The problem is that the two sides can never meet. From a believer’s perspective, it’s impossible to convince a nonbeliever about the existence of God because the nonbeliever sets the criteria that must be met, and those criteria present an impossible challenge — to change the nature of God so that he fits into a physical model that is recognizable by a specific set of tests. It can’t happen.

If God is indeed God, then he (masculine pronoun for ease of writing) exists independent from our concept of time, matter, space. Although there are theoretical models that continue to push the boundaries of how we define time, the universe, etc., they are still just theories that are constrained by our intellect.

Especially considering that from a purely subjective standpoint, God is real, regardless of whether he/it/whatever actually exists. It’s like arguing with a schizophrenic that their toaster isn’t talking to them. If you want to have a discussion that might result in instilling a more rational, reasonable perspective in the mind of a believer, you’re not going to make any progress by challenging subjective experiences that are very real to them.

noddinOff: But at the same time, we have to admit that our discussion and understanding of omnipotence is completely separate from it and bears no impact on the real thing.

From what I’ve read (Old Man and the Sea and a few short stories), he’s kind of melodramatically sentimental and his writing technique and style is pretty lacking.

Both are equally real.

And if such a being was omnipotent, it could likely bend/model reality in such a way that contradiction becomes agreement. Even if something happening would logically result in something else happening (e.g. blowing out a candle resulting in there being no flame), an omnipotent being could figure out a way around these constraints.

And I’m not presuming to tell you what you accept. I would stick by the statement, however, that some of the things you (probably?) accept about God are clearly impossible, from my atheistic standpoint. As I’m assuming you’ve never seen God firsthand and he’s essentially a spiritual thought experiment, then any number of things God has done/can do are just flat impossible, unless you’re God.

I guess my main point is that if you can find a loophole of some sort in the idea of omnipotence, well, some monk probably found it a thousand years ago. This particular one was addressed long ago in Catholic theology.