I am neither for nor against the belief in a god, but I am for sound reasoning.

There are a few things that I find unsound in your article.

The claim that God having no mass implies having no power in our universe rests on assumptions about the nature of power. Many theistic traditions see God's power as something beyond physical force governed by Einstein's equations. They envision God's power existing on a different plane.

The argument about the universe's size and God's omnipresence contains a potential fallacy of composition. This assumes that limitations we recognize for parts of our universe inherently apply to a being defined as existing outside space and time.

Similarly, arguments based on vast distances assume God is bound by physical space and the speed of light. Many theological understandings place God outside these limitations.

Debating God's size based on omnipresence highlights the limits of scientific observation. Science addresses the observable and measurable. Theological concepts (may) fall outside of what scientific tools can directly prove or disprove.

In the end, it's ultimately about belief in the existence of God, and discussions about His characteristics are essentially questions of faith. Neither scientific measurements nor purely logical arguments can definitively prove or disprove such beliefs.