How can God regret creating humans if He is omniscient? Passage in Context “Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great upon the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was altogether evil all the time. And the LORD regretted that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart” (Genesis 6:5-6). The statement sits at the climax of the antediluvian genealogy. It is followed immediately by God’s resolve to judge the world by a global Flood (Genesis 6:7, 13) and His gracious plan to preserve life through Noah (Genesis 6:8-9, 18-21). The Hebrew Term נִחָם (niḥam): Range of Meaning Niḥam can convey “to be grieved,” “to be comforted,” “to relent,” or “to change dealings with.” It describes a shift in action, not a lapse in foresight. In Exodus 32:14 God “relented” from destroying Israel after Moses’ intercession; in 1 Samuel 15:11 He “regrets” Saul’s kingship. Each context pairs divine sorrow with moral evaluation, underscoring God’s personal engagement with His creation. The verb never implies ignorance; rather, it communicates God’s righteous response to unfolding human rebellion. Anthropopathism: Communicating Divine Emotion Scripture often attributes human emotions to God (anthropopathism) to reveal His character in terms intelligible to finite minds. “The eyes of the LORD roam to and fro” (2 Chronicles 16:9), yet God is spirit (John 4:24). Such language is analogous, not literal, bridging the Creator-creature gap without compromising divine perfections. The inspired narrator employs ordinary vocabulary so readers grasp that evil affronts God personally, not that omniscience failed. Omniscience and Eternal Decree Psalm 147:5 declares, “His understanding is infinite.” Isaiah 46:9-10 adds, “I make known the end from the beginning.” God’s exhaustive foreknowledge and eternal decree (Ephesians 1:11) include every free human choice. Regret therefore cannot signal surprise; it signals holy revulsion. From eternity God ordained to create, permit the Fall, judge the pre-Flood world, and unveil redemption in Christ (Revelation 13:8). Within that single, all-comprehensive decree, particular moments are genuinely successive for creatures and truly relational for God (Acts 17:28). Harmony of Foreknowledge and Regret 1. Foreknowledge establishes certainty; it does not annul contingency. 2. Divine emotions flow from God’s nature, not from new data. 3. God’s moral reactions are temporally expressed though eternally willed. As C. S. Lewis pictured, an author outside his novel still writes each scene with authentic feeling. Purpose of the Flood Narrative Regret introduces judicial action and covenantal hope. By announcing sorrow before judgment, God vindicates His justice (Romans 3:26) and magnifies His grace through Noah, a foreshadowing of Christ (1 Peter 3:20-22). The narrative thus advances redemptive history: sin provokes grief, grief provokes judgment, judgment prepares salvation. Parallel Texts Illustrating Consistency • Exodus 32:9-14 – Divine “relenting” highlights God’s responsiveness within steadfast purposes. • Jonah 3:10 – God “relented” concerning Nineveh after repentance, revealing His unchanging mercy (Jeremiah 18:7-10). • Hebrews 13:8 – “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever,” showing immutability coexisting with covenantal interactions. Philosophical Clarification on Divine Emotions Classical theism teaches God is impassible in essence—He is never involuntarily overwhelmed—yet Scripture affirms He freely wills emotional expression appropriate to His holy nature. Regret signifies measured, sovereign displeasure, not fluctuating ignorance. Modern analytic philosophy (e.g., William Lane Craig, “Time and Eternity”) distinguishes God’s timeless decree from His temporal relations once creation exists. Archaeological and Extra-Biblical Corroboration • Global Flood traditions (Epic of Gilgamesh, Atrahasis) echo a cataclysmic deluge, attesting collective memory. • Marine fossils atop the Andes and Appalachian sedimentary megasequences align with catastrophic hydrodynamics (ICR research, 2021). • The Mesopotamian “Flood clay” layer at Ur and Kish (Woolley, 1929) dates close to biblical chronology when calibrated to a short post-Babel dispersion. These finds reinforce the historical framework in which Genesis situates divine regret and judgment. Practical Implications 1. Sin grieves God; therefore moral choices matter. 2. God’s omniscience does not negate His relational engagement; prayer and repentance are meaningful. 3. Divine regret warns of judgment yet invites grace; the ark prefigures Christ, the only refuge (John 10:9). Summary God’s “regret” in Genesis 6:6 communicates His personal, holy grief over human wickedness, not a lapse in foresight. The term portrays a sovereign, omniscient Creator who responds righteously in time to choices He eternally knew, thereby advancing His unwavering redemptive plan culminating in Jesus Christ. |
    |