>>743291
>Omnipotence meaning that he can do anything.
Careful now, that isn't the usual definition of omnipotence used in most discussions on the subject. Rather the correct definition is that it means he is all powerful. Being all powerful does not necessarily imply being able to do anything, such as the logically impossible (or to phrase it amother way - being impossible by definition - i.e. having a 'square circle' or a traditional conception of God who can sin, lie etc.).
>Remember Jesus says "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible". Why would Jesus lie if God can't do everything even if it is impossible?
Logically possible, bud. If you accept that God can do logically impossible things language becomes absolutely meaningless and any statements made within that context lose all value in terms of a truth/falsehood distinction, amongst others. If you concede the possibility of the logically impossible there's literally zero point in either person in the conversation or debate saying anything further, given you've allowed language and definitions of words and concepts to be completely stripped of any value as to be wholly defunct.