A Formal Mathematical Model of The Holy Trinity

[SOG]

A Formal Mathematical Model of The Holy Trinity.

The Crucifixion timeline forms a perfect cross on a modern clock when Jewish & Roman times are aligned. This alignment between the Crucifixion Timeline and the Time Clock is a strikingly precise match that defies mere coincidence.

The 3rd Hour (3) → 9:00 AM → Right Side of the Horizontal Beam
According to Mark 15:25, Jesus was crucified at the 3rd hour.
When the Crucifixion timeline is aligned onto the 12-hour time clock, the 3rd hour (Jewish time) corresponds to 9:00 AM (Roman time).
This places 9:00 AM at the right end of the horizontal beam, aligning it perfectly.

The 6th Hour (6) → 12:00 PM → Top of the Vertical Beam
According to Matthew 27:45, Mark 15:33, and Luke 23:44, darkness fell over the land at the 6th hour (12:00 PM).
On the time clock, the 6th hour (Jewish) corresponds to 12:00 PM (Roman).
This directly aligns with the top of the vertical beam, reinforcing the divine connection between time and the cross.

The 9th Hour (9) → 3:00 PM → Left Side of the Horizontal Beam
According to Matthew 27:46, Jesus cried out and gave up His spirit at the 9th hour (3:00 PM).
On the time clock, the 9th hour (Jewish) corresponds to 3:00 PM (Roman).
This places 3:00 PM at the left end of the horizontal beam, again aligning perfectly.

A look at the pictorial depiction of the convergence of The Roman and Jewish Timelines:

The convergence of Crucifixion timelines form a perfect Cross: The ultimate symbol of Crucifixion, Resurrection, and Salvation

The God Equation Axioms:
A Formal Mathematical Model of The Trinity

Preamble
The God Equation is a closed, self-consistent, predictive algebraic system that encodes the Christian doctrine of the Trinity using base-10 digital roots and cruciform geometry. It is not numerology. It is a formal model with axioms, theorems derived by necessity, predictions, and falsifiability conditions. All definitions, operations, and proofs are rigorous, testable, and independent of faith, relying solely on mathematics, geometry, and historical invariants in the crucifixion timeline as empirical data.

Formal Definitions

Symbol	Meaning	Value
T	Trinity sum	3 + 6 + 9 = 18
G	God	12
dr(x)	Digital root of x	x mod 9
⊕	Digital root addition	a ⊕ b = dr(a + b)

Theorem 1 (Trinity Closure)
dr(T) = 9
Proof: T = 3 + 6 + 9 = 18 → 1 + 8 = 9(A₁, A₂, A₄)

Theorem 2 (God Closure)
dr(G) = 3
Proof: G = 12 → 1 + 2 = 3(A₁, A₃)

Theorem 3 (God Equation Loop)
G ⊕ T = G
Proof: 12 + 18 = 30 → 3 + 0 = 3 → dr(G ⊕ T) = 3 = dr(G) (A₁, A₅)
→ Closed loop established: 3→9→12→3
G ⊕ T = G:
God + The Father + The Son + The Holy Spirit = God

The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit exist as distinct yet coequal hypostases within the divine essence, such that their individual distinctions neither augment nor diminish the totality of God’s being, but rather subsist harmoniously within the indivisible unity of the Godhead.

Predictive Verification

Input	Predicted Output	Actual Result	Status
T	dr(T) = 9	9	Confirmed
G	dr(G) = 3	3	Confirmed
G + T	dr(G + T) = 3	3	Confirmed
3×111	dr(333) = 9	9	Confirmed
4×111	dr(444) = 3	3	Confirmed

Structural Integrity Test: Robustness & Brittleness Test

Modification	Result	Loop Integrity
Holy Spirit = 8	T = 17→8, Equation fails	Broken
God = 11	G→2, Theology breaks	Broken
Son = 5	T = 17→8, Coherence lost	Broken

The system exhibits engineered brittleness: only one configuration closes the loop.

Falsification Conditions

The model is empirically falsified if any condition holds:

Mathematical falsifiers

· 3 + 6 + 9 ≠ 18

· dr(18) ≠ 9

· 12 + 18 ≠ 30

· dr(30) ≠ 3

· Any triple nnn → dr ∉ {3,6,9}

Historical falsifiers

· Crucifixion hours ≠ 3rd, 6th, 9th in all Gospels

Geometric falsifiers

· Points (9:00, 12:00, 3:00) ≠ perfect cross on 12-interval circle

All conditions are empirically false. The system stands.

Final Theorem — Trinity Isomorphism

The structure

{3, 6, 9}, ⊕, dr

is isomorphic to the doctrinal structure

{Father, Son, Spirit}

and the composite system satisfies:

God + The Father + The Son + The Holy Spirit = God

The whole is God, and each entity is fully God.

This is the mathematical analogue of perichoresis:

[SOG]

Mathematical Property	Trinitarian Doctrine
3 entities → 1 essence	3 + 6 + 9 = 18 → 9 (3-in-1; 3 3 3)
God + Father + Son + Holy Spirit = God	Perichoresis : mutual indwelling
Closed loop	Eternal, self-existent God
Brittle structure	One change (e.g., deny Son) = heresy

The math is the theology and vice versa.

Conclusion: A Demonstrated Truth
This is a mathematically necessary system revealing divine architecture. Coincidence is mathematically impossible. The combined probability of all these independent, eternal truths aligning by pure chance is effectively zero (far beyond 10⁻⁹, the usual threshold for “impossible” in science). Design is not probable; it is necessary.

Metaphysical Corollaries

• The Singularity Proof: The being who encoded this pattern necessarily transcends time — knowing time’s structure before temporal existence began.

• The Geometric Necessity: Crucifixion was the only method producing both temporal coordinates (3–6–9 hours) and eternal symbol (cross).

• The Unity Principle: Mathematics (law), history (event), and theology (meaning) converge in one coherent reality.

The God Equation represents:
⇛ Formal Closure: Self-consistent logical loop
⇛ Empirical Accuracy: Perfect historical-geometric alignment
⇛ Predictive Power: Forecasting mathematical outcomes
⇛ Structural Necessity: Engineered brittleness proving design
⇛ Isomorphism to Christian doctrine

The system is complete. The proof is demonstrative. The truth is now a geometric, historical, and mathematical certainty.
God + The Father + The Son + The Holy Spirit = God
It is not a pattern found. It is a system revealed. It is not faith-based. It is mathematically necessary. It is not refutable. It is demonstrative. A truth written in time, mathematics, and sacrifice, now formalized in the language of eternity itself. The God Equation is a self-proving, predictive, brittle mathematical law that demands the Trinity and collapses without it.

[SOG]

A Valid, Falsifiable Abductive Proof

1. The Puzzling Observation & The Falsifiable Hypothesis**

• Observation: The Gospels of Mark and Matthew record the key events of the crucifixion at the 3rd, 6th, and 9th hours (Jewish time). These are specific, discrete data points.

• Hypothesis (H1 - Design): “This specific timeline is not random, but reflects intentional, divine design, evidenced by its convergence with universal mathematical patterns and its embodiment of core Christian theology.”

• Falsifiability: This hypothesis is highly falsifiable. It would be proven false if:

  • The Gospels did not report these specific hours.

  • These hours, when synchronized with Roman time, did not form a perfect cross on a 12-interval diagram.

  • The numbers 3, 6, and 9 did not form a unique, cyclical pattern in base-10 mathematics.

  • The doctrine of the Trinity was not a central pillar of Christianity.

The hypothesis makes specific, testable claims about history, geometry, and mathematics.

2. Deduce Testable Consequences

If the “Divine Design” hypothesis (H1) is correct, it predicts:

• Geometric Consequence: The 3rd (9 AM), 6th (12 PM), and 9th (3 PM) hours will align perfectly with the vertical (12-6) and horizontal (3-9) axes of any circular 12-interval diagram, forming a Latin cross.

• Mathematical Consequence: The numbers 3, 6, and 9 will exhibit a unique, invariant property (the digital root cycle) that distinguishes them from other numbers.

• Theological Consequence: This numeric and geometric pattern will cohere with a pre-existing, central theological doctrine (the Trinity), and will be expressible in a self-consistent logical formula that demonstrates predictive power and internal consistency.

These are not vague predictions; they are precise and verifiable.

3. Use Induction to Test Predictions

This is the evidence-gathering phase. We observe the world to see if the predictions hold:

• Test 1 (Geometry): We take a 12-hour clock face. We plot 9 AM (3rd hour) at 3, 12 PM (6th hour) at 12, and 3 PM (9th hour) at 9. Observation: The points form a perfect cross that intersects at the very center of the clock. Result: Prediction Confirmed.

• Test 2 (Mathematics): We calculate the digital roots of Trinities of numbers (111, 222, 333, etc.).
  111 » 1 + 1 + 1 = 3
  222 » 2 + 2 + 2 = 6
  333 » 3 + 3 + 3 = 9
  444 » 4 + 4 + 4 = 12 » 1 + 2 = 3
  555 » 5 + 5 + 5 = 15 » 1 + 5 = 6
  151515 » 15 + 15 + 15 = 45 » 4 + 5 = 9
  Observation: They resolve infinitely to 3, 6, or 9. The system is falsifiable and robust: if any ‘nnn’ reduced to a number other than 3, 6, or 9, the model would break. None do. Result: Prediction Confirmed.

• Test 3 (Theology & Logical Coherence): We examine Christian doctrine. Observation: The Trinity (3-in-1) is a foundational concept. The numbers 3 and 9(3 3 3) are symbolically complete.

The Trinity:
The Father (3) + The Son (6) + The Holy Spirit (9) = 18 → 1 + 8 = 9.

The Godhead:
God = 12 → 1 + 2 = 3.

Result: Prediction Confirmed.

The God Equation:
God + The Father + The Son + The Holy Spirit = 3 + 9 = 12 → 1 + 2 = 3 [God].

God + The Father + The Son + The Holy Spirit = God

Observation: The equation forms a closed, self-consistent logical loop:

(3 → 9 → 12 → 3). This is not a random sequence but a system where the output of each step becomes the input for the next, ultimately returning to its starting point. This system demonstrates predictive power, accurately anticipating digital root reductions (e.g., 12→3, 18→9) before they are calculated. Most critically, its internal consistency is non-arbitrary; changing one component (e.g., assigning Holy Spirit=8 instead of 9) causes the entire coherent structure to collapse, demonstrating the system’s brittleness as evidence of engineering rather than coincidence. Result: Prediction Confirmed.

The hypothesis has survived multiple, independent tests, including the emergence of a sophisticated, self-validating logical formula that passes three rigorous examinations:

The Coherence Test: Perfect closed loop formation

The Prediction Test: Successful forecasting of its own operations

The Robustness Test: Non-arbitrary interdependence of components

This moves the proof from post-hoc observation (“look at this neat pattern”) to proactive forecasting (“I know what the math must do”). This is what separates a scientific model from numerology. Numerology finds patterns in existing data. A predictive model sets rules that successfully govern future calculations within the system. The framework correctly predicts the behavior of numbers (12, 18) that are generated by its own internal logic. It’s not just about a cross on a clock and some number patterns. It’s about the discovery of a logical and mathematical system with its own internal laws and predictive power, that is perfectly isomorphic to the Christian doctrine of the Trinity; affirming intentional, intelligent design.

[SOG]

4. Compare to Alternative Hypotheses

This is the crux of the matter. A critic must propose a better explanation. The primary competing hypothesis is:

• H2 (Coincidence): “The alignment is a mere coincidence, a product of human pattern-seeking (apophenia) and the trivial properties of numbers.”

Now we compare H1 and H2:

• Explanatory Power: H1 (Design) provides a unified explanation for the convergence of four domains: history, geometry, mathematics, and a derived logical formula (The God Equation), which exhibits closed-loop consistency, predictive power, and non-arbitrary interdependence. H2 (Coincidence) does not explain the convergence; it merely labels it and cannot account for the emergence of a self-consistent, predictive equation system.

• Explanatory Scope: H1 explains the historical data (the specific hours), the geometric result (the cross), the mathematical resonance and the theological coherence. H2 must dismiss each element as a separate, unconnected coincidence while ignoring their systematic interdependence.

• Simplicity (Occam’s Razor): H2 seems simpler on the surface because it doesn’t invoke a divine mind. However, Occam’s Razor favors the hypothesis with the *fewest unjustified assumptions. H2 assumes that a complex, precise, and logically closed alignment across four independent fields—exhibiting mathematical brittleness where any alteration collapses the entire system is “just one of those things.” This is a massive, unjustified assumption about probability. H1’s “assumption” (a designing intelligence) is a direct explanation for the observed specified complexity and logical integrity.

• Coherence with Existing Knowledge: H1 is coherent with the theistic worldview that reality reflects a rational, divine mind. H2 is coherent with a purely materialistic worldview. This is the fundamental philosophical impasse.

Conclusion of the Comparison: H1 (Design) remains the only explanation because it provides a unified, coherent account for the convergence, including its sophisticated mathematical-theological expression as a self-validating system. H2 (Coincidence) has failed to provide a plausible, naturalistic causal story for why this specific, intricate, and self-reinforcing convergence exists as an interdependent whole.

5. Corroborate Over Time

The proof gains strength through repeated testing and its resistance to falsification. Every time a skeptic attempts to refute it by:

• Claiming the Gospels don’t say what they say… they are falsified by the text.

• Claiming the cross doesn’t form… they are falsified by geometry.

• Claiming the math is trivial… they miss the point that its power is in the convergence and the predictive, closed-loop system it enables, not the math alone.

• Ignoring the God Equation… they overlook the culminating evidence of a self-consistent logical model derived from the convergence.

The hypothesis has withstood all attempts to falsify its core, testable claims.

Final Synthesis

This is a robust and valid abductive proof. It follows an exact process:

1. It starts with a clear observation (the Gospel timeline).

2. It proposes a falsifiable hypothesis (Divine Design).

3. It deduces testable consequences (a cross will form, a mathematical cycle will appear, a coherent theological equation system will emerge).

4. It tests these predictions through observation and finds them confirmed, including the discovery of a closed-loop, predictive mathematical system.

5. It competes with alternative hypotheses (Coincidence) and, by the criteria of explanatory power and scope, is shown to be decisively superior.

The critic’s job is no longer to simply say “I’m not convinced.” To be intellectually rigorous, they must either:

• Falsify one of the core, testable claims (e.g., prove the synchronization is wrong).

• Propose a better, testable, alternative hypothesis that explains the convergence and the self-consistent God Equation more effectively.

Until they do this, the abductive proof stands as valid-it is the only explanation for the remarkable alignment of history, mathematics, geometry, and theology. To deny this logic reveals a prior commitment not to reason, but to a worldview that is itself unfalsifiable.

King Iyk

1 John 5:20

[Johann]

@SOG

Mathematical Property Trinitarian Doctrine 3 entities → 1 essence 3 + 6 + 9 = 18 → 9 (3-in-1; 3 3 3) God + Father + Son + Holy Spirit = God Perichoresis : mutual indwelling Closed loop Eternal, self-existent God Brittle structure One change (e.g., deny Son) = heresy

No, brother, that system is not correct.
And more importantly, it is not needed.
It does not reflect biblical theology, classical Trinitarian doctrine, or apostolic reasoning in Scripture. It unintentionally turns the mystery of the Godhead into numerology, and that will not help your case against Oneness Pentecostals. In fact, it will harm it.

Let me explain in one long coherent line, hopefully…

The Trinity is not a mathematical structure, not a geometric inevitability, not a numerical pattern, but a revealed truth in Scripture where the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are each fully God, each personally distinct, each acting, speaking, loving, sending, and glorifying one another in the unified divine essence described in relational verbs like agapaō (love) and doxazō (glorify), and this truth is rooted in revelation, not math, not probability, and not numerical symmetry.

Now point by point, gently but truthfully.

1. “3 entities to 1 essence = 3 3 3”
   This is not how the doctrine of one essence and three persons works.
   It is not arithmetic.
   It is ontology.

2. “God + Father + Son + Spirit = God”
   This is also not accurate language.
   The Church Fathers never spoke this way.
   The formula is not additive but confessional.
   The Father is God.
   The Son is God.
   The Spirit is God.
   And there is one God.

Not addition.
Not summation.
Not distribution.
Divine simplicity, not divine arithmetic.

3. “Perichoresis = mutual indwelling like a loop”
   Perichoresis is a relational term describing shared divine life, not a geometric loop or closed system.
   Putting it into mathematical structures misrepresents the doctrine.

4. “Deny the Son = break the system”
   True that denying the Son is heresy, but not because of mathematical brittleness.
   It is because Scripture reveals the Son eternally with the Father.

5. “This is mathematically necessary and impossible by chance”
   This is metaphysics dressed as math.
   It is not how theological demonstration works.
   In fact, it resembles modern gnostic numerology more than patristic Trinitarian theology.

6. “Crucifixion geometry proves the Trinity”
   The crucifixion demonstrates the love of God and the self-giving of the Son, but not in geometric numeric terms.
   This comes dangerously close to mystical numerology.

7. “The system is complete and irrefutable”
   No.
   The Trinity is revealed, explained by Scripture, defended by exegesis.
   It is not a proof from numbers.
   It is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob revealing Himself through the Son and by the Spirit.

Here is the right way to anchor the Trinity.

The Father sends.
The Son comes.
The Spirit proceeds.

The verbs themselves carry the doctrine.
Nothing in Scripture rests the Trinity on quantities, geometric symmetry, or numerical probability.

If your goal is to refute Oneness theology, the strongest weapons are:

• John 1:1 with pros ton Theon
• John 17:5 with the imperfect eichon
• John 14:16 where Jesus asks the Father and the Father sends another Helper
• Matthew 28:19 where three divine names share one singular onoma
• Psalm 110:1 with two divine persons speaking
• Daniel 7:13 where the Son of Man approaches the Ancient of Days

Use Scripture.
Use grammar.
Use Greek.
Use Hebrew.
Use verbs, context, and prepositions.

Not mathematics.

J.

[SOG]

Brother, are you saying the eternal, omniscient God was unaware that the crucifixion: the most pivotal event in redemptive history, would fall on the exact 3rd, 6th, and 9th hours in both Jewish and Roman timekeeping, thereby causing those hours to form the literal shape of the instrument on which The Son died?

Are you saying God was unaware that those precise numerical values (3-6-9) constitute the only triplet in all of base-10 arithmetic that generates a closed, brittle, predictive mathematical loop that returns to its source when summed with the Godhead number 12 — a loop that mathematically necessitates the equation
God + Father + Son + Holy Spirit = God?

Are you saying God was unaware that this convergence would produce The God Equation — a self-validating, axiomatic system whose internal laws forecast their own outcomes and collapse the moment any single component is altered, thereby perfectly mirroring the orthodox doctrine that the Three are fully God, co-equal, co-eternal, and inseparable in essence?

Are you telling me the Triune God who spoke the universe into being with mathematical precision, who set the stars in their courses, who numbers the hairs on our heads, somehow accidentally orchestrated the central act of salvation so that its timeline, when plotted on the very clock humanity would later invent, would inscribe His own eternal nature in history, geometry, and mathematics?

If your answer is “Yes, God didn’t know or didn’t intend that,”
then you are the one turning the omniscience and sovereignty of the Trinity into an implausibility.

If your answer is “No, God did know and did intend it,”
then you agree that the mathematical and geometric demonstration is not a replacement for Scripture, but the signature of the Author written into the fabric of the event itself — fully compatible with John 1:1, John 17:5, Matthew 28:19, and every patristic confession.

Either way, the convergence stands, the loop closes.
And the Trinity, revealed in Scripture, has now signed its name in the language of creation.

________________

1 John 5:20

[OptionalAlgebra]

Interesting. The European painter Salvador Dali also believed that the hypercube was a mathematical crucifix and painted a canvass showing the crucifixion in angular perspective, so the cross was a cubes net when folded out face by face, and as thick as the original cube had been. It’s in a 23 degree perspective, which in engineering is a schizophrenic angle, from the Greek word for the fact that the earth tilts at twenty three degrees and also spins in orbit.

In Greek the word schizophrenic means all three: 23 degree angular tilt, plus rotating torque force, plus orbital velocity, its sound resembles the way of saying 23 out loud in Greek, but as a word, its applied to Euclid’s proof of orbital motion, and in engineering it’s the angle from which you draw a three dimensional picture of the finished design.

Dali painted the cross, with Jesus fixed to it suspended in thin air, and called it the hypercube.

[Cassia80]

Johann, your point about the ‘Verbs’ carrying the doctrine is brilliant. Do you think the human obsession with ‘proving’ things through math is actually a sign of our intellectual pride, or just a misunderstood desire to find order in the Infinite?

In my own journey, I’ve had to learn that numbers are a map, not the territory. Last year, I was going through a period of intense mental friction. I was trying to improve every second of my life using pure logic, but I felt spiritually empty.

My focus was gone, and my academic performance was dipping toward 75%. I used calculadoranumerologia.comto look at my 29/11 Life Path to prove my existence or calculate God, but to understand the vibrational patterns of my own personality. It helped me realize that as an 11, I was trying to use arithmetic to solve an ontological problem of the soul.

Once I stopped treating my life like a math problem and started looking at the relational aspect of my purpose, my clarity returned, and my final marks jumped to 92%

[Johann]

@Cassia80

Johann, your point about the ‘Verbs’ carrying the doctrine is brilliant. Do you think the human obsession with ‘proving’ things through math is actually a sign of our intellectual pride, or just a misunderstood desire to find order in the Infinite?

Not at all, I see the grammar, morphology and syntax the workhorse in delving deep into the Scriptures.
As for pride, we all have pride, in one form or other, don’t you think @Cassia80 ?

Still growing in sanctification and knowledge in Christ Jesus.

J.

[d-o.o-b]

I need some Asprin after all of that…

[Cassia80]

​I really value your honesty, Johann. It’s true pride is often the hidden variable in every human equation.

I’ve experienced that even the most mathematically perfect model will fail if the person building it is too proud to acknowledge the flaws in their own logic.

[Hungry]

Think about your own mind as you understand it, then if you can grasp that? let your head, come up. And glimpse the mind of christ jesus. And tell me? do you realy want, to know him? Or did you need to?

[Cassia80]

That is such a deep and beautiful question. I am a student at University of São Paulo studying data science, so my whole day is spent to solve problems. But I have learned that when it comes to understanding the Creator, our human brain is very small and it reaches its limit very quickly.

[Johann]

@Cassia80 would you say this is correct?

The average adult human brain weighs approximately 1.3 to 1.4 kilograms, which is about 1300 to 1400 grams, or roughly 2.8 to 3.1 pounds.

There is normal biological variation. Adult male brains tend statistically to average slightly heavier, around 1.4 kilograms, whereas adult female brains average closer to 1.25 kilograms. This difference reflects overall body size correlation rather than cognitive capacity. Brain weight scales moderately with body mass and cranial volume, not with intelligence.

At birth, the brain weighs about 350 to 400 grams. By the age of five it has reached roughly 90 percent of adult volume. In advanced age, mild reduction in mass can occur due to neuronal loss and cortical atrophy.

In terms of proportion, the brain constitutes about 2 percent of total body weight yet consumes approximately 20 percent of resting metabolic energy, reflecting its high synaptic and electrophysiological activity.

J.

[Cassia80]

Your data points align perfectly with the standard biological averages. I’ve learned that mass is often a noisy metric. Looking at the brain’s weight to understand its power is like looking at the weight of a laptop to judge its processing speed, it does not tell the whole story.

In my studies, I’m constantly struck by the brain’s efficiency. The reality that it’s only 2% of our body weight but consumes 20% of our energy is a massive ‘data processing’ feat. It’s like a high-end laptop running on a tiny battery!

Instead of focusing on the 1.4kg mass, we should look at neuroplasticity. Mass might stay the same, but the ‘efficiency’ of our neural networks is what actually scales.

[Johann]

It is remarkable to consider that if YHWH can dwell within the confines of my three-pound brain, He is still infinitely worthy of worship.

Correct?

J.

[Bruce_Leiter]

Why do you think this mathematical theorem is so important, @SOG, if true? Ultimately, the 3-in-1 nature of God is a mystery to our fallen, limited minds. Certainly, the gospel writers did not have math in mind when they wrote their inspired writings, did they?

[Hungry]

I watched a reality show when i was a teen. The man worked at a magor cities morgue. Big hospital, in a city. He was facinated with life and death. He said he knew when the patients life was soon to end. So he weighed the body right before death several times. Then upon death he weighed the body again. He said without a doubt, the body lost 4 ounces. He concluded that the soul weighs 4 ounces. everything has weight. Even your thoughts, So they say.

[Hungry]

You fall there. That is borderline testing the lord.

[Hungry]

Well acording to grock it is all mathimatical. There is code thru everything bruce i read a book back in 2007 that was writen in the 80’s rev decoded. They stated as well as grok the bible is mathematical certainty.