How can one possibly answer that question with a yes or no....
I don't believe that God is some white bearded guy up in heaven....
I do believe in The Q Continuum type god....a group of omnipotent dudes who probably live in outer space and at some time in the past....they dumped us off here.
I struggle with the omnipotence paradox....
The omnipotence paradox is expressed in the question: "Can an omnipotent being create a stone so heavy that it cannot lift it?" This question generates a dilemma. The being can either create a stone which it cannot lift, or it cannot create a stone which it cannot lift. If the being can create a stone that it cannot lift, then it seems that it can cease to be omnipotent. If the being cannot create a stone which it cannot lift, then it seems it is already not omnipotent.
The problem is similar to another classic paradox, the irresistible force paradox: What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object? One response to this paradox is that if a force is irresistible, then by definition there is no truly immovable object; conversely, if an immovable object were to exist, then no force could be defined as being truly irresistible. But this way out is not possible in the omnipotence case, because the purpose is to ask if the being's omnipotence makes its own omnipotence impossible.
J.L. Cowan attempts to resolve the paradox in "The Paradox of Omnipotence Revisited." He proposes the following:
1. Either God can create a stone which he cannot lift, or he cannot create a stone which he cannot lift.
2. If God can create a stone which he cannot lift, then he is not omnipotent (since he cannot lift the stone in question).
3. If God cannot create a stone which he cannot lift, then he is not omnipotent (since he cannot create the stone in question).
4. Therefore God is not omnipotent.
Omnipotence implies that God can lift anything, therefore it is illogical to say God can make a stone which he cannot lift. It is however logical to say if God can lift anything, then he is not capable of making a stone he cannot lift. Because he cannot make a stone he cannot lift, omnipotence is negated.
One should note the question relies on its clever linguistic construction. One who claims God's omnipotence could simply claim that there is no limit to how large a stone God can create, in other words, God can create all stones and that there is no stone too big for God to lift, that is, God cannot fail to lift any one stone. The question itself disguises a question of ability with a question of inability. An omnipotence paradox would also arise from the question "Can God not do something"? One would say if God cannot not do something, then God is not omnipotent. But the very definition of "omnipotent" is precisely that: that God "cannot cannot" do something. As such the Omnipotence problem could be argued to be a linguistic trick on one's definition of omnipotence or that term omnipotence is an oxymoron since its definition precludes its meaning.
Sorry...I think about shit...
) 
