WALID SHOEBAT is a Catholic Agent

[Mark]

Them ‘Damned’ Catholics
 
By Shoebat Foundation on June 12, 2013 in Blog, General
 
By Walid Shoebat

Throughout the Church’s history, it has warred with Islam. Yet, it has nothing to offer us today. This is the typical answer I get when I discuss Christian history with many Evangelicals. They tell me that beyond the Bible, there is nothing else we need. So next time you have a fire in the house, read the Bible, don’t forget to pray while you forget dialing 911 and enjoy the smoke and fire billowing inside the house.

I find it difficult to even ask questions: What was Christian history like, that withstood Islam’s evil and defeated it in Europe? Why and how did Christendom lose Egypt and Asia Minor to Islam? And what are we doing in our days to emulate or not emulate from that history?

The one million dollar question that no one can answer – although I will get many remarks from people damning me as a heretic – is this: Why did God choose Catholics to stop Islam in its tracks in all the major battles intended to destroy Christendom? Anyone who has the answer, please step forward.

What do most spirit-filled evangelicals know about the Battle of Lepanto, Battle of Tours, The Battle of Vienna, and The Battle of Malta?

Had the ‘damned’ Catholics not fought the Battle of Tours, all of Europe would have been Muslim today, like in Asia Minor. It would have been the end of Christianity, as we know it. Today, Turkey (Byzantium) is 99% Muslim and looks very likely to produce the Antichrist while Evangelicals still think that Antichrist and the Harlot is the Roman Catholic Church.

Why is it so rare to find holy spirit-filled evangelicals that speak of such history, except paint it as Crusader, dark, warring and bloodthirsty? What difference then is there between the die-hard liberal and the spirit-filled evangelical? Both criticize this history. Even further, like many evangelicals and liberals, the Muslims also condemn this history. So why do we echo their interpretation as we damn the Catholic?

Why? Is it because of them ‘damned’ Catholics who defended Christendom and saved the Protestants from utter annihilation? Could it be perhaps the Catholics did something right, like fight them damned Muslims and thwart them from annihilating Christendom?

In all these battles there were no Protestants coming to help save Europe and Protestant states refrained from helping or even lifting a finger. They were too busy doing Bible studies on how them ‘damned’ Catholics were the Antichrist.

Perhaps I need to exercise the typical American habit before speaking about such matters and prequalify my statements. I am not saying that all Protestants are evil, heavens no. Yet, every time I say the word “Catholic” and the whole church jumps up and down pin-pointing the leaven of the Catholics without even looking into the piles of dung worth of heretical books produced by so-called evangelicals.

Is the rich Catholic history such an evil subject that the Bible warned us not to touch and even beat down on the Catholic wars with Islam? Even during Nazism, there were many more of these ‘damned’ Catholics that chose to die in Hitler’s ovens than there were evangelicals and Protestants put together. Are these Catholics damned to hell despite making a choice to enter Hitler’s furnace? Which of the two is more pleasing to God, the sodomite loving pastor or the Jew loving Catholic who died in the infernos of Hitler’s crematoria?

So who will answer my questions? Will it be some unlearned, half-cocked, spikey-haired, tattooed, nose-pierced, ear ringed, mocking, useless, teenage brained heretic from The Free Grace Movement who will instantly obtain from his own authority to anathematize and excommunicate me since such homosexual sodomite sinners must be welcomed into the fold as Christians without repentance? Will such mutants be the future soldiers who will outdo the Knights of Saint John and fight to thwart the forces of darkness and the devil? What will they use to fight, the earrings of their noses and the spikes of their stupid looking hair? Or perhaps these are the very sons of the devil?



Must I denounce the Pope as a heretic while I remain silent on America’s pastor, this self-appointed son-of-the-devil-pope named Rick Warren who signs a treaty with Islam saying we “worship the same God”? Dare I say anything on that fattened **** who pussyfoots with homosexuality while he condemns the Crusaders in that very treaty?

Perhaps these things can aid in answering my question, which I’ve asked more than once and no one seems to have answered: During my two-decade walk in my Holy Spirit filled evangelical faith; Jesus said: “I will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”. Well, in two thousand years, who was this church? Was the church lost from the time the authors of the New Testament departed until the time the holy Martin Luther showed up? Hitler used Martin Luther’s demonic writ, On The Jews and Their Lies, to help him rid Europe of six million Jews.

Evangelicals answer this dilemma by saying that the true Church was always there but it was persecuted by them ‘damned’ Catholics. Yet, such answers are impossible to prove. Perhaps some Jesus-style questions will help clarify this issue. So which Christian movement was it that them ‘damned’ Catholics persecuted? Was it the Montanists, Novationists, Donatists, Docetists, Cathars, Albigensians, Waldenses, Hussites, and the followers of Wycliff? Were these “The Church” that Jesus spoke about? Were these the true Bible-believing, evangelical-type, spirit-filled believers?

There is no historian who will tell you that these movements even fit into the definition of evangelical “spirit-filled” model. Such movements, which the Catholics squashed (thank God), were radically non-Christian, heretical, and gnostic. Only the Waldenses and the Hussites were somewhat Christian but even these were closer to Catholicism than they were evangelical. How would a common Holy Spirit-filled evangelical even know what these movements are all about? After all, we only need the Bible and the hell with history, right? To ignore history is to also ignore the Bible.

Even Martin Luther and the Protestant movement, which came up with the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) that is adhered to by protestant denominations, in fact, aided the Ottoman Muslims and provided them with tin to build canons to destroy catholic states because in their view, the Catholic Church was the Harlot of Babylon and the Antichrist.

So important was this WCF that it was an essential doctrine of the faith and was non-negotiable. If the Trinity was essential, so was this belief regarding Catholics. Despite Islam’s overt denial of the Trinity, it was never even mentioned in the WCF while the Catholics who prevented the annihilation of Christendom, took precedence over Islam when it came to that document, despite Islam being the religion of Antichrist. Even Martin Luther himself came around on this issue to confess after reading the writing of the Catholic Riccaldo Di Montecroce in his wonderful work, Refutation of The Quran. As a result, Luther changed his views and even according to him Islam was the system of Antichrist, yet the WCF never even included it.

And lest I get into grace versus works theology… One thing is certain; Jesus gave the example about the good worker and the gung-ho church-goers of His day when He chose the Samaritan over the Pharisee who walked by the persecuted beaten naked man and did nothing, claiming he was doing the Lord’s business. If we take that example, the Samaritan in that time would be viewed as the way we view a Catholic; ‘he was all screwed up and got it all wrong’. The Samaritan didn’t even follow Sola Scriptura and his canon of Scripture was missing many books. He even believed such madness that the Temple was on mount Gerizim and not Jerusalem. Yet, Jesus honored the Samaritan over the Pharisee who got both the Bible and Temple correct – but helped not, the persecuted.

When Jesus comes, He will throw in hell many ‘damned’ Catholics and them ‘damned’ Evangelicals for not helping persecuted un-damned Jews, un-damned Catholics and un-damned Evangelicals and other un-damned others (Matthew 25). Today, neither Catholic nor Protestant is doing much to save Christians slaughtered in Muslim countries. Name me the organization that rescues Christians today? There are NONE. We try and our supporters are predominately Armenian, Copts and Assyrians. Where is America’s pastor? Where are the American Evangelicals and Catholics? Perhaps I should follow the Copt, Assyrian or even Armenian and dump this modernized homosexual-loving, Americanized version of Christianity.

While we accuse these ancient churches of holding to deuterocanonical books like The Wisdom of Solomon, which Evangelicals reject, in less than fifty words, sums up the entire purpose of the Incarnation of the Son of God and why God became man:


“While all things were in quiet silence, and the night was in the midst of her swift course, Thine almighty Word leaped out of Heaven out of Thy royal throne, as a fierce man of war, into the midst of a land of destruction.” (Wisdom of Solomon, 18:14-15)

Who is this “Thine almighty Word”? Who was “The Word”? When will He leap from out of Heaven and out of “Thy Royal throne”? When will He be this “man of war”? Is this not a prophecy about Christ coming to battle in the end of days? Who is He battling with? The Catholics, who preserved the Bible – including The Wisdom of Solomon? Has wisdom departed from earth that no man can point it out? Isn’t the Holy Spirit leading me to re-discover such prophecies struck out of the American evangelical Bibles? Is Polycarp who was the student of John unnecessary for study? Was Irenaeus his student so unimportant? Was the Coptic Church that was founded by Saint Mark of the Bible unimportant? Was it not Christ who built that Church in Egypt? Even when the Portuguese first entered India they found native Christians who, to their surprise, declared their apostolic succession to St. Thomas.

When I first became Christian, I entered an Evangelical Church that taught me that in Daniel chapter II, the two legs were the Eastern and Western churches (Orthodox and Catholic) and that these were the spirit of Antichrist. Yet, I never believed them because I examined the Word of God and discovered that Bible prophecies were speaking of Islam. Was I not following the Bible or were these Evangelicals misinterpreting the Bible? It was the Evangelicals who also misinterpreted many things in the Bible.

I reject all doctrines that differ with the Bible but for centuries, Holy Protestants have pointed to several Popes as Antichrist, which have all turned out to be false. Is this not unholy slander? Did Jesus not warn about such damned slanderers?

We trumpet: “my people perish for the lack of knowledge” when we, the ones who trumpet such verses are perishing. There is a difference between knowing the Bible and doing the Bible.

But there is also a difference between emotionally loving Jesus and doing what Jesus says. We preach something. Yet, we follow the opposite; we continue in lacking knowledge.

As a result, we see things from a certain prism we think is holy and is not.

http://shoebat.com/2013/06/12/them-damned-catholics/

[Mark]

I think his article says all that needs said. ALL the POPES are ANTICHRIST bub, every single one of them.

Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 

Col 2:8   Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. 

[Mark]

Thursday, June 13, 2013 at 4:28PM
Today's Show: WALID SHOEBAT: CRUSADES & HISTORY
http://www.noiseofthunder.com/storage/NOTR_WALID.SHOEBAT_06.14.13.mp3
 
Chris discusses a recent article posted by Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim brotherhood member who claims he is now a Christian and a peace activist.  His article is titled: "Them Damned Catholics."  The article is as abrasive as his title, and is aimed against the Protestant Evangelical view of Rome and the history of the Church.  In short, Shoebat's argument is that God "chose" Catholic armies to fight against the Islamic threats against Europe ... in other words, without the Catholics, the rest of Europe would have been given over to Islam.  But is this necessarily the case?  Why is it that the Muslims were repeatedly attacking Catholic countries?  Why didn't they attack Protestants?  Furthermore, if the Catholic armies could not defeat Protestant England, would the Muslim invaders have had any chance?  And do Protestants owe a debt of thanks to Rome for her battles against Islam?  Or was Rome being chastised by God for fighting against the true Gospel?

[Mark]

The False Teaching of Walid Shoebat
 By Sean Osborne

3 April 2011: On 29 March I received a link to a YouTube video recorded in 2008 entitled Walid Shoebat – Mark of the Beast. Anyone familiar with this blog knows that I consider Walid Shoebat to be one of the most infamously eisegetical of all current Bible prophecy expositors. The YouTube link of Shoebat's nauseating and unhinged eisegesis is included here only for the purpose of providing a direct reference to Eschatology Today's readers; otherwise this kind of eisegesis should be avoided as if it were the plague.
 
It is specifically Shoebat's patently ridiculous declaration within this video that the original Greek manuscript of the Revelation of Jesus Christ, Chapter 13 Verse 18, was not written in Greek, but in the Arabic language, and that the number of the Antichrist's name has the meaning of, "In the name of allah" that will be proven to be false teaching. In making his assertions I believe Walid Shoebat, and those who support, defend and reiterate his false teaching on this subject matter, have firmly walked themselves directly into the most foreboding of all of the Lord's promises regarding the adding to and taking away of the literal Word of God in The Revelation of Jesus Christ:
 
Revelation 22:18-19

"For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."
 
To begin with, here is the plain, English-language translated (per the King James and New King James Versions) from the original Greek-language verse which is the crux of the matter:
 
"Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is (Chi Xi Stigma) Six hundred three score and six, 666."
 
Let's go to the YouTube video tape, and this verbatim transcript of what was stated as fact by Walid Shoebat:
 
Joe Van Koevering: "It's Chi, Xi and Stigma…"

Shoebat: "Yes…

Joe Van Koevering: "…in the original language."

Shoebat: "Yes, that's what they think it is. They didn't know [what] these symbols - were. So, they thought they were Greek symbols. Then they began to evolve into, let's see, what these symbols really mean. Why would there be three Greek symbols into the text? Why would God put three Greek symbols into the text as a mystery? Well, God is not an author of mysteries, by the way, His yoke is easy.
 
What they thought were symbols were in reality a different script than even the Greek. God is not interested in gematria! Gematria is the process of adding numerals regarding names. … Gematria is a process that was used in witchcraft; God is not interested in this gematria stuff, okay?
 
So, this devolved and then the translations started to put down six, six, six because they thought it was about the gematria. But if you look at the Codex Siniaticus, it's a different codexes, they don't have six six six, they got these symbols! Some even translated these symbols as six sixteen! But it's not!. When I first saw the Codex Vaticanus (checks his on-stage notes), I was literally shocked. Because I could read the text! It was Arabic!"

Walid Shoebat goes on to eisegete how the original "Chi, Xi Stigma" text, six hundred three score and six was not written in the Greek language but in the Arabic language, and that the literal meaning of the Arabic text is "in the name of allah."
 
What abject nonsense this is!

To begin with, it was in 1844 that the 4th century Codex Sinaiticus manuscript was discovered by Constantine Tischendorf on Mount Sinai within St. Catharine's Monastery. The Codex Sinaiticus is not written in "symbols," it is written in the uncial characters of the Greek language, and comprised a sum total of forty-three leaves of the Septuagint. Those Greek-language leaves of text were just portions of Chronicles, Nehemiah, Jeremiah, Isaiah, I and II Maccabees, Esther and two fragments of Genesis. The Revelation of Jesus Christ was not part of this codex manuscript.
 
Unical Greek Letter Characters

Secondly, the Codex Vaticanus, so named because it is kept in the Vatican Library, and also referred to as the Codex Vaticanus, is also a 4th century manuscript written on fine parchment in the uncial characters of the Greek language. The Codex Vaticanus also does not contain the Revelation of Jesus Christ (a/k/a The Apocalypse). Sometime during the 15th to 16th centuries the missing books and portions of books of both the Old and New Testaments were added to the codex so that it might be used in the Vatican Library.
 
In all of the past two thousand-some odd years and of all the innumerable, highly learned Bible scholars who have ever studied this passage, here in the first decade of the 21st century we have the appearance of one Walid Shoebat trying to impress upon us the truth that he alone possesses the wisdom necessary to understand this verse because it is, "in reality" written in Arabic. If only Shoebat were a standup comedian this would have some inherent and monumental humorous value. However, given the true reality of the situation, there is precisely as much veracity in Shoebat's assertions on this issue are there are in his longstanding and highly disputed claim to be a former PLO terrorist. According to a former CIA chief-of-station in the Middle East I know, Shoebat was no PLO terrorist; a low-level go-fer, yes, but he was never, ever an operational PLO terrorist.
 
So, the plain text of this verse, which is identical in every language in the world to which it was translated from the original Greek, the Lord informs us of three prophetically important things:
 
1.) Calculate the number of the beast
 2.) It is the number of a man
 3.) The number is six hundred sixty six (666)

None of this has anything whatsoever to do with the false, satanically deceptive cult of islam, or of its false-god "allah."
 
When it comes to the wisdom of understanding this verse, I reference the reader to 1 Corinthians 2:14, which teaches us, "But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." In this is the foolishness of Walid Shoebat exposed, for nothing he has said has come from the Spirit. It has, in fact, come from within his own fanciful mind as yet another feeble, snake oil salesman's attempt to further the thoroughly discredited Islamic Antichrist eisegesis.
 
Original Article
http://www.raptureforums.com/FeaturedCommentary/thefalseteachingofwalidshoebat.cfm

[Mark]

HERE IS THE VIDEO

[Psalm 51:17]

Why? Is it because of them ‘damned’ Catholics who defended Christendom and saved the Protestants from utter annihilation? Could it be perhaps the Catholics did something right, like fight them damned Muslims and thwart them from annihilating Christendom?

I had to stop right there, almost in the middle of the article in the OP - Shoebat makes his true colors just from this paragraph ALONE. Either Shoebat is completely ignorant, willingly ignorant, or like the OP says a Catholic Agent! It's probably the latter.

He was on Jan Markel's show a couple of weeks ago - while doctrinally he seemed OK, there was just something that didn't sit right with me.

And while we're on the subject of Islam - while I agree that radical Islam is a big threat worldwide, at the same time it doesn't sit well with me when I hear someone like Shoebat just completely focus on Islam as the public enemy. Yes, they are playing a big role, but let's not forget that not only they were a creation from the RCC, but there's also a number of other NWO groups out there playing their part, especially the Vatican/Jesuits which are at the head.(Satan is at the very top of the food chain, of course, but just pointing this out) The only thing this does is give wolves like Texe "Jews are running the Illuminati" Marrs more ammunition to work with.

And as for Obama being a Muslim with a lot of Muslim cabinet members - Shoebat seems to forget that both Bush Jr and Reagan did their parts as well. Reagan funded Islamic terrorists in the ME, and that Fort Hood terrorist in 2009(if memory serves) served as a Bush Jr advisor. And of course Bush Jr became the 1st President to celebrate Ramada at the White House.

[Psalm 51:17]

Just read the entire article - some of the big traits of these wolves are that...

1) They know how to play Guilt by Association, in order to get you to sympathize with certain people or groups(in Shoebat's case here, the RCC). And another example was when he said how why Christians haven't done anything to rescue persecuted Christians in those ME/Islamic countries.

Search the scriptures...the scriptures make it clear that those who live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. It saddens me, yes, to see my fellow brethren being persecuted in these countries, but again, the scriptures make it clear.

2) One of the ways they'll convince you is they'll point fingers at others that they know YOU know is a big wolf - in this case midway through his article, Rick Warren, and if you're not paying attention, it will get you off track.

3) Instead of pointing out the WHOLE system, they will get POLITICAL instead. When I listened to him on Markel's show a couple of weeks ago, he almost completely focused on Obama and his administration. Yes, it's a concern that Obama is a Muslim, and some of his cabinet members are so as well - but it's as if Shoebat is using this to craftily build fearmongering that Sharia Law is going to be implemented here soon.

While this may be the case - let's not forget the battles for Sharia Law is going through the COURTS, and NOT Capitol Hill - and it has a LONG uphill climb(despite some strides) to go. And also to add - like said above, Shoebat seems to forget that Bush Jr and Reagan were friendly with Islam as well.

As for the article - I was just FLOORED at how doctrinally off he is, as well as ignorant he came off concerning Church history.

[Psalm 51:17]

Thursday, June 13, 2013 at 4:28PM
Today's Show: WALID SHOEBAT: CRUSADES & HISTORY
http://www.noiseofthunder.com/storage/NOTR_WALID.SHOEBAT_06.14.13.mp3
 
Chris discusses a recent article posted by Walid Shoebat, a former Muslim brotherhood member who claims he is now a Christian and a peace activist. 

Yes, while Jesus Christ says "blessed are the peacemakers...", Christians are NOT called to be "peace activists", right, if I understand this correctly?

Mat 10:34  Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
Mat 10:35  For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
Mat 10:36  And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

Mat 10:11  And into whatsoever city or town ye shall enter, enquire who in it is worthy; and there abide till ye go thence.
Mat 10:12  And when ye come into an house, salute it.
Mat 10:13  And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.
Mat 10:14  And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
Mat 10:15  Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.

[Kilika]

Christians are NOT called to be "peace activists", right, if I understand this correctly?

I would agree with your understanding. That's how I see it too. What those people are doing is of "works", and not of faith.

It is the Word of God that causes the divisions. This is why Jesus says a "sword", because those who live by it should be killed by it.

"He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints." Revelation 13:10 (KJB)

[Mark]

Wednesday, June 26, 2013 at 3:55PM
Today's Show: WALID SHOEBAT: DEFENDER OF THE INQUISITION
http://www.noiseofthunder.com/storage/NOTR_W.SHOEBAT.INQUISITION_06.28.13.mp3
 
Chris discusses a recent article published on the Walid Shoebat website titled, "Vatican as the Harlot of Babylon: Debunked."  Anyone who knows Walid Shoebat is familiar with his story of being a former Muslim Brotherhood member turned Christian.  But what sort of "Christian" is he?  It is reported that his wife is Catholic, and it may be that his understanding of history has suffered as a result.  In a previous article, Shoebat exalted the Catholic crusaders for fighting against the Turks when they tried to invade Europe, while denouncing Protestants for only defending the Bible and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  Now, this new article from his son (Theodore Shoebat) continues the assault, proclaiming what can only be called the Romanist view of history. While the article might have been a discussion of the ministry's alternative view of prophecy, instead it chose to attack the great teachers of the Protestant Reformation, denouncing them as "heretics" and aligning them with false prophets, such as Joseph Smith and Muhammed.  Then we learn that part of the history Shoebat relies on comes from a modern Catholic historian who defended the actions of the Inquisition, including having heretics burned at the stake.   


Here is the article http://shoebat.com/2013/06/25/vatican-as-the-harlot-of-babylon-debunked/

[Psalm 51:17]

Wednesday, June 26, 2013 at 3:55PM
Today's Show: WALID SHOEBAT: DEFENDER OF THE INQUISITION
http://www.noiseofthunder.com/storage/NOTR_W.SHOEBAT.INQUISITION_06.28.13.mp3
 
Chris discusses a recent article published on the Walid Shoebat website titled, "Vatican as the Harlot of Babylon: Debunked."  Anyone who knows Walid Shoebat is familiar with his story of being a former Muslim Brotherhood member turned Christian.  But what sort of "Christian" is he?  It is reported that his wife is Catholic, and it may be that his understanding of history has suffered as a result.  In a previous article, Shoebat exalted the Catholic crusaders for fighting against the Turks when they tried to invade Europe, while denouncing Protestants for only defending the Bible and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  Now, this new article from his son (Theodore Shoebat) continues the assault, proclaiming what can only be called the Romanist view of history. While the article might have been a discussion of the ministry's alternative view of prophecy, instead it chose to attack the great teachers of the Protestant Reformation, denouncing them as "heretics" and aligning them with false prophets, such as Joseph Smith and Muhammed.  Then we learn that part of the history Shoebat relies on comes from a modern Catholic historian who defended the actions of the Inquisition, including having heretics burned at the stake.   


Here is the article http://shoebat.com/2013/06/25/vatican-as-the-harlot-of-babylon-debunked/

Well, hopefully other end times ministries like Jan Markel's can get up to date with this - Shoebat has been a guest interviewee et al on some of these end times ministries shows many times. Surprised they have overlooked a lot of these things for a long time, in particular him being married to a Catholic.