
The question is phrased in many different ways, usually relating to one of
two points:
The 20th century worldview placed its faith in science. Everything could be proven by scientific method and experiment. Anything that could not be proven was either untrue or unworthy of thought. You could not depend on something that was unproven.
As an engineering graduate, I'd love a simple formula, which proves and defines God. The formula does not exist, and I doubt it ever will. The unproven nature of God does not make him unreal or unknowable. The question I like to ask is, "If He was real, wouldn't you want to know Him?" Science has value but it is not the sum of life, as Albert Einstein said:
Science without religion is lame, religion without
science is blind.Albert Einstein - Science, Philosophy and Religion (1941)
I've spent long hours debating how the world came into being with fellow Christians. Some Christians take the story literally (believing that popular science has missed something or got it wrong); others think it is a parable not meant to be taken literally.
I believe the bible tells us why we are here; what life is all about. Through the bible, we learn that God loves us and wants to know us. The creation story tells us that we are the pinnacle of God's creative acts; there is a reason for our existence.
I won't choose for you whether you take the creation story literally or as a parable. The most important thing is the message it gives us. We are important to God; whatever method God used, it was not an accident.
If God is real then we might expect Him to do unusual and supernatural things. It does not seem logical to say miracles are false, therefore, God is.
I've seen a number of miracles. I've known disabled people who have got out of wheel chairs. I've seen deaf people hear because of prayer.
Whether we've seen miracles or not, it seems logical, that God would be able to do them. People are healed today as they were in Jesus' day.