I've always know immutable as not subject or susceptible to change. God's will is not an object any more than the laws of physics are. We are not talking about an immutable "object" here, as in a static unchangeable constant. 2+2=4 is an immutable constant for example. God's will being kind of like the laws of physics, they can be acted upon yet they do not change. Lets take gravity for example. Gravity on the moon differs from what we observe here on earth, but that dose not change the law of gravity itself. Point being even with different ways of observation, means of measurement, and varied results concerning gravity; that does not in fact change the immutability of the law of gravity. We, as mankind can therefore act upon the forces of gravity to produce proscribed and measurable results in accordance to our understanding of gravity. Such as flight for example. We had to understand gravity to learn how to overcome it. We can not, nor will we ever be able to force gravity to comply to our train of thought, or methods of reasoning. We must relate to gravity as it presents itself. Then we can only the respond to it's immutable traits. We can not add or take away from gravity. Only act upon its traits. This is the same for the will of God. God's will is immutable, but we can act upon it. We are not however influencing God, or changing his will any more than flight changed the influence of gravity.
Which made me ask the question: what force constrains the laws of physics? I could not accept the notion that gravity, for example, is a sentient entity. Nor could I accept that gravity was a learned trait, or a force that had to learn it's own properties by morphing, or evolving into it's current state. Which lead me to believe in intelligent design. For me, even if all exsitance was created by a big bang, it still dose not account for the very laws of physics that put the expansion in motion in the first place. According to the theories of physics, if we were to look at the Universe one second after the Big Bang, what we would see is a 10-billion degree sea of neutrons, protons, electrons, anti-electrons (positrons), photons, and neutrinos. Then, as time went on, we would see the Universe cool, the neutrons either decaying into protons and electrons or combining with protons to make deuterium. So how did the matter even know how to react in that way? What set the laws in motion? Also the big bang theory is a conglomeration of Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity along with standard theories of fundamental particles. All of which (by the scientific model) was discovered some 14 billion years after the fact.
All existence came from somewhere, including God, but where? The only assumption I see is that God cannot be proven without knowledge of his origin. We don't know where anything came form, yet it's here, and we recognize them as fact due to empirical proof. As far as the laws of physics go, I believe it is fair to say that we can not see, touch, smell, taste or define any of the forces themselves. We can only observe the traits of these force and explain by definition how the act/react.
So here we have known factual laws that are found in nature, and we can observe their traits, but we do not know what these forces are comprised of, or were they came from.
Simply put as an example: gravity itself, not it's traits, but the actual "force" or law of gravity has never in any way been observed, and we have no idea of it's origin, or it's make up.
It fly's in the face of logic for something to have no origin, and yet here it is. So the only logical response is: at this point in time we do not yet know.
Also, as I stated many times. God is a force, and an Immutable constant. Just like the laws of physics, at this point in time we do not yet know his origin. But his traits can be tested, and by observation of his traits his existence can be proven, and since God's traits are immutable, thru observance of his traits we can tell god from other forces. Kind of like telling the difference of gravity from inertia. They both have different traits.
Now heres the bottle neck. I always told at this point something to the gest that "I can scientifically observe and/or experiment on what is perceived as "God", but I can't get anywhere other than "unknown""
But that Is experimentation.
ex·per·i·ment
/n. ɪkˈspɛr
ə
mənt; v. ɛkˈspɛr
əˌmɛnt/ Show Spelled [n. ik-sper-uh-muh
nt; v. ek-sper-uh-ment] Show IPA
noun 1. a test, trial, or tentative procedure; an act or operation for the purpose of discovering something unknown
But here's the other problem. You have to know how to do the research. It's kind of like solving a hard mathematical equation. To some, they may believe it foolish, and even impossible to solve, an yet to a learned scholar, and mathematician, quite possible. You see they key is in understanding the mechanics of the equation. I f you understand the mechanics of God, he is quite provable.
But no one will learn shrugging their shoulders saying: "can't be done...."
Which made me ask the question: what force constrains the laws of physics? I could not accept the notion that gravity, for example, is a sentient entity. Nor could I accept that gravity was a learned trait, or a force that had to learn it's own properties by morphing, or evolving into it's current state. Which lead me to believe in intelligent design. For me, even if all exsitance was created by a big bang, it still dose not account for the very laws of physics that put the expansion in motion in the first place. According to the theories of physics, if we were to look at the Universe one second after the Big Bang, what we would see is a 10-billion degree sea of neutrons, protons, electrons, anti-electrons (positrons), photons, and neutrinos. Then, as time went on, we would see the Universe cool, the neutrons either decaying into protons and electrons or combining with protons to make deuterium. So how did the matter even know how to react in that way? What set the laws in motion? Also the big bang theory is a conglomeration of Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity along with standard theories of fundamental particles. All of which (by the scientific model) was discovered some 14 billion years after the fact.
All existence came from somewhere, including God, but where? The only assumption I see is that God cannot be proven without knowledge of his origin. We don't know where anything came form, yet it's here, and we recognize them as fact due to empirical proof. As far as the laws of physics go, I believe it is fair to say that we can not see, touch, smell, taste or define any of the forces themselves. We can only observe the traits of these force and explain by definition how the act/react.
So here we have known factual laws that are found in nature, and we can observe their traits, but we do not know what these forces are comprised of, or were they came from.
Simply put as an example: gravity itself, not it's traits, but the actual "force" or law of gravity has never in any way been observed, and we have no idea of it's origin, or it's make up.
It fly's in the face of logic for something to have no origin, and yet here it is. So the only logical response is: at this point in time we do not yet know.
Also, as I stated many times. God is a force, and an Immutable constant. Just like the laws of physics, at this point in time we do not yet know his origin. But his traits can be tested, and by observation of his traits his existence can be proven, and since God's traits are immutable, thru observance of his traits we can tell god from other forces. Kind of like telling the difference of gravity from inertia. They both have different traits.
Now heres the bottle neck. I always told at this point something to the gest that "I can scientifically observe and/or experiment on what is perceived as "God", but I can't get anywhere other than "unknown""
But that Is experimentation.
ex·per·i·ment
/n. ɪkˈspɛr
noun 1. a test, trial, or tentative procedure; an act or operation for the purpose of discovering something unknown
But here's the other problem. You have to know how to do the research. It's kind of like solving a hard mathematical equation. To some, they may believe it foolish, and even impossible to solve, an yet to a learned scholar, and mathematician, quite possible. You see they key is in understanding the mechanics of the equation. I f you understand the mechanics of God, he is quite provable.
But no one will learn shrugging their shoulders saying: "can't be done...."
