The following is an answer and/or comment by inhahe aka ColorStorm (inhahe.com - myriachromat.wordpress.com).
A few thoughts..

First,
Going by the definition that "omnipotent" is "having unlimited power", does the paradox of God not being able to create a rock so heavy He can't lift it REALLY challenge the attribution of God as being "omnipotent?" That is, is it WITHIN the functionality of POWER to create a rock that's so heavy that's so heavy that said power cannot lift it? Is it within the functionality of POWER to perform what is apparently a logical paradox? If not, then God may be omnipotent yet still not be able to create a rock that's so heavy that He can't lift it.
And is it really a paradox? It seems it takes more energy to create an object of X mass than it does to lift an object of X mass. I guess we're comparing two infinities pitted against each other, infinite power toward creating the mass vs. infinite power toward lifting it. The first requires more power, so which one wins? X power is required to create a rock that requires X/Y power to lift it, where Y is some constant which depends on the mass of the object that is pulling the rock down. I guess it complicates matters that God would have to have created that object as well.
Anyway, it seems to be like asking what happens when an immovable object meets an irresistible force? Of course the answer is that there are no immovable objects ore irresistible forces, nature doesn't work that way, that's only our humanistic absolutist thinking confusing us. The same goes for a supposed being with infinite or unlimited power. And everything is natural. Supernatural is an oxymoron. If by supernatural one means to appeal to an area of nature that does not subscribe to natural laws as we know them, but instead to humanistic absolutist ideology, well, we can see where that goes. But I digress. (digress from what? i don't know.)

Second, I wonder if the paradox of God being able to create a rock so heavy you can't lift it is analogous to the prospect of, say, creating a square circle. In that it is simply a logical impossibility. Should God be expected to be able to pull off impossible feats? Not by a strict definition of having unlimited power, I would think. Power, scientifically speaking, functions within certain accordances.. But people seem to be really fancying that God has unlimited ABILITY. Should unlimited ability imply an ability to defy our logical limitations? Absolutely, I think. Why shouldn't an entity with unlimited ability BE ABLE to transcend our logical constrictions and precepts to perform any action whatsoever? Or is creating a square circle a non-action, as it cannot even be imagined and is a broken concept? Just word games? It's no more of a silly word game than is the very notion of an entity that's supposed to HAVE "unlimited ability." Nature just does what it does by its own rules of self-consistency. The very notion of ability brings into the question abstract concepts or hypothesis of "events"/things that "could" be done. That is, ability to do X means it causally brings forth a reality that conforms to some string of semiotic symbols constituting X. So unlimited ability should mean that it can causally bring forth a reality conforming to ANY arbitrary string of symbols, such as "square circle" or "rock that God cannot lift". So what if some are 'logical' and some are 'illogical'? The truth is that ANYTHING that doesn't actually happen, is illogical because such actuality would be self-contradictory-- nature is perfectly self-consistent. When we imagine something 'could' happen but it doesn't, the universe in which it happened would actually have been self-inconsistent on an absolute level, just beyond one's comprehension. So the difference between any kind of divine intervention and making a square circle is not qualitative, just quantitative- it is the scale on which one is able to see the self-inconsistency. I have ignored the question of indeterminacy of the future (QM) but even in that case there would be a large subset of all conceivable divine actions that would actually be self-inconsistent and thus illogical if we could see the big picture.

Third, and this is the thought I originally wanted to post, not very analytical just some theosophical speculation...

I suppose God COULD make a rock that's so big He couldn't lift it, but only until which time that He decides that he no longer wants to not be able to lift it..

Unless He wanted to make a rock that's so big (heavy) that He couldn't lift it even if He WANTED to, in which case He could do that, but only until the time that He no longer wants to not be able to lift it even if He wants to.

He could conform himself to such recursive limitations to any level. But what if He went so deep in levels that He FORGOT his unlimited ability and that He could just want to be able to do something that He wants to be able to want to be able to want to be able to want to.. etc.?

I guess that would make Him........... Human?