Is God Truly Omnipotent?

Lets examine this commonly held belief that God is omnipotent, and, by this we know that the majority of the populous would assume that God is omnipotent to the point that all things are possible. The term “all things” would also include illogical things such as: 2+2=5, 6-6+6, and actualize/alter past events. However, can God really actualize the illogical?

I previously posted an argument that addresses Alvin Plantinga’s views on the existence of natural evil. My argument is as follows:

1. If Satan is a spiritual being (not consisting of anything physical), then he has no influence or effect on physical objects.
2. Satan is spiritual.
3. Therefore he has no influence over physical worlds

I have had a number of valid objections, and I can see why. One objection stated “the argument works against God too. For Satan, fill in “God.” Thus, God has no influence over the physical world.” I agree with this objection superficially. However, I feel that there are some very important points that seem to make one believe that it doesn’t apply to God. If we examine some of the attributes of God when compared with Satan we find some very important differences. First, God is a being that is omnipotent, where as Satan is a being impotent and limited. Due to the fact that God is omnipotent then he would have control over a physical world, where as Satan would not.
With that concluded, an objector might state that God (according to my argument) cannot be non-physical and logically have control over this physical world. This objection brings up a number of possible solutions
1. One could state that God is composed of physical and spiritual parts.
2. State that God is omnipotent and has dominion over the physical world because he created it.
3. State that because he is omniscient and omnipotent he uses spiritual means to effect possible changes and occurrence on the physical world.
By taking any one of the following responses one could attempt to formulate a sufficiently sound argument to thwart the previous objection, yet would it be logically possible according to the previous argument?
I feel that even if one were to use the previous argument one still might run the chance of committing a fallacy or dealing with semantics in order to define God, so it would seem that the argument can’t retain it’s validity.
I think that it is possible, but I think that it is much easier to edit the premises of the current argument:

1. If Satan is an impotent spiritual being (not consisting of anything physical), then he has no influence or effect on physical objects.
2. Satan is a impotent spiritual being.
3. Therefore he has not influence over physical worlds

By changing (1) we have created a much tighter conclusion that God can actualize physical worlds being spiritual because he is omnipotent. This is due to the fact that premise 1 refers to only impotent spiritual beings. Therefore, Alvin Plantinga’s view that natural evil is caused by the free acts of the devil and other malevolent spiritual beings is flawed.
John