However, in the Christian view, the meaning, veen (sic) in teh (sic) here and now, though subjective, is based on objective values
I’ve often come across this argument, and I often wonder what makes Christian morality, values and purpose “objective” in nature. I would imagine, and I could be wrong here, that the idea of objectivity is closely linked to the belief that elements are “objective” or superior when they are given to us from a higher source, in this case from the hands of creator himself. This is what Daniel Dennett, in a debate with Dinesh D’Souza, calls the "trickle down" view of goodness: the belief that anything that comes from higher up (in this case, “meaning for our lives”) is always better than what we can create for ourselves.
But while I was thinking this through, I suddenly thought about God. If an objective meaning of life is one that is given to us from something higher up, then what about God himself? As a sentient being, God – if she/he/it exists – should also have purpose and meaning. Was God bestowed with purpose from a higher source, or did he decide it for himself? If he decided for himself, then isn’t his own “meaning of life” just as “subjective” as the atheist’s?
We can also use Plato’s Euthyphro dilemma and present a similar argument regarding morality. What criteria did God use to determine what is good and bad, wrong and right? If he decided for himself, without any input from an outside (or higher) source, then isn’t the moral code that he has supposedly handed down to us through the Bible subjective in nature?