Then, a minor premise states some particular data in our experience that come under that principle.
Finally, the conclusion follows from applying the general principle to the particular case.
Scientists follow the scientific method, within which theories must be verifiable by physical experiment.
The majority of prominent conceptions of God explicitly or effectively posit a being whose existence is not testable either by proof or disproof.
A common misconception is that theism is ancient while atheism is modern, but mankind has been making the same arguments for and against the existence of deities—including, with the rise of monotheism, God—since the dawn of human history.
Bronze Age texts such as the Vedas present various arguments against the deities, such as the problem of evil and the Ultimate Boeing 747 gambit, as well as arguments for the deities, such as argument from morality and Pascal's wager, without explaining the arguments themselves, implying that readers are familiar with them and that the arguments themselves were old by the Bronze Age.
I believe we can answer yes to the first four of these questions about the existence of God but not to the fifth.
God exists, we can know that, we can give reasons, and those reasons amount to proof, but not scientific proof, except in an unusually broad sense.
Fideists maintain that belief in God's existence may not be amenable to demonstration or refutation, but rests on faith alone.
Atheists view arguments for the existence of God as insufficient, mistaken or outweighed by arguments against it, whereas some religions, such as Buddhism, are not concerned with the existence of gods at all and other religions, such as Jainism, reject the possibility of a creator deity.