Moving the Goalposts

To my delight, and the considerable massaging of my ego, I discover that I can wear Slim-Fit shirts! Quite how this can be the case given that my current BMI only just squeezes below the ‘overweight’ category on the NHS Livewell site, I’m not quite sure. I’m equally sure that this transformation from ‘classic-fit’ to ‘slim-fit’ has been achieved without any significant change in my girth. Nonetheless, this is a major step and a moment to be relished.

Of course, the rational side of my brain appreciates that this is much more likely to be down to some clever marketing men realising that it never does any harm to flatter your consumer. The warm glow I experience when buying my shirts is exactly the effect they are seeking to achieve. The tough reality is that this goal has been reached only by moving the goalposts!

Such tactics are not limited to the manufacturers of gentlemen’s apparel: A new Chief Executive will often want to have a turkey of a first year in post in order to flatter their performance going forward. A political party will often downplay polling predictions in order to manage expectations. And if we are honest, too often we do the same – a “terrible” exam that “no work” was done in preparation for often produces surprisingly good results!

When it comes to moral standards though, it doesn’t wash to try the same tactic, although that doesn’t stop society from trying. The physical laws of the universe cannot be altered, however much we might like to do so. The existence of these laws was one of the key reasons that persuaded the late Professor Anthony Flew, author of books such as The Presumption of Atheism that there was indeed a God after all. It is equally undeniable that there exists a moral framework, moral laws if you like, that are, at a basic level at least, universal. Where did these come from? Did they evolve from inanimate minerals as some would have us believe? Are they a construct of society? If so, what if society changes its mind? After all, in Nazi Germany society decided that Jews were not fit to live. Did that make it morally correct?

For most of us, the answer to my last question will be a resounding “no.” We instinctively know (as did many Germans) that it was wrong. But who says so? The Bible tells us that a moral code has been divinely programmed into each one of us. Paul, writing to Roman Christians spoke of ‘Gentiles’ (non-Jews) who had never received ‘the Law’ (the Ten Commandments given to Moses), “For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.  They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them.” If this is true, and I submit that the evidence is overwhelming that our moral standards come from a source outside of ourselves and outside of society, then this is fundamental. It means that we cannot just move the goalposts of morality when they no longer suit us. Morality is absolute because it comes from an immutable God who will judge us according to the absolute moral laws that He has established.

This is a lesson that I sincerely hope will be born in mind by legislators but, even more importantly, be realised by individuals. I may manage to suppress my conscience but that does not suddenly turn what used to be ‘wrong’ to being ‘right’. In Biblical terms, sin remains sin, whatever else we might call it.

This entry was posted in Gospel and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.