i think that the whole 'buy presents!!' santa claus is a lie. 

but the santa claus that we share with our family is the legend of the man who gave joy to kids who otherwise wouldn't have had anything.  THAT santa claus was us while the kids were little, and year after year the joy that they had every christmas morning was testament to the idea living on.

when they were old enough, we took them aside and told them about the legend, and said that now that they knew about him, it was up to THEM to be santa claus to people who really needed it.

so every year, the kids sit down with the 'world vision' style catalogues that come in the mail, and buy chickens or goats or whatever for the families in developing countries. 

that isn't a lie.  that is how a GREAT legacy lives on.

I don't think I ever lied to my kids about Santa Claus.  I just read the stories and took them to the parade, and to the mall and to company parties where Santa was present,  and helped them to hang their stockings on Christmas eve.  It was part of the magic of the season of joy and good will.  It was fairytale and folk legend.    It wasn't presented as a fact that was either true or false.  It wasn't a lie. 

When they were old enough to ask questions - my son was five - I told him that the man in the red suit was just a man in a costume representing Santa, and that Santa Claus was an idea, a personification of the spirit of giving and sharing the joy of Christmas.    He didn't seem disappointed or disallusioned.  He still hung up his stocking - in his mid-forties he still does if he is home - and it was filled with treats and surprises on Christmas morning.  We all hang up our stockings - they are one of the fun things about Christmas.  

People who think Santa is a lie just don't get fantasy.

Well I like Sighs version of Santa and I get the fantasy bit, but I think "Santa" has unfortunately taken on a new personna now that he has been overly commercialized.

IMO, it really is a lie and the original story has been recreated into something grotesque. At the risk of sounding like a Scrooge, I don't like the Santa story much anymore. Too plastic.

St Nicholas is the Greek Saint of Sailors... what's to lie about? He was at the Council of Nicea, I think.

"Santa" is a North American marketing ploy.  it's greatest "virtue" is "cute". Nothing to lie about there either... lots of people get sucked in by "cute" (and you can see how sadly by checking out the garage sales later in the year).

My co-worker and I actually talked about St. Nick and his concern about this was that what we now know as Santa is so different from St Nicholas.

Santa is fun...he's a kid's fantasy. I remember lying awake at night when i was about 6 and I actually fooled myself into thinking that I could hear reindeer on the roof...then I heard rustling around in the living room (my parents sneaking out to fill the stockings and put out presents...my dad eating the cookie and drinking the milk). I was convinced it was Santa! I waited a little while then snuck out of my room and saw my first real bike sitting beside the tree...it was magical! My mom says she still remembers me letting out a quiet shreek "Wow..a bike!"  It was disappointing the following year to learn from other kids and have it confirmed that he wasn't real...but somehow I still kept that excitement and wonder alive in my mind.

I was also taught that Santa wasn't the true Christmas story...I don't know how the two were reconciled, but as a kid I managed to reconcile them. Santa represented a good, kind, happy, generous person. My mom and I bought a toy every year for a Santa toy drive for less fortunate families...I always picked a toy that was on my 'favourites' list..this was years after I found out about Santa not being real...but the ideal of giving and keeping the fantasy alive for other little kids lived on. I don't think of Santa as a lie you tell kids as much as an imaginative childhood experience, and finding out he isn't real is just part of growing up...but being good, kind, happy and generous doesn't need to be outgrown. Parents would do well to de-emphasize his commercial/ mall appeal though, imo.

In her book about her sister, Viola Desmond, Wanda Robson describes life in a large coloured family in NS in the depression.  Just before Christmas one year one of their sisters died.   Wonda tells how, while their parents perpared their sister for burial in one room of the house - the teenagers urged their little sisters and brothers to hang their stockings and hurry into bed.  One sister read them "A Vision of St. Nicholas", two of the oldest hurried to the store to buy candy and trinkets to fill the stockings and the others put up the tree and began preparations for the Christmas meal.   Santa came to their house that night.  

Kimio & Seeler:

Wasn't it REALLY, ACTUALLY, IN FACT love that came? Wasn't it something far more than the physical (and therefore ephemeral) actual gifts and sweets? And isn't THAT the big irresistible force that's at work in all of the world's many traditions of "New Light" (Christian and non-Christian alike) celebrations?  And, surely, it rises from gratitude for the greater-than-human renewal we each can experience: sure, the return of light, but also the renewal of ways of seeing, of ways of being, of hope, of emotion, of beauty in the world… renewals that also regenerate and have prospects of healing. Renewals that reassure us we CAN step back from the brink of our mistakes and accidents... that making things "right" again is inherent in our experience of the universe. 

Gratitude is big part of loving fully, but also of living fully.

Isn't love, isn't gratitude the entengled reality that the meaningful gift embodies? How does "Santa" add to that or explain that? Does "Santa" speak more of love or of the plain fact that someone went out and spent some money on you (for whatever reason)? How many loving tears is a Santa worth? I don't know, but I don't think Sanata has much to do with it anymore.

When we have a motif that's taken from that wonder and turned into a consumerist icon, I find it getting repugnant and (grumpy old man that I am) I start looking for healthier, less ambiguous ways of pointing to and evoking love inherent in our being and in the ever-generative renewals we too easily fear.  When I drive through a small town or walk around the suburban streets, I see inflatible internally-lit "Santa" figures, reindeer, candy canes — I recently saw a "funny" depiction of Santa's parcels-laden sleight crashed into a Christmas tree — even penguins (though how penguins found their way into the North Pole stories I tremble to imagine). And there are twinkling lights. I walked around Michael's the other day looking for something I could use to make a baby figure with to insert in an Epiphany bread I'm going to bake (Fimo won't take the temperature and I can't find a little ready-made china figurine that'll work)... and, amongst the mountains of "cute" there was hardly a trace of spiritual Christmas to be seen.

It may be time to let Santa cross the road altogether and find some new mythic source for representations of Christmas love.  I do fear that Santa now lives somewhere more comfortable, like 702 SW 8th Street, Bentonville, Arkansas.

I have used this book a few times in worship on the Sunday closest to St. Nicholas' Day (which is today btw) and we are using it for our early service on Christmas Eve this year.  IT tells the story or St. Nicholas--Santa Clause and ties it to the Christmas observance.

http://www.amazon.com/Special-Place-Santa-Legend-Time/dp/0961628618

It opens the question...

Where is chansen? He should be the one posing it.

You see, there are other things we teach our children about. The Exodus, the Red Sea, the feeding the multitude....

The least of which this time of year is combining the shepherds and the magi at the manger scene. But how many magi? Where do we get that from? Do we know?

Can we really say anything about original stories being changed or perverted?There is no stable, no shepherd in Matthew's account. Is the virgin birth part of the orignal story? Not to Paul, or John or Mark...It is Luke and Matthew. They do not agree on a hometown for Joseph and Mary, what story do we tell?

It is a myth that Jesus was born in December.

We seem to struggle understanding that myths are not lies.

Mike...you're probably right...but I am still not willing to let my childhood experience of Santa go, I guess...that kid in me...it still brings back fond memories. I don't have kids myself...but I like the fun of it all as long as it's not too campy and mall-ified. I wasn't raised going to church afterall, other than a few visits to friends' churches (my parents being lapsed United Church people..my dad I found out went to Anglican Church for part of his childhood)...but my parents did teach me the real Christmas story when I was small. Santa being part of Christmas was about love and giving and wonder and fantasy (including colourful lights and sparkle...appealing to a kid)  to me...Santa was a participant in Christmas...he was an eccentric old guy...like part of the extended family who happened to have flying reindeer (as a kid, who said it couldn't be done?...what did I know?)...it wasn't about how much money is spent (well, for the most part...my parents got divorced and the values were different in the two households..my step-siblings expected to be spoiled...but I already knew it wasn't about money).

Btw...I was kind of a weird kid I suppose...my favourite gift from Santa...well, other than my bike one year...was some standard office supplies that I could make arts and crafts with...and my own stapler, and a real "waitress" pad (as female servers were still called back then) that I could play restaurant with (with "Thank-you. Come again!" at the bottom). It was more than most kids get, I know that I was fortunate, but it wasn't the newest and latest toy...and likely didn't cost all that much comparitively.. much of it may have even come from my dad's office (he was self-employed).

It's NOT the stories and the wonder that's a problem, Kimmio — my frustrations are about all of that beauty being co-opted as yet another propaganda tool for "the economy" (meaning consumerism) in ways that exclude the love, the joy, the peace and the good will to ALL.

I agree, Mike. I think it is up to parents to reinforce that it's not about consumer propoganda, Santa or not.

Btw...about the real Christmas story...it's true that I kind of learned to combine the Biblical stories...Mary was a virgin according to my Christmas Story book (but I didn't know really what that meant), there was Mary and Joseph, no room at the Inn, and baby in the manger, the angel speaking to Mary, and the wise men bringing gold frankincense and myrrh (I didn't know what frankincense and myrrh was really but I went along with it being something good), and the shephards all followed the Star of Bethlehem and showed up at the same time, and somehow I also came to also believe  that the Little Drummer Boy was also there (probably incoproprated it due to the song but it didn't take away from the meaning because he was a kid, I could relate,and that helped me understand the meaning of giving) it wasn't until much later that I knew the different Biblical accounts.

 It also wasn't until much later that I learned that Orthodox Christmas is celebrated in January...so we all may have slightly different narratives running through our minds...but the meaning is the same for all of us who understand that Christmas is about the hope and anticipation of the arrival of Peace on Earth and Goodwill to Men (people).

Replace "Santa" with "God", and you have another good question.

My folks tell of when I was little and being driven from mall to mall during the Christmas shopping season, I pointed out that Santa was different in every mall, and worked out that Santa wasn't real.  They let me have the fantasy until I realized it for myself.

With my own daughter, I take the same "hands off" approach.  She's four, and already asks about stuff like Santa and God.  I tell her what some people think, and then ask her what she thinks.  Her answer changes depending on how badly she wants there to be a Santa, but I think she realizes, deep down, that it's a game.  And that's fine.  If some older kid starts teasing her that Santa isn't real, she'll probably just shrug her shoulders and declare that she knows he isn't real, but it's fun to pretend he is.

That's one of the great things about being a kid - you have license to pretend and let your imagination run wild.  You don't have to lie to kids to let them have fun with the Santa story.  They can discover the truth and still have fun with it.

I would tend to agree chansen (except I won't adress the God part of your post)...your experience was similar to mine it sounds like, and so does your daughter's.  It was so fun to believe it, I was able to believe it even though I  began to notice that there were different looking Santas. I think I was told that they were not real, only the Santa that comes on Christmas eve is the true Santa...as I remember it, I believed they were Santa's emmisaries...they took requests back to Santa at the North Pole because he was too busy getting ready for Christmas to go everywhere. I remember getting a couple of Santa photos at the mall...that was probably more for my gandparents than anything.  However, regardless of believing Santa was real or not, my mom made it clear that Christmas was about giving more than about receiving. I'm grateful for that. She also made it clear that just because I made a list, it didn't mean I would get everything...and in fact I was fortunate if I got one thing...because Santa has a lot of kids to give to, kids who were not as lucky as I was, and he also had a lot to carry and only so much room on his sleigh. That was reasonable to me.

You already did.  It's the same question, with the same answer:  Left to their own devices, kids will discover the truth for themselves at some point.  Whether it be about Santa, God, the Tooth Fairy, monsters, or any other mythical creature that alternately delights or frightens them, kids will discover the truth on their own, unless lies and a sufficient blanket of excuses to cover the lies are hammered into them at an early age.  Even then, many will eventually come to the realization that they were lied to.

Kids can have fun with all these characters. They can enjoy the nativity story without believing it is true, just as they can enjoy countless stories about beanstalks and serpents and other incredible things without worry.  I laugh at atheists who worry about their kids being exposed to religion.  I want my kids exposed to religion.  I want them to be exposed to and ask questions of religious authorities.  OK, maybe not "exposed to."  I want them to ask me questions, and I always do my best to answer truthfully.  On the subject of God, or Santa, I explain what some people believe, and what other people believe, in simple terms.  Hey, she's four.

Well, I don't resent my mom's approach...she wanted me to have fun with it as long as I could...she didn't hammer it into me...she just played along...she knew i would grow out of it...well. I kind of did ;)

Maybe we should start another thread...not to derail this one.

Which one did you grow out of?  Santa or God?

I'll move the balance of my reply to your new thread.

I always said that I would let my kids "believe in Santa" but would always be truthful when asked.  I did so with my eldest and when she was 6/7 she asked me if I put the presents under the tree or if the Santa of myth did it.  I told her the truth.  To this day she is upset that I did so and wishes that I had waited. 

Now my youngest daughter is 10.  She is emotionally/intellectually immature and still believes in Santa.  The kids at school make fun of her but she absolutely still believes (yes; we wrote a letter to Santa).  A couple of times in the past year she has asked me if I am Santa and I have evaded/reinterpreted...or perhaps lied.  It gives her such great joy to believe in Santa and I am not willing to change that yet for her.  For me it's a matter of knowing her personality.  I suppose that I will have to find a way to let her hang on to her imagination but to know that I am the giver in the myth.

Cathi

My mom screamed in a manic episode about Santa. I was in fourth grade. My brother was in 1st grade and my sister in pre-school. I hated her in that minute and for some time after. She shattered something that day and it was more than a myth.

Childhood is precious. Many things of childhood are stories and myths and make-believe, awe and wonder. .

Yes, somegalfromcan, there is a Santa Claus.

Just when I think we've run out of new information that I have to break to you...

well, there is a santa claus.

its me.  i gave a few toys to the local 'toy mountain' thingy, and next week i will start delivering the 'gift of christmas' hampers.

now that you know who i am, though, the responsibility to be santa claus is now yours as well...

take it and go!!

Tomorrow night (I think, I'll have to check my calendar) I am going down to the church to wrap gifts and help prepare hampers that will be delivered by others who drive trucks or are stronger than I am.   (Or perhaps that is just a rumour - perhaps Santa will stop by when we aren't looking and wisk those hampers and gifts on their way to the families, carrying them in a sleigh pulled by reindeer.  

I agree Sighs! The churches in our presbytery do Angel Gifts. Basically congregation members pick out a card with a first name, age, and clothing size on it. They then return a week later with a wrapped gift for that person. I picked a 37 year old man and decided to go with a theme of keeping him warm. I got him a coat, gloves, a toque and a Starbucks gift card. I hope he'll like it and be able to use it.

At work we talked to the kids about sharing what we can with those who need it and we held a food drive. We collected several good-sized boxes of food and, more importantly, we created awareness in the minds of those children.

SG, I am sorry that that happened to you in the 4th grade...you were too young to be the parent, and yet, my guess is you probably were often n those times  The story, Willow & Twig by Jean Little comes to mind..though not the same situation...

I remember when my friend, who lived in the fun house...you know, the one where people laughed & giggled, and danced, and alcohol was consumed, and there were shenanigans....it seemed so good from the outside just havnging out at that house.....and then there was the christmas we were just teens....i had been there christmas eve, and regretted having to come home to my boring house..and going to bed....  My eyes were opened, when talking to my friend on Christmas Day, i found out she had been woken up by her little brother in tears as santa didn't come to their house.  Turned out mom & dad had passed out.... so ...she got up...told him to go back to bed...mom & dad were too impaired still to get up...so she got the presents out, and made santa come, and then....let her little brothers & sister up.  

santa is a dream...it is a dream of gifts and treats that come to a house ...of magic, and treats.

sadly, it doesn't come to all

Well said sighs. That's exactly the spirit-kind I was speaking of.

This is a touchy subject.  I notice that Children are admitting the truth earlier and earlier.  i loived in hope for a long time because I wanted a Santa who had more money than mine.As children we invented scenarios to keep believing in Santa.  One was that Santa ordered one of everey toy from the Eaton's Catalogue or the Wish Book and then his elves made the rest themselves which was why the Barbie stuff from Santa was exactly the same as your friend's barbie stuff from their grandparents.Children with younger siblings are threatened not to tell them the "truth".  Yes Virginia there is a Santa Clause only he isnt a guy in a red suit with magical reindeer.  Yes there is a God, only s/he isnt an old man in a white beard making a list and checking it twice!  How interesting our theology and our Santaology is so similar.  

God is about Truth. Nothing good comes from a lie. When we don't consider the "why we do what we do", we are destined to mimic what goes on around us. Understanding right from wrong only comes by much consideration and study of who God is and what he expects of us. Who is Santa Claus ? He is a ficticious character loosely based on a real person around whom is built a story of fantasy. It makes for a good story and should be left there as a good ficticious story. Comparisons by metaphor can be made to God as the gift giver, the gift of His Son and all the good things that includes. Personally,I feel the "trying to make real" of ficticious characters such as Santa, the Tooth Fairy, the Monster under the bed, etc., only adds to a childs skepticism regarding the truthfulness of a parents instruction later in life, when it really becomes important that they listen.

I have very mixed feelings about Santa Claus.  I don't like the lying...not for Santa or the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy...but there is also great pressure from family to continue with the traditions, and I also know that the vast majority of people who were raised with these traditions doesn't have a traumatic story about how it messed them up to believe in them, although it does seem from reading here that HOW and WHEN kids learn the truth is a huge factor in how they feel about it afterwards. 

In my case, I never thought that the Santa at the mall was THE Santa, at least not once I was school aged.  I was told that they were "Santa's Helpers" and that the job is too big for one person to do, so a lot of people come together to make it possible.  I'd like to take that approach with Rachel as she gets older because it leads nicely in to Mommy and Daddy being Santa's helpers. 

I'd like to tell her the story of St. Nicholas (although admittedly I know very little about him--my basic understanding is that he was a Bishop a long time ago who was very kind and helped a lot of people, and that that is where the idea of giving gifts to each other and helping people at Christmas came from).  People kept the spirit of giving and kindness alive in the character of St. Nicholas, who also became known as Father Christmas, Kris Kringle and Santa Claus, as well as many other names.  Today parents and grandparents all over the world use the story of Santa and the magic of him to delight children and also to let them know how wonderful and magical it is to give to others because they will know how good it makes other people feel to receive gifts that they give them because they have experienced receiving gifts for themselves.

Or maybe that's just what I tell myself to get away from the idea that I'm lying to my daughter.  Either way, I think I'm going to use it when the time comes, but right now she's five and she totally believes in Santa.  She was skeptical about whether or not bears were real and she didn't believe me when I told her that I used to have pet turtles, but she completely accepts the idea of one old man delivering toys all over the world in one night with the help of flying reindeer, one of whom has a glowing, red nose.  Kids are weird.

MistsofSpring.  I really did laught out loud when I read your last paragraph.  It is worthy of retelling in a bit of juicy story telling gossip, that I pass as conversation. 

My kids thought about Santa Claus a little bit, but we never made much of a big deal about the concept.  Santa is as abstract as Jesus . . . an ideology, not one that all people practice and one which was created by colonializing influences who impressed themselves on Pagan holidays . . .

It's all a ball of fun and wax just as we all are.   Our discussion at the table tonight was that the age at which most people lose the magic of Christmas is around 13. I think that has to do with more than credulity.  It is a time of moralism, when kids can handle the sad silence of God and Jesus and cult things.  Instead we hear our heart beat and understand mortality, as it means so to an adult.  We intuit depression, anxiety and understand that the imperfections in our self that we have perceived from the age of 4 and on, have an even more sinister side to them " the little lame ballon man whistles far and wee . . ."

Isn't Santa a creation of Kresges, Timothy Eaton or somesuch? 

At our houses we all hung our stockings Christmas eve - Seelerman and I at our place;   Seelergirl and her family at theirs.   And Christmas morning they were all filled with gifts - new toothbrushes and paste, nice shampoo, canned oysters, special treats, a paperback book or a small puzzle or game - nothing big, nothing extra expensive - but each had something that would suit the individual, bring a smile or a laugh.   I've lived my three score years and ten, and I've always found something in my stocking.   (when I was a kid it was a box of cracker jack with a toy - now for the little ones it seems to be a kinder-egg with a toy)    You can't tell me there is no Santa Claus.  

(Under the tree:  Grandson received a hockey net from his dad and a card with the promise that he would set it up in the driveway and the two of them could shoot some pucks.  Granddaughter got the winter jacket that she's been wanting from her Grandparents.   Seelergirl a shoe-rack (granddaughter heard her mentioning one that a neighbour has in her front hall closet and how nice it was that the boots and shoes weren't piled in a jumble.  She found out it was available at Walmart and within her budget. I took her over to pick it up - it was the gift that she was most excited about at Christmas - something that she was giving - not receiving).   I got a book I've been wanting, and a mirror for the hallway.   Sil got the promise of new boots as soon as he has time to go pick them out and try them on - and also some handknit wool socks.)

I also went to church - both Christmas eve and Christmas day.  The praise and prayer, music, message and community brought a sense of peace and 'rightness' that has nothing to do with Santa Claus.   I really don't see how the two can be confused.  

You can say exactly the same thing about Jesus, except we don't know for sure that the stories are based on a real person.  In that way, Santa has a leg up on Jesus and God.

So, why is it OK to lie to children about God, well past the point where we tell kids the truth about Santa?

Why would we ever want to limit skepticism?!?  Skepticism leads to forming questions and evaluating the answers.  We desperately need kids to learn these skills.  We need young people who can drill down and get to the truth of a matter.  The byproduct of this ability, is you are going to have a lot of atheists.  Your option is to have a lot of stultified children who only listen to authority and never think for themselves.

Chanson - It isn't a lie to tell our children what we believe.

So, if you lie to yourself first, that makes it okay?

Children of Christians are not always told "We think there's a god." They're told that God exists. Long after they're told Santa does not. Both are in the same category, yet some Christians laughingly suggest that "lying" about Santa is a terrible thing to do to children. They even manage to write this without adding a smilie at the end.

Going with what is being said here:

Those who have blind faith -- which is what religious believers (as in believers in a supernatural G_d) -- lie to their children aboot their G_d and have to lie to their children to get them to believe.

The other types of G_ddesses & G_ds are a different matter.

Or something like that ;3

chansen

You can say exactly the same thing about Jesus, except we don't know for sure that the stories are based on a real person.  In that way, Santa has a leg up on Jesus and God.

So Chansen, you include yourself with those who demand empirical evidence before you will believe, then you create a "sum of the matter" based on your  biased assumption. There is great proof of Jesus being a real person - apart from the Bible and "we" are sure He is a real person. The problem with getting into a debate with people that are uneducated on a topic is that there is no common ground for debate.They don't use proven information to rationally and logically weigh out a matter, but instead reply with assumption, fantasy and emotional reasoning based on feelings.

God is who He says He is. If a person truly studies His written Word, they would find "mounds" of  evidence. As in many pursuits, humanity gets "led down the garden path" because someone has not done their homework.

Regarding your comments on skepticism, how many times have we heard and read of those who were trying to accomplish some goal and all they could get from those around them was "that won't work, it can't be done, what a waste of time, etc." All advancements our world enjoys weren't made by skeptics. Skeptics will never get to the Truth because they refuse to believe anything they don't comprehend, and won't do the work to understand because they don't believe there is any understanding to be found except in their own reasonings. Mr. Hitchens and Mr. Dawkins are perfect examples of this philosophy. The sad part is they have drawn away an ignorant part of society with their philosophy and we are less of a society for it.

Really?  You talk down to me about my "biased assumption", and you proceed to write that "God is who He says He is?"  Really?!?

You've got a hopeless compilation of conflicting accounts in the bible, and a bunch of conflicting accounts from other Christian sources, and the crown jewel for those who believe in a historical Jesus comes from a passage from "Antiquities of the Jews" by Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, and many many experts believe that passage was inserted or modified by Christians.  

There may have been a Jesus, or maybe not.  Perhaps he was crucified, or maybe hung.  Maybe he had 5 disciples, or 12.  At the very least, what we do know points to the gospels being heavily exaggerated, and of course, written by people who were not there to witness the events they describe.

You're confusing "skeptic" with "pessimist".  You are attempting to drag down a great scientist and a great author, and you don't even understand what you're accusung them of.  At the very least, they would know that the most common definition of "skeptic" is "someone who questions the validity of claims."

Dawkins and Hitchens have done wonders by dismantling religious arguments, each approaching faith from different directions.  They have contributed to the reduction of religious faith, not by dragging away the ignorant, but by getting people to think and question their faith - something neither you nor most religious leaders are terribly keen about.  After all, atheists actually know more about religion that believers do.

So go on pretending that people who have rejected your beliefs don't know what they're talking about - just like you pretend you know what words mean.

Thanks for linking to that survey.  I got 31/32 on the Religious Knowledge questions.  :) 

So did I.  And most atheists do better than your "Christian brothers and sisters", so Melbatross7 should tell me again who understands what.  Look at the most overtly devout members at WC and how intelligent and knowledgable they show themselves to be.  Learning about religion, and especialy about other religious beliefs and how similar and yet how arbitrary they all are, leads people away from faith.  A compulsory high school course in world religions would both give students a basic understanding of what people believe, and be one more cause for empty pews where young people once sat.  Knowledge about religion is not the enemy of my side of the debate.

Chansen, you said:

  "And most atheists do better than your "Christian brothers and sisters","

It seems to me that for many supposedly random surveys, the respondants self-select to a degree.  Suppose the guy with the questionaire is standing on a street corner, or in a mall, or ringing doorbells or telephoning a random list of people - what would be some of the replies:   "I'm busy."   "I'm not interested in doing your survey."  "I'm not interested in anything having to do with religion."   "Get the ----- out of my way."  I think many of the people I know who if asked their religion would say, atheist, or agnostic, or nothing, would not be willing to take a moment to fill in a survey or answer a few questions.    So I take these statistics, as I do many statistics, with a grain of salt. 

"Look at the most overtly devout members at WC and how intelligent and knowledgable they show themselves to be."

Just how do you decide who the most overtly devout members at the WC are?  Am I one of them?   I admit that I got two questions wrong.  Both because I got over confident and didn't read them all the way through.  I consider myself quite overtly devout.

 "Learning about religion, and especialy about other religious beliefs and how similar and yet how arbitrary they all are, leads people away from faith.  A compulsory high school course in world religions would both give students a basic understanding of what people believe,"

I've taken courses in comparative religion, I've attended services in their places of worship.  And I've talked seriously about faith with people of other faiths.  I've noted how similar we are at the root level.  It's led me deeper into my faith. 

Where are the "Religious Knowledge questions" that are scored out of 32?

I just scored 15/15 on something called "Religious Knowledge Quiz."

They are in the documents above the online quiz.  You have to download the original survey/quiz and then score it yourself using the next document with the answers.

I don't know about Ontario, but when I was in high school in the 1990s in BC, we learned about world religions in Social Studies. Like Seeler, I found the commonalities to be far more interesting than the differences.

Then if what you are pointing out in this thread, then your G_d is an understandable, grokkable and scientific G_d that follows observable rules that are testable and repeatable.  This would also apply to any experience that is 'of G_d' -- these are also observable, testable & repeatable.  "G_d" is empirical.

Which is all eminently proper -- no need to put this concept of "G_d" in some special, unassailable place (the 'supernatural') at all.

This is what happens when one confuses art with science--these are two ways of knowing -- science is where we uncover/discover 'facts' and art is where we create meaning.  Religion is an art -- to some people, certain concepts of "G_d" are meaningful as well as "Visnu", "Jesus", "Immaculate conception", "Raven", etc etc etc.

The confusion happens whenever someone does the equivalent of  "G_d exists or doesn't exist", which is confusing an artistic statement with a scientific one.

Quite simple, really :3

EDIT:  regards to Messr Dawkins and Hitchens, regardless of how you or I may feel personally aboot them (whether what and how they express what they express fits with our own beliefs and comfort levels), my reading of Dawkins is that when he uses the term religion he is being quite specific and talking aboot 'belief in a supernatural G_d' and wouldn't you agree that everyone should be helping everyone else to believe what they want to without someone else making some kind of law or breaking the rule of law against them?  That's really all I find people like Dawkins & Hitchens are dealing with, the powers and the various mechanisms (both neurological & in society) whereby people can actually force their own personal beliefs on others.  That's it.  Otherwise, I know what you mean -- I much prefer Voltaire to Dawkins :3

Thanks MOS, but it's just too much work. I'll just give myself a 30/32 and call it a night.

Does one presume that the only Christians on this site are the ones that are close-minded?  Wow...I would say they are by far the minority.  

For me, learning more , studying more, of any faith brings me closer to the church that i belong to, and trying to live in faithful ways.  I am not great at it...but I try.

As a child, I heard about Santa Claus and all its paraphenelia. Once I discovered the truth, I had a strange feeling and I have always wondered, even to this day, if I could truly trust my parents and family. I was eventually able to regain *some* trust, but never a complete one. Maybe that was good overall, I don't know.

Fast forward some 40 years. We never made our children believe in Santa. We were clear – and I was especially clear – that Santa Claus was a commercial hoax. They learnt from the start that *we* are the one who give gifts, as token of appreciation, because we take care of them, because we love them, etc. Apart from being honest, I think it was fairly easy to make them understand that we can't provide everything they might ever dream for.

Of course, being Christians, we also taught them that Christmas is a celebration day to commemorate the birth of Jesus. Even though we have no idea what date he was born, it still is a good occasion to reflect on our Saviour, pray for a better world and ask for the strength and wisdom to do our part to make it better.