Argument 2

1. If God exists, then he is immutable.

Assumption not in evidence

2. If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.

fair enough

3. An immutable being cannot at one time have an intention and then at another time not have that intention.

(Because, that would be a change.)

(1) This is equivocation over the meaning of "change." one can change physically without changing in character. So why can't one changing one's mind without changing psychically or in character? Atheists are always making stupid straight jacket assumptions about God.

(2) why define "immutable" in terms of mental attitudes or plans? The argument is just set up to arrive at a conclusion the premise is based upon. That's circular reasoning

4. For any being to create anything, prior to the creation he must have had the intention to create it, but at another time, (after the creation), no longer have the intention to create it.

Self contradiction in the argument. Why would you have the same intention to create something you already created? It already exists. it would have to be destroyed to create it again. That's irrational.

5. Thus, it is impossible for an immutable being to have created anything (from 3 and 4).

That doesn't follow from the premises. 4 is self contradiction.

6. Therefore, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1, 2, and 5).

the premises are illogical so the argument is illogical.

Or perhaps God changes.

so what if he does? process theology says he does. open theology says he does. This is so typical this guy knowing only of the fudnie version. it's so unthinkable to them and yet it's the theological fashion of the day.