The Problem of Free Will, An alternate arguement Options

[*kryogenix*]

Ok, I guess I was wrong, I'll try to list out my points, just as ABS did. Actually, I haven o idea what I'm doing, because I'm one of them "incompetent religious folks", so plagiarism FTW.

A1:
1 (p1). Free will is the ability to voluntarily choose.
2 (p2). Choice is the ability to decide among a varitety of options.
3 (p3). There must be at least two options for a choice to be present.
4 (p4). There must be a choice for there to be free will.
5 (c1). Therefor, there must be more than two possible options to choose from for there to be free will.

A2:
1 (p1). Natural/Scientific law is a rigid body of laws that determine how entities react and interact.
2 (p2). Men exist.
3 (p3). Men are active.
4 (c2). Because of Natural/Scientific law, things are constrained to behave within the statutes given by the law. Thus, given knowledge of the right variables, it is possible to use Natural/Scientific law to write a formula (hereon known as "the formula" that can predict how something will act.

A3:
1 (p1). A man does X.
2 (c2). Because of the formula, it is possible to know that the man will do x.
3 (c1). Free will requires that the man could have done otherwise.
4 (p2). If the man could have done otherwise, it would have made Natural/Scientific law wrong (imperfect).
5 (p3). It is impossible for Natural/Scientific law to be imperfect or wrong.
6 (c3). Therefore, it would have been impossible for the man to have done otherwise.

A4:
1 (c1). There must be more than two options to choose from for there to be free will.
2 (c2). The formula knows that man will always do X.
3 (c3). Since The formula knows man will always do X, he has no other option aside from X.
4 (c4). Since man has no other option aside from X, he fails to have free will.

Food for thought.