Simon Paynton wrote:

King Iyk wrote:
You could disprove this entire demonstration by conceiving an alternative demonstration of God

We’re not going to do this, because we’re atheists and don’t believe in God, and none of us believes it’s possible to prove (or disprove) the existence of God. If we’re arguing against your argument for the proof…

[Read more]

King Iyk wrote:
The 12-hour clock is not introduced as a mere human preference but as the actual temporal framework in which the crucifixion was recorded by the cultures that carried it out (Roman and Jewish). When Jewish and Roman timekeeping are synchronized at that historical event, the result is not a vague pattern but a specific geometric…

[Read more]

King Iyk wrote:
You could disprove this entire demonstration by conceiving an alternative demonstration of God

We’re not going to do this, because we’re atheists and don’t believe in God, and none of us believes it’s possible to prove (or disprove) the existence of God.

If we’re arguing against your argument for the proof of God’s existence,…[Read more]

This guy was posting this “mod math exists, therefore trinity” BS here like a year ago. If he didn’t understand your proof of Dracula is the same exact thing, we can at least admit he is a true theist. About as useless to science as the creationists.  There will be no thesis, there will be no dissertation. No Nobel prize for discovering god.

The…[Read more]

You have somewhat improved your “proof”  by changing it from a raw “+” to “mod 9” but your argument still fails because the mapping from theology to numbers is arbitrary.

God = 12 and Trinity = 18 are merely chosen assignments.

“Base-10 law” is not an “immutable law of reality”.  Digital-root tricks depend on base-10 representation (becau…[Read more]

This will be the last time I will repeat what has already been stated succinctly.

“No standard operation for A + B + C + D = A”

The operation is defined: digital-root addition (⊕) with dr(x) = x mod 9 (dr(9k)=9).
God (12) ⊕ Trinity (18) = 30 → dr(30)=3 = dr(12).
This is standard modular arithmetic, not invention. The loop is a theorem under the…[Read more]

“Must logically precede creation” is an assertion, not a consequence. Nothing in what you have presented logically entails pre-creation Trinitarian existence. To do that you would need to offer explicit premises with valid inference rules and then a conclusion that cannot be otherwise. All you are doing is offering a post-hoc pattern extracted fro…[Read more]

You are absolutely right that internal logical consistency ≠ empirical validity and that is exactly why this proof is stronger than any purely deductive or modal argument. The proof is not a closed logical system built on theological premises. It is empirically anchored in three independently verifiable, real-world facts. These are not a…[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:@king Iyk: Did the Trinity exist before the Creation of the Universe?

Yes.
The Trinity must logically precede creation.
Not as a theological assumption, but as a consequence of what this proof demonstrates.

The crucifixion does not create the Trinity; it reveals it. Revelation presupposes prior existence. A…[Read more]