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.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: TheoLogica: An International Journal for Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
