The Cultural Double Standard on Morality

Why is it culturally appropriate for an individual to deem certain actions as wrong, but not others? When I look at our cultural climate, I see certain actions that are easily condemned such as racism, sexism, body-shaming, and cultural appropriation. At the same time, other actions are said to be unjudgeable such as sexual promiscuity, same sex relationships, abortion, transitioning, and even sometimes drug use. From a Christian perspective, all of these actions do not fall in line with God’s design, and thus are wrong. Why then are some condemned in culture and others not?

It seems that moral judgments are only allowed today when someone is seen to infringe on another’s freedom, identity, or self expression. And moral judgments are not allowed when someone exercises those freedoms in self directed ways. This leaves society in great moral ambiguity, as moral truth is reduced to what an individual feels is right for them. If that is the standard, how can we call someone else out for injustice or wrong doing? If they felt as if it was right, and was an expression of their freedom, identity, and self expression, who are we to say they are wrong? If we call them out, we risk being labeled a bigot, exclusive, or intolerant. But I don’t think intolerance is always wrong, and here is why.

 

Finding a Better Standard: God’s Objective Moral Order

I think there is a better moral standard than the cultures’ subjective and situational standard. If God created the world, which I believe he did and have good reasons for, that means all of creation is infused with a moral order based on His character and nature. This is the traditional Christian understanding and this standard of right and wrong applies to all people through all time. It’s objective and universal. A universal moral order provides something modern society’s standard cannot, which is a foundation to do justice.

 

Related Content: If God is So Loving, Why Can’t He Be More Tolerant of Sin?

 

Why Moral Relativism Fails the Test of Justice

If modern society is right and no one can infringe on another’s freedom, identity, and self expression, then we cannot judge their actions based on anything other than what they feel to be right. This means just about anything is permissible. It’s a terrible standard for justice. In contrast, a moral order outside of our opinion, or majority vote allows people to hold others to that same standard. Thus, it’s a source for doing real justice, rather than opinion against opinion. I once heard the story of a moral relativist professor who went to Africa to confront the male leaders of a tribe for abusing women in their community. But when speaking to the leaders they asked her, “why should we stop? In our culture, we feel it is right.” The professor, holding to her belief that moral truth is relative, had nothing to say other than she feels as if it was wrong.

 

An Objective Foundation for Human Dignity

In reality, it’s wrong to abuse women, not because of feeling or cultural standards but because it violates the truth that all human beings are created in the image of God and therefore should be treated with dignity and respect. To do justice and call people to live as they ought, there must be a universal moral standard of right and wrong for all people at all times. 

 

Redefining Tolerance: The Modern vs. The Biblical View

Now, calling others out for their behavior to a higher moral standard goes against one of the great virtues of modern culture today which is tolerance. One of the outworkings of the subjective and situational modern moral standard is that tolerance has been redefined from its traditional sense. Modern tolerance may be defined as all truths, all behaviors, all values, all practices are equally valid, and thus we respect and affirm everyone’s choices and beliefs. This is not how tolerance has been viewed through history, and is not a Biblical understanding. The Biblical understanding says that we are to recognize and respect others because they are created in the image of God and have value and worth even though we may not personally share their values, beliefs or practices.

 

Why Biblical Intolerance Can Be the Most Loving Action

When we speak truth and call out wrong behavior or injustice, we are being intolerant of anything that goes against the true moral order. And anyone who lives their life in a way that goes against God’s good design is walking a path of deep pain, suffering, and eventually death and separation. Thus, to be intolerant of someone’s behavior is to see value in the individual and call them to the life-giving nature of walking in God’s good design. In reality, being intolerant of certain behaviors is loving because it calls people to the life of God.

 

Speaking the Truth in Love 

As a Christian steeped in a culture that promotes tolerance as not just respecting others beliefs and behaviors but affirming them to be equally valid as my own, I wrestle with how to communicate God’s design in a loving way. I’m reminded of Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 13:1 which says “If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging symbol.” The relationship you have with others in your life is the medium over which truth is communicated and it must be characterized by love, mercy and grace. If it is not, truth will be rejected.

 

More From Cru: Family Life: Understanding Intolerance

 

A Real-Life Story: The Power of Loving Correction

I’m intolerant of behaviors which go against God’s moral standard which all of humanity shares. And I am intolerant because I love people, and desire to see them walk with Jesus and experience life in relationship with him. A good friend of mine once identified as gay and is now a follower of Christ. I’ll never forget what he told me about someone who spoke truth into his life. He said that someone “loved me enough to affirm my true value, yet did not approve of my behavior, called it out as wrong, and yet shared the path to life which involved the denial of myself.” And in reality, it was not in following his heart where he found true freedom and satisfaction, he found it while surrendered to Jesus.

 

Conclusion: How to Stand for Truth with Grace

In summary, if modern society is right and there is no moral standard apart from how one feels and expresses themselves, intolerance is wrong. But there is a moral standard and as loving believers in Jesus we should call people up to that standard because it is right and how we ought to live. But this must be done in real personal face to face relationships characterized by listening, love, mercy, and grace. After all, that’s how God interacts with us.