ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the prospects for a case against propositional natural knowledge of God based on the noetic effects of sin. A reliable' cognitive process is often understood as one that has an actual track record that is favorable vis-vis the goal of producing true beliefs, that is, produces mostly true beliefs. Drawing largely on insights from contemporary epistemology, the author have argued that the noetic effects of sin do not constitute a project objection to natural theology for rejecting the apologetic use of theistic arguments. The Christian might have some natural knowledge of God and be capable of formalizing this knowledge by constructing cogent theistic arguments. Internalist theories have typically construed justification in terms of adequate evidence', even where they have recognized that justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge. Post-Gettier internalists attempt to Gettier-proof knowledge either by strengthening the justification condition or by adding some fourth condition that is necessary for knowledge.
