God set up the rules that create the circle. Why would God who instated what a circle would be, who determined what would constitute a circle and that having the nature of a circle can not by God's design be anything but a circle. God needs not redesign or change rules, but in fact, has said He will not according to His own will change them.
You are summarizing what you "think" my views are.
a circle is a circle due to the design of God. A circle is the nature of a shape that is described as a circle.
God is a rational Being that created the circle. The circle is the nature of a certain shape that if that shape is altered no longer is considered a circle. Again, God determined that this shape is a circle and His rational thought in doing so determines that if a circle is no longer in the shape of its nature it is no longer a circle.
Again, a circle of any other shape is no longer what its nature was designed to be. By all rational thought, a circle will not remain a circle if it is altered in such a way as to no longer be in the shape of its nature. God is not limited by the rules of logic but instead the rules are by His very rational nature and design.
Man knows that a circle is a circle and if it is altered in such a way becomes a square. A square is the nature of a shape that we label square. Logic did not exist before God for Him to be limited by them, Logic comes from God's rational thought.
This statement asserts that logic exists outside or separately from God's rational thought, that is not the case and as such God is not limited by logic as logic is God's rationality.
You conclude God is limited by logic, but logic tells us that logic is not a separate entity nor did it exist prior to God. God then is not limited by logic, but God is rational and logic is the flow of His rationality.
No, this is not my worldview, this is your misunderstanding of both of our worldviews.
Both are required but your premise that logic is a separate entity that precedes God is an assertion without basis.
Truth is God. Your assertion is simply a mis-characterization of God's limits. Only man is limited by propositions that are true or false but can not be shown to be either.
You are actually making the argument for God's existence. Everything in the universe has a cause. Everything has an explanation of being in existence if it exists there is the Principle of Sufficient Reason for it to exist. The universe is one large interacting chain of existence with each thing having a sufficient reason for existence. Your example for instance, beginning with the statue. The statue did not pop into existence without a cause, the cause of the statue is the marble. It exists by metamorphic rock that forms when limestone is subjected to the heat and pressure of metamorphism. The man exists because his parents existed before him and before that the universe spewed out stardust and man came to exist, the stardust exists by fusion in the universe, the universe then must have a sufficient reason for it to exist and the buck doesn't stop there. If there is no first cause or uncaused cause then we have an infinite regress of causes with no first link in the chain of all other causes in the universe. If there is a cause, an eternal, necessary, independent and self explanatory Being that has nothing above it, before it, or supporting it we have a sufficient reason for all causes in the universe and the universe itself. We have evidence throughout our existence that there is sufficient reason for all causes in the universe, why would you entertain the thought that the universe stands apart and separate from that chain of causes?
Did you forget the progression of the discussion?
As I've shown, your assertions are unfounded and the question of whether or not God could create us to be sinless is not refuted at all.
