Come on - you're dancing awfully close to sophistry here. Call it what you will, but the simple fact is that by asserting that God cannot change, you are asserting that there is something God cannot do. This belies the assertion that he is omnipotent. If you wish to assert that God is omnipotent, you must necessarily accept that God can do anything, no matter how illogical you find it to be.
Again, this so-called "deficiency" is really a perfection and an example of His immeasurable, limitless power.
That's rather convenient, but regardless, I never said it was a deficiency at all. Really, why not just accept that omnipotence means that He can truly do anything He wants, no matter what your particular opinion of its cogency is? Surely an omnipotent God is not bound by Aquinasfan's ideas of what "omnipotent" and "impossible" mean...
Of course, the biblical writers were neither systematic theologians nor philosophers and simply recounted events as they were witnessed or passed on to them.
Okay, I'll accept that. So we're back to the logical implications of gore3000's assertion about God, then.
God can do anything that is good and logically possible.
But the assertion that God can change is contradictory and therefore meaningless. Your assertion (really a meaningless group of words) does not rise to the level of being an assertion and therefore does not logically warrant refutation.
Here is how your assertion that God can change is contradictory:
Change (motion) necessarily implies movement from potency to act. But there can be no potency in God, since He is necessarily pure act –the necessary prime mover.
Speculation about God changing is simply a category error.
Power can only do what power can do.
At least that's my conclusion of 40 years of thinking about the issue after that atheist kid Slater in the first grade asked me sarcasticly in the cloak room at Delmar-Harvard elementary school if God could do anything, could he make a rock bigger than he could lift:^)
Cordially