By exhaustive divine determinism, I mean the notion that God actively determines all things which come about; He is not merely passive in anything. Thus, if God feels sorrowful over the extent to which mankind became wicked, He would be feeling sorrowful over something that He actively caused to happen.
And how does it make sense if He's omniscient, omnipotent, infallible, or immutable also.
What do you mean by "all things"? When you say, "that come about" do you mean God determines all the incremental consitutent, conditions and causes that bring a thing about? Do you think there are Calvinists here who believe God is making them write the posts that will be posted here in this thread, and they have absolutely no ability to anything other than post what exactly is posted?
did God directly make them the way they was that God didn't like them?
Anthropomorphism is a thing
I am fairly certain that the reason you cannot accept the notion that God changes His mind is because it doesn't "make sense" to you, despite a wealth of direct Scriptural references indicating that He does. I am not of the opinion that it somehow debases the Bible to interpret it in a way that makes sense to us.
I don't share all of your assumptions about God's attributes. I say we let God define Himself and bind ourselves to think of Him accordingly. It seems to me that there really isn't much of a principled difference between the Calvinist view of God and the attempt by modern theologians to blur God's masculinity so that He can be referred to as a he/she/it. In fact, those modern feminist theologians claim that God's masculine gender is nothing more than an anthropomorphism with just as much certainty as the Calvinists claim the same regarding His change of mind.
Yes.
I don't know if it's the majority view of Calvinists; but I am certain it's majority view among actual pastors who are Calvinists, as well as among the seminary professors who are Calvinists as well as anyone else who is in some kind of vocational ministry and is a Calvinist. John Piper is about as mainstream as you can get, and I don't think there's any wiggle room whatsoever in his view of how exhaustive God's determinism stretches. The only reason I hesitate to say it's the majority view among all Calvinists is because of the laypeople in Reformed leaning congregations. I'm not confident that a majority of those laypeople are willing to accept this notion of exhaustive divine determinism, even if they accept the 5 points and otherwise agree with their pastor on everything else. If you ask the average layperson in a Reformed congregation if they believe that God ordains the rape of children by sex traffickers they will probably give a firm "No!", but if you ask the same question of their pastor, you will either get a carefully nuanced "Yes" or a firm "Yes" depending on how cage-stage he is.
But is that an intelligible answer to the problem posed? See my reply to another poster about how feminist theologians try to make God out to be a he/she/it based on the idea that masculine pronouns in the Bible are anthropomorphisms. I believe in letting God choose His own pronouns. What's the principled difference between what those feminist theologians are doing with God's gender and what you're doing regarding His mind?
See below...
How is that not an example of the same thing you just accused me of?
Do you believe Jesus is God and a male human? If so then He has male organs like every other human male.
You said God and not God the Father.