Actually, I use the Blue Letter Bible.
The definition is from some other source I am not familiar with (Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon?) Does that square?
What makes Strong (a 19th century Protestant Englishman) alone the sole authority?
While in full control, for example, on one level God was grieved (or regretted or was sorry, etc.) to watch His Son die on a cross, while on another level it pleased Him that His beloved children were saved.
So, the Reformed God is a multi-leveled complex being, constantly changing and possibly having multiple personalities? On what "level" did God grieve for His Son? Human level? That all sound very pagan to me, no offense, please.
"Ponder" or "deliberate" means "think about". When is God ever not doing that? What is God thinking about, pray tell! Or do you not think that He had already thought everything ther was to think, and know everything there is to know?
Strong's says nothing about making any mistake.
You still didn't explain why was God "grieved" that mankind on His watch turned out to be wicked if He was in full control, FK. And if this was what He willed, then why was He "grieved?"
I thought that all sides agreed that man's sin had a profound affect on the whole of "the world".
Yes it does, as sinful man destroys what God gave us.
But even if you don't agree, all of God's creation is still His to do with as He pleases
Yes it is, and what can Love do?
I have no idea at all if the Flood actually covered the tippy-top of Mt. Everest. Since I can't imagine anything living up there it wouldn't seem like there was a need to
I guess it wouldn't be "up there" if the water level was "up there." :)
Nothing, it is just the most widely used such reference in the world. I merely said that according to him your interpretations were not required, and that since they were not required I wondered why you would choose the single interpretation MOST offensive to the integrity of the Bible itself.
So, the Reformed God is a multi-leveled complex being, constantly changing and possibly having multiple personalities?
From our point of view He is certainly multifaceted and complex. However, He does not constantly change or have multiple personalities. It might only seem that way to those who do not accept Him as He has revealed Himself to us throughout the scriptures.
On what "level" did God grieve for His Son? Human level? That all sound very pagan to me, no offense, please.
No problem. The "levels" I am talking about are only in human perception. God is obviously far above human perception. But think about it, how do YOU answer the question "Did God want Jesus to die on the cross?" Yes or no.
What is God thinking about, pray tell! Or do you not think that He had already thought everything there was to think, and know everything there is to know?
Well, of course God's infiniteness is difficult for us to comprehend. The distinction I am drawing is between a static God who is just "frozen" since everything everywhere and everywhen is already done for Him, and a LIVING God who is active and doing things within time.
You still didn't explain why was God "grieved" that mankind on His watch turned out to be wicked if He was in full control, FK. And if this was what He willed, then why was He "grieved?"
God created us knowing that it would turn out to be a "package" deal, the good with the bad. This really isn't that complicated. Here is a good and short explanation from CARM specifically on Gen. 6:6:
The above verse is not a problem for Classical Christian Theism nor is it a proof text for Open Theism. The verse simply tells us that the Lord was grieved and had sorrow in His heart for making man. Why? Because mankind had fallen into great sin and this grieved the Lord. Does it mean that God didn't know that mankind would fall and become sinful? Of course not. Cannot God know that they would become sinners and also be grieved when it happens? Of course. Let me illustrate.
I have children. I love them and provide for them. But, they have grieved me in their various sins -- as any child will do to his parents. I knew they would grieve me when they were born because I know they are sinners by nature. This doesn't mean I was surprised and didn't know they would rebel when it happened. Quite the contrary, and knowing they would sin doesn't mean I won't be grieved when their rebellion and sin is finally manifested.
The open theist would have us believe that God was grieved because He was surprised or didn't know the depths of sin to which the world would fall. But surely, even in Open Theism, God knew that people would sin. So, this verse can't be claimed to demonstrate that God didn't know the future choices of people.
This seems pretty reasonable to me.