God can do only what is good. In this his omnipotence is purely reflective and bound to his essence and being, which is Love. God being bound to himself which is the source from which logic finds its existence can do no other thing that is outside the realm of logic. God cannot make a rock too heavy that he cannot lift, nor can he do any action to his creation that is outside his sovereignty of Love. Sovereignty is done an undue injustice when it is defined outside of God understood as Love. Sovereignty or omnipotence righty understood is primarily what God can do not that of which he is limited too. For a God who is perfect and unchanging there is no need or ability to perform any actions that are outside of his Love and logic. For as a good tree cannot bear bad fruit neither can God do evil. For a God who has the ability to do “all things” including evil is not a God that allows for a permanent universal law of morals. Thus if this universal law of morals is to exist there needs to be an unchanging preexistent being (that can do nothing but good) from which the law of morals has its own existence. Love is a logical necessity. It is not as if Love and Logic are at odds with one another, rather like all good things, logic flows from Love which is Gods very being. Of course God can do all possible things. But one must define what they mean by possible. However I doubt that it is necessary to define possibility in such a way that would allow for anything outside the realm of Love and Logic to occur as an action of God. This would seem absurd as God would then better reflect the character of a raging lunatic rather than that of a being that is Love and that of which all good things flow from. I imagine at this point some of my Calvinist friends may say, “but God can do all things that please him” or in other words he can do whatever he chooses that operates from his will. God can do all things which please him, but certainly not all things please him. Again if you believe in a good and loving God then you must admit that there are certainly things that do not give him any sort of pleasure. That of the holocaust for example. It is here that I hear the rhetoric that God does all things for his Glory. Which seem to me as really a copout rather than an intelligent well thought out scheme of universal purpose for all things. Of course even this requires a definition. For from your definition does your theology flow. A God who requires all things to be for his Glory seems to be a rather petty and selfish God. More like that of the pagan gods from the Greek, Roman, and Near Eastern pantheons. I quiet imagine that this is where we have inherited this current notion of Gods glory. Gods glory is actually a rather wonderful object of affection. For this glory is selfless. Far from the kind of glory that the pagan gods demand this glory is the very essence of God’s being, Love. But this glory calls us to allow Gods love to flow through our very beings, it invites us into right relationship with God, and into and unleashing of Gods all consuming love in a reconciliation of all Creation. At this point I may sound more like an annoying gong rather than any sort of theologian but I think this is a matter of great importance for if we depart at even one moment from having our theology centered around God as Love then we have left a house worth living in.