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

[Ferrocyanide]

Not just emotion, but any and every thought yeah.

Roger.

And you can have the same exact car in multiple places at the same time, but that doesn't lead us to posit that cars aren't material.

A car is also a structure and structures are pieces of information and they are also designs.
Structure, design, information are all non material things, just like a sphere, cube, and other geometric shapes.

So a car’s design is a non-material thing. The actual implementation, to turn that design into something that has an effect in reality, you need atoms/molecules.
The original design, as thought of by the engineer, isn’t even made of atoms. It’s just certain complex geometric shapes.
In our reality, such shapes do not exist so what we do is approximate these complex geometric shapes using zillions of atoms/molecules.

Also, when a press makes car parts, like a muffler, one muffler doesn’t match another muffler. The number of atoms aren’t the same, the crystals aren’t in the exact same locations, there are various microfractures. The muffler that comes from a factory approximates the design as though of in the engineer’s mind.

Screwdrivers, notoriously material.

Same with screwdrivers. There is the design and then there is the real world approximation made of atoms.

It's a running description of material objects and material interactions.  If material forms are the only thing I encounter - then even if we lived in a world bursting with immaterial whatsists, it would be irrational of me to believe as much.  Most of the time, theology invokes a veil to explain the disconnect - tacit acknowledgement that the immaterial is nowhere to be found - at least by us - at least here - at least now. It's also the basis of belief in ritual or magical objects. Totems that can help you to apprehend or interact with the other - because even when we're positing the immaterial.....we can't escape describing it as nominally immaterial. Monkeybrains.

Yes, theology makes some interesting claims, such as X is not material such as the soul is not material. They sometimes seem to call it the spirit.
My understand of soul and spirit is that they believe that the soul is the thing makes makes the body move and maybe it does the thinking and has the emotions.

That’s nice but we also need to talk about some science/our understanding as to how nature operates and a few concepts such as non-material things, such as numbers, names, languages, designs, information, software. We need to plug all this together and see where the soul/spirit fits.
What effects does the soul/spirit have on the brain?
What effects does the soul/spirit have on each molecule of the brain?
With what forces is it interacting with the material world?
Has any research scientist done work on the soul or is it just all talk thus far?

For me, the soul would be the “software” of the brain. We can compare it with a PC although the way a brain works and a PC works isn’t an exact match. The brain has more of a similarity to a ASIC (a specialized chip. For example a MPEG hardware decoder.).

Once your ASIC is damaged, then the software that it represents is gone.

So, I’m fine with the notion that our soul/spirit is non-material.
Then there is the question of god. Why are people claiming that it is non-material when it clearly decides to make things out of atoms?
At least claim it that it is made of some other type of particles and maybe it is from another world or universe.

Claiming that the god is non-material is equivalent to saying that it is a nothing or just an idea and one has not been built yet.