Philosophy was invented in pursuit of a METHOD for discovery what is true and how to reason correctly toward that true picture of reality.
You cannot mix together things which nullify each other and call it a METHOD.
You may as well mix arsenic with fresh drinking water.
Christianity is forever tainted by mysticism. Yet, christians of all persuasions try to argue that the Bible is a source of "greater" reality.
This is asserted and it falls flat when it comes against Science time and again.
Consequently, Christianity cheats by resorting to mystical subjective and Intrinsic flummery to get its way.
Essentially, they eat their cake and want to still have it. Deuces are wild.
"Our doctrines are True because God says so and WE ALONE can interpret correctly on His behalf!"
What does all this have to do with FREE WILL and FOREKNOWLEDGE?
The important underlying basis of ANY and ALL arguments about it are deeply rooted in 1 or more of the above 3 schools of Philosophy.
Until and Unless you KNOW how to distinguish where one ends and the others begin there is a tar pit of muck that will bog your arguments down.
You cannot switch from Intrinsic to Subjective to Objective and make any connected and rational point that will stand!
IF there is no ACTUAL REALITY nobody can argue anything and prove anything. Why? It is all shadows and flickering nonsense in our head!
IF anybody's subjective opinion IS AS GOOD as everybody else's there can be no Science and no proof.
BUT IF THERE IS AN OBJECTIVE REALITY....we all have a way to test and refine and prove our point of view by how well it stands or falls.
Mixing philosophies is a coward's way of resorting to misdirection, like a card cheat or a magician.
Only RIGOROUS rational and logical thinking have given us mathematics, science and technology. There is nothing subjective about aiming at Mars and landing a rover there! There is nothing shadowy and Intrinsic about discovering the Genome and charting DNA in human beings to locate and cure disease! Only OBJECTIVE thought can pinpoint with accuracy and discover the real world.
Bottom line?
Free Will is not an OBJECTIVE thing which can be put under an electron microscope. It is a conceptual model of a decision tree.
What pulls the trigger on a decision is inside the machine we use to REASON.
In order to take apart that machine we must dismantle our only means of discovery.
The mind cannot examine its own function because self-reference is what triggers the glitch of Paradoxical thinking.
A mirror reflected in a mirror reflected in a mirror reflected in a mirror reflected in a mirror......
or, at the very least the Mind looking at Itself.
Philosophy answers the questions 1.What do we know and 2.How do we know it?
There are 3 schools of philosophy, essentially.
1.Intrinsic
2.Subjective
3.Objective
The first, Intrinsic, accepts as a given that the only true reality is inaccessible except by shadows in our mind which are poor representations.
The intrinsic theory holds that the good resides in some sort of reality, independent of man’s consciousness.
The second, Subjective, prefers to embrace the idea that we each carry around our own reality which is as good as the next fella.
The subjective means the arbitrary, the irrational, the blindly emotional.
The third, Objective, insists that Reality is "things as they actually are" no matter what anybody's opinion may be.
The objective theory of values is the only moral theory incompatible with rule by force.
Plato believed there were FORMS of an IDEAL truth, essentially like our ideas of GOD. Humanity flounders around unable to distinctly grasp the fullness of it. His is that Intrinsic school.
Neo-Platonic schools were very popular in the sections of the Roman Empire where Christianity was being transmitted, formed and argued.
Plato did not use Logic. It had not yet been invented by the later Aristotle (Objective school).
Once the Roman Catholic church became entrenched and authoratative in controlling the definitions of Christian Dogma, its two greatest Philosophers established Aristotle-like reasoning as the basis for argumentation.
However, although the style of Aristotle was emulated, the Objective nature of reality was denied and Plato's ideas soaked in to everything taught.
Jehovah's Witnesses play at Socratic arguments (Plato's heroic character) door to door and imply that theirs is an Objective Truth. However logically constructed their arguments may appear it is important to note there is nothing OBJECTIVE about the basis: mystical knowledge from Anointed shaman: the GB.
What am I saying here? What point is being made?
In an Objective Universe that can be understood we must be FREE to understand.