why logic will always "win" a debate against god...

I'm assuming you're looking at this from an objective point of view. If you were to apply objective logic (i.e. "God doesn't exist because we have the scientific findings that condradict his existence...") then yes, you could probably make a pretty firm stance on God not existing. That also depends on the God your talking about...every Judeo Christian practitioner has a different idea of God. The existence of the God of the more liberal minded Christians would be harder to prove or disprove because he/she would not be the traditional God of Bible. It's all a matter of perspective. Logic is nothing more a method of reasoning...as defined by the dictionary and my old college philosophy/logic professor. I've met a few Judeo-Christians with strong logic to support the existence of the Judeo-Christian God; enough so to stop any amatuer athiest in his tracks and reconsider his stance on things. That doesn't mean they were right, it just means they had a pretty strong argument for their case. In the end, if the right kind of logic is applied in a debate for or against the existence of God (and I've seen it happen), the conversation will go in circles, and both the believers and the non-believers would find themselves locked in a stalemate of logic. No actual wins or losses, just paradoxes and confusion.

Thank G-d you don't have to be logical to believe.If you need written proof that everything in the Bible is true or that it happened the exact way it is written to believe it, these religions are not for you.