The Truth: The Mathematical Proof Of God, The Holy Trinity.
- Thread starter kingiyk
- Start date
- Status
Pinball1970
Valued Senior Member
....Attempt to begin to explain your claims.
You have been asked several times to outline the proof. I am asking you again in simple terms.
Can you outline it?
No, you're ignoring those who have already found flaws in your nonsense. You remain oblivious.
Zero Point Native
Registered Senior Member
Please acknowledge your sources.
Finding a place that welcomes discussions on both rigorous topics like math, science, and physics as well as more interpretative topics like numerology can be tricky, as they cater to different audiences. Here are some options that might strike a balance:
Forums and Communities:
- Reddit:
- Subreddits like r/Math and r/Physics focus on rigorous scientific discussions.
- For numerology, you could visit r/Numerology or r/Esoteric.
- You might find some crossover in communities like r/EverythingScience or r/Futurology, where discussions sometimes broaden into speculative or interpretive topics.
- Quora:
- Quora has a range of communities where people discuss mathematics, science, and occasionally numerology. Be sure to clarify your intent, as some experts on Quora may be less open to blending scientific and numerological discussions.
- Physics Forums:
- A high-quality community focused on physics, math, and engineering (Physics Forums).
- This forum is highly science-oriented, so numerology discussions may not be well-received, but you can test the waters in general discussion areas.
Specialized Platforms:
- Stack Exchange:
- Mathematics Stack Exchange and Physics Stack Exchange are great for rigorous discussions but do not entertain numerology. Numerology would need to be explored elsewhere, such as dedicated numerology forums or communities.
- Discord:
- Look for Discord servers that combine science and esoteric topics. Servers like "Philosophy & Science" may accommodate a mix of disciplines, including numerology.
Mixed Communities:
- Medium or Substack:
- Write or join conversations on Medium or Substack where people publish articles on science and numerology. You may find communities that appreciate the overlap in these platforms.
- The Esoterica or Esoteric Science Forums:
- These forums often blend discussions on science, mathematics, and esoteric topics like numerology. Search for forums with an open approach to such interdisciplinary conversations.
Tips for Finding the Right Space:
- Be Clear About Your Goals: Engage communities where your interests align and make it clear whether you're focusing on empirical discussions, speculative ideas, or a mix.
- Search for Meetup or Facebook Groups: Some private groups cater specifically to discussions at the intersection of science, math, and esotericism.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Zero Point Native
Registered Senior Member
Anyway, my point is, you won't find it here, kingiyk. I know the name sciforums.com may sound misleading, but you would need to search elsewhere. The links above might be of some help for starters.
"Digital Roots" are not a thing. That's a pretty big flaw.
But it's not misleading, the website name applies to much of the discussion here. The fact that there are cranks, crackpots and loons here doesn't preclude the fact they are present on other science sites. And, it is a site for discussing science although kingiyk is not offering any science, he is offering nonsense dressed up as science. As you can plainly see, he's being called out for it.
If you believe what he offers is science, then you should pay a whole lot more attention to what others here are talking about.
It also does kingiyk a disservice to try to redirect him to pseudoscience sites and other places where his pseudoscience will be received with open arms.
For whatever reason - either because he wanted to hear a scientific perspective on his "work" or by some happy accident, kingiyk has stumbled into a discussion forum where people are qualified and able to give critical feedback about what he has spent his time on.
If he takes the helpful feedback he gets here on board, and he is willing to have an honest and open discussion about what he has presented, he might leave here wiser and better informed than when he arrived.
This is unlikely to happen if he goes to reddit/biblecode or whatever.
For whatever reason - either because he wanted to hear a scientific perspective on his "work" or by some happy accident, kingiyk has stumbled into a discussion forum where people are qualified and able to give critical feedback about what he has spent his time on.
If he takes the helpful feedback he gets here on board, and he is willing to have an honest and open discussion about what he has presented, he might leave here wiser and better informed than when he arrived.
This is unlikely to happen if he goes to reddit/biblecode or whatever.
exchemist
Valued Senior Member
For some reason your comment brought to mind the story of a hilarious error of an ebook scanning program that, with certain typefaces would misread “arms” as “anus”: https://www.theinternetpatrol.com/ocr-software-doesnt-know-its-anus-from-an-arm/
(I’ve been in bed with ‘flu’ so my sense of the absurd is a bit heightened, perhaps.)
HonestJoe
Registered Member
OK.
You've not provided proof for the existence of God (in general or as The Trinity). At best, you're offing evidence for the underlying logical consistency of one interpretation of selected biblical texts. You could achieve the same with something written as a work of fiction or with texts from other religions (or even different interpretations of the Bible) which directly contradict your beliefs.
kingiyk
Registered Member
The Son of God
could have died in a billion other ways but He came into this world specifically to die on a cross, crucified by the Romans. There is a reason for that. The cross is the representation of The Trinity. The digital root of all trinity of numbers(stated in the proof. e.g 555, 777) is either 3,6,9. The sequence is eternal and exclusive to trinity of numbers. couple this with Romans 5:6 and The reason for fixing the cross into a time clock will be justified.All other segments of the proof are built on this and prove consistent.
You are entitled to an opinion, as we all are. But One thing you can't say is that the Proof is the work of a deluded mind because the presence of coherence all through would invalidate that opinion.
-
Pinball1970
Valued Senior Member
Not according to some Biblical scholars
The concept of the trinity was introduced long the death of Jesus and is not mentioned in the oldest manuscripts.
Kingiyk has made it clear it doesn't matter what you say about his "Proof" as he makes the ill informed opinion that deluded minds have the presence of coherence. Kingiyk wants you to fall in line with his delusions, not to offer critique.
HonestJoe
Registered Member
According to (your interpretation of) the Bible, sure. No amount of mathematical connections you identify within that interpretation would support the claim that it is true though.The Son of God
I wasn't stating an opinion, I was stating a fact; Your evidence does not provide proof for the hypothesis you claim it does.
That isn't declaring that it is false, only that your "proof" is logically flawed, which is exactly what you asked for.
Yeah, like we mentioned, "digital roots" are not a thing.
That thing you posted showed an eagle and a whale, with three lines radiating out of them. This is an attempt to prove that the "three" trinity thing is universal. That is flawed.
In the case of the eagle, if the three lines are intended to represent the forces of flight, then that's wrong. There are four - lift, gravity, drag and thrust. If it is intended to represent the number of appendages, then it's also wrong. Eagles have two wings and two feet. Again, four.
In the case of the whale, if again they are forces, that's also wrong. And if it is intended to represent the number of fins, wrong again. Whales have either four or five, depending on whether or not you consider his tail flukes one or two fins.
Sorry!
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
This is just straight up Numerology. "I counted some things; that proves they must have cosmic significance." How does that work?
And it's bad numerology:
"Man was created in the Image of a Trinity. Three distinct parts: 1 2 3, all connected and controlled by a single mind."
So, by your claim, man consists of a torso and two arms and nothing else. Arms each count as distinct parts - but legs do not count at all (despite being 3x more mass than arms). Head or pelvis apparently do not count either.
Did you just stop counting when you got to three?
Have you ... studied the human body? I mean, beyond this cropped picture?
This paper contains is some of the most egregious "torturing the facts to fit the the idea" I have ever seen.
I suspect the OP will move on from place to place - wistfully - hoping anyone - anyone! - can poke holes in his ironclad proof.
And it's bad numerology:
"Man was created in the Image of a Trinity. Three distinct parts: 1 2 3, all connected and controlled by a single mind."
So, by your claim, man consists of a torso and two arms and nothing else. Arms each count as distinct parts - but legs do not count at all (despite being 3x more mass than arms). Head or pelvis apparently do not count either.
Did you just stop counting when you got to three?
Have you ... studied the human body? I mean, beyond this cropped picture?
This paper contains is some of the most egregious "torturing the facts to fit the the idea" I have ever seen.
I suspect the OP will move on from place to place - wistfully - hoping anyone - anyone! - can poke holes in his ironclad proof.
kingiyk
Registered Member
"So, by your claim, man consists of a torso and two arms and nothing else. Arms each count as distinct parts - but legs do not count at all (despite being 3x more mass than arms). Head or pelvis apparently do not count either."
"When The Cross is fixed into a Time Clock, the co-ordinates are 3 6 9 and 12. The Cross is comprised of three entities:
3, 6, 9 - each representing an entity of the Trinity, and a single head that unifies all three (The GodHead\God = 12;
1 Corinthians 11:3)." excerpt from The Proof.
The proof must be examined in its entirety for they build upon each one. ripping out a segment as you just did is disingenuous.
Pinball1970
Valued Senior Member
There is no "proof." This is stupid unscientific nonsense and I have given you a couple of objections which you have ignored. I have to bow out.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
That's four.
and 12. As you literally just finished saying explicitly.
So, because three is your chosen number, you just eliminate the fourth.
"The compass has three points!" you say. "East West and South, with North to unify them."
No. Each of your premises must stand on its own, If any one of them (let alone most of them) don't make the grade, they fall, and take the conclusion with them.
1. What you're trying to do is tantamount to this:
I claim that two to the fourth power is 18. Here is my proof:
P1: 2x2=4.
P2: 4x2=9.
P2: 9x2=18.
Er. One of your premises is false. 4x2 does not equal 9. So the conclusion you came to is wrong.
Well the proof must be examined in its entirety. Ripping out a segment as you did is disingenuous. (I mean, I got some of it right, didn't I? The other two premises are correct. Don't I still get credit?)"
No. Faulty premises result in faulty conclusions. Full stop.
The list of your premises could be gone through one by one but really, there's no need.
2. Look, here's another one:
"The Earth is the Third of Nine Planets."
Says who? Certainly not the Bible.
It was the only planet for Millenia, then it was one of five for a while, then it was one of six, then seven, then eight, then nine. Now it's eight again.
All of these counts are due to modern human decisions, over centuries - and in some case, simply boards of humans: the Royal Astronomical Society said Pluto isn't a planet so it isn't. (Was God sitting on that board? Or was he only interested in the 76-year period of 1930 till 2006, the only years that there were nine planets?)
So you can choose any number you want, from one to nine however it suits your preferred flavour of idea. This is what it means to torture the facts to fit the idea.
All your premises are using arbitrary numbers to suit your idea.
3. Here's another:
"(I need to find things with threes...) Birds have two wings and a body. So do whales."
Birds have heads, feet and tails. Whales have flukes. Why do you stop at three?
When I asked you why, you said: "Ah well because when The Cross is fixed into a Time Clock, the co-ordinates are 3 6 9 and 12. The Cross is comprised of three entities:
3, 6, 9"
For one: No it isn't; you just listed four. Again, do you just drop one when it doesn't fit?
But more to the point: What do birds and whales have to do with crosses? Where in the Bible was a bird or whale crucified on a cross?
You have decided a priori that three is The Number of Things you consider significant, and then you go looking for instances of threes in things.
• But when you find four or five or six things (such as body parts) you just stop at three and make up a justification about coordinates of a cross.
• And the cross is - itself - not three; it's four. So, once again, you just stop counting at three and make up a new name for the fourth.
• Or when you find only eight things (such as planets) or seven or six or five or one, (and arbitrarily labeled as such by humans for a mere 76 years) you just pick the number that suits your a priori target: nine. Wait, what's nine? I thought it was three?
• Yes, nine is still not three, so you have to do some further arithmetic gymnastics on it until it becomes three.
(Look at that. I gave you exactly three examples. Surely that's a sign of unity with the cosmos, proving I'm right! Or did I just stop at three and call it unity with the cosmos? See how easy it is?)
This is textbook Numerology; it is the pastime of generating illusory meaning in meaningless numbers by grinding them just enough - and stopping at just the right time - to get the numbers you want.
Numerology is Element Nu. 14th on the Periodic Table of Irrational Nonsense, snuggled up with Perpetual Motion, Astrology and in the Delusions-Block.
Last edited:
- Status