The way you say it sounds fatalistic to me
Only because you are used to a worldview where somehow things happen independent of purpose or specific causation. A game for your mind: We can be sure that what will happen, will indeed happen, and, that that is all that will happen. For all of history, we have no evidence that anything else ever happened, so why should we consider it possible that something other than what will happen, can happen?
But perhaps more convincingly is the logic of a few statements built upon each other: God is First Cause. I hope you can admit to that. He is first cause, or he is not God. And there can be no other first cause, or he is not quite first cause (I no, I did not say there are not other causes —just no other first causes). We then, are not first causes. Therefore, we are not independent of causation. So, either God caused some to be better than others in that they made better choices, or they choose better choices by Chance. But Chance can cause nothing. It is self-contradictory to say that chance determines anything.
Yes, we only have glimpses of glory now. But the historical Jesus was as real as a man gets and after the resurrection was met by those who knew him also. It was possible to see in Christ there and then what godly character looked like and in a humanly and historically understandable way.
It is natural to look at the notion of this life being a vapor with a certain degree of scorn. I do too, and I agree this life is indeed real. The Bible uses the idea of "vapor" only to describe the superiority and solidity/ finality of the next life. Christ did indeed die here. We do indeed make real decisions, with real, even eternal, results. But Christ was glorified and so will we be.
In the two Jesus examples I quoted and the more famous one about Jesus not knowing the date of his return you could suggest this was because he had not yet ascended back to the Father and away from the self-limiting associated with his mission. But the naming of the animals suggests that there were a lot of possibilities of what those animals could be called. God was probably aware of every single one of them but he was still expectant and interested to hear which ones Adam chose for these creatures.
Jesus was God, but he did not know the day. Is that hard to accept, that Christ was on this earth as subservient to his Father, yet was himself also God? But consider that Christ also, is subservient to his Father in heaven, and sits at his right hand, yet is still God. I don't see the Spirit of God, who is subservient to both, sitting on the Father's left hand, yet he too is God. It is not impossible that God the Father is the only one who knows the day and the hour, because even if that is so, God still knows.
The naming of the animals is no more convincing an example than many others, some even more convincing, that sound like God doesn't know certain things, or that there are possibilities that deny predetermined future. I don't want to get into a battle over the meaning and use of certain specific words and language and rhetoric, nor about God condescending to speak to our limited understanding, but just understand, that if he does not know all things, he is not God. First Cause is not subject to any principle from outside himself.