Very well-said. Thanks for the comment!

Suppose earthlings were everywhere in the universe and could have an impact everywhere. That would not show that their lives have meaning. The earthlings might ask: “We are everywhere but why are we anywhere? Why do we exist?” Our lack of cosmic impact cannot show that our lives lack meaning if maximal causal impact is consistent with meaninglessness. It is worth noting that size does not matter either. If we human animals were many times larger than we are and had the causal impact of elephants or dinosaurs, how would that augment our meaning? Suppose I am the biggest, baddest hombre in the entire universe. Suppose I am omni-located within it, able to affect every part of it. I could still ask: But why do I exist? For what purpose?

As for the actual size of the universe, I always think: it could always be larger (it is getting larger as we speak) and it could always be smaller. What difference would it make if the universe were half the size it is now? The key point for us religious folks is that the universe is not the ultimate point of view, that POV belongs to the Almighty, and no matter how many stars, galaxies or planets there are out there and how long they’ve been there, they will always be transcended by G-d.

Hi, Jim! Observant Jews do not write any of the names of G-d (even in non-Jewish languages!) in full, so as to avoid the desecration of those names if, say, this essay is printed out and then discarded, etc. It’s a sign of respect. I am not generally offended by others’ disrespect.

As for the Bible, this is not really much of an issue, as there is much more to revealed divine truth than what is written in the bible, and there are many details to the created universe that, though derivative of divine truth, may not be mentioned in it explicitly.

For example, when G-d’s creation of the universe is recounted at the beginning of Genesis, never is it mentioned that He created rocks. By your logic, this would mean the religious believer would have to doubt the existence of pebbles, boulders, etc., and that the existence of such entities would push us toward atheism. This is utterly absurd, for obvious reasons.

Incidentally, the stars ARE mentioned in the act of creation, making their existence even less problematic than the totally-unproblematic rocks. =)

Why doesn’t the Bible mention the vastness of the universe? Surely, God knew that He had created hundreds of billions of galaxies. Curious that his “revealed truth” would omit this fact.

The writers of the Bible clearly failed to mention the hundreds of billions of galaxies in the universe (not to mention the eventual existence of smartphones and automobiles). If any of this had been referenced, I wouldn’t be an atheist.