2008 Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy



Vision Forum has given us the opportunity to review a copy of the 2008 Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy through their affiliate program.

The Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy is a three day conference that Vision Forum does to teach a Christian view of law. We wanted to go last year, but Daddy was working too much. In this CD set, the speakers explain that the Bible must be the foundation for our view of law. We must have a biblical worldview. They also talk about the current status of laws and court decisions that relate to different issues such as Biblical Marriage and the 2nd Amendment. The Witherspoon School is not just for lawyers, it is helpful for all Christians in deciding who they should vote for, etc.

Here are summaries of several of the messages:

Introduction to the Christian Foundations of Western Law
by Doug Phillips

This message is really an introduction to the entire album. After going through the different speakers, he talked about how we must have a biblical worldview. We can not abandon our Biblical worldview when we relate to unbelievers, even when we are witnessing to them. Mr. Phillips said that the bible is sufficient and must be our grid to interpret everything. He spoke on what our view of Old Testament law must be, that we must realize it still applies, and that we must get principles for our law from it.


Christian Jurisprudence: Biblical Law, Natural Law, or Positive Law?
by Bill Einwechter

In this message Mr. Einwechter, one of our favorite speakers, talks about biblical law, natural law and positive law. Positive law says that all law is derived from the state, and evolves and changes as the state makes new laws. Many lawyers today hold to it, and this is why they believe that they do not have to follow the intent of the founders when they wrote the Constitution of the United States. Natural law says that there are unchanging principles of law in nature, which just laws are derived from. Natural law is not to be confused with the laws of nature. Many people, from the ancient Greeks until now, have believed this. Biblical law is much different from the others; it is getting our law from the bible. Christians should believe in biblical law.


Symposium on the Reformation and Law
by Bill Einwechter and Doug Phillips

This message is a Q&A session. In it Mr. Phillips and Mr. Einwechter answer questions about many issues, including Christians in today's military, and whether or not Christians can hire women.


Christianity and the Courts
by Hon. Roy S. Moore

This is a special message by Chief Justice Roy Moore. He spoke on how God must be over our government. There was also a Q&A time. I really enjoyed it because his speaking style is easy to follow and he includes many personal anecdotes. He is an inspiring speaker because he has been tried by the fire for what he believes, which is that we must honor God in everything we do and all the decisions we make.

A Theology of Church and State
by Doug Phillips

This message is about the biblical view of the three different jurisdictions: family, church and state, and how they relate to one another. At different times throughout history, different jurisdictions have ruled over the others. For example, in the time when Roman Catholicism was dominant, the church ruled over the family and state. In the bible, we see that they should not rule over any of the others. The three jurisdictions should be equal.

The Battle for Biblical Marriage
by Jordan Lawrence

In this message Mr. Lawrence spoke on the issue of marriage being between one man and one woman. He spoke on how the bible definitely affirms that, as well as most of the state constitutions. He spoke on many of the current events relating to this, and he finished by encouraging the Christians to keep fighting the battle for traditional marriage.


You May Not Take Our Guns
by Larry Pratt

Mr. Pratt, director of Gun Owners for America, spoke on the Second Amendment: the right to keep and bear arms. Many people think that there will be less crime if guns are outlawed, but that is not actually the case. Guns stop crimes. Gun bans will not stop criminals from having guns, but prevents law-abiding citizens from being able to defend themselves. When gun bans are passed, crimes increase. Constitutionally, there should be neither a gun ban, nor a concealed carry law. In one part of the message he mentioned that one political leader said during a speech that anyone who thought that they needed to have a gun to defend himself was paranoid. At that time, that person was surrounded by six armed bodyguards. He also talked about the current state of the gun laws in the United States.

Other Messages

What the Bible says about Female Magistrates by Bill Einwechter
Defamation in the Blogosphere by Josh Carden
Biblical Law, Ethics, & Public Policy for Lawyers by Doug Phillips
Biblical Law, Ethics, & Public Policy Recap by Doug Phillips
The Significance of the Electoral College
by Howard Phillips
Genesis & Geneva: The Emergence of Liberty in the West by Doug Phillips
Spheres of Sovereignty: Church Discipline, Autonomy, and the State by Bob Renaud
The State of Parental Rights in Light of the Texas Polygamy Case by Don Hart

You can buy the CD set here, or download it from behemoth here. If you would like to receive opportunities like this, join the Vision Forum Affiliate Program.

Ten P's in a Pod






Until the end of March, the audiobook Ten P's in a Pod is free at Behemoth.com. To download it, click here. Also, the book is 60% off. This book is really funny, and it is also convicting. Daddy thought it was convicting when he said that since you feed your family three times a day, it makes sense that you should feed your family from the word of God three times a day.

More snow pictures

These are some pictures of us in the snowfall we had last week. It was really good snow for snowballs, so we had some good snowball fights, of which I won one and Joshua won the other. We are sorry that we did not get any pictures of the snowball fights. We tried to sled, but the snow had melted off of the road where we usually sled. We tried using our sled as a snowboard but that was bad for it so we stopped. We went into the woods, which is where we took these pictures, and then got lost. The reason that we got lost is because we could not see far ahead at all because there was snow on everything. Joshua kept kicking trees and getting snow down his coat and his back.

Me in the snow


Snow on top of a bridge we built


Joshua after he fell in the snow


Snow on the trees


Joshua (he just kicked a tree and snow is falling on his head)


Snow falling

P. S. I took the pictures except for the one of me

Indiana Trip - Day 2

On Wednesday, the second day of our trip, we started out eating breakfast at the Damings. Then, while Daddy and Mr. Brown worked, Anthony, Nathaniel, Stephen and I played around their house. We rode bikes, crossed their creek and played games in their gym. Then we went by Mr. Daming's office, where he keeps his equipment for the excavating business, and picked up an excavator and dropped it off at a house that he was going to knock down. We ate lunch at Taco Bell, and Daddy had lunch with one of his employees who lives in Indiana.

In the afternoon we went back to the house that Mr. Daming was going to knock down. We walked through it, and the owner of the house, Mr. Daming's friend, wanted to keep some of the doorknobs, so we helped him take them of. Then we started ripping the house down with the excavator. It was really fun! The excavator is so powerful that if you were good at driving it, you could probably rip a house down in ten minutes. Stephen and I both got to operate it. Here are some pictures:

Stephen is the one operating the excavator in this picture

Me driving

David knocking down the chimney

After we knocked down most of the house, we left for Indianapolis where the conference was. The dinner at the conference was very good. We saw a lot of people that we already knew. After dinner, we heard two speakers, Mr. Voddie Baucham and Kevin Swanson. They were good messages, but I will talk about the conference more in the next post.

Indiana Trip - Day 1

Last weekend we attended the Leadership Summit Conference in Indianapolis which is put on by CHEC (Christian Home Educators of Colorodo.) The speakers were Kevin Swanson, Doug Phillips, Voddie Baucham, and others. We left at 5 a.m. on Wednesday to drive up to Indiana with the Damings, Mr. Brown, David Brown, and the NCFIC Interns. We stopped in the afternoon in Northern Kentucky to see the conference center where the Browns are planning to have the NCFIC Sufficiency of Scripture Conference. It is a very nice facility, and it should be a great conference. After that we left at about 7:00 p.m. and we arrived at the Daming's house in Indiana. We ate some pizza there that we picked up on the way, and after a little while we went to bed. Here are a few pictures:



Here we are in the RV



The Conference Center




Snow for the Third Time!!

On Monday we got a bigger snowfall than ever this winter, and about four inches accumulated. The weather report said that we got seven inches, but probably the first three inches melted when it touched the ground. This was not very good sledding snow, but it was good packing snow, so the boys had some snowball fights. It was right around freezing outside both Monday and Tuesday, so the snow didn't really melt until Wednesday (except on the road). Here are some photos:



The beautiful snow on the trees.


Joshua liked to kick the snow off the trees, and make it look like it was "snowing" again.



Stephen eating the snow off the trees.


Psalm 51:7 says, "Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow." KJV

Embry Family Photos

I recently finished scanning my maternal grandmother's old slides. Here are some of them in chronological order.

My Aunt Teri holding my newborn mother


My mother's family soon after my mother was born


My Aunt Teri and my mother


My mother (about 4)

CLEP


About a month ago, I (Joshua) took a CLEP test. I took the Information Systems and Computer Applications test. I had been studying for about a month using InstantCert. I passed it! I think that InstantCert was very helpful in my preperation. I am taking it so that I can earn college credit before I graduate from high school, so that it will be less expensive and quicker to get a college degree. From passing this test, I earned 3 credit hours. We first learned about CLEP tests from a book called Accelerated Disance Learing by Brad Voeller. I am currently working on English Composition, which I will take in a couple of weeks. I am hoping to pass 2 or 3 more CLEP tests before my birthday, May 5, because my father asked me.

The Three most Important things that Patrick Henry did for the Establishment of the United States

Click here to buy the book: The True Patrick Henry

Patrick Henry was a man who was one of the most eloquent orators at the time of the American War for Independence. In his youth, “He was 'thoughtful,' 'mild,' 'benevolent,' 'humane.'”1 When he was young he certainly was not a model for boys with his slovenly dress and slothfulness, but when he was old he was one of the fire brands in the American War for Independence. Three of the most important things he did were, his speech at the Continental Congress, his presence at the Convention, and his criticism of the Constitution of the United States.

The first of his acts that we will discuss is his celebrated speech in St. Johns Church on the 23rd of March, 1775. This is what Patrick Henry himself said about it, “My heart was hot within me, and while I was thus musing the fire kindled, and at last I spake with my tongue.”2 In this speech he explained that if the people of America did not want to be slaves they would have to fight the British and drive them out. “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it Almighty God!”3 These were Patrick Henry's words about what he thought that the colonists should do. After his speech, “No applause followed. For some seconds there was silence. Henry's former opponents were dumb; and they were without the wish to be otherwise than dumb.”4 They did not have an answer for what he had said. He inspired many people with this burst of fire from his mouth. “The war is inevitable. And let it come! I repeat it, sir; let it come!”5 These were the words that he spoke about what he thought about the war. He did not think it could be avoided without going into complete slavery. He spoke about those who wanted to wait, “They tell us, sir, that we are weak—unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction?”6 He thought that if America was going to be a free people they had to fight then or she would never have another chance at liberty. “There is no retreat but in submission and slavery.”7 He said that the only things to do other than fighting and slavery were only illusions of hope. He said that, “I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British Ministry, for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss.”8

Another of his important contributions was his presence and his eloquence at the convention. Henry was one of the main contributors in writing the Declaration of Independence, and he was very helpful. Before the Declaration of Independence almost everyone realized the need for one, and Henry saw it too. Henry saw, “that the work of the Convention was to be constructive, and that the unity of the action was a prerequisite to success. To him the Committee of Safety was a failure. Better government was needed.”9 The man appointed to be the president of the convention was one of Henry’s enemies, and he did not fight back for this reason. He believed that the unity of the convention was more important than his beliefs. He knew that the country needed a government, and he also knew that it could not happen in disunity of the makers. “Then, in the Committee of the Whole, at Henry’s request, General Thomas Nelson introduced some ‘rough resolutions’ (still preserved, in Henry’s handwriting enjoining the Virginia delegates in Congress ‘to procure an immediate, clear, and full Declaration of Independence’”10 “‘The party of Henry’ was never better led than now. It cooperated with Pendleton in all pressing matters, and did not raise its voice for independence until the 14th of May, when the delegates were free to give the measure their full and solemn consideration.”11 He was not only helpful in the writing of the Declaration of Independence but also in the writing of the Constitution of the United States.
The next thing important Henry did was his criticism of the Constitution of the United States. “Nor should we forget that Henry’s hostility to the Federal Constitution served a beneficial purpose. It was necessary to put the new instrument through fire in order to test it and temper it. Henry certainly put it through fire. Not only that, he forced the adoption of the first ten amendments, and so, practically, was one of the great makers of the Constitution.”12 Henry was not for the Constitution, and he fought against it, but in the end he was for the Constitution, because it needed to have the dross removed. He did not want a Constitution, so he fought against it, which in the end helped what he had been fighting against. Henry, in looking at the Constitution thought that the government would swallow up all of the state’s rights, which it did at the time of the Civil War. What he feared has happened, a government which is too big. He thought that the Constitution gave the federal government too much power, so they could do anything. What Henry feared has happened, even though he thought it would come through obedience to the Constitution, but it actually came through the breaking of the Constitution.
Here we have a discussion of how his speech at the Continental Congress, his presence at the Convention, and Henry's criticism of the Constitution Of the United States are the most important things he did in his life towards the making of The United States of America. It is hard to say which is the most important of his actions because they all have good things which resulted from them. His speech could easily be said of that it was the most important because it lit up the American War for Independence. But truly, it was only a spark to what was already there. He was one of the important men of the American War for Independence for this, but he probably is not the most important. His criticism of the Constitution, and his work on the Declaration of Independence were important, but not quite as important as his speech.
1Gorge Morgan, The True Patrick Henry, 1st ed. (Virginia: American Foundation Publications) p.25
2 As quoted in Ibid, p. 189
3As quoted in Ibid, p. 191
4Ibid, p. 191
5As quoted in Ibid, p. 191
6As quoted in Ibid, p. 191
7As quoted in Ibid, p. 191
8As quoted in Ibid, p. 189-90
9Ibid, p. 257
10Ibid, p. 258
11Ibid, p. 258
12Ibid, p. 329

The Logical Fallacies in Erasmus’ Arguments

Martin Luther, Author of The Bondage of The Will


by Joshua Horn

from Bondage of the Will by Martin Luther

buy The Bondage of the Will


In 1525 Martin Luther published a book entitled, De Servo Arbitrio, or in English, Bondage of the Will. He wrote it in response to On Free Will by Desiderus Erasmus. In his book, Erasmus argued that man has free will and he must chose to be saved. Luther replied to him in Bondage of the Will and pointed out many flaws in his arguments. Three of the most important flaws were that Erasmus twisted scripture to meet his own interpretation, that he rejected the Bible rather than split with the Pope, and lastly that he contradicted himself in his definition for free will.

The first of Erasmus’ flaws was that he frequently twisted scripture to match his own opinions. When he deals with the text where God says that he hardened Pharaoh's heart1, he claims that God really meant that Pharaoh hardened his own heart. Luther says, “When God says: ‘I will harden the heart of Pharaoh’, you change the persons, and take it thus: ‘Pharaoh hardens himself by my long-suffering’!”2 When the Bible says this, I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing,”3 Erasmus says that “‘nothing’ may mean the same as ‘a little imperfect something.’”4 This is clear twisting of the words of scripture. If you take that nothing means ‘an imperfect little something’, than most of the doctrines of the Bible fall apart. From these two examples it is clear that Erasmus was forced to twist the words of scripture to make them fit with his position.

Erasmus’ second logical fallacy is that he would rather give up the scriptures than contradict the Pope. He was so afraid of contention that he was willing to give up what he knew was true rather than fight for it. Luther says this to Erasmus, “For your teaching is designed to induce us, out of consideration for Popes, princes, and peace, to abandon and yield up … the sure word of God. But when we abandon that, we abandon God, faith, salvation, and all Christianity!”5 The Bible says in Matthew 10:28, “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.6 The basic problem is that Erasmus feared man more than God.

Erasmus admitted in his book that free will is a slave to sin and can not will to do anything good. He says that, “the human will after sin is so depraved that it has lost its freedom and is forced to serve sin, and cannot recall itself to a better state.”7 But later in the book he claims that a human can will to seek God! This is a clear contradiction. Luther says this, “You say that ‘free-will’ is a power of the human will by which a man can apply himself to good; but here you say, and and approve of its being said, that man without grace cannot will good.”8 Erasmus realized that free will could not do any good, but he still contradicted himself and said that it is man who chooses to be saved.

We have just seen Erasmus' three most important mistakes. They are that he twisted the words of scripture, that he rejected the Bible rather than split with the Pope, and thirdly that he contradicted himself in his definition of free will. After Luther pointed out Erasmus' fallacies and destroyed his arguments, there were no good arguments left for free will. Many people today who defend free will have the same problems and make the same logical fallacies as Erasmus did when arguing with Martin Luther. Being able to recognize these problems can help us defend the Biblical doctrine of the will.

1 Exodus 7:13, etc.

2Martin Luther, Bondage of the Will (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House Company, 2003) trans. J. I. Packer and O.R. Johnston, p. 195

3 John 15:5, KJV

4 Bondage of the Will, p. 260

5 Ibid, p. 91

6 Matthew 10:28, KJV

7 As quoted in Bondage of the Will, p. 145

8 Ibid, p. 145



Buy The Bondage of the Will Here

Falling in the Creek

Yesterday we went to our Grandmother's house, like we normally do on Tuesday, and since it was nice out we decided to go down to the creek. It is a very nice creek, with rapids in some places:


And calm in others:


I almost fell in a couple of times:


But I did not fall in, until I crossed the stream, and went on some rocks to get a stick Joshua threw, and stepped on a wet rock, then I slipped in. Providentially, Joshua had the camera out. Here are the pictures:

Me about to fall in:


The exact precise moment of me falling in:


Where I fell in(I slipped on the middle rock):


Me showing Joshua my bruised ankle:


8 New Henty Books from Vision Fourm


A Chapter of Adventures

The Cornet of Horse

In Greek Waters

The Plague Ship
With Roberts to Pretoria
Redskin and Cowboy
John Hawk's Fortune
Colonel Thorndyke's Secret


Buy the 8 new ones here.
Or the entire set here.

Louis de Berquin



Louis de Berquin was a French reformer in the 16th century. He desired to free France from the pope. He started by accusing the divinity professors at the Sorbonne1 of heresy. When his friends thought that he was about to be arrested, they urged him to make his escape. He refused because he thought that flight would be admitting that he committed a crime.2 He was arrested in March of 1529. When one of his friends begged him to ask pardon, he said this: “Truth before all things! We must fear neither man nor torture, but render all obedience to God. I will persevere to the end; I will not pray the leader of this good war for my discharge.”3 He was strangled by order of the court April 22th, 1529.


1 University of Paris

2 As quoted in J. H. Merle D'Aubigne, History of the Reformation in Europe in the Time of Calvin (Harrisonburg, VA: Sprinkle Publications, 2000) volume 1, p. 432

3 As quoted in Ibid, volume 2, p. 40

Hilton Head


On the week of January 1st, we went to Hilton Head Island with my paternal grandparents. They rented bikes for us, and we rode them on the beach and the bike paths. The ocean was very cold, but we waded in it for a little while. We visited the lighthouse, and Daddy, Stephen and I climbed to the top. We also visited a historic plantation. One thing we learned is that Hilton Head is where they got the live oak trees that they used to build the U.S.S. Constitution (aka Old Ironsides) during the war of 1812. Live oak trees are very hard, which is why cannon balls bounced off the Constitution's side during battle, earning it the title Old Ironsides. Here are some pictures:


Rachel and Stephen wading in the ocean


The Lighthouse


Stephen and Daddy on the top of the lighthouse


Mommy, Grandma and Rachel from the top of the Lighthouse



Here we are at Honey Horn Plantation


Stephen and I are in a Live Oak Tree


Stephen throwing the Frisbee on the beach

Finally, Snow!: The Snowball fight

Yesterday Joshua and I had two snowball fights. The first fight I was defending my fort against Joshua's attacks. He never drove me out of my fort so I won. The second fight I chose a different fort, and he attacked a couple times and could not drive me out so he retreated to his fort to attack me again. We were on opposite sides of a building, so I creeped around the back of the building, and when I was at the corner he went to attack my fort, but when he saw that I was not there, he turned around, and saw me knocking his supply of snow over, and threw snowballs at me so I retreated. I did it again, but not with as much success, so I ran up onto our deck and started throwing snowballs at him from there. I repulsed his charges three times, but he made it up on the next charge. I did not have enough time to make snowballs, so I was just throwing snow in his face, and whenever I did it, he would turn around and wipe the snow off his face, so I had time to get more. Finally, he did not turn around when I hit him and he started throwing snow down my hood, and since the snow we threw on each other was starting to melt, we went inside, and declared Joshua the victor of the second battle. Here are some pictures of the second battle:
Joshua throwing snow at me:

Me working on my fort
Me with my shovel

My fort