By Walid and Theodore Shoebat (Shoebat Exclusive)

The typical westerner who reads up on anti-Jihad literature usually concludes a limited bullet point view on Islam that it’s moon god worship or that Muslims want 70 virgins in heaven and that Muhammad had sex with a 9 year old and conclude that Allah is not the same god as the Bible.

Fact is that even some of the most ardent anti-Jihadists westerners can easily fall by not obeying one instruction which tells us to beware that “by peace he will deceive many”.

Most do not connect the dots to the biblical description in which Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah and John affirmed that the harlot religion of Islam is the process of preparing the Muslim to become God (2 Thessalonians 2) and that “peace” is the main method that Satan attracts them to acquiesce to Islam’s religion.

Yesterday we wrote NEW EVIDENCE DISCOVERED PROVES The Muslim Antichrist Will Come Into The Temple Of God, And Declare Himself To Be God regarding Sufi Islam and how it is the major form of Islam which teaches the theology of Fana in which the Muslim becomes God himself, a theology which consumes one-fifth of the Muslim world who are touted in the West as the most peaceful of Muslims and is why such deception did not only encompass the U.S. government, but Christians as well.

What is quite astounding is how I had Christian friends in the West who joined me to spearhead the war against the Islamic Antichrist, while at the same time uninentionally promoting the very religion of Antichrist.

Joel Richardson, who writes in both of his books (1) not only praised the foremost Muslim scholar behind Sufism, Jala al Din al Rumi complementing him and asking his readers to learn from the Antichrist religion’s positive aspects stating:

“Maybe you say that we cannot find any goodness and light in the religion of the Antichrist. But believe it or not, you can”.

Amazing.

It even got much worse since what Richardson promoted “methods of outreach to Muslims, but rather the spirit in which God desires us to reach out to Muslims in order that not only they, but also we, might be transformed”. Richardson, who is oblivious to Sufism uses the very man, Rumi the father of Sufism as the essence and beacon for such transformation:

“Jalal al Din al Rumi was one of Islam’s greatest mystics. He practiced a mystical form of Islam known as Sufiism. Rumi often spoke of God as “the Beloved” or “the Friend.” Sufis’ such as Rumi also placed far more emphasis on Jesus as their model for life than other Muslims. One cannot read many of Rumi’s writings without feeling as though he was very close to being a Christian. There is at least one quote of Rumi’s that I have truly come to appreciate. Rumi said, “One day I was going along looking to see in people the shining of the Friend, so I would recognize the Ocean in a drop.”

How this shows love for Jesus by Rumi is astounding, he continues in his admiration of Rumi:

Rumi attempted to see God in all of His creation, and particularly in every one of His creatures.

Richardson’s fascination with Rumi goes too far to even admire the very religion of Antichrist’s peaceful form of Islam, Sufism:

Maybe you say that we cannot find any goodness and light in the religion of the Antichrist. But believe it or not, you can. And here’s the reason: Islam is made of Muslims. And Muslims are people who are created in the image of God. And many of them are genuine God seekers. As such, even in Islam there are things that Christians can learn from.”

I finally had to detach from Richardson’s amateur approach who after visiting Turkey he complemented Adnan Oktar who spearheads the very expansion of Sufi Islam complementing him as a “man of peace” in which I had to finally rebuke him. Richardson’s naiveté advanced the major and main voice in Sufi Islam, Rumi, writing how he cannot read his Islamic writings without thinking that he is more of a Christian.

So lets look to the writings of Rumi, and see how close to Christianity his writings actually were. Firstly, Rumi’s writings promote pedophilia. Rumi writes:

“A lawyer was once beating a boy.
‘Why are you beating him?’ he was asked.
‘What crime has he committed?’
‘You don’t know what this fool does. He spoils everything.’
‘What does he do?’ someone asked.
‘Of what sin is he guilty?’
‘He runs away at the moment of climax,’ the lawyer replied.
What he meant was that when he was beating, the boy’s image ran away and spoiled the lawyer’s climax. There is no doubt the lawyer was in love with his mental image of the boy, but the boy was quite unaware of that fact. …Even if misguided and misdirected love for an image can produce ecstasy, it is nothing like the mutual love enjoyed with the actual beloved.” (2)

The deviancies of Rumi, Richardson’s example of good Muslim character who ‘got so close to Christianity’, and, according to Richardson, one ‘who can barely be distinguished from a Christian,’ extend from pedophilia to zoophilia, or beastiality. Rumi writes in one of his poetic writings:

“There was a maidservant who had cleverly trained a donkey to perform the services of a man. From a gourd, she had carved a flanged device to fit on the donkey’s penis, to keep him from going to far into her. She had fashioned just to the point of her pleasure, and she greatly enjoyed the arrangement, as often as she could! She thrived, but the donkey a little thin and tired looking. The mistress began to investigate. One day she peaked through a crack in the door and saw the animal’s marvelous member and the delight of the girl stretched under the donkey. She said nothing. Later, she knocked on the door and called the maid out on an errand, a long and complicated errand. I want go into details. The servant knew what was happening, though. “Ah, my mistress,” she thought to herself, “you should not send away the expert.” When you begin to work without full knowledge, you risk your life. Your shame keeps you from asking me about the gourd. But you must have that to join with this donkey. There’s a trick you don’t know! But the woman was too fascinated with her idea to consider any danger. She led the donkey in and closed the door thinking, “With no one around I can shout with my pleasure.” She was dizzy with anticipation, her vagina glowing and singing like a nightingale. She arranged the chair under the donkey, as she had seen the girl do. She raised her legs and pulled him into her. Her fire kindled more, and the donkey politely pushed as she urged him to, pushed through and into her intestines, and, without a word, she died. The chair fell one way, and she the other. The room was smeared with blood.” (3)

It can’t get any sicker than this.

As to Rumi’s theology, he was the main Muslim scholar to introduce how a Muslim, even Antichrist himself would promote himself as both “a servant of God” and “being God” at the same time, and by that, this fulfills both Daniel 11 and 2 Thessalonians 2. In Daniel 11 it states that Antichrist serves a god of fortresses (war) and advances the glory of this god through warfare while in 2 Thessalonians 2 it declares that Antichrist sits in the temple of God making himself to be God.

So how could he ‘serve a god’ and at the same time proclaim himself ‘to be this very god’?

All this contradiction of being a “servant of God” and say “I am God” at the same time in Islam was the invention of non-other than Rumi, Richardson’s hero:

“And so it is with the enlightenment ones, those who declares, “I am God.” Anyone who says “I am the servant of God” asserts the reality of two existences, one for himself and the other for God. But he who says “I am God” — and has realized the deepest levels of unity within his being” (4)

And here are two documentaries showing Rumi’s Sufism is still alive and well in how they achieve this “divine unity” to become gods:

Joel Richardson and others can easily fall right into complementing Antichrist’s religion by deceptions of being “peaceful” by not understanding Sufism or who Rumi was and by that they have no business in dealing with Muslims who woo westerners with flattery.

But far from Wahhabism, Sufism is the most dangerous, not only that because it teaches tremendous violence since it was the Sufis who are the muscle and sinew of the faith advancing it to become the world’s second-largest religion. Sufis are not simply a sect of Islam, but rather heirs of an ancient mystical tradition within both the Sunni and Shia branches of the faith combining their inward quest with war and expansion worldwide.

Sufism is not only the ecumenical force in which it is the best uniting factor between Shiite and Sunni Muslims, but is the best link to satanic worship in using Shamanism in which Sunni Sufis adore Shiite icons and like Shiites are mystical and charismatic and even provides a link between Islam and shamanism.

It is no wonder why Islam is the Mother of Harlots which combines all heresies and cults into one world religion. It has elements of Christianity, which woos westerners by saying they love Jesus. It also has elements of Judaism which woos Jews and is anti-Trinitarian which woos oneness Christian cults. It is iconoclast which woos many Evangelicals and it has Al-Qada Wal-Qadar (pre-destination) which woos Calvinists. It also has pagan elements from Zoroastrianism and Buddhism. It is perfectly packaged to truly be a one world religion.

In contemporary Muslim culture Sufism introduced the old practice of shamanism as it was combined with elements of Sufism in order to adapt to wider Islamic society. Shamanistic Sufi Islam thus expands deeply into Central Asia, the Middle East, North Africa and the Balkans and shows how the Muslim shaman, like his Siberian counterpart, cultivates personal relations with spirits to supposedly help individuals through what they believe as healing and divination. This ‘Islamized shamanism’, covering the geographic areas of modern-day Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kirghizstan, northern Afghanistan, the Turkoman province of Iran and the Uygur district of Xinjian province of China will play a major role in the end times and we predict that the Antichrist is likely to be Sufi. This region is the very bulk of the armies of Ezekiel 38 and this explains further why Gog is the Antichrist who will declare he serves God while proclaiming himself to be God.

In this video, notice how there is an orb of light in the middle of the circle on which is the name of Allah is placed. This illustration represents Richardson’s model Rumi who was the one to introduce this theology of the Muslim coming into the presence of Allah, and eventually reaching Fana (annihilation) and becoming God:

At times things get lonely when it is difficult to find westerners who comprehend the deception. Today we have so many unlearned Christians and self-proclaimed “experts” on the Bible and its prophecies when what is lacking is understanding the history behind Christianity’s struggle with Islam to even hatred of the very history of Christianity. Richardson writes as evidence against the Crusaders stating:

“Anders Breivik modeled himself after the Dominionist Christian crusaders”

Truth was finally discovered that Breivik, the terrorist was a Nazi who truly hated Christianity altogether including the very Crusaders whom Richardson abhors. Breivik claimed to have used my works in order to paint us as complacent with his crimes. CNN attacked us vehemently days prior to Breivik’s massacre saying that I was “never a terrorist” to only link us to Breivik a day later as being terrorist. Which is it? Was I a terrorist or not? This alone shows the depravity of the liberal media. Yet Christians go right along with such media in denouncing the Crusaders as evil doers. The rule of thumb is that whatever the liberal supports, look out, and whatever the liberal hates look into.

But instead of Richardson be apt to know the cunningness of devils, he had to find something to express such ridicule to anything that has an apostolic succession as if Copts in Egypt, Orthodox in Russia and Catholics in Rome are all on the wrong side of Christian history who are given the title by Richardson as “Dominionists” and that the only form of Christianity is what we find as non-Dominionist Evangelicalism in the West.

One could imagine Christ cursing one side of Christianity, the apostolic succession, while he will only elevate the ones without it even though the later did not exist for fifteen centuries, an issue that no one in history can explain since accepting such nonsense would mean that Christ failed His ministry when He said that “I will build my church” and that the very “lighthouse” was dim for over a millennia and half until Luther and Calvin showed up. Its the issue that puzzled me for two decades until I examined the Copts, Orthodox and Catholics for myself to finally learn the missing element: History.

Who can answer this dilemma was lost and will never be found, even though it was Christ who promised all the lost that they can all be found, if they so desired to knock, seek and find.

While I find so many great Protestant examples I so much admire, Sir Robert Anderson and Sir Edmond Allenby who emulated the Crusaders capturing Jerusalem from the Ottomans and finally giving a crushing blow to that Islamic Antichrist. Yet so many have turned away from the militarism of old Evangelicals to this new form of appeasement and even loosing their virginity by laying with the devil who laced there theology with a potion that put them completely to sleep.

Its a shame.

I thank God when I get slandered by the media and by my very own brethren, for it is slander that had me search into the most slandered and hated elements within the faith we call Christianity. Ask yourself, who is the most supposedly ‘exposed’ and hated sect of Christianity? Search for them, and there, you will find the truth.

REFERENCES

(1) See Antichrist, Islam’s Awaited Messiah, pages 225-226 and The Islamic Antichrist, pages 205-206

(2) Rumi, The true nature of one’s own face, in The Complete Discourses of Rumi, discourse 43, ed. Louis Rogers, pp. 265-265

(3) Barks, The Essential Rumi, ch. 16, pp. 181-182

(4) Rumi, Hearts bear witness one to another, in The Complete Discourses of Jalal al-Din Rumi, discourse 11, p. 75, ed. Louis Rogers