> dedicable What the hell is "dedicable". It is, through different Comparators, impossible to determine if the Comparators are Identical or Distinct, or if one is favorable to the other or not... That his typo was Intended to be "deducible", or that this typo was intended to be "distinct" in terms of their identity. That this type-correction is deducibly and certainly derived from the ambiguity of the Godelian M on the certainty of which Metastrategy M was employed in the construction of the Godelian M. Such that if we favor construction, we favor nonconstruction, and if we favor nonconstruction, we favor construction, and so there is ambiguity as to whether to favor construction or nonconstruction with respect to the Logos or Logic of God's conceivability or identity with/as his own intent. Perfectly purely certainly via omniscience, or Potentially perversely certainly or undecidable of certainly, through a Godelian M and the Metaproperty M with respect to M. So if there is no fact of the matter of our Logic ought be Classical or Intuitionistic, then we have a stronger proof for Godelian (a)theism over any and all strongest Classical Theisms G, through some ambiguous or undecidable property of M as deployed by M in the construction or nonconstruction ambiguously with regard to G or M.... Some stronger Godelian M which shifts the classical theist ontology of true value set identical with only "true" to better theistic Godelian ontology which the ontology of the theist true value set only contains "undecidable" or "incomprensible" in contrast with and superior to any classical G through strategy M which is an ambiguous feature and Metaproperty of M and with respect to M under M and with respect to S under M. And that this Metaproperty M is a Godelian which is more rationally convincing to alter our truth value ontology from the classical theistic to the Godelian (a)theistic. oopDGjpdgojspogjpogjopgjposgjdf. Many many failed attempts at simple phrasing. At intended simple phrasing... of certainty of Intent. Of possibly Mistaken or Perverse Intent of the Atheist actually or merely conceivably, abstractly or concretely... With undecidable feature of size 0, 1, or infinity. Which itself is a stronger Godel M in favor of God's incomprehensibility or undecidability on M through M as opposed to the Classical theist's G which is Godel's total rational ideal comprehensibility of God through God about God self-reflectively self-reflexively in a perfectly purely self-reference Relationship.... That through some proper understanding of Godel shit, that some ontological shift on our set of truth value possibilities.... or enumerated types... or enumerated tokens.... is or is not, or is not decidable regarding, its identity with the number of its properties or metaproperties, as or of 0, 1, or Infinity. Which itself is an ambiguous M which inspired as sufficiently justifies an ontological revision from the truth value possibility of classical theism of as "true" to the necessarily stronger Godelian ontological revision of Classical theist ontological truth value possibility set values... That this does, this a Godelian process M, motivate the change from the Classical to the Godelean. @KingOfWhiteAmerica @PS I feel like all attempts at simple phrasing failed. If this than that, if that then not this. God is or is not comprehensibility in the necessary determinacy of some Metaproperty M with respect to M under S or something like that... Which entails a Godelian incomprehensible and undecidable determinacy of some Metaproperty M with respect to M under the Godelian G or the Godelian M. Which itself, by its own name, entails the strength of that Godelian M or G over any strongest Classical theism. @KingOfWhiteAmerica @PS @Chiro Typos whether undecidably "best" comparators in a document about M's and their ambiguity are good source of trivial or unimportant examples of undecidability of distinct or identical interpretations lowercase i's under capital I requirements of I, where the Metaproperty of the relation of I with respect to i's as singular or plural or nonexistent is itself undecidable which itself is a Godelian ambiguous M favoring the shift to Godelian theism from classical theism.