Even then God cannot have free will as theists tell us that free will is given by an external being, an external being that does not exist in the case of God. God only acts good, and with total knowledge and perfection attributes, free will is curtailed to the point where there can only ever be one right answer to any decision, hence zero free will for God.

While God is not confined by our logic, that is not to say that he is completely beyond the grasp of logic. Otherwise, the work of St. Thomas Aquinas was all in vain.

LOL in the RCC every month is tautology month.

"whatever implies contradiction does not come within the scope of divine omnipotence"

So.

You face the challenge that your idea of God is not contradictory by saying that if something is contradictory it is not God.

I mean, that's one way of winning an argument.

Me: I hold that X.
You: No, but it can't be X, because X doesn't make sense.
Me: The definition of X is that it makes sense, so if it doesn't it's not X. So X.
You: Oh, now I see. May is tautology month.

"and you hate that."

Whether or not it is in response to a negative, sarcastic comment doesn't make this less ad hominem.

His phrasing may be off, but the point stands "the rational response is to stop and don't make up additional, unnecessary elements."

Platonic abstracts are certainly one way of looking at the world, but they seem to be becoming more unnecessary the more we learn about the links between the physics chemistry, biology and psychology of our central nervous systems.

Love, Justice, Beauty, Goodness are all shorthand uppercase words which retain much of the usefulness they had when first propounded.

I imagine that Newtonian physics works for most of us posting here, most of the time...the fact that it DOES doesn't mean that it's the final word on physics, nor the most complete.

The fact that we CAN talk about capital L Love and B Beauty as abstracts doesn't mean that they exist as fully real, independent capital O Objects any more than talking about T Time helps us understand time's warp and weft down below the Planck limit or G Gravity helps us understand the nature of the Higgs mechanism.

Concepts can have varying degrees of relevance or correctness at different scales, we have painfully and fruitfully learned, and I feel confident talking about abstract Love while acknowledging the biological foundations of love.

Your examples of patriotism, agape, theophily as contrasted with *currently* studied erotic hormones do little to help your cause.

I can easily imagine biological systems of tribalism, mutual aid, and shared cultural understandings/desire to be protected/placebo benefit from believing in immortality/dealing with ideas of absolutes as being plausible steps to the biological release of endorphins when running those bits of software: patriotism, agape, theophily.

You're boxing yourself into a realm of ignorance that science will, it seems likely, continue to encroach upon.

If by that you mean infinite possibilities for an infinite amount of situations, then I guess so.

We know the attributes of God by reasoning about them. Refer for instance to Aquinas's article on the power of God: http://newadvent.org/summa/1025.htm

By defining a subject or object, we set the parameters be they for discussion, argument, debate, etc. However, if definitions
are made for the purpose of winning an argument, that is really
disgusting.
So, it is not just a bad idea as you said. It is no better than hitting below the belt and is totally insincere.

The point I was trying to make is: how do we know the attributes of God? Are these attributes mental constructs? Or are they real by universal experience and not personal experience!