What can a Omnipotence God Do and what he can't ?
can he for example create logically incoherent things ?
Can god Create A being more powerful than he/it is ? Or Can god Prove he doesn't Exist ? if he wants to ? doesn't that defeats the claim that god is known (claimed by most mono-theistic religions) and god is the most powerful being to ever exist ?
First of all, the answer to this depends on how you define omnipotence. What you are asking goes in line with the first definition:
A deity is able to do anything that it chooses to do.
In other words, there is nothing an omnipotent god cannot do.
I have struggled with the concept of omnipotence for a while now. I don't think it makes sense to say that there is a being that is omnipotent in its own environment. This would lead to paradoxes, such as:
Can an omnipotent being create a stone so heavy that it cannot lift it?
The general problem with absolute omnipotence is that god could change his own environment in ways that restrict his omnipotence.
What if we refine the definition of omnipotence to the following: there is nothing an omnipotent god cannot do within the world he created. This would assume that god has created our universe and has complete control over it. Within his own world, though, he would not be omnipotent, and hence, the paradoxes are resolved.
Think of a programmer who created a simulated world. He can do anything within the world, but he is an ordinary person within his own world.
The human mind is constrained in its ability to conceive of what is "possible" and "impossible" by the fact that our perception is entirely shaped by the laws of physics that we live under, and that even in this perception we are also constrained by the time and size scales that we can perceive, which is quite a small portion of this physical existence. Existence outside of these constraints is presently not possible for us to envision.
But making the simple assumption that there can be a supernatural entity has perception that stretches far outside these ranges, and that can also shape the laws of nature, this entity can do things we cannot even begin to imagine. With that it also becomes possible for that entity to do things that to us seem impossible or inconsistent, because it operates outside of the basic rules that we take for granted and that shapes our perception of what is possible/impossible.
So what are the limits of what supernatural deity can do? The question is unanswerable because we cannot perceive what it is like to operate outside the laws of our universe.
One way around the problem for theists is to claim that God cannot do logically incoherent things.
Defining "omnipotence" as excluding logically incoherent things defeats this potential defeater for belief in God. This would still make God "the most powerful being to ever exist".
As an example of theists who have restricted omnipotence in this way, see Alvin Plantinga's "Free Will Defense". The wikipedia article states:
...Plantinga pointed out that God, though omnipotent, could not be expected to do literally anything. God could not, for example, create square circles, act contrary to his nature, or, more relevantly, create beings with free will that would never choose evil.
There may be other ways around the problem, but just restricting omnipotence to doing only what is logically coherent is all that is needed.
Layered realities
I have seen many come up with similar arguments. You propose a law or logical principle which is then broken, because if you can do anything, you can break the very rules one has set.
But here we have a problem. Anything can only happen when there is a thing upon which the thing or action happens. In defining this thing or object, one embeds limitations by its very existence.
It appears to us an infinite being could not make themselves finite in the same realm as the infinite, but could make themselves finite in another reality. Or can one make an immovable rock and then move it. You would have to ask, immovable to who or what? As soon as one talks about this, one has to assume boundaries and limitations that apply to creation and God Himself which is not possible for us to do.
So our language is bounded by our experience of our reality and perceptions. From our perspective the creator is all knowing, all powerful.
So you could argue omnipotence is only relative to the created world and our experience of it.
A for instance, if you created a rock that could not be lifted, by definition for it not to be at the centre of mass, it is being lifted or held up by something. If one extends this further, any force attracting the object which is being resisted qualifies as lifting the object away from the centre of attraction. So the question is not meaningful or possible to fulfil in the first place unless you start applying the approximations that exist in the real world. An unliftable rock would only exist in a universe where it alone existed. But then there would be nothing else to lift it.
I think the confusion derives from the language(-game?) embedded in the question itself: can something that is limitless be bound by limit? You don't even need to ask the ancillary questions if you can't answer that one.
It seems our use of language is already defining-down or hemming in the idea of 'growth without bound' by yoking it to 'somethinghood,' the ontological status of an object, which necessarily has limits.
An omnipotent god both can and cannot do all of those things you said since saying a thing 'cannot not' do something is, in fact, imposing a restriction upon omnipotence. "All" is necessarily the union of can and cannot. In fact, I think we probably need to invoke tetralemma here, since infinite can surely bust any law of excluded middle, n'est pas?
To talk about the truth of infinite power, we must say that: can, cannot, both can and cannot, neither can or cannot.
Mahayana helps.
