Dating to relating not
" This phrasing of the omnipotence paradox is vulnerable to objections based on the physical nature of gravity, such as how the weight of an object depends on what the local gravitational field is.
Alternative statements of the paradox that do not involve such difficulties include "If given the axioms of Riemannian geometry, can an omnipotent being create a triangle whose angles do not add up to 180 degrees?
A lot depends on the age difference between you and how much younger you're talking about.
The Pros: As a dating coach for women, I've found that age does not matter as much as compatibility.
The omnipotence paradox is a family of paradoxes that arise with some understandings of the term 'omnipotent'.
The paradox arises, for example, if one assumes that an omnipotent being has no limits and is capable of realizing any outcome, even logically contradictory ideas such as creating square circles.
Other possible resolutions to the paradox hinge on the definition of omnipotence applied and the nature of God regarding this application and whether or not omnipotence is directed toward God himself or outward toward his external surroundings.
The omnipotence paradox has medieval origins, dating at least to the 12th century.
But this is not a way out, because an object cannot in principle be immovable if a force exists that can in principle move it, regardless of whether the force and the object actually meet.
If the being cannot create a stone it cannot lift, then it seems it is already not omnipotent.
A related issue is whether the concept of 'logically possible' is different for a world in which omnipotence exists than a world in which omnipotence does not exist.
A no-limits understanding of omnipotence such as this has been rejected by theologians from Thomas Aquinas to contemporary philosophers of religion, such as Alvin Plantinga.
Atheological arguments based on the omnipotence paradox are sometimes described as evidence for atheism, though Christian theologians and philosophers, such as Norman Geisler and William Lane Craig contend that a no-limits understanding of 'omnipotence' is not relevant to orthodox Christian theology.
An essentially omnipotent being is an entity that is necessarily omnipotent.