Here it is:
1. There is a valid general revelation to which all men are accountable (Ro 1:18ff)
a. There is in Man's nature a general revelation of God
i. Man has a sense of Diety
(1) It is the witness of God within the creature
(2) A continuous reflection of the Divine Majesty upon the consciousness of Man (Ro 1:19;2:15)
ii. This sense of Diety creates in man the seed of religion
iii. If the seed of religion is allowed to flourish without interference then there issues true religion
iv. Several of Man's characteristics are revelational
(1) Talents or gifts point to a Giver
(2) Intelligence - "unfailing signs of divinity within us
(3) Moral sense - Moral experience is meaningless unless there is a Judge in Heaven
(4) Existence - A witness to the existence of God
(5) Depravity - "Purity of righteousness rests in the Lord alone"
b. There is in creation a general revelation of God (Ps 19:1;Ro 1:20)
c. There is a general revelation of God in God's providential care of Man
i. In nature (Ge 9:1-4;Ac 14:17;17:24-26)
ii. In history (I Co 10:1-10)
a. Even though Man is depraved he is without excuse (Ro 1:20)
b. Intense philosophical thought cannot remedy the darkness occasioned by our depravity (Ro 8:6-7;Col 2:8)
c. There will always be corrupted religion. There is no natural theology.
a. The emphasis on revelation as redemptive is very important and very strong
b. Calvin discusses Soteric Revelation in Principle before he discusses Sacred Scripture
c. For all practical purposes the written Word is the Word of Special Revelation to Calvin
a. Calvin places the Church and human reason beneath the Scriptures and as inferior to the witness of the Spirit
b. Calvin believed that there are substantial reasons or evidences which in themselves manifest the Divine Origin of the Scriptures and the Christian faith
c. However, these evidences are no match for human depravity
d. It is the witness of the Spirit which is the match for human depravity
e. Christian evidences play a confirming role AFTER the Spirit has sealed His witness in our hearts
So far our study has pretty much paralled this outline.
Sounds as if your apologetics Prof. needs to do a serious study of the language of Romans 1:17-32. The fact is that most Theologians since Kant have denied (to one extent or another) the existence of natural theology. Barth was most vehement against it. The difficulty with the position is that God's general revelation does not fail to accomplish it's purpose. There is a second difficulty. God in His special revelation, the bible claims that there is a natural theology. There is a clear crisis of authority: If God, Speaking through Paul to the Romans, claims a natural theology, and Kant -> Barth claims that there is not, either Paul (hence, God) or Immanuel Kant must be wrong...there are no other logical alternatives to this statement.