That is what is called in mathematics "a special case" of a triangle; just as a sphere, the locus of all points equidistant by a distance r from a point, is still a sphere when r = 0.

You cannot use the Bible (or any other religious document)to demonstrate the validity of religious concepts. Religious texts can make no claim to divine inspiration, for all we know, they could be complete fabrications, deliberate frauds, or the ravings of madmen. You cannot use the Bible's claim of divine authorship as proof of divine inspiration, and if there is no reason to accept Scripture as divinely inspired, then there is no reason to accept them as an authority on anything, much less theological matters. And without Scripture, religious thought resolves itself into nothing more than mere speculation and personal opinion.

Besides, not only do different religious texts conflict with one another, different religious sects often disagree and dispute violently the interpretation of any one religious text.

In other words, its all bullshit; nonsense for people afraid of death, or who need a high-falutin' excuse to justify what they want to do anyway. The Habitable Zone has been plagued for too long with anomalism, we've had to put up with supernatural manifestations, psychic phenomena, political conspiracies, allegedly "self-evident" ideological axioms and elaborate theorems based on them, pseudoscience, cryptozoology, reincarnation, Atlantis, Bigfoot, the Bermuda Triangle and a host of other nonsense. Enough, already.

Its a free country, you're entitled to believe anything you want, and even to argue whatever you think. But once you bring it up, you can't complain if people respond with exactly what they think. Don't get me wrong, we welcome "thinking out loud", and throwing out wild ideas for common discussion or debate. After all, I do it often enough myself, that's what a forum like HZ is for.

But we should never have the audacity to claim that any of our crazy ideas have to be true simply because we read them in a sacred book, or because we believe they sound just like something we read in another book. And we should certainly not let ourselves fall into the trap of selecting similar logical structures from other fields, like science, and claiming they are analogues or models of our religious superstitions in an effort to provide them with legitimacy. Maybe you see Jesus in E = mc^2, but I don't. Not even close.