. Perhaps it was resistance to temptation they lacked. Perhaps it was wisdom. It was obvious that they didn't know right from wrong (they couldn't until they ate the fruit). Whatever it was, it is what cost them paradise.

False stipulations.

Only existance was stipulated, which is why it was noted as such in parentheses. All of the others are premises that are free to be challenged, save the conclusion which is the result of the premises. IF the conclusion is false, then either I'm missing something in the premises, or one of the premises is false. Existance is stipulated so that this doesn't devolve into another proof of God's existance thread thingything .

God's Will is free. It is enslaved to nothing. It is His own. But God does not make choices in the present tense. Would that even make any sense? If God is infinite, existing independant of time and matter (the dimensions of this world), how can we confine His Will to these dimensions? We cannot.

I am not trying to limit God. I am merely noting that God is said to have Free Will ( no matter the form it takes ), as well as God's sinless state. The concept of Free will is not limited to any dimensions. It simply allows for one to do what one wills if one is able, based on choice, rather than limiting one to the chain of cause and effect.

Adam and Eve were perfect in the sense that they were blameless before God.

Again, blameless, as sinless, does not mean perfect. The fact that they committed a sin is proof of their flaw even before the fruit's mystical changing effects.

Our sinful nature came about after eating from the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil.

But the choice to commit that sin was made before the eating. This choice was based on their nature. If it was not in their nature to sin, they would not have. That they did shows that their nature was flawed before the actual act of sin.

As for the Free Will issue

The Free Will defense is a popular one with regards to the Problem of Evil. As well, Free Will is what accounted for Man's rebellion. Without it, the entire justification of hell fails. It would not be punishment so much as eternal torment on a creature that had no say in the matter. That is not merciful, fair, or just. It is simply cruel.

I would be happy to take up the matter of free will in the predestination thread, however I think Amadeus (amoung others. I don't mean to single you out ) would agree that people, and God, have free will, which is why it is one of the premises.

[Amadeus]

Are you implying that God is flawed because He could also choose between good and evil?

[Gaunt]

Not at all. I'm saying that Adam and Eve were flawed because they chose to sin.

[Amadeus]

Then don't you see that they flawed themselves?

[Gaunt]

no because

But the choice to commit that sin was made before the eating. This choice was based on their nature. If it was not in their nature to sin, they would not have. That they did shows that their nature was flawed before the actual act of sin.

[Amadeus]

I really don't agree! If your mother told you not to do something, but you did it anyway in disobedience, it would not follow that it was her fault that you decided to disobey. The same goes with God.

[Gaunt]

I really don't agree! If your mother told you not to do something, but you did it anyway in disobedience, it would not follow that it was her fault that you decided to disobey. The same goes with God.

I really disagree with your analogy here. There is a fundamental difference between me disobeying my mother and Adam and Eve disobeying God. My mother would have taught me the difference between good and bad, right and wrong, etc.
God did not do the same for Adam and Eve.

As well, my mother does not have absolute control over my environment. she could not remove ALL harmful influences. God could and did not.

My mother never claimed that she would raise me in a Paradise.
God did, and yet let the snake in.

etc etc yadda yadda

[dangerdan]

…nor did your mother design you from scratch with intentions for you to be perfect.

God designed Adam and Eve with intentions for them to be perfect, and the exact moment they “chose” to eat the apple, is apparently the first sign of their “sin” (so the bible seems to say), therefore the apple itself really has nothing to do with the origins of “sin”, whatever that may be. The “choice” predates the actual apple eating.

By the way, how can a snake talk? Do they even have a voice box capable of the frequency response humans can hear? Wait, let me guess, the snake “supernaturally” talked. No problem.

[dangerdan]

There are a lot of people that can try to find a lot of problems with the way God does things. Fine. And it also may be true that if a person had God's infinite power... they would no doubt make some changes to His plan and do things differently.

But I garuntee you this: Whether you understand God's plan or not, if you had God's infinite power AND infinite WISDOM... you would be running things the EXACT SAME WAY.

How can you guarantee me this?

I hope you can see that you can rationalize anything with this argument. It can’t be falsified. It’s a truism. So even if God goes around slaughtering and cursing things left right and center, like he did in the bible, you still have no problem with it!?

I’ll be a little more specific, if you would do everything the exact same way as God did, would you also curse all women with painful childbirth, like God did?

[chrispalasz]

To Gaunt: 8)

Only existance was stipulated

My bad. I meant the conclusions.

Again, blameless, as sinless, does not mean perfect.

Well then for the sake of this discussion, I will use the word blameless. That is what the Bible refers to.

The Free Will defense is a popular one with regards to the Problem of Evil.

True, true.

As well, Free Will is what accounted for Man's rebellion. Without it, the entire justification of hell fails.

No, not true. It is a very weak argument and it provides a very weak foundation for Biblical theology. The Bible simply cannot stand on the concept of free will as it is meant and understood today. I'm not saying that "free will" doesn't exist... but I am saying that it doesn't mean what people assume it means.

It would not be punishment so much as eternal torment on a creature that had no say in the matter. That is not merciful, fair, or just. It is simply cruel.

This is also not true. Maybe you can explain the cruelty of punishing an Evil that has not a hint of Goodness inside.

I would be happy to take up the matter of free will in the predestination thread,

Move it on down

however I think Amadeus (amoung others. I don't mean to single you out ) would agree that people, and God, have free will, which is why it is one of the premises.

Well that's fine. I am not critical of anyone that believes in free will and/or uses it as a defense. Free will certainly does exist, just not in the sense that people now-a-days understand it. So, I stand firm in my view, and as it is being demonstrated on this board, sound Christian Doctrine and free will doctrine are not the same and do not peacefully exist with one another.

a blip for dangerdan:

How can you guarantee me this?

I garuntee with my word.

I hope you can see that you can rationalize anything with this argument. It can’t be falsified. It’s a truism. So even if God goes around slaughtering and cursing things left right and center, like he did in the bible, you still have no problem with it!?

What you have named as "slaughtering and cursing" is God's Righteous Judgment. Of course I agree with it! Why shouldn't God, knowing everything, have the right to pronounce judgement on evil???

It is true. Anything can be rationalized with that argument... but not everything that CAN be rationalized is Truth, whereas what I have said is.

I’ll be a little more specific, if you would do everything the exact same way as God did, would you also curse all women with painful childbirth, like God did?

Absolutely! I most definately would... and I will confidently speak for anyone on this issue. They would do the same... and so would you.

I have no shame in speaking on behalf of God's Benevolence (as though He needed me to...). It's one of the easiest things I can possibly do. Anyone that knows Him firsthand would tell you the same thing.