JMR40:
You bring up an interesting point. However, this is one of those rare times when Science and Mathematics are actually on the side of Faith.
Y'all read about all this hooey where science writers are trying to make the belief in God seem like a silly superstition. The truth is Science can neither prove or disprove the existence of God. True Science is a tool to understanding the same way diesel mechanics is a tool to understanding how trucks run. You can't really use either to prove or disprove God.
On the other hand, look at some of the great minds of Science during the Enlightenment. Most were convinced Science would bring them to a better understanding of God. Here is an instance where that belief paid off.
For those of you who are saying something to the effect of "I have Faith, that's all I need." This is, in essence, a mathematic equivalent.
From the Wikipedia entry on Godel's Proof:
The argument is in a line of development that goes back to Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109). St. Anselm's ontological argument, in its most succinct form, is as follows: "God, by definition, is that for which no greater can be conceived. God exists in the understanding. If God exists in the understanding, we could imagine Him to be greater by existing in reality. Therefore, God must exist.
or distilled further: "If you can conceive of GOD then he must exist."
or as I always say, "I'm not so worried about whether I believe in God, but rather whether He believes in me."
