Do we need God? Debate - Andrew Copson vs Adam Deen

Why do we need God? Most Theists answer comes down to three basic components:

1. We need God as an explanation for the existence of all life, the existence of the universe, human consciousness, design found in the universe etc
2. We need God to operate as a foundation for objective morality and hence a justification for morality
3. We need God as an explanation for the grand meaning and purpose of our lives.

Do we need God to explain the cause of the universe or design found in the universe? Well I have already addressed this here and here and here. The answer is no. Do we need God for objective morality? I have already answered this here, here, here and here. Besides it isn't "Objective Morality", because the morality itself doesn't apply to God or any other species but humans, it is also dependent on God's mood swings. Do we need God for a sense of ultimate meaning and purpose? Well the best answer to this question is found in the debate itself. An answer that remains unrefuted even after this debate had finished.

In the words of Andrew Copson:

"And I think you can apply the same question can be applied to the notion of an infinite existence. What meaning could there be in our lives we went on forever? People may very well fear death, but in fact, it's death, the fact of death that gives any structure to our lives at all. The moment between birth and death is our lives, it's what gives that story of our lives shape, a beginning and an end, and that shape without beginning and an end, without that I don't think can be any meaning either. Without death but with eternal life what would motivate us do anything in the here and now, why should we help anyone today we can help tomorrow? Why would we see any point in seeking in-particular achievements in the here and now and the caring of other people if really we just go on and on and on which by the way is a very tedious idea...What sense could we make of the things that we value, love and experience in our lives, communications, achievements, the warmth of other people , or the sun on our faces, with a ever lasting spring end, if we were disembodied, unending beings, what sort experiences, what sort of meaning would actually be possible?..." 

Also:

"I think we should also conceive the horror and tedium of going on forever. I really like chocolate cake. But the idea of doing nothing but eating chocolate cake forever and on and on and on and on and never having any break, takes the meaning of our chocolate cake away , because the enjoyment of it, lies in large part to it's finitude and the fact that it will be over and the fact that it is an experience, time bound and earth bound that gives meaning to itself. So I don't think the idea that we will go on and on and on and on is at all sustainable and we don't need God for it. 

Finally:

Why not say, if no help will come outside, all the more important to help each other?  All the more important that we should have human solidarity. That we should help each other here and now. If there's no justice to come, lets try for justice today. If there's no continued existence, where individuals can reach there true completeness and realization, there true personal development , there true fulfillment, then lets make it as likely as we can, as possible as we can for those things to happen today. Lets make every life , the only life that each individual  will have as good as possible. Because that's the only way, completeness and fulfillment will ever come. If there is no help from outside then the duty on us to help one another all the more defensible, and to the universe we are peripheral that's true, but that doesn't mean we are peripheral to ourselves or to each other. I come back to the idea that meaning, that values must be grounded into our humanity what we are to each other.