Why do you reject what the Bible says about God and His son Jesus?

Robert has failed to provide a counter-proof that could be attested and validated by AI, admitting the uniqueness of this proof.

So I will go over to you, RTFF;

If the Trinity does not exist – as you claim, rooted in Arianism and denying co-equal persons—then explain how a precise, formal model of it could be extracted from the immutable f…[Read more]

King Iyk wrote:

_Robert_ wrote:
I consider it just a mythological motif, many predating Jesus. Egypt’s Osiris, Greece’s Dionysus, the Near Eastern Tammuz/Adonis, and Hinduism’s Ganesha were all resurrected as well.

You could have your work cut out for you by formulating a proof for Osiris, Dionysus or Ganesha, that is empirically and mathe…

[Read more]

_Robert_ wrote:
I consider it just a mythological motif, many predating Jesus. Egypt’s Osiris, Greece’s Dionysus, the Near Eastern Tammuz/Adonis, and Hinduism’s Ganesha were all resurrected as well.

You could have your work cut out for you by formulating a proof for Osiris, Dionysus or Ganesha, that is empirically and mathematically roote…[Read more]

@King Iyk –  I reject Trinitarianism, not because I am an atheist but because I have studied the Bible. The word “Trinity” does not appear anywhere in the Bible. The fully formed doctrine of ‘one God in three co-equal, co-eternal persons’ as described to me in Catholic school, is not explicitly stated in either the Old or New Testamen…[Read more]

King Iyk wrote:

_Robert_ wrote:

Simon Paynton wrote:

_Robert_ wrote:
Divine significance to Digital Root Mechanics is often characterized as pseudomath or numerology by the scientific community.

Here is the magic: A + B + C + D = A, using modulus arithmetic. It’s beyond circular stupidity.

You will respond with further supposed objections. B…

[Read more]

@Robert – you’re assuming that the Bible is proposed as proof of God’s existence, when that may be too much burden.  Maybe the Bible is not supposed to make sense, but God does.

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
Proof for Dracula.

Excellent. Now endeavor to obtain an explicit affirmation that your proof is grounded in empirical and mathematical certainty, and that it is both accurate and valid—just as mine did from every artificial intelligence developed by atheist scientists.

If you are unable to, you should ask yourself w…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:
The thing is, it’s impossible to prove or disprove the existence of God, by logic or any other means, in this world we have. Evidence would be nice; failing that, it’s unprovable either way.

It’s not an atheists’ task to disprove a claimed god, but when contradictory claims are made about a god, that particular version of tha…[Read more]

_Robert_ wrote:

Simon Paynton wrote:

_Robert_ wrote:
Divine significance to Digital Root Mechanics is often characterized as pseudomath or numerology by the scientific community.

Here is the magic: A + B + C + D = A, using modulus arithmetic. It’s beyond circular stupidity.

You will respond with further supposed objections. But one thing you w…[Read more]