If you lack evidence for Santa Claus, you lack evidence he danced a jig.

I recently encountered some speculation about Jesus getting married, living through the crucifixion (via swoon theory) few kids and other things. In response I made a point I've made several other times concerning this sort of in depth speculation.


There is no evidence that a historical Jesus existed at all. I've done enough research to know the sources are exceedingly poor in that regard so I know, by default, that this in depth speculation is a crock of shit.

Allow me an analogy. There is absolutely no good evidence for the existence of big foot. We have no good skeletons, no poop, no hairs, nothing to suggest that there even is a big foot. No matter what qualifications you have, if you are speculating on the mating habits of big foot, the social hierarchy, food preference, etc. ... you are talking out of your ass.

The fact that there is no good evidence that something even exists in the first place, precludes a good evidentiary standing on which significantly more in depth speculation might rest. If you lack good evidence for Santa Claus, you lack good evidence Santa Claus dancing a jig.