Understandably, we humans have an anthropocentric view of reality. We want—and clearly you want—to believe that humans possess some intrinsic worth that distinguishes us from other creatures, and that our fundamental sense of what is fair and decent is, in fact, endorsed by the universe. But wanting to believe it, and abhoring the idea of dwelling in a universe without meaning, does not in any way serve as evidence for a universe created by the Christian deity. It is wholly conceivable that the cosmos is the inevitable byproduct of natural laws that we do not yet (and may never) comprehend. “I want” doesnʻt equate to “it is.”

But even if we grant that morality must somehow be rooted in the larger universe, or that existence must have some type of transcendent meaning, we are not compelled to embrace Christian theology … there are numerous other alternatives that are equally (or perhaps more) compelling. These range from the traditionally religious (e.g., Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, etc.) to the unconventional new ideas emerging from contemporary cosmology (e.g., the universe as a computer simulation).

Intellectually, you are free to make sense of the universe in any manner that you choose. But if your goal is to show nontheism to be somehow deficient when compared to Christian theology, I donʻt think that you have made your case.