That seems like a misreading of grandparent. Their point was that thinking of programs as logic isn't a powerful way of thinking because it doesn't match the wa

That seems like a misreading of grandparent. Their point was that thinking of programs as logic isn't a powerful way of thinking because it doesn't match the way computers work. That's different from power of programming languages per se. A language could be very powerful in your sense, but abstract away from some important aspect of computation. (For example, Haskell is very powerful, but the space complexity of a Haskell program is hard to determine from the language spec.) Then such a language wouldn't be a "powerful way of thinking" in the sense of grandparent - in thinking about some aspects of computation it would hinder rather than help. The same is true for Prolog, I think.