How do Christians reconcile God's omnipotence with his omniscience?

If God knows everything, he is therefore incapable of acquiring new knowledge. I believe that one of the purposes of Jesus existing as a man was to give the 'godhead' insight into what it was like to be human. That doesn't seem to be true, reading this article

I don't think this is a very serious logical problem at all.

First, we need to define omnipotence properly. It is not the ability of God to do anything. Christians have always recognised that God cannot sin, lie, cease to exist etc. Omnipotence is God's ability to do all that He pleases.

Secondly, we must realise that the basis of God's omniscience is His knowledge of Himself. As John Frame puts it, God’s knowledge depends only on Himself. God knows all things by knowing Himself and knowing His plan for the universe. Since both of these objects of thought are eternal, God’s knowledge is eternal.(J. Frame, The Doctrine of God, 481)

If this is the case, then God's knowledge of all that has been, is and will be is grounded in His pleasure (i.e. the purpose of His will). God's omniscience is in part, His knowing what He has been pleased to bring about in space and time, and His omnipotence is His ability to do His pleasure. Where is the contradiction?

The OP could be falling into the trap of imagining "omnipotent" as being something like having command of a genie who fulfills any wish imaginable. If you are familiar with tales of genies, they have the capacity to grant wishes, and the people who make the wishes are generally free from worrying about the details involved in making the wish come true. They wish for a sack of gold coins, and shazam, a sack of gold coins appears. In the classic versions of the tale we are never told how the genie pulls this off (although The Tenth Kingdom took an amusing look into this). This concept of omnipotence figures heavily into atheistic reasoning, in which God's actions are likened to a series of commands issued to this putative genie without any regard to the results or consequences.

But this is a very naive view of omnipotence. If we even look at ourselves, we recognize that to do anything requires some specific knowledge, and that to do anything that is both beneficial and lasting requires a higher order or knowledge, not only of the thing we hope do achieve, but also of the full context of what we are doing. Many of us could spend the rest of our lives relating anecdotes of people who tried to accomplish something, but due to a lack of knowledge caused far less good and far more harm than they intended.

God does not have this problem. He always knows exactly what He is doing, because He has the full knowledge of the context and the consequences of everything thing He does and permits us to do.

For this reason we can see that omniscience does not conflict with omnipotence, but is in fact a prerequisite for omnipotence.

I think we may very well abstain from ascribing omnipotence and omniscience in the strong sense to GOD and were it only to avoid the well known paradoxies that make it impossible to understand what this even means.

Allowing such paradoxies can gravely affect faith, especially among logical thinking men.

The bible does not give any accounts where GOD actually demonstrated his omnipotence (emphasis on OMNI - I am not saying that GOD didn't demonstrate great power). While we are at it, can you think of a way HE could demonstrate omnipotence?

Anyway, there is no reason to ascribe a logically impossible attribute to GOD.

Just because God is all powerful doesn't mean that he has to use the full force of his power at all times. He can control it. Just like a strong man doesn't always pickup up every heavy thing he can see.

Just because God can see the future doesn't mean he is limited in his ability to control himself and choose not to look.

Isaiah 42:14 says "I remained silent and restrained myself." This is an example that shows that he can choose when to use his powers and to what extent.

This article answers your question very well: http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102009048

The short answer to your two questions is "no". These things do not limit God. That's what makes Him omnipotent. Omnipotent doesn't mean an unlimited amount of power similar to human power. It means power that is fundamentally unlimited. Where you think you see a conflict, "If God does X, doesn't that mean he cannot do Y" -- no, it does not. Such conflicts pose no limit for God because he is omnipotent.

To say, "If God does X, he cannot do Y" would require God's decision to do X to limit him in some way. But nothing limits him. That is the definition of "omnipotent".

"[I]f he can truly do anything because he is 'all powerful', this has to make the future uncertain even to himself."

The distinction between past and future doesn't apply to an omnipotent, omniscient being. He can change the past as easily as the future and neither the past nor the future are uncertain. Even the idea of "he can truly do anything" isn't really well-formed, because it implies a time before he does something and a time after.

You are trying to understand that which cannot be understood.

First of all, you are assuming that God is bound by time. God is a being outside of time. He created time. Concepts like "future" and "past" would look totally different to him.

Secondly, turn your order around. Rather than trying to understand how a being that is first omniscient (regarding the future) can also be omnipotent, rather think how easy it would be for a being that is first omnipotent to control outcomes so that the future becomes what he already knows. But again, that is irrelevant as God is outside time.

There's a third "omni" that reconciles the two: omnibenevolent. God has the power to make any choice he feels like, but because he has a perfect moral code, he always knows which choice is the best one to make, and so he can know the future, even concerning his own actions, without losing free will: he will make the correct choice for each choice he is given. It's not that he can't make any other choice, but that he won't.