11 Theses On Natural Law | Doug Wilson

At the foundational level, natural law needs to refer what nature teaches us, and not to what any particular men have said about it. Natural law theorists are commentators on the text, and commentaries on a great text always differ among themselves. We should not make the mistake of rejecting the text because we have rejected any or even most of the commentaries.

[markwood]

Love to here Doug’s opinion on Russell Moore’s piece on Uganda’s new law in Christianity today. Whoever said it had anything to do with Christianity!

[dsgarver]

Doug, I love you man. You are always spot on. But it's a lot to take in all at once. You see what's going on all around us and we agree on how offensive it is to us as followers of God. I don't pretend to have the talent and platform that you do, so I don't want to be an armchair quarterback. But if you could please break it down into smaller segments with the relevant examples in today's issues. Like something that someone with a busy life could digest in one sitting, one point at a time.

[jimhughes]

I've been studying the Bible and world history for 37 years... But I have no idea what you just said🤣🤣🤣🤣 patiently awaiting the explanation😂

[joejohnson]

I'm not sure I understand. So, maybe if I ask a question, i can gain a better understanding.

Let's say I replicate the Cavendish experiment, what should I draw from the results of that experiment, as it pertains to Natural Law?

[MrPruijssen]

Agreed. I would like to ask more about creation and grace (thesis 2). When grace is seen as gift, as something to be thankful for, I would understand it and agree. But to see creation as pure grace, I would have questions. Is such an argument not vulnerable to the thinking that merely being human (creation) is already being taken up into the grace of God? In that line of thinking the Fall would be merely a way of telling that we are 'broken' people but thanks be to God, we are all saved by grace.

[jacekszczech]

hi Brother .My name is Jacek and I come from Poland. Last week, a uniformed corporation called the Police attacked my brother from Poland in Walsall. Ignoring all documents and explanations, they impounded his car and are threatening to lose it. We need your help, friends. The pressure we should put on this corporation should restore the right to live, breathe and use the road as a human traveler. We should act quite efficiently and we are planning a happening this weekend. Will you help?

[NicholasproclaimerofMessiah]

I'm a hard sell, especially when it comes to Doug. I don't care about natural, because I have the Bible, but I have no objections to anything which Doug said here.

I prefer Doug's offerings when he is hedging against worldly compromise, rather than when he is hedging against the neglecting of earthly affairs. Not that we should neglect earthly affairs, but I don't think we can make apples grow by dissecting apples. Earthly affairs are handled as the fruit of spiritual obedience, so I always prefer spiritual emphasis.

In the case of natural law, I would note that studying the Book Of Nature only leads to needing a better Book and a Savior. At best, studying the Book Of Nature is reinventing the wheel, except I doubt we can reinvent that which God has made.

[stevenwelp]

But just ask the animals, and have them teach you; And the birds of the sky, and have them tell you. Job 12:7.

[manager]

"Special revelation is consistent with natural revelation"? I do not think so. And there is no reason it should be consistent.

[LAS-olzi]

You are getting there, Doug, but you still have some gaps to fill. You should see that Thesis 8 (the God of special revelations is the same God as natural revelation/law) contradicts Thesis 5 (special revelation trumps natural revelation/law). God does not contradict himself. What he speaks in one context is always fully consistent with what he speaks in another. Special revelation may be more specific, but it can never trump the natural law. God is the author of both.

[doejohn]

Natural law cannot be defined objectively outside of Scripture. That’s a fact. God’s law is written on our hearts (Rom. 2:14) but it is no different law than OT or NT principles.

[thecrypt]

The final verses of Leviticus 18 and 20 clearly indicate that God judged the Canaanite nations for detestable violations of natural law, even prior to the special revelation given to Moses. Because of their contra-natural crimes, nature "vomited them out."

Those nations had zero scripture, but they were still punished for transgressing the natural order. If God did not spare from national extermination these peoples, who had no scripture, how much more harshly will modern pro-SSM "Christians" be judged who have both special and natural revelation? To whom much is given, much more is required!

The men of Sodom will rise up against this generation and condemn it, for Sodom had neither history nor special revelation to serve as a warning to them, but only the gentle call of nature and the feeble example of Lot. We have so much more to warn us than they did, both historically and biblically, and yet we celebrate a month of detestable Pride in defiance of nature and nature's God. Our celebration will be short-lived and cut off, swept into the fires of punishment and purification: punishment for the proud, purification for the penitent. Come, Lord Jesus.

[manager]

"What is nature but one vast repository of grace." That is not a "commentary on the text"? Is that what "nature teaches us"? Is he (Wilson) not a "particular man saying something about nature"? By his own standard, we should reject his "commentary".

[reachfaithwithericmoser]

Natural law is not what Van Til taught — Neither the scriptures. What is natural law except an assumption of neutrality. It says that you can come to truth without the Bible. I know Doug does not believe in the myth of neutrality generally, but on this issue he is assuming neutrality.

Most importantly, if you are opposed to secularism, and the secular state, you must be opposed to the common conception of natural law. because, you see, natural law is what supports secularism. It is the idea that you can look at nature in and of itself and come to truth. That, it is a authority that can be used outside of scripture.
The cosmos is not an autonomous standard outside of scripture, but it should be interpreted through the lens of scripture. In other words— Scripture must be the ultimate authority and not natural law. 😢

[manager]

Now he is trying to exercise theonomy over science. Been there, done that. Science has corrected the Bible many times. The Bible has never successfully corrected science. There was a time when Christians believed the Earth was at the center of the solar system. Christians believed our solar system was the only one in the galaxy. That our galaxy was the only one in the universe. There was a time when Calvinists asserted that because God sovereignly created all things, God would also preserve all He created. And from there, Calvinists denied extinction. No Christian believes any of these things any more. Science corrected religious belief. And that's the way it should be. Tell Duggie "BEEN THERE! DONE THAT! NO THANK YOU! CRAWL BACK INTO YOUR DUNGEON, HANG BY YOUR FEET, EAT YOUR GRUEL!"