The attribute of omniscience, of knowing all things, must be clarified. Christian belief holds that God is timeless. Past, present and future for God can be seen as a whole. God also knows how things would turn out if a different path had been taken at every potential choice-making nexus. Furthermore, a 'prophet' in the Bible meant more than simply 'a predictor of the future'. A prophet was also a messenger and an exhorter. His words were never set in stone. A key verse for this is Jeremiah 18:7-10. With this verse, and the fact that the role of a prophet was more than just as a predictor, it is quite clear why it is pointless to object when God withholds judgment. Following ancient rules of rhetoric and the constraints of oral communication, as well as the nature of the Semitic mindset which typically expressed itself in extremes, it would be less appropriate for a prophet making a popular declaration to delineate possible exceptions in his general proclamation. Such side-tracking would make his message less memorable and effective in an era when retention and effect was far more important in the short term than detailed analysis. Finally, to say that God does not 'change' does not mean that God is static, never does anything, or never says anything. Nor can it be asserted to mean that God does not alter stated plans in reaction to human freewill choices. The references to God not 'changing' cannot hold up such a narrow interpretation.

Genesis 6:6-7 is a primary hinge point of arguments alleging contradiction. But let's look at that word 'repent' more closely. It is nacham, and it means to be sorry, grieve, or to pity. Is it not possible to grieve and feel sorry over something — even if we know that it is going to happen, even if we cause it to happen? Of course it is. And there is no reason why this cannot also apply to God.

Genesis 6:5-6 and other verses where God "repents" are taken by skeptics and Open Theists to suggest a non-omniscient God. However, Christians have historically understood such language as divine condescension (anthropopathism) — speaking of God in human terms so we might comprehend. Moreover, it is possible to grieve over something even if we know that it is going to happen.

Furthermore, Pilch and Malina in the Handbook of Biblical Social Values note the emphasis in the Biblical world on dramatic orientation as a point of honor. To be expressive in word and deed was to "gain, maintain, and enhance personal and group honor." Expressions of eloquence, which involve exaggeration and over-assertion, may at times "not [be] intended to be taken seriously but are made solely for effect and are heartily appreciated and applauded by an audience that enjoys such eloquence when it hears it." Free and unrestrained expression of emotion was normal and acceptable. To put it in modern terms, some of this functions as a vivid communicative device — not implying a "real" change or emotional instability in God.