The role of natural law in Reformed Protestantism has been a topic of considerable debate since the twentieth century. As early as the debate between Karl Barth and Emil Brunner in 1934, two competing views on natural law emerged: the classical view, which claims continuity with early Protestant orthodoxy and promotes a robust place for natural law in Reformed ethics, and the critical view—associated especially with Karl Barth, Cornelius Van Til, and their students—which highlights the noetic effects of sin and the necessity and sufficiency of Scripture for ethics.
Want to keep reading?
Subscribe for free to access this article and all of our resources.
I’m very grateful for the work of MO and have really appreciated the things I’ve learned and the companion that it has been for me on my spiritual journey.
Mere Orthodoxy reader
Thank you for offering thoughtful, reasonable and decent commentary. It is a boon to my sanity at this stage of my life in this cultural moment.
Mere Orthodoxy reader
Mere Orthodoxy is (for me) a counterpoint to social media, a place of depth and critical thought.
Mere Orthodoxy reader
You're in. Check your inbox.
Something went wrong. Try again.
.png?width=5000&height=2188&name=Mere%20Orthodoxy%20-%20Banner.png%20(1).png)
