Euthyphro dilemma

[Whateverist]

Wait.  What is the point of inventing the supernatural category to explain god's omni powers and undetectability if you're going to turn right around and say God's nature is the reason God's behavior itself is constrained by a more comprehensive 'nature' which apparently encompasses both what the rest of us call nature and your supernatural?  You seem to be biting yourself in the ass.

You are confusing the two very different definitions of the word:

na·ture
ˈnāCHər/
noun

1. the phenomena of the physical world collectively, including plants, animals, the landscape, and other features and products of the earth, as opposed to humans or human creations.
   "the breathtaking beauty of nature"
   synonyms:
   the natural world, Mother Nature, Mother Earth, the environment; More
   
2. the basic or inherent features of something, especially when seen as characteristic of it.
   "helping them to realize the nature of their problems"
   synonyms:
   essence, inherent/basic/essential qualities, inherent/basic/essential features, character, complexion More
   

I don't think that is the problem. The problem is that you're begging the question whether or not there is anything apart from the physical world (including the observed subjective states of physical beings such as ourselves). You want to say there is a category apart from the first meaning which itself has a nature of the second kind. Still waiting for any reason to think such an alternative category to the first meaning isn't empty.