Free will

[Ignorant]

Can the action "not happen"? 

Meatiest part of the edit.  

I already responded to you about this several pages back, here, and I will do it again in this new context.

The conditions are irrelevant.  In an absurdist universe where there is no cause or condition..a true claim to foreknowledge is still true.  

Well of course.

In a fatalist universe where the only cause or condition is that outcomes are fatalistic, a true claim to foreknowledge is still true.  

Yup. Got it. True things are true.

In a closed loop of causal determinism, a true claim to foreknowledge is still true. 

Still yes.

 This is a demand of the claim regardless of the circumstances which led to it, even if there -are- no circumstances which led to it...which is why discussing those circumstances is an irrelevancy with regards to the claims being considered for compatibility.  

It is certainly not irrelevant. It is evident that things occur according to conditions (e.g. a fruit tree making fruit). I hope that is not something you would like to dispute. That is merely evidence, data. Fruit trees either make fruit or they don't depending on certain conditions. That is just the way a fruit tree exists. <= If you deny that, please just let me know so I can bow out of the conversation.

If we suppose that God infallibly knows that tomorrow, this fruit tree will make fruit, there is no way that it won't make fruit tomorrow. 

From this, you can either conclude, as you seem to do, that the fruit tree makes fruit tomorrow independently from the conditions upon which it depends for making fruit (which is a non-sequitur), -OR- you can conclude, as I do, that the fruit tree makes fruit tomorrow according to the conditions upon which it depends for making fruit. It's that simple.

You're still focusing on what god does, but it's irrelevant. 

In a discussion about an all-knowing god and human action, you think discussing what god does is irrelevant? Weird.

If god made a claim to foreknowledge of the tree making fruit..it must make fruit...regardless of the circumstance, or the claim to foreknowledge is false. 

OR, his knowledge INCLUDES knowledge of the circumstances within which the tree makes fruit. See above, that conclusion does not follow.

This includes the unlikely possibility that no conditions of fruit set are met. It doesn't matter that the conditions are not met (and I;d be careful turning gods foreknowledge into condition, temporal, causally deterministic knowledge, btw). If god said fruit will set, fruit will set. This is a necessity of the truth of the claim to foreknowledge without any regard for condition, cause, the state of the universe, what makes what happen, what god does or doesn't do, or will..free or otherwise. 

Here is the problem. See above. God knows that fruit will set because he makes the tree as making fruit according to the conditions he is making. It is almost as if you are having trouble distinguishing between determination, necessity and contingency =)

If god knows that the tree-which-makes-fruit-according-to-conditions WILL make fruit tomorrow according to conditions, then there is no way that the tree-which-makes-fruit-according-to-conditions will not make fruit according to conditions. <= My perspective

If god knows that the tree-which-makes-fruit-according-to-conditions WILL make fruit tomorrow, then there is no way that the tree-which-makes-fruit-according-to-conditions will not make fruit tomorrow unconditionally <= Your perspective

Do you see the questionable reasoning in your perspective?