03 Jul '14 17:36>1 edit
A) "I claim certainty that no type of god or gods exist"
B) "I claim certainty that the god you believe exists does not exist"
The claimant states with certainty that no type of god or gods exist in statement A.
Statement B is merely a reiteration of the same claim. The only difference is that the claimant identifies a certain god, but that god was identified inferentially by statement A.
Therefore statement B is redundant, and the two statements are only superficially different by the addition of 6 words in statement B, and the omission of 2 words in statement A.
Otherwise both statement say the same thing, to wit, the claimant doesn't believe God exists.
B) "I claim certainty that the god you believe exists does not exist"
The claimant states with certainty that no type of god or gods exist in statement A.
Statement B is merely a reiteration of the same claim. The only difference is that the claimant identifies a certain god, but that god was identified inferentially by statement A.
Therefore statement B is redundant, and the two statements are only superficially different by the addition of 6 words in statement B, and the omission of 2 words in statement A.
Otherwise both statement say the same thing, to wit, the claimant doesn't believe God exists.