In replies to the mariner’s posts (replies are often more enlightening than his own post), one idea has been referenced that can be considered a conundrum. Many religions consider that God is omnipresent, that God is the creator of all things, and that God’s love is a power source available to all creatures. Yet there is an element of freewill, of obligation.

On the other hand, there are a number of non-theist groups that believe every piece of existence – from neutron stars, planets, life forms, chemicals and molecules – all have an awareness insofar as their role in the universe.

Do not dismiss this idea lightly. We all are looking for an answer to God’s creation and why we are part of it. Most obvious, at first look, is the absence of love and accountability. Yet, universal creationists see a complete and reasonable way that everything behaves according to a universal plan and accordingly we love and feel accountable because of that plan.

Many universal creationists accept Darwin’s evolution thesis as a description of how creatures evolve on this particular planet in the universe. We behave as we are meant to behave – as humans created according to the laws of the universe.

The conundrum is how is this different from a God model?

The field of these ideas is called teleology. Many books have been written on the subject over the ages. No matter which path you believe, what is the difference? The earliest citation the mariner could find is Cicero the author (just before Jesus was born), who said, “gods are our own graphic idealization of the life to which we aspire,” wherein he cynically accepts that we create our god to our convenience, falling short on heavenly knowledge. All elements of the universe have a purpose bound to the laws of the universe else they would not exist.

Is our existence God’s purpose? Is our existence the Universe’s purpose?

Is our behavior predetermined by a universe that has created our molecules?

A conundrum indeed.

Ancient Mariner