Arguing for Atonement?

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v6i2.63473

Keywords:

Abstract Objects, Aseity, Atonement, Nominalism, Platonism

Abstract

According to William Lane Craig, to avoid compromising God’s aseity we must embrace nominalism with respect to mathematical and logical objects. There are no numbers, propositions, possible worlds, properties, or relations. In this paper I argue that Craig’s nominalism threatens to undermine his theological stance on the atonement.

Author Biography

Richard Brian Davis, Tyndale University

Professor, Department of Philosophy, Tyndale University

Downloads

Published

2022-12-31

How to Cite

Davis, R. B. (2022). Arguing for Atonement?. TheoLogica: An International Journal for Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology, 6(2), 271–282. https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v6i2.63473

Issue

Vol. 6 No. 2 (2022): Analytic Theology and the Tri-Personal God: the Trinitarian Renewal in Analytic Tradition

Section

Varia

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Richard Brian Davis

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.