Scientific proof of God? We seem to be turning into a society that relies on science for all the answers. The question of the evidence for God changes as the culture changes. Now, in the age of science, God’s existence is given a scientific standard. My response: “I’ll give you scientific proof of God as soon as you can give me the scientific answer to why we should do science.” Science deals the actions of the physical world. Many scientists, especially atheistic scientists think that if something can’t be studied by science then it is non existent, or absurd. But what if I apply the same criteria to that statement or that standard. Can a person give a scientific reason that science explains everything? The science community needs to fess up and admit that science is not the only game in town. In fact, for science to be meaningful it has to be built on philosophy. We must have a reason to do science before ever beginning the enterprise of science. Getting back on the original question, “is there scientific proof of God”, there are 2 key assumptions in the question. Assumption 1, why does the question require that the proof be scientific? The assumption is that science is the only thing capable of answering questions when it is not. In fact, there’s a category mistake in the question. God is the creator of all things studied by science and therefore is not subject to the laws of science. God exists apart from all the physical laws. We don’t always need to submit the questioner’s criteria. What if I asked a math question like 4 * 4, but my requirement for the answer needed to be a letter of the alphabet. That would be an unfair criteria for the answer. More to the point, what if I asked for physical proof of my existence as a human. Which of my physical attributes can a person point to to prove that I really am a human? What part of me exists that could not also exist as a robot? No physical attribute about me is proof that I really am a human. When we determine that somebody is a human we have come to the conclusion that there is and invisible personhood that they are made up of. This invisible person hood is also what God is made up of. But he possesses it in an unlimited manner . The second assumption in the question is what is meant by proof. Proof is a very loose term when you’re having a discussion. To be more honest, you need to admit that absolute proof will never be reached in questions like this. What we need to do is give evidence and good reasons. With that out of the way, let’s tackle the question- is there scientific evidence for God? I believe science is the fingerprint of God. It is acting as a road sign pointing us to the existence of God, but it alone cannot be taken as proof for God. Without getting too deep into the teleological argument for God, I would just say that as we discover more about science and about our fragile world, we see evidence that God’s hand is in the creation of it. Summing up whether there is scientific proof of God: there is scientific evidence of God. There is also logical evidence, philosophical evidence, and personal evidence for God. All evidence is should be taken into account. we should not need to subject our answer to the skeptics narrow criteria, which are often set up so that there is no possible successful answer.