I think that proving God's existence or any deity from any culture with the rigors of science is fundamentally absurd.
The popular arguments usually involve space-time and the big bang theory. (I have a layperson's understanding of those ideas). Suppose that some scientific theory has indeed proven that there exist a creator of the universe, then it still remains to be shown that "the creator of the universe" does in fact have all the attributes of the deity of that culture. Furthermore, if our greatest thinkers succeed in showing that "the creator" does have personal attributes, then what if those attributes contradict the characteristics of the believed deity? Should the new found "creator of the universe" be considered God?
Hence, my main reason that it is absurd to try prove God's existence with science is that God is not well-defined even in non-scientific language and that proving it in scientific terms is comical. Does this argument make any sense to you?
To prove God does one have to show that a certain physical particles exist? An equation? A fruit? A dog? A mathematical proof? What exactly needs to be shown is unclear to me. So what I want to know is what people trying to prove God, wants to show.