The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Natural Theology

Natural Theology
I was on a Reformed board recently and the topic was Natural Theology. Some of the discussion was going over my head, because I have never actually looked into ‘Natural Theology’ before.
I decided to look into what is was, before I decided whether or not to participate in the discussion. The first link I noticed in my Google search was a Greg Bahnsen article. https://defenseofaith.wordpress.com/2015/10/29/greg-bahnsens-critique-of-natural-theology/
In the article Greg Bahnsen had a section called: “Five problems for natural theology”.
As I was reading these Five problems, to be quite frank I could not understand how someone Reformed could possibly because in natural theology.
For example number two says I decided to participate in the thread, by using what I have learned in these five points.
However, the response I received I found a bit confusing. It almost seemed like it was talking about something different.
For example, the following is a response I got.
https://www.baptistdogmatics.com/.../onapjzzffz1whi42a8iu...
Anything, that might help would be appreciated.

Tom

Romans 1 teaches that what can be known about God, namely His power and deity:

Notice that Paul first states that he is not ashamed of the Gospel for IT is the power of God unto salvation; not what can and is known about God from the creation. Secondly, notice that the WRATH of God is revealed from the things that are perceived.

1. The existence and power of the Creator, Almighty God are clearly perceptive from the natural (created) world. And that which is perspicuous to the natural man is hated and rejected and that ALL mankind substitutes a fabricated lie for that truth.

2. Morality also is included in Natural Theology as Paul teaches in Romans 2:

ALL mankind knows within them that which is bad, evil, sinful because the law of God is innately known due to the fact that all are created in the image of God. But knowing what is right only brings condemnation upon men because they knowingly and willingly do those things which are contrary to the commandments of God.

Thus, natural theology exists, but it produces nothing in man which will bring him to salvation in Christ, nor even to worship God who is revealed in nature. EVERY man, woman and child from conception naturally opposes the one true God and hates what can be known about Him from what can and is naturally perceived. One must guard against building an edifice of doctrine using natural theology other than what is clearly taught in Scripture. Many have gone "off the rails" with their musings and alleged deductions from what is seen, rather than what God has revealed in His written Word. The world MUST be understood through Scripture alone for it is God's own interpretation of what He has made.

Pilgrim

You basically said what my understanding of Natural Theology is. Yet, I am a little confused, Greg Bahsen seemed to indicate that those who believe in "Natural Theology" believed that it assumes that it can indeed by reason alone lead someone to Christ. However, people that say they use Natural Theology do not believe it can lead someone to Christ without Special Revelation. It would seem, someone is misunderstanding something.

Tom

There is sufficient revelation in nature to CONDEMN men, but the only way of salvation is CHRIST as He is revealed in the Scriptures ("special revelation").

I echo Robin's response. The Scriptures are clear as a bell on this as Paul, by the inspiration of the Spirit wrote:

Whoever believes that "Natural Theology" can lead someone to salvation in Christ, 1) cannot believe in the doctrine of Total Depravity/Inability, and 2) that knowledge of Christ isn't necessary for salvation. For Natural Theology in and of itself reveals nothing of the Son of God becoming man, living a perfect righteous life, being crucified as the Lamb of God (the antecedently absolutely necessary substitutionary atonement), the death of Christ and His resurrection. Nor does it reveal the absolute necessity of the supernatural new birth and power of the Spirit giving and leading a sinner to repentance and faith in Christ.... etc. (cf. Rom 10:14-17; 1Cor 1:18-24; 1Thess 2:13; 2Thess 2:13,14; 1Pet 1:23-25)

To a lesser extent, substitute Classical Apologetics for Natural Theology and the same applies. I don’t believe there is a better substitute than leading with the Word, nor should acceptance of the hearer be presupposed. But that cannot impact what we know to be true, nor can we sacrifice anything….