What do you call a contradiction that spawns another contradiction?

As far as I have understood the doctrine, the "omni's" mean "all" rather than "most," so it would not be a problem to have one or more omnipotent persons. Besides that, I agree with RE (his name is too difficult to keep writing!) that it would be conflicting conditions .

I agree that "omni" means "all", but theoretically two omnipotent beings would be impossible, since each would limit the other's power, thus making each [not] all-powerful.

It's a tricky one, because doctrines are not supposed be be deconstructed, and can lead to switch-flipping in certain people's brains. If instead, the example claimed there existed 2 tallest men, then that would be contradictory, since then neither can be the tallest.

They'd be joint-tallest :)

Then again, this can easily be considered equivocation especially if there was an emphasis on one particular entity as being supreme.

Rat...el

I agree that "joint-tallest" is partly correct, but only in the sense of convention/convenience fudging.

If we had a competition for the strongest man, and the result was a tie, then convention would want both to share the title. However, in terms of strict logic, "strongest" means stronger than no other, so two people cannot be stronger than each other. In terms of strict logic, only one superlative is allowed.

 but theoretically two omnipotent beings would be impossible, since each would limit the other's power, thus making each [not] all-powerful.

This is the same argument is "can god make a stone so heavy he can't lift it." Apologists just argue that this being is actually "maximally powerful" which excludes such contradictions.