No offense to Christians meant, but the creed makes a lot more sense if God isn't *literally* all powerful. Otherwise everything would be as he wished, yeah?
I mention Christians because they speak here most often (far behind atheists, sadly) and Christian doctrine *seems* to describe Jehovah as ALL-powerful. But maybe some Christians don't believe that?
I can't speak for Trinitarian Christians, but it was once described to me that the power of God is Honor. As in, the spirits of everything in existence Honor Him as long as He doesn't violate their trust. In essence, they set rules that He must follow, in exchange for obeying His commands. One of the main things that would violate their trust would be allowing a spirit that disobeyed His commands back into His presence, except that Christ was so beloved by everything that they allow Him to vouch for people. God also voluntarily limits His power to avoid taking away our ability to choose, as part of a plan to help us grow up to be like Him.
So yes, not exactly all-powerful, but powerful enough to do accomplish His purposes.
I once wondered whether spirits affect the material world by deciding how quantum states collapse, which also provides an interesting limit on how much they can achieve.
But I'd love any discussion on fallible gods. External manipulators or creators who might have limits and who, with time and dedication, humanity technically might have a chance of surpassing.
A fallible god being would be very scary indeed. How could a being have created us without also having the power to destroy us? Would we be treated more like toys, like lab rats, like pets, or like children? Would we be destroyed out of boredom, fear, or mercy?
After all, we are as gods to the dwarves we watch over. We create their planets, guide their actions, and destroy them at a whim. Who is to say we are not living in a similar simulation?
That said, this is a popular topic of fiction. There's always the "Gods need prayer" trope, wherein we created gods instead of the other way around, and defeat them through agnosticism, though belief in something else often creates a new kind of god. Star Trek is fond of talking godlike beings out of destroying a ship, planet, or civilization. Other science fiction works show us struggling to overcome species who have manipulated or subjugated us in the past, and returned just as we got powerful enough to resist them. (Any sooner or later and it doesn't make nearly as interesting a story.)
Magic: the Gathering postulates god-like beings both from other universes, some of whom created their own universes, and from the æther between universes, who can enter a universe only partially. Oh, and one universe has the "Gods need prayer" variety, while another has powerful spirits from a companion universe. All types have been overcome to greater or lesser degrees.
Good point except that there's a difference between "benevolence" and "morality". The right thing isn't always the nice thing.
As a basic hypothetical, imagine if God ended the Earth and gave everyone the exact same eternal happiness after death (ignoring the logistics of making people happy equally). That would be benevolent, but would it be fair? Or just?
A benevolent God would do that, but a "just" one - one who followed a certain set of moral guidelines - probably wouldn't.
Of course, if I were given ultimate power, that is what I would do. All people who actually exist would be happy. Suffering would only happen in fiction - and it would happen a lot there, because it's interesting, but it wouldn't be real. That's because my personal morality is about maximizing happiness. Even if terrible people share in the benefits. But that's because I believe evil is a product of one's environment... And punishment is only just (or useful) when it prevents further evil.
But uh yeah. Many people would say that a bad person needs to be punished, for justice to be done. Even if it doesn't increase overall happiness.
I'm not sure it's possible to take us as we are and make us perfectly happy all the time. Granted, there are probably a few simple things that would have significantly reduced misery, but contentment halts progress, and our individual desires come into conflict a bit too often.
I once believed that punishment in the afterlife would consist mainly of being too ashamed of one's actions to face one's God, family, and peers, all of whom would have a perfect knowledge of everything that had been done, leaving one to desire nonexistence or at least anonymity.
Sometimes I wish I still could.