No, your post is against revealed and comprehensive truth and falls short of 2 Timothy 2:15...
Your pretext and verse-ology leads you astray.
He was submissive to the Father.
The Romans didn't over-power God. It is an obtuse and ignorant conclusion. See, this is your failure to understand the full Scripture and use it correctly, 2 Timothy 2:15; John 10:17-18. You are going by pretexts which always lead to error, a truncated gospel, and a mitigated god.
Keep studying, as with all we still need to.
Please read your Bible through, several times, and then again, and garner some teachers to help you from the path that is leading you astray, Ephesians 4:11,12,13,14ff. If your answer is "I have read it through several times" it is an excuse, and you are not rightly handling the Word of God. You are coming to some false conclusions, good questions, but you are making some errors. Glad to see someone thinking, yet you are heading off into Open Theism.
First of all, you sound arrogant. So, I'd appreciate it if you didn't. Regardless of your intention, your words come off that way.
Maybe you got a point in the over-power thing. If Jesus didn't put up a "fight" with his full God-power, then its not an overpowering... it's him allowing himself for those things to happen.
Either way, Jesus was not using his full power. That point still stands. God does not need to practice his full power, all the time, to be God. A God that does not know the future, at least temporarily,... is still God.
This means that requirement for God to be all powerful,
keyword: all the time, is NOT a requirement. This is an important biblical truth. It leaves the door wide open for many other claims. It allows us to ask the questions IF God is not required to read the heart of men... to do miracles... to be everywhere... all the time... These powers of God are all questionable now (Notice I'm not claiming any specific answers). This is good for our study of God.
More to the point...
First of all, I think there's intuitive problems with God determining people to God to heaven and hell. There's moral tensions... and I believe blind faith among Calvinists to ignore that moral intention. That's unGodly... not necessarily faithful. I believe this state is described best in the following:
1 Timothy 4:2 Such teachings come through hypocritical liars,
whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.
Our consciousnesses can possibly be seared. I've met Calvinists that struggle with their own conscious... understanding what a worthless and evil God Calvinism seems to make God... struggling with their conscious to accept what they really think is a good interpretation.
We have a God Romans 2:14-15 Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the Law, do by nature what the Law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the Law, 15 since they show that the work of the Law is written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts either accusing or defending them
God gave everyone the law in our hearts and a conscious (perhaps these two are the same). Either way, if there's moral tension, it needs to be resolved, not dismissed naively.
Secondly, God not having to be all powerful all the time... opens the question of God necessarily determining people to heaven and/or hell. I personally believe God does not need humans to be glorified... like Calvinists do. I believe it does not diminish God's glory in any way for humans to do anything. So, I already have an answer. He doesn't need to determine humans because God never needed humans in any way to be God. God was God before humans ever existed.