Without God, our lives lack any ultimate objective purpose, meaning, or value.

Meaning In Life Can Only Have Value If It Is Limited: What makes life valuable is that we have an idea of that which is precious. A world where things can only be discovered once, where life may end at any time, these make life valuable. In a world of immortality, nothing would be precious. Everything would be infinite, and with no purpose. What would be the purpose of life in heaven? My opponent didn't give an answer to this, he merely stated that since because God is infinite, it answers the objection. Even if God exists, and is infinite, you would still have to explain how that gives meaning to an immortal existence. In this world, I can have meaning by helping those that are suffering. I can help lead them to a better path. I could invent something beneficial to humanity. But, in a heaven-like existence, you cannot help others. You can't invent anything. Everything would be perfect, and no one would be in need of anything. How can there be meaning in that? My opponent then gave an example of an astronaut marooned in outer space, and chose to drink poison over living for eternity. Granted, this astronaut was alone. However, I would argue that adding more people to dilemma would still lead towards the same outcome. Why would you want to live forever? Authors have tackled this thought countless times, and have always conceded that living forever only causes the longing for death. Immortality: My opponent objects to my argument for clones. He argues that they wouldn't be the same person. This is very true. They would be the same physical person as you, but different circumstances and environments would alter them on a psychological level. But that was just one possibility for longevity of the human race, not for the immortality of the individual. My opponent argued that humans always have the possibility of error. He somehow then equates this with meaning that we could accidentally wipe out the entire human race at some point in the future. The conclusion does not follow from the premises. Sure, there may be some mistakes along the way, but humanity as a whole will still continue to progress. My opponent argued that in an infinite world set, there would be races of species vastly more powerful than humans. Even in an infinite world set, events are limited by what is realistically possible (i. e. in the constraints of physical and logical limitations). I would argue that some kind of magical species that could wipe out all of humanity in a whisper is realistically impossible. My opponent argued that information cannot leave this universe. It was proven that if information goes into a black hole, that information will eventually come back out, albeit jumbled up. However, this is only in relation to a black hole. A wormhole is a theoretical concept that could allow information to travel to another universe. My opponent also argued that I haven't shown that life can have ultimate value without God. However, my first argument was that real value can only exist without God. Real value can only exist in a world where things can be destroyed, and suffering happens. In a heaven-like world with God, there cannot be real value or meaning.