God`s omniscience contradicts the notion that we have free will.

[Explicit vs Implicit contradictions] Consider where Pro says. .. "My opponent claims that there is no EXPLICIT contradiction in the existence of an all knowing God and free will. This cannot be simply asserted. " Well actually I can, when you understand the difference between an explicit contradiction and an (alleged) implicit contradiction. The following are examples of explicit contradictions 1) The earth is flat, the earth is not flat 2) God exists, God does not exist 3) Free will exists, free will does not exist. You will notice with explicit contradictions straight of the bat they contradict themselves by stating X and not X are both true. But there is no such explicit contradictions when stating X and Y are true for example. .. 1) Rabbits exist, Horses exists 2) God exists, aliens do not exist 3) Pro exists, Con wonders why he has to explain what an explicit contradiction is or is not. So when some one claims or implies that X and Y contradict each other they need other premise/s to make that connection, but what that premise/s is and whether it can be justified is the question when dealing with implicit contradictions. [Knowledge of A vs Free will choice (or not) of A] At the core of Pros argument is about how if a choice is made but that choice is known beforehand (From the choosers point of view) with 100% metaphysical certitude this entails that no free will choice of A is even possible. I still maintain this is a non sequitor. Recall how Pro argues. .. "Now if God foreknows that I will choose A then I cannot choose B since it would mean that God`s foreknowledge is wrong and it cannot be wrong by definition of omniscience. This means that B is not possible course of action. It is impossible to choose B since God foreknows that it wont be chosen. So there is no choice to be made. " Notice the conflation between the impossibility that God can be wrong about you are going to choose A and the impossibility of being able to choose B. That was the purpose of my thought experiments to try and show more clearly these are two very different things, knowledge of choice A (even before it happens from the choosers point of view) vs the free will choice made in the present (from the choosers point of view). They are two different things and thus impossibility of one (God having false knowledge about your choice) does not entail the other (therefore you have no choice). Pro decides to counter with arguments about the impossibility of time travel, well that isn't really the important point here now is it ? [Gods knowledge of Choice A dependent on determinism ? ] Consider where Pro says. .. The problem is that if your future action is known then that means the future is determined already. Since it is the only way to be known. If it wasn't determined then its logically impossible to have definite knowledge about some future event. " & "Yes. Because the only way for God to know what will be chosen is if it was already determined. " But must such knowledge be dependent on determinism ? for example a common conception of God is one that stands outside of time so too speak. Thus from Gods point of view what we would consider as our past, present, and unknown (to us) future is an observed event from Gods point of view. But even if this isn't true, why must Gods knowledge of choice A be dependent on determinism ? because that is the only way that humans could know and thus that must mean the only way that God or anything else could know too ? well that's an unjustified leap there. [Closing remarks] As I said in the previous round Pro argument rests upon the premise that in order for free will to exist it can only do so if there is lack of knowledge of what a free will choice will be before it happens. (Pro admits as such). Pro can't get past that the impossibility of God being wrong about Pro making choice A (before Pro makes it from Pros temporal point of view) does not logically entail therefore Pro will have no choice when it comes to Pro choosing A (again from Pros temporal point of view). But, but, but I hear you say, I have not made the decision yet (from my point of view), thus God or anything else can't know before I do and if they do then I don't really have a choice. Sounds a bit like a dummy spit to me as opposed to rationality. I look forward to Pros reply.