Why would an atheist care who Heli was, enough to spend hours upon hours and days upon days discussing him?

stiggy wiggy

Well-known member
Personally, I don't give a flying fart as to who he was, so this thread is not to renew that crashingly boring topic. But are we to think the motivation is honest curiosity?

Which of these two possibilities do you think are more likely?

"I think this Jesus guy was just a mere man, but I'm curious about his alleged grandfather. I want to know more about him."

"I THINK I found in the Bible what appears to be an inaccuracy. I think I'll go on a Christian internet discussion forum and rub their faces in it?"


The motivation for the first would be just plain weirdness, seeing as how numerous ancestors are listed. Why pick Heli? Does the guy inquiring about Heli just like his name? The second one requires a motivation behind the motivation. WHY would the guy want to rub it in the faces of Christians?

Personally again, I find no inaccuracy but the subject bores me too much to discuss here, so I'm hoping this thread will be confined to speculations about motive. And even if Luke got it wrong, it would not impact my faith in Christ in the least. I will defer all discussions about who Heli was to caroljeen in the other thread. She apparently has a better tolerance for irrelevant nonsense than I and appears to be doing a good job defending Luke without my help.

Meanwhile, even though as an American I have no interest in the sport of cricket. what would you atheists think about me if I went to a cricket discussion board to bash cricket lovers? And PLEASE don't tell me that cricket is not a danger to society (with which I agree) but that:

"People who think Heli was Jesus' grandfather are a danger to society."
 
Last edited:

Furion

Well-known member
Which of these two possibilities do you think are more likely?

"I think this Jesus guy was just a mere man, but I'm curious about his alleged grandfather. I want to know more about him."

"I THINK I found in the Bible what appears to be an inaccuracy. I think I'll go one a Christian internet discussion forum and rub their faces in it?"
After careful consideration, using the three brain cells that all christians have and only have three, my guess is the latter. It's just a guess.

I think they are claiming you now have poopies on your nose after the smearing.
 

Semmelweis Reflex

Active member
Personally, I don't give a flying fart as to who he was, so this thread is not to renew that crashingly boring topic. But are we to think the motivation is honest curiosity?

Which of these two possibilities do you think are more likely?

"I think this Jesus guy was just a mere man, but I'm curious about his alleged grandfather. I want to know more about him."

"I THINK I found in the Bible what appears to be an inaccuracy. I think I'll go on a Christian internet discussion forum and rub their faces in it?"


The motivation for the first would be just plain weirdness, seeing as how numerous ancestors are listed. Why pick Heli? Does the guy inquiring about Heli just like his name? The second one requires a motivation behind the motivation. WHY would the guy want to rub it in the faces of Christians?

Personally again, I find no inaccuracy but the subject bores me too much to discuss here, so I'm hoping this thread will be confined to speculations about motive. And even if Luke got it wrong, it would not impact my faith in Christ in the least. I will defer all discussions about who Heli was to caroljeen in the other thread. She apparently has a better tolerance for irrelevant nonsense than I and appears to be doing a good job defending Luke without my help.

Meanwhile, even though as an American I have no interest in the sport of cricket. what would you atheists think about me if I went to a cricket discussion board to bash cricket lovers? And PLEASE don't tell me that cricket is not a danger to society (with which I agree) but that:

"People who think Heli was Jesus' grandfather are a danger to society."

[Heavy sigh] You know, sometimes you seem intelligent and articulate and other times you seem very much like Homer Simpson.


Which is cool enough, but, c'mon, man, this is important stuff! I think you dumb it down when approached with criticism of your world view. Which is what the unwashed heathens do to the Bible. My view of American Christians is that they do that. Nothing matters but their illusory concept of salvation. God doesn't really matter, the Bible doesn't really matter, only Uh-Cheees-us matters. And he needs money. Christianity has become so stupid. Which is a shame. It really is. IMO.

On the other hand, militant fundamentalist atheists aren't much better. They just have different algorithms. Back when I first came to CARM in the 1990s we weren't so reliant on GooGoo [sic: Google] for our answers, I can tell you! Of course, come to think of it CARM bored the left man tit right off me because it was so meticulously doctrinal - theological dissection as it were - totally missing the point. If fact, obfuscating it. Some of that still goes on in other parts of the forum. I can't bear it. Practical spirituality is my forte. I like to think.

Anyway, the genealogies were extremely important for establishing if Christ Jesus was the awaited messiah. More so than the signs he gave the spiritually weak of faith.

The thing is, with, skeptics, and their sources as well, is that they don't understand the basics of genealogy. Especially that all names weren't needed and legal adoption, for example. They just go straight to "that's wrong." But, I don't want to restart another thread here when the other one is active.

By the way, this habit of yours of drawing special attention to your theological nemesis is a symptom of a neediness, isn't it, really? Huh? Need a good ol' slap on the back, do ya? Trying to score some dopamine for Jesus? [tsk-tsk-tsk]
 

stiggy wiggy

Well-known member
Which is cool enough, but, c'mon, man, this is important stuff! I think you dumb it down when approached with criticism of your world view.

Absurd comment. My "world view" is not based in any way upon who this guy Heli was, nor whether he was grandfather or third cousin, twice removed from Jesus.

Which is what the unwashed heathens do to the Bible. My view of American Christians is that they do that.

Your view of American Christians is irrelevant to me. Do I do that? How have I "dumbed down" anything here? Please identify not only what I have dumbed down, but how I dumbed whatever it is down?

Nothing matters but their illusory concept of salvation.


Please identify my "concept of salvation," how it's illusory and how this OP of mine manifests both.

God doesn't really matter, the Bible doesn't really matter, only Uh-Cheees-us matters.

Who the hell is Cheeesus?

And he needs money. Christianity has become so stupid.

What do charlatan evangelists have to do with an atheist's interest in Heli or with Christianity for that matter?

Anyway, the genealogies were extremely important for establishing if Christ Jesus was the awaited messiah.

Heh, is the Pixie awaiting his Messiah? Should I have included that as a third possible motivation?

By the way, this habit of yours of drawing special attention to your theological nemesis is a symptom of a neediness,

Nah I don't really NEED to know why anyone would obsess over something which logic would indicate should be of no interest. I'll let you in on a hint as to what motive I suspect. It has to do with a famous line spoken by Queen Gertrude when watching the play within the play in Hamlet.
 
Last edited:

Semmelweis Reflex

Active member
Absurd comment. My "world view" is not based in any way upon who this guy Heli was, nor whether he was grandfather or third cousin, twice removed from Jesus.

It should be.

Your view of American Christians is irrelevant to me. Do I do that? How have I "dumbed down" anything here? Please identify not only what I have dumbed down, but how I dumbed whatever it is down?

The genealogy of Christ Jesus in the Bible. Duh.

Please identify my "concept of salvation," how it's illusory and how this OP of mine manifests both.

Do I have to?

Who the hell is Cheeesus?

Well, that's a derogatory parody of the dumbed down Merican Jesus, per say. Republican, obviously. Fighting for democracy and against hom'sexules around the world. With a gun. White as bread with light colored long hair. Effeminate, ironically. Blue eyes and perfect teeth.

What do charlatan evangelists have to do with an atheist's interest in Heli or with Christianity for that matter?

More than you might think. Just imagine Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton on a book tour and if that don't get your blood boiling then it's too late. You're too far gone.


Heh, is the Pixie awaiting his Messiah? Should I have included that as a third possible motivation?

Pixie's messiah has been and he is Richard.


Nah I don't really NEED to know why anyone would obsess over something which logic would indicate should be of no interest. I'll let you in on a hint as to what motive I suspect. It has to do with a famous line spoken by Queen Gertrude when watching the play within the play in Hamlet.

Well, that's a bit archaic, don't you think? What, no video?
 

stiggy wiggy

Well-known member
It should be.

Heh, I'm glad it's not. Should everyone's world view be based on who Heli was?

The genealogy of Christ Jesus in the Bible.

How did I dumb down the genealogy of Jesus? Please describe it's state both before and after the alleged dumbing down



You just replaced a vowel from o to u in your favorite theologian's battle cry whose video you provided last response. Why?

Do I have to?

So you now want to discuss free will versus predestination?

Well, that's a derogatory parody of the dumbed down Merican Jesus, per say. Republican, obviously. Fighting for democracy and against hom'sexules around the world. With a gun. White as bread with light colored long hair. Effeminate, ironically. Blue eyes and perfect teeth.

Your fantasies bore me about as much as Heli's kinfolk.

More than you might think. Just imagine Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton on a book tour and if that don't get your blood boiling then it's too late.

It's definitely too late. Nothing makes my blood boil. In fact nothing even makes it simmer.

Well, that's a bit archaic, don't you think? What, no video?

The Bard predated Chad Hurley by nearly four centuries.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Personally, I don't give a flying fart as to who he was, so this thread is not to renew that crashingly boring topic. But are we to think the motivation is honest curiosity?

Which of these two possibilities do you think are more likely?

"I think this Jesus guy was just a mere man, but I'm curious about his alleged grandfather. I want to know more about him."

"I THINK I found in the Bible what appears to be an inaccuracy. I think I'll go on a Christian internet discussion forum and rub their faces in it?"


The motivation for the first would be just plain weirdness, seeing as how numerous ancestors are listed. Why pick Heli? Does the guy inquiring about Heli just like his name? The second one requires a motivation behind the motivation. WHY would the guy want to rub it in the faces of Christians?

Personally again, I find no inaccuracy but the subject bores me too much to discuss here, so I'm hoping this thread will be confined to speculations about motive. And even if Luke got it wrong, it would not impact my faith in Christ in the least. I will defer all discussions about who Heli was to caroljeen in the other thread. She apparently has a better tolerance for irrelevant nonsense than I and appears to be doing a good job defending Luke without my help.

Meanwhile, even though as an American I have no interest in the sport of cricket. what would you atheists think about me if I went to a cricket discussion board to bash cricket lovers? And PLEASE don't tell me that cricket is not a danger to society (with which I agree) but that:

"People who think Heli was Jesus' grandfather are a danger to society."
I'm thinking "an axe to grind."
They feel it an imperative to make sure they exclude themselves from the gift of eternal life......

🤷🏽‍♂️
 

The Pixie

Well-known member
I'm thinking "an axe to grind."
They feel it an imperative to make sure they exclude themselves from the gift of eternal life......
I started the thread to prove you wrong, Steve. I guess you could say that was me grinding an axe.

Either way, job done.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
I started the thread to prove you wrong, Steve. I guess you could say that was me grinding an axe.

Either way, job done.
You didn't however actually prove yourself right.

You proved that you don't actually want to know the truth.

So, if you're satisfied that the job is done, then yes.... you had absolutely nothing but an axe to grind.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
No, Luke did. He clearly stated Joseph was the son of Heli, not that Mary was his daughter.
Actually, Luke said,
Enomizeto.
You decided that you could ignore that.
But, as you made it quite clear...
You're not actually interested in knowing the truth. You just have an axe to grind.
I proved that you were wrong when you claimed Mary was Heli's daughter. That is all I set out to do.
Rather curious thing about enomizeto.

So, is your axe sharp enough, or did you grind it to dust?
 

The Pixie

Well-known member
Actually, Luke said,
Enomizeto.
He certainly did. He said it about the relationship between Jesus and Joseph, and he said it to get around the claim of a virgin birth:

23 Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph

And then he told us of the relationship between Joseph and Heli, and when he did that he did NOT say Enomizeto.

Joseph, the son of Heli,

You decided that you could ignore that.
Ignore what? We discussed the Enomizeto issue in depth.

Anyone can find the five posts where I discussed it here: https://forums.carm.org/search/96418/?q=Enomizeto&c[users]=The+Pixie&o=date

You are WRONG that I decided to ignore it. You are WRONG that Enomizeto refers to the relationship between Joseph and Heli. You are WRONG that Heli was the father of Mary.

But, as you made it quite clear...
You're not actually interested in knowing the truth. You just have an axe to grind.
And I can grind that axe because I am right, and you are WRONG.

Rather curious thing about enomizeto.
Not really, it is pretty straightforward. Luke used it about the relationship between Jesus and Joseph, to allow for the virgin birth.

You want to pretend that instead it is about the relationship between Heli and Joseph. You know it does not work - that is why you cannot quote the text. You are WRONG.

But you have to keep up the pretence to save your precious pride.

So, is your axe sharp enough, or did you grind it to dust?
Still grinding it, Steve.
 

Caroljeen

Well-known member
Personally, I don't give a flying fart as to who he was, so this thread is not to renew that crashingly boring topic. But are we to think the motivation is honest curiosity?

Which of these two possibilities do you think are more likely?

"I think this Jesus guy was just a mere man, but I'm curious about his alleged grandfather. I want to know more about him."

"I THINK I found in the Bible what appears to be an inaccuracy. I think I'll go on a Christian internet discussion forum and rub their faces in it?"


The motivation for the first would be just plain weirdness, seeing as how numerous ancestors are listed. Why pick Heli? Does the guy inquiring about Heli just like his name? The second one requires a motivation behind the motivation. WHY would the guy want to rub it in the faces of Christians?

The second possibility is the most likely motive. What did you expect?
 

mikeT

Well-known member
Christians who are unwilling to answer reasonable questions reasonably or sincerely are like blood in the water for sharks. It's a clear sign that something's going on that's worth investigating.

The vast majority of threads in this sub-forum present the same kind of attraction. The reason is that the majority of Christians here get upset when atheists question their faith, and the very fact that they DO get upset tells atheists that the questions are worth asking.
 

stiggy wiggy

Well-known member
Christians who are unwilling to answer reasonable questions reasonably or sincerely are like blood in the water for sharks. It's a clear sign that something's going on that's worth investigating.

So you fancy yourself as a shark, eh? Then hit me up. Ask me one of those "reasonable questions" and see if I am unwilling to answer reasonably.

The reason is that the majority of Christians here get upset when atheists question their faith, and the very fact that they DO get upset tells atheists that the questions are worth asking.

So the REASON they're worth asking is because you THINK it upsets them?

I doubt you're capable of upsetting me, but go ahead and try. Hit me with your best shot.
 

The Pixie

Well-known member
So you fancy yourself as a shark, eh? Then hit me up. Ask me one of those "reasonable questions" and see if I am unwilling to answer reasonably.
Yeah, because when I think of someone who goes out of his way to make himself clear, stiggy is that guy. Not.
 

Furion

Well-known member
Christians who are unwilling to answer reasonable questions reasonably or sincerely ...
Bring some atheists here who are not as angry and trolly as the current crop and you may receive some sincerely held answers to actual sincere questions. What-ever-boy.
 

Caroljeen

Well-known member
No, Luke did. He clearly stated Joseph was the son of Heli, not that Mary was his daughter.


I proved that you were wrong when you claimed Mary was Heli's daughter. That is all I set out to do.
I thought you set out to prove that Jesus isn't a descendent of David since his real Father is God.
 
Top