The Posion of Subjectivism

In this reading from C.S. Lewis, he again discusses the existence of a moral law. He argues that there is in fact a moral standard in place that does not differ from person to person, and cannot be changed or altered. As he puts it: "This whole attempt to jettison traditional values as something subjective and to substitute a new scheme of values for them is wrong. It is like trying to lift yourself by your own coat collar....The human mind has no more power of inventing a new value than of planting a new sun in the sky or a new primary colour in the spectrum." Lewis presents several ways of looking at his points, and also refutes a few objections to his ideas that he has encountered. People claim that "to tie ourselves to an immutable moral code is to cut off all progress and acquiesce in stagnation." But Lewis first argues that the use of the word "stagnant" is too emotive. I personally liked this clever statement: "To infer thence that whatever stands long must be unwholesome is to be the victim of metaphor. Space does not stink because it has preserved its three dimensions from the beginning. The square on the hypotenuse has not gone moldy by continuing to equal the sum of the squares on the other two sides." He goes on to say that we should replace "stagnant" with "permanent." With this idea, the following of a moral code is the only way to decide whether our ideas of good are better or worse because we have a standard against which to judge them.
In the concluding portions of the this essay, it discusses some rather thought-provoking topics. We did not discuss these in class, deciding instead to look over them again over the weekend, and after doing so, I think I understand more so what he is saying. Before, I was confused about his statement that "God neither obeys nor creates the moral law." I struggled with the idea that God did not create the moral law.  But then I reread the part where he says "God is not merely good, but goodness; goodness is not merely divine, but God." To me this meant that God did not create goodness but He is goodness and therefore goodness has no beginning or end, just as God has no beginning or end. That's how I read it, anyway. Anyone feel free to let me know if you agree or disagree, or point out anything I might have missed on this topic that might be helpful.