+1 because I left out the key to understanding the phrase “the laws of nature and of Nature’s God”. “Nature’s God” from the Declaration of Independence = Jefferson’s poetic allusion to natural law theory used by Jefferson as a just and acceptable theory for declaring independence.
Jefferson and Franklin held hybrid deistic/theistic views the Creator God, but in 1776, a majority of the Founders were church attending believers in God and they prayed at the Continental Congress for divine assistance. Jefferson’s use of “Nature’s God” enabled both deists and theists to feel satisfied in the appeal to God as justification for independence from the Crown.
The Signers of the Decl. of Indep., the ones who were firm believers in Christian doctrines including the miracles could, and did sign on to Jefferson’s “laws of nature and of Nature’s God” because to them, this phrase = simply a code for the idea that in a perfect state of nature, the basic principles of knowing we have a creator god and basic rules of right and wrong could be derived without reference to the Revealed Scriptures. They had no problem with Jefferson’s phrase, because Genesis chapter 4 teaches that as human beings with consciousness, we can and should learn to know and do right behavior.
In the Cain and Abel story God tells Cain that he has within him the knowledge of what is right and wrong (his parents had eaten from the tree of knowledge of good and evil), and God told Cain he should use his inner strength to conquer any desire to commit any wrongdoing. “Nature’s God” is an allusion to these principles, that the god of nature can be understood, and right behavior can be determined without reference to the written Scriptures. Genesis chapter 4 agrees with Jefferson.
Jefferson explained that he was not inserting in to the Decl. of Indep. a belief that he may or may not have held in a god of nature, different than say, the God of Abraham, Moses, or James the brother of Jesus (Yeshua / Yahowshua).
Jefferson explained that in 1776 he was synthesizing all the thoughts by philosophers from Aristotle to the those of the Enlightenment and telling King George III and Parliament: we’ve got natural law, all of the principles of right and wrong taught by the great philosophers on our side, and we’re on God’s side for carrying out justice for the people we represent. We’ve got all this stacked up against you. Here’s an article that references Jefferson’s 1825 letter explaining what he was doing back in 1776 with his phrase in the Decl. of Indep. https://constitutionleadership.org/2016/06/29/the-founders-view-of-natural-law/
Summary: The western field law of and rights (and responsibilities) has a basis in Greek philosophers and the Scriptures given by God. Parliament and King George 3 asserted their positive laws (man-made laws) over the Colonies. Jefferson asserted in poetic fashion an appeal to all western legal authorities of natural law, from the Greeks to the Hebrews to the Christians whether deist or theist or hybrid theologians.
+1 because I left out the key to understanding the phrase “the laws of nature and of Nature’s God”. “Nature’s God” from the Declaration of Independence = Jefferson’s poetic allusion to natural law theory used by Jefferson as a just and acceptable theory for declaring independence.
Jefferson and Franklin held hybrid deistic/theistic views the Creator God, but in 1776, a majority of the Founders were church attending believers in God and they prayed at the Continental Congress for divine assistance. Jefferson’s use of “Nature’s God” enabled both deists and theists to feel satisfied in the appeal to God as justification for independence from the Crown.
The Signers of the Decl. of Indep., the ones who were firm believers in Christian doctrines including the miracles could, and did sign on to Jefferson’s “laws of nature and of Nature’s God” because to them, this phrase = simply a code for the idea that in a perfect state of nature, the basic principles of knowing we have a creator god and basic rules of right and wrong could be derived without reference to the Revealed Scriptures. They had no problem with Jefferson’s phrase, because Genesis chapter 4 teaches that as human beings with consciousness, we can and should learn to know and do right behavior.
In the Cain and Abel story God tells Cain that he has within him the knowledge of what is right and wrong (his parents had eaten from the tree of knowledge of good and evil), and God told Cain he should use his inner strength to conquer any desire to commit any wrongdoing. “Nature’s God” is an allusion to these principles, that the god of nature can be understood, and right behavior can be determined without reference to the written Scriptures. Genesis chapter 4 agrees with Jefferson.
Jefferson explained that he was not inserting in to the Decl. of Indep. a belief that he may or may not have held in a god of nature, different than say, the God of Abraham, Moses, or James the brother of Jesus (Yeshua / Yahowshua).
Jefferson explained that in 1776 he was synthesizing all the thoughts by philosophers from Aristotle to the those of the Enlightenment and telling King George III and Parliament: we’ve got natural law, all of the principles of right and wrong taught by the great philosophers on our side, and we’re on God’s side for carrying out justice for the people we represent. We’ve got all this stacked up against you. Here’s an article that references Jefferson’s 1825 letter explaining what he was doing back in 1776 with his phrase in the Decl. of Indep. https://constitutionleadership.org/2016/06/29/the-founders-view-of-natural-law/
Here’s Jefferson’s full letter. https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/98-01-02-5212
Summary: The western field law of and rights (and responsibilities) has a basis in Greek philosophers and the Scriptures given by God. Parliament and King George 3 asserted their positive laws (man-made laws) over the Colonies. Jefferson asserted in poetic fashion an appeal to all western legal authorities of natural law, from the Greeks to the Hebrews to the Christians whether deist or theist or hybrid theologians.
Thank you for your thoughts on this.