Admit that your intelligent atheist friend is correct.
He may be intelligent, but his own statements either prove himself wrong or are based on major assumptions which me must prove. Example for the former, he wrongly equates “to know” with “to determine”; his definition of “to know” is “to know AND to determine”.
He also must prove that omnipotent being must control everything.
If by “correct” you mean that he is using wrong definitions and unproved assumptions in refutation of Catholic philosophy, then I agree with you.
The omniscience/omnipotence notions were bad dogmas from their inception, You cannot explain away a logical contradiction.
There is no logical contradiction between them. But yes, by definition, it is impossible to explain a logical contradiction.
Why do you say “bad dogmas”? This is an emotional appeal. It is the equivalent of me saying, “They are good dogmas.” We should keep this objective.
Then, move on and take a look at what the contradiction is really telling you.
You assume it is a contradiction. You need to acknowledge this fact. Ok… Omniscience, omnipotence and omnibenevolence… This is closer to a seeming contradiction than omniscience/omnipotence, but you would still have to prove that it is a contradiction.
In other words, you must prove your case, that it is a contradiction.
Is it that God therefore cannot exist, as your “friend” might claim, or that humans got their definition of God completely wrong? (My opinion.) God does not need to be omniscient or omnipotent in order to create the universe. He only needs to be smart enough and powerful enough to do so— as would appear to be the case.
I disagree. God brought material existence out of material non-existence. This is an infinite change. This would most definitely require infinite power and without infinite knowledge, infinite power would be useless.
In order to give existence in the first place, He would have to be Existence Itself. If He created the universe (which we are in agreement here), He does not only give the universe existence, but also the truth that comes with it. So, He must be Truth Itself also in order that the universe also has truth. Humans are content with knowing they will not know everything. There are even inexplicable things like friendship, Love, Life and such… For us who recognize those things as objective (or maybe even subjective), then it is not far-fetched to make the leap that truth is indeed infinite. Since, God is the Truth, He must know what is true. Truth is not limited by time. Therefore, omniscience is an attribute God did have.
Yes, these things are crazy. I am honest enough to admit that. But before you dismiss it as ludicrous, just think about it. I am not saying my reasoning or logic is right, or that my argument is valid or sound. This is mere speculation. That fact does not make it wrong though.
Using this argument on your, ah, friend, will expose his true anti-creator agenda. Bring it on. I know that you want to be right, but so does he, and if he’s dumb enough to be an atheist despite all evidence to the contrary, no arguments from you will make him (or her, or it) any smarter. You, however, have that option.
“Dumb enough to be an atheist”? Atheists are not dumb. In fact, it is quite the opposite. They care so much about the truth that they will not believe it until they get hard, see-it-to-believe-it, airtight logic, philosophical, scientific, reasonable, rational, trustworthy eyewitness evidence. (I believe there is this kind of evidence, but that is beside the point.) Although rationalistic, it most certainly is not a dumb thing to want.
