Throughout the history of the Jewish religion, spanning nearly 4,500 years, and entering into the Christian religion, beginning nearly 2000 years ago, knowledge pertaining to the existence of a singular entity with designs against the human race has been upheld. 

Many living within a “post-modern” mentality, one that believes only in those things which can be repeated in a lab and verified through some kind of scientific process, i.e. positivism, do not believe that there is such an entity.  Rather, it is often believed that the existence of such a person or angel is merely figurative literature, one that ascribes human characteristics to a source for various manifestations of evil, i.e. the absence of good that should be there. 

The “possession” of human beings by this entity, or associated persons of the entity, has been well documented throughout history, many of which have included supernatural events, such as languages never studied having been spoken, levitations, or “secret” knowledge about a person or sacred object being revealed, but is often ignored or explained away. 

In this article, I’ve set forth seven offensive strategies the Lord of Darkness uses to achieve his designs against human persons, i.e. damnation of their soul.  These strategies are:

  1. Direct attacks on the ethos of God, e.g. “Nothing is truly authoritative, holy or sacred. Conversely, nothing is forbidden, nothing is sinful.”
  2. The propagation of naturalism, which 
    1. treats the Church and Sacred Scripture as man-made, i.e. not inspired by God Himself through the work of Jesus and the Holy Spirit
    2. seeks to explain away supernatural events as though capable of occurring naturally, such as the creation of the universe and the human person
    3. encourages positivism
  3. The propagation of relativism, i.e. there is no Absolute Truth, whether engendered through reason / philosophy, ignorance, illiteracy or superstition
  4. Inducement to drug abuse and hedonism
  5. Aversion to suffering, i.e. materialism and an aversion to The Cross
  6. Subversion of Divine Truth, whether as derivations of Scripture that contain some truth, a.k.a. heresies, or divisions within the Body of Christ, as in the case of “Sola Scriptura” reasoning
  7. Culturalization that neglects the dignity of the human person and associated human rights, whether through media, another religion, Socialism, Communism, Fascism, Nazism, etc

Since the fall of mankind in the Garden of Eden, and even after the redemption of mankind through the blood of Jesus, the devil has used one or more of the preceding strategies for the damnation of souls.  

Arguably, Satan has been gaining ground offensively over the course of the last century through today’s system of public education, a system that was once predominantly orchestrated by churches, particularly in early America,1 in that the current system fails to teach about the fallen nature of man, a.k.a. Original Sin.  It is this kind of education that enables the first of Satan’s offensive strategies, one that fails to prepare souls for a defense, for the development and reinforcement of conscience. 

With respect to the second strategy, a person’s world outlook often depends on their understanding of the universe and the origin of life. One of the basic tenets of a “modern” secular public education, whether taught directly or through the absence of education surrounding the alternative, is that matter came from nothing: the universe and life came about by random interactions between matter, whether atomic or subatomic, as though through chance, as though without guidance or cause. 

Our public education system enables the first and second strategy.  After all, if the world came about naturally, and death existed in the world long before sin, then there is no basis or reason to teach any of the evidence behind Creation, and even less so, the redemption of mankind through Christ Jesus.  Accordingly, it is not as though the choice to believe or be taught evidence or beliefs other than naturalism are neglected by students, the freedom to learn about the alternative simply doesn’t exist. 

When was the last time you heard about classes surrounding Salvation History being available for students to enroll in? 

Thankfully however, Christmas is still a recognized holiday.    


The state controls public education, and separation of Church and State has come to mean exclusion of Church from State sponsored activities.  Does the state have grounds for anything but collective indifference in matters of faith? 

If the state were not indifferent, if a state desired to offer classes at a public school that teach Salvation History, one in accordance with the facts and fostered by the majority of citizens, could not one person sue or threaten to sue the school and the government for a claimed violation of the state’s supposed stance of neutrality with regards to matters of faith in public schools, even if the majority of parents and students favored the opportunity for such an education, and students weren’t required to take the class? 

If the lawsuit is taken to the state level and the state sides with the school, the state being composed mostly of God fearing Christians, the person or group, such as the “Freedom from Religion Foundation,” could then go to the Federal government, i.e. to the Supreme Court.  Sadly, the Federal government has already set a precedent for involvement in state affairs shortly after the Civil War, when some states sought succession, an attitude for action engendered through racism and the greed associated with slavery. 

Arguably, the Federal government should involve itself with state affairs when the violation of human rights are occurring in one of her states.  But, since when is there a right to prevent students from learning about Salvation History, especially when the majority of parents and students desire such an education for their children, and when students are not forced to take such classes?

Though the action taken by the Federal government was appropriate after the Civil War, such involvement of the Federal government in state affairs has since been seen as normative, even though this was not the intention of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights or the Founding Fathers in general, especially since most were godly men of Christian orientation, though that has been remarkably disputed.  Thankfully, David Barton, founder of WallBuilders, an organization dedicated to presenting America’s forgotten history and heroes (with an emphasis on our moral, religious, and constitutional heritage), has authored many books establishing the truth surrounding the religious orientation of the Founding Fathers.

Accordingly, the mentality that the Federal government has the right to prevent states or public schools from promoting principles found in the Church, or in accordance with Divine Law, is a modern fallacy.  Arguably, if states offered education oriented towards a knowledge of Salvation History, they could do so while still protecting the rights of all citizens, which is the principle responsibility of government, and conversely, an arguable reason for Federal intervention, i.e. when states are violating basic human rights. 

More to it, a student need not attend classes on Salvation History.  Nonetheless, many Americans are interested in learning Salvation History and having their children learn likewise.  Rather, in light of the present circumstances, public education has been reduced to vocational preparation, neglecting knowledge that could lead to the cultivation of virtue, to a happy and more productive life, to a more just and civil society.  And, if the belief is held that all human beings have souls, it becomes the responsibility of government, a government “of, by and for the people,” to spread such knowledge, especially when the majority of tax-paying citizens uphold such knowledge.       

With this kind of government, state courts could reject many lawsuits, lawsuits deemed appropriate only within the notion that separation of Church and State means exclusion of Church from anything involving the state, involving the money of tax-payers.  Conversely, in that the majority of statesman and citizens believe in God and desire that this belief be reflected in their state, whether that means the opportunity for their children to learn about Him at a public school or the prevention of state funded abortion services, the notion that Church and state should be completely separate is absurd!