Santa gives gifts to only the good children.

Jesus blesses everyone.

There is at least that profound difference.

Both ARE myths… in the stricter understanding of what a "myth" is.  That's why both are so embedded in our society, despite having very little to do with each other.

Jae: if you think ONLY "good" children get presents, you are crazy. Poor kids are the least likely to get presents. Neglected kids, forgotten kids, abused kids… "Bad" kids? No presents? Wake up!

I think both Santa and Jesus have their own separate histories. Santa was originally Sanctus Nicolaus (a bishop in the Roman Catholic church). I'm not sure but I think that the history of Saturnalia celebrations in the Roman culture (and others like it) helped contribute to both Santa and Jesus becoming something that probably both would be aghast at.

Mike, I think you are forgetting the Santa Claus myth. A major part of it is that Santa keeps a list of who is naughty and who is nice, in order to ensure that he delivers toys only to the good little girls and boys. Indeed, some cultures add to the myth a sidekick of Santa's named Black Peter, whose job it is to go around and punish the bad kids.

Also, do you assume that poor kids, neglected kids, forgotten kids, and abused kids must of necessity be the good ones? Is it not possible to be a good child if you are rich, cared for, remembered, and treated well?

waterfall,

it is now questioned that St. Nicholas even existed.

Whereas, despite what Chansen like to claim, the historical consensus is that a preacher named Jesus did exist.  The details about his life, death and resurrection have a varying degree of certainty though.

It is said that Santa keeps a list of the good kids and the bad and gives giftsaccording to that list.

The bottom line is that Sanata doesn't give gifts - sometimes parents and other family members do.  The decision is based more on the state of their finances and desire to please the children than the actual behavior of the children.

Just thinking of the year when a group of kids each asked Santa for a new bike.  To cover their bets they also prayed to Jesus that they could get a new bike.  Some of the rich kids got new bikes - none of the poor kids did.

I guess we have to make of this stuff what we can and will!

I've heard that too Gord, but from what I've heard about the original "Santa" he was supposedly influenced by scripture to help the poor. If it is a myth, it's a good one, if only it were still attached to helping the poor and not the commercial bastardization that it has become.

Jae: I don't think "goodness" and "socioeconomic status" are linked. That was assumed in my response to you. The "good" and "bad" of the myth are parental "bribes", lazy admonitions of convenience almost always unrelated to real goodness or badness. 

"Naughty" and "nice" is a quote from a dreadful, silly little song — Santa Claus is Coming to Town (written in 1934 by John Frederick Coots and Haven Gillespie) — that provides the following  memorable "moral" instruction:

You better watch out!
Better not cry!
Better not pout!
I'm telling you why,
Santa Claus is comin' to town.

He's making a list
and checking it twice.
He's going to find out who's naughty or nice.
Santa Claus is comin' to town.

He sees when you're sleeping.
He knows when you're awake.
He knows if you've been bad or good.
So be good for goodness sake!

You better watch out!
Better not cry!
Better not pout!
I'm telling you why,
Santa Claus is comin' to town.

… come on, Jae!

Which (Santa or Jesus) do more people spend their time trying to disclaim once the notion sets in either may be myth?

Also, all those saying Happy Holidays over Merry Christimas might very well have had one put over on them with the golden rule disguised as Santa.

The evidence for Jesus is suspect at best. The "consensus" you write of isn't as strong as you say it is. Fer cryin' out loud, Gord, there are theologians like Tom Harpur and ministers like UCCan's own Gretta Vosper who aren't convinced by the historical evidence for Jesus! There are people in your own church who don't believe Jesus existed, and you're trying to argue consensus? Good luck.

In the absence of evidence of the events described, Jesus remains best described as a myth. You may not like that, but what you want to be true has little bearing on what we can say is true.

What is a "myth?' A lie? Or mythology?

Both St. Nicholas and Jesus Christ are Christian mythology.

This does not mean there was no historical Jesus or Nicholas, it means that legends were built around these historical personages, and mythological elements were added to the legends.

The main characters in myths are usually gods, supernatural heroes and humans - from Wikipedia about Mythology.

Jesus is a God and Santa is a supernatural hero so "yes" Arminius both St Nicholas and Jesus Christ are Christian mythology.

Yes, Armi —

…but Santa gets a tremendous amount of expensive promotion and publicity from commerce and The Economy.  Santa is now more a "Brand" and a marketing device than "Christian mythology", I think.

Jesus doesn't figure in too many corporate strategies.

What would be the purpose of building a myth around either? Certainly in the case of Jesus nothing that could benefit the institutions of mankind, His Gospel being adversary. (see Mr Paterson's post above) Santa? Perhaps to further the ideology behind the teachings of Jesus regarding social intercourse using a surrogate. Good is often hijacked for evil purpose and using the 'do unto others' thing for profit has not escaped those who misuse good for gain.

Folk heroes often become legendary. And, if hey they are spiritual folk heroes, they sometimes get mythologized as well.

Why do you suppose that is over the Bush's or Lance Armstrongs of the world?

The oldest known epic poem that came down to us in its original written version is Gilgamesh. Gilgamesh, the hero of the epic, was two thirds god an one third man. Probably our oldest written example of a spirtual folk hero who became legendary and mythologized. I see a Holy Trinity in Gilgamesh.

I'm personally not aware of Greta Vosper ever denying the historical existence of Jesus, but if you know something I don't, please fill me in. 

There are a very small handful of scholars who deny the existence of Jesus, and when the debate comes up those names get thrown around again and again as evidence that there's no consensus that Jesus existed. For fun, I googled "scholars who deny that Jesus existed." I was fascinated that the top hit that came up was a treatise denying the existence of Jesus and the existence of a scholarly consensus that Jesus existed by an unnamed person who quotes exactly NO ONE in support of that position (I could at least mention Harpur, although Harpur is more of a spiritual commentator than a scholar, as I think he'd agree himself.)

Of course, many of the scholars who do deny the historical existence of Jesus are non-Christian and so have a personal vested interest in denying the existence of Jesus in order to promote what they themselves believe.

Here we go on the "myth" merry-go-round again.

Look, the story of Darwin's finches and the Apollo missions to the moon are both myths. That doesn't mean that they didn't happen. But by assuming mythic status, they have something to say to us beyond mere history. Perhaps you've used the expression "if they can put a man on the moon, they can ....". And Darwin's finches teaches us that noticing the small details (in this case, the many different shapes of beaks despite being otherwise very similar) can help us piece together the big story. To deny that the story of Jesus is no more than a tale of a man of questionable birth, tramping the dusty outback of the Roman empire doing miraculous things and is executed by provincial authorities worried about their position is near-sighted, to say the least. And it misses most of the point (not to mention all of what Jesus had to say. I have yet to hear what exactly is profound about hohoho, on the part of the other "myth").

Then there is the issue about what the object of the myth is. In its current construction, dating from the early 20th century, the object of the Santa myth is to serve commercial interests by convincing people to buy more stuff (whether needed or not). The Jesus "myth" serves mankind's quest to find something larger than oneself (what the religious call the divine) and the practice and pitfalls of building the relationships with others and our world.  To me, the Santa myth is much more frivolous than that of Jesus. Much like trying to decide what to have for lunch vs whether to get married (consumption vs relationship).

Rene Descartes was given his mathematical insight, so he said, by a visitation from "The Angel of Truth". Isaac Newton got sconed by am apple and suddenly the principles of gravitation became wondrously clear… Einstein was simply reflecting on a dream in which the tobaggan he was riding went faster and faster: bigo! Eureka!

We LOVE narratives, stories, myths…

I don't see many people debating that there's a mythic aspect to Jesus, spiritbear, so I'm not sure what you mean by "here we go on the 'myth' merry-go-round again." The issue being discussed here as I understand it is whether there's a historical figure behind the myth.

Whereas Jesus keeps list of those He will allow into Heaven and those who He will send to eternal torture.

I'm thinking Santa might be a better image of the spirit of Christmas, even with his coal.

Coal is good.. especially when it dips to -30 tonight.

Nice. I think I owe you a drink for that one.

Rev Steve said ", so I'm not sure what you mean by "here we go on the 'myth' merry-go-round again"

The myth thing has raised several times before on WC. Do a search. I'm sure you'll several of the previous discussions come up. With many of the same points - eg. Chansen saying (once again) that there's no reliable evidence, and that the Romans kept good records so why so little record of Jesus (answer: because he was viewed as an insignificant rabble-rouser in a backward province that was filled with insignificant rabble-rousers). And others trotting out their own favourite myth, and others who have no understanding of the difference between myth and history.

Then the soul/psyche/mind is a myth ...

Without a mind how would we know this?

Is that too indirect evidence for utilitarian use ... good for the 'hole thing ...?

Spatial or abstract dimensions allows mind to wander ---SHUE! Like rye jay boids ...

Then Santa is better for business ...

I seem to recall a great little s-f story that I read years ago set in a near future where Jesus and Santa got conflated in some weird and wonderful ways. IIRC, it was largely poking fun at political correctness and the "War on Christmas" notion, though I don't think the term "War on Christmas" was in wide us yet at that point. Wish I could remember either the title or author, but all I'm sure of is that it was in Isaac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine sometime in the 80s.

Mendalla

Hi Mike:

Santa is a marketing device only in the English speaking world. In Germany, for instance, the Christ Child brings presents on Christmas Eve, and this concept is not commercially exploited as much as Santa Claus.

In Germany and other parts of Europe, Nicholas brings presents to children on the feast day of St. Nicholas, Dec. 9. This Nicholas usually brings only simple things like nuts and dried fruits and is not commercially exploited. In Bavaria, Nicholas is sometimes accompanied by a sidekick named Krampus, who punishes bad children.

The gift giving excess on Christmas is, of course, as prevalent and commercially exploited in Germany as elsewhere in the Western world.

Hi Not 4,

The biggest reason for building a myth is to secure power.  There is no question that historically religion was a tool used by rulers to control the populace and this continues even today. 

Another reason for building a myth is profit.  The commercialization of Christmas is just one example.

These are just two examples.

Your Buddy on the Path - Poguru

Santa... shop til you drop

Jesus... For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul

an expensive coffin ? 

Now that's Husky ... like  the devil for Christmas ... a mire thought ... invite the stranger in ...

Oh we couldn't do that .... such is the wall of fear a self sustaining thing  ... unless understands the alien ...

Does that ring a belle?

For whome the belle trolls ... a form of lazy fishing when you don't have to cast ... mortals are like that when dealing with the poeL ...

Scares the chad out of eM like Bush's election ...

Pure satyr on the democratic system ... curse those daemons ... wee people ...

This is what Xmas has become an all out war for deals ---Jesus gives us all we need so as the song says in the video ---I need nothing for Christmas as the Lord fills all my needs -----Have we ever wondered why the Bible doesn't give us the exact date of the birth of Jesus ---just maybe we are to focus on His death and resurrection more than His birth ????

Peace to all .

His birth is a dark issue to man ... can't speak about L'uv or even thoughts about it that may shadow your soul as aDonii (that's a given)!

It is a mortal rule ... but there are other conceptions out-there ...

We're not beyond the od'eire yet?

So many things autocrats can't see ... won' t allow the stretch ... Grecean Urn?

Perhaps a thunder bucket ... purely gravid material for another creation ...

I watched your video unsafe and am wondering what point you were trying to make.  I think we all know that some people indulge in shopping frenzies and others don't.  

So far in my life I haven't noticed anyone forcing me or my family and neighbors to go shopping. 

Hi kaythecurler   Your Quote   I watched your video unsafe and am wondering what point you were trying to make. 

Actually it is a Question not a Point ---Who should our focus be on Santa or Jesus ??

The video says people are willing to be hurt to get a deal to provide Santa with the gifts to give ----Jesus says rely on me and I will provide you with all the gifts needed for you to live a happy --healthy --prosperous --peaceful joyest life .

Christmas should glorify Jesus not Santa in my opinion ---We teach our children not to lie --to tell the truth and yet we parents lie to our Children about who Santa is all in the name of tradition ---breaking the 9th Commandtment ----is this right or wrong --only each individual person can answer that for themselves .

Peace

Well, Santa isn't so much a myth as his is the creation of adverisers.

As to Jesus, it doesn't matter whether he's a myth.  What's important is the words that somebody left to us. In most practical respects, it doesn't matter whether they were said by a Jew 2000 years ago or by an atheist yesterday. They make sense.

On the side, i also have faith, and the faith includes believing that Jesus spoke at least most of those words. But even if I had no faith, it would be very bad, indeed, if the world were to ignore those words. (As I think it is doing.)

Exactly.

People as individuals are manipulatative creatures, each having their own definition of right and wrong to justify their actions and living accordingly. As a result they try to out manipulate others to establish superiority or band together with the like minded. These are the traditional ways of mankind.

Yet if a universal definition is presented, especially seemingly from outside the realm of man, and one that most people can agree on as being sensible... we have a foundation to weigh all other definitions of mankind against. Such is the case with the teachings of Jesus. They make sense.

unsafe - my focus won't be on Jesus or Santa.  I will focus my attention on my family over the holidays.  No, I haven't shopped for this occasion, nor will I (other than my share of the special foods our family enjoy).

I have made substantial donations to a few carefully selected organisations that do worthwhile work (in my opinion).  None of them are specifically Christian. 

How about you - are you spending money on gifts for family or friends?

So do the teachings of Buddha, Freya, Manannan Mac Lir, and practically every god and demi-god in history.

The problem, of course,with your search for a definition from outside the realm of man, is that you cannot show even one that is verifiably outside the realm of man. Until you can actually do that, all you can do is decide which man made morality you like better.

What goodness do they have in common?

Quote Witch ...!

"The problem, of course,with your search for a definition from outside the realm of man, is that you cannot show even one that is verifiably outside the realm of man."

Gotta L'uv it ... like an indeterminate interalized "i" ... just choqan ... when read in code ...! Basis of irrational math ...some think math being an absolute but everything appears to have another side to it like the sine wave form ... polar calculating?

It is just beyond us like myth ... unless you can drift out of the box periodically ... a step beyond the wardrobe ... rye sol' ... a singularity ... the wave appears as a light particle ... just a flash onthe rear of the "i"-Ba'aL or is that function of the rille; brae within ... for lack of soul?

Something even the academically institutionalized cannot comprehend ... something to think about and I've been told by many PHD'd: "Don't think!"

The urge to control even that ... Icons of mortal Gods ... then there are the wee daemons ... demos untastfull things to the higher ups who like to stand on eM! Thats paradigm eh bye ... to which there has to be another side ... Den Arious Rules ... even quanta flip ... travel is threes contained by what (aÐ'm-ism)? Is that sublime or what like a distant faint cerulean glow ... lime light? Be careful of whose behind the curtains ... could be a brutii, might be an angel that would bring you to you knees ... Gabriel in the Shadows?

Is is said that even Jaqob the lyre struggled with that question ... his string was plucked ...

As we sink lower in thse dimensions do we create our own fires to burn ... what else .. our own collective backside? Some say there is not collective sentient power ... outside the collective conscious ... but it is something we fail to gather ... or so it appears to me when people follow the "don't process" rule ... mental ceded fades into the infinite ...

Then there is this neurological rule that a soul needs a myth to operate from ... a real quirk to match with a quark ... just flipp'n sum thin' eh bye? When you're close to it you could tumble either way ... time to shed baggage except thoughts about what you learned about what's out-there? Then yah flies and people hate Light spirits ... often create shadows when pas'n ... that's like beyond eh, sans, or without ... a permeating power?