On Eagles' Wings Pt 174 — Don Courville

The Prophet Habakkuk said a prayer. He said, O LORD, I have heard thy speech, and was afraid. O LORD, revive thy work in the midst of the years. In the midst of the years, make known in wrath, remember mercy.

My friend, we're in a time of great need. It's an exciting time to share Jesus with people. By the way, if you don't know, Christ is your Savior. You don't have life. And I'm not talking about knowing about Christ.

I'm not talking about going to Church. I'm not talking about being baptized or joining a church or giving. I'm talking about, do you know Jesus Christ personally? The Bible says, He that has the Son has life, and he that has not the Son of God does not have life.

Jesus is life. The sad thing is, many of our churches, there's no life because Jesus is not there. Oh, he's there in figurehead type of function. And they may sing songs to him, and they may praise his name and word.

But there's no vibrant Christ-like life. He is life. Eternal life is to know him. Do you know him? And we in America have turned from the Lord. We've turned from the Lord God Almighty, the Lord that gave us this great land, probably the last great frontier, the last great opportunity to the world.

What a marvelous display of the grace of God when he gave us this country. Well, we started out in the last couple of weeks, we've been doing a little patriotic series and we're going to continue on today with this tape that I've started playing for you last week, America's Godly Heritage by David Barton.

I'd like to recommend that you write and get a copy from the publishers, not from me, but from them. I've communicated with them, and it's all right for me to play this tape. And I'm doing this, I'm a revival man.

I can't get off onto every type of thing that comes along. And there's all kinds of stuff, all kinds of teachings, all kinds of things that come along and sometimes I do stretch out a little bit here or there.

But basically what we need in America is revival. And this message is about America's godly heritage. One of the things that I believe that we in America need is we need a turning to God among our civil authorities from the president on down.

We need to go back and see that this land was built on God's Word, godly principles, and that's why I'm playing this tape, America's Godly Heritage. I'm going to give you the address here in just about a couple minutes and then you write it down and I'm going to continue playing the tape for you.

While you're getting a pen, I'll just remind you that we need to repent in America. We need to turn to God. The Bible says righteousness exalteth a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people. We are in sin.

We are a reproach. And whenever we've had the power of God upon our lives and it's gone, then it becomes a reproach. We become an offense. And God said if my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, it's his people that are to turn from their wicked ways.

If America's Christians will turn from their own wicked ways, then America will experience revival. If America will experience revival, then America will be changed. But we can't change America by marching down the streets protesting this and that or whatever we want to do.

Our battle is spiritual and we have to deal with the fact that we have lost. We're losing in America and God is judging us because we have turned from God. So he says if my people, which are called by my name, do you call yourself a Christian, shall humble themselves.

I have to humble myself. You have to take care of yourself and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways. Then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. He says now mine eyes shall be open and mine ears attend unto the prayer that is made in this place.

Let me ask you this. Is your church a place of prayer? When's the last time you went into a church where the people of God were silent before him waiting on him in prayer? When's the last time you went into the basement of a church or room of a church and the leaders were on their face before God and there was a holy groan as the spirit of God was dealing with them about their sin?

When was the last time when you were in a church where you sensed that the men of God in that church were men that were seeking the face of God and were seeking to lead the church as God led them? When's the last time?

I'm afraid so many of our churches, we have programs that I got a letter from somebody the other day and they was bragging on their church, talking about all their activities and they said they had things planned out in months for months ahead and I thought that's true.

They do. But is God able to break in on those plans? Is he able to break in on your plans today? My friend, God is life. He's my life and he can do whatever he wants. I'll confess to you, I don't always like what he wants but I'm learning as I get older that it's a lot easier just to go along with his plans and his will.

Now here's that address, America's Godly Heritage. It's Wall Builders, Box 397, Aledo, Texas, 76008. We're going to play the tape here in a minute. I want you to get this down. If you like to get a copy of this, then they'll send you a list of other things they have.

You write to them. This is an excellent thing for your children to listen to, for your family. The video is just tremendous. You can sit there and watch them as he gives this series. Here it is again, Wall Builders, Box 397, Aledo, Texas, 76008.

And they have a phone number if you'd like to call them. It's 817 -441 -6044. Now we're going to start off the tape and continue on where we were last week. I'll maybe back it up a little bit so you can get in on just a little bit of the last part.

Maybe I'll even give you the intro that they gave and then we'll get into it. You use this as a springboard for revival in your own heart, in your own church, your own community. And ask God what he would want you to do.

But first, ask God to show you anything in your life that you've done wrong or maybe your community. I'm working on a series. I wanted to start it up last week, but I just needed more time on the iniquities of the fathers, how the iniquities of the fathers are passed on from generation to generation.

And God said that he would visit the iniquities. Now, here's the message by David Barton from Wall Builders. And I think I'll just leave out that intro. We played it last week. Probably most of you listened to it.

So we'll just cut right on into the tape.

Now, this next case is a case from 1844, and it came out of Philadelphia. There was a school in Philadelphia that said, and we're going to teach our young people morality, but we don't need religion to do that.

We can teach them to be moral without religion. It sounds just like schools today. They said, we don't need Christianity for the Bible. We can teach morality without it. That was such an unorthodox position at the time of the founders that this case made the Supreme Court.

And look what the court told that school in Philadelphia. The court said, yes, you're going to teach your young students morality. They said the purest principles of morality are to be taught. But where are those principles found?

The court said, whoever searches for those principles must go to the same source from which a Christian man derives his faith. You have to go to the Bible. Now, the court ruled you couldn't have a school that didn't teach Christianity to the Bible because that was the source of morality.

And we're just the opposite now. Now, this case from 1811 might even seem to be strong for us. But notice what the court said. It says, whatever strikes at the root of Christianity tends to destroy civil government.

Now, that case dealt with a man who really got mad. He got irate. When he got irate, he went into a profanity fit. Profanity wasn't a problem. It was what he said when he got profaned. And not only had he said it, he had written it all out and distributed it and passed it around.

And the court looked at what he'd said, and they contained it. It contained it in the court's records. And it said, Jesus Christ is this. Jesus is this. God is this. The Bible is this. And he'd gone through a whole string of accusations against Jesus Christ and against the Word of God.

Well, the court summed that up, and they said, no, that's blasphemy. And the court said, the problem with blasphemy is this. The court said, if you attack Jesus Christ, you've attacked Christianity. And the court said, if you've attacked Christianity, you have attacked the foundation of the United States.

The court said, therefore, an attack on Jesus Christ is equivalent to attacking the United States. That man got three months in prison and a $500 fine for attacking the United States by going after Jesus.

That's almost hard to imagine today. But notice the date on that case. It was an 1811 case, nearly two decades after the First Amendment was in place. The First Amendment never intended to separate Christian principles from government.

But yet we hear separation of church and state so often today. As a matter of fact, we hear it so often that in recent polls, 67 of the nation said that they thought that the phrase separation of church and state was found in the First Amendment.

And that's despite the fact that the words separation, church, or state don't even appear in the Constitution. Well, where did we get that perception of separation of church and state? Well, to look at that, we have to go back and look at our origins.

Most people know the phrase, but few people know its origins. And you really have to start by looking at the First Amendment. When the First Amendment was framed in Congress, when they went through and arrived at the wording that we have now, and the First Amendment very simply says now, Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

Notice the words separation, church, state, they're not even found in the First Amendment. Well, what's the history and background of the First Amendment? Where did separation of church and state come from?

Well, the background of the First Amendment is very clear as to what the intent of Congress was because before they passed the wording that we have now, they went through 12 different iterations. And those iterations make the intent clear.

For example, some of the earlier versions said Congress will make no law establishing one denomination of Christians higher than another denomination. Congress will make no law respecting one society more than another society of Christians.

The intent was clear. We do not want in America what we had in Great Britain. We don't want one denomination running the nation. And that's what they had in Great Britain, whether it was just the Catholics or just the Anglicans.

They said we don't want a repeat of that in America. We do want God's principles, but we don't want one denomination running the nation. And that was so well understood that even court rulings several years after the First Amendment made that very clear.

For example, this is a case from 1796, and look what the court says. The court says, by our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion, but all sects and denominations of Christians are placed on the same equal footing.

Well, again, that's clear. We do want Christian principles. We do want God's principles. But we don't want one denomination to run the nation. Now, that was understood long after that. But the phrase, separation church and state, where did it come from?

Well, it came out of an incident that happened in 1801. In 1801, the Danbury Baptist Association of Danbury, Connecticut, heard a rumor that the congregationalist denomination was about to be made the national denomination of America.

And that distressed them, and it should have. So they fired off a letter to President Thomas Jefferson to express their concern. January 1, 1802, Jefferson addressed that group of Danbury Baptists, and in his address, he assured them.

He said, the First Amendment has erected a wall of separation between church and state. He said, but that wall is a one-directional wall. It keeps the government from running the church, but it makes sure that Christian principles will always stay in government.

Now, all we hear of his speech anymore is just half the speech, that the First Amendment has erected a wall of separation. Well, he made it very clear that God's principles are to stay in government, but the government's not to run the church.

And that was the definition of the First Amendment, was to protect the church from the government, not vice versa. Well, as time progressed, there was no national denomination established, so his speech fell into disuse.

And then in 1853, another group came to Congress with a petition. And they petitioned Congress, it was a small group, and they said, we want a separation of Christian principles from government. We want separation of church and state.

Well, that petition was referred to the House and the Senate Judiciary Committee, and they investigated for one year to see if it would be possible to separate Christian principles from government. At the end of that year, they came back with a report, both the House and the Senate.

And I'll show you versions from the House report. The Senate was very similar, but the House report said this. It said, had the people, during the Revolution, had a suspicion of any attempt to war against Christianity, that Revolution would have been strangled in its cradle.

That's strong. If the Founding Fathers had thought they were doing anything to limit Christianity, the Revolution would have died. And the report continued. They said, at the time of the adoption of the Constitution and its amendments, the universal settlement was that Christianity should be encouraged, but not anyone's denomination.

And they continued. They said, in this age, there is no substitute for Christianity. That was the religion of the founders of the Republic, and they expected it to remain the religion of their descendants.

And they finished off the report with this strong statement. They said, the great, the vital, the conservative element of our system, the thing that holds our system together, is the belief of our people in the pure doctrines and the divine truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

They said, there's no way we're going to separate because that's what's made us so successful. That's been our foundation, our base, our root. Well, as time continued to progress, there was another challenge in the late 1800s, in the 1870s and 80s and 90s.

There was a group that specifically challenged Christian principles and government. And so, as that challenge progressed through the courts and through the legal system, it arrived at the Supreme Court, challenging Christian principles and government, saying there shouldn't be that.

Well, at that time, the court went back, for example, in the 1878 case, Reynolds v. United States, they went back and pulled out Jefferson's speech in its entirety. And they gave it again, and they said, yes, Jefferson did say there was to be a separation of church and state, but he said that was to protect the church from the government.

He said, notice that Jefferson also said that Christian principles were never to be separated from government. And the Supreme Court used Jefferson's speech for the next 15 years to make sure that Christian principles stayed part of government.

Well, it remained that way until 1947. And in 1947, for the first time in the court's history, it used only eight words out of Jefferson's speech. In a case called Everson v. Board of Education, the court said this.

It says, the First Amendment has erected a wall of separation between church and state. That wall must be kept high and impregnable. Now, that was the first time that it had been reversed in America. Always before that, the First Amendment was to protect the church from the government, but now the court said, no, the First Amendment's to protect the government from the church.

There's a high wall there. We can't allow any breaches. Now, that was a new philosophy for the court. And what would have allowed the court justices to say that and to arrive at that? Well, they were influenced by a man named Dr. William James.

He's called the father of modern psychology. And he was a strong opponent of religious principles and government and education. He wanted religious principles separated completely. And he made this statement.

He said, there's nothing so absurd but that if you repeat it often enough, people will believe it. And that's the tact that the court began to take in the following years after 1947. They began to talk about separation.

They said, this is what the founders wanted, separation of church and state. They didn't quote the founders, but they just said that's what the founders wanted. Well, they continued on that track so long that in 1958, in a case called Behr v. Cole Morgan, one of the judges was tired of hearing about it.

And he wrote a stinging dissent. He said, if this court doesn't stop talking about separation of church and state, he said, someone's going to think it's part of the Constitution. And that was his warning in 1958.

But the court continued to talk about it. They continued to talk and talk and talk until 1962. In 1962, in the case called Engle v. Vitale, it's the first time in America's history that we had a ruling that separated Christian principals from education, Christian principals from government.

That was the case that removed school prayer. Now, we know that's the first time in America's history that religious principals were separated by legal research. But on top of that, the World Book Encyclopedia for the next year, the 1963 World Book, said that that case was the first time that we had had separation of church and state.

Do you realize that that doctrine is a brand new doctrine? It's not something from the founders. It's not an original doctrine. That's something that even outside observers know started just in recent years.

But yet, look how much we've lost in those recent years under that brand new doctrine. Now, that case that removed school prayer, it was interesting in a number of aspects. One was, you remember I told you that 1892 case used 87 precedents to say that this is a Christian nation and the teachings of Christ have to be in everything we do?

Well, this was the first case in court history that we'd seen like this, this 1962 case. The court gave zero precedents. It quoted zero previous legal cases. It gave zero historical instance. It simply made an announcement.

It said, we'll not have prayer in schools anymore. That violates the Constitution. Without historical or legal base, a brand new direction in America. Well, within a 12-month period of time, by June 17th of 1963, in two more cases called Abingdon Champ and Murray Curlette, the court had completely removed prayer, Bible reading, religious classes, religious instruction, and that was a radical change.

For example, to show you how radical it had been, how recent it was, this is a book from 1946 and it says, Bible Study Courses of the New Testament for Dallas High Schools. You look on the inside and it says that it's authorized by the Board of Education April the 23rd, 1946.

It's printed in the Dallas Public Schools print shop and as you get into the introduction, you find that this is a course for graduation from Dallas High Schools. Well, it wasn't a bland course on the New Testament.

Notice some of these. This is the first lesson. Lesson one says, The Preexistence of Christ. Where was Christ before he was born on earth? What titles does John apply to Christ in this chapter? For what purpose was John sent by God?

The Annunciation, Birth, and Infancy of Jesus. Name five things the angel told Mary concerning her child Jesus. What does the word Jesus mean? How did the angel explain the miraculous birth of John and Jesus?

And run it through the lessons. And at the end of lesson one, there's some memory work. Memorize the preexistence of Christ. In the beginning was the word, and the word is with God, and the word was God.

All things were made by him, and without him was not anything made that was made. And right on through. Now, that was in 1946. So what happened in 1962 and 63 was a radical reversal of everything that we'd had prior to that point.

Now that 1963 case, the Abingdon Ship case, is the one that removed Bible reading out of schools. And if you think back just over the brief survey that we've done here, you recall that 94 of the quotes of the Founders were based on the Bible.

You recall the early textbooks quoted the Bible used as part of the alphabet. You even recall earlier legal cases we've looked at where the court said you couldn't have a school that didn't teach Christianity in the Bible.

How in the world can the court justify in this 1963 case removing the Bible out of schools? Well, the court never makes a decision without explaining its decision and you can go to a law library and check out the text of the case and read it just like you would in a book in a regular library.

And this is what you'll find in that 1963 case, Abingdon Ship. This is the court's explanation of why the Bible had to come out of schools. The court said that if portions of the New Testament were read without explanation they could have been and had been psychologically harmful to the child.

And that's quite a statement. The Bible has to come out of schools because it causes psychological damage for children. That's a branded statement. Again, this was another case without historical base, without legal base.

It said no more Bible reading in schools. That causes psychological damage for the students. Well, the whole controversy has started over this little prayer. This little prayer is a 22-word prayer that led to the removal of all prayers across America.

This was the prayer of the Engel Vital case and it very simply says, Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon thee and we beg thy blessings over us, our parents, our teachers, and our country.

Now that prayer only acknowledges God, doesn't even contain the word Jesus in it, and that prayer was so bland that eight years later when the court was talking about that prayer, the court said that that prayer was a to whom it may concern prayer.

I mean, that's bland. If somebody's up there, if you happen to be listening, I think we're praying. That type of prayer even described by the court. Well, that little bland prayer was interesting for a number of reasons.

It acknowledged God one time, it was declared unconstitutional. Do you realize the Declaration of Independence talks about God four times? And this prayer that just mentions God once is unconstitutional?

And furthermore, this prayer merely acknowledged God and the court went so far as to find out what percentage of the nation did believe in God. And in the 1963 case, Edmonton Shemp, the court said in that case, they said at that time only 3 of the nation professed no belief in religion, no belief in God.

97 of the nation believed in God. That prayer was consistent with the beliefs of 97%, but the court took another first. So we side with the 3 against the 97%. That was the first time in America's history that 3 had become a majority.

3 had always been a minority, but now the philosophy of the 3 would be the philosophy under which the 97 would conduct their business. Well, if you look at the four categories in that prayer, it talks about students, it talks about families, it talks about schools, and it talks about the nation.

And in all four of those categories, we have numbers of Supreme Court cases where the Supreme Court used to rule in all four of those areas using biblical principles following God's guideline. For example, in that area dealing with families, we have a recent case from 1941 that dealt with divorce.

And in that case, the court said, now, in America we only allow divorce for six reasons. And they said, the reason we only allow six reasons is because the Bible only allows six reasons. And the court explained.

They said, you have to understand we didn't make the family, God did. Therefore, we don't have a right to regulate something we didn't make. We simply take God's rules and apply that to the family the same way God did.

And the court then went into a Bible lesson. The court said, now remember, in the beginning, God made Adam and Eve. God made the first family. And then it continued on through the history. And it said, by the time you got to Noah and the flood, it said God took Noah and his wife and he put them in the ark.

That was one family. God took their three sons, the three wives, put them in the ark. God put four families in the ark. Here came the flood, wiped out the world. When God took them off the ark, he took four families off.

And the court went through a history of how God had created the family and pointed out that since God had created it, they used his rules in dealing with the family. But now we arrive at 1962 -63 and the court says, no, no, no.

We're not going to use those rules anymore. They cause psychological damage. So we want to see if that made any difference. Does it make a difference to stop ruling by God's principles and start conducting life by God's principles?

Well, let's look at each of those four categories. Let's start with students. What happened to students when we removed religious principles? Well, this statement by George Washington is really good. Washington says, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that we can maintain national morality and exclusion of religious principles.

He says, if you take away religious principles, you're going to lose national morality. Well, did that happen? Remember that in 1962 the court took out prayer. In 1963 it took out Bible reading. The court continued step by step by step.

1965 in a case called Reed v. Van Hoven the court said, now it's okay for students to pray over their lunch at school. No problem praying over their lunch as long as no one knows they're praying. They can't say any words, they can't move their lips, but they can pray if nobody knows about it.

1967 in a case called DeKalb v. DeSpain, the court took a four-line nursery rhyme used by a K -5 kindergarten class and the court said, that's an unconstitutional nursery rhyme. And the court explained.

They said, now although the word God is not contained in this nursery rhyme, they said if someone were to hear it, they might think that it was talking about God and that would be unconstitutional. Continues on with case after case.

But let's get to 19...

...to Wall Builders by David Burton. If you'd like a copy of that tape you could write to Wall Builders Box 397 Aledo, Texas A-L-E-D-O and the zip code is 76008. This is the second in the series playing this on our Patriotic Series in the month of July on Eagle's Wings.

We trust that this has been a blessing to you. Well, we're going to have to go again that address so before we go is Wall Builders Box 397 Aledo A-L-E-D-O, Texas 76008. Remember my friend, we need Jesus Christ.

The Bible said the heathen are entered into her sanctuary. The heathen have entered into the church. Have they entered into your heart? Has the heathen entered into your home? We need revival. We need to turn back to God and not be like Zechariah when her prophets were lied and treacherous persons.

Her priests have polluted the sanctuary. They have done violence to the law. We have done violence to the law in our land by turning from our Constitution. Pray for revival. Pray for America. God bless you.

Remember Jesus Christ is all you need but is he all you want? May God bless you my friend.