Trying to use natural law so that you won’t be accused of reasoning from the Bible is a fool’s mission.
It has been pretty common for some Christians and Christian traditions to insist that we should reason about matters of public justice and the social order from “natural law.” Supposedly, natural law is a realm of moral principles that are evident to all reasonable people whether or not they are Christians.
Can we please let the Supreme Court’s latest offense end that myth?
Look, I admit I’m surprised too. I never thought I would find myself needing to resort to Scripture to tell people that God created humanity as male and female, and that the family is supposed to consist of a man and a woman.
Could anything be clearer? If there was ever a basic fact of life that anyone should be able to see without needing help from God’s word, wouldn’t that be it?
And yet we have a sixty-five-year-old athlete trying to pretend he is “really” a youngish pin-up model. And we have the Supreme Court declaring that a marriage includes two persons irrespective of sex.
What are Christians left with? We are left with quoting Scripture.
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth” (Genesis 1:27-28 ESV).
Matthew 19.4-6 (Jesus speaking):
He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together let not man separate.”
One of the things this shows us is that evolutionary Darwinism is not even that important to our culture. It is like Islam in cultures that tolerate men raping boys. I don’t think the Koran actually approves that practice, but because Islam has prevented the spread of Christianity, it basically protects ancient tribal evils so they can continue. So likewise, Darwinism makes sexual reproduction a key component for the formation and survival and progress of the human race. But people don’t bother to think about it when they insist that homosexuality is equal to heterosexuality. Darwinism is just a useful tool to prevent Christianity from having a cultural impact. Other than that, no one has much time for Darwinism. It would be too constricting for what they currently want.
But even if you try not to bring the Bible into it, your listener will respond to you as if you are playing the part of a theocratic prophet! He will know that you are looking at the biological world with all its overflowing male-female pairings as the Bible tells you to look at it. He will accuse you of using the Bible. And, in a way, he will be right. If it wasn’t for the Bible you would be just as blind to the design for human sexuality as any other Supreme-Court-worshiper.
So, if you are called to stand for the truth, use all the reasons available to you. But nothing will work unless God enlightens the blind. You might as well openly bring Scripture into the conversation when necessary. Only that provides the redemptive light for us to see what is all over nature.
It is absolutely true that God’s world shows forth God’s character. But we need God Word to properly understand God’s world. If we reject God’s Word we will distort God’s world, which is what the Supreme Court just did.