I talked about this once, and I was surprised I didn’t find this post before I posted my version about it. anyways here’s my answer when intangible concepts are used as evidence for a deity:
Intangible concepts like love, energy, or ideas to “prove” God is but a flawed attempt to redefine God using terms for things that already exist. Like saying God is love, or God is energy, or God is existence, or whatever intangible thing that is already defined.
The primary problem with defining God as being synonymous with things that are already proven to exist in reality (such as love, energy, nature, or the universe) is that we already have words for those things and don’t need to use God to describe them. The word God comes with extra baggage because most theists think of God as conscious, smart, and involved in the world, answering prayers and judging people. There is no evidence whatsoever that energy has consciousness or self-awareness. Ideas, faith, love, morality, and other societal constructs are related to the human brain. All of which arise from evolutionary strategies that enhance survival through teamwork, cooperation, and altruism.
But creation and existence are not connected to the brain, you say? But we already have words for them. Creation and existence in itself do not burn, punish, and persecute homosexuals and other “sinful enemies” of a faith. People do that in the name of their fantasy.
God is everything, God is you and me, God is all around us. Tell me, do they all pass judgement to others for not aligning with their agenda, or is it just you?
Ultimately, if the word “God” is used to mean anything to anyone (such as love, energy, or nature), then it essentially carries no meaning and undermines effective communication.