Review and Confirm The Mathematical Proof of God

quote:

---

Your Lack of belief does not change The Truth.

---

Your belief does not change the truth that your so-called “Proof” is nothing of the sort.

quote:

---

The Proof is a unification of Mathematics and The Word of God. The Creator of The Universe ingrained His nature into The Universe through Mathematics, The language of The Universe and The Proof succeeds at revealing this ingrained nature as a Trinity: which is seen in The composition of The Bible (The Word of God), The creation of Man(Gen. 1:26), The Solar system (Space & Time), and the unique phenomenon of The Triune Number 9.

---

I’m sorry I wasted my time reviewing your “Proof” as you clearly had no interest in the outcome. The fact is that it shows none of these things. For instance going back to the mathematics - rather important to a so-called “mathematical proof” - the “unique nature” of the number 9 is not fundamental at all, but a simple consequence of using base 10.

quote:

---

The Trinity of Numbers is well stated in The Bible (Revelation 13:18) and the idea of The Crucifixion Cross being fixed into a time clock is well rooted in the scriptures as well (Romans 5:6)

---

Romans 5:6 in no way validates your misuse of the clock face.

quote:

---

Some day you will believe this Truth.

---

Unless you are planning torture or brainwashing I can’t be made to believe the ridiculous nonsense you call a “Proof”.

Your belief doesn't change what is true.There is no unification of math and the Word of God. There is no proof of God, no proof of a universe constructed with intent that math be ingrained, no revealed truth of any ingrained nature nor of a Trinity, and no evidence that the Bible is anything but the words of men. Conflating the evolution of homo sapiens with the solar system and the number 9 is just numerology.There is no Trinity of numbers in Revelation 13:18, nor anything about the cross and a time clock in Romans 5:6.Someday you will understand that it isn't what you yourself have become convinced is true, but what you can convincingly demonstrate is true to others. It is clear that you sincerely believe you have happened across a deep truth (you are not alone in your specific beliefs - many very similar numerological claims litter the Internet, but you probably already know that - the only thing original on your webpages is the images - the same numerological claims can be found at many websites), but it is clear to everyone else that you have fallen into the very common trap of thinking that certain numerical coincidences have religious meaning.--Percy

The Proof illustrates howThe Father + The Son + The Holy Spirit = 9;
God = 3;To break it down, 9 represents the three members of the trinity and 3 represents God. It means there are three individuals who are God in 9(3 3 3)-The Trinity.Couple this with the fact that the holy trinity (3 3 3) was derived from the trinity of numbers. (as illustrated in the proof.)

The so-called proof plays some games with numbers. That in no way defeats the criticisms.I’m sorry that you had no interest in a genuine review of your claims. But that’s your problem. Stay wrapped up in your errors and your pride all you like. It’s hardly a good advertisement for Christianity.

quote:

---

The Proof clearly states that Man was created in the image of a trinity: three distinct parts (represented by 3, 6, 9 on the clock), all connected and controlled by a single mind(head, 12), Hence, Trinity - Meaning three united by one. The head is an essential aspect, which you failed to notice. And yes, legs must be views as a single entity attached to the torso, For they are united as one and share a single entity on The Cross(6).

---

Humans have way more than 3 distinct parts though. You can arbitrarily define 3 "parts" if you want to, but you can do that about as easily for any other arbitrary number you want. It doesn't seem to have much significance, especially when the "parts" are as counterintuitive as "left arm, right arm, and the rest". When you do that it's pretty obvious you're trying to force things to fit that really don't.

quote:

---

The same Scientists who sat down in a round Table to eliminate Pluto could also do the same thing to Venus but on what Authority are they acting upon? Many planetary scientists advocate for a simpler definition, focusing on intrinsic properties like size, shape, and geological activity. By this standard, Pluto would easily qualify as a planet. Pluto exhibits active geology, seasonal changes, and surface renewal processes not seen on most asteroids or other small bodies. These features reflect internal heat and dynamic systems akin to those of terrestrial planets. Unlike asteroids, which are often fragments of larger bodies, Pluto is a primordial object that has retained its integrity since the solar system’s formation.

---

It's not like scientists are out there trying to force there not to be 9 planets. Pluto was found early so it was in the classical list, but it differs from the 8 uncontroversial planets in some key respects, and if we include it, it's hard to say why things like Eris or the other dwarf planets shouldn't also count. It may be that you can define the category in such a way as to include Pluto but nothing else, but the harder you have to work to do that, again the more clear it becomes you're trying to force the fit.​

quote:

---

I also noticed how you skipped my prior question on how the same 333 derived from the trinity of numbers is also derived from The Cross being fixed into a Time clock as the proof illustrates. I guess that serves as the heaviest stumbling block.

---

The "how" seems to just be that clocks are based around 12, which is divisible by 3 and 4, so things with 4 parts map on to the multiples of 3. It's not clear why that coincidence (or all of them taken together) are necessarily a product of God, much less a proof.

"Humans have way more than 3 distinct parts though. You can arbitrarily define 3 "parts" if you want to, but you can do that about as easily for any other arbitrary number you want. It doesn't seem to have much significance, especially when the "parts" are as counterintuitive as "left arm, right arm, and the rest". When you do that it's pretty obvious you're trying to force things to fit that really don't."The Cross is the representation of The Holy Trinity. If God depicts Man as having 3 distinct parts which are unified by one(head), then so it is."It's not like scientists are out there trying to force there not to be 9 planets. Pluto was found early so it was in the classical list, but it differs from the 8 uncontroversial planets in some key respects, and if we include it, it's hard to say why things like Eris or the other dwarf planets shouldn't also count. It may be that you can define the category in such a way as to include Pluto but nothing else, but the harder you have to work to do that, again the more clear it becomes you're trying to force the fit."Pluto demonstrates dynamic and complex "planet-like" features (e.g., atmosphere, geological activity, and a system of moons)."The "how" seems to just be that clocks are based around 12, which is divisible by 3 and 4, so things with 4 parts map on to the multiples of 3. It's not clear why that coincidence (or all of them taken together) are necessarily a product of God, much less a proof."I stated earlier that The Proof is a unification of Math and The Word of God.
Romans 5:6 provides justification for the cross being fixed into the time clock.

quote:

---

I stated earlier that The Proof is a unification of Math and The Word of God.

---

The Drivel (a more accurate term than “Proof”) doesn’t really do that, as you really ought to know,

quote:

---

Romans 5:6 provides justification for the cross being fixed into the time clock

---

It certainly does not but I suppose you don’t expect anyone to read it and find that out. Your lack of respect for what you call “The Word of God” is another count against you.

The cross has either 2 parts or 4 parts, depending on how you view it. The cross is an ancient Roman method of torture and execution. It lacks the features required to be a planet, such as clearing its orbit of other bodies and moving in the planetary disk of the solar system. Any such "proof" could be made between math and any given fairy tale.

Of course the number games work better as a proof of Hinduism.Why else would they rely on a notation invented by Hindus - and unknown to the authors of the books of the Bible?Clearly it demonstrates the supremacy of the Hindu Trimurti. Can you not see the similarity of the Om symbol to the numeral “3”? Does Shiva not have his third eye open, does he not wield a trident?(Which just goes to show how worthless these arguments are)

quote:

---

The Cross is the representation of The Holy Trinity. If God depicts Man as having 3 distinct parts which are unified by one(head), then so it is.

---

If you're appealing to how God depicts humans (and birds and whales I guess?) the argument essentially boils down to "The Bible has a lot of 3s in it", it's not actually identifying any kind of consistency with the natural world or anything that's been independently derived anymore.

quote:

---

Pluto demonstrates dynamic and complex "planet-like" features (e.g., atmosphere, geological activity, and a system of moons).

---

So does Eris. Why should only one of them be included, other than that you just want the total to be 9? Why are there even any possible points of controversy if the number of planets was supposed to be created to obviously reflect a trinity?

quote:

---

I stated earlier that The Proof is a unification of Math and The Word of God.
Romans 5:6 provides justification for the cross being fixed into the time clock.

---

quote:

---

For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

---

Why does that rise above the level of coincidence though? It seems like you just cherry picked a verse that mentioned "time" (and not even the time of day like on a clock) and declared it to have extra significance because it fit your point.

"The cross has either 2 parts or 4 parts, depending on how you view it. The cross is an ancient Roman method of torture and execution.''Then why are three parts pierced during crucifixion? Both hands and the feet joined as one - 3 parts"It lacks the features required to be a planet, such as clearing its orbit of other bodies and moving in the planetary disk of the solar system."Pluto should be considered a planet because it shares key characteristics with other planets: it orbits the Sun, is spherical due to its self-gravity, and has a complex geology and atmosphere. The "clearing its orbit" criterion, used to exclude Pluto, is inconsistently applied, as even larger planets like Jupiter and Earth share their orbits with asteroids, Look this up and you will confirm it is true."Any such "proof" could be made between math and any given fairy tale."The Christian God, who is the One True God(OTG) revealed himself as a trinity. This same God is the only God who has his nature ingrained into the Universe by way of Mathematics and the Proof reveals The Christian God to be this OTG.

It was not the Hindu god that was fixed into the time clock and revealed The Truth.

I see. You didn’t invent silly nonsense about the Hindu God. Obviously you are a devout Hindu trying to make Christianity look silly.

Quoting Sarah Jessica Parker's character in Miami Rhapsody (1995) from memory (since imdb doesn't include this quote, practically the only one I can remember):

Parker:

---

Answering the phone while playing Solitaire on her computer:

​

I'm just spending all day in mental masturbation. It's my second favorite kind.

---

The hands and feet are not joined as one. Those aren't the key characteristics of planets because there are many, many other objects that have those features, such as many meteors. Only in your imagination.