It doesn’t get you to any deity at all, it only involves a string of assumptions that lead you to a first cause, and then a deity. The argument is demonstrably fallacious, and of course, contains no objective evidence whatsoever.
Only for those prepared to make pure assumption in their arguments, as you did.
Well there you go, pure unevidenced assumption. It is nothing more than an argument from assertion fallacy. It is also of course a begging the question fallacy.
Can you seriously not see the contradiction there? This is also a special pleading fallacy, and so it makes your argument irrational by definition.
So universes can’t be infinite, but a deity can, and all without explanation or evidence? Another special pleading fallacy, and making unevidenced inexplicable assumptions about magic, and the supernatural is not sound argument.
Since when is pure assumption remotely rational, and you have used several known logical fallacies, which I have listed here yet again. So your argument is demonstrably irrational, and not logical as you keep claiming.