Rise of Islamic Terrorism is Requiring a New Level of Islamic Deception

As Islamic terrorism continues to rise and as the horrors of ISIS continue to take root in the collective consciousness of westerners, stealth Jihadists (stealthists) and Muslim sympathizers (sympies) need to reach a new level of deception. Non-Muslims will seek clearer lines of demarcation between Muslims and radical Muslims, even between Muslims and non-Muslims.

As such, look for the stealthists and sympies to be more critical of Islamic terrorism. Barack Obama’s attempt to assert that ‘ISIL is not Islamic’ insulted our intelligence, especially when the group’s leader Abu Baker al-Baghdadi has a PhD in Islamic studies.

The recent criticism of Islam by liberal atheists Bill Maher and Sam Harris has in many ways moved the ball further down the field than anyone on the right could have done. That’s a fire stealthists and sympies are still trying to put out. Berkeley’s call for banning Maher isn’t helping.

In the past, supposed ‘moderate’ Muslims would denounce acts of terrorism while simultaneously denying that the terrorists were not true Muslims. The ‘moderates’ would say this while also refusing to denounce terrorist organizations like Hamas.

Now, more attention is being given to stealthists and sympies who are willing to say Islam has a problem. Many make this admission not out of belief but out of political necessity. This movement is not necessarily new but it’s a page out of the playbook that could see increased usage. The upshot is that it reflects an awakening western civilization; the downside is that it demonstrates a new level of deceit to neutralize that awakening.

Let’s take a look at CNN personality and author Fareed Zakaria, the same man whose book Post-American World, Obama was caught reading when he stepped off a plane in 2008. The New York Times mocked the controversy instead of investigating Zakaria’s background. Prior to Obama’s first presidential campaign, vetting authors of books candidates read was quite common.

Obama reading Zakaria's book in 2008.

Obama reading Zakaria’s book in 2008.

Zakaria is an interesting case because when it comes to Islam, he’s either a stealthist or a sympie. His father Rafiq Zakaria was a fundamentalist Islamic scholar who died in 2005. Fareed granted an interview to the Village Voice that year and said that he was raised in a secular home:

“I do know a lot about the world of Islam in an instinctive way that you can’t get through book learning,” he says thoughtfully, but admits he finds the role of token Muslim explainer in the American media slightly uncomfortable. “I occasionally find myself reluctant to be pulled into a world that’s not mine, in the sense that I’m not a religious guy.”

How does Fareed grow up in a secular home with a fundamentalist Islamic scholar as a father? The Village Voice interview leaves no indication that the relationship between Fareed and his father was in any way damaged or even strained. If Fareed concedes that he’s not “religious” despite his father’s fundamentalism, why isn’t there any such separation?

Also in 2005, Fareed received a first amendment award from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL).

Fast forward to the summer of 2010. The issue of the Ground Zero mosque was front and center. Shoebat.com exposed Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf’s true intentions as a stealth jihadist. Five years earlier, the allegedly agnostic Fareed himself admitted to knowing “a lot about the world of Islam” which must mean that he understands the true intentions of Rauf.

Yet, Fareed returned the ADL award because the ADL opposed construction of the mosque. Here are some excerpts from the letter Zakaria sent to the ADL:

I was stunned at your decision to publicly side with those urging the relocation of the planned Islamic center in lower Manhattan. You are choosing to use your immense prestige to take a side that is utterly opposed to the animating purpose of your organization. Your own statements subsequently, asserting that we must honor the feelings of victims even if irrational or bigoted, made matters worse… I cannot in good conscience hold onto the award or the honorarium that came with it and am returning both. I hope that it might add to the many voices that have urged you to reconsider and reverse your position on this issue. This decision will haunt the ADL for years if not decades to come.

As someone who “know(s) a lot about Islam”, Zakaria’s support for the Ground Zero mosque is somewhat revealing, especially considering what Walid uncovered about Rauf:

In the weeks after the 9/11/01 attacks, Fareed wrote an article that appeared in TIME Magazine. In it, he asserted that Islamic extremism was not rooted in Islam. He then had this to say about one of the Muslim Brotherhood’s most recognized fore fathers, Sayyid Qutb (keep in mind that Zakaria’s father was a fundamentalist Islamic scholar):

In his book, Qutub condemned Nasser as an impious Muslim and his regime as un-Islamic. Indeed, he went on, almost every modern Arab regime was similarly flawed. Qutub envisioned a better, more virtuous polity that was based on strict Islamic principles, a core goal of orthodox Muslims since the 1880s. As the regimes of the Middle East grew more distant and oppressive and hollow in the decades following Nasser, fundamentalism’s appeal grew. It flourished because the Muslim Brotherhood and organizations like it at least tried to give people a sense of meaning and purpose in a changing world, something no leader in the Middle East tried to do.

That was Fareed in 2001; here is Fareed in 2014:

Note in the above commentary that Zarkaria insists that terrorists represent a “tiny minority”. As Ben Shapiro excellently points out, the MAJORITY of Muslims in the world are radical.

print

, , , , , , ,

  • I read some where . the Government all over the world use drugs to convert people to islam. I think all of Islam , if you look at their faces they hold a blank unemotional stare of evil. Like they are in a trance or something. Absent of a normal mind. Ever looked at the blank look in Obama’s face. He reminds me of the Ft Hood shooter’s look he has on his face.

    • Tom_mcewen

      I think we can safely claim Obama is guilty of workplace violence against the American people.

    • Woody

      We’ll be there so as THC alter our brains to stupidity.

    • lil-echoes

      Possibly Obama’s look comes from his cocaine look, since he apparently uses drugs…. No one knows this cause he probably hides it. Im not saying I have an inside track of his habits, but if he was known to snort it with Larry Sinclair, it’s very doubtful he has stopped a habit he had back then.

  • Impeach Obama Now!

    Obama held that book on purpose! He knows pictures will be taken of it! Obama always gives subtle hints like this to his pure evil Islamic Cohorts in the Middle East!

  • Pingback: OBAMA CHRONICLES: Rise Of Islamic Terrorism Is Requiring A New Level Of Islamic Deception | Information 360()

  • royal

    Terrorism is using a new level, of deception. The biggest deception in all of history . The President of the United States of America ” Barack Hussein Obama” if only the people would fall under the spell, well they did, the messianic leader.” Barack Hussein Obama” The president of hope and change, . I hope the chang don’t kill us, thank you so much
    “Barack Hussein Obama”

  • Pingback: オバマCHRONICLES:イスラーム過激派の台頭はイスラム詐欺の新たなレベルを要求している | アミュゥーズィング()

  • richinnameonly

    Fareed gives me the creeps and I wonder how he still has a job. But my mind works opposite to the media and the naive american public that get their education from TV media. CNN over the years has become a den of liberal deceivers, like most of the other stations.

  • shoebat

    Michael,

    My wife says that I do not need to add anything. So I am puzzled, should I listen to you or her?

  • shoebat

    Michael,

    I am not aware of any book, but I do prefer that the website is not used to advertise books. do you have any links on your work on the web?

  • shoebat

    Michael,

    I never once said that “Christians killing Muslims is great”. Perhaps you might want to include an exact quote?

  • shoebat

    “Is there one place in the New Testament that condones killing of any kind? I will answer that. NO, NO, NO. PERIOD”

    The most typical response I get after writing articles on the necessity to combat ISIS via warfare is a comment that some coward posts on my blog that usually goes like this: “Jesus never killed anyone or instructed to killing one soul in His life” and that ” and “Is there one place in the New Testament that condones killing of any kind?”

    In which I always respond with a Jesus-style question: who then inspired David to kill Goliath? Was it the Father, The Son or The Holy Spirit? I insist on an answer without explanation.

    They could never directly answer the simple question but always resort to typical spin. I could also ask; was God against beheadings? If so, just look at David depicted with Goliath’s head in his hand.

    I ask such a question because answering this question alone would refute billions of worthless comments like yours, millions of worthless sermons and thousands of worthless books that permeate the western Church that has become so plagued with heretical teachings and corrupt pastors which ended-up with a western church that is hardly ready for the coming onslaught of militant Islam, ISIS, the rising Caliphate and even the very Antichrist they constantly write about.

    They are even unaware that they have even joined a spirit of Antichrist themselves.

    How do I know that they are part of Antichrist?

    Its simple, just answer the simple question: so who instructed David to kill Goliath: The Father, The Son or The Holy Spirit?

    Here, let me help you. It would be difficult to deny that The Son (Jesus) and The Father and The Holy Spirit are all one and that this One God instructed David to kill Goliath.

    So to say that Jesus never instructed to kill anyone is the very essence of the denial of the Son which is the spirit of Antichrist (1 John 2:22).

    Indeed, denying Jesus is the Son of God is the essence of the spirit of Antichrist, but to deny what the Son did is also of the same spirit.

    Didn’t Joshua see Jesus before the Battle of Jericho who promised Joshua victory? Didn’t Jesus visit Abraham before God killed every living soul at Sodom and Gomorrah?

    So many are unaware how they slander, blaspheme and follow their own lies. When confronted, they simply consider these an “error”, but they repent not and move on.

    Such a simple analogy refutes much of what the modern heretics says these days. You can even know them by their questions. In much of what they analyze they always ask as to how can we conclude this or that from “a New Testament perspective?”,instead of asking how they analyze everything from a “BIBLICAL perspective” or even “a historic perspective” as to how the Church dealt in all its history with any situation. They are unaware on how to even differentiate what is for Jew and what is for Gentile and what is for both to the point that Abraham, Moses, Joshua and Gideon are completely ignored.

    Indeed, even the very “falling away” and the “great apostasy” they comment on and always speak about is really about them. They are unaware that they are the very wicked and an adulterous generation that says Jesus never instructed to kill anyone. By this they separate Jesus from the Father and from the Holy Spirit who inspired not just David killing Goliath but even the death penalty so many of them supports; this also becomes obsolete, but they are not even aware of what they say. They teach such heresy that when someone killing in pre-emptive or defensive wars by restricting Scripture to finding only what Jesus said as if the Old Testament was not the words of Jesus.

    Of course, such heretics have exceptions that when a pastor wants to instruct someone to pay church tithing, he would resort to finding verses regarding the Old Testament Temple; the tithe of one-tenth. Over there, they see what they can glean from what the Holy Spirit instructed, but when someone or some nation resorts to fighting evil, they instruct them to only resort to one instruction which says that “God is love” and “thou shall not kill”. They do this in order to prevent Christians from fighting evil since “fighting” in-itself is evil. And if “Jesus never instructed to kill a soul” as they say, than we ought to be against Capital punishment and the very death penalty they so much fight the system to uphold.

    So how do such heretics suppose we fight ISIS? Do we only send non-Christians to fight them and always protect and prevent Christians from being the Davids who fight the Goliaths of this world? Or perhaps they will go and fight ISIS on our behalf with Bible in hand instructing ISIS to lay down their arms since Jesus never instructed them to kill, behead, rape, pillage and torture?

    “TRUE Christianity is NOT militant… Christ taught love and peace…” so says the one lazy servant on my comment section. How then can this lazy servant fulfill “No love is greater than this that a man lay down his life for his friend”? How can such love be accomplished of one does not defend wife, brother or friend? How does one give his life for his brother? This instruction presumes that one is to die defending him, doesn’t it?

    Answering the question of who instructed to kill Goliath, the Father, The Son, or The Holy Spirit reveals a sick church that is plagued with the Marcionite heresy. But even telling them this gains little, for they are so lazy to even look up the heresy itself. They go to churches that they say: “we need to go where we are fed”, yet they never glean, research, study or examine their wicked hearts to see indeed if they are truly Christian. These claim that they expose the great apostasy at Rome and you even see them talking how the Church supposedly went apostate after Jesus disciples departed and that in Rome such an apostasy began, when in fact, they simply picked up where Marcion of Sinope left off in 144 A.D., when he taught his heresy called Marcionism. (Tertullian’s reckoning in Adversus Marcionem, xv)

    Millions upon millions of so-called Christians today speak like Marcion who believed Jesus was the savior sent by God, and Paul the Apostle was his chief apostle claiming that Paul did not follow the Old Testament and that he did not follow all the wrath in the Old Testament which is now separated by the all-forgiving God of the New Testament.

    Sound familiar?

    This belief was in some ways similar to Gnostic Christian theology; notably, both are dualistic. Marcionism was denounced by the Church fathers as a heresy, and they have written so much against, notably by Tertullian whom they rarely if ever read his works exposing the early heresies.

    The very essence and premise of Marcionism is that many of the teachings of Christ are incompatible with the actions of the God of the Old Testament since now we live in the age of grace and that there is no more wars.

    Marcion, like so many millions upon millions of today’s typical western church further regarded the arguments of Paul regarding law and gospel, wrath and grace, works and faith, flesh and spirit, sin and righteousness, death and life, as the essence of Scriptural truth.

    Sounds familiar?

    Marcion ascribed these aspects and characteristics as two principles, the righteous and wrathful God of the Old Testament, who is at the same time identical with the creator of the world, and a second God of the Gospel, quite unknown before Christ, who is only love and mercy. (Adolf von Harnack, History of Dogma, vol. 1, ch. 5, p. 269)

    Today’s Marcionites have very little difference in which they simply lump the two Gods (Old and New Testament) into one.

    Regardless, the Church firmly rejected such error, reminding all that God’s tenderness was already revealed in the Old Testament.

    Unfortunately the Marcionite temptation has been working hard in making its appearance again in the last few decades with very little done to expose or fight it. However what occurs most frequently is an ignorance of the deep ties linking the New Testament to the Old, an ignorance that gives some people the impression that Christians have nothing in common with the Jews of the Old Testament. So who in reality is linking to Israel and the Jews more; the Orthodox or the war hating modern Marcionites who deny Old Testament militarism as applicable for today?

    They are not even aware that this is what permeated Nazi Germany when Hitler took over. The Church has become Schizophrenics. Schizophrenics are usually identified when their God flip-flops.

    They are unaware that God never changed His mind; all this progressive theology happened only in the last few decades, which even revives an old Waldensian heresy that killing is wrong in all instances. They are not even aware that they honor the Waldensians, the Cathars, the Paulicians, and the Bogomils as “the martyrs of Jesus Christ” when in reality all these were heretics like them who forbade all wars.

    Just War was always part of Church doctrine during and even after the New Testament in which they always believed that savage tyrannies were still fought just as they were in the days of Israel and to say otherwise would denounce the very God of Israel whom they espouse to believe in. Yet they always harp on the mistakes that were made in order to advance their heresy. They even do this without reviewing Israel in the Bible and see how many confessed mistakes they also had and how they never even scrubbed such wars out of Scripture. Yet they never can answer, has God condemned David’s wars or David’s murder and adultery? The heretic always focuses only on David’s sins while his battles are now obsolete for the Church, but he is always ready to adapt and is always ready to condemn the very church history which saved his hide from being Islamized by mimicking David at Poitier, Lepanto and Vienna. The heretic is proud that Israel crushed Islam and the Arabs in 1948, 1967 and 1973 while arguing that what is good for the geese (the Jews in 1967) is not good for the ganders (the Christians)!

    Today’s heretic is not even aware that the reason he hates the historical Christian wars is that he is the very essence of what he also hates, the liberals who inflate the mistakes done by the church and write manuals on the issues while they elevate the greatest butchers in history.

    The heretic is destroyed for his lack of knowledge and continually says “its not about knowledge, its about Jesus”. The heretic sparks the name “Jesus” as an excuse for all his sins, slanders and his wicked view of God. He is always ready to depart from this world in an inclining of an eye while he produced nothing but comments that are loaded with slandering the innocent hard working servants of Christ.

    The heretic boasts of his support for Israel and its recent battles and rightfully so. Only then God becomes the same as He was yesterday, but when it comes to our understanding of a warring God in the Old Testament and after we read about the warring God, The Son, in Revelation, and in light of what we are taught about the new dawning of grace, God all of the sudden is not the same today like He was yesterday. And then for some reason as soon as this Marcionite is snatched away in the Rapture, God will be the same as He was yesterday, warring all over again, but only when He returns and kills the wicked ones who are after his hide.

    This is the exact definition of the heresy of dualism.

    These do not even know that they will only be snatched into everlasting fire prepared for the wicked who believed that there is no need for works in their lives. These are the very lazy servant whom they study about daily in their Bible during Sunday schools.

    The most major discovery of mine when I read the Bible in 1993 was that God is not like the schizophrenic Allah, but when I entered the church, He all of a sudden became schizophrenic, flip-flopping between war and peace!

    This interpretation on the nature of God seemed blasphemous the moment I entered the church, especially when we see Jesus’ violence in the Temple before His second coming, and if we are to emulate Him during His first coming, then indeed, at times violence is subscribed. Jesus was not a lunatic or a schizophrenic in that He followed the Wisdom of Solomon that there is “a time for peace” and “a time for war” a “time to speak in the Temple” and a “time to turn the tables in the Temple”.

    The heretic always calls for “a time for peace” when its “time for war” and a “time for war” only when their hides are at stake. Such are the wicked cowards whom God already ordained that they will never inherit the Kingdom of Christ. (Revelation 21:8)

    To them, Christian wars was sort of forbidden for the Christian, while it was ‘expected’ of Muslims, of course! Well, not exactly, it wasn’t completely forbidden for Christians to war, it was rather strange, these would sanction the Israelis fighting during the Six Day War as fulfillment of prophecy, Americans fighting in World War II, were in their view (as well as mine) biblically sanctioned, of course, since these wars had to do with their own survival; but when Christians defend themselves militarily against Muslims, in lets say, Serbia, Mindanao or Africa, they would cry out foul, pass judgments, demand quick peaceful resolutions, and then focus on “love your enemy” the Muslims, since only these Christians ought to “love their enemies”!

    When it came to such issues, they would instantly find biblical verses they instantly text on a comment section to go in line with the American conservative thought sanctioning only their wars, and then instantly finding verses to rebuke other Christians overseas from fighting their wars. They don’t even take a moment to think of what they write.

    What was ironic in all what I witnessed is that such verses to support American wars were the same verses that the Orthodox and Catholics found during the days they had to fight Islam, heresy and paganism.

    Muslims killing Catholics was absent from their thought process because to them, ‘Catholicism’ was a warmongering religion and “the Vatican,” of course, was the greater enemy from Islam. Muslims and Islam represented little but a field for the Christian sower of seed. Such a “field” now includes Catholic nations which so many missionaries are sent to who predominately enjoy visiting in order to undo the centuries of what evil Mary worshipping old Jesuits and Franciscan monks have done while giving their lives for Christ in South America, Mexico and Africa, especially that since these regions, while at times were converted through militancy, are now humble Catholics and would not fight back as the Muslim would when these evangelists begin to machinegun 45 caliber clips shooting forth “Mariology,” “idol worship,” “icons,” “incense” and all sorts of supposedly God given warnings claiming that such arguments to be right out of the very Word of God and Scripture that was canonized by the very Catholics they so much hated.

    But when it comes to Muslim territory, finding such missionaries in these geographic areas is rare. This is the “unreached by the Gospel 10-40 Window,” which such missionaries refrain from entering since it is virtually hostile territory, a territory that was all Christianized once-upon-a-time by evil Catholics of all people. Ironically, this was pretty much Catholic/Orthodox lost territory which has become the territory of Antichrist after it was conquered from Christians. Yet they want to only evangelize Catholic-Orthodox lands while avoiding re-occupying and taking from the Antichrist, the 10-40 window Christian Islamized territories through warfare?

    The only Christians who dared to face death and still do to shed the light of Christ in the “10-40 window” are not predominately these missionaries, but are what little remnants that still exist from Copts in Egypt, Assyrians in Iraq and Maronites in Lebanon. These are holding down the fort who are still even giving their lives by the droves without much notice; who the grace movement giants bewails over 1,200 documented slain Christians so far, and almost 500,000 forced to flee their homes to escape.(1)

    I would tell these that Islam had conquered the once-upon-a-time Christianized 10-40 Window and even wanted more, Europe itself, the centre of their heritage they slandered so much proclaiming it as the future Antichrist and that Rome is “harlot” and that Russian Orthodox are (Gog and Magog). They say such things without the backing of any sound historians and use theologians proclaiming themselves as historians. By this only they remain as the true pure, unadulterated Church, the very essence of Christianity that remained faithful and true after the so-called great apostasy which can never be found historically. Ask them to give a historic unbroken timeline from the disciples onward and they cannot give a lick of any documentation to such a false claim. All they can show for their movements are schisms after schisms, grand heresies after smaller heresies …

    They knew nothing about the Battle of Lepanto, Battle of Tours, The Battle of Vienna, and The Battle of Malta—wars to defend Europe from Islam—they are combatant against such wars since all these were Catholic-Islamic wars. The Vatican was after all an enemy of Christianity.

    The absence of Muslim-Catholic wars from their awkward interpretations was simple to explain; such struggle was described as the suffering of a “whore” who drinks the blood of Cathari saints, while the Muslim killing them was simply “doing God a service”, not realizing that Arabia’s Islam was the vampire who hadn’t had its fill of sanguine Christian blood. I was always astonished; how can killing Catholics serve Allah, the false God of Islam, and also serve the true God of the Bible, unless that such god is Lucifer in disguise.

    To these Islam was not even on their radar. It mattered little prophetically when I explained how the Bible in Revelation 13:2 was speaking of the greatest threat to Christianity. It was Islam that became this threat (beastly nation) as predicted in Scripture that occupied the region that was prophesied by John; Lion (Iraq/Arabia), Bear (Persia) and Leopard (Asia Minor), all Muslim today, the very essence of the 10-40 window.

    Writing such truths doesn’t even help such heretics who simply bombarded me with no challenges or well-written refutations, but with questions as if to know if I am one of them or not. They do this by asking; Walid, are you Catholic? Not all who ask are heretics, some are simply curious.

    And I always counter with; I am Christian, but how about you, are you Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Anglican, and Protestant Adventists, Anabaptists, Baptists, Binitarians, Charismatics, Congregationalists, Evangelicals, Holiness churches, Lutherans, Methodists, Moravians, Pentecostals, Presbyterians, Reformed?

    What if I said I was Copt? The very church that was founded by the Apostle Mark in Egypt? O how would that throw a monkey wrench in such arguments, especially that Christ comes to rescue the Copts in the Tribulation. So to play it safe perhaps I should join the Copts.

    Listen to Coptic Father Makarious (start at 00:50). No, he is not doing a tele evangelist healing service. He is calling upon Christ to rescue his flock from the thousands of Muslim wolves surrounding his church preparing to kill his sheep inside the church.

    He cries out “We have none but you [Christ]“. His cries pierce the heart. Indeed, the marrow and the bone. “Everyone cry to the Lord to rescue the Copts of Egypt”, he cried to all the saints to pray for him in heaven and on earth while he is accused and slandered of praying and worshipping saints.

    So to all who ask, what am I?

    I am a Copt when we see Copts suffer.
    I am a Catholic when I read Charles Martel’s victory over Abdul Rahman Al-Ghafiqi.
    I am an Orthodox when I yearn for the liberation of Hagia Sohpia by war.
    I am an Evangelical when I sit in a plane to witness to my poor neighbor.
    And I am a Samaritan when I see a wounded slave in Pakistan who suffered 25 years working in a kiln.

    But would all this matter when you are all collected under ISIS?

    Ask not whether you are of this or of that.

    Who would take me to heaven or to hell is Jesus Christ and the moment you can judge if I will enter heaven or hell is when you have proclaimed yourself God while in reality you are of lucifer who thinks that he is God which is the very thing that sends one to hell.

    Repent and know that God is forgiving.

    SOURCES
    (1) New American, World Turns Away as Rebel Massacres of Syrian Christians Intensify, Friday, 20 December 2013

    You tried to sell your book on my website, a website that sponsors christian militarism. It was no problem for you to use my website to sell your wares? How hypocritical.

  • shoebat

    Sir,

    I am not sure why you are machine gunning these other issues before having a closure on the previous issue? Lets not get all over the place discussing issue as canons of Scripture. You are way out of order here.

    “There are the apocrypha, books of the Bible, such as
    Maccabees, which
    the Catholic church canonizes and takes as holy, and God-breathed.
    These are added to the Old and New Testaments, despite the fact that
    neither Jews nor Protestants recognize them nor affirm them as proper
    doctrine, nor truth.”

    Fact is, you took 7 books out. Now, we can discuss this later. Frankly I don’t have the time, you can find this issue responded to here:

    http://shoebat.com/2014/09/17/prophecy-never-knew/

    God bless

    • Dear Mr. Shoebat:

      I did not yet take the time to read your cut and paste, but because the catholic church canonizes books does not meant that they are sent from God. The book of Maccabees and others were seen as illegitimate even by the Hebrews, who had them first. The other apocrypha went against much doctrine of the NT, and the Catjholics put as much faith in modern popes and other catholics as they do in the Bible, as being equal. they also call people saints only if they are named as such by them, by their qualifications. On the other hand, Paul clearly named all true believers as saints. In addition, the catholics ask for intercession from the saints, which the Bible says only Jesus is. There are many things like this which the catholics do which are ungodly, and do not follow scriptures, showing their true colors. I am not calling them as bad as muslims, but they are following doctrines of demons, as described in timothy 4. The priests blatantly disregard scriptures, including not to call anyone “father” but Him in heaven. They practice so much anti-scripiural habits, seared consciences, that are explaiined in their extraBiblical books, as being true, like a veil over the eyes of the deceived, blinded by satan. you can read all the history you want, but it isn’t the Bible. same with apocrypha. Can you see the forest for the trees?
      michael

  • shoebat

    Never called you “hypocrite” or “Lucifer”. Please show quote. Are you imagining things, sir?

    Again, never write me unless you show QUOTES. I don’t have time to chase after the wind.

  • shoebat

    No problem.

  • Vicky

    I’m so fascinated by the discuss’. I should have subscribe to this sight a long time ago. I attend a program presided by pastor with a difference. He was able to prove from Jesus own words in the NT that Jesus was not against violent defence of oneself! The deception that Jesus is a weak figure has always being a LIE!!!

    • Woody

      I never thought that; especially after He routed the money-changers in the Temple.

  • Roha Waha

    Excellent point of view and well presented , I hope you don’t mind if I use it in
    my attempt to educate people ?

  • Pingback: Obama Tells Lie About Islam in Interview with Man who Has Told the Same Lie and Whose Father Was Islamic Scholar - Walid Shoebat()