Sir Tim Berners-Lee invented the world wide web. His creation, given freely to the world, has changed the way we interact, work, shop – and even the way we think. We have had to find new language to describe new ways of being, rather than to force old paradigms upon new ways. We don't describe 140 character social messages as telegrams.

Berners-Lee could be forgiven for expecting the way we describe religion to shift in a world very different from the one that created traditional labels. When he had the opportunity to edit BBC's Today programme on Boxing Day, Berners-Lee invited me, a Unitarian minister of religion, to present Thought for the Day. I am a "religious" person who does not believe in a supernatural entity that intervenes in our lives. In language no longer helpful or precise, I am an atheist.

Berners-Lee's selection was overruled by the BBC's religion and ethics department whose head, Aaqil Ahmed, declared in 2012 that Thought for the Day should not be opened up to people of no faith. A theistic Unitarian minister was chosen instead. I presented an "alternative thought for the day".

It is easy to empathise with the BBC's quandary. Traditionally, religious people feel threatened about the diminishing role of their perspectives in the public discourse, while a fiercely anti-belief strand of atheism seemingly aims to make religion disappear entirely. So theists are deemed acceptable, while non-theists are not – unless they are Buddhists. This stance is as absurd and unhelpful as insisting that Britain can be meaningfully divided between those who do and do not send telegrams.

The word "religion" itself has no precise definition. At the end of last year, Britain's supreme court ruled that Scientology was a religion. Lord Toulson, giving the judgement, wrote that "religion should not be confined to religions which recognise a supreme deity". Toulson describes religion as "a spiritual or non-secular belief system, held by a group of adherents, which claims to explain mankind's place in the universe and relationship with the infinite ... " Unfortunately, the terms Toulson uses – spiritual and non-secular – are no clearer than the one he aims to clarify. His ruling reflects a futile struggle to use outmoded language to describe a changing world.

What we historically described as religion is but one embodiment of our human yearning to make meaning. Life is full of challenges and paradoxes. We have a short time to live – a time full of both joy and sorrow. We must live knowing that we will die and struggle to find meaning to make our brief appearance on the stage of eternity purposeful, happy, and significant.

Today, meaning-making takes many forms. Some fit into definitions of religion or spirituality; most do not. A 2005 poll revealed that only 37% of UK citizens believe in "God"; another 33% believe in "some sort of spirit or life force". Most of the rest believe in neither, but everyone has a need for meaning-making. Given low UK religious participation rates, it's clear that most of that need is not met by traditional religious communities.

Today, meaning-making takes many forms. Much takes place on Berners-Lee's creation, with websites, videos and mobile applications increasingly serving as sources of inspiration and guidance. "Real-world" meaning-making is not gone. It has simply changed form. Lectures, non-traditional religious communities such as New Unity and Sunday Assembly and educational models such as School of Life, have emerged to provide resources for the many who no longer find the traditional ways helpful.

It is tempting to look at the changing face of meaning-making and conclude that, amid such diversity, it doesn't matter what the BBC does with Thought for the Day. After all, we will all continue to find meaning in our own way. But guidance matters all the more.

Our hunger for meaning can lead in destructive directions. Many today find meaning in pursuit of financial success and material acquisition – ways of making meaning that are increasingly destroying the planet and exacerbating inequality. Fascism, Stalinism and many of the most harmful movements of the last century resonated with and satisfied human meaning-making needs.

It matters, not just that we make meaning, but how we make meaning. And this is why Thought for the Day and other meaning-making resources are important. They are so important, in fact, that they should not be restricted to the increasingly small proportion of the population that believes in traditional deities. If we are to be a society of people who make meaning in constructive, compassionate and just ways, we need to engage together in seeking and offering the resources with which people can do this very human work.