An argument against God

[Mister Agenda]

If statements can be about something not true.

You can say.

If I walked to school, I would be tired.
I am not tired.
Therefore I didn't want to school.

In this case, we had a series of statements, but mainly that God would have made himself known if he exists due to his attributes and due it being a favor to humanity to make himself known beyond doubt. As that is not done, we can deny what follows the first if, "if God exists". That is if the argument is sound.

That is valid:

If P, then Q.
Not Q.
Therefore, not P.

Maybe:

1. If God, then universal awareness of God.
2. Awareness of God is not universal.
3. Therefore, no God.

If the premise is true, the argument is sound. But it won't work on anyone who doesn't also grant that premise, which is not self-evident and therefore must itself be supported.

For instance, if God doesn't mete out eternal rewards and punishments for our finite actions and thoughts; revealing himself becomes somewhat irrelevant; so at least you would want to specifiy what specific God you're referring to; such as Yahweh as depicted in the Bible as read by a literalist.