alt Hacker News> But this assertion itself constitutes a defensive truth claim about God
You seem to be asserting this without any proof, or at least none that I can follow. The assertion itself is a "defensive truth" about "truths about God," not about "God." I'm not sure how you are justifying considering "truth about [truth about [truth about [... X]]]" as the same thing as "statement about X".
Is it possible that you're considering the properties of the truths about X to be properties of X as well? I don't think this is justified. Properties of truths about X come from properties of X. For example, statements about the color of X are not statements about X itself, despite coming from properties of X. E.g. color(X) = color(Y) -/> X = Y.
Recursion doesn't complicate the case here. The original statement made assertions about "statements about God", not about God. For example, the statement "All statements about God are false" is not paradoxical, it is simply false (if we accept the law of the excluded middle). A statement like "Everything I've said about God is false" could very well be true, it's not paradoxical, despite also being part of the set "Everything I've said;" it's just not "about God."
Thinking about your argument a little more, it seems like our disagreement comes from your belief that "about X" is 'infectious' to all higher order statements, whereas I don't believe this is the case. The best way I can think to argue my point right now is from examples.
Suppose we had many books about movies on one hand, each book containing movie reviews or something, and then we have one book about [books about movies] on the other hand, call it B. The book B, which is about [books about movies], simply contains the number of words that each book about movies has written in it. Is B "about movies"? I would argue that it is not, it contains nothing about movies in it at all, just numbers describing other books. I can say "all books about movies are wrong" without meaning to refer to B, as B is not wrong (as long as the word-counting is correct).
Would you argue that B is "about movies"?