The problem here has always been the thwarted definition of "religion" to begin with. The word "religion" comes from the word "religio" which means "conscientiousness". The word "conscientiousness" means "painstakingly done with care according to conscience". The word "conscience" comes from "Old French", from latin "conscientia" and further comes from the word "conscious" and was combined by the words "knowledge and consciousness", from conscīre, " to know". So there is the origins of the word "religion".
So how the word "religion" came to later mean in a general and common sense "a belief in, a worship of, or an obedience to
a supernatural power or powers considered to be divine or to have control of human destiny" is a bit of a warping of the original concept. This is as it is commonly described today while all along truly meaning merely someones' opinion and reaction to those opinions with a need to gather support and congregation from others about "knowledge and consciousness". Here this job of convincing others comes into play as "religious" duty. Remember the original meaning of the word "religion" is "conscientiousness". A "religion" then, is a personal and often private take on reality and knowledge and is a magistrate for personal inner navigation of existence, shared or unshared. "Religion" as the original "conscience" of "conscientiousness" or driver of such is individually known and felt, not collectively like clones of the same soul. Understand that no one has ever agreed that "reality" is exactly the same for everyone and "conscience" is obviously not the same expeiriential inner guide for all that people want to believe that it is on a group level. It simply isn't. It never has been and THIS is evident.
Belief in an all perfect higher entity that orchestrates perfect reality in a valued human consciousness of ever changing rules is ludicris when you take a brief look around the world. Perhaps accepting the antecdotal rule that humans can not know the mind of God is the safer suffice after all and will do more to halt these incredulous thwartings and postulations of God by the minds of disfunctional and hysterical humans. So, there is the offense. I said it. The nonqualitative reactions to this statement only support the claim that "religion" is a thwarted concept in today's world, knowing what we now know. The man has grown and no longer fits the clothes of his ignorant youth. Throw them out and dress properly. Be angry if you must, but DO wear clothes that fit. Please.
So, in this "religion of science" there is still great room for everyones "opinions" and relative "conscience" and experiences. Paradoxically, the answer could be "yes and no". One could easily claim that God does not play dice, because he is limited by rules of engagement and therefore is held to hard and fast rules that guarentee a destiny boundary and controlled outcomes. One could just as easily claim that God does play dice and has taken chances and thrown guesses and even made seeming errors and goofs within a protective seal, a "bubble", exempt and not subjected to the usual hard fast rules. The "free space" or "bubble" ensures a relatively safe "chance" playing board for him to experiment and play upon without disrupting the rest of his creations or the creations of others in the larger Cosmos. Yes, a "controlled" experiment as it is termed in the sciences. It is used all the time to control rules of the experiements performed in science and even becomes evident as "common" in particle physics. Particle physics displays a number of controlled experiments where chance and gambling take place regularly. Particle behavior runs on probabilities and potentialities "chances" within limit controls. THAT is the true nature of reality. "Chances".
I am NOT one of those who believe they are here in this world, as god awful as it is, without my consent or against my will. I am one of those who knows that I chose to be here, I chose. God may be responsible for the creation of these rickit embodiments, these babbling brains, the consciousness constructs of current reality that we are all limited to, the evolutionary grids, the animals and what have you. He may well also be responsible for the autrocities and gore, the inconsistency and purely "bad design" of much of this physical world here by his own choices and errors, if that is what they are, but he is not responsible for me. I am. But again, that's another story. The question here was this, "Does God play dice?" I stated that he does and that particle physics and progressing scientific knowledge as well as "conscience" supports this answer when you delve deep enough into it to get difinitive answers. That's the key.
It is a very messed up world for any gentle soul and is truly no "Eden" planet for the delicate of heart. This alone is obvious and a blatant and stark starting point for analysis of God and the subsequent surmise is not good so accept it and move on. I believe you chose to be here all the same as I have. You must have a reason even if it is only to wittness, to watch, to observe, to learn, to know. I have learned to take responsibility for myself in ALL things in this world for no one else is responsible for me, this is no different.
So . . . I have taken the responsibility of putting the science of reality back into the religio of self sentitence. I put the broken pieces we have fragmented with disfunctional perspective back together. I have replaced the dimensional and holographic nature back into the whole of matter and substance to comprehend the whole picture again. And if you are not an organic emote artificial intelligence program, following directives from mass programming, then you will see it too. There is nothing to "convince" once you have undertaken this first requirement of personal power. It's obvious.
The redundancy of repeating this primary knowedge as "yourself the master programmer and yourself as the avatar under that programming" in a simulated reality is or is not worth another mention here? You decide. What I personally value as a mention is that things CAN go wrong and there are MANY players in this game. The struggle of "programming verses programming" is what leaps to the forefront of perspective to the problem of self control. It's a game. It has rules of engagement. It has wins and losses. Choose your opponant as you will, however you see it. But it is a game, all the same.
. . . and this is about how it goes.
The power on the gameboard, is neither the Pawn, the Knight, the Bishop, nor the King and Queen, the power is the hand that moves the players on the board.
Be the power in your own game and foget about God. God is playing dice and has his own troubles right now and is not responsible for yours.