Atheist Apologist

Here a Christian demanded to know why atheists so often bring up Santa in atheist-theist discussions. In response, I reviewed an article that lists obvious parallels between Santa Claus and Jesus/God.

The article was written by Dr. Hank Davis and Stephanie Tytus, published in Canadian Freethinker, pp. 6-10 in the Winter 2008 issue. Davis is a professor of evolutionary psychology at the University of Guelph; Tytus was his thesis student at the time.

Title: Santa Claus and God: A Match Made in Heaven?

Davis and Tytus used the following as a research question and did a formal project: Is Santa Claus a weapon in the theist's arsenal, or is he just another childhood belief that, if anything, might undermine later belief in God? (p. 6)

Davis decided to do this project because of an atheist who made the public statement that he would not allow Santa Claus in his home; his first child was due to be born. That atheist made that decision because, in his opinion, belief in Santa Claus led to belief in invisible entities such as God. Davis and Tytus quote him: "Gifts and celebration would be fine: just no jolly old magic fat guy" (p. 6).

In their article, Davis and Tytus present arguments for and against that man's idea. They also mention an author, Belk, 1987, who:

analyzed similarities between Santa Claus and Jesus Christ, including the role of miracles, gifts, prayer and omniscience, and concluded that Santa Claus is a secular version of Christ (p. 6).

So Davis and Tytus set out to examine the similarities between Santa and God in the popular culture (children's books, songs, stories, TV shows and movies), and also got parental permission to "discuss Santa Claus and God" with four to six-year-old children at their university's day care centre. Faculty, staff, and students, as well as local people, use the university's daycare (pp. 6-7).

Here are the similarities between God and Santa that emerged from their discussions with the children (p. 7):

• both were viewed as old white men
• both had magic powers, including omniscience (all-knowing) and omnipresence (being in multiple places at the same time)
• both had the ability to fly
• both lived "up there"
• both wanted children to be good
• both used super-human powers to monitor day-to-day activities from afar
• Quote from one child: Santa can watch you even when he's not there because he's magic like God.
• both rewarded them directly for being good and took note of misbehaviour

A six-year-old seemed to know that God and Santa don't live in the same place; maybe the North Pole isn't quite as high up as heaven, but both are "up there" (p. 7).

In addition to talking with children, Davis and Tytus analyzed popular songs, TV shows, children's books, etc. They did no less than fifty each for God and for Santa Claus (p. 7). They found three themes that are common for each (direct quotes--original is not numbered--from p. 7):

1.The first of these, magical powers, includes a wide range of mastery over the physical universe. When God or Santa has something that needs doing, the laws that normally govern time, space or physical matter simply don't apply.
2. The second theme common to God and Santa is omniscience. Both are able to detect what is in our hearts and minds. Words do not need to be spoken and, even when they are, they are audible over impossibly great distances. In short, both God and Santa know all they need to in order to act as moral agents.
3. The final theme common to God and Santa is social exchange.... [which is] offering something with the wish or expectation of receiving something in return.... Such "deals" are frequently proposed in the form of prayers to God or letters to Santa. In most cases, the suppliant asures the supernatural agent that he or she has been or intends to be good in return for a specified outcome, be it a toy, a healing or an economic upturn.

Sources for magical powers, omniscience, and effiicacy of prayer (p. 7-8 ):

• lyrics to gospel music such as His Eye is on the Sparrow and Amazing Grace; Strange Man, 1968, Dorothy Love Coates, (Okey 12125); The Battle is the Lord's, 1994, Yolanda Adams (New Haven 2027); Touch the Hem of His Garment, 1956, Sam Cooke and the Soul Stirrers (Specialty 896); Oh Happy Day, 1969, Edwin Hawkins Singers, (Pavillion 20001) (p.7).
• Santa baby, I want a yacht and really that's not/ A lot/ Been an awfully good girl (Santa Baby, 1953, Eartha Kitt, RCA 47-5502) (p. 8 ).
• Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz/ My friends all drive Porches and I must make amends (Mercedes Benz, 1971, Janis Joplin, Columbia 4-45379) (p. 8 ).
• He sees you when you're sleeping/ He knows when you're awake/ He knows when you've been good or bad/ So be good for goodness sake (Santa Claus is Coming To Town, 1934, Coots/Gillespie) (p. 8 ).

That gives you an idea what kind of stuff Davis and Tytus are looking at. Here is one more direct quote:

In the movie Must Be Santa (1999), Santa's elves are shown as angels who live in the clouds on "Heaven Standard Time." It is also common to portray Santa as a godlike figure in children's books such as Santa Calls, (1993), Christmas Angel (1995) and The Light of Christmas (2002) (p. 9).

Needless to say, angels, God, and Jesus are also supposed to "live in the clouds," and to know when we've "been good or bad," etc. The similarities are undeniable. People have deconverted for the exact reason that they found that their parents lied about Santa, so what else did they lie about? My parents, who were very devout Christians, taught me that Santa is a lie--something that only worldly people believe but we who have the true faith do not believe in Santa Claus. They also taught that when children find out that Santa is not true, they will be likely to question God.

Davis and Tytus ask whether this really is the case. Drawing on evolutionary psychology, they think the answer is No. They cite Pascal Boyer. There are other reasons for which people are liable to believe in God and also in Santa, but belief in one does not necessarily lead to belief in the other, or vice versa.

I think the evidence of living human beings shows that for some people it does lead to, or away from, God. For others, it makes no difference.

No honest person, however, can deny the similarities. Thus, if Christians wish to be considered honest, they will either provide solid reasons for why they think this article is wrong; or refrain from ridiculing people for using Santa as an equivalent for Jesus/God.

Originally posted here in a discussion on theism vs atheism.

Ten reasons for the nonexistence of Santa Claus:

1. My mother taught me that he is a worldly teaching and we as Christians don't accept him because he doesn't exist.
2. It is impossible that a fat man can climb down chimneys.
3. Explorers and others have been to the North Pole where Santa Claus is reported to live and they did not report seeing a fat man in a red suit, or his wife or reindeer, or sled, elves, or workshop where he makes toys.
4. A fat man with sled full of toys pulled by a team of reindeer cannot travel through the sky.
5. It is impossible for a single sled team to deliver toys to all the billions of children around the world in one night, esp. considering the difficult task it is to squish his bulk down chimneys, and the additional problem he's got of manufacturing chimneys for a lot of huts in jungles and apartments buildings with central gas or electrical heating.
6. The concept of a man in a red suit getting letters and emails from every child in the world is not viable.
7. The concept of him knowing if children were good all year is ridiculous.
8. His name is Satan with a few letters rearranged so he must be an agent of the devil and therefore not real.
9. Nobody ever saw him.
10. There is no scientific evidence for his existence.

Ten reasons for the existence of Santa Claus:

1. Millions of children around the world believe in him.
2. Millions of children around the world send letters and emails to him each years.
3. Millions of children around the world get gifts from him each year.
4. Millions of children around the world are convinced the gifts are from Santa Claus, even though they never actually see the fat man in the red suit, because they get what they asked for. If they don't, they always realize it was because they cried when they shouldn't have or did something else that was bad.
5. All of us know Santa Claus is real because everybody says so and all the stores, magazines, newspapers, and TV programs show pictures and images of him every Christmas.
6. There are many songs and stories about Santa Claus that prove he's real.
7. Thinking about Santa Claus and what he does for us at Christmas if we're good makes us feel good, special and loved, if we're young children. If we're parents, Santa Claus helps us control our kids because when we threaten them that they won't get anything from Santa this Christmas if they do that they always shape up.
8. Very many of us have actually seen the fat man in the red suit at shopping malls. We have heard his voice and some of us sat on his lap when we were little.
9. The song says the little girl saw her mommy kiss Santa. If her mother kissed Santa he's got to be real. Adult women don't kiss pretend men, so there!
10. St. Nicholas actually existed.

I'd like to say a bit about the background of Santa Claus as compared to that of God. To do so, I will have to bring in a bit of history from the other forums to provide context.

As stated, the OP of this thread was written in response to a Christian demanding to know why atheists always brought Santa Claus into the argument.

Christian:

...in the case of people who truly believe that they have only one life, and are bent on ridicule, I don't understand why they waste their time on Santa?

My Response: Post 65

I challenge you to document any posts where I "waste time on Santa."

Also me, in Post 67

First, let me reiterate that, unless memory fails me, I personally have not used the Santa Claus argument.

That is the opening sentence of my post as it stands on Reasonable Faith.org. I made a few changes before I posted it here on these forums.

While I was writing Post 67, apparently he looked up and posted a copy of my "Ten Reasons" post from way back when, and provided a link to it.

As soon as I posted Post 67, I saw the Ten Reasons Post and remembered very well that I had written it. I was, and remain, proud of it. He actually did me quite a favour in looking it up. (I may have posted it elsewhere on these forums but don't remember doing so.) I copied his post and said underneath it:

You posted that while I was writing. I forgot about that post. I need to think about it some more before I can respond appropriately.

I had to say something right away if I wanted him to believe me because the level of trust between Christians and atheists on those forums is not very high. He was nice about it. Half an hour later I posted:

Okay, I've had a bit of time to look it up in context and think about the situation. First, not in the least do I consider that post to be "wasting time" on Santa. I did apparently use him as an analogy for the theist/atheist argument and I think he makes an excellent case--then and now.

Unlike God, a forerunner of Santa Claus actually existed in history--so I am told. However, the mythical character from whom children think they get gifts at Christmas today is not the historical St. Nikolaus; it is a supernatural character not unlike God/Jesus, as shown by Davis and Tytus, and also Belk. I feel confident that the readers of this forum, esp. people of mature age such as yourself, can easily tell which version of St. Nick/Santa is being referred to in the posts above.

I've been thinking since posting that. How big is the difference between God/Jesus and Santa Claus? These days, in discussions about Jesus, sharp distinction is made between the historical Jesus and the Jesus as personal Savior of religion. The Muslims seem to put Jesus somewhere in the middle by giving him the role of prophet; this brings him to the level of deified human rather than deity itself as Christianity holds him, but I get the impression that in Islam Jesus is still far above regular prophets. Santa Claus is not part of that hierarchy; what Santa Claus and Jesus have in common is some basis in history, however disputed, as having at one time existed as a flesh and blood human being on this planet.

I think we all know the Jesus story. I understand the Santa Claus of today is based on a person known in history as St. Nikolaus, who was a very generous person who gave gifts to the poor. I further understand that St. Nikolaus was not known as a fat man in a red suit until the eighteenth or nineteenth century when some American poet or artist cast him that way. For some reason, the image took hold of the public's imagination and now we have the indispensable jolly red-suited fat man riding his sleigh to every home in the world on Christmas Eve every year, delivering presents to rich and poor, old and young. Except that in real life, the actual gifts end up disproportionately in the homes of the well-to-do.

As stated above, I personally was raised not to believe in Santa Clause. To this day, I do not think I missed out on anything. I had enough religious lies to sort through--stories that had no basis in reality yet I was supposed to believe them. Possibly, if I had been raised with Santa Claus, I could have deconverted from the Jesus stories decades earlier; it probably would have worked exactly as my mother feared.

I cannot cease to marvel how it comes to be that the horse and buggy people share so many values with the atheists: no Santa Claus or Christmas decorations, and also pacifism, i.e. don't go to war--those two for starters hit me in the face right away. End result: I can't ever be part of mainstream society--I must always be part of a minority if I want to be true to my convictions. At first, I had a real problem with the idea that Christmas decorations are wrong for atheists. It did not feel like freethinking at all! I like to enjoy Christmas lights in other people's front yards and finally I came to realize that the Winter Festival of Lights, on which most of this is based, pre-dates Christianity.

As for the Christ Child, as Richard Dawkins says, we need to keep the Bible in our society because of its major role in shaping our culture and making Western society who and what we are. I consider myself fortunate to live at a time when I can see well-respected and highly educated adults living out age-old myths without losing one iota of social and personal dignity. It's like watching a scene from anthropology of the Pacific Islanders or history of the ancient Greeks and Romans in which people celebrated myths as though they were real. Different people, different time, same theme.

As for jolly ol' St. Nick, he's part of our culture now, too, in the same way as are the bunny, baby chicks, and eggs of Easter, and the corn, pumpkins, and jack-o-lanterns of Thanksgiving and Halloween.

Originally posted as Post 84.

Mathenaut wrote:rsmartin compared christianity to santa, not because he was arguing santa, but because we don't argue santa. We don't argue about santa because we know it's false, makes no sense, and is generally silly.

Actually, I think Lightfoot gets this when he asks why do we argue for something we don't think exists. I think he's trying to turn our own argument back on us. As you, Mathenaut, or someone else said, I don't think the aim of this thread is what he claims it to be. LF is not that honest and transparent. In my experience he is quite the opposite. He's been taking a different tactic with me recently but my guess is that's just because he decided on a different tactic.

Never underestimate the trickery of a Christian. In my experience, the Christians on these forums are con-men to the core. In my opinion, there is nothing as evil as iniquity justified by religion. If something appears honest, it's nothing but appearances. *All that glitters is not gold.*

Mathenaut wrote:Christianity is no different, which makes it all the more ridiculous that we honestly need to have these discussions to keep you christians from hurting yourselves and, more importantly, others.

My hope is that if we keep banging away at this long enough and repeat it often enough, maybe some of the younger ones will eventually begin to think. It might be ten years down the road. It may be a lurker or seeker who just happens to read something and we'll never know it.

If only Christians would have the intellectual integrity to accept--and examine--the analogy between Santa Claus and their God/Jesus. One is as real as the other. Santa Claus may have some basis in historic reality; so may Jesus, though I seriously doubt it. Gods and elves--no. Nor flying reindeer and toy factories at the North Pole, heavens full of angels, and hells full of demons somewhere in--or outside--the universe.

Of course, religious people can argue for it but in so doing they make themselves responsible for proving why their specific deities and demons and heavens and hells should be taken more seriously than those of other religions and peoples and cultures. That their god is the true god because their sacred text says so holds less water than a sieve because all other religions and sacred texts say the same thing of all other deities and demons and heavens and hells.

They say it with just as much enthusiasm, fervor, and emphasis. And they are just as absolutely true! They think that anyone who disagrees--which definitely includes those self-serving greedy capitalist pale-faced worshippers of a god-on-a-stick (also known as Christians) will suffer some very serious unpleasantry or other for their rejection of the True Belief.

So how, exactly, are we to know that your god on a stick crushed the head of a snake that talked to a women three thousand years earlier? Like, hadn't that snake fossilized by that time? How could he crush its head if he was nailed to a tree? Shouldn't the woman's husband have taken a huge rock right then and there and crushed it--given that the woman herself was too frighten to do it?

I mean, there's something wrong--either with the person who hears the snake talking in human voice or with the snake that is talking. If crushing the snake's head didn't stop the voices, finding some medicinal leaves for the woman might have helped. It has been proven that voices in people's heads can make them do horrible and evil things such as kill their own children. It has also been proven that meds can stop the voices in people's heads so they can live normal and productive lives.

I'm sure some of the stuff in this post sounds down-right ridiculous and even scandalous to Christians. But it sounds perfectly logical to me as an atheist and I'm sure it would sound comforting to people from certain other religions whom Christianity and/or Judaism have been oppressing for hundreds, or even thousands, of years.

Who--or what--is to say that your specific view is more correct than mine or anyone else's?

PS I am not taking "Christ" out of Christianity in the title of this post so much as I am seeking a way to say more in my title than the software allows. I had to cut two characters. My New Testament professor taught that "X" was the Greek letter used as shorthand for Christ by the early Christians. Thus, I consider it appropriate for the title of this post.

Originally posted as Post 93

Lightfoot wrote:

Mathenaut wrote:Post 81

Christianity is no different, which makes it all the more ridiculous that we honestly need to have these discussions to keep you christians from hurting yourselves and, more importantly, others.

Post 91

Yet what seriously can hurt people, is things like bombs and nukes, global warming etc.

Why not put 100% into fighting those things, without being sidetracked by Santa?

As you full well know, Lightfoot, and as has been amply demonstrated in this thread, we use Santa as an analogy for the stupid god in whose name you build these weapons of mass destruction by which to manipulate your Jesus into making an appearance, also known as the Second Coming.

As real as is the jolly ol' fat man who brings gifts down non-existent chimneys to children of rich Christian families in Western countries--that is how real is this God of Abraham in whose name the Christians, Jews, and Muslims have been killing each other ever since there have been Christians, Jews, and Muslims.

Now if that does not make Santa relevant to this thread, please remember that it was you who posted this thread with the claim that you wished to better understand the atheist. And when we explained you started asking irrelevant questions about Santa Claus and other stuff. You asked; we answered. Whether or not you like the answer is not exactly the point.

If you don't wish for us to talk to you about mythical characters, all you have to do is quit killing--and otherwise hurting--people in the name of mythical characters. "Hurting people" includes making laws against women, gays, science, and other means of social progress. Is that clear enough or must we use more graphic language?

By way of further conversation...It's quite obvious that if atheists believed in using lethal weapons as strongly as they believe in using words to accomplish their goals, that there would be few religious people left on this planet. Indeed, if we believed as strongly as many religious people do in killing people with whom we disagree about the most important issues of life and death there would be few religious people left. We've got brains and we don't hesitate to use them; religious people have a guy in the sky very like the man in the red suit who squeezes down non-existent chimneys of modern houses that are centrally heated with oil, gas, or electricity and who disproportionately leaves gifts for children of well-to-do families.

Your guy-in-the-sky promises to answer prayer but when it comes to gifts at Christmas he mostly answers the prayers of children in well-to-do families. He so reliably fails to answer the heart-felt longings of amputees that they daren't even put their deepest wishes into words. The same goes for the general poverty-stricken masses of humanity, homosexuals and others who don't fit but who are born into fundy religion that is unkind to anyone who fails to fit the mould...

Not that you, Lightfoot, will read or accept the argument in this post but maybe someone will.

For interested parties, this is also posted, along with my comments, as part of the post on "2nd Part Continued: Charge About Santa Claus" in the thread A Christian Asks in the Let's Talk section on these FFFR forums.