Another apologist with his "clever" questions

[FallentoReason]

No, goblygoop isn't logic, you told us it wasn't very plainly...that's the whole point of proposing goblygoop in the first place - so that a hypothetical god, in a hypothetical universe...can do illogical things like making 2+2=5.  

Refer to Fred and Bob again.

Goblygoop is illogical, because goblygoop is a set of rules (loosely put) that exist for no other purpose than to facilate the illogical in your hypothetical.  If your hypothetical god, in your hypothetical unverse, operates on logical rules...then there's no need for goblygoop at all...but then, I suppose, it couldn;t make 2+2=5. This is extremely simple....I'm not sure why you seem to think you can have illogical logic. You can have a coherent set of rules, if you like, different than the ones we call logic. Bobs to our Freds. We've already agreed on that...if things were different, things would be different.

The trouble you have is that you're universalist (kind of like sexist or what have you, but to do with universes).

You say that if things were different, then they would be different. Perfect! That's as much as we can agree on. But then you add your universe's superiority by implicitly calling it the True Logic ™. Goblygoopians can play that game too, and would they be wrong in doing so?

However, insisting that Bob -is- Fred

I'll stop you there, because this is an explicit show of your inability to understand what I'm saying. I didn't once say they were the same person. I said they were both *human*, just like our logic here and goblygoop are both axioms.