One on One: Knight and Lonster open up the settled view.

[Nathon Detroit]

Earlier I asked....

"If God has exhaustive foreknowledge nothing could ever happen that wasn't contained within that knowledge."

To which you agreed. Now when we say "nothing" we expressly mean no "thing". "Nothing" means no "thing". The "thing" could be replaced with any "thing"

So lets rephrase the question and see if you still agree with it.....

If God has exhaustive foreknowledge no choice could ever happen that wasn't contained within that knowledge.

Agree or disagree?

 

[Lon]

Agree.

I believe the SV Theologists agree also.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Agree.

If you agree.... then why don't you see how exhaustive foreknowledge eliminates freewill?

 

[Lon]

Earlier I asked....

"If God has exhaustive foreknowledge nothing could ever happen that wasn't contained within that knowledge."

To which you agreed. Now when we say "nothing" we expressly mean no "thing". "Nothing" means no "thing". The "thing" could be replaced with any "thing"

So lets rephrase the question and see if you still agree with it.....

If God has exhaustive foreknowledge no choice could ever happen that wasn't contained within that knowledge.

Agree or disagree?

Agree.

I believe the SV Theologists agree also.

If you agree.... then why don't you see how exhaustive foreknowledge eliminates freewill?

The difficulty here, I believe, is how we both look at this from differing perspectives.
Our doctrinal stances focus on the differences that standout to our view.
This often leads to talking past one another, and it is my hope that we can understand more of what those differences are so that a meeting in the middle will allow for meaningful discussion and better communication.

I've been racking my brain on how to give understanding on this as well as a few other ideas from a traditional perspective, and in so doing, I've really worked at trying to get an OV mindset because I believe while there are some concerns, that you have a love for God, a love for His Word, and that you stand on basic doctrines of faith.

I have no basis for analogy here because I can only guess or give clouded perception on a characteristic of God's that I do not possess, God's foreknowledge. We share many of God's attributes, but there are a few that are His alone and this is one of them. He knows stuff about the future and can say something is definitely going to happen and it will. Satan is going to be thrown into the Lake of Fire. Nothing is going to stop that from happening. The only reason I know this, is because God shared the truth of His foreknowledge, but I don't have foreknowledge, just a perception from His foreknowledge. It is like His eternality, we don't have any perception of an eternity past. Everything in our perception has a beginning except God. Anything that is God's alone, and is not shared with us is going to have logic problems for us. It is His alone, we can only perceive the truth about those attributes but not understand them, no matter how logical our minds or how brilliant. 1Co 1:27 But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
1Co 1:28 and God has chosen the base things of the world, and things which are despised, and things which are not, in order to bring to nothing things that are;
1Co 1:29 so that no flesh should glory in His presence.
1Co 1:30 But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who of God is made to us wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and redemption;
1Co 1:31 so that, according as it is written, "He who glories, let him glory in the Lord."
Are you tying together Will and Knowledge here? I am still trying to understand why knowing something is the same as doing something. If I tell you that yesterday it rained, I am 100% sure about that, but I didn't cause it.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

He knows stuff about the future and can say something is definitely going to happen and it will.

And that's because God can bring events to pass if He so chooses. Satan can't stop God from throwing him into the lake of fire! God doesn't need to have seen the future to be able to know what He plans to do with Satan.

Yet....

How do you respond to things that God thought was going to happen but didn't? :think:

How can that possibly fit into God having "seen" the future?

I am still trying to understand why knowing something is the same as doing something. If I tell you that yesterday it rained, I am 100% sure about that, but I didn't cause it.

The past is settled, the future isn't.

Do you know any OPV'ers? (Open Past Viewers) :idunno: As for me? I am a CPV'er (Closed Past Viewer).

You cannot compare what HAS happened to what HAS YET to happen, they are as far from each other as the west is from the east.

 

[Lon]

And that's because God can bring events to pass if He so chooses. Satan can't stop God from throwing him into the lake of fire! God doesn't need to have seen the future to be able to know what He plans to do with Satan. Yet....

As our perspective views allow, for differing reasons. Is it Omnipotence then here? What is the view that helps OV understand this?

How do you respond to things that God thought was going to happen but didn't? :think:
How can that possibly fit into God having "seen" the future?

Your turn here. Bring up some scriptures examples so that we can examine them together.

The past is settled, the future isn't.

Do you know any OPV'ers? (Open Past Viewers) :idunno: As for me? I am a CPV'er (Closed Past Viewer).

Just God. You?


If I could bring back the 'Choose your own story,' the idea of Foreknowledge is that God wrote the book, but we are in the middle of the story. I know what I chose to get here, but I don't know how the book ends. God provided the prompts for me to continue, but He knows all the ways the book can proceed and will end. I haven't read the last chapter, but God has written it in this perspective. Again, we both know He has foreknowledge because the greek word is used. I think what we need to flesh out is how we both perceive this, and how much we can possibly know for certain about this.

You cannot compare what HAS happened to what HAS YET to happen, they are as far from each other as the west is from the east.

I think the bold print question will bring some perspective and meaningful discussion.

 

[Lon]

In #17 you pointed out a potential hazard. Please forgive my definition problem.

I'd like to correct myself if you will allow.

I said that I did not believe in exhaustive foreknowledge. I meant that I do not believe in exhaustive knowledge. God chooses to forget our sin, so while I believe in extensive knowlege of God, including the future, I believe He chooses to set limits on His knowledge. I tend to get uncomfortable when man sets these limits. If God tells us He chooses to forget, no problem. I'm not sure why I didn't hone in on 'fore' in foreknowledge in that post. That link sure would have done it. Please forgive the misunderstanding and any ensuing problems in reasoning or discussion after.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

As our perspective views allow, for differing reasons. Is it Omnipotence then here? What is the view that helps OV understand this?

Yes. God has the power to do all that is logically doable. Satan does not have power over God. When God feels enough is enough (please Lord come soon ) then God will handle Satan the way He has determined.

If a man said.... "I am going to Wal-Mart tomorrow." If that man is reliable, it is very likely that we will see that man at Wal-Mart tomorrow. Yet there are several variables (known and unknown to the man) that could prevent the man from accomplishing his goals i.e., the battery in his car could fail, his wife might over rule him :sibbie: , or he might forget! :doh:

God on the other hand is all powerful. There is NOTHING (other than His own will) that will stop Him from doing what He wants to do.

Why God would want to go to Wal-Mart is beyond me.

Therefore because we trust God and know He is Omni-reliable ( :idea: I just made that up) we can trust that God will keep His word and bring the events to pass that He has determined to bring to pass.

I trust God... not because He has peeked into the future but instead because He is good, loving, trustworthy and righteous.

NEXT TOPIC:

I asked...

How do you respond to things that God thought was going to happen but didn't?
How can that possibly fit into God having "seen" the future?

You responded...

Your turn here. Bring up some scriptures examples so that we can examine them together.

Lets examine one at a time....

Isaiah 5:1 Now let me sing to my Well-beloved A song of my Beloved regarding His vineyard: My Well-beloved has a vineyard On a very fruitful hill. 2 He dug it up and cleared out its stones, And planted it with the choicest vine. He built a tower in its midst, And also made a winepress in it; So He expected it to bring forth good grapes, But it brought forth wild grapes. 3 “ And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, Judge, please, between Me and My vineyard. 4 What more could have been done to My vineyard That I have not done in it? Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes, Did it bring forth wild grapes? ​

God expected Israel to be obedient, yet Israel was disobedient.

If God had already seen the future why would God expect something other than what He had seen in advance?

 

[Lon]

How do you respond to things that God thought was going to happen but didn't?
How can that possibly fit into God having "seen" the future?

You responded...
Lets examine one at a time....

Isaiah 5:1 Now let me sing to my Well-beloved A song of my Beloved regarding His vineyard: My Well-beloved has a vineyard On a very fruitful hill. 2 He dug it up and cleared out its stones, And planted it with the choicest vine. He built a tower in its midst, And also made a winepress in it; So He expected it to bring forth good grapes, But it brought forth wild grapes. 3 “ And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, Judge, please, between Me and My vineyard. 4 What more could have been done to My vineyard That I have not done in it? Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes, Did it bring forth wild grapes? ​

God expected Israel to be obedient, yet Israel was disobedient.

If God had already seen the future why would God expect something other than what He had seen in advance?

Do you see His question as rhetorical/accusative or as a perplexing dilemma here? My answer is that it is rhetoric for the obvious and it's purpose is reflective for their self analysis. In other words, God knew the anwer but was elliciting a response.
The next verse after should clear that up I believe.

 

[Lon]

On #17 I was very perplexed that I could make a mistake like this so had to go back and re-read all of our posts. In your response #13, you stated: "Man does not have exhaustive foreknowledge. (you actually answered the question yourself in your post)"

As I said in post #10 that I didn't know, when you said I was an OVer I believed you at that point, but as I told you before in PM, I'm scrambling to read other posts and get a better understanding of the OV. As I understand OV from my research last night, I don't believe I could be called such as a theological position and here is why:

Regardless of the fact that some of the Omni's are not found as "Omni's" (All Powerful, All Knowing, Everywhere present, etc.)in Scripture, I believe in God's transcendant attributes. In other words God has attributes that are His alone. I think you hold to this view also, but we disagree on quite a few of them. When Enyart spoke to the differences and rejection of the Omni's and I read that last night, I understood at least our differences there. I read a bit from John Sanders also, so I have an better understanding of where OV stands this morning. If the scriptures do not use an Omni, there are other words that substitute in or there are passages that explain those characteristics.

In Enyart's diagram, http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=826464&postcount=6 he specifically rejects the attributes that are God's transcendant characteristics. If any of God's attributes are transcendant, they cannot be clearly understood by man because they are God's qualities alone. We do not share them so we have no capability to apprehend them in a logical way. We can acknowledge them, but once we would try to apprehend them, logic will only allow us to go so far.

God is not a man nor does He think like a man. God's ways are higher than our ways.
He does not relent, He does not lie. He cannot make a mistake.

To discount any of God's transcendant attributes based on logical reasoning is not consistent with His revelation. The only thing we can do at these times is accept truth, no matter if it is difficult to apprehend. To make a system that apprehends God's transcendant nature, is compartmental, and I believe you have our God in a human shaped box. Each and every view concerning that which is unknowable is categorically dismissed, and I don't think this allows God to be God in passages where His transcendence is indicated and expressed.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Do you see His question as rhetorical/accusative or as a perplexing dilemma here? My answer is that it is rhetoric for the obvious and it's purpose is reflective for their self analysis. In other words, God knew the anwer but was elliciting a response.

In Isaiah 5 God twice says He "expected" good grapes.

Yet you are saying He didn't "expect" good grapes?

Furthermore.... rhetorical questions are generally in question format. :doh:

Does this REALLY look like a rhetorical question to you?
"So He expected it to bring forth good grapes, But it brought forth wild grapes."

Not only is it not a rhetorical question, it's not even a question.

The next verse after should clear that up I believe.

How so????

Isaiah 5:5 And now, please let Me tell you what I will do to My vineyard: I will take away its hedge, and it shall be burned; And break down its wall, and it shall be trampled down.​

God is simply saying that because Israel disobeyed (when He expected them to obey) He is now going to punish them for their disobedience. How does that help your argument? (now that my friend is a rhetorical question)

Sorry Lonster, It's very clear your explanation strikes out on all counts.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

He does not relent

Gen 6:4-9 There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. 5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the Lord repented [it repented the LORD] that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I repent that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. 9 This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God.

Ex 32:9-14 And the Lord said to Moses, I have seen this people, and indeed it is a stiff-necked people! 10 Now therefore, let Me alone, that My wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them. And I will make of you a great nation. 11 Then Moses pleaded with the Lord his God, and said: Lord, why does Your wrath burn hot against Your people whom You have brought out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? 12 Why should the Egyptians speak, and say, `He brought them out to harm them, to kill them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from Your fierce wrath, and repent from this harm to Your people. 13 Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Your servants, to whom You swore by Your own self, and said to them, I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven; and all this land that I have spoken of I give to your descendants, and they shall inherit it forever. 14 So the Lord repented from the harm which He said He would do to His people.

Jud 2:18 And when the Lord raised up judges for them, the Lord was with the judge and delivered them out of the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge; for the Lord repented because of their groaning because of those who oppressed them and harassed them.

1 Sa 15:11,29,35 I repent that I have set up Saul as king, for he has turned back from following Me, and has not performed My commandments. And it grieved Samuel, and he cried out to the Lord all night. 29 And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent. For He is not a man, that He should repent. 35 And Samuel went no more to see Saul until the day of his death. Nevertheless Samuel mourned for Saul, and the Lord repented that He had made Saul king over Israel.

2 Sa 24:16And when the angel stretched out His hand over Jerusalem to destroy it, the Lord repented from the destruction, and said to the angel who was destroying the people, It is enough; now restrain your hand.

1 Chr 21:1,15 Now Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel. 15 And God sent an angel to Jerusalem to destroy it. As he was destroying, the Lord looked and repented of the disaster, and said to the angel who was destroying, It is enough; now restrain your hand. And the angel of the Lord stood by the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite.
Psa 90:13 Return, O Lord! How long? And [repent concerning] Your servants.

Psa 106:45 And for their sake He remembered His covenant and repented according to the multitude of His mercies.

Jer 4:28 For this shall the earth mourn and the heavens above be black because I have spoken. I have purposed and will not repent, nor will I turn back from it.

Jer 15:6 You have forsaken Me, says the Lord, You have gone backward. Therefore I will stretch out My hand against you and destroy you; I am weary of repenting!

Jer 18:7-10 The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, 8 if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will repent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. 9 And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, 10 if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will repent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.

Jer 20:16 And let that man be like the cities which the Lord overthrew, and did not repent; Let him hear the cry in the morning and the shouting at noon.

Jer 26:3,13,19 Perhaps everyone will listen and turn from his evil way, that I may repent concerning the calamity which I purpose to bring on them because of the evil of their doings. 13 Now therefore, amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the Lord your God; then the Lord will repent concerning the doom that He has pronounced against you. 19 Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah ever put him to death? Did he not fear the Lord and seek the Lords favor? And the Lord repented concerning the doom which He had pronounced against them. But we are doing great evil against ourselves.

Jer 42:10 If you will still remain in this land, then I will build you and not pull you down, and I will plant you and not pluck you up. For I repent concerning the disaster that I have brought upon you.

Eze 24:14 I, the Lord, have spoken it; It shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not hold back, Nor will I spare, Nor will I repent; According to your ways and according to your deeds they will judge you, says the Lord God.

Joel 2:13,14 So rend your heart, and not your garments; Return to the Lord your God, For He is gracious and merciful, Slow to anger, and of great kindness; And He repents from doing harm. 14 Who knows if He will turn and repent, and leave a blessing behind Him – A grain offering and a drink offering for the Lord your God?

Amos 7:3-6 So the Lord repented concerning this. It shall not be, said the Lord. 4 Thus the Lord God showed me: Behold, the Lord God called for conflict by fire, and it consumed the great deep and devoured the territory. 5 Then I said: O Lord God, cease, I pray! Oh, that Jacob may stand, For he is small! 6 So the Lord repented concerning this. This also shall not be, said the Lord God.

Jon 3:9-4:2 Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from His fierce anger, so that we may not perish? 10 Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it. 4:1 But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he became angry. 2 So he prayed to the Lord, and said, Ah, Lord, was not this what I said when I was still in my country? Therefore I fled previously to Tarshish; for I know that You are a gracious and merciful God, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness, One who repents from doing harm.

Zec 8:14,15 For thus says the Lord of hosts: Just as I determined to punish you when your fathers provoked Me to wrath, says the Lord of hosts, and I would not repent, 15 so again in these days I am determined to do good to Jerusalem and to the house of Judah.

Hmmmmm :think: one of the two of you must be right.

God? Or Lonster?
God? Or Lonster?
God? Or Lonster?
God? Or Lonster? :think:

This is a toughy.

 

[Lon]

Hmmmmm :think: one of the two of you must be right.

God? Or Lonster?
God? Or Lonster?
God? Or Lonster?
God? Or Lonster? :think:

This is a toughy.

It is a toughy

Relent:verb (used without object) 1. to soften in feeling, temper, or determination; become more mild, compassionate, or forgiving.
2. to become less severe; slacken: The winds relented.
–verb (used with object) 3. Obsolete. to cause to soften in feeling, temper, or determination.
4. Obsolete. to cause to slacken; abate.
5. Obsolete. to abandon; relinquish.

Repent:–verb (used without object) 1. to feel sorry, self-reproachful, or contrite for past conduct; regret or be conscience-stricken about a past action, attitude, etc. (often fol. by of): He repented after his thoughtless act.
2. to feel such sorrow for sin or fault as to be disposed to change one's life for the better; be penitent.
–verb (used with object) 3. to remember or regard with self-reproach or contrition: to repent one's injustice to another.
4. to feel sorry for; regret: to repent an imprudent act.


We perceive our disagreement here, how far do we want to take this? Can there be any agreement from our perspectives? Battle Royale already did a fair case on this so I wouldn't want to just repeat the same things that would just double up our understandings, but what I would like us to do is appreciate our positions. We come at this understanding One emphasizing God's transcendence and the other emphasizing His relation. The apparent illogic, is taken care of by an OV, but the SV says that any understanding of God's omniscience is always going to be in question logically because of it's very transcendence. We desperately need meaning just to meet minds or this continues to be chat past one another. Thoughts?

 

[Lon]

In Isaiah 5 God twice says He "expected" good grapes.

Yet you are saying He didn't "expect" good grapes?

Furthermore.... rhetorical questions are generally in question format. :doh:

Interesting, whatever versions I was reading used it as a question format. "What more could I have done?" Even if the question isn't posed, the proposition asks a rhetorical question: "What happened?" Did God really not know?

Does this REALLY look like a rhetorical question to you?
"So He expected it to bring forth good grapes, But it brought forth wild grapes."

Not only is it not a rhetorical question, it's not even a question.

How so????

Isaiah 5:5 And now, please let Me tell you what I will do to My vineyard: I will take away its hedge, and it shall be burned; And break down its wall, and it shall be trampled down.​

God is simply saying that because Israel disobeyed (when He expected them to obey) He is now going to punish them for their disobedience. How does that help your argument? (now that my friend is a rhetorical question)

Sorry Lonster, It's very clear your explanation strikes out on all counts.

No problem. I don't believe it is inept explanation on my part or inept recognition on your part. V5 answered the rhetorical question's answer in judgement in my mind.
God didn't wait for an answer. If it wasn't a question, it still elicits one. "If you have been cared for by the God of the universe to produce righteousness, how is it that this didn't happen?" Does God know the answer? I do as I hope you do as well. I think it is so obvious that God doesn't expound the obvious but cuts to the chase. What is the answer? What is it that caused the 'grapes' to sour or rot?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Thoughts?

Thoughts?

The Bible is clear. God is clear, He can and does repent.

Why complicate things simply to fit a preconceived theology? :idunno:

My thought is that you should conform your theology to fit God's word, instead of the reverse.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

What is it that caused the 'grapes' to sour or rot?

You tell me.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Interesting, whatever versions I was reading used it as a question format. "What more could I have done?" Even if the question isn't posed, the proposition asks a rhetorical question: "What happened?" Did God really not know?

OK, but my point is... God's expectation is not rhetorical which of course is what I was pointing out.

If you where only looking at the "why then" question in the verse you are missing the most important part: God's expectation of good grapes.

YES or NO... was God expecting good grapes?

If you answer YES, please explain how that would fit into your "God's seen the future already" theology.

If you answer NO, please explain why He stated the opposite.

Thanks! :up:

 

[Lon]

Thoughts?

The Bible is clear. God is clear, He can and does repent.

Why complicate things simply to fit a preconceived theology? :idunno:

My thought is that you should conform your theology to fit God's word, instead of the reverse.

I appreciate this, but when God says that He does not relent, I have to understand each and every passage afterwards. The OV says that God was mistaken, but this is not a valid arguement for me. And of course, I stated that particular characteristic, because it shows a significant contrast from our perspectives.

I know it makes complete sense to you. I cannot jump to the obvious and take the easy route, but rather wrestle with the text to see what God is saying. I have questions at that point. "Did God mean He doesn't relent in one aspect, but does in others?" This would make sense. As a Father I do this with my children, somethings I can relent on, others will stand no matter what. I need however, to go back and really 'dig' into the context and wrestle with understanding, I cannot just extrapolate a meaning and hope I am right.

I think Lamerson gave a reasonable response. http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=828561&postcount=8

 

[Lon]

OK, but my point is... God's expectation is not rhetorical which of course is what I was pointing out.

If you where only looking at the "why then" question in the verse you are missing the most important part: God's expectation of good grapes.

YES or NO... was God expecting good grapes?

If you answer YES, please explain how that would fit into your "God's seen the future already" theology.

If you answer NO, please explain why He stated the opposite.

Thanks! :up:

No. God did the work to show in fact that such a thing does not work. Why? Because every religion afterward is going to try to get to God by works and it doesn't work, even in the best tended garden. Why? Because man is incapable of bridging the gap. What was the point? To prepare the mind for a Savior. To show that there is a significant problem that simple husbandry will not fix. They needed to come to an understanding that man does not have the answer to his dilemma. Could the Israelites actually change? Is there a possibility that their fruit could have worked to righteousness? My answer is no. There is no way to eliminate sin without the shedding of blood. There is no way to be right with God without Christ. In Isaiah 53 this is expounded. There is promise after this. Did God expect good grapes? No, but His standard is Holiness and the Israelites had to come to faith the same way we come to faith, but trusting God because our righteousness is sour grapes.
In the discussion, something(s) are wrong with the grapes. Is it the soil? Is it bad seed? Is it a fungus?
I ask: What is it that made the fruit of His people bad?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

I appreciate this, but when God says that He does not relent, I have to understand each and every passage afterwards. The OV says that God was mistaken, but this is not a valid arguement for me.

Huh???

No OVer I know says that God was mistaken about relenting. Where did you get that notion?

Instead, the OV rightly points out that God has the capability to NOT repent in a specific instance.

Lets look at an example....

God repented that He made Saul King....

1Samuel 15:10 Then came the word of the LORD unto Samuel, saying, 11 It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the LORD all night.

Saul begs Samuel and asks that God pardon him.

1Samuel 15:24 And Saul said unto Samuel, I have sinned: for I have transgressed the commandment of the LORD, and thy words: because I feared the people, and obeyed their voice. 25 Now therefore, I pray thee, pardon my sin, and turn again with me, that I may worship the LORD.

But Samuel says... "nope!" God is not going to repent and pardon you.

1Samuel 15:29 And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent.

Then God affirms that He repented that He made Saul King.

1Samuel 15:35 And Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death: nevertheless Samuel mourned for Saul: and the LORD repented that he had made Saul king over Israel. ​

1st Samuel 15 is a direct, objective lesson in the manner in which God can repent. Clearly God can repent, but that doesn't mean He is always going to repent as we see in 1st Samuel 15.

Lonster, do you understand the OV position better now regarding God having the ability to repent/relent but not the obligation to repent/relent?