James 1

James 1:7 · Lane G. Tipton

processions, internal to the being of God, but especially when we think about the missions of God in relation to creation. And I’ll just point out two things from the text that Van Til uses. Malachi 3.6, and there’s a little typo in the original. It’s James 1.7, but we would all know that it’s James

James 1:17 · Lane G. Tipton

processions, internal to the being of God, but especially when we think about the missions of God in relation to creation. And I’ll just point out two things from the text that Van Til uses. Malachi 3.6, and there’s a little typo in the original. It’s James 1.7, but we would all know that it’s James

James 1:17 · Lane G. Tipton

conditioned by creation and time and change. Rather, the covenant God is the absolute God. The covenant God is identical, exhaustively, to the self-sufficient, self-contained, absolute God. And James 1.17 makes that so explicit. In giving every good and perfect gift, God does not change

James 1:17 · Carlton Wynne

To put it negatively, what do you think about this? I love how he puts it, God does not change, cannot change, since there is nothing besides his own eternal being on which he depends. It seems to me Van Til would have to say, negatively, were God to depend upon something besides his own being, in l

James 1:17 · Lane G. Tipton

what we might call modernist or biblicist anthropomorphism, where if the creature acts and behaves in a certain way, then God has to act and behave in that exact way. James 1.17 is very useful, especially in conjunction with Malachi 3.6. Malachi 3.6, I, the Lord of the covenant, do not change. There

James 1:17 · Lane G. Tipton

And James 1.17 expressing this, the Father of heavenly lights gives to his creatures every good and perfect gift through the Son and by the Spirit. But the Father of heavenly lights is the giver of every good and perfect gift. And in that personal giving, in that sovereign agency of the divine perso

James 1:17 · Lane G. Tipton

just me and my Bible way of looking at the Scriptures, you can miss the way that there’s a really deep sense in which God’s condescending relation to the creation is an expression of immutable, living, Trinitarian persons. And that James 1.17 text is very, very helpful in recalibrating, I think, our

James 1:17 · Camden Bucey

Well, I think also a biblicistic approach, as you say, me and my Bible, of certain varieties is also not just misguided, but it’s selective because you just mentioned James 1.17, Malachi 3.6, if I’m not mistaken, if I recall correctly, but now the one that’s on tap for us today looking at the prophe

James 1:17 · Lane G. Tipton

barred from either the human or avian or animal world, the extension of the feathers bringing people to himself on eagle’s wings, all of that really boils down to the fact that the scriptures are clear in the light of texts like Malachi 3.6 and James 1.17, texts that we’ve mentioned on this program

James 1:17 · Lane G. Tipton

I, the Lord, the covenant God, in my condescension to you, do not change. We can call that unqualified immutability. Qualified immutability is not immutability. James 1.17, complimenting that, thinking at, from the perspective of the creation in James 1.17, the father of the heavenly lights, the gre

James 1:17 · Lane G. Tipton

I, the Lord, the covenant God, in my condescension to you, do not change. We can call that unqualified immutability. Qualified immutability is not immutability. James 1.17, complimenting that, thinking at, from the perspective of the creation in James 1.17, the father of the heavenly lights, the gre