Atheism is more probable than Theism

So if I were to define God, I would say a maximally great being that functioned as the initial creator. I myself do not fully believe all of the written word of God. It's contradicting, it has too many gaps, it's been edited by man throughout history.Theism is the idea of believing in one or more than one deity. Atheism is denying any God or any deity, thus an atheist must believe that everything can originate from nothing.Ontological Argument Our understanding of God is a being than which no greater can be conceived. The idea of God exists in the mind. A being which exists both in the mind and in reality is greater than a being that exists only in the mind. If God only exists in the mind, then we can conceive of a greater being—that which exists in reality. We cannot be imagining something that is greater than God. Therefore, God exists.What this basically means is that there has to be a maximally great being which would be defined as God. If a maximally great being can exist in some possible world, than a maximally great being must exist in all possible worlds, thus meaning a maximally great being must exist in the actual world. So, if there is even the possibility that a maximally great being could exist, then a maximally great being must exist. This is the math behind the Ontological Argument made by mathemitician Kurt Godel. Definition 1: x is God-like if and only if x has as essential properties those and only those properties which are positive Definition 2: A is an essence of x if and only if for every property B, x has B necessarily if and only if A entails B Definition 3: x necessarily exists if and only if every essence of x is necessarily exemplified Axiom 1: If a property is positive, then its negation is not positive. Axiom 2: Any property entailed by—i.e., strictly implied by—a positive property is positive Axiom 3: The property of being God-like is positive Axiom 4: If a property is positive, then it is necessarily positive Axiom 5: Necessary existence is positive Axiom 6: For any property P, if P is positive, then being necessarily P is positive. Theorem 1: If a property is positive, then it is consistent, i.e., possibly exemplified. Corollary 1: The property of being God-like is consistent. Theorem 2: If something is God-like, then the property of being God-like is an essence of that thing. Theorem 3: Necessarily, the property of being God-like is exemplified. The Contingency ArgumentSince the Universe could, under different circumstances, conceivably not exist (contingency), its existence must have a cause – not merely another contingent thing, but something that exists by necessity (something that must exist in order for anything else to exist). In other words, even if the Universe has always existed, it still owes its existence to an uncaused causeThe Kalam Cosmological Argument Whatever begins to exist, has a cause of its existence. The universe began to exist. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its existence.Cause does not mean the same as purpose. Cause means, the relationship from one event to the next. It is impossible for there to be an infinite amount of causes because even scientists believe that there had to have been a beggining of our universe, and nothing real in our universe can be infinite. When I say 'real,' I mean tangible. Certainly ideas can be infinite such as Pi, which is supposedly infinite.Fine Tuned Argument There are over 50 physical cosmological constants (basically equations that had to equal a certain value) for our universe to form properly and support life. To stress the importance of how perfect these constants had to be in order for life to form, think about this analogy:Cover the entire North American continent in dimes all the way up to the moon, a height of about 239,000 miles (In comparison, the money to pay for the U.S. federal government debt would cover one square mile less than two feet deep with dimes.). Next, pile dimes from here to the moon on a billion other continents the same size as North America. Paint one dime red and mix it into the billions of piles of dimes. Blindfold a friend and ask him to pick out one dime. The odds that he will pick the red dime are one in 10^37.Your friend would have had to pick that red dime 50 times in order for the universe to form properly, and for life to exist. That's how perfect these constants had to be. If even one of these were to not equal what they equal, life would no exist and I wouldn't even be here to make this argument. This argument does not prove the existence of a deity like the others, but it does support the idea of one. It supports that the universe was finely tuned. It shows that it is more logical to believe that something guided our universe to creation.Pretend you were trying to throw 50 pennies into a 3 inch by 3 inch square and have them all land in the same spot. By throwing them, you are leaving their destination to chance, and it is very unlikely that they will all land in that square. But if one were to place each penny into that square then it is very likely for them all to fit. That's all I got. Your turn. :)