If the God of classical theism exists, then God is omnipotent (all-powerful). Given that God is all-powerful, would God set up the world in such a way where humans compete for resources?
The upshot is that an omnipotent Being doesn’t need competition in order for humans to survive and thrive; God can bring about human flourishing and societal flourishing without economic competition. In fact, there are countless ways for God to do this because God is all-powerful.
Formal Statement of the Argument
1. It is a known fact that many humans compete in society for resources in order to survive and thrive (i.e. economic competition).
2. (1) is more expected on the hypothesis of metaphysical naturalism than on the hypothesis of classical theism.
3. The intrinsic probability of metaphysical naturalism is equal to that of classical theism.
4. Therefore, other evidence held equal, classical theism is probably false.
It’s important to notice that premise 1 isn’t so much focused on human competition in general, nor is it focused on societal competition in general. Rather, the premise is more focused on economic competition, nevertheless, economic competition includes societal and human competition.
Defense of Premise 2
There is no reason on theism to expect a world filled with competition. Thus, even more specifically, there is no reason to expect (on theism) a world filled with human competition in society. In fact, it seems that we would expect the opposite on theism. On theism, we have an all-loving Being who cares deeply about the needs and wants of finite creatures. On naturalism, however, nature is indifferent to our needs and desires. In other words, it is survival of the fittest (this would also include the ability to thrive). So, if we have good reasons in general to expect competition for resources on naturalism, then it seems that this fact would give us at least some reason to expect the more specific fact of societal competition for resources on metaphysical naturalism.
Secondly, given the omnipotence of God, there are countless ways for God to help humans survive and thrive in society, and God doesn’t need competition to do this. On naturalism, however, there are not countless ways. Therefore, even if naturalism doesn’t exactly predict capitalism, it certainly predicts something like it.
It might be objected that we will eventually get to a society where humans don’t have to work or compete for resources because robots will be doing all the work. However, even if this is true, the point is that God could have set up the world to be that way from the very beginning.
It might also be objected that humans implemented economic competition through their own free choices, hence, there is no issue here. But even if that is true, there are still humans and other animals who suffer as a result of being born in such places. Humans have to work in the system in which they were born in, which is a society that is largely capitalistic.
One might also object that there are no societies that are purely capitalistic. I agree with this, and I’m not saying any society is only capitalistic. The issue is that having humans compete for resources in society isn’t surprising on the no-God hypothesis. And, in general, humans competing for resources is not surprising on the no-God hypothesis (e.g. naturalism. 
Finally, one might say that economic competition builds character. Firstly, we don’t need economic competition to build character. In fact, we don’t need any societal competition to build character. In addition, even if building character is a good thing, one must weigh that good vs. all the harm the societal/economic competition can bring.
 See my previous posts for a definition of metaphysical naturalism