A "meta-argument" against all future arguments for God's existence ?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I saw you palm that card. God making his existence known is not conditional on the argument for God’s existence. And vice versa.

Boru

I am not sure I follow. God making his existence known to X is a sufficient condition for X to rationally believe in God... disagree?

If I understand your objection correctly, you think God making his existence known to X is not a necessary condition for rational belief (one can rationally believe in God without God making his existence known to them), and although I disagree, I can concede your objection and my argument still holds, because I only need 4 -> 5.

Nope, you need all of them to work, but none of them do. What you’re doing is attempting to link God revealing himself to a hypothetical argument for God’s existence.

Boru