# Islamophobia



## JM (Sep 19, 2008)

Do you suffer from Islamophobia?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaIslamophobia is a neologism that refers to prejudice or discrimination against Islam or Muslims.[1] The term itself dates back to the 1980s,[2] but came into common usage after the September 11, 2001 attacks.[3] In 1997, the British Runnymede Trust defined Islamophobia as the "dread or hatred of Islam and therefore, to the fear and dislike of all Muslims," stating that it also refers to the practice of discriminating against Muslims by excluding them from the economic, social, and public life of the nation. It includes the perception that Islam has no values in common with other cultures, is inferior to the West and is a violent political ideology rather than a religion.[4] Professor Anne Sophie Roald writes that steps were taken toward official acceptance of the term in January 2001 at the "Stockholm International Forum on Combating Intolerance", where Islamophobia was recognized as a form of intolerance alongside Xenophobia and Antisemitism.[5]

Sources have suggested an increasing trend in Islamophobia, some of which attribute it to the September 11 attacks,[6] while others associate it with the increased presence of Muslims in the Western world.[7] In May 2002 the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC), a European Union watchdog, released a report entitled "Summary report on Islamophobia in the EU after 11 September 2001", which described an increase in Islamophobia-related incidents in European member states post-9/11.[8] Although the term is widely recognized and used, it has not been without controversy.[9] Opponents argue that the term "Islamophobia" is often misused to undermine criticism of Islam.[10]​
Islamophobia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did Luther and Calvin suffer from this phobia?



Should we start a support group or something?


----------



## Athaleyah (Sep 19, 2008)

I think Islam is a religion inspired by demonic forces. Does that count? Or am I merely intolerant?


----------



## Pergamum (Sep 19, 2008)

We NEED to rightly fear some things.


----------



## kalawine (Sep 19, 2008)

Athaleyah said:


> I think Islam is a religion inspired by demonic forces. Does that count? Or am I merely intolerant?



I agree with what you're saying but we have to remember that Buddism, Hinduism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons... the list goes on... these are all demonicly inspired "religions." As humans, we tend to despise the ones that might cause physical harm to us and/or our families and loved ones. This is OK but when you look at things from the aspect of eternity they are all equally harmful as they cause eternal harm (death).


----------



## kalawine (Sep 19, 2008)

Pergamum said:


> We NEED to rightly fear some things.


 When someone tells you they're going to kill you, you might want to listen to them.


----------



## Athaleyah (Sep 20, 2008)

kalawine said:


> I agree with what you're saying but we have to remember that Buddism, Hinduism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons... the list goes on... these are all demonicly inspired "religions." As humans, we tend to despise the ones that might cause physical harm to us and/or our families and loved ones. This is OK but when you look at things from the aspect of eternity they are all equally harmful as they cause eternal harm (death).



I wasn't clear in what I meant. I think that man made religions have a part of man's own sinful desires put into them as well as a demonic component. This demonic component can be greater or lesser. So to me Buddhism seems more man centered and less directly demonic than Islam does. Islam seems more demonic to me. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm certainly open to being corrected.


----------



## kalawine (Sep 20, 2008)

JM said:


> Did Luther and Calvin suffer from this phobia?



Luther saw the Muslims as God's rod that he was using to punish his people when they went astray. Luther thought that the only way to defeat Islam was for God's people to repent and turn to God and he would turn back the danger. (I must say that he may have been on to something) 
Calvin saw Islam the same way he saw Judaism and Papal worship - as forms of antichrist (they do deny the Christ). He also saw Islam as "the little horn" that sprang up from the beast in the book of Daniel. Rome is the "big horn."


----------



## kalawine (Sep 20, 2008)

Athaleyah said:


> kalawine said:
> 
> 
> > I agree with what you're saying but we have to remember that Buddism, Hinduism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons... the list goes on... these are all demonicly inspired "religions." As humans, we tend to despise the ones that might cause physical harm to us and/or our families and loved ones. This is OK but when you look at things from the aspect of eternity they are all equally harmful as they cause eternal harm (death).
> ...



I understood what you meant. Point taken.


----------



## JM (Sep 20, 2008)

> A quote from an 1899 book by Winston Churchill, "The River War", in which he describes Muslims he apparently observed during Kitchener's campaign in the Sudan
> 
> How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
> 
> Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.



What would Churchill say about the UK now?


----------



## kalawine (Sep 20, 2008)

JM said:


> > A quote from an 1899 book by Winston Churchill, "The River War", in which he describes Muslims he apparently observed during Kitchener's campaign in the Sudan
> >
> > How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
> >
> ...



Thanks man! That's good stuff! Do you own this book?


----------



## TimV (Sep 20, 2008)

You might also want to read what Churchill said about Jews and Calvinists. Luther's writing about Jews is also instructive when doing the sort of high level research on comparative religions that have been posted lately.



> Islam seems more demonic to me. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm certainly open to being corrected.



I suppose you could compare the way Christ is treated in various religions to get an idea of how they fit on the demonometer. And since Churchill and Luther were mentioned in seeming support of the idea that Islam is more a threat, more demonic than other religions, here follows some food for thought. Not that I agree with these two, it just good practice when one singles out a demographic group to target to play the substitution game to keep one honest with himself. One would hate to have an unconscious whipping boy.

Luther considered Jews far more dangerous then Muslims, and wrote much more about them. Here's a link to a book he wrote, which starts here:



> I had made up my mind to write no more either about the Jews or against them. But since I learned that those miserable and accursed people do not cease to lure to themselves even us, that is, the Christians, I have published this little book, so that I might be found among those who opposed such poisonous activities of the Jews and who warned the Christians to be on their guard against them. I would not have believed that a Christian could be duped by the Jews into taking their exile and wretchedness upon himself. However, the devil is the god of the world, and wherever God's word is absent he has an easy task, not only with the weak but also with the strong. May God help us. Amen.



Martin Luther - On the Jews and Their Lies

Churchill as well felt Christian civilization was under threat from Jews, although as in the above linked Muslim article he distinguishes good Jews from bad Jews, as in this 1920 article from a major British newspaper he wrote:



> There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and in the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution, by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews, it is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd) or of Krassin or Radek -- all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combating Counter-Revolution has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses. The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.



I personally think Luther went over the top with Jews. What do you all think? Perhaps we should study other historic figures and study which groups they thought more or less demonic than others. John Trapp, whom Spurgeon affectionately calls "pithy" has some interesting ideas.

I leave you all with this qoute from Martin Luther's book



> They are real liars and bloodhounds who have not only continually perverted and falsified all of Scripture with their mendacious glosses from the beginning until the present day. Their heart's most ardent sighing and yearning and hoping is set on the day on which they can deal with us Gentiles as they did with the Gentiles in Persia at the time of Esther. Oh, how fond they are of the book of Esther, which is so beautifully attuned to their bloodthirsty, vengeful, murderous yearning and hope. The sun has never shone on a more bloodthirsty and vengeful people than they are who imagine that they are God's people who have been commissioned and commanded to murder and to slay the Gentiles. In fact, the most important thing that they expect of their Messiah is that he will murder and kill the entire world with their sword. They treated us Christians in this manner at the very beginning through out all the world. They would still like to do this if they had the power, and often enough have made the attempt, for which they have got their snouts boxed lustily.


----------



## Archlute (Sep 20, 2008)

TimV said:


> Wrote some stuff.



So, how many videos have you watched lately of Jews or Calvinists beheading folk, or blowing themselves up (along with a portion of the local population). A tree is known by its fruit, and fruit is something that you can either taste, see, touch, or smell. I suppose that you can hear it when it crunches as well.

 <====== Suicide bomber


----------



## TimV (Sep 20, 2008)

> So, how many videos have you watched lately of Jews or Calvinists beheading folk, or blowing themselves up (along with a portion of the local population). A tree is known by its fruit, and fruit is something that you can either taste, see, touch, or smell. I suppose that you can hear it when it crunches as well.



Calvinists have the closest understanding of the truth of any major theological school in the world, so a thoughtful person wouldn't expect to see many videos of us killing ourselves and innocent civilians.

As to Jews and Muslims and killing non combatants using whatever method, e.g. suicide bombing, firing missiles into apartment complexes etc.., in Israel the current score card over the last twenty years is that the Jews are ahead by almost 50%. But that is hardly the type of solid data one would use to make a conclusive case.

I would be interested in a thoughtful thread about the relative influence of demonic activity and level of threat to Christianity of various world religions, and that is why I posted from Luther's book on the subject. There are many other historical Protestant figures who have also written much on the subject. I would hope, though, that this post isn't just the daily drive by shooting to make people feel superior to others by mocking. Articles by neocon Jews and Christian Zionists need to be balanced by works of a, well, deeper sort. Perhaps limiting data to writings and events over, say, 30 years ago would help keep this or a similar thread non-political.


----------



## Webservant (Sep 20, 2008)

Much of this fear is that which was instilled into our culture by a government which needs a boogie-man in order to maintain its power and continue its growth. 

Islam is a demon-inspired perversion, and in that sense I do not fear it at all.


----------



## Curt (Sep 20, 2008)

Count me as a "phobe." God is sovereign and He has already won the war. We, however, have to live out history - and they are intent on killing all Christians and Jews.
That's just not nice.


----------



## fredtgreco (Sep 20, 2008)

I wonder how many nations where Christianity flourished have been destroyed by Jews?

Because I know that Algeria/Tunisia went from being one of the strongholds of the church to a being a backwater persecution chamber. Byzantium no longer exists, and the world's largest church is now a gathering of Satanists. Spain was enslaved for decades. But for God's Providence at Tours, all our (European) ancestors might have enslaved and compelled to worship Satan, as the Byzantine children were.

Jews have not been kind to Christianity, but Islam has sought to destroy, maime and torture for centuries.


----------



## TimV (Sep 20, 2008)

> Count me as a "phobe." God is sovereign and He has already won the war. We, however, have to live out history - and they are intent on killing all Christians and Jews.
> That's just not nice.



The have been Jews in Iran since the time of the Book of Daniel, and many of their descendants still live there, and one is currently a member of Iran's Parliament. Are you also using hyperbole, and if so, how does one distinguish this sort of hyperbole from bearing false witness?


----------



## Curt (Sep 20, 2008)

TimV said:


> > Count me as a "phobe." God is sovereign and He has already won the war. We, however, have to live out history - and they are intent on killing all Christians and Jews.
> > That's just not nice.
> 
> 
> ...



Islam as a faith emphasizes submission of Muslims to God and, by a logical extension, the submission of non-Muslims to Muslims. "Fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)" says the Qurân (Surah 9, verse 5). An explanatory note in the respected translation by A. Yusuf Ali makes clear that this is not intended metaphorically. " From "Islam Review"


----------



## TimV (Sep 20, 2008)

> I wonder how many nations where Christianity flourished have been destroyed by Jews?
> 
> Because I know that Algeria/Tunisia went from being one of the strongholds of the church to a being a backwater persecution chamber. Byzantium no longer exists, and the world's largest church is now a gathering of Satanists. Spain was enslaved for decades. But for God's Providence at Tours, all our (European) ancestors might have enslaved and compelled to worship Satan, as the Byzantine children were.
> 
> Jews have not been kind to Christianity, but Islam has sought to destroy, maime and torture for centuries.



I think one could put numbers to those questions if we agree on terms and definitions. Muslims are currently a billion people, and Jews are 15 million. I think you would agree that since there has been no Jewish state except for the Khazars in the last two thousand years until 60 years ago, it would have been hard for a Jewish state to destroy a Christian state. So, in fairness one would have to compare Christians killed by Jews who had the power of life or death over Christians and the number of Christians killed by Muslims who had the power of life or death over Christians, and then adjust for population percentage. Does that seem fair? I think such an exchange would be interesting to forum readers of Latvian, Lithuanian, Estonian, Polish, Russian, Ukrainian, Hungarian, Romanian, German and Palestinian backgrounds. 

There have also been historical cases where Muslims and Jews took the same side against Christians, and one could look at what developed in the aftermath of the conflict to compare how Muslims and Jews treated Christians. Not that there would of necessity be a common enough type of behavior that one could call typical. I'd actually argue against one.


----------



## TimV (Sep 20, 2008)

> Islam as a faith emphasizes submission of Muslims to God and, by a logical extension, the submission of non-Muslims to Muslims. "Fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)" says the Qurân (Surah 9, verse 5). An explanatory note in the respected translation by A. Yusuf Ali makes clear that this is not intended metaphorically. " From "Islam Review"



Brother, could you address the example I gave? When you said



> We, however, have to live out history - and they are intent on killing all Christians and Jews.
> That's just not nice.



were you purposely exaggerating to make a point?


----------



## Archlute (Sep 20, 2008)

So Tim, are you serious in your tit-for-tat here, or are you just wasting time on the Internet in frivolous debate? I'm finding your posts a bit silly. Re-read Fred's post, and then go do some research.


----------



## TimV (Sep 20, 2008)

> So Tim, are you serious in your tit-for-tat here, or are you just wasting time on the Internet in frivolous debate? I'm finding your posts a bit silly. Re-read Fred's post, and then go do some research.



I'm sorry to hear that. I've been studying 20th century war crimes for most of my adult life and don't think I'm wasting my time, at least with everyone here.

Now, I have re-read Fred's post, and offered a way to test his opinion that Islam is far more demonic than Judaism.

I've also responded to your post, that you don't see Calvinists and Jews blowing themselves up and bystanders. I'm not sure why you brought Calvinists into the subject, although we've done our share of property damage. I myself was part of that 10,000 strong crowd that broke into the SA World Trade Center with a tank to protest the government negotiating with Communists, so I know first hand of what I speak.

Now, please, it doesn't take that much thought to figure out why certain Hindus, Christians and Muslims have used suicide bombing as an offensive weapon; in the situations that they are used, there's not much else to use. A poor man's atomic bomb, if you will, not that I'm justifying it's use. When Jews fire a missile from a helicopter into an apartment complex to kill a Palestinian they don't like, the kill civilians, and they don't care. Read Luther. When a Palestinian boards a bus in the hope of killing a few reservists and kills a bunch of civilians, he doesn't care either, as both men are Christ-haters. And as I've said, when it comes to killing civilians, the Jews are ahead, at least in Israel.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Sep 20, 2008)

A phobia is not simply a fear but an _irrational_ fear. So Islamophobia by definition is irrational. Therefore I can't be an Islamophobe since my serious concern about Islam is _rational_. . . and warranted by the evidence.


----------



## DMcFadden (Sep 20, 2008)

*[MODERATION NOTE]

This is not the P&G forum. Please stick to the topic under discussion in the Cults and World Religions arena and avoid both personal slams and political posturing on either side.*


----------



## Curt (Sep 20, 2008)

Gomarus said:


> A phobia is not simply a fear but an _irrational_ fear. So Islamophobia by definition is irrational. Therefore I can't be an Islamophobe since my serious concern about Islam is _rational_. . . and warranted by the evidence.



Thank you. I stand corrected. I am not an Islamophobe. I'm a rational man.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Sep 20, 2008)

To put it mildly, there would have to be a drastic, _drastic_ change in literally dozens of cultural, military, and economic factors, within the so-called Islamic world for Islam _per se_ to be a credible threat to the well-being of probably 99% of us--and our children.

Stateless criminals notwithstanding, the chances of my individual bodily suffering at the hands of religiously motivated Muslims is very slim, especially since I am not a traveler, even moreso since I seldom travel internationally. I am only slightly more likely (still negligible) to risk bodily suffering at the hands of more nationalistically or martially motivated attackers. 9-11 barely changed this metric.

I am not "Islamophobic." I utterly reject as preposterous the idea that there is an new "Caliphate" brewing, or that there is real chance of a new threat of the "Turk" (to use the Renaissance/Reformation age term) rising to battle for the Crescent Moon in the next hundred years.

Is it impossible to conceive that there could again be armies marching to spread Islam? No, because the future is inherently opaque. But this is no more likely than that the present contrary state of Islamic cultural inertia will itself prevail in the future. In fact, if history is any guide, it would appear to be next to impossible to repeat the expansionistic hegemony of the Ottomans.

On the other hand, if history is again any guide, the one thing that could fuel a new Islamic expansion would be if Europe was "Islamicized", mainly (or at first) through unchecked immigration (could be too late) and a booming Muslim birthrate in European countries. Once formerly non-Muslim countries were subdued through civil war and then state control, the pattern would be for them to ask the question: "what do we do with our rising generation's energies, now that the parents have settled on their lees?" History's answer has been to turn those forces outward until they have been dissipated.

BUT (!) this scenario once again presumes that Islam is not itself subject to the forces of history. _Who is to say that Islam, in the form of Islam, can survive another phase of geographical expansion?_ Folks, this is a great, unanswered objection!

Do you have any idea how unique Christianity is?!? How it has maintained a form of orthodoxy while embarked on an *unbroken* expansion (stateless, I should add, despite various state attempts to associate with it)--expanding in greater and lesser modes--for 2000 years. Jesus' promise to accomplish his own conquest is one of the proofs of the truth of his doctrine.

Islam cannot claim this kind of success. I completely deny the assertion that Islam has maintained a zealous dynamism against all foes (especially outside forces) since the 700s, or especially since the 1500s. On the contrary it has been receding, and in retrenchment since the days of the Ottomans. Until western, secular colonialism and its aftermath literally invited Islam back into central and western Europe, the West faced no more threat from them at all. Of course, fading, insular societies attack weak minorities (i.e. Christians) within their own borders. Is this surprising? No, nor is it unique to Islamic countries.

Islam draws its own strength from the energies of those who fight it with weapons of the world--of course it does, because Islam is of the same worldly species. On the other hand, it cannot draw strength from the labors of the church, for those energies are spiritual, and Islam has no spiritual vitality.

Islam may have a long shelf-life, on account of it is a Christian heresy. However, it cannot break free of its own cultural conditioning. It cannot transcend. It cannot bring its practitioners past a medieval point of maximum expression. Islam is doomed, doomed IN HISTORY, along with every other form of hostility to true religion.


----------



## Webservant (Sep 20, 2008)

Contra_Mundum said:


> On the other hand, if history is again any guide, the one thing that could fuel a new Islamic expansion would be if Europe was "Islamicized", mainly (or at first) through unchecked immigration (could be too late) and a booming Muslim birthrate in European countries. Once formerly non-Muslim countries were subdued through civil war and then state control, the pattern would be for them to ask the question: "what do we do with our rising generation's energies, now that the parents have settled on their lees?" History's answer has been to turn those forces outward until they have been dissipated.


_I pray that none of my brothers here take my words the wrong way. _

Would this be a failure of our government to "protect" us if this were to happen? NO! God's people will have failed. The Islamic "threat" is not a military one - it is a spiritual one.

The reason the Mod has had to step into this conversation to remind us that this is a thread in the Cults and World Religions forum is because God's people bow down before government for solutions to spiritual issues. It is confusing because so many of us, I think, blur the distinction between political and religious issues. 

From slavery to abortion to Islam - God's people failed and the result has been the same - carnage. Yet we forget all about it if it's not on Fox News tonight. What a shameful thing.


----------



## kvanlaan (Oct 11, 2008)

> I think you would agree that since there has been no Jewish state except for the Khazars in the last two thousand years until 60 years ago, it would have been hard for a Jewish state to destroy a Christian state.



True enough, but this helps to illustrate the immense gulf between the underlying philosophy of Islam and Judaism (and _biblical_ Christianity, for that matter.) There were no hoardes of Jews clamouring at the gates of Vienna. 

The other thing is, I don't even know if Islam can be classified as a 'religion" _per se_. I heard an interesting show (I think it was on the WHI) in which the guest, I don't recall the name, but he was _very_ well informed, spoke Arabic, and had, I believe, actually served as a judge in a Sharia court. He made the comment that Islam is not even a religion in the terms that we think of 'religion'. Fascinating show. But my point is, there is nothing else quite like it and I don't know that many of us can even wrap our heads around what it actually is. I don't think grouping it with Judaism and Reformed Christianity is even correct in a religiously nomenclatural (I think I just made up a new word there) sense, from what this guy was saying.

As for those who say there is no threat, they will one day go to bed a free man and wake up in dhimmitude.


----------



## Pergamum (Oct 11, 2008)

How would Islam NOT be a religion?


----------



## kvanlaan (Oct 11, 2008)

As I recall from the show, it _is_ a religion, but not in the same way as Judaism or Christianity, not in the typcial way that we think of religion. I'll try to find the show and post the link.


----------



## kvanlaan (Oct 11, 2008)

Here's a short excerpt from the show - I will try to find the rest of the transcript, 'cause I know you can't download the program. (If anyone has a link, please let me know!)



> Christianity Confronts Islam (Parts 1 and 2)
> The White Horse Inn ^ | 1 October and 8 October 2006 | Dr. Michael Horton interviews former Muslim and professor of Sharia Law, Sam Solomon
> 
> Posted on October 10, 2006 9:47:24 AM by Ottofire
> ...


----------



## BJClark (Oct 12, 2008)

TimV;4



> Now, please, it doesn't take that much thought to figure out why certain Hindus, Christians and Muslims have used suicide bombing as an offensive weapon; in the situations that they are used, there's not much else to use. A poor man's atomic bomb, if you will, not that I'm justifying it's use. When Jews fire a missile from a helicopter into an apartment complex to kill a Palestinian they don't like, the kill civilians, and they don't care. Read Luther. When a Palestinian boards a bus in the hope of killing a few reservists and kills a bunch of civilians, he doesn't care either, as both men are Christ-haters. And as I've said, when it comes to killing civilians, the Jews are ahead, at least in Israel.



I wonder, are there really any civilians in a War between God and Satan, for the souls of mankind?

Because ultimately that is the war we live within, God has already been the Victor, but we are still here living within the battle grounds. 

God knows who are His, but that doesn't mean there isn't more bloodshed in the process.


----------

