The Arabs Are Furious And Are Accusing Pakistan Of Allying With Iran Against Mecca

By Walid And Theodore Shoebat

The Arabs are furious at Pakistan for abandoning Mecca accusing Pakistan and Turkey for turning their backs on the holiest place in Islam. This should bring some serious issues on how we interpret the situation in light of the biblical prophecies regarding the ends of times. So few are even focused on the seriousness of the issues at hand. We had no other time in history where we see the pieces of the puzzle coming together as these days we live.

The Pakistani parliament on Friday passed a unanimous resolution, vowing to defend Saudi Arabia’s territorial integrity and the holy places of Makkah and Madinah. But Pakistan claims that none of these locations appear to have so far been threatened by the conflict.

The Pakistani lawmakers neutrality on the escalating crisis in Yemen has evoked a strong response from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) on Saturday arguing that Pakistan indeed had turned its back on Arabia.

“The vague and contradictory stands of Pakistan and Turkey are an absolute proof that Arab security – from Libya to Yemen – is the responsibility of none but Arab countries,” said UAE’s Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Anwar Mohammed Gargash.

UAE’s Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Anwar Mohammed Gargash

Garhash warned Pakistan of having to pay a “heavy price” for taking on what he called an “ambiguous stand”. He added that Pakistan should take a clear position “in favour of its strategic relations with the six-nation Arab Gulf Cooperation Council”.

Gargash went on to symbolise Pakistan’s resolution as equivalent of siding up with Iran instead of the Gulf.

“Tehran seems to be more important to Islamabad and Ankara than the Gulf countries,” Gargash said.

“Pakistan should play a mediating role and not get involved in the fighting in Yemen,” the Pakistani  resolution stated, adding that “Parliament desires that Pakistan should maintain neutrality in the Yemen conflict so as to be able to play a proactive diplomatic role to end the crisis,” it stated.

To accuse Pakistan of siding with Iran is a strong statement. Pakistan is Sunni just as the UAE and for Pakistan to take a nuetral position on Saudi interests advances the cause of Shiite Iran.

The situation in Saudi Arabia brings a crucial question which challenges centuries of proposed theories regarding the biblical narrative on Mystery Babylon: which prophetic model truly depicts the situation we see at hand: Mecca or Rome?

And perhaps some questions that are impossible to answer must be asked: are the Italians, French and Germans coming to the destruction of Rome after having turned their backs on her?

Remember, Scripture insists:

“The beast … will hate the prostitute. They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will eat her flesh and burn her with fire. For God has put it in their hearts to execute His purpose …” (Revelation 17:16-18)

Saudi Arabia is abandoned and is left “naked” with her allies looking the other way while Iran (biblical Elam, see Isaiah 21) threatens her very existence.

Is there a threat from the European Union or the G8 or the United Nations or from whatever threat  proposed by strange biblical interpretation leveled at the Vatican these days? Where are all these so-called Prophecy experts giving us their ‘expert’ analysis?

Sure, I will get comments about how terrible the Vatican has become and we would agree on many issues; there is a gay agenda that infiltrated and cults were invited to Rome … etc … but so were many fallen Protestant denominations. These days anyone can find in denominations evidence to see that our institutions can hardly be close to what represents Christianity.

The one unescapable question that our detractors can never answer is this: can they ever deny that by such interpretation, that Vatican is the “harlot of Babylon”, would they then agree with the Book of Mormon which claims that the Catholic Church was the “mother of harlots”?

And the angel said unto me: Behold the formation of a church which is most abominable above all other churches, which slayeth the saints of God, yea, and tortureth them and bindeth them down, and yoketh them with a yoke of iron, and bringeth them down into captivity. And it came to pass that I beheld this great and abominable church; and I saw the devil that he was the founder of it. And I also saw gold, and silver, and silks, and scarlets, and fine-twined linen, and all manner of precious clothing; and I saw many harlots. …that abominable church, which is the mother of harlots (I Nephi 13: 5-7, 34) (1)

The other question is a Jesus style question: “If Satan is divided against himself, how can his kingdom stand?” (Luke 11:18) So, can a book that is authored by the devil be trusted to represent anything but the devil’s interests? Do Mormons walk in light?

And before the Mormons and even the Protestants, it was the Albigensian heretics (who are not even Christian) that coined such an idea that the Catholic Church was the whore of Babylon, and before you begin to have a liking for these groups because of this belief, there is the world’s leading heresiarch who was to coin the Catholic Church as the archenemy: Muhammad himself.

Here we have the very demonic agent who established the harlot, Mecca, as the central focus for all Muslims, and at the same time he was the main agent to spreading this heretical interpretation.

Do you agree with the Albigensians, Muhammad and Joseph Smith?

And because of this belief, the Albigensians, sought out ways to utterly uproot Christianity from Europe. The head of this heretical group, Raymond of Toulouse, sought to self-fulfill this proposed interpretation and sent his emissaries to the king of Morocco begging the Muslims to destroy all of Christendom. (2)

While the falling away is in every mainline denomination today, this does not mean that God will not establish a remnant. He always does. And while denominations, cities, even Israel can become “harlot” this by no means is a justification for any wild interpretation that these are the “Harlot of Babylon”.

And we can give some biblical examples: “How the faithful city [Jerusalem] has become a harlot” (Isaiah 1:21) “Israel, how she … played the harlot” (Jeremiah 3:6) “You also played the harlot with the Egyptians …” (Ezekiel 16:26-30)

But do such verses justify wild interpretations? If we find the word “harlot” regarding Israel and Jerusalem, does this justify then that Jerusalem is the “Harlot of Babylon”?

The key word to examine when viewing these verses is “Babylon”. Jerusalem is not Babylon.

Folks should stop looking for “the harlot” in all the wrong places, Isaiah and John fully described this “whore of Babylon” in perfect detail, especially in Isaiah 21 where the reference to the fall of Babylon “Babylon is Fallen is Fallen” the exact reference in Revelation, is referred to “Arabia,” literally.

Now that the Arabs are complaining their Mecca is abandoned by her lovers, why are you not paying close attention?

SOURCES

(1) That this verse is directed against the Catholic Church, see Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History, ch. iv, p. 60

(2) Peter of les Vaux-de-Cernay, History of the Albigensian Crusade, 12, 394, trans. W.A. Sibly and M.D. Sibly