My argument to prove God exists (IIc.)

3. Polytheists/Pagans in general - I don't know if I can accurately say that polytheists/pagans believe in one God but address it through different aspects.

Much like the God aspects found in the sephiroth on the Tree of Life or even the Father, Son, Holy Spirit combo in the Trinity, however this cannot be said to be polytheism because both Judaism/Kabbala and Christianity in that God despite the different aspects has a unity of one. It is more to do with differing personality aspects which people can relate to and approach rather than God creating these aspects so it can relate to people. So there are so called polytheists who are actually monotheists, they just haven't examined their actual beliefs and 'gods'

If a polytheist does actually worship different gods, then do they hold them all as equal? If not, then can they explain why this isn't the case? After all if they are viewed as a god wouldn't this make them all equals? But as we examine any particular branch of mythology we will see these 'gods' do things like marrying, having children, engaging in personal beefs and indeed all manner of emotional based behaviour commonly associated with humans.

We can look at the likes of the ancient Egyptian gods which had animal heads as well as other non-human forms (you know Kek). Does the polytheist actually believe these gods were actually partly or wholly the creatures they have been depicted as?

Some probably would but mostly polytheists would accept the paintings and other artworks depicting these gods as symbolic. Ancient Egyptian art was symbolic, in addition the pharaoh was held to be a descendant of the gods but should he not have had an animal head or something? And why do bloodlines come into it.

I believe that the different gods were different human families and that the head of a family was portrayed in artwork with an animal head so that when that person died they could be replaced with little effort. Indeed as we have seen in all manner of polytheistic and occult rituals the leader of a coven or temple had their face covered. Did wearing a mask give them super dooper powers? No. In searching for where they got their occult knowledge inevitably leads back to the nephilim/djinn/demons/rogue angels/etc.

Again staying in ancient Egypt we see that its occult influence lingers today, Moses was an Egyptian prince and would have been taught the occult practices that were the domain of the 'god' families and bloodlines. We also have to list Rosicrucianism, Enochian magic, Thelema and I very strongly suspect Freemasonry. I was a Rosicrucian (AMORC) and the more you get into it you see the ancient Egyptian factor and it cannot be denied. Enochian magic does reference ancient Egyptian 'gods' as a factor in various practices, Thelema is just ancient Egyptian magical practices mixed in with yoga and was cooked up by Aleister Crowley. Freemasonry does have a 'god' but it is a syncretisation of Jah, Bael and Osirus, its name is Jahbulon. Syncretisation of gods is an ancient Egyptian practice, although some will say that the followers of these gods would agree to syncretise them if the numbers dedicated to these gods fell away due to other gods gaining more popularity. But I would tend to say that it was the intermarriage of certain bloodlines which caused the syncretisation as no one wanted to relinquish their bloodline name. Much like the way when upper class members intermarry, so if let's say a member of an elite family with the surname of Jones marries a member of an elite family called Smith then the surname that the couple will use is Jones-Smith.

So far I have been referring to ancient Egypt, but what of ancient Rome, Greece and other groups such as the Etruscans, Vikings and Celts. What differentiates them from the Egyptians is that they largely portrayed their gods as human beings, sure they were portrayed as above average humans but humans never the less. But these mythologies were also known to clone each others gods, all they did was rename them in their language and nothing else. The occult aspect was rather poor and was easily swept away by Christianity.

I will mention Hinduism which to me comes across as a free choice polytheism, you can add or subtract gods. Even Jesus Christ is accepted as a god by some Hindus but not especially a prominent or highly ranked one. I believe that the Lord Jesus Christ has been factored into not Hinduism per se but into the cultural beliefs/practices of the Indian sub-continent. This is because of the 'lost' years of Jesus Christ where it is believed that he travelled to India and took in the culture before returning to ancient Israel/Judea. Some say that he was close to Krishna but I never was concerned about this and I don't have an opinion either way.

With voodoo although we have the loas/lwas who interact with humans there is an actual chief God called Bon Dieu or some spell it Bondye. Bon Dieu has nothing to do with humans but will do on occasion, so it has delegated things concerning humans to the loas. I suppose it could be said that the same situation exists with the Holy Trinity, Jehovah, Yahweh, Allah delegating certain responsibilities to the various rankings of angels. The same should also be said for the God of Deism as well.

The real nutjobs concerning polytheism are the likes of Wiccans, chaos magicians and eris followers.
All wicca is just bits and pieces of magical beliefs and superstitions picked up by Gerald Gardiner, it was Aleister Crowley who formulated these bits and pieces into a basic occult system......of sorts. Crowley only met Gardiner once, so apart from setting up a bare bones system for occult practice it was Gardiner and his nutjob followers who tacked on all sorts of crap and make believe to produce the instant insanity that is called wicca today. Oh... it was Gardiner who introduced the 'skyclad' practice, yes he was just a dirty old man.

Chaos magic? Along the same lines of wicca, you can add or subtract gods from anywhere on earth or in history and mix them together and just add ritual. You can throw eris worship into the mix, although eris and discordianism is just a joke even to its 'followers' the same cannot be said for chaos magic 'practitioners'.

Atheist? Solipsist? Hardcore nutjob? Doesn't matter chaos magic can cater for anyone because (in the words of Hasan of Alamut) nothing is true; all is permitted.

"THE PANENDEISM TREATISE"

Full text of "THE PANENDEISM TREATISE"
See other formats
THE PANENDEISM TREATISE
PANENDEISM ORGANIZATION PRESS
By Benjamin Sullivan & James McDermott
© 2017. Panendeism Organization certificate of publication N°- OW120875
PANENDEISM ORGANIZATION PRESS

Panendeism Organization is dedicated to exploring the vast potential of Panendeism, a world view that is both millennia old and has more recently been hailed by many of the greatest physicists as a potentially true representation of reality. From its shocking implications in science, to its affirmation of human dignity, Panendeism is a promising new focus within the parent philosophy of Deism.

Our focus is to analyze the wealth of scientific data that has been accrued over the past century and promote new and revolutionary ways of investigating and expanding potentially groundbreaking fields of research.

Above all else, we are committed to the cultivation and recognition of all humanity as one extended family in which each member is worthy of value, respect, and friendship. We affirm that all life is also worthy of our care,
respect, and admiration.

For more information about our organization and mission, please visit us on the web at www.panendeism.org .
© 2017. Panendeism Organization certificate of publication N°- OW120875 [1]

ETYMOLOGY

Panendeism (or pan-en-deism), pronounced paen'en'dei Iz'sm, is derived from the Greek pan (nav), meaning all, en (sv) meaning in, and deus (Asug), meaning god. The earliest known use of the term was in 1995 by Jim Garvin 1 , a Korean War veteran and Catholic turned Trappist monk. Garvin described his concept of deity as being similar to the "all-pervading Great Spirit" of the Native Americans, and called it "Pan-en-deism." The term “Panendeism” was officially proposed more recently by Larry Copling in 2001.

OVERVIEW

Panendeism is an ontological position that explores the interrelationship between God (The Cosmic Mind) and the known attributes of the universe. Combining aspects of Panentheism and Deism, Panendeism proposes an idea of God that both embodies the universe and is transcendent of its observable physical properties. Although examples of Panendeistic thought can be found as early as the 1st millennium BCE, it was not until nearly 3,000 years had passed, at the dawn of the 20th century, that these ideas began to gain traction as a prevailing scientific model of reality.

The first well recorded teachings that evoke the God hypothesis of Panendeism were introduced by Adi Shankara, who unified the Eastern Philosophy of Advaita Vedanta in Hinduism in the 8th century BCE. Later, in the 4th century BCE, Plato’s philosophy of “The One” or “The Good” introduced these concepts to the West and were subsequently expounded upon by Plotinus as in the 2nd century BCE. Much later, in the 17th century CE, Baruch Spinoza would define God as the only thing that exists in his “Short Treatise on God, Man, and His Well-Being,” a work that later earned him the affection of Albert Einstein, who described his own belief as being similar to Spinoza’s.

After Spinoza, German idealism continued to pave the way for Panendeism, with authors such as Immanuel Kant and Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling, and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel all leaving behind fantastic works that are certainly worth reading. Other wonderful examples include the Transcendentalism of Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, and Walt Whitman, as well as the 20th century Process Theism of Alfred North Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne.

With the dawn of the 20th century, science had at last begun to advance to a point at which the potential in several millennia of Panendeistic philosophy began to appear consistent with the objective picture of reality. Einstein’s earth shattering publication of special relativity in 1905 opened the flood gates to an entirely new scientific conception for the very basis of what we perceive as reality. The universe could no longer be seen solely in terms of Newton’s static, unchanging celestial spheres. Our understanding of the entire universe was very suddenly 'transformed' to something infinitely more perplexing, but also remarkably more insightful and potentially closer to the true reality of the Universe. Through one equation, Einstein conceived of a dynamic Universe that behaved like a sea of energy arrayed with an expanding fabric of space-time, and comprised of dynamic and interactive energy modules that could take on the form of matter, light/ radiation, or other forms, unknown: E=MC 2 .

Einstein, who would be echoed by other physicists contemplating the scientific
implications of this quantum sea in which we are immersed and of which we are composed, later mused:

“[Man] experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest — a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. The striving to free oneself from this delusion is the one issue of true religion. Not to nourish it but to try to overcome it is the way to reach the attainable measure of peace of mind. "[2]

In 1905, Max Planck, the father of quantum theory, was among the first to immediately recognize the significance of Einstein’s (later famous) publication. Indeed, much of the initial notoriety Einstein’s theory received was largely thanks to Planck’s efforts to introduce it within the scientific community. After receiving the Nobel Prize in 1918 and spending a lifetime in Quantum Physics, Planck, as its father, unabashedly said this regarding the nature of reality:

As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clearheaded science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about the atoms this much: There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together... We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter. [3]

As science continued to unravel the mysteries of reality, new proponents of Panendeistic thought emerged. Niels Bohr, who in 1922, received the Nobel Prize in Physics for his contributions to atomic structure and quantum theory clearly defined Panendeism in these terms:

“We can admittedly find nothing in physics or chemistry that has even a remote bearing on consciousness. Yet all of us know that there is such a thing as consciousness, simply because we have it ourselves. Hence consciousness must be part of nature, or, more generally, of reality, which means that, quite apart from the laws of physics and chemistry, as laid down in quantum theory, we must also consider laws of quite a different kind. ”

Erwin Schrodinger, who in 1933, received the Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on quantum theory, said this:

"It is not possible that this unity of knowledge, feeling and choice which you call your own should have sprung into being from nothingness at a given moment not so long ago; rather this knowledge, feeling, and choice are essentially eternal and unchangeable and numerically one in all men, nay in all sensitive beings. But not in this sense — that you are a part, a piece, of an eternal, infinite being, an aspect or modification of it . . For we should then have the same baffling question:Which part, which aspect are you? What, objectively, differentiates it from the others? No, but, inconceivable as it seems to ordinary reason, you — and all other conscious beings as such — are all in all. Hence, this life of yours. . . is, in a certain sense, the whole. . . This, as we know, is what the Brahmins express in that sacred, mystic formula... 'Tat tvam asi' — this is you. Or, again, in such words as 'I am in the east and in the west, I am below and above, I am this whole world. "

Werner Heisenberg, one of the fathers of quantum mechanics, had this to say
regarding the ultimate nature of reality:

"...The same organizing forces that have shaped nature in all her forms are also responsible for the structure of our minds... Of course, we all know that our own reality depends on the structure of our consciousness; we can objectify no more than a small part of our world. But even when we try to probe into the subjective realm, we cannot ignore the central order. ..In the final analysis, the central order, or the 'one' as it used to be called and with which we commune in the language of religion, must win out. "

David Bohm, a protege of Einstein who's often referred to as one of the most
significant theoretical physicists of the 20th century, said this:

“The field of the finite is all that we can see, hear, touch, remember, and describe. This field is basically that which is manifest, or tangible. The essential quality of the infinite, by contrast, is its subtlety, its intangibility. This quality is conveyed in the word spirit, whose root meaning is "wind, or breath. "

This suggests an invisible but pervasive energy, to which the manifest world of the finite responds. This energy, or spirit, infuses all living beings, and without it any organism must fall apart into its constituent elements. That which is truly alive in the living being is this energy of spirit, and this is never born and never dies.

And these great minds only begin to scrape the surface of names that have both revolutionized science and seen clear implications for a Panendeistic sort of world view. Among many others, Nikola Tesla, Gregory Bateson, Sir Arthur Eddington, Robert Jahn, Sir James Jeans, Henry Margenau, Carl Friedrich Von Weizsacker, Freeman Dyson, and contemporary scientists like Paul Davies and Robert Lanza, have all advocated or affirmed the ontological ideas put forth by Panendeism as both plausible and in perfect harmony with the reality that science reveals to us. Indeed, it is not unfair to say that without the ability of these brilliant minds who forsook their own human perception of reality for the scientific evidence they were presented with, we might never have arrived at the proven theories of quantum physics or relativity, both of which have radically changed the course of human progress over the past century.

Like its parent philosophy Deism, Panendeism is closely related to naturalism and advocates that arguments for the existence of Deity must be maintained through science, reason, and observation of the natural world. Also, as in Deism, Panendeism is reasonably skeptical of - or dismisses religious figureheads, prophets, and claims of divine revelation. Panendeism is more likely to readily avoid the errors of dogma, corruption, oppression, and manipulation often manifest in organized religions, simply because it is self-governed and has no founders, fathers, or leaders. Each Deist or Panendeist, past, present and future, must justify their conclusions and hypotheses by means of the 'God-given' instruments of reason and science. Purely speculative notions are encouraged, where they are presented as speculation. 

Likewise, Panendeism is highly skeptical of claims relating to the suspension of natural law through mediums such as supernatural forces or beings. Panendeism does not seek to define the attributes of Deity beyond affirming that the necessary Uncaused First Cause exists and is itself the underlying substance and cause of reality. By necessity of the proposed interconnection between God and reality, Panendeism proposes and presumes that the entire universe and everything within it is both sacred and meaningful. In this way, scientific knowledge, nature, and being are all modes of spiritual connection to Deity. Each sapient being, and to some degree, every living thing, is and must be part and parcel of God.

THE 5 TENETS OF PANENDEISM

Like our progressive science, both Deism and Panendeism represent broad world views that are constantly evolving as knowledge and science progress. However, Panendeism is governed by 5 unchanging principles:

1. We affirm as a defining thesis, that the natural terrestrial world, and the greater Universe we observe are, by very definition, “real,” and acknowledge that these may well be the only semblance of God we shall ever witness with our human eyes. We assert that we, as sapient beings, are an integral part of the whole, and that human observational perception, both material and spiritual, is worthy of our interest, pursuit, and trust.

2. We affirm the primacy of human reason and science as the final arbiters of
truth and error regarding our understanding of the universe, but acknowledge
that human beings embody, by design, integrated intuition and expression that transcend the bounds of science. We propound that qualities such as consciousness, compassion, passion, introspection, interconnection, love, friendship, kindness, hope, goodwill, charity, sincerity, inspiration, music, art, and spirituality, are among these inherent and inspired natural qualities.

3. We affirm that we are, even in our own cognitive abilities, finite. We
acknowledge that human reasoning is limited, our senses and perception are
imperfect, and that we are free to do good or cause harm to others, or leave
others to do good or cause harm. We assert that any action that disrupts the
joy, peace, purpose, or balance of the beings or environment around us, shall
inevitably derogate and diminish both the quality and scope of our own joy,
peace, purpose, balance, and meaning. If such detrimental, counter-intuitive
behavior is embraced by many, we propound that all life could cease to exist in the natural, terrestrial world we inhabit.

4. We affirm that we are endowed by Deity with the inalienable liberty to govern and orchestrate our thoughts and our actions, within the bounds circumscribed by the Laws of Nature, known and unknown, and assert that the entire Universe, and we ourselves, are part and parcel of the Creator Architect- Supreme Being and Cosmic Mind we know as God.

5. We assert that God is not expected to be manifest inter personally in our lives, or through prophets or figureheads, but rather, intra-personally and perhaps in other ways too subtle to be understood or detected by our finite human senses.
Through the intrinsic presence of Deity, we are naturally drawn toward love; a
realization of life; a sense of oneness, brotherhood and sisterhood with the
natural world around us; and thus, we are compelled to live sublime and
purposeful lives. Therefore, among the transcendent purposes unique to sapient life such as human beings, is the seeking after self-understanding, and the externalization of the resulting discovery within to positively affect the material and spiritual world around us and all living things and beings whose paths cross our own, to make the world a better, kinder, and gentler place for all its inhabitants.

7 POINT CODE OF CONDUCT 
Panendeism additionally sets forth a simple 7-point code of conduct:

1. Approach to understanding external reality: Free -thought (rationality,objectivity, and critical-thinking).

2. Arbiters of external truth: Primacy of science and primacy of reason.

3. The universe and everything within it is sacred: We shall endeavor to do good and not cause harm.

4. Discussing or presenting information regarding external reality: Only
scientifically validated information and proven theories should ever be
presented as fact, while suggestive evidence and hypothesis must always be
presented as speculative.

5. Exploring the nature of self, other, and being: Compassion, passion,
introspection, interconnection, love, friendship, kindness, hope, goodwill,
charity, sincerity, inspiration, music, art, and spirituality are all excellent
examples of the benevolent reason-based processes and mechanisms by which we engage in and experience the full spectrum of wonders that life has to offer us.

6. Discussing or presenting information regarding personal experiences or
self: Panendeism, as an entity of philosophy, shall forever refrain from teaching spiritual practices or mysticism, as they have been used throughout recorded history by organized religions and cults to victimize and gain power over innocent people. However, we do recognize that we live in an amazing universe and welcome individuals to freely discuss and explore their own experiences, keeping in mind that things like spirituality and self are different for each person. Anyone who promotes the contrary position or claims to have special powers, methods, or connection to God should be treated with extreme caution and is perhaps more inclined toward Panentheism than Panendeism. 

We encourage exploration, but not evangelism. Personal and public exploration may include any one of a number of things, from sitting atop a mountain as the sun sets or gazing into the vastness of space on a clear night, to a pursuit of science, deep meditation, or the simplest things in life, such as being close to someone you love.

Incompatible with: Organized religion, prophets, figure heads, dogma, false-
information, oppression, and inequality.

PANENDEISM & THE PANTHEISM

Pantheism is the worship of a physical universe and mindless energy force as God, whereas Panendeism postulates that a mindful and transcendent God is the underlying reality of what we perceive as the universe. As with Panentheists, Pantheists tend to present and accept speculations as facts and follow a structure that is more akin to organized religions and dogmatic-theism.

PANENDEISM & PANDEISM

Pandeism is the worship of a physical universe and mindless energy force as a
deceased or destroyed God with a resurrection doctrine that claims God will someday evolve back into being, whereas Panendeism postulates that a mindful and transcendent God is the underlying reality of what we perceive as the universe. A great real-world analogy for this is to imagine the universe as a quantum super-computer.

In this scenario, Panendeism's God would be primarily the processor, memory, and hard drive and Pandeism's God would be the battery. This isn't to say that
Panendeists don't recognize the importance of energy, or see it as part of God, they just don't attribute the vast complexity of the universe solely to it.

PANENDEISM & PANENTHEISM

While Panendeism and Panenthiesm are fairly similar in their base assumptions, Panendeists tend to look at the universe as being purely comprised of mind, while Panentheists tend look at the universe as being a part of the body of God.

Additionally, Panendeists, being a part of the parent organization of Deism, tend to be more agnostic, speculative, and cautious when it comes to forming and presenting opinions about the true nature of reality, whereas Panentheists tend to present and accept speculations as facts and follow a structure that is more akin to organized religions and dogmatic -theism. Panentheists also tend to more commonly view their relationship with Deity as interpersonal, often engaging in prayer and other religious rituals, while Panendeists often view their relationship with God as intra personal and based upon observation of the natural world, science, and reason.

Moreover, Panendeism's rejection of religious dogma allows it the freedom and agility to remain relevant by taking into consideration and adapting to all new knowledge arising at the forefront of our progressive science.

PANENDEISM & DEISM

Panendeism is a recognized member of the Deism Alliance and part of the greater Deism family. As such, Panendeism is not a breakaway from or rejection of Deism, but a concise ontological position within Deism that focuses on the vast sea of contemporary scientific knowledge, especially physics, quantum physics, quantum mechanics, consciousness, and neuroscience. All Panendeists are therefore effectively Deists with a default variation regarding the relationship between Deity and the universe .

PANENDEIST TERMINOLOGY FOR GOD

• Superior-Mind

• Cosmic-Mind

• Cosmic Consciousness

• Divine-Mind

• Word-Soul

• Supreme Being

• Deity

• Divinity

• Great Spirit

• Creator-Architect-Supreme-Being

• Plenum

• The All

• The All-in-All

• The One


SUPPORTIVE THEORIES & MODELS


• Bose-Einstein Condensate

• Particle Wave-Duality

• The Anthropic Principal

• Synaptic Tunneling

• Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle

• Pribram's Theory of Sensory Perception

• Bertrand Russell's Consciousness Model

• Michael Lockwood's Theory of Consciousness

• The Theory of Biocentrism

• Alwyn Scott's Consciousness Model

• James Culbertson's Model of Consciousness

• Orchestrated objective reduction (Orch-OR)

• Panpsychism

• Nondualism


REFERENCES


1. Albuquerque Journal, Saturday, November 11, 1995, B-10

2. Letter sent by Einstein to Robert S. Marcus, Political Director of the World
Jewish Congress, offering condolences for his son who had succumbed to polio. February 12, 1950

3. Das Wesen der Materie (The Nature of Matter), a 1944 speech in Florence, Italy.
Source: Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 1 1
Planck, Nr. 1797

4. Werner Heisenberg, 1971, Physics and Beyond: Encounters and Conversations, New York: Harper & Row

5. "The Mystic Vision" as translated in Quantum Questions: Mystical Writings of the World's Great Physicists (1984) edited by Ken Wilber

6. Werner Heisenberg, 1971, Physics and Beyond: Encounters and Conversations, New York: Harper & Row

7. Speech written by David Bohm in 1987 for the memorial service of his friend
and University of Pennsylvania classmate, Malcolm Sagenkahn.

Can You Show That God Exists Without the Bible?

Can You Show That God Exists Without the Bible?

Question:

Can you prove that God exists today without using the Bible?
And if so, how do you know that he is the ONLY God? And that all of those other 'gods' who others have claimed to be gods aren't real or else fall into the category of demons or djinn?

Answer:

There are three distinct questions here, these are;
a.) Can you prove that God exists today without using the Bible?
b.) And if so, how do you know that he is the ONLY God
c.) And that all of those other 'gods' who others have claimed to be gods aren't real or else fall into the category of demons or djinn? Or else are not just human beings who have taken upon themselves the title of God or else have had it placed upon them?

Each question logically follows from the one before it. But before we start, we need to resolve a background issue.

What is Proof?

In asking this question, we're basically asking "What kind of proof will be good enough? How much proof is needed?". When we talk about proof, we're talking about establishing some degree of certainty about something.

Scientific knowledge is based on repeated observations, but scientific knowledge is only one kind of knowledge. 
Other kinds include historical knowledge, philosophical knowledge, moral knowledge and personal knowledge. 
These types of knowledge lie outside the bounds of scientific knowledge.

For example, take historical knowledge.
Can you prove that King Henry the Eighth existed? Using the scientific approach of observation and repeatable experiments, this would be impossible. But using historical methods, it is certain that he existed beyond a reasonable doubt. This phrase is the key. While not one person living today has ever seen King Henry the Eighth, we know he existed beyond a reasonable doubt. This is why in law courts, a jury must be convinced of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not beyond a shadow of a doubt.

So, when we look to prove whether God exists today, a scientific approach will not work. The amount of proof needed is enough so that we can say: "God exists beyond a reasonable doubt".

The Question Restated

We can now restate the questions as such:

Is it reasonable to accept that there is a 'Higher Being' behind this universe? If so, how do we know 'what' or 'who' the Higher Being is? Is There A Higher Being?

a.) Can this Higher Being be proven to exist with using the Bible?
b.) How do you know there is only one Higher Being?
c.) Have there been others who have tried to take the place of the Higher Being?

There are many different arguments for the existence of a Higher Being, none of which rely on the Bible, and none of which can be scientifically proved. Here are a few:

The Argument From Design

When we look at anything which has a design, we rightly conclude that it had a designer. Somebody designed chairs for a purpose.
Let's use this as an example; You walk into an empty room and have a need to sit down, as there is no furniture and have a need then you want a solution - this is emanation. Next you envision that a chair you suit your need and imagine the shape, height and colour of the chair - this is creation. But for your creation to come into being you have to 'blueprints' in order to decide the construction of the chair - this is formation. From that all that remains is the physical action in order to make the chair.
You can add somebody designed a glove to fit over a hand, if one has cold hands or else needs to have them covered then any solution requires a design and has to be practical so it can be used by a variety of human beings and can be replicated if it was designed by human beings for the use of human beings.

We can look at the universe, the complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe but sustains it today through its design. In other words it is the design that sustains itself due to the emanation, creation and formation that is behind the design which could only come from a designer. It would go against the laws of mathematics that the universe came in existence by accident or some random event.

Many examples showing God's design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few:

The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter. Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.

The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -20 degrees to +50 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. 
The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.

And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.

And then in particular we have human beings, we show an unbelievable amount of design which replicates. Same anatomy as can be seen in regards to the likes of medicine and surgery, we also have life spans which governs our biological being. Even though humans try to prolong their lifespan through various means it does not extend 'life' as they knew it. In order to extend their life people will have all manner of surgeries, all manner of implants and take all manner of drugs, but from all this they will change from their personality nature and end up as drug induced robots and zombies without life.     

Human beings were not designed to be immortal and neither was any other form of physical life on this Earth. If we were immortal then we would not reproduce as designed, but if we did this Earth would be overpopulated and the likes of murder and utter poverty would skyrocket on a global scale and most (if not all) animal species would be extinct due to hunting caused by hunger.

The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.

The human brain processes more than a million messages a second. Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people.

The eye...can distinguish among seven million colors. It has automatic focusing and handles an astounding 1.5 million messages -- simultaneously.8 Evolution focuses on mutations and changes from and within existing organisms. Yet evolution alone does not fully explain the initial source of the eye or the brain -- the start of living organisms from nonliving matter.

The DNA code informs and programs a cell's behavior; All instruction, all teaching and all training comes with intent. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose. Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? As you may know, a computer program is made up of ones and zeros, as in binary code like this: 110010101011000. The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It's made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. These are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. There are three billion of these letters in every human cell!!

Just as you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a three billion lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual.
Why is this so amazing? One has to ask....how did this information program wind up in each human cell? These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the persons body should develop.

Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it.

Let us continue...

Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:
It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 37 degrees. Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that various chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.

Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.
Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.
Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter.

Ninety-seven percent of the Earth's water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.

Much of life as a whole may seem uncertain, but look at what we can count on day after day: gravity remains consistent, a hot cup of coffee left on a counter will get cold, the earth rotates in the same 24 hours, and the speed of light doesn't change - on earth or in galaxies far from us.

How is it that we can identify laws of nature that never change? Why is the universe so orderly, so reliable? And when anomalies occur they can correct themselves. This points to a Designer.

"The greatest scientists have been struck by how strange this is. There is no logical necessity for a universe that obeys rules, let alone one that abides by the rules of mathematics. This astonishment springs from the recognition that the universe doesn't have to behave this way. It is easy to imagine a universe in which conditions change unpredictably from instant to instant, or even a universe in which things pop in and out of existence."
Dinesh D'Souza, What's So Great about Christianity; (Regnery Publishing, Inc, 2007, chapter 11)

Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said,
"Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle."
Richard Feynman, The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist (New York: BasicBooks, 1998)

We can also compare the universe to the likes of a railway system, at any given time all over the Earth there are thousands of trains on a multitude of railway tracks. There may be accidents and collisions but in comparison to the amount of journeys this is in fact a fraction. Likewise in the universe there may be collisions between comets and rocks of various placements and sizes. Considering the amount of rocks and comets in the universe the mathematical odds that this planet should have been hit and ultimately destroyed defies the laws of mathematics.

As we see we find ourselves with the intuition that random, unplanned, unexplained accident just couldn't produce the order, beauty, elegance, and seeming purpose that we experience in the natural world around us. More notable is that the components within the order have the ability to replicate and reproduce within the segments of the order. Examples are humans reproducing with humans, dogs reproducing with dogs, plants reproducing with plants usually by pollination (which can require division of the sexes) or else asexually as seen in the likes of plant grafts or else by 'splitting'. As we see these days because of political correctness and the continuous redefining of words and terms there are those who claim cross breeding within a species is 'evolution'. It is not, the amount of chromosomes has not changed.

In terms of reproduction there cannot be interbreeding between various species because of the various number of chromosomes between the species. The DNA/RNA of each creature will not ultimately absorb that of any other, it may be 'absorbed' with the aid of various chemicals and drugs. But then the problem will be two fold; the first problem is that the receiver will constantly need chemicals and drugs in order to keep the absorbsion. The second being that the constant ingestation of chemicals and drugs will either kill the receiver or else have them in a continuous sickly condition.

"Look round the world; contemplate the whole and every part of it: You will find it to be nothing but one great machine, subdivided into an infinite number of lesser machines, which again admit of subdivisions to a degree beyond what human senses and faculties can trace and explain. All these various machines, and even their most minute parts, are adjusted to each other with an accuracy which ravishes into admiration all men who have ever contemplated them. The curious adapting of means to ends, throughout all nature, resembles exactly, though it much exceeds, the productions of human contrivance; of human design, thought, wisdom, and intelligence. Since, therefore, the effects resemble each other, we are led to infer, by all the rules of analogy, that the causes also resemble; and that the Author of Nature is somewhat similar to the mind of man, though possessed of much larger faculties, proportioned to the grandeur of the work which he has executed. By this argument a posteriori, and by this argument alone, do we prove at once the existence of a Deity, and his similarity to human mind and intelligence."
 - Hume 1779

Design type arguments are largely unproblematic when based upon things nature clearly could not or would not produce (e.g., most human artifacts), or when the intelligent agency is itself ‘natural’ (human). Identifying designed traces of ‘lost’ human civilisations could in principle be uncontroversial or even nearly trivial. If we are confronted with something which nature unaided by an intelligence truly could not or would not produce (e.g., a DVD player), a design conclusion of some sort is very nearly inescapable. The unproblematic nature of such arguments has often been appropriated as a foundation for analogous inferences concerning (things in) nature. But in cases involving design in (or of) nature itself inferences are more problematic. Things actually in nature presumably are among those things which nature could or would produce, the intelligence in question would typically presumably not be within nature, and our everyday types of design inferences would appear to be wide of the mark.

But despite the variety of spirited critical attacks they have elicited, design arguments have historically had and continue to have widespread intuitive appeal—indeed, it is sometimes claimed that design arguments are the most persuasive of all purely philosophical theistic arguments.

Cosmological arguments begin with the bare fact that there are contingently existing things and end with conclusions concerning the existence of a maker with the power to account for the existence of those contingent things. Teleological arguments (or arguments from design) by contrast begin with a much more specialised catalogue of properties and end with a conclusion concerning the existence of a designer with the intellectual properties (knowledge, purpose, understanding, foresight, wisdom, intention) necessary to design the things exhibiting the special properties in question. In broad outline, then, teleological arguments focus upon finding and identifying various traces of the operation of a mind in nature's temporal and physical structures, behaviors and paths. Order of some significant type is usually the starting point of design arguments. Various advocates have focused on different types, levels and instances of order, have suggested different logical connections between order, design and designer and have pursued different levels of rigor

Design Inference Patterns

The historical arguments of interest are precisely the potentially problematic ones—inferences beginning with some empirical features of nature taken as (or argued to be) design-indicative, and concluding with the designedness of, and a designer of, the phenomena in question. A standard but separable second step—the natural theology step—involves identifying the designer as God, often via particular properties and powers required by the designing in question. Although the argument wielded its greatest intellectual influence during the 18th and early 19th centuries, it goes back at least to the Greeks and in extremely clipped form comprises one of Aquinas's Five Ways.

Design Arguments Example:

Entity 'A'  (stone) within nature is like specified human creation 'B' (concrete) in relevant respects because it is a product of deliberate design by an intelligent non-human agency. Like effects typically have like causes (or like explanations, like existence requirements, etc.) Therefore it is (highly) probable that 'B' has 'A' precisely because it is a product of deliberate design by an intelligent human agency. But as to item 'A'? If you were in find a stone in a riverbed for example, would you know how old it is and how it was created?

On a theistic level it can be argued that as man was created in the image of God; then man too will create in the image of God. Whether that be by reproduction or replication in relation to animate (such as children) or inanimate (such as concrete) 'objects'.

 Some things in nature (or nature itself, the cosmos) are design-like (exhibit a cognition-resonating, intention-shaped character). Design-like properties are not producible by (unguided) natural means—i.e., any phenomenon exhibiting such properties must be a product of intentional design. Therefore some things in nature (or nature itself, the cosmos) are products of intentional design. And of course, the capacity for intentional design requires an agency of some type. An agency of some type would have to refer to a Higher Intelligence or Higher Being or as we commonly say... God.