There is no god
God has no free will
A benevolent god all-knowing being only has one option in any situation, and that is the option that causes most good. Therefore a perfectly good all-knowing God has no free will. An all-knowing god instantly knows all of its future actions and therefore has no free will to change them. A god with no free will is not moral.
Evil and suffering contradict the existence of a benevolent god
If God is all-powerful and all-good, it would have created a universe with no suffering and no evil. But, evil and suffering exist. Therefore God does not exist, is not all-powerful or is not benevolent. Attempts to justify the existence of evil are called theodicies. There are no fully working theodicies, even popular ones such as the free will theodicy were rejected thousands of years ago. It seems that if there is a god, it is not the all-good moral being that classical religions would have us believe
Because evil exists, the existence of heaven negates the existence of a moral god
Is there a point to life before heaven? If God wants what is best for everyone it could immediately place everyone in heaven. If we want what is best for our children, we could kill them, and then God would send them to heaven because they were innocent. That we do not do this means that there is no God, no heaven, or that there is some purpose to life and evil. However, there is no such purpose. Babies who die (for example, in natural disasters) go to heaven, therefore there is no essential point of life, nor any essential reason that we have to endure suffering and go through the tests of life before we can go to heaven. This shows no moral God exists."
Religion is pointless
If God is moral then everyone has a chance to enter heaven. This means people who never learn which religion is correct, or even accept the wrong religion, have a chance at entering heaven. Our moral actions must determine whether or not we enter heaven, not our knowledge or religion therefore revealed religion must be false.
God is dangerous
The major monotheistic religions hold that idolatry is a serious sin so it is safer to accept no god rather than risk accepting the incorrect one. The goal of reaching heaven is dubious as we know very little about what heaven is really like. In conclusion: Atheism is safer than theism and for everyone's safety it is urgent we all reject theism.
If God is just, moral or understanding it will forgive us our cautiousness! If God is not just, moral or understanding then we hardly want to share heaven with it for all eternity. Either way: atheism is safest by far.
The worlds' religions could all be the creation of evil demons, all of them spreading lies, deceit, confusion and war. They make us worship them, as god(s), and make us submit to them en masse, clouding our minds. What if religions are the creations of demons? Or more likely, viral irrationality?
Souls do not exist
God doesn't need souls in order to control our consciousness, God can revive and restore our consciousness as it sees fit. The existence of immaterial souls is not required to explain any supernatural phenomenon or magical events associated with willpower or even life after death. There are insurmountable problems with the physics of how souls would interact with our bodies. Souls do not exist and have no reason to exist.
There are no absolute Morals
There are no absolute morals, as all things are experienced by humans subjectively. The existence of morals does not imply the existence of God, and, if God has morals it wants us to follow we have no methods of knowing for sure what those morals are. God has more often been used to justify immoral actions, such as war, oppression, the dark ages, that it has to support good morals. Good morals can all be derived through humanistic logic, reason and biological impetus, there is no space for a competition between "God" and morals.
Gods word - mistranslated and contradictory
It is apparent that every translation of holy texts (this is truer for older religions such as Judaism and Christianity) than newer ones like Islam is different to other translations (otherwise there would only be one translation required per language per book), and there are many different versions of holy texts available. This means that there are multiple ways of interpreting the texts.
In most texts you can find one part which appears to contradict another part. In most cases, tradition will dictate which part is the 'most' correct or which part is a refinement on the other. Deciding which parts override which is another cause of confusion;
Prayer is superstition
If you look in the Bible, there are an amazing number of people that God wants his followers to murder. For example, in Exodus 35:2 God lays down this commandment:
For six days, work is to be done, but the seventh day shall be your holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the LORD. Whoever does any work on it must be put to death.
God or the Bible is saying evryone who works on a Sunday must be put to death. Now look at Deut 21:18-21. It says:
If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father and mother, who does not heed them when they discipline him, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town at the gate of that place. They shall say to the elders of his town, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of the town shall stone him to death. So you shall purge the evil from your midst; and all Israel will hear, and be afraid.
That is a whole lot of teenagers that we need to kill in addition to everyone who works on a Sunday.
Then there is Leviticus 20:13:
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.
All homosexuals need to be killed, a lot of teenagers, and anyone who works on a Sunday. What about this:
If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbour, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death.
According to the Bible, all adulterers, people who work on Sundays, many teenagers, and all homosexuals need to be killed.
There are two things in this that show you that God is imaginary. First there is the utter stupidity of these verses. Second, there is the fact that if God is an all-powerful being, he would kill them himself. There would be no need for people to do the murdering.
Many believers completely ignore these parts of the Bible. That is because they know that the verses are insane. By acknowledging that their God is insane, they prove that their God is imaginary.
Why believe in your particular god?
There are hundreds of religions being practiced today. Here are 20 of the most popular, along with an estimate of the number of followers:
1. Christianity: 2.1 billion
2. Islam: 1.3 billion
3. Hinduism: 900 million
4. Chinese traditional religion: 394 million
5. Buddhism: 376 million
6. African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million
7. Sikhism: 23 million
8. Juche: 19 million
9. Spiritism: 15 million
10. Judaism: 14 million
11. Baha'i: 7 million
12. Jainism: 4.2 million
13. Shinto: 4 million
14. Cao Dai: 4 million
15. Zoroastrianism: 2.6 million
16. Tenrikyo: 2 million
17. Neo-Paganism: 1 million
18. Unitarian-Universalism: 800 thousand
19. Rastafarianism: 600 thousand
20. Scientology: 500 thousand
If you believe in God, you have chosen to reject Allah, Vishnu, Budda, Waheguru and all the other gods that other people worship today. It is quite likely that you rejected these other gods without ever looking into their religions or reading their books. You simply absorbed the dominant faith in your home or in the society you grew up in.
In the same way, the followers of all these other religions have chosen to reject God. You think their gods are imaginary, and they think your God is imaginary.
In other words, each religious person on earth today arbitrarily rejects thousands of gods as imaginary, many of which he/she has never even heard of, and arbitrarily chooses to believe in one of them.
The following quote from Stephen F. Roberts sums up the situation very nicely:
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
A rational person rejects all human gods equally, because all of them are equally imaginary. How do we know that they are imaginary? Simply imagine that one of them is real. If one of these thousands of gods were actually real, then his followers would be experiencing real, undeniable benefits. These benefits would be obvious to everyone. The followers of a true god would pray, and their prayers would be answered. The followers of a true god would therefore live longer, have fewer diseases, have lots more money, etc. There would be thousands of statistical markers surrounding the followers of a true god.
Everyone would notice all of these benefits, and they would gravitate toward this true god. And thus, over the course of several centuries, everyone would be aligned on the one true god. All the other false gods would have fallen by the wayside long ago, and there would be only one religion under the one true god.
When we look at our world today, we see nothing like that. There are two billion Christians AND there are more than one billion Muslims, and their religions are mutually exclusive. There are thousands of other religions. When you analyse any of them, they all show a remarkable similarity -- there is zero evidence that any of these gods exist. That is how we know that they are all imaginary.
God is impossible
If you consult the dictionary, here is the first definition of God that you will find:
"A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions."
Most believers would agree with this definition because they share a remarkably clear and consistent view of God. Yes, there are thousands of minor quibbles about religion. Believers express those quibbles in dozens of denominations -- Presbyterians, Lutherans, Catholics, Baptists, Episcopalians, Methodists and such. But at the heart of it all, the belief in God aligns on a set of core ideas that everyone accepts.
What if you were to simply think about what it would mean if there were a perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe? Is it possible for such a being to exist? Epicures thought about it in 300 BCE, and he came up with this:
"The gods can either take away evil from the world and will not, or, being willing to do so, cannot; or they neither can nor will, or lastly, they are both able and willing. If they have the will to remove evil and cannot, then they are not omnipotent. If they can, but will not, than they are not benevolent. If they are neither able nor willing, then they are neither omnipotent nor benevolent. Lastly, if they are both able and willing to annihilate evil, how does it exist?"
In other words, if you sit and think about who God is supposed to be, you realize that such a being is impossible. Ridiculous, in fact.
Here is another way to understand the impossibility of God. If you look at the definition of God, you can see that he is defined as the "originator and ruler of the universe". Why does the universe need an originator -- a creator? Because, according to religious logic, the universe cannot exist unless it has a creator. A believer will say, "nothing can exist unless it is created." However, that satement immediately constructs a contradiction, because we must then wonder who created God. For a believer the answer to that is simple -- "God is the one thing that does not need a creator. God is timeless and has always existed." How can it be that the everything MUST have a creator, while God must NOT? The contradiction in the definition of God is palpable.
As soon as your think about the concept of a perfect, omnipotent, omniscient being, you realize the impossibility of the concept. That impossibility is yet another way to see that God is imaginary.