[PatrickHenry]

But I assert it is trivial to specify a square that is perfectly circular and is yet still a square.

It's not a trivial question. Assuming that the words "circle" and "square" have a specific meaning, what is propposed (a circular square) is this: Can there be an "A" which is also -- at the same time -- not an "A". So the question becomes this: Can an omnipotent God contradict the law of identity (A = A)?

[longshadow]

Assuming that the words "circle" and "square" have a specific meaning, what is propposed (a circular square) is this: Can there be an "A" which is also -- at the same time -- not an "A".

You made an implicit assumption (which happens to not be true) in your argument.

I'll give you a few moments to think about it.... and if you sneak a peak at my other replies, you may spot it.