How can someone who is all knowing and all powerful do something that they'd later regret?

@SlaveEt [quote]Regardless of existence or not, if a being is willing to wipe out an entire race just because they exercised the free will he gave them, he's not a creature I'd respect let alone worship.[/quote]

Here is what's wrong there. He isn't a creature because he wasn't created. You had it right the first time. A being. Then there is the fact that there was only ever one race and God preserved those through Noah. The only other beings were the Nephilim, which were destroyed. Also you have to consider that it took Noah and his family about 50 years to build the ark and they invited anyone who wished to go with them. They refused. So, they are responsible for all of the death. That raises the continuation of the problem today. Do you refuse as they did?

If the being in question isn't deserving of your respect for being a monster you can hardly blame him for your refusal. If he was a monster willing to preserve you under those circumstances you reject him. Of course, it is far more likely that you judge him too harshly out of ignorance.

@BibleData
God is a human creation used to control the masses and steal from the gullible. YMMV.

@SlaveEt You understand that when I say you are ignorant that isn't an insult, it just means you are not informed. You have two differing perspectives, both wanting. The first is linguistic. The word god is just a word. The second is religious. The Bible is grossly misrepresented by apostate religion. The word I can help you with but it won't make much difference because people think in groups. You will stick to the religious misrepresentation even though it is the very thing you either hate or mistrust.

The ancient Hebrew word El and its variations are translated as god, gods or goddesses. They are applied to men, such as Moses (Exodus 4:16 Hebrew lelohim, Greek theon, Latin Deum; Exodus 7:1 Hebrew elohim, Greek theon, Latin Deum), the Judges of Israel (Psalm 82:1, 6 Hebrew elohim, Greek theoi, Latin dii) and Jesus, prophetically at Isaiah 9:6 (Hebrew El Gibbohr, Latin Deus fortis). At John 10:34-35 Jesus himself quoted Psalm 82:1, 6 confirming the prophetic and practical application of gods as men, including himself.

At Psalm 8:5 the Hebrew term beneh ha Elohim, or as the KJV reads, "sons of God" is applied to angels. Page 134 of the 1958 Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros, by Koehler and Baumgartner gives "(individual) divine beings, gods." Page 51 says "the (single) gods." (Genesis 6:2; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7) Paul quoted Psalm 8:5 at Hebrews 2:6-8. The Hebrew word elohim is also used in the plural form. Sometimes this means multiple gods (Exodus 12:12; 20:23) but sometimes it is used as a plural of excellence in application to single gods and goddess. For example, Ashtoreth (1 Kings 11:5), Dagon (1 Samuel 5:7). and Marduk (Daniel 1:2)

When elohim is used with the definite article ha it refers to Jehovah exclusively. (Genesis 5:22) Similarly, the Hebrew word satan, meaning adversary; resistor; opposer, can apply to anyone acting as an adversary or resistor, but when used with the definite article ha, as in ha satan, it refers to the chief adversary of God, Satan the devil. (Job 1:6; Zechariah 3:1-2) Devil means slanderer; liar. At Numbers 22:22, 32 the Hebrew word satan is used describing an angel of Jehovah resisting, or acting as an adversary to Balaam. There are many examples of others being referred to as satan. (1 Samuel 29:4; 2 Sa 19:21, 22; 1 Kings 5:4; 11:14, 23, 25) In a similar way the contraction of the Arabic al-Ilāh is "the God" from which comes Allāh.

The ancient Greek word for god is theos, from the Proto-Hellenic reconstruction of *tʰehós; Theos can be a god, God, a ruler, and when in the feminine, a goddess. It's a thematicization of the Proto-Indo-European *dʰéh₁s which comes from a root meaning "to do, or put, to place" A thematicization is where a thematic vowel is inserted on the root or stem of the word to make it undergo a productive vocalic inflection.

A cognate is a word having the same linguistic derivation as another, from the same original word or root. For example, the English is, German ist, Latin est are from the Indo-European esti. Theos is a cognate with the Phrygian δεως (deōs, "to the gods"), Old Armenian դիք (dikʿ, "pagan gods") and Latin fēriae ("festival days"), fānum ("temple") and fēstus ("festive"). Though the Latin deus appears similar it is actually a cognate of Zeus, meaning "sky, heaven, sky god," which was applied to Zeus specifically, to other gods, and to emperors of Rome.

If following the etymology of the word god is, to use the common vernacular, "Greek to you," like it is to me, just try and think it through; how does translation work? Words are translated from the source language to the target (also called receptor) language. This can be problematic due to lexical and syntactical variations. For example, the German word for trespass is Hausfriedensbruch, which means "house peace breakage." The English word God comes from the Proto-German *ǥuđán from the Proto-Indo-European *ǵʰutóm which is derived from a root word meaning to pour, libate or to invoke.

Words translated as god are associated with the use of pagan worship because that is how the words were used prior to Christianity; festivals, temples, pagan gods, sacrifice, libation, pouring, invocation, prayer and sky are meanings associated with worship. God is just a word, not a name. In the Classical Latin the polytheistic Romans didn't use the regularly constructed singular form of deus (*dee) because they addressed their gods individually by name. It was only in the Late Latin after Rome's conversion to monotheistic Christianity where God was used as a name, though it was never meant to be used in that way. The writers of the Bible were neither mono or polytheistic, they were henotheistic. They worshiped one supreme god but acknowledged that lesser gods existed as the examples above show.

@BibleData
That's nice. Doesn't change the fact I believe your god is a figment of man kinds imagination. But hey, it works for you, no need to waste your time on a heathen and denier like me😁

@SlaveEt [quote]That's nice. Doesn't change the fact I believe your god is a figment of man kinds imagination.[/quote]

I told you it wouldn't. I've been doing this a long time and I have had interesting give and take discussions with Christians and atheists who disagree with me on the Bible. I mean, like night and day. I listen to those people because they have good evidence for what they believe, just as I do. They may come to very different conclusions but I respect their opinion because they can show their work.

Then, on the other hand, you have those who don't, who can't do that.

@SlaveEt [quote]But hey, it works for you, no need to waste your time on a heathen and denier like me[/quote]

Not the way I see it, but isn't it you who shouldn't waste your time on me?

@BibleData
🤔 ....good point! Have a nice day!

@SlaveEt How come they always say "Have a nice day!"

Good day, sir! Ooo. [walks off in a huff] There's an impressive argument for a world view.

@BibleData
You read the huff. I'd have to care a whole lot more to get into a huff😉

@SlaveEt Right. So, why do you waste your time telling people things like man invented gods, which is not only conjectural but also irrelevant to you. There has to be some reason. It isn't that you think it makes you look intelligent because all the idiots around you already think that. You apparently can't give any more information on that than they can, so nothing new there.

It could very well be group think, atheist signaling, get a slap on the back, but would such an irrelevant acknowledgement be worth the time? I don't think so. It's sociopolitical frustration with theocracy.

@BibleData
You are much wiser and more educated than I. Could be you are right.

@SlaveEt [quote]You are much wiser and more educated than I.[/quote]

I don't believe that. I've known children and mentally handicapped people who have no problem with what I say.

[quote]Could be you are right.[/quote]

I'm probably right. No other reasonable explanation once you get around group think, propaganda, ideology and signaling.

@BibleData
🧐🤣

@SlaveEt I thought you would enjoy that.