In light of Anne Rice’s announcement that she “has left Christianity,” I re-read an old Trinity Foundation article analyzing the reasoning behind the Whitehorse Inn’s decision to interview Rice and give her an entire program to talk about her “return to Christianity” from atheism (even though she returned to Roman Catholicism, not Christianity). The Whitehorse Inn: Nonsense on Tap
Anyways, I read the following quote and it amazes me how many people I have come across that don’t understand this. Some people actually think that Romans 1 is talking about trees and stars.
Furthermore, Christ lights, John 1:9 says, echoing Romans 1 and 2, the mind of every man who comes into the world. This is the Biblical doctrine of general revelation. It is a denial of the pagan Aristotelian-Thomist-evidentialist-empiricist theory. The mind of every man, who is the image of God, is informed by the mind of Christ. So even if he is blind and cannot see the heavens, he has an innate idea of God. This information is innate, not learned by sensation. It makes man the image of God, and it makes all men inexcusable. It is these innate ideas that all sinners suppress in their zeal to escape God. One of the ways philosophers and theologians suppress these innate ideas is by inventing “proofs” for the existence of God derived from observation. (The pagan Aristotle is the godfather of all such proofs.) The gods they so “prove” are not the God of the Bible; they are idols – inventions of their sinful minds. If the Thomistic proofs for the existence of God were valid, they would disprove Christianity, for the gods they prove are not the God of the Bible. They are an illustration of the philosophers’ desire to escape the God of the Bible.
The Bible does not begin with any proof of the existence of God; it begins with God. Nor does the Bible contain any argument attempting to prove the existence of God from what Rosenthal calls “general revelation.” Such a proof is logically impossible and theologically reprehensible. Truth cannot be derived form anything non-propositional. Unless one starts with truth, with propositional revelation, one can never arrive at any truth. Unless one starts with Scripture, God will remain merely a suppressed idea.
4 thoughts on “Innate Propositional Revelation”
“Truth cannot be derived from anything non-propositional.”
What does the author mean by “propositional” here?
Presumably that statement is literally false, since Jesus, the cause and maker of all things, is not a proposition, and yet he is “…the Truth”. So it seems that *some* truth is non-propositional.
Thanks for the sharpening Derek.
I recommend listening to Robbins’ two lectures on the topic to learn more about what he means:
Propositional Revelation 1
Propositional Revelation 2
You can also read here:
I would also encourage you to make sure you have read the original article in full, not just my excerpt – he elaborates there as well
I was the one that sparked that TF issue. It was the first thing that came to my mind when I heard about Ann Rice’s “leaving christianity” after her recent “return to christianity”. I still can’t believe the WHI gave her the time of day. I’ll never forget all of my corresponding with Dr. Robbins over the years. he is truely missed.