How does the Santa analogy actually work for atheists?

Atheists love to jeer at belief in God by saying it’s like believing in Santa Claus.

What they overlook is that children brought up with no belief in God have been known to come to faith in God in adult life. But no child brought up without encouragement to believe in the Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus went on to believe in them in adult life.

The atheist fallacy is a straw man argument because, if it wasn’t, then all children brought up to believe in God would become atheists in adult life. Not so. It’s a straw man because all children brought up to believe in Santa Claus drop that belief as they become adults. AiH

It's a false analogy, Santa is not proposed as the explanation for the mystery of existence, he's just an incidental folklore character

You got it all wrong.

Atheists use Santa as an example to demonstrate the concept of 'burden of proof'.

I can't prove there is no Santa Claus, but that doesn't mean I should believe that Santa really exists, because, after all, there are an infinite number of things that aren't and can't be proven to not exist: elves, leprechauns, ghosts, vampires, flying spaghetti monsters, chupacabras, or any other being you can imagine. So as long as there is no conclusive evidence about the existence of Santa, elves, ghosts or vampires, there's no reason to assume these things exist. The same principle applies to gods as well.

Actually, God is like nothing; he doesn't exist. Just like Santa.

EDIT: The present does NOT cause the present. Your allusion is false. The common events, actions and motions set forth in the past shape the future. As such, the past causes the future. As for the ultimate cause for the ultimate cause (the big bang) we aren't advanced enough yet to understand it. But some day we will. And up until now, none of the explanations have pointed in the direction of "divine influence".

Easy: The analogy isn't valid. You assume a slippery slope is a natural progression.

Also, the argument requires leaps of assumption.

...

Ok, more information: Your analogy of "God is like Santa" to "The nonsense I thought up to compare it to" is a slippery slope involving making assumptions.

There you go.

It doesn't matter what we say. You're going to pick an "Atheists are deluded or you're confusing the atheists" style answer anyway.

The flaw in your argument is that you assume the natural world requires a deity. It does not.

Edit: OK, so this seems to be some sort of weird variation of the "First Cause" argument. That argument has been sufficiently answered many times. I think the most likely answer is that nothing has ever been created. The universe has simply existed in one state or another for eternity. Indeed, since time is dependent upon gravity it appears that time is a secondary or tertiary force in the universe, not a force that dictates how the universe behaves. There simply is no evidence that anything in the universe was ever created. You simply assume a point of creation because you want to.

Because rather than the belief of Santa coming from your parents, belief in god comes from bronze age goat farmers.

Same level of evidence, same unbelievable supernatural claims.

I'm not against the idea, I just find it incredibly unconvincing. Having been exposed to reality, I no longer believe in Santa because of a lack of evidence for such supernatural claims, and I require more than the word of people I've never met that lived thousands of years ago to believe in any one of the 3,000 claims of god throughout recorded history.

Thou has converted me!

I now believe in Wotan, the Father of All Gods.

I shall not take His name in vain.

I shall keep holy Wotan's Day. (The day between Two's Day and Thor's Day).

Since Wotansday is commonly referred to as "Hump Day", in my home country, are you suggesting I eat the specially blessed flesh of a camel?

Or am I supposed to have sexual intercourse with as many other Believers as possible?

You're the expert on theology, and I am but a recent convert, so I'll take your advice.

How do you know your parents put those presents under the tree? Maybe it was your sister or your aunt. You probably assume that the gifts weren't placed by aliens, divine intervention, unicorns, Santa Clause or any other supernatural/magical/extraterrestrial beings, but that doesn't mean you know who put them there. Analogy fixed.

Adults intentionality lie about there being a Santa. That's the issue.

At 62 years of age I fervently believe in the 'spirit' of Santa Klaus and the concept of giving freely to my fellow man without expectation of reward.

I do not, however, believe in a fictional Skye Fairie who will reward me in Heaven with riches beyond compare that I cannot spend. That's akin to a rich man being allowed to take his gold to heaven when they pave the streets with it.