Can God create a rock so big he can't lift it, or can he not create the rock? the answer is yes...

Introduction:This is the last round, so I hope I make my position clear to Pro and to everyone that reads/vote. Rebuttals:"god can create that rock. as long as he is not acting as the unstoppabe force when said rock exists. so it couldn't be exactly accurate to say God an 'always' lift it. but yes, he can always change his mind, allow time to pass, and then lift it. but they cannot be simultaneously existing at the same time. "Pro contradicts herself here. It doesn't matter if it isn't simultaneous. The rock was never a "rock that he can't lift" because he was always able to change his mind, so he can always able to lift it. Remember, "able to change his mind' = "able to lift it", according to Pro's logic. Therefore, paradox. "so it's not illogical to ask a nonomipotent being to create the rock, but illogical to ask an omnipotent? "Exactly, the reason? Omnipotence is not logical. You will always have logical problems with the unlimited. "again, i dont see why God can't create the rock, as long as he is staying within the laws of logic while doing so, not acting as an unstoppable force at the same time as the rock exists. "The problem is that "staying within the laws of logic" is what's causing the problems. God can't stay within the laws of logic while making something illogical. "he cannot lift the rock at all for ten days. according to me, he could, it's just that he probably wouldnt"Both have the same problem. It doesn't matter if it is not simultaneous. "all i said was that GOd can create the rock. but then he can decide to lift it. as long as he doesn't do both at the same time, he is acting consistently. "But that's not logical. If you want to fix the logic, or you say he never create such a rock, but created a rock that he can lift, or that he is not able to lift it, but not both. What I mean is that he never created an immovable object, even if he was not an unstoppable force at the time. Why? Because he was able to move it afterwards. "his is probably easier for him given he is an atheist and does't like the connotations of God"It's easier for me because I'm not trying to fix a paradox using logic. I mean, technically you could, like the grandfather paradox and Hawking solution, which to me is pretty smart and simple, but it's definitely not an easy task. And it's not like I don't like the connotations of god. God really needs better definitions for his characteristics, so he is not impossible just in the start. "'unlimited even within the laws of logic' is impossible. can we really be ready to make that assertion? "No. But this is not the topic of the debate. Unlimited is not logical. When you start using infinities for the attributes of god, you will always find paradoxes. Omnipotence is illogical, even when trying to do things "within logic". You solution doesn't fix it, because it is not logical. "having a hard time following your bachelor examples, but from what i can gather it's not applicable to the God paradox. i can gather that we shouldn't assume that God is unlimited without establishing first that he is? "Exactly, you god it. You can't reference god's attributes in the question. That's like asking a bachelor if it's married. That's not how it works. You should ask if it's married first to know if it's a bachelor. Sadly, no one can answer the question of the paradox correctly and then being omnipotent. It is simply not logical. I tried, it was a yes, so no omnipotent. Thanks for the debate.