People Are Saying That World War Three Will Never Happen, Well These People Are Utterly Wrong And Here’s Why

By Theodore Shoebat

I have heard many a time that there will never be another world war again, well I am here to say that these people are dead wrong. Here’s why:

Christianity Is At War, This Is Why We Must Prepare Our Souls For The Great World War That Is To Come. Click Here To Get Our New Book And Educate Your Mind And Ready Your Soul For The Coming World War 

print
  • Of course there would be a world war. It’s simply a matter of when.

    • Kamau41

      Exactly.

  • Higlac

    I’m sorry to have to be negative about this broadcast of yours, Mr. Theodore Shoebat; however, most unfortunately you’re wrong several times about various dates and other facts:
    1) the Hussites were active during the late 14th and especially the early 15th century. [Jan Hus lived from c.1369 to 1415/07/06 (when he was burned alive at the stake as a heretic in Konstanz, Germany).]
    2) Many of the cases of German Catholic prelates (particularly archbishops and bishops) joining Protestantism were NOT because of anti-Catholicism on the basis of theology – or of simple theft (in fact, in a few cases it was a case of their reacting against the Catholic Counter-Reformation which had started in 1535 with the accession of Pope Paul III); rather, they were pushed at least to some extent against their wills often enough by secular authorities in Germany (the “Holy Roman Empire” was an ultra-fragmented patchwork quilt of well over 100 principalities (Wikipedia in fact mentions as many as 1,800 of them!!!) who wanted to confiscate “Church lands” and with those pieces of territory aggrandise their own statelets – which in that way could build themselves up into the what later became principal components of the united German Empire (Saxony, Brandenburg – Preußen [Prussia}, Hannover, Bavaria), the zweites Reich (literally “second Empire”) of 1870-1918.
    3) The Thirty Years’ War took place in 1618/05/23 to 1648/05/15. It ended with the Peace of Westfalen (Westphalia).
    4) The surname of Jean-Jacques Rousseau should be pronounced with a soft ‘s’ (as in soft), NOT a ‘z’.
    5) Much of what caused the “Enlightenment” was caused by the attempts of King Louis XIV to cleanse France of Protestantism (specifically Calvinism – Lutheranism wasn’t by then of almost any influence), culminating in the 1683 Revocation of the Edict of Nantes which his father Louis XIII’s chief minister Cardinal-Duke Armand Duplessis de Richelieu had negotiated to allow France to have at least a sufficient basis for national unity. MANY of these Huguenots (the word is a corruption of the German Eidgenoss, which translates as “oath-comrade”) fled France for other lands (England, Scotland, Protestant parts of Germany (even to Russia and Scandinavia). Thanks to this event and associated brutalities both before and after (Louis XIV blamed Protestantism for his failed invasion of the Netherlands of 1672-74), MANY Frenchmen entirely turned away from Christianity at least in their hearts. THIS doubt of Christianity became fertile ground for humanistic ideas derived from the Renaissance and Græco-Roman + Egyptian paganism (and reinforced by Freemasonry, which now began to become a significant political force): hence the basic anti-Christianity of men like François-Marie Arouet (Voltaire), Denis Diderot, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and the rest of those philosophes.

    Mr. Shoebat, I’m not out to attack you as a person or the body of truth you happen to have (and there’s much that is true in you); however, you would do well to re-record this broadcast of yours after rechecking these facts I have had to raise. Doing what you’ve done when you’re obviously tired (and I can sympathise with that) makes your presentation look quite sadly amateurish and hurts you at a time when you least need it.

    To conclude a little more positively: I fully concur and agree with your basic premise of that a MAJOR war à la World Wars I and II is most certainly not a question of “if” but of “when”. There’s no escape from that, period; especially due to that – just as the Bible says and as you quote – thanks to the Original Sin, ALL Mankind is intrinsically EVIL, often in spite of one’s best instincts and intentions.

    • Julie

      There was clericalism in Germany, the ecclesiastics and clergy were having issues that St. Hildegard of Bingen spoke of several hundred years before the split.

      And there were German Catholics at the beginning of the Crusades living in the Danube/Rheinland that killed over 2,000 Jews incited by a bishop and Cistercian monk gone AWOL…while the pope and bishops forbade them.

      Luther and Germany fell increasingly nationalistic. The English countryside did not want to leave the Church but it was forced on them.

      Thanks for all the details.

      Following the French Revolution, the mindset changed of Europeans to where it was more about self-determination…that all led to Vatican I in the 1850’s. I don’t think most of Germany ever deeply converted to Catholicism.

      • Higlac

        Much of what you said, dear “Julie”, is true: yes, that monk Rodolphe (for the Second Crusade) caused a LOT of scandal – it finally took St.Bernard de Clairvaux to personally travel to Germany, confront Rodolphe and force him to return to his monastery. Is he the one you had in mind above?

        Otherwise, a more general question: when you say “clericalism”, do you mean “ANTI-clericalism” perchance (where there’s animosity against the clergy)??

        As to Vatican I (the First Vatican Council), which took place in 1869-70, it was pre-empted by the Kingdom of Savoy-Piedmont growing into the Kingdom of Italy and which in 1870 conquered the Papal States, capturing Rome in the process on 1870/09/20, leading to the “indefinite suspension” of that council (it was finally officially closed in 1960 by John XXIII – in preparation for that infamous Vatican II). [Ever since then until the Concordat of 1929 (Lateran Treaty), the Pope and his assisting clergy considered themselves prisoners under a sort of “house-arrest”, never leaving the Vatican grounds during that time.]

        Finally, if we be really honest, most of the ENTIRE WORLD has never truly converted all the way to Christianity, period!!! Not for nothing that St. Augustine of Hippo (AD 354/11/13–430/08/28) speculated that for everyone who calls himself a Christian and is welcomed as a true saint (finding his way into the New Jerusalem after the Last Judgement), no less than ONE THOUSAND (1,000) others will end up in Hell (the Lake of Fire).

        • Julie

          It was Rodolfe…but unfortunately alot of Jews don’t understand what really happened and are still mad at the Catholic Church…which shouldn’t surprise me as it happens ALL the time.

          I took a seminar at our local seminary. It was ‘The Roots of the Papacy’, and the only problem was it was way too short.

          One Saturday we did cover Vatican I…and I knew that the Council of Trent was the reformation of the Church…….and how the pope was to be given advisors….don’t know what is happening in that regard right at the moment…..

          I was never told that it was incompleted…except on the last day there was this huge clap of thunder that shook the House up. Alot of Catholics don’t know what papal infallibility is…and ironically….it being the second dogma of the Church that came about in 1850 something….was an oversight of the Church’s history and the primacy of Peter…and that there is nothing else in Christology to define. So when the pope speaks, he does so ordinarily through papal encyclicals and not all encyclicals have the same degree of truth.

          In essence, a pope cannot define a dogma…from the ‘senses’ of Scripture without full consent of bishops…which in turn observe the practice of faith over a long period of time…the Christians always saw Mary all pure, virgin…so the Immaculate Conception was defined at the First Vatican Council.

          There were the French Montanists…who looked at the papacy like..if the pope likes chocolate, then we all like chocolate, vs those of the ‘garden’ type…as the instructor explained…not so revolving around the papacy…and Cardinal Newman of Great Britain was part of the latter.

          I don’t know much of the papal states…but do know the Orthodox ran the Holy Roman Empire that covered Perugia…and St Francis of Assisi lived in that town…and you could see each other 22 miles away and they were always fighting and St. Clare was from an Orthodox family, a blond, so they think she had the Orthodox German blood….

          Our priest who taught most of our classes in the archdiocese said most Christians live there faith out as spectators and down below living it out, belting it out are those who live it….

          So we pray for everyone at Mass,…and our prayers connect with the salvation of each other, and the rest of humanity…but a Pope Clement said that affluence and Christianity don’t work together too well…

        • Julie

          There is an article on Spirit Daily….are modern preachers like the early ones?….the first 30 or so popes were martyrs.

          • Higlac

            That surely tells us all just how stalwart those early Roman popes were – that they were so ready to die for Our Lord!!! No denying that, ever. [Very few modern preachers are like the early ones – I’d say the number is not more than one handful; likely they can be counted on the fingers of two, or even only ONE, of the hands.]

            Yes, I’m well aware that the idea of “papal infallibility” is a sort of ‘negative charism’: a pope can only pronounce relative to matters of faith and morals – and absolutely nothing else!!! Anything dealing purely with sports, science and the arts outside of the church are BEYOND his competency.

            As to the odd conclusion of Vatican I: that I got from Wikipedia, for better &/or for worse (I was curious about it, having heard that the Italian annexation of the Papal States had abruptly terminated – however, until my reading thereof yesterday, my very limited knowledge was quite hazy). [The Papal States at one time – and for a long time indeed – included the cities of Bologna, Ravenna, Ancona, Perugia and Orvieto as well as the lesser towns of Benevento and Pontecorvo to the south-east of Roma (Rome).]

            Otherwise, your priest AND whoever that particular Pope Clement was (there were fourteen {14} of them!) were BOTH right about most Christians being mere spectators AND that affluence plus Christianity don’t mix well.

          • Julie

            I was in Umbria visited a chapel St. Francis built. Francis lived under Innocent III.

            Alot of Catholics don’t even understand papal infallibility.

            John Paul II appeared anti Capitalist…and in time after he travelled, came to conclusion a free economy, democracy and strong moral voice was best form of government….

            When it comes to politics, popes have their own opinions as every one else…it is when there come about issues with sacred tradition and the sacrament of marriage that Christ said was permanent. In Catholic marriage, it is Christ Himself Who is the binding agent…

            A pope can have his opinion on politics…and he is supposed to uphold the faith and practice…and keep everybody together.

            I like then Cardinal Ratzinger…we are to be orthodox….the correct way of believing…and orthopraxis…the right way of living….you have to have both…believe and practice.

            We don’t look at the pope as much as some think…it is more looking at Him in Christ.

            It was a Pope Clement………………………………………..way back in the 300’s or around then who said affluence and Christianity don’t mix…now look how affluent we are now……………………………………………………………………

          • Julie

            About the specific article…I remember now it was Cardinal Bernadin of Chicago….who the praxis, ‘Seamless Garment’….putting abortion on the same level of helping the poor…

            You need to get a copy of EWTN’s ‘Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing’…brilliant, simple, clear, to the point, and most powerful….DVD

  • filomena seiffert

    I believe the world can not escape from a terrible conflagration as we watch the bully and bickering of the powerful nations and also the invasions. So far the invasions were done to countries without power to defend themselves, however it will come a day when stupid rulers of nations will attack one with power then, all hell will brake loose.

  • susan

    I really enjoyed the class Professor. I think that’s why the analysts seem so “off” to me even though i admire their knowledge and their wit. It’s like they’ve described every detail of a blueberry pie from the crust, to the proper way to cool it on a rack after baking and forgot to mention the berries are blue. And I suppose this stems from the belief you discussed earlier. Whether man is intrinsicly evil or not. To which I’ll reply, it’s never been difficult for me to sin. Not in the least.

    You’re the only one I’ve ever
    heard discussing the “spirit” behind man.

  • AnthonyM

    I love it, ‘The Professor is in”.
    Good report. Sad to say, I don’t see war can be avoided. There are countries that want one to restore their former glory days.

  • Kamau41

    Excellent analysis. War is certainly inevitable and there is no way around that reality other than to be well prepared!

  • Georgeorwell

    WWIII has been going on since 2001.

  • Higlac

    First, I did NOT say that his work was amateurish – rather, I said that it LOOKED amateurish on account of his being tired and tripping over what he was trying to say. Surely there’s a difference between saying something LOOKS amateurish as opposed to saying that it IS amateurish.

    Second, regarding point #3: the fact remains that those delegates who were “defenestrated” owed their lives (if it was a 70′-drop the way he said) to that they landed in the dung-hill – it cushioned and softened the impact. Falling 70 feet otherwise would guarantee you very severe injuries if not death – I remember living on the fifth storey of an apartment building as a child and I was repeatedly told that if I fell I’d die. [Those storeys were not more than 8′ tall, so with the first storey starting 8′ off the ground (as in European fashion) would already mean trouble at just a total of 40′.]

    As to point #6: what I wrote was meant to be complementary to what he had to say, NOT to override or belittle it in the least.

    Third: Mr. Theodore Shoebat does try frequently to get pronunciation right (though he enough times misses the mark). What’s wrong with giving him a little hint, especially given how he’s valiantly trying (so many Americans have trouble over what others have been trained from childhood elsewhere to do!!!)?

    Overall, it seems to me that you’re idolising the Shoebats and that the slightest criticism, no matter how much it’s meant to be constructive, should be considered as an INSULT!!!! As to accuse me of seeming angry that he “didn’t focus on the stuff you wanted him to do” strikes me as childish on your part. If you want to attack me for being “pompous”, let that be on your conscience and your soul. I fully trust the Shoebats are nobler and more generous people than you seem to think should be the case.

  • Higlac

    Compared to other reviews of Mr. Theodore Shoebat’s broadcasts where I was unreservedly positive and where it truly seemed he scored not less than 90% right, I felt that my review of this particular one was negative. That’s why I felt I had to make sure to acknowledge it and not to play any games (over which others might well have been even more angered – e.g., “faint praise” or “backhand statements”).

    No doubt there’s much that in retrospect I could wish, both here and elsewhere, to phrase differently; and somebody without the mental and spiritual curses I have to carry as part of my cross no doubt would see such things and amend them without even thinking about it.

    Either way, the Shoebats have truly earned their reputation – and continue to establish it through this very day. It’s an absolute pleasure for me to visit this Website; and it speaks that much more for them that they’ve been so tolerant and downright sympathetic to my comments, which most certainly are not good diplomatically.

    Thanks likewise for your feedback – all the best!!!