[guesswest]

It's not illogical to arrive at that understanding of the definition, but the whole concept of unrestrained omnipotence is very obviously completely internally illogical, by definition.

My point wasn't to challenge that interpretation of the word though. What I said is, if you use that definition you can't then use logic to infer anything subsequent (ie the actions of that god, whether he see's the future, anything), because the premise is already logically compromised. Maybe you can use some tool other than logic to do this, that doesn't fail on it's own terms, but I don't know what it'd be.