Questions about the trilogy

To the honorable Rabbi, Shalom Rabbi,
I'm in the middle of the second book in His Majesty's trilogy and I wanted to ask questions that have occurred to me.
A) You write in the second book about things that were not handed down to us in tradition, so there is no problem with disagreeing. Where do you get that from? Maybe they were handed down in tradition and you don't know about it?
 
B) Regarding the question of God's knowledge and choice, you claim that He cannot know the future because then there is no free choice by definition. Perhaps our intellect is incapable of understanding the solution to the logical contradiction? After all, even saying that God does not know what will be chosen raises very great difficulties in its entirety, in my opinion. Bottom line, there is a limitation here that you are placing on the Creator of the world, and in my opinion this is also the intention of the Maimonides. Even in the first book, you prove the Creator of the world without understanding how it is really possible, but because it is spirit and not matter, you assume that it is possible (according to your method that the more reasonable alternative should be chosen).
C) Another point. In the first book, you assume that the Creator gave us guidance on what to do in the world in order to worship Him if there is a purpose for creation. But on the other hand, you simultaneously, with respect to Jewish thought, erase this argument. You say that even if all the great men of Israel said otherwise, everything here would be examined with reason and reason, but in my opinion there is an inconsistency here. Here too, the Holy One, the Blessed One, gave us guidance so that we would know what to believe and could not possibly stumble us with false beliefs. I want to emphasize that I am not referring to the issues in dispute, but to the issues on which all the sages throughout the generations have agreed.
 
With great appreciation,
 
Yair