That's a really interesting way to look at it, how did you manage to make your answer congruent with beliefs about free will?
Pretty much my argument was that God was doing nothing. I looked at it from one perspective where man has created God so it's the cosmos that precedes Him and also mentioned how the question assumes that God is a person who does something, but its more likely that God exists in a way in which he doesn't necessarily do anything and his very existence is what brings the cosmos into being. I rounded off with that one thought experiment about Mary the scientist in a colorless room and that we can't really get a proper answer to the question but we don't really need one so as far as we're concerned he wasn't doing anything.
Oh that's such a cool argument!! Really interesting take challenging the nature of God. RE free will: I didn't touch on it much (word limit sucks) but essentially argued that just because future events can be seen from a certain perspective or slice of space-time, does not mean they were not freely chosen. God having a wider view of past, present, and future, because he exists atemporarily, does not necessitate him influencing our actions. It simply means that he has a greater understanding of time and the workings of the Cosmos. Our perception of the past, present and future is relative not fixed. So a different perspective on what the 'present' it which enables one person (or god) to see actions which would only exist in another's 'future' or 'past' does not impact free will. Sorry my answer is not very concise :[