The implications of this view are spelled out quite clearly in Carl Henry's massive God, Revelation, and Authority , in which he posits that the logos of John 1, Jesus Christ, guarantees a rational, universal epistemology. This, in my view, is a serious distortion of John 1, and is, in fact, the very sort of reasoning John was attempting to refute. His whole point is that the logos of the ancient Greeks is not the logos of the Christian God. His logos is a Person , Jesus Christ. The issue is not, as in neo-orthodox parlance, personal versus propositional revelation.
Biblical revelation is surely propositional, and it is the truth.
Men are saved not by contemplation, but by appropriation. Rational communication between men is possible not because of the Greek idea of a rational, universal, abstract principle, but because all men are made in the image of God and reflect that image in every iota of their being. God's revelation to man is religiously holistic, not reductionistically rational. Clark needs a logos -epistemology to guarantee rational certainty because he does not recognize the exhaustively personal relation between God and His creation. For Van Til, the personalism of the Triune God, not an impersonal rational principle, secures epistemological certainty.