Response to Deven's Post- Existentialism

I am responding to Deven's post "Secular Rebuttal to Existentialism ". I will start by saying I enjoyed the concept you brought up, and find credence in the argument.  The case it supports provides a greater understanding of the views associated with existentialism; and works to provide an alternate perspective that I can embrace.  I wondered after reading your passage- Who deciphers the constitution of objective purpose? Wouldn't any qualifications or strengths of arguments be formulated from subjective views?  If "meaning" or "value" is ascribed to any totality of life, wouldn't they be formulations as the result of an overwhelming subjective consensus?  I often consider subjective and objective to be interrelated, a possible mistake on my part but I am convinced neither can exist without the other.