And when you say, “On the other side, metaphysical Libertarianism says that a decision is only free when agents can chose A, B, or ~A/B. They would deny the view that God is a determinative agent in the history of man,” I would emphasize that I do not think it is just as likely that man chooses B over A.. no, I think my decisions are highly influenced by my natural state. The point in talking about A or B or neither is to distinguish between contingency and necessity â?? not to say that there are no reasons for our decisions or that the options open to us are equally likely or probable. Itâ??s important to distinguish between probability and possibility. The non-Calvinist typically thinks that compatibilism entails necessity, and that necessity rules out human responsibility as well as true freedom.

Molinists, in particular, do not think that God doesnâ??t determine certain things, and hopefully all Christians recognize Godâ??s determining agency in history â?? which is His history to begin with. But causal determinism is not the same thing as God determining certain things, nor is it the same as God working out His sovereign plan in history.

All that aside, it is good that you are defending what you believe to be true based on your reading of Scripture and careful thought about the issues. I think a strong case can be made for both sides, and that both sides can have a reading that falls within the pale of orthodoxy.