... the fate of every atom ...
Why stop there? What is the criterion that selects for atoms? Why not the basic troika of sub-atomic particles: n, p and e? Continuing on, why not Fermions or, better yet, their constituent parts: quarks?
At least there
is a limit to the depth of our discretization of space - the Planck Length (appr. 10
-20 the diameter of a proton!) It is based on our theoretical inability to measure anything of lesser dimension: Not a practical limit based on a given technology, but a limit that could never be exceeded no matter our progress. Just an aside: Given that this is based on the Constants of Nature which God established, He, logically, neither would be able to best it. God cannot create logical impossibilities.
The point of this excess, in part, is to remind us (primarily me) of not imposing arbitrary limits on any discussion other than to simplify, by approximation (and appropriately so noted), the reasoning process. Of course, the person so inclined to expedite the argument would further be obliged to show that the ultimate intended conclusion would nevertheless obtain. (Details, details! ;-} )
It also points out that God, exceeding as He (pardon my misogyny) does, the spatial and temporal extent of the Universe, would have the ability to maintain a model of His creation. (Of course, maintained in God's IT dept. for any in the house enjoying a periodic bit of anthropomorphizing.)
Now, on to the issue of omniscience: What difference does it really make? Let us assume that God is Omniscient as most, an approximation (See? I remembered!), of this site's posters (as do I) would agree upon.
The view of Divine temporality seems to be divided betwixt the temporal God and the atemporal God. The latter existing but not existing at any given point (universal quantification) in time and not experiencing temporal succession. The former: God neither began to exist nor will cease to exist and that He exists at each moment in time. I fall in the latter camp with at least one difference, God exists at each point along the temporal dimension together. The latter point, in my meaning, is that there is no energy required to transit from one temporal location to another since both are occupied at once. Similarly, all are occupied. In other words, all such associations are realized in His extent. I believe that this makes the solution to the Fate, Foreknowledge, Fatalist problems trivial. Without a temporal experience (never mind that the term 'experience' assumes temporal extension) there are neither antecedents nor consequents, no past, no future, no present. Since Man in his limited state invariably attempts to shoehorn God into those same limitations, Man is unable to conceive of a space including a temporal dimensionality, 4-space. God, logically, cannot know a future that He doesn't have. He does not aspire to act, plan to act, He makes no proposal nor does He choose to act. He acts. In God's 'world,' there is no past, present or future. There is only 'is.'
Even Scripture has difficulty describing concurrent acts. "... [H]e lifts his voice, the earth melts." Psalm 46:6b
There obviously is a lot to say about this. Definitions need explication. Further examination of the consequences of the arguments needs making. Axioms, the 'obvious' stuff, must be delineated, always paying heed to Gödel and accepting our systems limitations.
I sure wish there was a teacher's edition that I could borrow. :-)