What this tells us
     Thereís something I like about this story. It makes the first one look good. It tries to make God unnecessary and proves the opposite.
     The second story ignores God. When we take God out of the picture, we canít explain where value came from. We canít really say that it exists. If the universe starts without life and ends without life, I see no difference in between worthy of note.
     How can life hold more value than that which produced it? The computer you use holds value because you use it. It was made for you. If you use it, it holds value. If you stop using it, it loses its value. Regardless of the technology, it holds the value of a rock.
      The cosmos does not care about itself. You do. Yet, if the cosmos is all, that means that it produced you and gave value to you that it doesnít even have.
     The prophet Isaiah described a man who cut a log from a tree; half the log, he used for a fire, and the other half he carved into an idol. He burned half of it for common use, and he got down on his knees and worshipped the other half. We feel more sophisticated than that, worshipping the cosmos.
     This story gives no basis for value. Value and morality are personal convictions; you donít get them from the cosmos. If the cosmos produced us on its own, a human being holds no more value than a rock.
     The cosmos gives us no law regarding right and wrong. As Francis Schaeffer illustrated, if there is no right and wrong, there is no difference between helping a little old lady across the street and pushing her out in front of a car.*
     If God made the universe, value and morality are real. Otherwise they are imaginary concepts, and we have no real standard for judging right and wrong. We are simply living, feeling, existing.
     Morality reflects the truth that life holds value (and thus deserves respect). Morality is either real or make-believe. It is based on a true story or a lie. You cannot have it both ways.
* I changed the illustration a little, but it's the same idea.