In the aftermath of Obergefell, I wrote a paper that deals at least in a
cursory way with nature, natural law, and sexual perversion. I also explore
why appeals to nature are sometimes effective and sometimes not. See pages 2-16 of this essay:
http://trinity-pres.net/essays/obergefellandamericaswarongod.pdf
About the same time, I developed one of the footnotes from that essay into
a paper of its own, dealing with nature in relation to the regeneration
question and seeking to close the gap between Jordan and Wilson. This paper provides some further clarifications on how “nature” functions in the
Scriptures:
http://trinity-pres.net/essays/natureandregeneration.pdf
On the relationship of nature to providence and miracle, Vern Poythress’
Symphonic Theology has a section that is must reading
https://frame-poythress.org/ebooks/symphonic-theology-by-vern-poythress/#ch9.
See chapter 9.
For those wanting to delve more deeply into natural revelation and natural
law, I would strongly suggest reading two books, from different ends of the
theological spectrum. Cornelius Van Til’s Intro to Systematic Theology
)https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Systematic-Theology-Prolegomena-Revelation/dp/0875527892/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1525359233&sr=1-3-fkmr0&keywords=cornelius+van+til+intro+systematic+theology) is
an overlooked part of the Vantillian corpus, but is crucial reading for
understanding how natural and special revelation cohere. Of course, John
Frame develops these thoughts in various places, and I much prefer reading
him to Van Til, but in this case, it’s worth going to Van Til himself. For
the best intro to traditional natural law ethics, one of my grad school
profs, J Budziszewski is worth reading
(https://www.amazon.com/Written-Heart-Case-Natural-Law/dp/083081891X). I do not agree with Budz all the way down, but he has a lot to contribute to this discussion. He is the most articulate defender of the natural law tradition in the world today imo. Of course, other natural lawyers like Ryan Anderson have developed natural law arguments specifically targeted at same sex “marriage,” transgenderism, etc.
I will also add that Peter Leithart’s book Delivered From the Elements is
crucial reading on the topic of nature. I had not read Leithart when I
wrote the linked papers above, and his discussion of “nature” is very
tedious, so I am not sure I have fully digested it yet. But it should not
be overlooked. Leithart argues that “nature” in the NT is often a social
universe, not the physical universe, but he develops this argument in way
that does not threaten the integrity of God’s creational design. See
especially p. 27, fn 3, where he says, commenting on Romans 1, “whatever
Paul says about the transformation of social physics [nature], he does *not* teach that it dissolves the created difference of male and female, nor does he undermine the OT’s sexual ethics that is grounded on that difference.” Thus for Leithart, God’s creational design remains fixed even through the
cultural and covenantal changes of history. Elsewhere in the book, Leithart
reconstructs what a “change of nature” for humans means. With all due
respect to Jim Jordan, Leithart’s Delivered should take the place of
Jordan’s regeneration paper, at least with regard to discussions of “nature.” Leithart’s work matures and develops and heavily revises some of Jordan’s inchoate thoughts on the topic.
Pastors must constantly address the sexual revolution and what it continues to morph into. It seems we face a new perversion every day. Our session here at TPC adopted a statement in our constitution back in 2014 (before Obergefell) to address some of these issues from a pastoral and policy perspective. See Appendix 4 of the TPC Constitution.
Some men today are especially concerned to make sure we can give arguments against sexual perversions not named in Scripture, e.g., sexbots, and that drives a concern to invoke the category of nature. I do not disagree with what that, in principle. But I think a bare appeal to nature is insufficient, at least if we want to be persuasive. We actually have to construct an *argument* that shows why a sexbot is unnatural, and therefore a perverted use of our sexual powers. This is where the natural lawyers like J Budz are helpful. See the article linked below. The argument in this article does not deal with sexbots, but it would be very easy to take what he says here and plug sexbots into the argument. This is a very good short intro to how natural
law/creational design arguments work. While Vantillians (like myself) might
have objections to various philosophical commitments Budz operates from,
there is no reason why Vantillians should not embrace this kind of
argumentation since it is really just an upacking and application of Romans
1:18ff.
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=18-06-022-f
TPC Pastor's Page 