What is the actual mechanism by which God can affect the natural world? How did he create the universe? Does he just think stuff and then it happens? How can he read the minds of seven billion people at once? I’ve never heard a good answer to the question. “Because he’s god“ doesn’t count.
If your argument is since nobody can explain how an immaterial being can interact with material being, then that must mean God doesn't exist, then it isn't a good one. You'd have to show how the idea of an immaterial being interacting with a material world is logically incoherent. Immateriality != nonbeing or not anything.
The idea of an immaterial being interacting with a material world needn't be logically incoherent to be false.
Perpetual motion machines are logically coherent, as are rocks that fall upwards.
The reason we rule these things out as possible is that our very well tested and highly successful physical theories would have to be wrong, if these things were to be possible.
The same applies to interactions with material objects.
Einstein tells us that energy and matter are interchangeable. This has been repeatedly tested in myriad ways.
Quantum field theory tells us that every force has a corresponding particle, and that the properties of both forces and their carrier particles fall into a collection of entities called the Standard Model.
If we accept these observations about how reality behaves, we can deduce certain things about those parts of reality that are not yet known. Then we can test those deductions. The Higgs particle (aka Higgs boson) is an excellent example of this.
When enough energy is crammed into a small enough volume, EVERY particle with a mass equivalent to or less than the available energy is always produced. So to detect the Higgs field, you can just put higher and higher energies in one place, until the Higgs particle appears.
This applies to all interactions between matter and anything else. You can detect photons (the carriers of electromagnetic force); W particles that carry the weak nuclear interaction; Gluons that carry the strong nuclear interaction, and so on.
Notably, the graviton hasn't been found. That's because it's too heavy (and therefore requires too much energy to create); And this goes hand in hand with its incrediby weak abilities. Gravity is so pathetically weak that the force exerted by the entire planet Earth can be overwhelmed by the electromagnetic force in a tiny fridge magnet.
Weak forces cannot be applied only in a small localised area; Their area of influence is always large. So the Earth's gravity cannot affect me, but not also affect the person standing next to me, or even a person several miles away. Everyone gets the same effects from weak forces.
There may be unknown forces; But their range of possible energies, given that we haven't yet detected their carrier particles, implies that they cannot interact meaningfully with any object as small as or smaller than a solar system (much less an individual human), without doing so with sufficient energy that a single particle would annihilate any human with whom it interacted.
So when we consider potentially unknown forces, affecting humans, we can say with certainty that either:
a) Those forces are weak, like gravity; They cannot influence one human without influencing them all in exactly the same way; or
b) Those forces must have given rise to carrier particles in our particle accelerators, (and yet they did not); or
c) The Standard Model of particle physics is not just wrong, but massively wrong in ways that would be obvious to physicists (it's not; We checked).
There are no other possibilities. Either we must reject interactions between our (hypothetical) souls and our material bodies; Or we must reject the Standard Model.
One of these things is purely speculative and is hypothesised as an attempt to rescue traditional thinking originating with pre-scientific minds; The other is the most accurate way of describing reality ever tested by science.
You don't HAVE to reject the idea that the immaterial could interact with material reality on human scales; But if you do not, you MUST reject all of modern physics. Or, as most people prefer, simply remain ignorant of it.
Note that the Standard Model need not be completely correct or correctly complete for this argument to stand. It's just got to be not wildly wrong at human scales. Just as Newton's gravity isn't completely accurate as a description of how massive bodies interact, but it's good enough for us to be sure that Einstein's revisions of it (and any future revisions of Einstein) will not produce rocks that sometimes fall upwards.
