an order that is known to all people through their natural faculties (especially reason and/or conscience) even apart from supernatural divine revelation that binds morally the whole of the human race.53
As critics have shown, though, the Natural Law ethic commits the naturalistic fallacy, erroneously moving from what is the case in nature to what morally ought to be the case. But what gives nature this kind of moral authority? Without authority, obligation cannot exist.
Some advocates of nature, however, appeal to the Bible and to the God of the Bible for this natural order’s authority. J. Budziszewski, for example, says that “the Bible itself testifies to the reality of the natural law,”54 and that Natural Law derives its “authority from God alone.”55 David VanDrunen teaches that “natural law need not be considered a godless or autonomous law—indeed, it should not be. . . . [T]he natural law is in fact given by God and bears its authority from him”;56 therefore “appealing to natural law . . . [is] ultimately to the authority of God the Creator.”57 So when Natural Law is defined as known “apart from supernatural divine revelation,” what is meant is God’s verbal revelation, whether spoken or written.58
But if these Natural theologians appeal to the Bible and to the God of the Bible to give authority to their ethic, why not seek the entire ethic from his Word? To this question they have at least two replies. First, a common ethical standard is needed for the common social and political realms enjoyed by both believers and unbelievers. “The character of the civil kingdom59 as a common realm calls for a moral standard that is common to all human beings, and this is what natural law is.”60 Scripture’s ethical guidance, on the other hand, is for believers only: “Biblical moral instructions are given to people who are redeemed and are given as a consequence of their redemption,”61 and therefore, “Scripture is not the appropriate moral standard for the civil kingdom.”62 T. David Gordon concurs: “The Bible is sufficient to guide the human-as-covenanter, but not sufficient to guide the human-as-mechanic, the human-as-physician, the human-as businessman, the human-as-parent, the human-as-husband, the human-as-wife, or the human-as-legislator.”63 And discussing the topic of homosexuality, Budziszewski writes:
Among activists who want to keep the “hetero” in “sexuality,” a consensus is developing that we need a “public philosophy,” a way to speak wisdom to the people. It is pretty much taken for granted that means something different from quoting Scripture to our fellow citizens; they don’t all believe in the Bible, those who say they believe it interpret it in diverse ways, and they are suspicious of anything that looks like “forcing one’s religious opinions upon others.”64
VanDrunen likewise asks, “And what if . . . my neighbor is not a Christian and does not accept Scripture as a moral authority? Do I tell her that if she does not submit to the Scriptures then she has no right to participate in the political process?”65
Second, they say the Bible itself endorses Natural Law. Budziszewski was quoted earlier as saying “the Bible itself testifies to the reality of the natural law.”66 VanDrunen, who titles his book A Biblical Case for Natural Law, says “that natural law is taught in Scripture and should be affirmed in Christian theology.”67 He notes “that when God’s people [in the Bible] . . . interacted with others in the civil kingdom, they did so by appealing to a common, natural moral standard rather than to the particular special revelation divinely given to their covenant community.”68 He gives the examples of the pagan Abimelech, who believed that polyandry was simply a thing that should not be done (Gen 20:9); of Moses’ father-in-law, Jethro, who advised that the fear of God should be a criterion for electing judges (Exod 18:21); and of Job, who was deterred from unjustly treating his slaves by considering the notion of a common humanity (Job 31:13–15).69 In all of these examples, appeal is made to common moral notions, not to any word from God. Furthermore, Natural theologians claim that Paul’s teaching of the law written on human hearts (Rom 2:14–15) “is a natural law because human nature itself proclaims this law and judges whether it has been kept.”70
Critique: Misunderstands Scripture’s Commonality
Though Natural Law has a prestigious pedigree, Christians should nevertheless shun its teachings for three major reasons. First, it misunderstands the common obligation of God’s Word. If natural theologians seek a common standard, they need look no further than Holy Writ. God’s voice, recorded for us in the Scriptures, binds all—believer and unbeliever. In Leviticus 18, for example, after God enumerates specific laws for Israel, he explains that it was the pagans failure to keep these same laws that caused their ejection from the land (vv. 24–30; cf. Deut 18:9–14). In prescribing to the Jews the civil penalty for blasphemy, God declares that his penalties are for the “stranger as well as him who is born in the land,” for “you shall have the same law for the stranger and for one from your own country” (Lev 24:16, 22).
Consider also God’s condemnation of pagan nations: for violations of the first commandment, God condemned Moab (Jer 48:13, 35), Babylon (Isa 14:13–20; 21:9; Jer 50:2; Hab 1:11), and Nineveh (Nah 1:14); of the second commandment, Babylon (Isa 21:9; Jer 50:2, 38; 51:17–18, 47, 52), Egypt (Ezek 30:13), and Nineveh (Nah 1:14); of the eighth commandment, Ammon (Jer 49:1), and Nineveh (Nah 3:1); and of the ninth commandment, Nineveh (Nah 3:1).
Likewise, the prophet Jeremiah speaks of the prosperity and adversity of nations—both for covenanted Israel and unbelieving nations—as dependent on their adherence to God’s law (Jer 18:7–11; cf. Deut 28). Paul could therefore summarize that “all the world” is “under the law” (Rom 3:19). Indeed, God’s “word” binds universal “man” (Deut 8:3; Matt 4:4).
Moreover, God’s revelation in nature and his revelation in word are, ethically speaking, identical. He reveals himself through the created order (Ps 19:1; Rom 1:19–20), man (Gen 1:26–27), and his Word (cp. Rom 7:12 and Lev 11:44; John 17:25; Mark 10:18). Each medium reveals the same God. And since he is our moral ideal (Lev 19:2; Matt 5:48; 1 Pet 1:15–16), each medium reveals the same moral teaching as well. Calvin notes this often:
We have taught that the knowledge of God, otherwise quite clearly set forth in the system of the universe and in all creatures, is nonetheless more intimately and also more vividly revealed in his Word.71
And yet nothing is set down there [in Ps 145] that cannot be beheld in his creatures. Indeed, with experience as our teacher we find God just as he declares himself in his Word.72
Now that inward law, which we have above described as written, even engraved, upon the hearts of all, in a sense asserts the very same things that are to be learned from the two Tables
