I think most people who talk about omnipotence aren't clear on what they really mean by it. They dismiss snarky questions about whether God could create a rock so heavy he couldn't lift it, but there are very real internal consistency issues with the idea that an otherwise anthropomorphic entity is omnipotent. If God is omnipotent, why is he? Does he choose how powerful he wants to be, or is his nature and power imposed on him by a reality that transcends him? If he chooses, is the choice itself inescapably imposed on him?
Based on these issues (among others), I've concluded that the only ultimate and irresistible power in reality must be the static truth of reality itself, rather than any dynamic actor. An entity defined by perfect consistency with truth will always be more powerful than entities that deny and rebel against the reality they inhabit, but conflating reality itself with any entity within it to arrive at an entity that transcends all reality and context is a mistake.
In common usage I understand the word "God" to mean both the ultimate truth of reality and the entity who acts consistently with that truth, but I think it's important to recognize the distinction. By following [truth/God], we conform to unalterable reality, integrate ourselves as part of the [church/body of God], and create [harmony/the kingdom of God]. To sin is to deny reality and try to take shortcuts that don't exist, and the ultimate result is always destruction as we dash ourselves against truths we can't change.