Re: i need urgent help : i'm demonically possessed

"Can do" everything does not mean "Is doing" everything.

This is something that theologians don't seem to understand.

Creating a rock doesn't come with an associated obligation of lifting it, or of even trying to. So it being unliftable doesn't infringe omnipotence.

Sorry, but that's a cop-out. The question wasn't will God make a rock he can't lift, but can he do so. Either answer demonstrates that omnipotence is a paradox; it cannot exist. If he cannot create such a rock, then that is something that lies outside of his power. If he can create such a rock, then he can't lift the rock and that shows he is not all-powerful too. There's no way around the fact that omnipotence is a self-negating concept and therefore a fallacy.

(Leaving aside the fact that this is all very anthropocentric and anti-Copernican. If God controls the universe, ultimately all rocks can be lifted; if not directly, then through physical forces such as gravity and dark energy. Thinking of a bearded guy grabbing a rock and being able or unable to lift it is good for art, but too anthropocentric to be meaningful. Obviously the guys who first thought up the paradox were not aware that black holes can lift; or rather, "throw", entire galaxies.)

That's nonsense. You're moving the goalposts, not to mention equivocating about the definition of 'lift.' Anyway, if all rocks that are in existence can be lifted (by the universe or whatever), it doesn't negate the point of whether God can create a rock he can't lift. If all rocks can be lifted, then clearly he cannot create such a rock and therefore is not omnipotent. There are attempts to claim the question is meaningless, but they're also a cop-out. They do not demonstrate that the question is meaningless but that the concept of omnipotence is meaningless (if one presupposes that God is omnipotent, I mean.) The question can be applied to anyone else and receive a valid answer; therefore why not God?