3. Proper Use of “Natural Law”

If all the above is true, have we not thrown out the Biblical concept of Natural Law? Have we not denied that God has revealed His law to men so that it can be clearly known? No.

We have denied a rationalistic approach to deriving ethics from the creature rather than from the Creator.

We have denied the legitimacy of an autonomous approach to ethics that leaves God out of the picture and pretends to have a neutral common ground between the believer and the unbeliever.

We have denied that Natural Law has a content that is different than Scripture. Though Natural Law provides far less information than the Bible does, what is written on the heart does not go beyond what is revealed in the Bible.

We have denied the sufficiency of Natural Law for fallen man and we have denied the insufficiency of Scripture for social ethics.

We have denied the legitimacy of separating special revelation from general (or “natural” revelation).

In short, we have denied that Natural Law has anything but an informal similarity to the biblical doctrine of Natural Law.

Apologetics

Having said all this, it is important that we realize the great value of the Biblical doctrine of Natural Law for it is a useful presupposition in our apologetic method. The Puritans, while pouring the full content of Old Testament case law into their discussions of Natural Law, spoke of Natural Law in defense of their positions. Their main purpose in speaking of “the light of nature” was “to leave men inexcusable.”¹⁰⁴ Every time the “light of nature” is mentioned in the Confession of Faith or the Catechism, its insufficiency apart from Scripture is either explicitly declared (WCF I.i.; I.vi.; X.iv.; XXI.i; Catechism 2,60) or at least implied (WCF XXI.vii.). It is sufficient to make men without excuse (and therefore the clarity of this Natural Law is not a problem), but it is insufficient to enable men to do what they ought to do (something that only redemptive revelation can accomplish). The fullness and absolute sufficiency of Scripture for all norms in life (not just faith norms but also all life norms!) is clearly brought out in the Confession,

The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequences may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men. (Westminster Confession I.vi.)

Thus the Puritans, though holding to a doctrine of Natural Law, utilized detailed legislation from the Old Testament when formulating civil codes.¹⁰⁵ Though they may have used the language of Natural Law, it is clear that they did not hold to the rationalistic view of Natural Law that is often attributed to them. They did not see two standards of justice or two logically diverse moral codes. Nor did they separate natural revelation from special revelation. Like Calvin, they saw God’s law as one. As seen in the first part of this book, Calvin’s teaching concerning Natural Law was that it was the subjective counterpart in our hearts to the objective standard of God’s truth. It was not something that could be discovered in creation or in a world of ideas or in participation in the mind of God. Rather it was the conscience or heart of man which had been imprinted by God with the sense (sensus) of God and of His will. Calvin’s view of Natural Law can be distinguished from both the rationalist and the empiricist approaches to Natural Law since he held to a kind of intuitionalism.

However, Calvin can avoid any charge of irrationalism since he never approached Natural Law independently of Scripture. Scripture always informed him on every aspect of Natural Law and therefore the intuitions of people’s hearts were not the objective standards. Rather, Calvin appealed to intuitions that had not been totally hardened or effaced as the subjective response to his objective proclamation of Scripture. Sometimes he would use Natural Law in an ad hominum way to rebuke Christians who were not responding to his teaching of Scripture. The type of argument used was, “If even the pagans recognized the justice of God on this matter, how much more so should you who have the objective word of God.”

This is the use that we should make of Natural Law. With the insights of Van Tillian apologetics we can hopefully utilize Natural Law in a much more effective way than Calvin did. The unbeliever both knows the truth of Biblical law and yet seeks to suppress that knowledge. While this fact makes him an unreliable guide as to what Natural Law is all about, this fact also makes him very vulnerable to the apologetic weapons that we use as we seek to win him captive to Christ. Just as the unbeliever assumes God in much of what he does (he assumes purpose, order, law, etc., which only God can give when he works as a scientist, drives his car, etc.) and yet denies the existence of God when called upon to trust and serve Him, so too the unbeliever assumes the ethical standards of God when it suits his purposes, but denies the God of ethics and is often pushed to deny the ethics themselves in order to protect his autonomy. The unbeliever is insecure without the ethics and he is insecure with the ethics. He wants autonomy from God and His law, but he does not like it when the autonomy of others grates against his God-given sense of justice and liberty. If this dynamic is properly understood, then Natural Law can be a valuable tool in winning people to Christ.

Restraining Grace

Another positive role that Natural Law plays is that it is a restraint that God places in men’s hearts. Even when the Scripture is not present to accuse men and call them to accountability, their consciences do that accusatory work (Rom. 2:15) and stimulate people to do outward good. As Romans 2:14 words it, “for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things contained in the law [N.B. that Natural Law here is doing what is contained in the Mosaic law.], these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves.” Likewise there is a social dimension to Natural Law since one person’s conscience may also accuse or excuse another person (Rom. 2:15, “between themselves”).

While consciences can become so seared that they are virtually ineffective (the stage when God gives them over to judgment Rom. 1:24ff), this two-fold aspect of Natural Law helps to keep society from degenerating as quickly and enables a great deal of justice to happen even in a pagan government like Rome (Rom. 13). A magistrate may provide justice because of his own conscience, or if his conscience is so hardened that it is no longer an effective witness, the consciences of other people may help to restrain his depraved desires. The same holds true for those who are governed. Where a person’s conscience is no longer effective in restraining his sin, the work of the law in the hearts of the magistrates and other citizens continues to restrain the sin to some extent. Society is fit for judgment when most of the society has seared consciences and Natural Law plays no part. Let us be thankful then for the biblical doctrine of Natural Law and not trade it for the mess of pottage offered by Natural Law theorists.