Is This a Logic Argument?

Can these two premises form a valid argument and add up to a logically true conclusion?

A

Here is where I see the above typical Calvinist argument above logically leading to concerning Icon view of “self will” and the nature being Determined to support a philosophical theory which conveniently uses the term “free moral agency” but in conjunction with the nature of man being pre-determined:

B

Can a true conclusion be derived from within my example?
We will see, Icon is about use his two premises above and explain how his argument can be demonstrated to be logically true using ethical philosophical principles to do so.
Take it way Icon!