The Truth: The Mathematical Proof of God, The Holy Trinity

There are bigger objects than Pluto which are not regarded as planets. It also is not gravitationally massive enough to have cleared its orbit of other objects. That's why it was downgraded.

Before 1930, would you have been making an argument that 8 planets were proof of something something in the bible? Because nobody had observed a ninth.

You are still asserting "truth" based solely on assertion. Martin Luther's "truth" of 66 books beats the Pope's "truth" of 73 books, because…..?

My God, by this rationality, 333 means that God is only half the value of the Devil. Or did I get the maths wrong?

Technically, I think it's witchcraft, which would also include practicing the use of 111. We need a new Council Of Nicea to sort out this numerological disaster. Otherwise people will continue to unwittingly consign themselves to the flames of hell.

Apart from the fact that the document contains nothing but arithmetic that adds up to SFA, the various assertions as to anchoring facts for the infantile numerology are also vacuous.

The bible, depending on which version you are talking about, varies from 66 to 80 books. If you start looking at how that came about you see that there was a very human, arbitrary process to decide what was included.

The point has already been made about the number of planets in the solar system. And if you want to get really tinfoil hat about it, what about Nibiru, Vulcan and Planet X?

Also the cross transposed onto the clock is a good one. The clockface as we use it is only one representation of the division of the hours, which again, are an entirely arbitrary, human invention. There is also strong evidence from various places that crosses used to crucify people by first century Romans, were more often than not headless (as in T-shaped), and not the stylised ones we know today.

Furthermore, the idea of the Trinity only emerged about 100-150 years after the chap who might have been who we call Jesus actually died. It was then retrofitted by a powerful church later to fit its needs.

And finally, I was truly lost to the point of this when I read the triune god was "Equal in Diety [sic] & Divinity, Unequal in Power & Authority and the same in being."

I love a good diety, me — low carbs, high protein.

So, which bible are you settling on then? There are many to choose from.

Secondly, from a logical standpoint, citing the very document for which you are arguing as to the validity of that document is circular and redundant.

Is it intelligent design? Or is it a series of patterns that emerge due to the basic make up of things?

Jumping to a conclusion of supernatural forces to explain things is an abdication of responsibility to question further.

Nothing in what has been revealed by human curiosity and study has thus far required a supernatural explanation.

Especially one which has been added to, edited, and translated, many times.

So OP maybe you should be applying your analysis to the Koran 😉

Arguably we already do… unless you play guitar or piano or some other instruments you'd hardly miss your little finger, it's not up to much!

I have not used the term random chance and wouldn't.

Universal intelligent design is just as useless a term in this context.

Patterns are not an necessarily indication of intelligence, nor is randomness and indication of an absence of it.

Coincidence.

Eclipses are interesting because of how they were recorded throughout human history as noteworthy events. Also can permit astronomical observations which are not otherwise possible. But they are of no significance in themselves, unless you're into astrology and 'planetary alignments' and all that guff

The moon was orbiting the earth for a very long time before any mammals evolved to align their menstrual cycles with it. You might as well wonder why we feel tired and alert on a 24 hour cycle…

Numerology and its its cognitive ilk is a natural human tendency to find meaningful patterns in the world around us, lending itself to beliefs in conspiracy and supernatural agency. The overall cognitive tendency is called apophenia. All of us are prone to it, some more than others.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophenia

But by definition such a designer (should one exist) exists outside our universe and is unknown, and unknowable, to us.

A deistic creator is at least kind of plausible. A theistic creator is not.

I already did.

Ah, here.  My whole point concerns acknowledging that coincidences that prove consistent and coherent should be acknowledged, but that they exist through the natural act of cognition. For materialists and naturalists, the world and its mysteries – in the end - have perfectly natural and rational explanations, i.e., rooted in natural rather than supernatural explanations (rather than physicalists - you can be a scientist and use this empirical process, and still have supernatural beliefs). The humility here is that mysteries remaining are simply those that can’t be figured out by our limited minds, rather than resorting to the ‘The God of the gaps’. This is simply psychological faith in there being only a natural world, and not a supernatural one (faith, rather than Faith). The onus on naturalists to explain the way the world happens to be is much harder than for those that don’t subscribe to the metaphysical principle of Occam’s Razor, because otherwise the typical trump card, such as in theism, is the soothing balm of explaining how everything mysterious and inexplicable is explainable -  as “God did it”. It is soothing to think that mere mortals can never comprehend the real reasons behind actions that deities could have prevented, as Job’s story preaches, but that's a psychological need, not a metaphysical fact.

Confusion and doubt can thus be assuaged. Finding proof in numerology is not proof of deities - only a repetition of Aeschylus’ observation well over 2000 years ago: "The man who seeks for God, finds him." You see what you want to see. Cognition does the rest as imagination, and a fear of the death of an imaginary soul.