I always thought this argument resulted from confusion concerning what counts as knowledge for God. We tend to define knowledge in terms relative to human experience. Mainly, we are finite beings existing at a point in time, and we experience past, present, and future. We can have knowlegde of the past and present because we can test whether our experience corresponds with reality. We can't do this with the future because there is no reality with which to compare.

God, on the other hand, is not limited by space and time. He is a timeless being, and the notions of past, present, and future do not apply to him. The reason God knows the future is not because he lives in the present and can predict  the future. The reason God knows the future is because He exists at all points in time and has already experienced every occurence that will happen (past, present, and future). In this sense, God's knowledge comes from experience, and He is not controlling the future. He is a timeless observer. Taking this view, I think omnisciennce and free will are compatible, but I have no idea if Abrahamic religions would accept the argument. There are just so many competing notions of God's characteristics.

What does that mean and how could you possibly know that?

Context of what I write, is people on the Internet you interact with.  It is people you don't know, who you really don't care about, and it is the same for them with you.  It is individuals who have lives outside of you, and if you disappeared, it wouldn't make a bit of difference to them.  Well, unless you are presuming strangers on the Internet, who post and read forums like this, are somehow your friends, the way the friend you talk about is.

If you seriously want a new one ripped determinism, I suggest you do research into quantum mechanics.  The fact that something gets an observer impacts how it acts.  If things were totally deterministic, then why would this happen?  Besides this, if everything were totally deterministic, why would you bother trying to convert anyone to anything?  Won't the deterministic system of the universe end up making what they are?  And also, how do you know that it isn't important for people to believe that they have free will, in order to make determinism work?  Either you have zero impact in the ability to change others personally, because the system is there, or the fact you can change someone with your thoughts to believe determinism means that your belief in determinism is folly, because what you decided to do did have an impact.

I know I don't care, but not every religious person do live an honest and virtous life. The main point of all my religious threads is to make people understand that sins do not exist. Murder is wrong, stealing is wrong, being homosexual is not wrong, sex before marriage is not wrong, education based on unproven beliefs such as creationism is wrong. I don't mind spiritual thinking, as long as it doesn't contain a law book with bullshit laws. People are falling victum every day because of certain religious movements (note: I'm definitely not talking about every religious person here, but the ones who oppose gay marriage or approve of cutting babies skin without asking them, and so on)

I am inserting logic to a illogical way of thinking. And in a world such as the one we live in, a perfect deity is not logical. A heaven and hell cannot exist if God is almighty.

So, if there is no sin, anything goes?  Is that what you're trying to convince people of?  And if that's the case, then why should you care if someone is for or against gay marriage, or whatever else you're against?  There is no right or wrong in that world, only opinions.  In that world, Hitler is not evil, his is simply his own path to happiness.  In that world, might makes right.  That world may be the most illogical thing of all.

You may think you're inserting logic into this...  but it's logic from your own limited point of view.  None of your opinions on the matter factor into proper religious logic.  Quite a few people have postulated a few ways in which the Abrahamic religions can make absolute sense.  We have no way to actually prove it, so our hypotheses and those theologians far superior to us are all we can give.  Just as, at some point, all of the atheist's vaunted logic falls down, as we reach a point where human knowledge fails us.  We all find ourselves in the same boat.

Yet, in the end, if your point of view is true, then why would you expend so much energy in convincing someone that something isn't true?  If there is no sin, if there is no standard of right and wrong, all that is left is opinion.  It's your opinion that a world without God is correct.  It's our opinion that a world with God is correct.  By your own logic, neither side is right or wrong, the opinions merely exist, and we do all we can to convince others of our rightness, but in the end it will have nothing to do with logic, but with the exercise of power.  And in that hypothetical scenario, the world gets even messier than it is now.

I will not discuss this here (I even have a separate thread about that). You are going way off-topic.

So, if there is no sin, anything goes?  Is that what you're trying to convince people of?  And if that's the case, then why should you care if someone is for or against gay marriage, or whatever else you're against?  There is no right or wrong in that world, only opinions.  In that world, Hitler is not evil, his is simply his own path to happiness.  In that world, might makes right.  That world may be the most illogical thing of all.

You may think you're inserting logic into this...  but it's logic from your own limited point of view.  None of your opinions on the matter factor into proper religious logic.  Quite a few people have postulated a few ways in which the Abrahamic religions can make absolute sense.  We have no way to actually prove it, so our hypotheses and those theologians far superior to us are all we can give.  Just as, at some point, all of the atheist's vaunted logic falls down, as we reach a point where human knowledge fails us.  We all find ourselves in the same boat.

Yet, in the end, if your point of view is true, then why would you expend so much energy in convincing someone that something isn't true?  If there is no sin, if there is no standard of right and wrong, all that is left is opinion.  It's your opinion that a world without God is correct.  It's our opinion that a world with God is correct.  By your own logic, neither side is right or wrong, the opinions merely exist, and we do all we can to convince others of our rightness, but in the end it will have nothing to do with logic, but with the exercise of power.  And in that hypothetical scenario, the world gets even messier than it is now.

So, you are saying you have chosen to not discuss or defend determinism here?  Part of your argument is a case for determinism, so I addressed that.  It is ok, to understand that it was preordained that you no longer discuss determinism.  Those are the breaks I guess.