Evidence?

[Retorth]

you're saying that because God says living apart from him is condemned, then this is God being inflexible?

Not inflexible. Indecisive more like.

Look at it this way: The Christian concept is a model for the best a human could possibly aspire to.

I disagree, but for the sake of keeping on topic I won't go into it.

Now it is clear we can say that anything opposing this concept results in the opposite: the worst a human could possibly sink to.

If, for the sake of discussion, I was to assume that the above statement about the christian model being the best a human could be was true then yes. Again, for the sake of keeping on topic I won't go into it.

So.. condemnation is actually you choosing to do what would be detrimental to your well being.

If I smoke weed and take other assorted drugs and end up a drug addict on the verge of death then yes I have condemned myself.. However, here it is god who condemns us for not following him while still claiming to give us free will that confuses me.

So could you equally say you have no choice in life because some choices are self destructive? What about greed, lust, jealousy etc... these instincts can be destructive even though the choice to do them is natural. We can control our instincts with a strong moral stance. Intellectually we control what would do us harm.

Christianity asserts itself as the ultimate moral stance. Belief in God is the acceptance of ultimate morality. Without the choice, there is no morality.

If choice equals morality as you say then god isn't moral since he does not give you a choice anyway. Whats more he still condemns you for making what he perceives to be the wrong choice. That is being plain indecisive.