The Problem of Infinite Aspects

[NoMoreFaith]

I take issue with the wording of premise 4. Although direct observation of infinity (a divine aspect) is not possible, it could be a reasonable inference. If a person was immortal they may find that however far they go there is still further they could go. From this they could reasonably infer that the universe extends on to infinity.

....

Premise 5 seems self-evident if I understand it to mean that humanity’s understanding of God is limited by what it is possible for human’s to experience.
Premise 6 also seems as self-evident. God is real or not real independent of how he is conceived.

The concepts of omnipotence et al are orthodox absolutely, it is very much this I am poking. More importantly, I am poking the claim that anyone can "ABSOLUTELY KNOW God is has infinite aspect A,B, or C".
The premises of this argument rely on the state of play in this day and age. No physical manifestations, no objectively proven miracles, just private internal conviction of connection with a higher being.

In argument 4, an immortal man is not truly eternal. By being a man, his eternity started at a finite point. The eternal metaphysical God however, the eternity goes both ways, there can be no finite start point.
Also, being a man, additional longevity may lead you to inference of infinity, it would not allow that ability to grasp the reality of it. This is slightly irrelevant to the point.

It is the arguments beforehand that lend weight to the notion that anybody describing their experience internally about God, MUST rely on lies, exaggeration, or taking the voices word for it.
The proof I am attempting with this argument is that NOBODY has even private evidence of God, and even if he exists or not, he is impotent to convince anyone of his power.
It can be proved your internal experience is not evidence even to yourself, even if you really are talking to God.
Any claim that you have private internal evidence for God, is a fallacy, as all his powers are inherently unknowable (the proof of the argument), and therefore definitely indistinguishable from delusion and should therefore not be dismissed as such.

Which leads you to 2 conclusions, either any one who says GOD is Infinite, is either definitely delusional or exaggerating orlying or exaggerating the voices powers.

We can never be absolutely certain about what’s going on, but we make inferences.

Which is why science never claims infinity. Maths can as a model, but science cannot truly prove or disprove infinity.

All human knowledge is approximate. I suppose that’s the same as saying that everything we know is a convenient fiction. But that does not stop us acting as if our best descriptions of reality were actually real.
If one believed that some form of deity could be reasonably inferred from their experience with reality (which is the ultimate point of contention) then why should that stop them from living according to that inference even if it may eventual prove unfounded?

None at all. Merely that is unreasonable to claim that private subjective evidence is actually evidence.
You can never prove, even to yourself, that you are not delusional, regardless of your claim.

The question an atheist must ask, is whether it is fair to dismiss any argument from private experience. The answer is definitely yes.

In another words... a theist must stop pretending they have evidence of God, because it will always be a statement of faith indistinguishable from delusion, and this fact can be proved logically.
Its okay to have faith, but you must release all claim to the word evidence, not just objectively, but subjective evidence as well, and rely purely on faith.... and hell.. isn't that kinda what they were telling you all along?

Any theist who claims evidence of any kind, can therefore be dismissed, even evidence contained in the bible, because it was written by a man who equally has no evidence, even subjectively to rely on.