Because such a being sets out to accomplish a purpose, which means such a being is consciousness, which has fractured the world into the meaningful bits we call words. That framework is already in place before we could even begin to hypothetically set "god" out to "do" or make god "be" "anything." There is no "anything" and no way to accomplish it without it being "something," which means it has a word.Why would such a being use words? Indeed would there even BE words in such an existence? Words are, but a poor attempt to reference concepts.
I understand the point, however in such an existence where we are talking about an entity unrestrained by logic, the vestments we have created within our universe such as linguistics, even epistemology.... would they still have any validity? The inability to rely on simply logic as being reliable means we are faced with considering a non rational existence not characterised by anything which we can reliably examine. :/ what would be nonsensical musings here may be reliable there; to suggest that logic does not constrain is a premise that defeats any attempt at examination >.<
Even being "unrestrained by logic" is "something."
If your argument shifts to that "god" moves, acts and exists beyond our ability to frame a hypothetical situation for him in words, then you argue against yourself to be in support of a "god" that "does" "anything" "beyond words."