Actually Santa Claus was based on a real person. He's dead too now, just like Jesus.

http://www.santalady.com/history.html

 

"based on" not an actual human being at one time.

 

He "WAS" an actual human being. Not sure if you caught that part. He's actually a saint in the catholic church, thus the blend of him and Christ's birth. as a holiday

 

The history of Saint Nicholas has become the myth of Santa Claus.

Jesus Christ is still Jesus Christ.

I know its splitting hairs, but each is based on a different premise.

 

Not really, cause the majority of the "history" of Jesus Christ was passed by word of mouth for at least a century before it was written. How distorted was it during the period of time is unknown. Tell you what, tell your friend something over the phone, tell him to tell someone, and have at least 20 people in between before it comes back to you, and see how accurate it is.

 

This is a terrible argument.

 

 

jeez a lot of "interesting" posts here
regardless of whether you are a Christian or not, there was in "fact" a man named Jesus who was born in Nazarene and who claimed to be God and was crucified on a Roman cross. The historical data "proves" this is so (as long as you believe in historical data aka historical documents). Even secular/liberal scholars will agree to those facts. Now whether you believe he rose from the dead or is God is another matter requiring faith. If you don't believe that a man named Jesus lived, then you'd have to question whether anyone in history existed at or before the time of Jesus (e.g. Plato, Aristotle, etc) as there are many more references to Jesus, even by secular documents (e.g. Romans) than, for example, Plato or Aristotle.

 

This is a no win argument for both sides.

 

not for nothing, but the Bible is not a credible source of information.