Question

Prove Scientifically that God Exists or Doesn't Exist.

Answer 1

Some Christian philosophers, like Søren Kierkegaard, would say that it is better that proof doesn't enter into belief in God at all, because the Leap of faith required in the absence of concrete evidence makes belief a more significant and meaningful act. You wouldn't necessarily want to know God in the same way that you know your iPhone 6S, even if it were possible. Ultimately, though, a lack of verifiable evidence of the divine could easily be chalked up to a lack of interest on the part of the Divine Being, perhaps because the lack results is some positive effect (ala Kierkegaard), the Being just generally lacks interest in humanity (Cosmicism), it's not the sort of thing that has intent (Pantheism), or it has taken a hands-off approach (Deism). But I don't know that this is a problem. The interesting philosophical and theological question about why there is a lack of concrete evidence, since we can't really know that; it's what the effect is of that lack of evidence.