Yes but I'm not using that as a way to say God exists. I'm using it as a way to say you can't disprove that he does. You also can't disprove evolution, I mean this whole argument is based on opinions anyways.
God: Based off of evidence; Evolution: Based off of evidence, and what can be proven mathematically. The evidence of God's existance can be argued as being the doing of a human. Now, evolution can be argued in the the same way, but the mathematical portion still stands, without an opinionated belief.
Because there is no valid proof towards God's existence(which some christians may say is the bible, when, if simplified, is a book telling you that the same book must be true(paradox)) the only evidence Science has towards its nonexistence, is that there is no proof towards its existence; the proof that Christianity has obtained, is the Science's disproof.
Let's say you have an imaginary friend, his name is Bill. You write a book, tell people that your imaginary friend wrote it, and disguise the evidence towards who really wrote it. You've convinced a group of people that the beliefs stated within this book are true, and that spreading the beliefs of this book, will allow you to achieve something great. But, you can only die to achieve that something, and Self Delete is not an option.
Somebody disproves your imaginary friend, by stating that he isn't there, and that there's no solid evidence proving him (the proof of which you do not have, is my disproof). You use the book for your arguement. Now, the situation is looked upon with extreme detail, and the research behind the book's writer is still unknown. But, the book states that Bill had written the book(scientific paradox), so the people who have been convinced that this belief system exists, still follow it.
2000 years pass, and this belief system is now one of the major belief systems of the world. But, Bill, has yet to be proven.
If I apply this situation to Christianity, I see little to no difference.
