"God's Only Begotten Son": A Reply to R. T. Mullins
R. T. Mullins objects, as do a number of contemporary evangelical theologians, to the doctrine of processions in God. In my recent book on the Trinity I affirmed and defended this doctrine. Mullins has provided a lengthy critique of my defense, and this is my reply. The reply comprises four main e...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
University of Innsbruck in cooperation with the John Hick Centre for Philosophy of Religion at the University of Birmingham
[2017]
|
| Dans: |
European journal for philosophy of religion
Année: 2017, Volume: 9, Numéro: 4, Pages: 217-237 |
| Sujets / Chaînes de mots-clés standardisés: | B
Doctrine de la Trinité
|
| RelBib Classification: | NBC Dieu |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (doi) Volltext (teilw. kostenfrei) |
| Résumé: | R. T. Mullins objects, as do a number of contemporary evangelical theologians, to the doctrine of processions in God. In my recent book on the Trinity I affirmed and defended this doctrine. Mullins has provided a lengthy critique of my defense, and this is my reply. The reply comprises four main elements. First, there is a brief summary of the doctrine of processions. This is followed by a consideration of the three principal objections to the doctrine developed by Mullins. Next, there is a discussion of the difficulties for the doctrine of the Trinity if the doctrine of processions is rejected. Finally, I provide a positive account of the coherence and evidential support for the doctrine of processions. |
|---|---|
| Contient: | Enthalten in: European journal for philosophy of religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.24204/ejpr.v9i4.1942 |