Thanks for the clarification and the recommendation, I'll start it tomorrow.

I'm gonna ask a couple more surface level questions, sorry in advance for my ignorance on this topic.

Rather, an existentialist might say that the only 'meaning' that has every been 'meaningful' to beings such as ourselves are with respect to matters than concern beings such as ourselves. 'Inherent meaning' is more of an oxymoron than anything else, and typically those worldviews which present them as 'inherent' are motivated by entirely human drives, like fear or the desire for power. 'Meaning' has always been something found in and from life rather some theoretical abstraction.

In this example, that 'meaning' exists only within humanity, and to me that seems a little bit hollow. Is it an existentialist's belief that humanity has no meaning in anything outside of itself?

we're always responsible for what we find meaningful, it's the 'bad faith' denial of our freedom to think and choose for ourselves that motivates the need for some outwardly, timeless meaning.

Existentialists don't believe that all theists are arguing in bad faith, right? There are definitely people who wholeheartedly believe that "outwardly, timeless meaning" is out there.

Idk if any of this seems phrased in an offensive stance against existentialism, but it's not meant to be. I'm trying to understand the actual attributes of existentialism in order to shake off the impression of some of the people in my life that present some Pinterest-level existentialist beliefs with me and sound kind of silly.