Disclaimer for Jesus and Santa as Representatives of a Sacred Mushroom Cult

This topic was not broached to profane the holy holiday of Christmas; not to besmirch the good name of either Jesus or Old St. Nick (aka Santa Claus) and, in the process, corrupt of young innocent minds that believe in them.

With our current American "drug war" mentality, I'm afraid to say that many Americans will find any insinuation that their beloved Jesus founded a Palestinian hallucinogenic mushroom cult or that their beloved Santa came out of an archaic "drug-culture" sacrilegious!

With Santa Claus in particular, given the infamous reputation of hallucinogenic drugs of the sixties and seventies, many of my fellow Americans would find it too hard to understand why this kind of behavior would be sanctioned by the religious authorities of those archaic shamanic times, or why ingesting hallucinogens (drinking urine from reindeer who feed on amanita muscaria mushrooms) by "decadent shamans" didn't offend the moral standards of their community. The GS realizes that this is the kind of thing that just pisses a lot of people off!

Therefore, the GS would like to make clear that introducing this taboo topic into a discussion about the origins of our Christmas religious beliefs, rituals, and secular customs is not to "promote drugs" in any shape or form. (Besides, the GS doesn't want to be blamed for starting a run on hallucinogenic mushroom-laced reindeer urine!) No, the GS simply wants to offer a different perspective on how the two most revered and influential supernatural beings that have ever walked (or flown) the earth—Jesus and Santa Claus—originated.

After all, Christ and Santa are logically paired, since they both seem to serve the same needs of people on Christmas. Of course, there are those who would balk at this unnatural pairing. After all, the distinction is obvious: one is a "mythological" creation, who never really existed as a man and who practically has no historical record, but who may have been tenuously based upon a historical personage and embellished all out of proportion; the the other is a magical elf who lives at the North Pole! But, seriously, if you compare the evidence we have for a "real person" behind the supernatural office, you will discover that both the god-man from Palestine and the elf from the North Pole have about equal a-historicity; i.e., they may be equally "mythological."

But, the question evoked by this alternative perspective is not whether therefore, because they're both "mythological," we should continue to "believe" in them but rather: Does this mean they are not "real"? (Along with the secondary question: And if we suddenly discovered that hallucinogenic plants had something fundamental to do with their spiritual nature and divinity— through contacting non-ordinary or "transcendental" states of consciousness—, would we be correct in confidently asserting these were "not real"?)