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.
IOW, he cannot do yet some other thing, and he is therefore still not omnipotent. This strikes me a simply your personal a posteriori requirement, that he can only do certain things and not others.
Regardless, if I accept the truth of this assertion, why assume that God must be consistent and logical in a manner that is evident to us? Surely if God is beyond our ken, then he can act in logical and consistent ways that are simply too subtle and complex for us to understand their logical consistency, don't you think?
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.
And yet, here you are. ;)
Speculation about God changing is simply a category error.
And what sort of error is it when Aquinasfan speculates that God can only act in ways that are understandable and logically consistent to Aquinasfan?