"Free will" and an omniscient God are a contradiction.
We do have free will, although we also are influenced by our genetic programming (instincts) and environmental influences (peer pressure, advertising, etc.).
God cannot be omniscient. God cannot exist.
Bob J said it correctly in his post: "Only a child believes in hell."
As are light waves and photons, yet you hold both of them as true (if you have ever taken introductory physics). You simply acknowledge your mind and the state of human knowledge is not comprehensive enough to grasp it. That is the proper and humble state of mind to approach a being who says clearly that meaningful human choice and Divine sovereignty coexist in a non-contradictory manner. It is amazing how many "contradictory" elements men cheerfully affirm when it comes to the world of science (Newtonian physics and quantum mechanics is another example), yet become intolerable asses when presented with the first logical problem in an area where BY DEFINITION, there would be elements of an Infinite Creator that would be past human comprehension.
We do have free will, although we also are influenced by our genetic programming (instincts) and environmental influences (peer pressure, advertising, etc.).
Horse puckey. Determinism and meaningful choice are a logical problem whether you are a materialist or a theist. If you are a materialist, though, it is logically inescapable that there is, in fact, no "you" to even make a choice in the first place. "You" are a chance collection of chemicals which has no more control over the neurochemical stimuli which you call "choice" or "will" than whether a rock falls to the earth when dropped. Chemicals respond as they will and there is no"soul" or "being" or "mind" to make the choice in the first place. Materialism means there is ABSOLUTE chemical determinism and bullshit like "influence" by our environment is the deliberate, pathetic. and hopeful embrace of foolishness by someone who is afraid to face the implications of his own worldview. There is no "choice" for a materialist, and no concept of "meaning" to those "choices" even if they existed.
At least with the concept of an infinite God there is the possibility of a meaningful personality, in that it has an eternal and infinite analog. I am not denying that there are logical difficulties with the concept of sovereignty and meaningful choice (the true seat of the problem, not in omniscience). I am saying, though, that a retreat into materialism only "fixes" the problem by moving the problem of personality and choice into a total and complete illusion.
Man! People sneer at the religious for being afraid to face the truth!!!! I find that the secularist is the one terrified to face the implications of his own worldview, and continually clings to idiocy like "choice" "meaning" and fights like a maniac to avoid the clear implication that if there is no God, then absolutely nothing in his life makes any difference to anything anywhere at any time. They continually puke up some subterfuge like "survival of humanity" (like that has some intrinsic value!) or the collective "desires" of men (ignoring the plain fact that meaningless chemical interactions of cosmic accidents don't magically create meaning when you multiply them by 4 billion).
Sorry if that sounds a bit harsh, but you really should think through the silly assertions you make.