Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Christmas thoughts and satire


Facebook

It would be a cool graphic where someone crazy rides down that mountain.

I am not trying to be offensive or attack anyone with this article, I am making some theological and satirical observations concerning Christmas. The blog is satire and theology, after all.

Teacher fired

Portions:

'A primary school teacher who left a class of 25 pupils in tears after she told them Santa Claus did not exist has been fired.

When excited youngsters became rowdy as they talked about Santa, the supply teacher blurted out: 'It's your parents who leave out presents on Christmas Day.'

The class of seven-year-olds at Blackshaw Lane Primary School, Royton, near Oldham, Greater Manchester burst into tears and told their parents when they arrived home.

Mothers and fathers then complained about the incident and were sent a letter by the school saying the substitute teacher, who only worked at the school for one day last week, has been disciplined.

The school has now said it will not hire her again...

'A lot of parents were disgusted and complained to the school.''

End

I have no strong feelings or thoughts on the above story, but Jay Leno mentioned it on the Tonight Show and it is a good precursor for my presentation with Christmas albums. But, the school story makes me reason that at secular school and within secular society, Santa Claus for the most part, is more important than Jesus Christ and the date of his birth as is traditionally celebrated.

Most of my research for satire and theology and thekingpin68 comes from Jay Leno and David Letterman, by the way.;)

Is the celebration of Santa Claus an aspect of the problem of evil? Well, I think it is an evil as Claus surpasses Christ in importance in the minds of many and is taught to children as the central focus of Christmas. But, Christmas and even Santa Claus can also be used for good as Christians and Christian churches use the Christmas season as an opportunity to present the gospel. The same can be done on Halloween as the occult can be contrasted with the supernatural power of almighty God.

Here are some wonderful Christmas albums to listen to over the next few weeks.

I did a search for the worst Christmas albums.

Brady



This review from Amazon.com states:

'This was the first album released by the Brady Bunch. Unfortunately, it was also their worst album. I could mention the dull arrangements of traditional Christmas carols here. But worse than that is the kids' singing. Marsha was the only one who could come close to carrying a tune at this point. To be fair to them, they worked hard and later became better singers. But at this point in their show biz careers, listening to them sing was unbearable. Greg's singing on "O Holy Night" is particularly painful. By the way, this album is only 20 minutes long, which is fortunate, because that's about all a sane person can take. This album has nothing to recommend about it. Sorry, Brady fans.'

Marsha (Maureen McCormick) actually has been a professional singer:

Maureen McCormick

I have to agree, Greg (Barry Williams) bit of singing on the 'O Holy Night' preview sounds less than sparking, to put it nicely. I would prefer hearing the Kool-Aid man say 'Oh Yea', and hopefully bust through the wall of the Brady's recording studio in the process, ending the session. A bit of 'O Holy Night' can be heard via the Amazon link above.

I have to admit, I have a very difficult time sitting through an entire episode of the Brady Bunch as it is just too corny, and that 'sucky' music that plays, even as a kid just rubbed me the wrong way. But the two made for theatre remake films were funny as spoofs. 'A Very Brady Christmas' is decent and I have watched it with my Mom previously.

Satirically, although I honestly do think Robert Reed was a fine actor, as I saw him in other shows, I do smirk a bit knowing he was playing this wholesome father figure while he was a homosexual.

Even if one is pro-homosexuality he/she can see my point if they have a reasonably open mind.

This strikes me as a classic example of how fact and reality can be so different from fiction. And yes, I realize this is often the case when it comes to drama and fiction.

Sadly, Mr. Reed died from issues related to HIV.

Robert Reed

Quote:

'Reed felt that his career required him to be secretive about his homosexuality.[4] Several of his male partners have since stated that he threatened them after sex, because he wanted his homosexuality to remain hidden.

Robert Reed died in 1992, at age 59, in Pasadena, California, from colon cancer; he was suffering from HIV at the time. He was cremated and his ashes are buried in Memorial Park Cemetery, Skokie, Illinois.'

I would really like to see a cure for HIV and so if there are some radical liberal types reading this article, relax, I am not glad for this disease or any other disease that within my theological approach, is a result of the fall of humanity and a somewhat corrupted physical universe within God's sovereignty.

I am making a legitimate theological and satirical point in regard to Robert Reed having played a wholesome family man on television, when the actual reality of his life was radically different.

Partridge



When I was a child my brother used to watch the Partridge Family which in my view was funnier than the Brady Bunch and a bit easier to stomach for thirty minutes. It would have been nice to have a drummer that actually appeared to be drumming to the songs though.

Death Row



I listened to a few of the preview tracks and I did not hear anything crude, but really this is a sad idea for a Christmas album. I do not post this to promote the album or because I think it is cool in any way. I think rather it shows that some of the dark humour is our Western society is just dark and not really humourous.

41 comments:

  1. Is the Coloniel backed up by a chorus of fryers? And why is it always Marsha, Marsha, Marsha?

    Nice piece.

    Larry E.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Famous Blogger Crooning Carols."
    Russ you could do it to. Anyone that is anyone has a Christmas album.

    It's no different here in Australia. Each year we have our Christmas Carols in the Myer Music Bowl in our fair city. It just gets more and more commercialized every year. This year we have an Australian Idol runner up singing at the carols again. He "came out" just after loosing idol. He is not singing for the first time at the carols, but the first time with his partner. I'm not sure if his parter can sing but it will be interesting. I suppose it's a time of getting together with family and friends. Sorry for the sarcasm, not satire.

    I ponder the question as to why they sing amazing theological songs anyway. Maybe it's popularity. Everyone wants a stage. I'm mostly turned off by some famous singer doing "Amazing Grace".

    Oh well, maybe I am a man of little faith because they might get a little convicted when singing such a powerful song.

    Thanks Russ.
    Have a great time with your family and friends this holiday time and may you also have a time of refreshing.

    Russell.

    ReplyDelete
  3. '"Famous Blogger Crooning Carols."
    Russ you could do it to. Anyone that is anyone has a Christmas album.'

    I don't sing, but my friends and blog commenters Chucky and Bobby Buff sing.

    We should do a Christmas album:

    thekingpin68 presents: satire and theology: Marry a Christian, I mean Merry Christmas

    'I suppose it's a time of getting together with family and friends. Sorry for the sarcasm, not satire.'

    Yes, Russell, it is easy to be sarcastic and for good reason.

    'Oh well, maybe I am a man of little faith because they might get a little convicted when singing such a powerful song.'

    We can hope.

    'Thanks Russ.
    Have a great time with your family and friends this holiday time and may you also have a time of refreshing.'

    God bless you and family, Russell.

    Merry Christmas

    ReplyDelete
  4. The office building I work in had a little Christmas dessert thing the other day and brought in a string quartet to play Christmas carols while we enjoyed our desserts. They played the usual, but to my surprise they ended up also playing "Let All Mortal Flesh Keep Silence." Of course, that song is not well known outside of the church (or, as some of my Christian co-workers demonstrated, not even in the church), so playing it was not a big risk, so to speak, for the quartet. Nonetheless, despite the commercialization, the fact that in most Western countries it is still acceptable to listen to music that refers directly to Christ is quite interesting.

    Feliz Navidad, Russ. :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Aaa! why would that teacher spoil a dash of Christmas magic for little children? I think the Santa idea is legendary and teaches a lot about giving. I was always taught the Biblical Christmas Story as well, so I was balanced, and Christmas was always exciting and memorable...and still is!
    -Child at Heart-

    ReplyDelete
  6. Marry a Christian.

    I recently found out it was ok to tell "hard of hearing" jokes.

    I like this one:
    Three hard of hearing guys are standing on a street corner.
    First hard of hearing guy says, “ Brrrrr, it’s windy!”
    Second one says, “No...it’s Thursday.”
    Third one says, “Me too, lets go get a drink.”

    So I told this one at Church on Sunday while explaining to people that they must make sure I understood what they said.

    Male member of congregation asks me: "will you give me visit please."

    I went home and told my wife that such and such asked me a really weired question today: "will you give me a vasectomy."

    Hard of hearing,
    Russell.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Quite possible the worst Christmas album ever: Christmas in the Stars

    ReplyDelete
  8. 'Nonetheless, despite the commercialization, the fact that in most Western countries it is still acceptable to listen to music that refers directly to Christ is quite interesting.

    Feliz Navidad, Russ. :)'

    Jake, thanks for the encouraging point.

    Merry Christmas,

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  9. 'I was always taught the Biblical Christmas Story as well, so I was balanced, and Christmas was always exciting and memorable...and still is!'

    A reasonable concept, thanks. I was taught both, by my Mom, as well.

    Russ

    ReplyDelete
  10. Those are funny, Russell.

    I will ask my Mom, who is mostly deaf to read your comments.

    I am praying for you.

    Russ

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thanks, Chuck, I listened to a bit of it.

    What is the worst track in your opinion?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hi Russ,
    Two of the actor's stories were surprising to me. The Homosexual Reed playing Mike Brady and Maureen being a singer.
    I think I recall a scene on television with Marsha holding a microphone, doing some singing.
    Colonel Sanders Christmas album. Interesting. Who Knew?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thanks, Jim.

    Here:

    Dick Sargent

    'Dick Sargent (April 19, 1930 – July 8, 1994), born Richard Stanford Cox, was an American actor, best known for his portrayal of "the second Darrin Stephens" on the television series Bewitched. The actor took the name Dick Sargent from a "Saturday Evening Post" illustrator/artist of the same name.'

    'Personal life
    Later in life, he publicly declared his homosexuality, and supported gay rights issues. He had long hidden his sexual orientation, appearing with lesbian actress Fannie Flagg on the 1970s game show Tattletales as a couple. The game show featured celebrity married couples, and Sargent and Flagg claimed they were dating. In reality, Sargent lived with life partner Albert Williams until his death. In June 1992, Sargent was a Grand Marshal of the Los Angeles Gay Pride parade along with former co-star Elizabeth Montgomery.

    Death
    Sargent died in 1994 from prostate cancer in Los Angeles. He was cremated. His ashes were either given to a friend or family.'

    ReplyDelete
  14. Here are my thoughts on Satan Clause and Believers.

    Believers who lie to their kids and teach Satan Clause is real are not helping. You lie to your kids, but then tell them lying is wrong and wonder why they get into so much trouble.

    I find humor in the death row album. Rick b

    ReplyDelete
  15. Thanks, Rick.

    I do not think that parents should lie to their children and so the Santa Claus issue would need to be handled carefully.

    Rick, I thought you would find the Death Row album funny.

    It is not my style, but I think I can somewhat understand.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  16. Russ,

    I was brought up to believe in Santa Claus as well. Some say that your children won't believe you when you tell them the gospel if you also tell them that Santa Claus is real, and later they find that he isn't. But that was never a problem for me, since my parents never told me the gospel. My dad didn't even want us to be brought up in a church.

    Now, if I had kids, I would be torn, and I'm not sure what I would do, since believing in Santa Claus brought me much happiness as a kid.

    Well, I think it is an evil as Claus surpasses Christ in importance in the minds of many and is taught to children as the central focus of Christmas. But, Christmas and even Santa Claus can also be used for good as Christians and Christian churches use the Christmas season as an opportunity to present the gospel. The same can be done on Halloween as the occult can be contrasted with the supernatural power of almighty God.

    I believe the same.

    'This was the first album released by the Brady Bunch. Unfortunately, it was also their worst album. I could mention the dull arrangements of traditional Christmas carols here. But worse than that is the kids' singing. Marsha was the only one who could come close to carrying a tune at this point. To be fair to them, they worked hard and later became better singers. But at this point in their show biz careers, listening to them sing was unbearable. Greg's singing on "O Holy Night" is particularly painful. By the way, this album is only 20 minutes long, which is fortunate, because that's about all a sane person can take. This album has nothing to recommend about it. Sorry, Brady fans.'

    LOL! I used to very much enjoy watching "The Brady Bunch" when I was little, but it definitely seems very corny now. I think I mainly watched it because I had a crush on Marsha (Maureen McCormick), though I did enjoy the family-friendly story line back then.

    I have to agree, Greg (Barry Williams) bit of singing on the 'O Holy Night' preview sounds less than sparking, to put it nicely.

    How about a Christmas album by Leonard Nimoy and William Shatner? Can you imagine either of them singing "O, Holy Night"? Now THAT gives me the shivers, and it's not even cold here!

    I would prefer hearing the Kool-Aid man say 'Oh Yea', and hopefully bust through the wall of the Brady's recording studio in the process, ending the session.

    LOL!

    When I was a child my brother used to watch the Partridge Family which in my view was funnier than the Brady Bunch and a bit easier to stomach for thirty minutes.

    The only reason I watched "The Partridge Family" when I was little was because of Laurie (Susan Dey), whom I also had a crush on.

    Listen to Colonel Sanders and friends, Christmas Eve.

    I guess that would be better than having Ronald McJoker and the freaky Burger King guy show up at your house Christmas Eve.

    In reality, Sargent lived with life partner Albert Williams until his death. In June 1992, Sargent was a Grand Marshal of the Los Angeles Gay Pride parade along with former co-star Elizabeth Montgomery.

    I knew Robert Reed had been gay and had died of HIV-related issues, but I did not know Dick Sargent (Darrin) was gay. And was Elizabeth Montgomery a lesbian, or merely a supporter of homosexuality? In any case, there are many homosexuals in Hollywood, and their number is increasing. In addition, more homosexual roles are being shown in TV shows and movies.

    On a completely different note, Obama is being named 'Person of the Year' by Time magazine, and there is talk of possibly bringing war crime charges against Bush. Both are unbelievable and very disturbing to me.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Lying to your kids is one thing but telling the whole story in one installment is entirely another. We told our kids the truth when they asked. I call it truth in installments. They have all grown up making their own decisions about following Christ and at this point in time they are all doing so consistently and faithfully to their respective local Churches.

    The truth about Santa did come up early with my first son when he was at kinda. We got notice to appear to explain why our son told a kid that santa was not real. He actually worked it out himself.

    Some might say we lied to our kids because we did not tell them the whole truth. Well it worked for us especially when it came to sex education. My kids did learn about sexual matters early because I did not want some kids giving them the facts of life down the back of the football field at school.

    I have found over the years that some extreme teaching "against" santa can be a little unproductive.

    Just a thought.
    Russell, from down under.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Thanks, Jeff.

    Jay Leno jokes about the 'gays' in Hollywood, and I take it there are plenty.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thanks, Russell.

    Your approach is balanced as usual.

    We do not want to lie to our kids, but we do not want our kids telling other kids 'about Santa' and upsetting them and their parents.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  20. Well, that was some portage, eh?

    For Santa, please look at this link. It will blow you away!

    http://luke2219.wordpress.com/2008/12/12/696/

    ReplyDelete
  21. I received an email from the Evangelical Philosophical Society which contained a link to an article on the problem of evil.

    My comments in bold.

    epssociety blog article

    EPS Blog

    This is the blog area for the Evangelical Philosophical Society and its journal, Philosophia Christi.

    Saturday, December 13, 2008

    Another Consideration for the Problem of Evil

    I am currently writing a book on the problem of evil. No doubt this is a monumental task, and I'll admit I probably will not be completely satisfied with the final result. That nothwithstanding, something has come to my attention concerning the literature ranging over the evidential problem of evil. We recall the famous article by William Rowe (1979) entitled "The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism." His argument (simplified) is that an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent God is unlikely given the extent, distribution, and apparent existence of gratuitous evil. Of course, by gratuitous it is generally agreed that these are evils where no outweighing good results as a consequence of their having obtained. The vast majority of the literature in response to Rowe centers on a debate as to whether or not we can understand the reasons God has for allowing certain instances of evil to occur (often called theistic skepticism). Would we expect, given our finitude, to understand all of God's ways and workings in creation--or is it more reasonable to believe that there are goods "beyond our ken" that only God apprehends that result from evil having occurred? Many suggestions as to what God is up to have resulted, ranging from various free will theodicies, soul making theodicies, or even eschatological theodicies (or perhaps some combination of these). Admittedly, I still do not understand the need for resulting goods from evil to be "outweighing" goods (perhaps someone can enlighten me). In terms of the consequences of actions, it seems that God can remunerate a "matching" good for the harm done, and that be a sufficient response to the problem (if in fact the matching goods theory were worked out--which is not what I'm doing here).

    My observation is that there is an underlying assumption in the evidential argument that provides its force, namely that God has some obligation (moral) toward his creation that binds Him to act in ways that correlate to human relationships. In an excellent article entitled "The Persistent Problem of Evil," Bruce Russell argues the following:

    1. If God exists, then nothing happens which he should have prevented from happening.

    Agreed, as God is sovereign. This does not mean that satanic and human beings do not commit wrong/sinful actions, but that all willingly allowed by God is part of God's plans for the greater and ultimate good.

    There is a difference in motives from wrong acts of God's finite fallen creations and God in what he wills. His motives are perfect and holy, theirs are not.


    The death of Christ is a prime example. God had pure motives while the enemies of Jesus, supernatural and natural did not.

    2. If something happens that any human moral agent should have prevented if he knew about it and could have prevented it without serious risk to himself or others,
    then something happens which God should have prevented from happening.

    I can agree that this statement does have a logic to it.

    Often a finite human being has sufficient knowledge of something that from his/her human perspective is a great evil and one can logically assume it as an evil means the perfectly good God should too prevent it.

    However, at times human finite knowledge does not suffice, and God has infinite knowledge and can know of a greater good by willingly not preventing an evil from happening and this too is logical and even more reasonable than premise 2.


    3. Something has happened that any human moral agent should have prevented if he knew about it and could have prevented it without risk to himself or others.

    If something does not occur, God was just in prohibiting it, if is does occur, even if evil on the part of finite creations, God can use it for the greater good and therefore should not have prevented it.

    An infinite God can use all finite actions of his creatures for the greater good. He can use all acts to lead to acts culminating with plans.

    4. Therefore, God does not exist. (the numbering of the propositions is changed for our purposes).

    No. Rather God willingly uses what is often inscrutable evil for the greater good.

    Of course, the critical premise is 2, and in the rest of my post I want to offer an initial line of thought (admittedly sketchy at this point) to respond to Russell. Rather than worry about the problem of outweighing goods, my concern is to ask "in what sense is God obligated to any of His creatures?" If there is no account of divine obligation, then we have sufficient reason to reject premise 2, and with it goes the rest of Russell's argument.

    Obviously we cannot obligate God in any meaningful sense. We do not have the status to legislate the moral values of actions to Him. The only account of divine obligation that makes any sense is that God obligates Himself to certain actions, and perhaps this obligation obtains as a result of His covenant or promises. But such a contruel is far from clear, and I think part of the confusion rests on conflating what is "good" with what is "right". In perfect being parlance God is the sum of all perfections, His goodness is perfect. I understand this to mean that when he promises to work in a certain way (say, to bless Abraham as a result of His covenant with him) He will do what He says He will do. But more importantly, God does not need the force of an obligation to "draw" Him to fulfill His word. If God needed the force of an obligation to carry through with His promises, then that would imply a defect in His character--in effect saying that He doesn't want to fulfill His promises, but will since He promised. Such a defect would give us reason to doubt his goodness (which is ontological), and to provide a moral injuction binding Him to His word (which would be deontological).

    God will always act within his perfect moral and holy nature and will keep promises made in Scripture.

    Thomas Morris provides a helpful distinction between an agent acting "under a rule" and acting "in accord with a rule." (see his excellent introduction to philosophical theology called Our Idea of God. For a good buy see Amazon at http://amazon.com/dp/9781573831017?tagevangephiloss-20). Acting in accord with a rule means an agent carries out actions without any need of external motivation (such as a moral injunction). Acting under a rule speaks of when an agent requires the force of an injunction to carry out what they have said they will do. In other words, moral obligation only obtains on morally defective agents. God, being perfectly good, has no moral obligations. Therefore, saying that God should bring about an outweighing good implies that He is morally obligated to act in just such a way--a notion, I contend, is incoherent (contra premise 2).

    God is not morally obligated to his creation, other than in his Scripture. But, by nature as God is not evil, as if he was evil that would make him a contradictory being if he is perfectly good, his actions will always work toward the good. God does not primarily bring about an outweighing good because he has an obligation to his corrupt creatures, but because a perfectly good and holy God will always do good. As God is infinite and omnipotent he wills all things as the primary cause, even as he wills the wrong acts of defective/corrupt significantly free creatures he is still working toward the greater and ultimate good.

    To state that at times God allows things to occur that are not necessarily for the greater good seems to me an admission that God indeed does allow gratuitous (too much) evil. And I see no conclusive reason why I should accept this.


    Again, these thoughts are preliminary, but I think if they can be developed more sufficiently, then a different undermining objection to the evidential argument is on the horizon.

    Excellent article, and I can always learn more and appreciate the read.

    Posted by: Jeremy Evans 10:24 AM

    gratuitous evil

    ReplyDelete
  22. Would we expect, given our finitude, to understand all of God's ways and workings in creation--or is it more reasonable to believe that there are goods "beyond our ken" that only God apprehends that result from evil having occurred?

    That is well put, and I agree with that.

    Admittedly, I still do not understand the need for resulting goods from evil to be "outweighing" goods (perhaps someone can enlighten me).

    That is a good point. Given the fact that mankind chose to rebel against God, God then has no obligation to do any good to us or for us, and would be completely "fair" and "just" if He simply destroyed all of us.

    Also, if someone were to say something like, "I can see no good coming out of that child dying from cancer," first, they cannot know all the ramifications that have resulted from that incident. Maybe someone got saved as a result. Maybe something happened, or even was prevented from happening, because of that child dying from cancer, that we will never know this side of eternity.

    In any case, God will ultimately do much more than just "remunerate a "matching" good for the harm done." He will bring all believers to Paradise, and will make all things new, other than those who are never saved, who will be forever discarded as rubbage (and even they will serve a 'good' purpose, as they will be eternal examples and testimonies of God's justice).

    My observation is that there is an underlying assumption in the evidential argument that provides its force, namely that God has some obligation (moral) toward his creation that binds Him to act in ways that correlate to human relationships.

    Exactly. Men attempt to bring God down to their understanding. True, God gave man a sense of justice and fairness, but because man is not omniscient, man cannot know all consequences of all actions for all time, and neither can man fully understand justice and fairness to the extent that God does.

    However, at times human finite knowledge does not suffice, and God has infinite knowledge and can know of a greater good by willingly not preventing an evil from happening and this too is logical and even more reasonable than premise 2.

    Good point.

    God is not accountable to man. Neither is man capable of understanding all of God's actions. We can't even understand all the actions of other people (in fact, we don't even always understand why we ourselves do certain things!), so how can we presume to understand God's actions?

    An infinite God can use all finite actions of his creatures for the greater good. He can use all acts to lead to acts culminating with plans.

    Nicely put. I like that.

    Therefore, God does not exist.

    This is the height of egotistical pride, and puts man as not only the judge of God, but allows man to decide whether or not God even exists. In fact, the existence of God is not up to man's decision or opinion or emotional sway. God exists, no matter how people feel about His existence, and whether or not man's logic (or philosophy) or man's scientific efforts can prove God's existence.

    Rather than worry about the problem of outweighing goods, my concern is to ask "in what sense is God obligated to any of His creatures?" If there is no account of divine obligation, then we have sufficient reason to reject premise 2, and with it goes the rest of Russell's argument.

    Exactly. As I said earlier, God has no inherent obligation to man.

    Obviously we cannot obligate God in any meaningful sense. We do not have the status to legislate the moral values of actions to Him. The only account of divine obligation that makes any sense is that God obligates Himself to certain actions, and perhaps this obligation obtains as a result of His covenant or promises.

    Yes.


    I saw an interesting quote on the Internet:
    "If God doesn't exist, then everything is permitted."

    ReplyDelete
  23. Russ,

    Despite the fact that Santa is an anagram of Satan, I don't see great harm in the tradition and haven't a problem with those who apply the pretense with young children.

    My wife and I choose not to do so with our own children and truthfully, I never saw a joy or excitement about Christmas or the season any diffeentthan I felt as a child awaiting Santa or have observed in other children. However, I will say, my children never loss that joy and excitement at any point either and as adult still have it.

    "2. If something happens that any human moral agent should have prevented if he knew about it and could have prevented it without serious risk to himself or others,
    then something happens which God should have prevented from happening."

    There are a lot of "ifs" in this hypothetical. If something happened with all those conditions then a truly moral agent would step in and prevent it. Where a person doesn't step in and prevent it the person was not moral, but just another sinner committing another sin.

    Seems like some always want to claim God doesn't exist because there is evil or suffering in this world. What does that accomplish? They would prefer no God, just evil and suffering and no hope?

    Larry E.

    ReplyDelete
  24. 'My wife and I choose not to do so with our own children and truthfully, I never saw a joy or excitement about Christmas or the season any diffeentthan I felt as a child awaiting Santa or have observed in other children. However, I will say, my children never loss that joy and excitement at any point either and as adult still have it.'

    Yes, I was the same as a kid once I knew there was no Santa.

    'Seems like some always want to claim God doesn't exist because there is evil or suffering in this world. What does that accomplish? They would prefer no God, just evil and suffering and no hope?'

    You raise a good point, Larry.

    Cheers.

    Russ

    ReplyDelete
  25. Me and my wife told our kids from day one santa is not real and has never been real.

    We also have no problem with our kids telling other kids santa is not real, if our kids tell people santa is not real and they or their kids get offended then I say to bad, he not real and my kids will not lie about that.

    If you can find it on line, weird AL has a song called, the day santa went crazy, and another called christmas at ground zero. both very funny.

    Russ I dont know if you can find it on you tube or not, but some music I love is, Strong Arm, Savior Machine, scattered few, Spy Glass blue, the crucified, Thats just a few bands. rick b

    ReplyDelete
  26. Thanks, Rick.

    'We also have no problem with our kids telling other kids santa is not real, if our kids tell people santa is not real and they or their kids get offended then I say to bad, he not real and my kids will not lie about that.'

    My thought here is that this could potentially set up difficulties between Christian parents and non-Christian parents, and even some Christian parents. I think as Christians we need to pick our battles when dealing with the world, and the Santa issue to me is a small issue. As a child I was allowed to hear about Santa Claus until I figured out it was false at five or six, but my Mom especially made it known to me that the central aspect of Christmas was the birth of the Son of God, Jesus Christ.

    Non-Christians families will usually downplay Christ at Christmas, Santa Claus or not.

    Interestingly, I have CNN on in the background and Rick Warren will apparently be at Obama's inauguration and the experts were stating that this hurts many in the homosexual community.

    As Biblical Christians we cannot back down on opposition to same-sex marriage, even though we already have it in Canada, but this is a far more important issue than Santa Claus and an issue among many that will already put those in the Christian community at odds with those is the secular realm.

    We can state, 'so what' and 'who cares', but we still need to be able to keep our jobs, and live at peace in the community for as long as possible, etc., and so I recommend we show tact with our non-Christian neigbours even as we do not EVER give up on Biblical standards.

    I do not think a militant approach is the best approach although as I demonstrate on my theses, my blogs, and my life, I will not compromise on my philosophical views as God guides me. A militant approach to me leads to many needless fights whereas a non-compromising view will lead to enough fights on its own, as persons such as Rick, Jeff and I can attest to!

    A lot of times the battles are with other Christians.

    I need to go to the bank.

    God bless, Rick,

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  27. You know what? The more I read these comments, the more I think that kids really don't care that much about Santa; their focus is really on the toys they will get. So I'm thinking that if you tell them that Santa Claus doesn't exist, I'm now thinking that maybe they really won't be any less happy. I cannot speak from personal experience, because I did believe in Santa Claus, but it makes sense to me that what they really care about is the toys, not so much the myth of Santa Claus.

    My friend's wife emailed me today about a Study Guide that their daughter (my goddaughter) brought
    home from school as homework. She said:
    "They send home a "study guide" every week with "facts" they need to learn about social studies or science that week.
    This week was social studies and it happened to be about December holidays, Hanukkah, Christmas, and Kwanzaa....
    It had a long paragraph about Hanukkah facts and Kwanzaa facts. And Christmas, well in case you did not know....
    Christmas is celebrated on December 25th. And, Santa Claus brings gifts to children in a his sled pulled by reindeer.
    One of the reindeer's name is Rudolph.
    And that is all it said. Not even a word about Peace on Earth Good Will Towards Men!
    So there it is, Christmas is not about Jesus Christ, God's gift to mankind. Santa Claus and Rudolph is Christmas."

    So, after I read that, and also after reading some of the comments here, I'm thinking more and more that a Christian who tells their kids that there is a Santa Claus, especially in this day and age of increased liberalism and ungodliness, is only contributing to our secular society's replacement of Jesus with Santa Claus.

    So, whether this is considered a 'militaristic' approach or not, I think we, as Christians, should stand up against an ungodly society that hates even the Name of Jesus, and who has pushed God out of the history textbooks, out of the classroom, and more and more out of the holidays.

    As far as difficulties between Christian parents and non-Christian parents, we need to shine a light, not dim our light for the sake of possibly offending others. If we're too concerned about offending someone, we may be giving up an opportunity to lead someone to Christ. Jesus said there will be conflict, because He is in conflict with the world system.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Thanks, Jeff.

    I do think that to the kids Christmas is more about toys than Santa. Good point.

    If our secular society stopped telling kids about Santa Claus it would not point kids toward Christ. It would still be mainly a celebration of toys and family.

    The near Christless Christmas is as result of a secular society, an overemphasis on Santa is a symptom, not the disease.

    Thanksgiving does not have a mascot, so to speak, and it does not cause secular people to necessarily consider God or Christ for Thanksgiving.

    We should not offend others that wish to tell their kids about Santa Claus, but should proclaim the gospel in word and deed.

    We do not want unnecessary conflicts with the world system because we shall have enough already doing what we need to do, and this will likely increase.

    Russ:)

    ReplyDelete
  29. I didn't believe in Santa because my family always had the gifts under the tree well before Christmas, and we opened them on Christmas Eve. But I still liked the mythology of Santa. I think for some kids, the idea of an all-seeing, all-knowing Santa who may reward them may be a greater motivator for good behaviour than just an awareness of parents buying the goodies. And it would not be morally correct to say that Jesus will reward you or punish you according to your behaviour, that is actually teaching heresy. So I see Santa is kind of a mythical motivational tool for parents.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Russ said
    I do not think a militant approach is the best


    I understand picking your battles, and I do not view my way or my kids way of doing it militant, It's more a matter of if the topic comes up we address it, but we do not go out of our way to say, hey guys santa is not real.

    I am the kinda guy that pretty much keeps my mouth shut and just lets everything go in one ear and out the other on most every matter.

    But when some one brings the Bible into it or Who God is or something about Him is brought up, Then I speak up.

    As to your Photo, I think Jeff Should put a fire Breathing Dragon on the mountain roasting santa, LOL, Rick b

    ReplyDelete
  31. 'I understand picking your battles, and I do not view my way or my kids way of doing it militant, It's more a matter of if the topic comes up we address it, but we do not go out of our way to say, hey guys santa is not real.

    I am the kinda guy that pretty much keeps my mouth shut and just lets everything go in one ear and out the other on most every matter.

    But when some one brings the Bible into it or Who God is or something about Him is brought up, Then I speak up.

    As to your Photo, I think Jeff Should put a fire Breathing Dragon on the mountain roasting santa, LOL, Rick b'

    Cheers, Rick.

    I was not stating you are for sure militant on this issue, or is Jeff, but was putting the idea of a hypothetical militant approach in comparison to mine.

    That is funny, Rick.

    My Mom took your Happiness photos with Chuck and I. Your Happiness photos and others from last night will appear in two new blog articles; one on satire and theology and one on thekingpin68.

    Stay tuned, it should be today, and God bless, Rick.

    Russ

    ReplyDelete
  32. I was Thinking,
    Maybe Jeff could create a Poster of A mountain of KFC buckets and Chicken Bones with a fire breathing Dragon roasting Santa clause while holding a bottle of Happiness. This way the Poster covers all Aspects on your Blog.

    It Covers the mountain, KFC, Santa, And death row since someone is Dying, and might as well toss in Happiness, LOL, Rick b

    ReplyDelete
  33. This just in:

    Dear Sir:

    Our factory locates in Shenzhen city, China and would like to carry any project in:

    Precision Parts Machining of any material such as aluminum, brass,bronze,SS,etc.

    Metal or alloy Fabrication such as enclosure,cabinet,housing,etc.

    Assembly of Small Machine & Equipment such as small generator,machines and processors.

    Reenginnering from Samples Provided.

    We work in the way:

    a,Accept small runs;

    b,Create good finishing (we have anodizing,powder coating and plating);

    c,Accept all CAD files and even hand draft such as IGS, STEP, AutoCAD, Solidworks,
    AutoDesk, UGNX,edrawings, ProE, x_t,etc.;

    4,Multi Delivery Mode:

    - Emergency: 3 days
    - Fast delivery: 2 weeks
    - Normal delivery: monthly basis

    Serious buyers please send us drawings or 3D modeling and for you:

    * US reference will be provided;
    * Quotation will be rendered
    * Basic information will be generated (brochure, website, photoes of works)

    We will show you a reliable quality source, please Email Us Now!!!

    Yada Inc./Taihao Factory
    Contact: Mr. Ling (Hotline: 86 755 88832548)
    Email:m1647@tom.com

    ReplyDelete
  34. As to your Photo, I think Jeff Should put a fire Breathing Dragon on the mountain roasting santa, LOL, Rick b

    LMHO! Hilarious!

    I was Thinking,
    Maybe Jeff could create a Poster of A mountain of KFC buckets and Chicken Bones with a fire breathing Dragon roasting Santa clause while holding a bottle of Happiness. This way the Poster covers all Aspects on your Blog.

    It Covers the mountain, KFC, Santa, And death row since someone is Dying, and might as well toss in Happiness, LOL, Rick b


    Wow, that would be a project.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Rick,

    I emailed something to Russ. Not precisely what you suggested, but something similar.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Thanks, Chuck.

    The Shatner clip is funny, but may get missed in the now older article, although I realize it fits the context.

    Could you place it in the newer post too? Thanks.

    I think the Michelin Man would defeat the Kool-Aid man due to greater maneuverability.

    ReplyDelete