Ontological reverse

[Angrboda]

Just because I am here:

Nothing that you know of that exists is perfect.

Rephrasing: m elements of a set containing m+n element have property ~P'.

Either:
i) all m+n elements are ~P', God has property ~~P', therefore God is not a member
ii) there is a probability that all elements are ~P', based on the values of m, n, and m+n, and therefore if God has property ~~P', there is a certain related probability that God is not a member of the set.

I believe the latter is okay, while the former equivocates by treating a conclusion based on inductive inference as being one formed by deductive inference. The conclusion is not deductively sound. I believe that is the main matter. Correct me if I'm wrong.

(ETA: It was nice of our resident critic of philosophy, LP, to weigh in with a red herring. The fact that you must have faith to believe in it is in no way necessarily related to whether or not the proposition of His existence is itself true.)