Sorry my thoughts aren't entirely cohesive. There's too many issues involved in these topics for me to condense my thoughts in a reasonable amount of time. (More specific questions make it easier.)
What is your basis for this statement? If this is true, why not simply make another Adam and Eve, unless the same outcome was inevitable? Mark 10:18 – “..No one is good but One, that is, God.”
You seem to be struggling with the nature of free will. Free will means the person gets to decide. When free will is from God, it is an untwisted "he just gets to decide" and he is responsible for his choice and the consequences. When a person is tainted with sin, then he has a twisted free will.
God designed Adam to be in union with Himself, which means Adam was designed for eternal perfection. Humans were not designed to have the knowledge of good and evil and hence not designed to be able to handle sin. Scripture testifies that humans are powerless against sin—that's why we
need a Savior.
Yes, but it was hindered by the combination of having true choice, being a natural man (but not a sinful natural man), but not having perfect oneness with God. If another natural man (vs Adam) could have remained morally perfect (if given the opportunity to exist without original sin), then that person could argue against the need for Christ for himself. Adam must not just be the source of original sin; he must be the representative case of every natural man without original sin. Jesus is thus necessary because he is the God-man; Jesus combines original sinlessness, true choice, and natural obedience because of His virgin birth, humanity, and oneness with God. Man had to ultimately choose oneness with God (after Christ opened the way); Christ already was pre-existent and had oneness with God, His choice was to humble himself as a man, but he did not choose to forfeit his natural obedience that existed through oneness within Yahweh.
Nothing hindered Adam's free will, although he did acquire an increased knowledge of disobedience (from the snake). But God equipped him to deal with that when he commanded Adam to not eat from the tree. Adam chose to do a terrible evil (for reasons Scripture does not go into detail about), as we do every time we choose to sin.
Because of His freewill he was fully capable of sinning; I should not have used the term ‘incapable’; however, because of His divine nature, His nature was to always naturally obey.
What you have discovered is what free will was like for Adam before he sinned, except that it was much harder on Jesus, because his temptations were many, which can be lumped into "opportunities to relieve himself of pain." Adam didn't have the incentive to sin to stop pain. Both Jesus and Adam had the advantage we don't of a perfect relationship with the Father. On earth Jesus lived as a human his whole life; his divine nature did not show up on any occasion until after he died. He set us an example for us to follow of living in obedience to the Holy Spirit with the Holy Spirit's help. Everything Jesus did we have the potential to do as well. Presumably it is much harder for us because we are twisted from sin, but that's not something God did to us. It's the result of our ancestors' choices AND is still a choice for us, and yet we still choose to sin. And YET, God still offers us the opportunity to do everything Jesus did and even greater things, because it is not us doing them, but God doing them through us.
I think this is a false statement. To sin is to miss the mark with God, to break His commands, act contrary to love; God by definition is sinless, perfect, pure, love, holy, faultless, good. It is impossible for Him to be contrary to that; He is the source. You would have a very difficult time making a theological argument that God is capable of sin; if He is the guideline, then by definition every choice He makes is free, and every choice He makes is pure and right.
Almost everyone seems to stumble over the conflicts that arise from mixing facts from God's perspective with facts from a human perspective. It is a part of growing in our knowledge of God and ourselves. Just because God knew everything that would ever happen does not mean that any given event is what he wanted. His foreknowledge is absolutely not indicative of what he chooses to do. For example, God has never and will never judge someone for something they have yet to do. It is a moral imperative (proven by his commands) that He interact with us according to the flow of time we are in, but that doesn't tell us his power is limited to just that.
Scripture's perspective includes the knowledge that God will never sin, but that doesn't have anything to do with his capabilities. Is it even possible for a being without full free will to create a being with full free will? To suggest that God doesn't have full free will to choose good or evil is to assert that something more powerful than he is constraining him. It isn't that difficult to grasp: God will never choose to do evil, but it's not because he lacks the ability.
One key point I am trying to affirm is the complete dependence of man upon God; and the utter need for Jesus to be more than a created being; He had to share in the divine nature of Yahweh (to achieve perfection) as only Yahweh can save (Isaiah 45:21-23); but as well he had to fully share in the natural nature of man (in order to redeem that which was lost). I am definitely not saying that Jesus did not suffer in obedience, and suffer more than any man, because His obedience was perfect.
We are certainly completely dependent upon God. But Jesus' capabilities were (1) just like ours, except that (2) he was not tainted with sin and therefore had all the advantages of his unity with the Holy Spirit his whole life (which are available to us, although not from birth). His calling presumably empowered him because he knew what the Father wanted him to do, which is also available to us.
