Walid Shoebat’s Wrong Interpretation
(This is the Appendix of Book 3, The FALL of BABYLON the Great AMERICA, June, 2015. Walid Shoebat is the author of God’s War on Terror, co-author is Joel Richardson, author of the Islamic Antichrist.)
In addition to the information given already that points against Shoebat’s theory of BTG, his view is actually very confused and contradictory. First, he claims the mark of the beast is the “in the name of Allah,” and that the Antichrist will be the Mahdi, and that his kingdom will be a revived Islamic empire; but then he claims that the Antichrist will claim to be god and all the Muslims will follow and worship him as god, and will then nuke Saudi Arabia and Mecca!
So how does all the Islamic info he gives in his book relate to an Islamic Antichrist if he will only be Islamic until he becomes Antichrist, then leaves Islam and nukes Mecca? Islam does not allow for their god to appear in the flesh. No, he and Joel Richardson, the coauthor of his book, are wrong. The Antichrist will be Islamic, not merely Islamic before he reveals himself.
Joel Richardson also wrote a book himself called The Islamic Antichrist, wherein he makes a similar claim, that the Antichrist will claim to be god. He tells us how it is that all the Muslims will follow someone who claims to be god, even though it is clearly against Islamic theology:
The imams, mullahs, sheiks, and ayatollahs – all of the world’s Islamic leadership – will have already given their allegiance to the Mahdi. To deny him after this point would be the ultimate shame for Islam. It would come at a time when Islam will experience its greatest rush of vindication and fulfillment. In the midst of all of this incredible elation, to suddenly declare and acknowledge that an absolute-evil charlatan has deceived the entire Islamic world would simply be unthinkable. Once the deception has taken place, it will be impossible to undo. (The Islamic Antichrist, Page 180)
I think Shoebat and Richardson are saying that the Muslims will continue to be Muslims, while worshiping the Antichrist as god, which, though possible, I do not think will happen. As I have shown in BK1 & 2, many Scripture references pointing to Allah or Muhammad himself, who shares many of the same names and attributes with Allah.
The most ridiculous claim they make is that the Antichrist/Madhi and his followers will hate Saudi Arabia and Mecca. Shoebat said:
For the whole concept to fit, then the Muslim world must destroy Arabia, no? Is that unfathomable to you? They hate Saudi Arabia, they hate the harlot. Why? Because she lives in luxury.” (video on The Right Scoop, Jan. 27, 2014, and Youtube.)
It may be true that a small number of Muslims hate the Saudis, and believe that the rulers of Mecca have done things that they don’t like, and claim the Saudis have “betrayed” Islam. But, the Saudis are building mosques and religious schools all over the world, so most Muslims have very good reasons to love them and not want them nuked.
Also, Mecca is Islam’s most holy city, so to nuke Mecca does not make any sense, unless the Antichrist is NOT a Muslim. Just because it was invaded and sacked by Muslims many hundreds of years ago, does not mean that nearly 2 billion Muslims would approve of completely wiping Mecca from the face of the earth with a nuclear bomb. It does not make good sense. They pray toward Mecca every day and look to it as the main holy city in Islam, so I do not believe they would ever nuke Mecca.
So this is a conundrum, and here is another: the Saudis are Muslims, so if they all follow the Antichrist, then why would they even need to nuke Mecca? Is all of Islam going to follow the Antichrist except Saudi Arabia? See how this is more nonsense?
Also, who will be crying “Woe! Woe! oh great city” when Mecca is destroyed? No one except Muslims even cares what happens to Mecca, but Shoebat says it is the Muslims who will hate and nuke Mecca! So if the Muslims hate and nuke Mecca, and the rest of the world does not care what happens to Mecca, then no one will be saying, “Woe! Woe! oh great city.”
So this is a mixed up interpretation. If it should get nuked, it will be done by those at war with the beast and false prophet, and no one else.
We also know that Babylon the Great says, “I sit a queen” (18:7). This is very much against Islam in all respects. There is a king of Saudi Arabia, but there is no queen! That would mean she had power and position, but women are not allowed to have power or position in Islam, especially not in Saudi Arabia. So if you liken BTG to a queen, it can never fit Saudi Arabia or any other Islamic nation, not even a little. (I know that it is figurative, but the meaning, as we have seen, usually applies on several different levels, so I still don’t see it applying, any level.)
Even though Saudi Arabia is rich, they do not, and cannot buy as much product as the United States. The U.S. has a consumer-driven economy, and we produce and buy more goods than any other nation in the world. Notice what it says in Rev. 18:11, that when BTG falls, “no one buys their cargoes any more.” They cannot come anywhere close to the U.S.
We are still the number one consumer nation. We buy more cargo per capita than any other people in the world, of that I am 100% certain. When Babylon falls the whole world will morn because many factories that make goods sold in America will shut down, and many people will be unemployed. It will cause a global economic depression.
Also, if BTG is Saudi Arabia and Mecca, then she would be supporting the beast, since the beast is based in Islam, and Mecca is the chief city of Islam, with the Kaaba, but the text says the woman rides the beast. So how does the harlot ride the beast in Shoebat’s view? I have not learned of his teaching on this if he has one.
Shoebat says that Isaiah 21 refers to Babylon as Arabia, and that it will be destroyed by Iran. Here are some key verses:
An oracle concerning the Desert by the Sea: . . . 2 A dire vision has been shown to me: The traitor betrays, the looter takes loot. Elam, attack! Media, lay siege! . . .
9 . . . ‘Babylon has fallen, has fallen! All the images of its gods lie shattered on the ground!’” 10 . . .
11 An oracle concerning Dumah: Someone calls to me from Seir, . . .
13 An oracle concerning Arabia: You caravans of Dedanites, who camp in the thickets of Arabia, . . .
It is true that many prophecies contained in the prophetical books refer to end-time events, but it is also true that many, if not most, of the prophecies were about events that were to take place within a few decades or centuries, which is the case in this chapter.
Shoebat claims that Saudi Arabia is the “desert by the sea” and that the reference to Babylon is really Saudi Arabia. However, the Euphrates River contained a very large marsh that was like a sea. And Barnes Notes says, “The name ‘sea’ים) yâm) is not unfrequently given to a large river, to the Nile, and to the Euphrates . . .” So it does not have to actually be by the sea, because it can refer to the Euphrates.
Shoebat points out that there is a city in Arabia named Dumah, but it is nothing but ruins today. There were also other cities by the same name, says The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia:
This word [Dumah] occurs in the Old Testament with the following significations: (1) The land of silence or death, the grave (Psa_94:17; Psa_115:17); (2) a town in the highlands of Judah between Hebron and Beersheba, now ed-Daume (Jos_15:52); (3) an emblematical designation of Edom in the obscure oracle (Isa_21:11, Isa_21:12); (4) an Ishmaelite tribe in Arabia (Gen_25:14; 1Ch_1:30). According to the Arabic geographies this son of Ishmael rounded the town of Dūmat-el-Jandal, the stone-built Dūmah, so called to distinguish it from another Dumah near the Euphrates.
But what about verse 13 that clearly refers to Arabia? There were no chapter divisions when Isaiah was written, so each time you read, “An oracle concerning,” it begins a new prophecy. Notice that in the above passage that phrase occurs three times. The oracle against the desert by the sea, refers to Babylon, which is why it later names Babylon as falling. This is followed by an oracle against Edom, and it references “Seir,” which was located in Edom. Then finally in verse 13 is an oracle against Arabia. None of them are about modern Saudi Arabia. Are we to believe that Saudi Arabia is prophetically referred to by three different names in one chapter, all nearby nations? Are we to believe that Saudi Arabia has lots of “images” (v9) today when we know that Islam forbids images of Allah and Muhammad?
Shoebat also likes to point out that the harlot is said to be in the “desert.” But Smith’s Bible Dictionary defines desert (eremos) (2048) as, “Not a stretch of sand, an utterly barren waste, but a wild, uninhabited region” (p. 149). CWD says, “Sometimes it denotes no more than an uncultivated piece of ground . . . Used of a woman meaning solitary, destitute of a husband, unmarried.” As I point out in Book 1, North America was a wild and sparsely inhabited region when the first settlers arrived.
Shoebat also says that the 7th head of the beast is the Ottoman Empire, but the Bible clearly says that the 7th head of the beast will only exist or rule for a short time. The Ottoman Empire lasted about 500 years after it became an empire, over 600 years from its small beginning in northwest Anatolia. So, his view of the 7th head is another example of his blatantly grossly wrong misinterpretation of Bible prophecy.
So Shoebat’s interpretation is confused and contradictory and based mostly on what Islam teaches and expects to happen, and less on a detailed analysis of what the Bible actually teaches in detail, as I do in this series of books. When he does analyze the Bible he misapplies or misinterprets it. So I agree with him maybe .1%.
Perhaps more important than all the above evidence, why would the Bible spend several chapters of prophecies in the Old and New Testaments to prophesy the future destruction of such a small nation as Saudi Arabia that has never been a world power. (Even when the Muslims first came out of Arabia and conquered the Middle East, it was not long until the capital of the empire was moved to Damascus, and the Baghdad.) Though it is the home of Islam, that is not enough for all the attention in the Bible. The Bible details the rise and destruction of the Islamic beast empire, which is sufficient because it includes all those who follow the beast. So why would even more space be devoted to the destruction of Saudi Arabia in the Bible than to the beast and false prophet? Again, it does not make good sense.
Finally, according to Chuck Colson’s prophecy in another chapter, Saudi Arabia will eventually be taken over by the radial Islamists, such as ISIS or Al Qaeda, not nuked by the beast and its allies like BTG in Revelation.
P.S. If you research it, you will discover that Shoebat’s wife is Roman Catholic, and he has declared in print, support for many RCC doctrines while criticizing some Protestant doctrines. Some people believe that he is really a RC who is pushing his Saudi Arabia is Babylon teaching to counter the still popular belief that the RCC is Babylon.