Revealing the incoherence and specious nature of this 'paradox', starting with a most useful analogy of a circumstantial video game programmer, extended to the un-circumstantial:

“Could God create a stone so heavy that even He could not lift it?”

Could a game programmer (in their own simulation), create a rock that even he could not lift?

• *bool canDevLiftRock = false;*

There, I can't lift it. (Or, I could).

Apparently, to some people that would mean I'm not really capable of anything in my own game (which exists, *circumstantial to me [as I will, design]). And my capabilities as such are an impossible, incoherent paradox. What’s the next move? Bugs? That would apply if there exists further context to my will/intent/design for the game, such that there is further context to its entire existence.

In my case, this is true. I am not God, and I have not existed forever.

• I am relatively omni-potent [in the game], as any author of fiction [books, media] (or lies).
  • Truth is downstream, constructed/evaluated by premises. A truth or belief ultimately exists subject to you[r reasoning].
• *I am [premise] subject to circumstances beyond my fact of being. My will and knowledge are subjective, not [altogether] objective.
• I exist, ultimately contingent (not necessary, and not self-sufficient).

What’s next in the gibberish parade?

If: God can’t make 2 + 2 = 5, (or make Himself not God), then: God is not really God (omni-potent)?

A system's behaviour is defined by constraints, imposed by design. Constraints are proof of power (subjugation, limitation), not lack of it.

• It takes authority, and influence to constrain/compel/force.
• A system without constraints is not descriptive of a system.

A being with total control over a system can trivially design constraints that simulate (or are interpreted as-) an incapability. However, doing so is a choice, not an actual limit or compulsion.

• It has absolutely no further context. It is intent/will, un-circumstantial to *any “*else” or “other”.

God as “the being upon/to which all else is circumstantial” (which grounds explanation) is immune.

Everything [contingent that exists, happens] is circumstantial to [meaning: depends on-] God.

• That is omnipotence, omni-potence; the all-capable being, by which all we observe is possible.

It is not an illogical immunity (arbitrarily imposed), but otherwise a categorical error to subject God to further context. Without a singular creator, who’s designs and will are not subject or inspired by any further context, there will always exist some objective differentiating frame of reference.