Skip to main content

Ten reasons why God is different than Santa Claus

  1. Santa is an intentional fiction. God is seriously believed to exist.


  2. Santa's existence is irrelevant for the universe's existence, but if God exists she is the foundation of all existence.


  3. Santa is a contingent being, he could or not exist. If God exists, she is necessary, she could not not exist.


  4. Santa's existence is falsifiable. God's existence is not.


  5. God's existence is an issue of serious reflection for unbelievers. Santa's is not.


  6. Many famous people of high intellectual caliber believe in God. There's no serious intellectual known for her belief in Santa.


  7. There are different kind of arguments that seriously pretend to support the case for God's existence. No such arguments exist for Santa.


  8. God's invisible and inmaterial. Santa is not.


  9. Belief in God is a basic tenet of many religious organizations. There is no organization known to defend belief in Santa.


  10. There is no philosophical basis for belief in Santa, but there is for God.


See also:

The invisible pink unicorn comparison tactic / Santa Claus gambit.

Comments

Daniel said…
1. Yes, I agree - God is unintentional fiction, not intentional fiction.

2. Santa Claus is still responsible for the origins of things (presents) that are very important to the people who believe in him (children), just as God is responsible for the origins of bigger things, in your opinion. Same kind of thing, albeit of different degree.

3. Yes, if God exists, God would not not exist. And, if God does not exist, God would not exist. This is a tautology, and a contingent tautology at that. So on this critera, God and Santa Claus are equal.

4. Nonsense. You can't disprove the notion that Santa is just hiding really really well up there on the North Pole. Again, no points for God on that one.

5. Tell that to a group of children, some of whom believe and others who don't believe. No points for God there.

6. So all children are stupid?

7. Again, what about the children who rationalize the existence of Santa Claus?

8. Have you ever seen Santa Claus? Clearly, if he does in fact exist, he is either invisible, or very very good at hiding.

9. Again, are you saying that children don't believe in Santa?

10. No philosophical basis for Santa? Hello - Christmas presents - Duh!!!
I agree, but, can you show the ten (or more) reasons why God is equal than Santa Claus? I'm sure you can.
Daniel said…
I already gave ten reasons why Santa and God are equivalent; or, if you'd rather, you could say that I gave 10 reasons why they are not not equal. (see above)

Popular posts from this blog

The Santa Claus Argument

"There's no reason to believe in God" says the atheist, "there's no evidence of his existence".

"But what is the evidence that God does not exist" replies the theist. "Sure you have faith that God does not exist".

"I don't have to provide evidence that God does not exist more than the evidence I have to provide to show that Santa does not exist. If you are congruent and reject the existence of Santa you should also reject the existence of God. Where's the proof that Santa does not exist?”

Such is a line of reasoning popular among atheists. I call it "the Santa Claus argument". It conveys the idea that God is a fiction character.

But what is the basis of this idea?

It seems to be based in the idea that God does not exist. But if this is the case, this argument (sic) is question begging, because this is precisely the issue at stake.

Some atheists seem to imply that God does not exist because the concept of God is a human c…

Abiogenesis and the atheist's faith

Taken from this forum.

Everyone has some faith in an ultimate something that cannot be substantiated solely by physical evidence.

Atheists have faith in naturalism alone - their faith is nakedly exposed in topics such as the origin of life or, as they term it, abiogeneis. Abiogenesis is the idea that life originated from non-living matter in the sense that it arose naturalistically. The naturalistic (and therefore “scientific”) concept is that life ("bio") must have originated ("genesis") without ("a-") any outside help.
Life, ALL BIOLOGICAL LIFE anywhere in the universe, ultimately either arose naturally or supernaturally. So, ultimately, there are really only two alternatives.

With abiogenesis, atheists must ulimately rely upon the "unknown process" of the gaps in contrast to the theists' so called "God of the gaps" argument (a criticism of ID). The reason this explanation is not any better than their own sarcastic carature of God,…