Theists, are you immune to being decieved?

[Esquilax]

In either case, a viable universe must conform to indispensible principles that constrain the possibilities. So you cannot have a universe that both exists and does not exist

This is the only principle you've listed that's actually true, and it's because it's axiomatic; something can't be both itself and not itself.

OR a universe in which mathematics does not work

I don't know that this is true, though; all you can safely say is that you can't envision a universe where mathematics don't work.

OR where causes do not have effects or effects causes.

And this one's just a bare assertion; under certain quantum mechanical models, this universe has effects without causes, in some sense.

A universe in which the smallest particle is a Lego seems pretty unlikely, too.

But I'm sure the Lego corporation is working on it.

In addition, there must be a motivating force that makes change happen and yet keeps everything from collapsing back into nothing, i.e. “why is there something and not nothing?”

Another bare assertion.

Now there is a huge gulf between transcendent principles and a personal god, but at the same time many of the attributes of a basic god-like entity match those of the transcendent principles. As Aquinas would say, “Everyone calls this God.”

So, Aquinas is demonstrably wrong, because I don't call that god, but moreover, you've just exposed the extent to which these arguments are nothing more than religious grasping, because you don't believe in a vague motivating force, you've got a very specific, conscious god in mind. To make reference to Aquinas and transcendent principles as proof of your god is a non-sequitur; it helps no-one, because what you've described doesn't describe a conscious being at all. You've mentioned how this reveals the vacuousness of materialism, but in order to show that you presented an argument that can be applied just as easily to both of our positions.

When you talk about objective things, I take it that you mean sensible objects. That does not mean that all real ‘things’ are sensible objects. Are you prepared to argue that sadness, anger and joy are not real?

They're neurological arrangements inside the brain. We can literally measure that.

You also mentioned that everything is material even the mind. Tell me which of the following statements would you include in your position: 1) physical processes can cause mental properties to appear; 2) mental properties can influence physical processes; 3) physical processes and mental properties exist in parallel but do not interact?

The mind is an emergent property of the physical brain; your sense of self isn't some external thing, it's tied to your body. That's why it can be manipulated with drugs and physical stimuli.