Pope John Paul II described God as the All-knowing Absolute.

Yet does this contain a contradiction?

What is absolute, if not a state with no distinctions, qualifications, differences, etc. Like absolute zero, where there is nothing separate or different, or any measurable action.

While knowledge is very much a function of distinctions. How can knowledge exist, if there is nothing to know, no distinction between observer and observed?

The problem monotheism seems to have, is the absolute is assumed to be an ideal.

Logically a spiritual absolute, the source of sentience, would be the essence of this awareness, from which we rise, not an ideal of wisdom and judgement, from which we fell. More the light animating the film, than any particular images on it.

So how much is this father figure lawgiver a social construct to instill cooperation and obedience to authority in the social unit? Consider democracy and republicanism originated in pantheistic cultures and the Romans adopted Christianity as the Empire solidified and vestiges of the Republic were fading into a messy history.

For the Jews, monotheism has always been monocultural. One people, one rule, one god. Evangelism wasn't a thing.

Jesus was mostly popular with the Greeks, who were trying to revitalize a belief system that had grown rigid. The Trinity was based on the year god cycle, of the son reborn in the spring, of the sky god and earth mother. So it couldn't be eliminated, but its deeper connections had to be obscured.

When the West went back to less top down, centralized government models, it required the separation of church and state, culture and civics, since a culture of absolute rule didn't fit with a system of competing and hopefully balanced interests.

Are sure even our religious beliefs are not survival mechanisms?

A couple thousand years is not very long, in terms of evolutionary adaptations.