Huh? . . . debated? . . . who? . . . what?
Infinity, like anything else can be debated but for such a debate to be resolved requires careful adherence to definitions of the terms used and logical analysis to avoid self-contradicting statements.
Everything is all there is and is therefore and thereby
limited by virtue of being contained within the set of all that exists. Anything postulated to be outside or beyond the realm of existence is by definition non-existent. There is no such thing as everything and something else.
Infinity refers to an abstraction of an indefinite and theoretically limitless number of entities. However, when a set of specified enties is implied we find that even infinity is limited to the specific entities defined as belonging to that set. (see previous paragraph).
The problem appears to be a matter of defining precisely what you mean by the term "infinity" which once limited to the meaning of its definition is shown to itself be a contradiction.
For example:
Eternity: time without end
Without specifying both a beginning and an end, time becomes a meaningless, non-event. Eternity is likewise meaningless unless it is meant to refer to time from the beginning to the end of time. Even if we (hopefully) do not live to witness the end of time, the beginning of time is one end of time. We now have strong evidence to support the �big bang� when the markers we use to measure time, space and matter, came into being.
cont . . .
. . .
what?