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 23^rd 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 14^th 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, 1^st 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 16^th 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 22^th, 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

Finally, Snow!

We finally have snow in NC! We woke up and we looked out the window(because snow was predicted,) and there it was. Joshua and I immediately went out and started playing. We had two snow fights, the first one was won by me, and the second by Joshua. Here are some pictures we took of the snow:

Our cat(she got a vole)

Our road

Our yard

Our fort

Our roof

Our car (it was half-scraped for ammunition)

Snow on the ground

Snow on a plant

Snow on the roof

Snow in a pile

Blogging the Reformers: Philibert Berthelier

J. H. Merle D'Aubigne

This year I am reading History of the Reformation in the Time of Calvin by J. H. Merle D'Aubigne because this year is the 500th aniversary of the birth of John Calvin. We are also planning on attending the Reformation 500 Celebration by Vision Forum Ministries. For a book report on this book, I am writing a paragraph on the important reformation figures that D'Aubigne writes about in his book. My first one is on Philibert Berthelier.


Philibert Berthelier

Philibert Berthelier was a Swiss Patriot in the town of Geneva in the 16^th century. He defended the liberties of the city of Geneva against the Duke of Savoy, who wished to unlawfully rule the city. When he was about the be arrested, he fled Geneva and went to Friburg, a Swiss city, to ask if they would protect Geneva. In this he was successful, and the city of Geneva made a treaty with Friburg. He later returned to Geneva, and was arrested by the bishop, who hoped that by killing him he would destroy the desire for independence in Geneva. Berthelier said,

I am accused of being a marplot because I ask for justice; - a good-for-nothing, because I defend liberty against the enterprises of usurpers; - a conspirator against the bishop's life, because they conspire against mine.¹

When he was about to be killed, he trusted in the Lord, even though he was a Catholic². He was beheaded by the bishop of Geneva on August 23, 1519, and his head was hung on a tree as a warning to the other Genevans. D'Aubigne says this, “[Bethelier's] death has not been useless to the universal cause of civilization.”3

1 As quoted in J. H. Merle D'Aubigne, History of the Reformation in Europe in the Time of Calvin (Harrisonburg, VA: Sprinkle Publications, 2000) v. 1 p. 143

2 Ibid, p. 191-192

3 Ibid, p. 198

Three of Knox's most important traits that were used by God in the Scottish Reformation and how were they used

based on Trumpeter of God by William Stanford Reid

The author of Trumpeter of God is William Stanford Reid. John Knox was a godly man who was one of the important reformers in the Scottish Reformation. One of the things that he is most known for is his book, The First Blast of the Trumpet Against the Regime of Monstrous Women. He is also known for his conversations with Mary Queen of Scots about the sermons he had preached before her. Some of the most important characteristics to the Scottish Reformation he showed in his life were respect for authority, boldness, and trust in God. It seems that without these characteristics the Reformation in Scotland would not have been nearly as useful as it was, but it is clear that God provided it with John Knox who was one of the main figures in it.

John Knox's first trait that will be discussed is respect for authority. This was one of the traits that was important to John Knox in his conversations with Mary Queen of Scots. John Knox was one of the of people who agreed that Mary should be dethroned for not doing her duty towards the people, but he also said that she should be restored to her throne if she repented. This is what he said:

And therefore it shall be profitable to your Majesty to consider what is the thing your Grace's subjects look to receive of your Majesty, and what it is that ye ought to do unto them by mutual contract. They are bound to you and that not but in God. Ye are bound to keep the laws unto them. Ye crave of them service: they crave of you protection and defense against wicked doers. Now, Madam, if ye shall deny your duty unto them . . . think ye to receive full obedience of them? I fear Madam, ye shall not.¹

Knox is saying why he thinks that she should be dethroned and his beliefs on her responsibility. In his first conversation with her about him preaching against princes rejoicing over the destruction of Christians which she believed was against her:

When Mary heard of his criticisms she promptly summoned Knox to Holyrood, where, surrounded by some of her court including Moray, Morton, and Lethington, and the guards who had reported his statements, she accused him of speaking irrelevantly of her, of stirring up the people against her, and exceeding the bounds of his text. Thereupon he proceeded to outline to her his sermon in which he had made no direct reference to her. Apparently realizing that she had no ground for complaint, she then spoke more kindly to him saying that if she did anything of which he did not approve he should come to her privately.²

Knox did not refuse to come to her, or tell her that he was right even if he did say things against her, but instead he kindly shows her how he was not speaking directly to her. Here it is seen that he respected the authority in his defense and in what he was being called about to do. Even though Knox respected the authority, he still was very bold in preaching the gospel and speaking the truth to Queen Mary.

The second characteristic was that John Knox was bold before Queen Mary and would not stop preaching when she told him to. “Knowing that [Mary's command for him to speak privately] would inhibit [Knox's] freedom to preach, he pointed out that he was called to the public ministry not to wait at princes' doors to whisper in their ears. If she wished to hear his views on any matter she could do so by attending the services in St. Giles.” ³ He would only speak the truth and not what people wanted him to say but what God wanted him to say. If he saw a problem with something he would preach a sermon on it; He did not care if whoever had the problem wanted him to preach against it even if it was the Queen. Queen Mary did not like this because if he saw a problem in her then he would preach a sermon against it and she did not like this because he revealed her sins to her and all of the rest of the nation. He believed that the church was a separate sphere of authority from the church and the civil government could not control the church. He did not think that the ruler should be able to make him be quiet or limit what he could preach. Because of this reason Mary tried to get him to stop preaching but he believed that God wanted him to speak the truth and was not afraid of Queen Mary's threats.

Here it is also see that John Knox trusted in God when Queen Mary threatened him so he was not afraid. After Queen Mary had threatened him, “some were surprised at his lack of fear, but his reply was, ^'I have looked in the faces of many angry men, and yet have not been afraid above measure'. Mary had again failed to silence the one whom she regarded as the chief obstacle to her plans to re-establish [Roman-Catholicism] in Scotland.”⁴ This shows that he was not afraid of the threats by Mary, and also because the Parliament was in favor of him they would not let Queen Mary carry out her threats against him. The reason for this was that he feared God and he did not fear man's threats. He was not a man to preach what the rulers wanted him to. Mary did not like him speaking but there was no way that she could shut him up.

Here is an explanation of why respect for authority, boldness, and trusting in God were the most important traits that were useful to him in the Scottish Reformation and his conversations with Queen Mary. The respect for authority was one of the most useful traits in his conversations with Queen Mary, but he would not of been as useful to the Reformation if he had not preached his message with boldness. He would not have had so much boldness had it not been for his belief in God and his trust in him to protect him from his enemies. Because of this it seems that his trust in God was the most important trait because if he did not have it he would not have had the ability to be bold because he would not have had anything to trust in and Mary would not have called him if he had not spoken bold things which offended her.

• 1William Stanford Reid, Trumpeter of God (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons), 229 Quoting John Knox

• 2William Stanford Reid, Trumpeter of God (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons), 227

• 3William Stanford Reid, Trumpeter of God (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons), 227

• 4William Stanford Reid, Trumpeter of God (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons), 227-8

Click Here to buy Trumpeter of God: A Biography of John Knox

Vision Forum Affilate Program

Today I would like to write about Vision Forum's affilate program. What happens is you join it, and they give you links to put on your site. When someone clicks on your link, and orders something from Vision Forum, you get a 8% commission! We do not get many orders through this blog, but at least we get 8% from our orders!

So if you clicked here and bought the entire G. A. Henty collection, we would get $58! (By the way, if you actually do ever want to buy something and do not want to get your own account, why don't you click here?)

The only bad part about it is that you only get paid when you get over $50.

Become a Vision Forum Affilate

Alba Gu Bra
Joshua Horn