My Answer to a Request for a "Proof" That God Exists Without Using the Bible

      It's a person's own choice to embrace the Light, or keep their eyes shut to it. That is not the Light's doing, that is the personal choice of that person. One can be, and is, surrounded by this Being of infinite Light, Love, Joy, and Compassion, but if they refuse to open their eyes to this Being, if they plunge themselves into darkness by shutting their eyes, stopping their ears, and refusing to acknowledge His existence surrounding them, how is that His fault? They create their own darkness, they put themselves into a torment which does not need to be.
     What is energy? It's a really interesting question because the definition of energy we learn in school, "The ability to do work," is wholly inadequate to what we know it to be in reality. We know that everything which exists, ultimately, is a form of energy. We know that every particle of matter is really just a one-dimensional string of energy vibrating at a certain frequency and a certain spin. So energy, really, is the foundation, the building blocks of everything we experience as existing, all matter and everything which that matter comprises is ultimately energy which has been organized into a specific form and specific combinations of different forms. As a result, energy is literally everywhere at once. Even when we take something down to the "zero point" removing all energy from a vacuum, there is still the presence of energy and particles popping in and out of existence. In other words, it is omnipresent. We know that energy cannot be created or destroyed. It can change forms, but it cannot be created or destroyed. In other words, it is eternal. Energy might be considered finite in a finite universe, but in what many now believe is an infinite multiverse there must also be an infinite, unbounded, limitless amount of energy in order for that infinite multiverse to exist. Infinite, eternal, omnipresent, and the source or foundation of all created existence. Energy is also the source and spark of life as something is not considered alive without that electrical form of energy coursing through its biological circuitry. We're already halfway there to something that sounds very much like the Being you very much want to deny exists. How can the Source of life itself not be alive? I'm sure an argument can be made against it, but it is a question to ponder. What's really interesting is that all of these qualities we know to be true about energy the ancient Stoics attributed to "pneuma," what we translate as "spirit" (and which they referred to as a "fiery breath") something which we cannot see but the effects of which we can feel.
     So, let's take this one step further and assume that energy, the Source of life and underlying foundation of everything which exists, is itself alive. Would that Being not be, by its very nature, omnipotent? Because of its extremely intimate contact with all that exists, being literally the substance which gives everything form, would it not by nature be omniscient, knowing by nature the movement and location of every particle of matter and carrier of energy which exists? Honestly, we're already there at this point in describing such a Being, though I'm not sure the word "God" quite covers it. It is in fact quite the understatement.
     So, what would this Being be like as a person, should it be a person? Would it be selfish? Why? What would be the point of creating other beings then? No, I don't think so. I think it would be turned wholly outward and concerned with those beings. Would it make those beings like puppets? Again, why? What would be the purpose? No, it would make those beings, though dependent on the Being's own existence for their own, autonomous with their own wills. Would it just create them and ignore them? Again, same question. Why? What would be the purpose? No, it would create them for interaction with someone or something other than itself.
     And wouldn't it then somehow try and communicate with those beings so that they could get to know it as a person of some kind? Is it that much of a stretch that it would try to make its mind known about what it considers to be the best way for those beings to interact with not only itself, but with one another? There is a reason why we see such commonalities between the teachings of Jesus, the Buddha, Lao Tzu, the Stoic philosophers, and many others. There is a reason why we see the "golden rule" repeated across the ancient world in many different cultures. So, there is this.
     Is it proof that "God" exists? No, but I think it's a damn good argument for it.
     Then there are the hundreds if not thousands of Near Death Experience testimonies of people, many if not most of whom do not claim to be Christian, who report being surrounded by overwhelming love and peace centered around a Being of pure light, love, and infinite goodness which many equate with a loving parent figure. One more thought. Referring back to those NDEs, while 75% of them are generally positive and they return profoundly changed for the better, about 25% of them are deeply negative, hellish even. Many of those 25% were professing Christians who experienced such a hellish NDE in addition to atheists and people of various faiths. My conclusion to this based on what I've read isn't that these people had the wrong religious beliefs, as nearly every religious belief or lack thereof is represented, but it's that they were so caught up in themselves, their own interests, cravings, pettiness, and pride that they shut their eyes to the Light that wanted nothing more than to embrace them and for them to accept its embrace. They were willing to play the part of good religious person, but it was only an act. Internally, they willfully blinded themselves and experienced the consequences.