The existence of God is something that cannot be proven with hard data (i.e. measurements of some kind), simply because of the metaphysical nature of the question. Maybe in a million years we have a way to prove it (or disprove it), but until then the only way to reach a conclusion about God's existence is via Logic. There are many arguments that support the existence of God. Among them search for the argument for the First Cause, the Teleological argument and the Ontological argument (especially for Godels proof).
Mathematics does not directly prove the existence of God. The relationship between math and the concept of God is a matter of personal belief and interpretation, rather than a scientific or mathematical proof.
There is no proof of God existing, though there is also no proof that he doesn't. It's all a matter of belief, until we can prove or disprove God's existence.
Rene Descartes philosophy of logic and rationality led him to come to the conclusion that God must exist. Without his existence, there is not explanation for the universe.
Science doesn’t have the processes to prove or disprove the existence of God. Science studies and attempts to explain only the natural world while God, in most religions, is supernatural.
Only if you can disprove/prove the existence of God.
God
Agnosticism is the belief that the existence of God or the supernatural is unknown or unknowable. It is a philosophical stance that asserts that there is not enough evidence to prove or disprove the existence of a higher power.
You cant prove god isn't real so buzz off and go
Most philosophers would say that it is impossible to disprove the existence of god(s), because it is usually not possible absolutely to prove a negative. It can only be proventhat God is highly improbable. As in all arguments about existence or non-existence, the responsibility to provide the proof falls on those who claim that God does exist. In almost two thousand years of Christian argument fo the existence of God, that proof has not been forthcoming.
The only valid proof of the existence of ghosts or of gods or of anything at all is the proof by example. Someone must produce a ghost or a god or a heffalump which is verified by the senses (non-distorting aids like telescopes, microscopes, and amplifiers are OK, transformative aids like Photoshop are not) of experts judged to be credible both by believers in the idea in question and by nonbelievers. Until a ghost or a god is produced for public evaluation their existence may be considered doubtful but unproven.
here be me thomas aquinas own argument to say that god is real i can prove bye the holy spirit
There is no "the" agnostic. An agnostic is a person whom does not see enough evidence to prove or disprove God's existence, and they don't really dwell on it.