How can an omnipotent god ever find out that he is omnipotent? Isn't it logically impossible for him to understand?

Question

Let us assume that an omnipotent god exists. He by definition can do anything that is logically possible. So if it is logically possible to prove that a being is omnipotent then an omnipotent god can prove to himself that he is omnipotent.

So we just need to show that it is logically possible to prove that a being is omnipotent, to show that an omnipotent god can find out that he is omnipotent.

Can anyone show that it is indeed possible to prove that a being is omnipotent?

I don't think it is possible. Like he can ask a question "Can I stop time?" and he will find out that he can. Next, he can ask "Can I create 1 more time dimension?" and he will find out that he can. Next, he can again ask "Can I create 1 more time dimension?". He can keep on asking that question. He also can ask "Can I find out whether this hypothesis is correct or false or undecidable in our axioms?" (This hypothesis can be any mathematical hypothesis. There are infinite of them). If he can not do something that is logically possible then he will have found that he is not omnipotent. So it is easy to prove nonomnipotence. So it seems to me that an omnipotent being can never understand that it is omnipotent.

Edit:Please do not answer this question with your own definition of Omnipotence. Here I clearly mentioned that omnipotence is bound by logic. That is the definition I am using.

Answer 1

It is important in philosophy to be open to examining the assumptions one is making, and evaluate whether they are valid. Intrinsic to the definitions being used here, is the Aquinian assumption that there is One True Logic, and one can derive the nature of our world using logic. Also implicit to WLCraig's assumption is that this One True Logic is constraining on everything.

These assumptions are used to evaluate limit cases involving infinities around the Omni properties of God.

However, going from back to front on the assumptions, we know that the assumed One True Logic of classical logic, is NOT applicable nor constraining to our world. One simple test case, identity. A=A does not apply to any material object in our world, as all objects have subtle matter exchange, and minor structural variances all the time. Another test case, the LEM does not apply to any evaluation of our world, which uses a 4 state logic not the 2 state required by LEM: likely true, likely false, currently indeterminate, and incoherent/unevaluable question.

Kant demonstrated that one cannot derive the nature of the world thru logic, in his Critique of Pure Reason. Our universe is contingent, and one cannot evaluate contingent realities through logic.

Additionally, there is not "One True Logic". Logicians have established that there are likely ININITE logics: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/think/article/guide-to-logical-pluralism-for-nonlogicians/EDFDFA1C9EB65DB71848DABD6B12D877 If there are infinite logics, then all sorts of things in our universe will violate one or even possibly all of them. Hence a God violating classical logic -- and even deciding what logic if any applies to particular parts of our universe, is intrinsic to what we now know of logic.

Rather than focusing on limit cases involving definitions of infinities, it is more useful to evaluate the postulate that there is one being which is creator of all our universe. Such a being may not have INFINITE power or knowledge, but would have to have SUFFICIENT power and knowledge to create everything there is. The infinities test you describe, are therefore not particularly relevant to evaluating whether such a being exists. Instead, the teleological tests of design intention, such as the Problem of Evil, are the sorts of test cases one should focus on in evaluating such a claim.