From a reading of “Summa Contra Gentiles” by St. Thomas Aquinas, Book II chapter 25, reprinted in Philosophy of Religion: The Big Questions, Ed. by Eleonore Stump and Michael Murray.
Aquinas’ arguments here fall flat to me for the same reason that I don’t enjoy modern superhero movies.
A character who can be given whatever supernatural powers the author dreams up is so implausible as to be ridiculous. Character 1 has X power which is countered by character 2 with Y power, enabling both to act outside the laws of physics and reality.
To me, the plot of the story is made pointless and irrelevant by the unrealistic and implausible abilities and antics of the super-characters. The same goes for much of the fantasy genre.
I see Aquinas’ detailed explanation and defense of divine omnipotence equally unsatisfying and for the same reason. With the end (omnipotence) already in mind, he exercised his substantial intellect to devise rational arguments to counter every potential critique. His arguments make sense. They seem sound and rational.
But the fact is that none of this was explicitly delivered to him by the deity. It is merely his great mind reasoning from a conclusion he had already established. He has fashioned the ultimate superhero (God) by giving him the trait of omnipotence and then rationalizing how and why this is actually true.
Aquinas does not convince me that God is any more real than a comic book hero.