Review and Confirm The Mathematical Proof of God

Perhaps you would like to outline this so called “proof” here, so we have something to discuss which doesn’t rely on going to your website.

quote:

---

The Proof illustrates how the trinity of numbers (e.g. 111, 222, 333), reveals the one true God in a consistent and coherent manner that is beyond doubt.

---

That’s well short of an outline. There’s not even a hint of how such a “proof” could possibly work.

So, in other words it’s not a proof at all. And some of it is pretty silly. It is in no way surprising that 1 x 3 =3 or that 2 x 3 =6, for instance.

quote:

---

The Proof does not only illustrate how numbers work but also why.

---

It really doesn’t. And if you were any sort of a mathematician you could show how it really works (“why” is just a consequence of using base 10 notation as you should know)

quote:

---

The Proof explains why such a phenomenon is, 9 is the Triune number.

---

No, it does not.

quote:

---

Why don't you highlight the segments you think are silly? If they really are, that is.

---

To be honest, that would be all of it.

quote:

---

It should be noted that you are yet to provide reasons for why The Proof is incorrect.

---

It should also be noted that you ignored the mathematical points I made at the start of my post.It also should be noted that the “proof” is remarkably short of reasoning to support its claims.Nevertheless I shall do better than you have managed and point out some facts.Let us start with the fact that the “triple numbers” are not special. Any multiple of 3 must have a digital root of 3, 6 or 9 - so long as we use base 10 notation. The proof is easy enough that I’ll leave it to you. If you used base 12 notation - and since you think a clock face is important for some reason - you really should - things don’t work out for you. 444 would have a digital root of 1, for instance.So why should a quirk of base 10 notation be taken as proving anything of significance?

quote:

---

The Proof clearly states why we use base 10 numeral systems. Man was designed to use base 10 numeral due to our fingers.

---

Then you shouldn’t be using the clock face since that is derived from humans using base 12.

quote:

---

And When a number is multiplied by 9, the digital root of the product will be 9.
…
What explanation do you have for this phenomenon?

---

That’s ultimately a consequence of 9 preceding 10. That is why it works in base 10. If you really think you have the mathematical skills to tackle it then do so - mathematically. That is the only correct way.

quote:

---

The Proof reveals why that is with convincing, coherent coincidences in all 7 segments.

---

It certainly doesn’t - jumping to the conclusions you want does not explain it at all, let alone convincingly.

quote:

---

I desire to hear your thoughts on how the same 333 that was derived from the trinity of numbers was also derived when the cross was fixed into a time clock.

---

The decision to use the arms and the torso while neglecting the head and the legs is so obviously arbitrary that the whole thing is worthless. Playing games without even having consistent rules is no way to prove anything.(See also the number of planets. In an attempt to get a more consistent definition of “planet” Pluto was demoted to a “dwarf planetoid” leaving our solar system with only 8 planets.)

quote:

---

The Proof states how 9 is The Triune number. How the nature of The One True God, a Trinity, is ingrained into the fabrics of The Universe through Mathematics(The Trinity of numbers).

---

The falsely-named “Proof” may assert that, but it doesn’t give any reason to believe that it’s true. Indeed, since base 10 is not in any way fundamental, features of base 10 notation are irrelevant to the claim. Likewise the number of planets in our solar system - even if it could be established as 9, which it can’t - is just a local feature, of no significance at the scale of the Universe.

quote:

---

If you spot a blemish in The Proof, express them.

---

I can’t see anything of value in the falsely-named “Proof”. The author clearly does not know what a mathematical proof is, does not understand how to reason or present a coherent case (e.g. the assertion that “there are no extraterrestrial beings” is inserted without any support for the claim or any explanation of how it could be relevant). Not that the rest is much better.And I will point out that I am being very polite about this. It really is hopelessly bad.

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).

---

Can you please stop calling it “the Proof” since it is no such thing. And it doesn’t count the legs at all. The head may be essential but it is at 12 which isn’t counted either.

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?

---

No they could not do the same for Venus because they would have no justification for singling out Venus. And they did so under the authority of the International Astronomical Union.

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

---

i don’t believe that I did miss it. It’s just more arbitrary nonsense.Please at least tell me that you’ve taken onboard the fact that the whole “triple numbers” thing is meaningless, simply a quirk of base 10 notation. Because if you haven’t learned that much the whole discussion is a waste of time.

quote:

---

You focus on the "how" of things and pay little attention on the "why" of things(which is more important) and that's why you could call it meaningless.

---

Wrong. I simply don’t believe your unsupported assertions about the “why” of things. The “why” multiples of 3 and 9 have the properties they do in decimal notation is because it is decimal notation. There’s no reason to think that there is anything deeper.Your unsupported assertions are just opinions and have no argumentative force. That is one reason why you don’t have anything like a proof.

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”.

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:

---

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.

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)

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