Karl S. from Hungary wrote in about the article Who created God? by Dr Don Batten. Karl S.’s questions are answered point-by-point by Dr Jonathan Sarfati.

I really liked this article, but I still have some qualms with your argument in terms of the attributes of God.

Yes, it was a very important article. However, it had a strong focus: dealing with one skeptical argument in a lucid and strong way. It could not be expected to cover everything. I will try my best to answer these questions, although many of them are found on the site.

Maybe some people can help me figure this out. You define God as: 
1. Omnipotent 
2. Eternal 
3. Spiritual 
4. Omniscient

Indeed we do. But we define them in their original intended meanings, which were actually negative—to indicate that God had no limitations outside Himself.

On omnipotence-simple, traditional arguments such as questioning whether an omnipotent being could create a rock too heavy for himself to lift seem to prove true omnipotence impossible. Moreover, the common response that God is commonly omnipotent, i.e., can only bring logical effects about seems to refute itself because it says that He/She/It

If you are objecting to the male pronoun, see What’s in a pronoun? The divine gender controversy by Lita Cosner, a female New Testament specialist.

We must define God’s omni-attributes in their original intended meanings, which were actually negative—to indicate that God had no limitations outside Himself.

cannot bring about logical inconsistencies, proving H/S/I not omnipotent.

But this was never the intended meaning of the term, as thoroughly shown in What does God’s omnipotence really mean?For example:

An all powerful God can do or make anything, but it’s meaningless to say that he can do or make a nothing. A logically contradictory state of affairs is not a thing at all, but NOTHING.

The point is, ‘a rock too heavy for God to lift’ is really ‘a rock too heavy for a being who can lift anything’, so it is a self-contradiction. Your son’s friend’s example really resolves to ‘a being more powerful than a supremely powerful being’, so is likewise self contradictory. A ‘square circle’ and ‘2+2=5’ are likewise contradictory states of affairs. Therefore these are all nothings. And a meaningless nothing doesn’t become a ‘something’ just because someone puts the phrase, ‘an all-powerful God could’ in front of it….

Continue Reading on creation.com