How should we respond to the paradox of omnipotence? In classic mode, it is stated like this: can God make a rock so big that he cannot lift it?
One plausible reply is to say that this is an example of language which appears to describe a meaningful state of affairs when, in fact, it does not.
In that case, the so-called “paradox” is analogous to saying “Dave is taller than himself”. At first blush, that seems to be a meaningful sentence. But in fact, it describes a contradictory state of affairs and thus it is not actually describing a property that Dave could possibly have.
Just as Dave could not possibly be taller than himself, so God could not possibly create a rock too big for him to lift. In each case, a seemingly meaningful challenge is, in fact, nothing more than nonsense. Thus, that which initially seems to be a challenge to omnipotence is, in fact, nothing more than a tribute to linguistic confusion.