Daniel eleven verse twenty-four identifies the period which pagan Rome would rule supremely with the word “time.” A “time” represents 360 years in prophetic application, and those years began at the most famous naval battle of ancient history, the battle of Actium in 31 BC. There were other naval battles that were larger and strategically more sophisticated, but Actium was the most iconic naval battle through its association with Marc Antony and Cleopatra. Similar in historical significance to the collapse of the Berlin Wall in fulfillment of Daniel 11:40, and the Twin Towers of 9/11 in fulfillment of Revelation eighteen; for when God chooses the historical events to fulfill His prophetic Word, He does so in a fashion that reaches the attention of the largest possible audience.
Daniel kapitulo onse bersikulo beinte-kuatro ket pinakakitaan ti panawen a mangituray a nangato ti pagan a Roma babaen ti sao a “panawen.” Ti maysa a “panawen” ket mangituding iti 360 a tawen iti naimpadtoan nga aplikasion, ket dagidiay a tawen ket nangrugi idiay kadaklan ken kadakkelan a bantog a laban iti baybay ti nagkauna nga istoria, ti gubat ti Actium idi 31 BC. Adda pay sabali a laban iti baybay a dakdakkel ken mas naestratehiko a naisagana, ngem ti Actium ti kaaduan a naibatay a pakasirmata a laban iti baybay gapu iti pannakikadua na ken Marc Antony ken Cleopatra. Kapadpada iti kinapateg na iti pakasaritaan iti pannakarba ti Berlin Wall iti pannakatungpal ti Daniel 11:40, ken dagiti Twin Towers idi 9/11 iti pannakatungpal ti Revelation dieciocho; ta no pili-en ti Dios dagiti pasamak iti pakasaritaan tapno tungpalen ti Sao na a naimpadto, aramiden na dayta iti wagas a makaawis iti imatang ti kadakkelan a mabalin nga audiencia.
And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people. He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers’ fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches: yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strong holds, even for a time. Daniel 11:23, 24.
Ug muren sura dirina kunkï yaljjaña lurani; jupasti makata jutasinxa, mä jiskʼa markampiw chʼamani tukuñani. Sumankañampiw markan wali qamir cheqanakar mantani; jupasti kunatï jupan awkinakapasa jan lurapkänsa, janiraki awkinakapan awkinakapasa lurapkänsa, ukwa lurani; jupasti katuntat yänaka, qʼal jaquqatanaka, qamir yänaksa jupanakan taypiruw lakirayani; ukhamaraki chʼamani saytʼäwinak contra amuytʼatanakap wakichtʼani, mä pachataki. Daniel 11:23, 24.
Uriah Smith concludes his observations of the league between Rome and the Maccabees of verse twenty-three by commenting upon the small people of the verse.
Uriah Smith, ૨૩મી કલમમાં આવેલ રોમ અને મક્કાબીઓની સંધિ વિષે પોતાની નોંધો પૂર્ણ કરતાં, તે કલમના “નાના લોકો” અંગે ટિપ્પણી કરે છે.
“At this time the Romans were a small people, and began to work deceitfully, or with cunning, as the word signifies. And from this point they rose by a steady and rapid ascent to the height of power which they afterward attained.
«Аҕа саҕалаах кэмҥэ римляннар аһылыга суох элбэх буолбатах сир-халык этиллер, уонна бу сөпкө тылыҥ суолунан эттэххэ, улар мэхчэриэннээхтик, эбэтэр хыймыылаахтык үлэлииргэ саҕаламмыттара. Уонтан саҕалаан, кэнники кыахтара туһугар тиийбит үрдүк дьоҕурга улар тас быһаарыылаах уонна түргэн үрдэлээһинэн тахсан бардылар.»
“[Verse twenty-four quoted].
“[Averse kánéyúu ts’ídii quoted].”
“The usual manner in which nations had, before the days of Rome, entered upon valuable provinces and rich territory, was by war and conquest. Rome was now to do what had not been done by the fathers or the fathers’ fathers; namely, receive these acquisitions through peaceful means. The custom, before unheard of, was now inaugurated, of kings’ leaving by legacy their kingdoms to the Romans. Rome came into possession of large provinces in this manner.
«Սովորական եղանակը, որով ազգերը՝ մինչև Հռոմի օրերը, տիրացել էին արժեքավոր գավառների և հարուստ երկրամասերի, եղել էր պատերազմն ու նվաճումը։ Այժմ Հռոմը պետք է աներ այն, ինչ չէին արել հայրերը և հայրերի հայրերը, այն է՝ այդ ձեռքբերումները ստանալ խաղաղ միջոցներով։ Այժմ սկիզբ էր առնում մինչ այդ անլսելի մի սովորություն, ըստ որի՝ թագավորները իրենց թագավորությունները կտակով թողնում էին հռոմեացիներին։ Այս կերպ Հռոմը տիրացավ մեծ գավառների»։
“And those who thus came under the dominion of Rome derived no small advantage therefrom. They were treated with kindness and leniency. It was like having the prey and spoil distributed among them. They were protected from their enemies, and rested in peace and safety under the aegis of the Roman power.
«Và những kẻ bởi đó mà phục dưới quyền thống trị của La Mã đã nhận được từ đó không ít lợi ích. Họ được đối đãi bằng sự nhân từ và khoan dung. Điều ấy chẳng khác nào con mồi và chiến lợi phẩm được phân phát cho họ. Họ được bảo vệ khỏi kẻ thù mình, và an nghỉ trong sự bình an cùng an toàn dưới sự che chở của quyền lực La Mã. »
“To the latter portion of this verse, Bishop Newton gives the idea of forecasting devices from strongholds, instead of against them. This the Romans did from the strong fortress of their seven-hilled city. ‘Even for a time;’ doubtless a prophetic time, 360 years. From what point are these years to be dated? Probably from the event brought to view in the following verse.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 272, 273.
«بەشی دواتری ئەم ئایەتەدا، ئوسقوف نیوتن ئەو بیرۆکەیە دەدات کە ئامێرەکانی پێشبینی لە قەڵاکانەوە بن، نە دژیان. ڕۆمانییەکان ئەمەیان لە قەڵای بەهێزی شارە حەوتگردەکەیانەوە کرد. “هەتا ماوەیەک؛” بێگومان ماوەیەکی پێغەمبەرانەیە، ٣٦٠ ساڵ. ئەم ساڵانە دەبێت لە کوێوە دەست پێ بکرێن؟ لەوانەیە لەو ڕووداوەوە هەژمار بکرێن کە لە ئایەتی دواتردا خراوەتەڕوو.» Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 272, 273.
Smith continues and identifies the battle of Actium in 31 BC as the starting point for the three hundred and sixty years. After quoting verse twenty-five Smith states the following.
Smith an de to se Actium ko akyuapo no, a esii afe 31 ansa na Kristo reba no mu, sɛ ɛno na ɛyɛ mfiase ma mfe ahasa ne aduosia no. Bere a waka nkyekyem aduonu anum no awie no, Smith ka nea edidi so yi.
“By verses 23 and 24 we are brought down this side of the league between the Jews and the Romans, BC 161, to the time when Rome had acquired universal dominion. The verse now before us brings to view a vigorous campaign against the king of the south, Egypt, and the occurrence of a notable battle between great and mighty armies. Did such events as these transpire in the history of Rome about this time? — They did. The war was the war between Egypt and Rome; and the battle was the battle of Actium. Let us take a brief view of the circumstances that led to this conflict.
“आयत 23 और 24 के द्वारा हमें यहूदियों और रोमियों के बीच की उस संधि, ईसा-पूर्व 161, के इस पार, उस समय तक ले जाया जाता है जब रोम ने सार्वभौमिक प्रभुत्व प्राप्त कर लिया था। अब हमारे सामने की यह आयत दक्षिण के राजा, अर्थात् मिस्र, के विरुद्ध एक प्रबल अभियान, और महान तथा शक्तिशाली सेनाओं के बीच एक उल्लेखनीय युद्ध के घटित होने को दृष्टिगत कराती है। क्या ऐसे घटनाक्रम इस समय के आसपास रोम के इतिहास में घटित हुए थे? — हुए थे। वह युद्ध मिस्र और रोम के बीच का युद्ध था; और वह लड़ाई एक्टियम की लड़ाई थी। आइए, उन परिस्थितियों पर संक्षेप में दृष्टि डालें जिन्होंने इस संघर्ष को जन्म दिया।”
“[Marc] Antony, Augustus Caesar, and Lepidus constituted the triumvirate which had sworn to avenge the death of Julius Caesar. This Antony became the brother-in-law of Augustus by marrying his sister, Octavia. Antony was sent into Egypt on government business, but fell a victim to the arts and charms of Cleopatra, Egypt’s dissolute queen. So strong was the passion he conceived for her, that he finally espoused the Egyptian interests, rejected his wife, Octavia, to please Cleopatra, bestowed province after province upon the latter to gratify her avarice, celebrated a triumph at Alexandria instead of Rome, and otherwise so affronted the Roman people that Augustus had no difficulty in leading them to engage heartily in a war against this enemy of their country. This war was ostensibly against Egypt and Cleopatra; but it was really against Antony, who now stood at the head of Egyptian affairs. And the true cause of their controversy was, says Prideaux, that neither of them could be content with only half of the Roman empire; for Lepidus having been deposed from the triumvirate, it now lay between them, and each being determined to possess the whole, they cast the die of war for its possession.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 273.
«[Marc] Antony, Augustus Caesar, leh Lepidus te triumvirate an siam a, an thihna Julius Caesar chu an phuba lâk tumnaa an intiam tawh kha. He Antony hian Augustus unau Octavia a nupuiin a nei a, chutichuan Augustus pasal nau a lo ni ta. Sorkar hnathawknaa Egypt ramah tirh a ni a; nimahsela, Egypt lalnu nungchaang lo tak Cleopatra thiamna leh mawinaah a tla zo ta. Amah nêna a hmangaihnaa a rilru a kal nasa em avângin, a tâwpah Egypt lama an duh zâwng chu a pawm ta a, Cleopatra lawmna atâna a nupui Octavia a hnâwl ta a, a duh hmu theihna atâna province pakhat hnu pakhat chu Cleopatra hnêna pe tawh a ni a, a hnehna lawmna pawh Rome-ah ni lovin Alexandria-ah a lawm a; tin, a dangte pawh Roman mite a tihsual hle niin, chutichuan Augustus chuan an ram hmêlma chungchangah indonaa an thinlung zawng zawngin an lût theih nân harsatna eng mah a nei lo. He indona hi lang tlang taka sawi chuan Egypt leh Cleopatra chungchanga ni mah se, a tak takah chuan Antony chungchanga ni; a tuipui ber chu tûnah Egypt thil tih zawng zawng hotu hmasa ber a ni tawh si a. Tin, an inkalh chhan dik tak chu, Prideaux-in a sawi angin, an pahnih zung zungin Roman empire chanve chauh nêna lungâwi thei an ni lo va; Lepidus chu triumvirate atangin paih a nih tawh avângin, thil chu an pahnih kârah a awm ta, tin, pakhat zêl hian a pum pui a neih vek tum tlat avângin, an neih theih nâna indona chu an thlanchhuahtîr ta a ni.» Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 273.
Prophetically the battle of Actium identifies the Sunday law, for it represented the third conquering of the three geographical obstacles which established pagan Rome’s “universal dominion,” as Smith describes it. As with pagan Rome, it was when the third obstacle of papal Rome was driven from the city of Rome that the “universal dominion” of papal Rome began in 538. Those two witnesses address the Sunday law where and when modern Rome overcomes both the sixth and seventh kingdoms of Bible prophecy, and in doing so, overcomes its third obstacle; thus, establishing “universal dominion” for forty-two symbolic months.
پرۆفێتیانە، شەڕی ئەکتیۆم یاسای یەکشەممە ناساندن دەکات، چونکە ئەو وێنەی سێهەمین سەرکەوتنی سەر سێ بەربەستە جوگرافییەکان بوو کە «دەسەڵاتی جیهانی»ی ڕۆمای بەتپەرست دامەزراند، وەک ئەوەی Smith باس دەکات. وەک لەگەڵ ڕۆمای بەتپەرست، ئەو کاتەی سێهەمین بەربەستی ڕۆمای پاپایەتی لە شارەکەی ڕۆما دوورخرایەوە، «دەسەڵاتی جیهانی»ی ڕۆمای پاپایەتی لە ساڵی 538 دەستی پێکرد. ئەو دوو شایەتە ئاماژە بە یاسای یەکشەممە دەکەن لەو شوێنە و لەو کاتەدا کە ڕۆمای نوێ هەردوو شانشەمی و حەوتەمی شانشینی پەیغەمبەریی پەرەستگای پیرۆز داگیر دەکات، و لەو کارەدا، سێهەمین بەربەستی خۆشی دەبەزێنێت؛ بەم شێوەیە، «دەسەڵاتی جیهانی» بۆ چل و دوو مانگی هێمایی دامەزرێنێت.
And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. Revelation 13:5.
Ne e te nganiaka ae e kakaitau ma e kaariri n aron te buakaka; ao e naki n ana iai te iteraoi n te waaki n riki aika uoua n te roko. Te Kaotioti 13:5.
Rome Against Egypt
Roma Misirə qarşı
The prophetic dynamics of the war of Augustus of Rome, against Egypt and Cleopatra was motivated by the rebellion of Marc Antony, and those prophetic dynamics must of prophetic necessity represent the prophetic dynamics that are represented at the Sunday law.
ნაუწყები წინასწარმეტყველური დინამიკა რომის ავგუსტუსის ომისა ეგვიპტისა და კლეოპატრას წინააღმდეგ განპირობებული იყო მარკუს ანტონიუსის ამბოხებით, და ეს წინასწარმეტყველური დინამიკა წინასწარმეტყველური აუცილებლობით უნდა წარმოადგენდეს იმ წინასწარმეტყველურ დინამიკას, რომელიც კვირა კანონის დროს არის წარმოდგენილი.
At Actium Rome conquered Egypt, a power which consisted of an alliance between a rebellious man and an unholy woman. The alliance of Antony and Cleopatra is the combination of church and state. At Actium, Augustine’s Rome conquered a power represented by an unholy combination of church and state.
Actium-də Roma Misiri məğlub etdi; bu güc üsyankar bir kişi ilə müqəddəs olmayan bir qadının ittifaqından ibarət idi. Antoni ilə Kleopatranın ittifaqı kilsə ilə dövlətin birləşməsidir. Actium-də Avqustunun Roması, kilsə ilə dövlətin müqəddəs olmayan birləşməsi ilə təmsil olunan bir gücü məğlub etdi.
Image of the Beast
Hayvanın Sureti
Cleopatra represents a corrupted church aligned with Antony, a symbol of Rome. Cleopatra was the ruler over their relationship, as represented by Uriah Smith, when he stated that Antony “fell a victim to the arts and charms of Cleopatra, Egypt’s dissolute queen.” The alliance of church and state represented by Antony and Cleopatra identified Cleopatra as the power ruling in the relationship; so, the combination of church and state represented by their relationship meets the definition of the image of the beast—which is the combination of church and state with the woman in control of the relationship. Actium typified the soon-coming Sunday law.
קליאופטרה מייצגת כנסייה מושחתת המיושרת עם אנטוניוס, סמל לרומא. קליאופטרה הייתה השליטה על יחסיהם, כפי שמיוצג אצל אוריה סמית, כאשר קבע כי אנטוניוס “fell a victim to the arts and charms of Cleopatra, Egypt’s dissolute queen.” הברית של כנסייה ומדינה, המיוצגת בידי אנטוניוס וקליאופטרה, זיהתה את קליאופטרה ככוח השולט במערכת היחסים; לפיכך, השילוב של כנסייה ומדינה המיוצג על ידי יחסיהם עונה על ההגדרה של צלם החיה — שהוא השילוב של כנסייה ומדינה כאשר האישה שולטת במערכת היחסים. אקטיום שימשה כאב־טיפוס לחוק יום ראשון העתיד לבוא במהרה.
Augustus, represents the papal power conquering the United States at the soon-coming Sunday law. Marc Antony is the Republican horn of the earth beast and Cleopatra is the Protestant horn. Antony and Cleopatra come together and speak as a dragon at the soon-coming Sunday law. Both Cleopatra and Antony are symbols of a dragon power, and when they are fully joined together at the Sunday law—they speak as a dragon.
اوگستوس، قوتِ پاپائیت کی نمائندگی کرتا ہے جو عنقریب آنے والے سنڈے لا کے وقت ریاستہائے متحدہ پر غالب آئے گی۔ مارک انٹنی زمین کے حیوان کے ریپبلکن سینگ کی علامت ہے، اور کلیوپیٹرا پروٹسٹنٹ سینگ کی۔ انٹنی اور کلیوپیٹرا عنقریب آنے والے سنڈے لا کے وقت باہم متحد ہوتے ہیں اور اژدہا کی مانند کلام کرتے ہیں۔ کلیوپیٹرا اور انٹنی دونوں اژدہائی قوت کی علامتیں ہیں، اور جب وہ سنڈے لا پر پوری طرح ایک ہو جاتے ہیں—تو اژدہا کی مانند کلام کرتے ہیں۔
Dragons
ئەژدهاکان
Both Greece and Egypt prophetically represent a dragon power, and Antony also represented a dragon power. Egypt was the south in Daniel eleven and Greece was the west. Egypt was taken by Ptolemy I after Alexander’s kingdom divided into four parts. Ptolemy I then became the first prophetic king of the south and Cleopatra was the last Ptolemaic ruler in Egypt. Ptolemy was born in Macedon, the birth place of Alexander the Great.
گريڪ ۽ مصر ٻئي نبوتي طور تي اژدها جي طاقت جي نمائندگي ڪن ٿا، ۽ انٽوني پڻ اژدها جي طاقت جي نمائندگي ڪندو هو. دانيال يارهن ۾ مصر ڏکڻ هو ۽ گريڪ اولهه هو. سڪندر جي بادشاھت چئن حصن ۾ ورهائجڻ کان پوءِ مصر بطليموس پهرئين جي قبضي ۾ آيو. پوءِ بطليموس پهريون نبوتي طور ڏکڻ جو پهريون بادشاھ بڻيو، ۽ ڪليوپيٽرا مصر ۾ بطليمي حڪمراني جي آخري حڪمران هئي. بطليموس ميسڊون ۾ پيدا ٿيو هو، جيڪو سڪندر اعظم جي پيدائش جو هنڌ هو.
Macedon was in northern Greece, and claimed their ancestral origins were from Greek mythical heroes. The southern Greek city-states considered the Macedonians as more barbaric than the Hellenists of southern Greece. The Macedonians were a monarchy, and the southern city-states (poleis) like Athens, Sparta, Thebes, Corinth, etc., were in southern and central Greece and the Aegean islands. These poleis often had democratic, oligarchic, or mixed governments, while Macedon was a centralized monarchy with a strong royal dynasty (the Argeads). Still, they were all Hellenists, and when Rome came into history, they labelled the Hellenists Greek. Cleopatra was the last Ptolemaic ruler, which represented the northern kingdom’s monarchial tribe of Greeks from the area of Macedon, or northern Greece.
مقدونيا كانت في شمال اليونان، وكانت تدّعي أنّ أصولها السَّلَفية ترجع إلى أبطالٍ أسطوريين يونانيين. وكانت دولُ المدن اليونانية الجنوبية تعتبر المقدونيين أشدَّ بربريةً من الهيلينيين في جنوب اليونان. وكان المقدونيون ذويَ نظامٍ مَلَكي، أمّا دولُ المدن الجنوبية (poleis) مثل أثينا، وإسبرطة، وطيبة، وكورنثوس، وغيرها، فكانت في جنوب اليونان ووسطها وفي جزر بحر إيجه. وكانت هذه الـ poleis كثيرًا ما تتخذ أنظمة حكم ديمقراطية أو أوليغارشية أو مختلطة، بينما كانت مقدونيا مملكةً مركزية ذات سلالةٍ مَلَكية قوية (الأرغيون). ومع ذلك، فقد كانوا جميعًا هيلينيين، ولمّا دخلت روما مجرى التاريخ، أطلقت على الهيلينيين اسم اليونانيين. وكانت كليوباترا آخرَ حاكمةٍ بطلمية، وكانت تمثّل القبيلةَ المَلَكية التابعة للمملكة الشمالية من اليونانيين المنحدرين من منطقة مقدونيا، أو من شمال اليونان.
King of the South
Rey del Sur
Cleopatra was the final ruler of the Ptolemaic kingdom that began with Ptolemy I when Alexander’s kingdom divided into four. At the battle of Actium the Ptolemaic kingdom, the literal king of the south, reached its end. The next king of the south would be spiritual Egypt, represented by atheistic France during the French Revolution history.
كليوباترا كانت آخر حاكمة للمملكة البطلمية التي بدأت مع بطليموس الأول حين انقسمت مملكة الإسكندر إلى أربع ممالك. وفي معركة أكتيوم بلغت المملكة البطلمية، ملك الجنوب الحرفي، نهايتها. وكان ملك الجنوب التالي هو مصر الروحية، التي مثّلتها فرنسا الإلحادية خلال أحداث الثورة الفرنسية.
And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. Revelation 11:8.
Na wabodan pɨr pɛt apʉa ap bɛ mɛdɨt bɛm ci kpaŋ, ci, bɛ dɔm ci mɛ yuŋ pɔ, bɛ yi ye Sodom kʉt Egypt, kɛmni mɛdɨt ci a karan dɔm bɛ pɔr kɛr taŋɛr ti nyin Yesu Kristi pɛ. Revelation 11:8.
Literal Egypt was the literal king of the south as related to the division of Alexander’s kingdom, but spiritual Egypt is represented as the king of the south by the prophetic attributes of Egypt, not a literal direction.
Mipirku Egiptoqa cheqaq llaqtakuna hina ura suyuq rey karqan, Alejandroq qhapaq suyun rakisqa kasqanman hina; ichaqa espirituwanchis Egiptoqa ura suyuq rey hina rikuchisqa kachkan Egiptoq profetiku kayninkunawan, manam cheqaq mayman qawarispaqa kanchu.
South and West
جنوب و مغرب
Cleopatra being the last Ptolemaic ruler of the kingdom was prophetically a twofold power of Greek (west) and Egypt (south), whereas; the next, and then spiritual king of the south would be France, also a twofold power represented in Revelation eleven as Egypt and Sodom. The licentiousness of Sodom aligns with the licentiousness of Cleopatra of the west, and Cleopatra of the south aligns with the atheism of Egypt. The last literal king of the south’s twofold nature aligned with the first spiritual king of the south.
کلیوپاترا، چون واپسین فرمانروای بطلمیوسیِ آن پادشاهی بود، از لحاظ نبوی قدرتی دوگانه، یعنی یونان (مغرب) و مصر (جنوب)، بهشمار میرفت؛ حال آنکه پادشاه بعدیِ جنوب، و سپس پادشاه روحانیِ جنوب، فرانسه میبود، که آن نیز قدرتی دوگانه است و در مکاشفه یازده بهصورت مصر و سدوم معرفی شده است. بیعفتیِ سدوم با بیعفتیِ کلئوپاترای مغرب مطابقت دارد، و کلئوپاترای جنوب با الحادِ مصر همسو است. سرشتِ دوگانهٔ واپسین پادشاهِ لفظیِ جنوب با نخستین پادشاهِ روحانیِ جنوب منطبق بود.
The battle of Actium was the unholy alliance of Antony’s dragon of Rome and Cleopatra’s dragon of the south and west. Antony and Cleopatra represent a church and a state, so the conquering of Actium by Augustus of Rome, represents a conquering where Rome prevails over an unholy twofold union typifying the image of the beast. Three hundred and sixty years later, in fulfillment of Daniel 11:24, Constantine divided Rome into east and west, leaving the woman of Rome in the west and moving the man of Rome to the east. A conquering of south and west typified the division of east and west after a “time” of three hundred and sixty years, at the battle of Actium. In an earlier encounter Antony was given eastern Rome and Augustus the west, so Actium brought together east and west, but only for a “time.”
युद्ध एक्टियम रोम के अन्तनी के अजगर और दक्षिण तथा पश्चिम की क्लियोपात्रा के अजगर की अपवित्र संधि था। अन्तनी और क्लियोपात्रा एक कलीसिया और एक राज्य का प्रतिनिधित्व करते हैं; अतः रोम के ऑगस्टस द्वारा एक्टियम का विजय-प्राप्त किया जाना उस विजय का प्रतिनिधित्व करता है जिसमें रोम उस अपवित्र द्विगुणित संघ पर प्रबल होता है जो पशु की मूरत का प्रतीक है। तीन सौ साठ वर्ष बाद, दानिय्येल 11:24 की पूर्ति में, कॉन्स्टैन्टिन ने रोम को पूर्व और पश्चिम में विभाजित कर दिया, रोम की स्त्री को पश्चिम में छोड़ दिया और रोम के पुरुष को पूर्व की ओर ले गया। दक्षिण और पश्चिम पर एक विजय, तीन सौ साठ वर्षों के एक “समय” के पश्चात, एक्टियम के युद्ध में, पूर्व और पश्चिम के विभाजन का प्रतीकरूप थी। एक पूर्ववर्ती मुठभेड़ में अन्तनी को पूर्वी रोम और ऑगस्टस को पश्चिम दिया गया था; इसलिए एक्टियम ने पूर्व और पश्चिम को एक साथ ले आया, परन्तु केवल एक “समय” के लिए।
31 BC and 330
31 BC و 330 م
Jesus always illustrates the end with the beginning, so the conquering of Actium in 31 BC typifies the division of the empire into east and west in 330. Actium of 31 BC was the alpha of the omega in the 360 years that concluded in 330. Both 31 BC and 330 typify the soon-coming Sunday law as represented in verse sixteen and forty-one of Daniel eleven.
Yeshu daima hujiyyan ƙarshe da farko, saboda haka nasarar Actium a 31 K.H. tana zama alamar rarrabuwar daular zuwa gabas da yamma a 330. Actium na 31 K.H. shi ne alfa na omega a cikin shekaru 360 da suka ƙare a 330. Duka 31 K.H. da 330 suna zama alamar dokar Lahadi mai zuwa nan ba da jimawa ba kamar yadda aka wakilta a aya ta goma sha shida da ta arba’in da ɗaya na Daniyel goma sha ɗaya.
Another Symbol
سیمبولێکی دیکە
Antony of Rome, aligned with Cleopatra of the south and of the west represents a threefold alliance within their twofold union of the image of the beast. The cross also aligns with the Sunday law, and therefore with Actium and 330. At the cross a twofold union of church and state is represented by the Jews (corrupted church) joining with Rome (state) to murder Christ. The third party in the union at the cross is represented by Barabbas, a false Christ, whose name means “son of the father.” Barabbas is symbolically a false prophet when contrasted with Christ as the true prophet. Rome was Antony, and Cleopatra of the south and west represented the Jews and Barabbas.
Antony mi Roma, ay-mikuywan Cleopatra llaqtap sudmanta chaymanta oeste-mantapas, rikuchin kimsa kutin huñunakuyta, iskay kutin huñunakuyninkupi animalpa imagennin ukhupi. Cruzpas aylluchakunin domingo kamachiywan, chayrayku Actiumwan hina 330 wanpas. Cruzpi iskay kutin huñunakuy iglesiawan estadowan rikuchisqa kachkan judiokuna (waqllichisqa iglesia) Romawan (estado) huñuspa Cristo-ta wañuchinankupaq. Kimsakaq parti huñunakuypi cruzpi rikuchisqa kachkan Barabás nisqawan, llulla Cristo, sutinpa niynin “taytapa churin.” Barabásqa simbólicamente huk llulla profeta kachkan, Cristowan tupachisqa kaspa cheqaq profeta hina. Romaqa Antony karqa, Cleopatra-taq sudmanta chaymanta oeste-mantapas judiokunatawan Barabás-tapas rikuchirqan.
The cross also aligns with Elijah on Mount Carmel where the choice was over who was the true or false prophet. The false prophet then was a twofold symbol consisting of the prophets of Baal and the priests of the grove. Baal is a male deity and the priests of the grove represented Ashtaroth, a female deity. The Jews at the cross were Ashtaroth, the female deity and Barabbas, the counterfeit of the Man of Sorrows, was the male deity Baal.
Kurusu man Elijah a Mount Carmel, da tefɛr over husat i tru ur fals profet, align tu. Di fals profet den i bin wan tufold simbol, konsistin ov di profets ov Baal an di prist-dem ov di grove. Baal na wan mel dɛiti, an di prist-dem ov di grove bin rɛprizent Ashtaroth, wan fimel dɛiti. Di Juz na di kurusu bin Ashtaroth, di fimel dɛiti, an Barabbas, di kauntafit ov di Man ov Sorrows, bin di mel dɛiti Baal.
Cleopatra was both the queen of the south and the queen of the west. Antony was the image of Rome, part of the threefold triumvirate sworn to avenge the assassination of Julius. Julius death by twenty-three wounds represented the papacies deadly wound in 1798, in fulfillment of verse forty of Daniel eleven. Augustine at Actium represents the healing of that deadly wound. The wound is healed when Antony and Cleopatra die. Antony and Cleopatra represent the image of the beast in the United States that is a threefold prophetic entity, consisting of the earth beast and its two horns. Antony is one part and Cleopatra represents the other two parts. Whether it is Antony’s Rome, or Cleopatra’s Egypt and Greece, they die together at the Sunday law when the sixth kingdom of Bible prophecy ends. Prophetically Cleopatra in relation to Antony is the mixture of church craft and statecraft, with the church craft seducing and controlling the statecraft.
კლეოპატრა იყო როგორც სამხრეთის დედოფალი, ისე დასავლეთის დედოფალიც. ანტონი იყო რომის ხატი, იულიუსის მკვლელობის შურისსაძიებლად ფიცით შეკრული სამნაწილიანი ტრიუმვირატის ნაწილი. იულიუსის სიკვდილი ოცდასამი ჭრილობით წარმოადგენდა პაპობის სასიკვდილო ჭრილობას 1798 წელს, დანიელის მეთერთმეტე თავის მეორმოცე მუხლის აღსრულებაში. ავგუსტინე აკციუმთან წარმოადგენს იმ სასიკვდილო ჭრილობის განკურნებას. ჭრილობა განიკურნება, როდესაც ანტონი და კლეოპატრა კვდებიან. ანტონი და კლეოპატრა წარმოადგენენ მხეცის ხატს შეერთებულ შტატებში, რომელიც სამნაწილიანი წინასწარმეტყველური ერთეულია და შედგება მიწის მხეცისა და მისი ორი რქისაგან. ანტონი ერთი ნაწილია, ხოლო კლეოპატრა დანარჩენ ორ ნაწილს წარმოადგენს. იქნება ეს ანტონის რომი, თუ კლეოპატრას ეგვიპტე და საბერძნეთი, ისინი ერთად იღუპებიან კვირა კანონის დროს, როდესაც ბიბლიური წინასწარმეტყველების მეექვსე სამეფო სრულდება. წინასწარმეტყველურად, კლეოპატრა ანტონის მიმართ არის ეკლესიური პოლიტიკისა და სახელმწიფო პოლიტიკის ნაზავი, სადაც ეკლესიური პოლიტიკა აცდუნებს და აკონტროლებს სახელმწიფო პოლიტიკას.
The Second Death Typified
Ажарны Хоёрдугаар Үхлийн Дүрслэл
At another prophetic level Cleopatra’s relation to Julius Caesar and Marc Antony represents two times that the church craft of Cleopatra is in a relationship with the statecraft of the Roman Empire. She was left by Julius in 1798 at her first symbolic death, in fulfillment of verse forty of Daniel eleven; and then she comes to her end with none to help, at Actium in fulfillment of verse forty-five of Daniel eleven. Verse forty is the alpha of her first deadly wound that is to be healed and the omega of verse forty-five is where she receives her second and final death.
پەیامبەرانەیەکی دیکەدا، پەیوەندیی کڵیۆپاترا بە جولیوس سیزەر و مارک ئانتۆنی دوو جار نیشان دەدات کە هونەری کلیسایی کڵیۆپاترا لە پەیوەندیدایە لەگەڵ هونەری دەوڵەتداریی ئیمپراتۆریەتی ڕۆما. جولیوس لە ساڵی 1798دا لە یەکەم مردنی هێماییدا وازی لێ هێنا، بە تەواوبوونی ئایەتی چل لە دانیال یازدە؛ و پاشان لە ئەکتیۆم دەگاتە کۆتایی خۆی و کەس نییە یارمەتیی بدات، بە تەواوبوونی ئایەتی چل و پێنج لە دانیال یازدە. ئایەتی چل ئەلفای یەکەم برینی کوشندەی ئەوەیە کە دەبێت چاک بکرێتەوە، و ئۆمێگای ئایەتی چل و پێنج ئەو شوێنەیە کە تێیدا دووەمین و کۆتاییین مردنی خۆی وەردەگرێت.
As with the four Roman powers of verse sixteen through twenty-two, Cleopatra as a biblical symbol has more than one meaning, based upon the context. Julius left her in 1798 when kingly support was removed, and then her deadly wound is healed at the Sunday law, but the ten kings of Revelation seventeen ultimately destroy her with fire, when she meets her second and final death.
Kaamarom yoññi Roman bu ñent yi ci aaya fukk ak juróom-benn ba ñaar-fukk ak ñaar, Cleopatra itam, ci ni mu nekk misaal bu Bíbël bi, am na lu mu tekki lu ëpp benn, te loolu aju na ci kontèks bi. Julius bàyyi na ko ci 1798 bi ñu dindi woon ndimbal gu buur, te gannaaw loolu ñu fajaatalal ay gaafaam yu rey yi ci yoonu dimbalal bésu Dimaas bi; waaye fukki buur yi ci Peeñu gi 17, ci mujj, dañuy ko alax ak safara, bi mu dajeekee ak deeñam ñaareel te mujj.
Cleopatra is a symbol of the twofold nature represented by the atheism of Pharoah’s Egypt, and the religious philosophy of Greece. Her twofold nature represents the statecraft of Egypt and the church craft of Greece. Greek religious philosophy is represented by the Greek goddess Athena, who was enshrined as a statue in her temple, called the Parthenon. Athena is the symbol of wisdom, and as a woman she represents a religion of human education, in contrast with Divine education.
Клеопатра е символ на двојната природа претставена преку атеизмот на Египетот на Фараонот и религиозната филозофија на Грција. Нејзината двојна природа ја претставува државничката вештина на Египет и црковната вештина на Грција. Грчката религиозна филозофија е претставена преку грчката божица Атина, која била поставена како статуа во нејзиниот храм, наречен Партенон. Атина е симбол на мудроста, а како жена таа претставува религија на човечко образование, наспроти Божественото образование.
The two horns of the United States are Republicanism and Protestantism, which were typified in France by Egypt and Sodom. Egypt is statecraft and Sodom is church craft; thus, Republicanism aligns with Egypt and Protestantism with Sodom. Republicanism is Egypt and Protestantism is Sodom and Greece. The symbol of human education is the Greek goddess Athena, whose temple was the Parthenon that finds its modern twin in Nashville, Tennessee’s Parthenon temple. The symbol of the corrupt church that aligns with the Republican horn in the United States at the Sunday law is represented as Cleopatra, Ashtaroth, Salome and Sodom.
امریکیہ کی دو سینگیں جمہوریت پسندی اور پروٹسٹنٹیت ہیں، جن کی تمثیل فرانس میں مصر اور سدوم کے ذریعے کی گئی تھی۔ مصر ریاستی سیاست گری ہے اور سدوم کلیسیائی سیاست گری؛ لہٰذا جمہوریت پسندی مصر کے مطابق ہے اور پروٹسٹنٹیت سدوم کے مطابق۔ جمہوریت پسندی مصر ہے اور پروٹسٹنٹیت سدوم اور یونان ہے۔ انسانی تعلیم کی علامت یونانی دیوی ایتھینا ہے، جس کا ہیکل پارتھینون تھا، اور جس کی جدید ہم مثل نیش وِل، ٹینیسی کے پارتھینون ہیکل میں پائی جاتی ہے۔ فاسد کلیسیا کی علامت، جو ریاستہائے متحدہ میں اتوار کے قانون کے وقت جمہوری سینگ کے ساتھ متحد ہوتی ہے، کلیوپیٹرا، عشتاروت، سلومی اور سدوم کے طور پر پیش کی گئی ہے۔
Cleopatra portrays the atheism of Pharoah and the religion of the Greeks. The religion that accompanies the philosophy of atheism is the worship of Greek education. Jesus always illustrates the end with the beginning and the tree in the garden that was forbidden to eat was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, typifying the religion of Greek philosophy that Sister White calls, “higher education.” It identifies and emphasizes Cleopatra’s Greek religion of wisdom as the corrupted and counterfeit of true education in the great controversy between Christ and Satan.
Cleopatra, Faraón way aqllisaq apayllankuta, griegokunapa religionnintapas rikuchin. Atheísmo filosofíawan kuska puriq religiónqa, griego yachay-simi yachachiyta yupaychaymi. Jesusqa sapa kuti qallariymanta tukukuyman rikuchin; chay huertapi mikhuymanta hark’asqa sach’aqa allinwan mana allinwan yachay sach’am karqa, Sister White nisqanman hina “higher education” sutiyuq griego filosofiapa religionninta unanchaspa. Chayqa Cristo wan Satanás hatun ch’aqwaypi, Cleopatraq griego yachay religionninta cheqaq yachachiypa ismusqa, llulla rakinchasqan hina reqsichin, hinaspa sinchita sut’inchan.
Nashville, Tennessee is called the “Athens of the south,” and Cleopatra was the last literal queen of the south. The last queen of the south typified the next and first spiritual king of the south, fulfilled by atheistic France. Atheistic France typifies the United States, where in Nashville, Tennessee, “Athens of the south” the Parthenon temple for the goddess Athena is symbolically represented. The temple is located at 2500 West End in Nashville. The number twenty-five represents the closed door of Matthew twenty-five’s three parables. Cleopatra as both the queen of the “south” and “west” comes to her “end” in Athens of the south.
نەشڤیل، تێنەسی، بە «ئەسینای باشوور» ناودەبرێت، و کلێوپاترا دوایین شاژنێ ھەقیقیِ باشوور بوو. دوایین شاژنێ باشوور، پێشنمونەی ئەو شاھە روحانییەی داهاتوو و یەکەم شاھی باشوور بوو کە لە فەرەنسای بێخواییباوەڕدا تەواو بوو. فەرەنسای بێخواییباوەڕ پێشنمونەی ویلایەتە یەکگرتووەکانە، لەوێدا لە نەشڤیل، تێنەسی، «ئەسینای باشوور»دا، پەرستگای پارتینۆن بۆ خوداوەندی ئەتێنا بە شێوەی هێمایی نیشان دراوە. ئەو پەرستگا لە 2500 West End لە نەشڤیلدا هەڵکەوتووە. ژمارەی بیست و پێنج دەرگای داخراوی سێ مێثلەکانی مەتی بیست و پێنج نیشان دەدات. کلێوپاترا وەک هەردوو شاژنێی «باشوور» و «ڕۆژئاوا» لە «کۆتایی»ی خۆی لە ئەسینای باشوور دەگات.
With these considerations of Actium, Cleopatra, Augustus and Antony we return to verse twenty-four through verse thirty of Daniel eleven. Perhaps, the vaguest part of the passage is when they speak lies at one table.
Bu düşüncelerle — Actium, Cleopatra, Augustus ve Antony hakkında — Daniel on birin yirmi dört ile otuzuncu ayetlerine dönelim. Belki de bu pasajın en belirsiz kısmı, onların bir sofrada yalan konuşmalarıdır.
And both these kings’ hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall not prosper: for yet the end shall be at the time appointed. Daniel 11:27.
E xaoganıñ da köñülleri yamanlıq qılmağa qoyulğan bolur, hem olar bir dastixanda oturup yalğan sözleydu; biraq bu oñuşluq tapmaydu, çünki axiri téxi belgilengen waqitta bolidu. Daniyal 11:27.
The time appointed in the verse is 330, the end of the “time” of verse twenty-four. The time appointed represents the Sunday law for the United States and it also represents the close of human probation for the world. Before the Sunday law the two kings, whose hearts were to do mischief will speak lies to one another at one table. Before the Sunday law of verses sixteen and forty-one of Daniel eleven, two kings will speak lies at one table, but their lies do not prosper. Who are the two kings that speak lies to one another? Before we answer that thought, I will remind us of some symbolism we have previously addressed in this series.
دەڤەرا دیارکرەیە لەو ئایەتەدا 330ە، کۆتایی «کات»ی ئایەتی بیستوچوار. ئەو دەڤەرا دیارکرەیە یاسای ڕۆژی یەکشەممە بۆ ویلایەتە یەکگرتووەکانی ئەمریکا نیشان دەدات، هەروەها داخستنی ماوەی تاقیکردنەوەی مرۆڤ بۆ جیهانیش نیشان دەدات. پێش یاسای ڕۆژی یەکشەممە، ئەو دوو پاشایەی کە دڵیان بۆ خراپەکاری بوو، لەسەر یەک مێز بە یەکتر درۆ دەڵێن. پێش یاسای ڕۆژی یەکشەممەی ئایەتەکانی شانزە و چلو یەکی دانیال یانزە، دوو پاشا لەسەر یەک مێز درۆ دەڵێن، بەڵام درۆکانیان سەرناکەون. ئەو دوو پاشایە کێن کە بە یەکتر درۆ دەڵێن؟ پێش ئەوەی وەڵامی ئەو بیرۆکەیە بدەینەوە، دەمەوێت هەندێک لەو نیشانەسازییە بەبیرهێنمەوە کە پێشتر لەم زنجیرەیەدا باسیان کردووە.
The four Roman rulers represent a variety of prophetic symbols depending on what context they are considered. Though Roman rulers, as a symbol they essentially represent the prophetic history of ancient Judah as they transitioned from the Seleucid domination into the domination of the Romans.
Atajiri Romanoguna chhaichha pratikatmak artha vividha bhabare, context anusar heriyeko khanda. Tiniharu Roman shasak bhae pani, pratikko rupma tiniharule mulatah prachin Yahudako bhavishyavani-itihaslai pratinidhitva garchhan, jaba tyo Seleucidharuko prabhutvabata Romanharuko prabhutvama sarnu thalyo.
Pompey was a general and the next three Roman rulers were all Caesars. Julius in relation to Augustus represented two threefold unions with the two triumvirates, the first unofficial, the second official. All four rulers represent the Sunday law in certain contexts. Pompey conquered the glorious land, Julius, represented by twenty-three stab wounds is the first angel, for he is the first Caesar, and he typifies the third angel, which was Tiberias. Tiberias at the cross, which is the Sunday law is also represented by twenty-three, for twenty-three represents the at-one-ment; and the cross is a most essential part of the work of Christ in combining His Divinity with our humanity. So, Julius and Tiberias are the first and third message, represented by twenty-three.
Պոմպեոսը զորավար էր, իսկ հաջորդ երեք հռոմեական տիրակալները բոլորն էլ Կեսարներ էին։ Հուլիոսը, Օգոստոսի նկատմամբ ունեցած առնչությամբ, ներկայացնում էր երկու եռակի միություններ՝ երկու տրիումվիրատների հետ, առաջինը՝ ոչ պաշտոնական, երկրորդը՝ պաշտոնական։ Այս բոլոր չորս տիրակալները որոշ համատեքստերում ներկայացնում են կիրակնօրյա օրենքը։ Պոմպեոսը նվաճեց փառավոր երկիրը, Հուլիոսը, որ ներկայացված է քսաներեք դանակահարության վերքերով, առաջին հրեշտակն է, որովհետև նա առաջին Կեսարն է, և նա խորհրդանշում է երրորդ հրեշտակին, որը Տիբերիոսն էր։ Տիբերիոսը խաչի ժամանակ, որը կիրակնօրյա օրենքն է, նույնպես ներկայացվում է քսաներեք թվով, որովհետև քսաներեքը ներկայացնում է հաշտությունը. և խաչը Քրիստոսի գործի ամենաէական մասերից է՝ Իր Աստվածությունը մեր մարդկության հետ միավորելու գործում։ Այսպիսով, Հուլիոսը և Տիբերիոսը առաջին և երրորդ պատգամներն են՝ ներկայացված քսաներեք թվով։
Julius was not the romantic figure he is often portrayed as in Hollywood lore; he was a ruthless man bent on power. Tiberias was worse than Julius, for his vileness is even addressed in the verse, for the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet is twenty-two and the first letter is one. The alpha is smaller than the omega and Tiberias’ vileness is located in verse twenty-two, which is the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and in between the two vile persons represented by Julius and Tiberias was Augustus. Augustus represents the height of the glory of Rome’s power and prestige. As the opposite of the first and third message he is represented by the letter thirteen, which is a symbol of rebellion. Augustus secured his kingdom by subduing the rebellion of Antony and Cleopatra, the most famous rebellion of Rome’s history.
Julius pa augaña ndaha’éi pe figura romántica ojehechaháicha heta jey Hollywood rembiasakue-pe; ha’e va’ekue peteĩ kuimba’e ndorekóiva poriahuvereko, ohekáva mbarete añoite. Tiberias ivaivéva Julius-gui, pórke iñaña jehechakuaa jepe oñemombe’u pe versíkulo-pe, pórke pe letra paha alfabeto hebreo-pe ha’e mokõi pa mokõiha ha pe letra peteĩha ha’e peteĩha. Pe alpha michĩve pe omega-gui ha Tiberias rembipota vai oĩ pe versíkulo mokõi pa mokõiha-pe, ha’éva pe letra paha alfabeto hebreo-pe, ha umi mokõi tapicha vai apytépe, ojehechaukáva Julius ha Tiberias rupive, oĩkuri Augustus. Augustus ohechauka pe yvateve Roma pu’aka ha ijeroviaha guasu mimbipa rehegua. Oñemoĩvo peteĩcha’ỹme pe marandu peteĩha ha mbohapyha rehe, ha’e ojehechauka pe letra pahaapyha rupive, ha’éva peteĩ símbolo ñepu’ã rehegua. Augustus omombarete hekovia guasu omoĩmbývo ipoguýpe Antony ha Cleopatra ñepu’ã, pe ñepu’ã herakuãvéva Roma rembiasakuépe.
Augustus is the Roman power who conquered the third obstacle and in doing so he represented the Sunday law, and the Roman power who reigns during the forty-two symbolic months of Revelation thirteen’s chapter of rebellion. When placed before the Sunday law Pompey is both 1798 and 1989, making Pompey a symbol of Antiochus Magnus ending the fourth Syrian War from 219 unto 217 BC, in fulfillment of verse ten of chapter eleven. Julius Caesar is then aligned with verses eleven and twelve and the battle of the borderline, the battle of Raphia in 217 BC. There Julius is also Antiochus Magnus, and Augustus Caesar is also Antiochus Magnus in verse fifteen’s battle of Panium. Then in verse sixteen Tiberias is the Sunday law, but he is not Antiochus Magnus, for there he is Pompey, for Jesus always illustrates the end with the beginning. The verse marks the end of the Seleucid Empire typifying the end of the United States as the sixth kingdom of Bible prophecy.
Augustus မင်းသည် တတိယအတားအဆီးကို အနိုင်ယူခဲ့သော ရောမအာဏာဖြစ်ပြီး၊ ထိုသို့ အနိုင်ယူခြင်းအားဖြင့် တနင်္ဂနွေနေ့ဥပဒေကို ကိုယ်စားပြုခဲ့သည်။ ထို့ပြင် သူသည် ဗျာဒိတ်ကျမ်း အခန်း ၁၃ တွင် ဖော်ပြသော ပုန်ကန်မှု၏ သင်္ကေတဆိုင်ရာ လေးဆယ့်နှစ်လအတွင်း အုပ်စိုးသော ရောမအာဏာလည်း ဖြစ်သည်။ တနင်္ဂနွေနေ့ဥပဒေ၏ ရှေ့တွင် ထား၍ ကြည့်လျှင် Pompey သည် 1798 နှင့် 1989 နှစ်ခုလုံးဖြစ်ပြီး၊ ထိုကြောင့် Pompey သည် ဒံယေလ အခန်း ၁၁ ၏ အခန်းငယ် ၁၀ ပြည့်စုံခြင်းအရ ဘီစီ 219 မှ 217 အထိ ဖြစ်ပွားခဲ့သော စတုတ္ထ ဆီးရီးယားစစ်ပွဲကို အဆုံးသတ်ခဲ့သည့် Antiochus Magnus ၏ သင်္ကေတတစ်ရပ် ဖြစ်လာသည်။ ထို့နောက် Julius Caesar သည် အခန်းငယ် ၁၁ နှင့် ၁၂ တို့၊ နယ်စပ်စစ်ပွဲ၊ အဓိကအားဖြင့် ဘီစီ 217 ရှိ Raphia စစ်ပွဲနှင့် ကိုက်ညီစေထားသည်။ ထိုနေရာတွင် Julius သည်လည်း Antiochus Magnus ဖြစ်သကဲ့သို့၊ Augustus Caesar သည်လည်း အခန်းငယ် ၁၅ ၏ Panium စစ်ပွဲ၌ Antiochus Magnus ပင် ဖြစ်သည်။ ထို့နောက် အခန်းငယ် ၁၆ ၌ Tiberias သည် တနင်္ဂနွေနေ့ဥပဒေဖြစ်သည်။ သို့ရာတွင် ထိုနေရာ၌ သူသည် Antiochus Magnus မဟုတ်ဘဲ Pompey ဖြစ်သည်။ အကြောင်းမူကား ယေရှုသည် အဆုံးကို အစနှင့် အစဉ်အမြဲ နှိုင်းယှဉ်ဖော်ပြတော်မူသောကြောင့် ဖြစ်သည်။ ထိုအခန်းငယ်သည် Seleucid အင်ပါယာ၏ အဆုံးကို မှတ်သားထားပြီး၊ ထိုအရာသည် သမ္မာကျမ်းစာပရောဖက်ပြုချက်၌ ခြောက်မြောက်နိုင်ငံတော်ဖြစ်သော အမေရိကန်ပြည်ထောင်စု၏ အဆုံးကို ပုံဆောင်ပြသည်။
There are more alignments to be made of the four Roman rulers, and the line represents the hidden history of verse forty. The Maccabean line of verse twenty-three also illustrates the hidden history of verse forty. Then in verses twenty-four, the story of pagan Imperial Rome is represented by a time—three hundred and sixty years. The line of Roman history represented from verse twenty-four through to verse thirty is also an illustration of the hidden history of verse forty. It ends in verse thirty-one when the subject changes from pagan to papal Rome. Pagan Rome is still in the verse, but there it is not represented as the fourth kingdom of Bible prophecy, but as the political power that placed the papacy on the throne in 538. In 538 the papacy passed a Sunday law, so verse thirty-one is aligning with verses sixteen and forty-one. Verse twenty-four introduced the battle of Actium and the history associated with the line.
چەند هاوتاکردنێکی دیکە هەن کە دەبێت بۆ چوار فەرمانڕەوای ڕۆمانی ئەنجام بدرێن، و ئەو هێڵە مێژووی نهێنیی ئایەتی چل نیشان دەدات. هێڵی مەککابیی ئایەتی بیست و سێش هەروەها مێژووی نهێنیی ئایەتی چل وێنا دەکات. پاشان لە ئایەتەکانی بیست و چواردا، چیرۆکی ڕۆمای ئیمپراتۆریی بتپەرست بە کاتێک وێنا دەکرێت—سێ سەد و شەست ساڵ. ئەو هێڵەی مێژووی ڕۆمان کە لە ئایەتی بیست و چوارەوە هەتا ئایەتی سی وێنا کراوە، هەروەها نموونەیەکە بۆ مێژووی نهێنیی ئایەتی چل. لە ئایەتی سی و یەکدا کۆتایی پێ دێت، کاتێک بابەتەکە لە ڕۆمای بتپەرستەوە بۆ ڕۆمای پاپایەتی دەگۆڕێت. ڕۆمای بتپەرست هێشتا لەو ئایەتەدا هەیە، بەڵام لەوێدا وەک شانشینی چوارەمی پێشبینیی کتێبی پیرۆز وێنا ناکرێت، بەڵکو وەک ئەو هێزە سیاسییەی کە لە ساڵی 538 پاپایەتیی لەسەر تەخت دانا. لە ساڵی 538 پاپایەتی یاسای ڕۆژی یەکشەممەیەکی دەرکرد، بۆیە ئایەتی سی و یەک هاوتا دەکرێت بە ئایەتەکانی شانزە و چل و یەک. ئایەتی بیست و چوار شەڕی ئەکتیۆم و ئەو مێژووەی پەیوەندیدارە بەو هێڵە ناساند.
Verse twenty-four is identifying when pagan Rome began to rule supremely for three hundred and sixty years, and then in verse thirty-one papal Rome begins to rule supremely for twelve hundred and sixty-years. The beginning and ending of the line bear the signature of Christ, the Alpha and Omega. In the verses we have the history of Marc Antony, Cleopatra and Augustus Caesar. In verse sixteen pagan Rome conquered the Seleucid Empire in 65 BC, and then Judah in 63 BC. The third obstacle of Actium in 31 BC identified the end of the kingdom of Egypt, as typified by the first obstacles of the Seleucid’s in 65 BC. Once again, we find the signature of the First and the Last. 65 BC was the first of three obstacles and it represented the conquering of the king of the north and 31 BC represented the third of three obstacles and it represented the conquering of the king of the south. Judah, as the middle obstacle of the three obstacles, was having a civil war within the walls of Jerusalem when Pompey arrived in 63 BC. The second obstacle is a symbol of rebellion.
ވީސް އަރި ހަތަރު އެންގެނީ، މުޝްރިކު ރޯމު ތިން ސަތޭކަ ހައްދިހަ އަހަރަށް އެންމެ މަތީ ސިޔާދަތުގައި ހުކުމް ފެށި ވަގުތަށެވެ، ދެން ވީސް އަރި އެކެއްތިރީހައި އެއްގައި ޕޭޕަލް ރޯމު ބާރަ ސަތޭކަ ހައްދިހަ އަހަރަށް އެންމެ މަތީ ސިޔާދަތުގައި ހުކުމް ފަށައެވެ. މި ރޮނގުގެ ފެށުމާއި ނިމުމުގައި މަސީހުގެ ސޮއި ހުރެއެވެ، އެބަހީ އަލްފާ އާއި އޯމެގާ. މި ވާހަކަތަކުގައި މާކް އެންޓަނީ، ކްލިއޮޕެޓްރާ އާއި އޯގަސްޓަސް ސީޒަރުގެ ތާރީޚު ހިމެނެއެވެ. ވީސް އަރި ސޯޅައިގައި މުޝްރިކު ރޯމު 65 BC ގައި ސެލިއުސިޑް އިމްޕަޔަރު ފަތަޙަ ކުރިއެވެ، ދެން 63 BC ގައި ޔަހޫދާއެވެ. 31 BC ގެ އެކްޓިއަމްގެ ތިންވަނަ ހުރަސް މިޞްރު މަންދޫބުގެ ނިމުމަށް ދަލީލު ދިނެވެ، 65 BC ގައި ސެލިއުސިޑުންގެ ފުރަތަމަ ހުރަސްތަކުން މިކަން މިސާލު ކުރާ ފަދައިންނެވެ. އަލުންމެ، ފުރަތަމަޔާއި ފަހުގެ ސޮއި އެބަ ފެނެއެވެ. 65 BC އަކީ ތިން ހުރަސްތަކުގެ ފުރަތަމަ ހުރަހެވެ، އަދި އެއީ އުތުރުގެ ރަސްގެ ފަތަޙަ ކުރުމަށް މަނާ ކުރާ މަޢުނަ ކަމެވެ؛ އަދި 31 BC އަކީ ތިން ހުރަސްތަކުގެ ތިންވަނަ ހުރަހެވެ، އަދި އެއީ ދެކުނުގެ ރަސްގެ ފަތަޙަ ކުރުމަށް މަނާ ކުރާ މަޢުނަ ކަމެވެ. ތިން ހުރަސްތަކުގެ މެދުގައިވާ ހުރަހަކަށް ޔަހޫދާ މިސާލެވެ؛ 63 BC ގައި ޕޮމްޕޭ ވާޞިލު ވިއިރު، ޔެރޫސަލަމުގެ ފާރުތަކުގެ ތެރޭގައި އެއަށް ދެބަޔަކަށް ބެހިގެން އެތެރޭގެ ހަނގުރާމައެއް ހިނގަމުން ދިޔައެވެ. ދެވަނަ ހުރަސް އަކީ ބަޣާވަތުގެ ރަމްޒެވެ.
In 538, the third obstacle for papal Rome was driven out of the City of Rome. That obstacle was the Goths, and there the fifth kingdom of Bible prophecy began; right where the fourth kingdom ended. And just as the fourth kingdom began at its third obstacle, the kingdom of Egypt was defeated, as had been typified in the first obstacle of the Seleucid kingdom. This identifies that the prophetic testimony found in verses twenty-four through to verse thirty, represent a line that is also to be located in the hidden history of verse forty. For this reason, it is essential to consider the various prophetic relationships that are represented by Marc Antony, Cleopatra, Julius Caesar, Pompey and Augustus Caesar.
538-ൽ, പാപ്പസഭാധിപത്യ റോമിന്റെ മൂന്നാമത്തെ തടസ്സം റോമ നഗരം മുതൽ നീക്കിക്കളയപ്പെട്ടു. ആ തടസ്സം ഗോത്തുക്കളായിരുന്നു; അവിടെ തന്നെയാണ് ബൈബിൾ പ്രവചനത്തിലെ അഞ്ചാമത്തെ രാജ്യം ആരംഭിച്ചത്—നാലാമത്തെ രാജ്യം അവസാനിച്ച അതേ സ്ഥലത്ത്. നാലാമത്തെ രാജ്യം അതിന്റെ മൂന്നാമത്തെ തടസ്സത്തിൽ ആരംഭിച്ചതുപോലെ, സെല്യൂസിഡ് രാജ്യത്തിന്റെ ആദ്യത്തെ തടസ്സത്തിൽ മുൻചിഹ്നമായി പ്രതിനിധീകരിക്കപ്പെട്ടിരുന്നതുപോലെ, ഈജിപ്ത് രാജ്യം പരാജയപ്പെടുത്തി. ഇത് ഇരുപത്തിനാലാം വചനത്തിൽ നിന്ന് മുപ്പതാം വചനത്തോളം കാണപ്പെടുന്ന പ്രവചനസാക്ഷ്യം, നാല്പതാം വചനത്തിന്റെ ഗൂഢചരിത്രത്തിലും സ്ഥിതിചെയ്യുന്ന ഒരു രേഖയെ പ്രതിനിധീകരിക്കുന്നു എന്ന് തിരിച്ചറിയിക്കുന്നു. ഈ കാരണത്താൽ, മാർക്ക് ആന്റണി, ക്ലിയോപാട്ര, ജൂലിയസ് സീസർ, പോംപെയ്, ഓഗസ്റ്റസ് സീസർ എന്നിവരാൽ പ്രതിനിധീകരിക്കപ്പെടുന്ന വിവിധ പ്രവചനബന്ധങ്ങളെ പരിഗണിക്കുന്നത് അത്യാവശ്യമാണ്.
So is the vaguest part of the passage of verse twenty-four unto thirty, when they speak lies at one table?
Wéeymo ko neqeelaŋce ayzaabı yáa ay hadhúur qawl gosa iyye geeshsha afata lama qoomuuto geeda, “issi tarabeeza bolli soba haasayiyaan” giisiyo wode?
And both these kings’ hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall not prosper: for yet the end shall be at the time appointed. Daniel 11:27.
Misi ya awọn ọba mejeeji wọnyi yóò wà lati ṣe ibi, wọn yóò sì máa sọ irọ́ níbi tábìlì kan naa; ṣùgbọ́n kò ní ṣe aṣeyọri, nítorí opin náà ṣì jẹ́ fún àkókò tí a ti yàn. Danieli 11:27.
Uriah Smith identifies the two kings as Marc Antony and Augustus Caesar.
Урая Смит муайян месозад, ки он ду подшоҳ Марк Антоний ва Августус Қайсар мебошанд.
“Verse twenty-seven quoted
«آیەی بیست و حەوت هاوڕێکە کرا»
“Antony and Caesar were formerly in alliance. Yet under the garb of friendship they were both aspiring and intriguing for universal dominion. Their protestations of deference to, and friendship for, each other, were the utterances of hypocrites. They spoke lies at one table. Octavia, the wife of Antony and sister of Caesar, declared to the people of Rome at the time Antony divorced her, that she had consented to marry him solely with the hope that it would prove a pledge of union between Caesar and Antony. But that counsel did not prosper. The rupture came; and in the conflict that ensued, Caesar came off entirely victorious.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 276.
«انطونیو و قیصر پیشتر در اتحاد بودند. با این همه، زیر جامۀ دوستی، هر دو در پی جاهطلبی و دسیسهچینی برای فرمانروایی بر سراسر جهان بودند. اظهارهای آنان مبنی بر حرمتگذاری به یکدیگر و دوستی با یکدیگر، گفتار منافقان بود. ایشان بر یک سفره دروغ میگفتند. اوکتاویه، همسر انطونیو و خواهر قیصر، هنگامی که انطونیو او را طلاق داد، به مردم روم اعلام کرد که تنها با این امید به ازدواج با او رضایت داده بود که آن، وثیقۀ پیوند میان قیصر و انطونیو گردد. اما آن تدبیر کامیاب نشد. گسستگی پدید آمد؛ و در کشمکشی که در پی آن رخ داد، قیصر بهکلی پیروزمند بیرون آمد.» Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 276.
When Octavia identified that her marriage to Antony was as a pledge of union, it identified the marital alliance which had been typified earlier in chapter eleven with the Hellenistic-era marriage of Berenice to the Seleucid king Antiochus II Theos around 252 BC. Berenice was the daughter of Ptolemy II Philadelphus. Octavia and Berenice represent diplomatic marriages or prophetically, treaties. Verses five through ten identify the history of the diplomatic marriage between the southern and northern kingdoms, and when Marc Antony and Octavian, later known as Augustus Caesar, arranged the marriage, they also divided the kingdom into east and west.
ئەگەر ئۆكتاۋیا نیشان کرد کە هاوسەرگیریی ئەو لەگەڵ ئەنتۆنی وەک پەیمانێکی یەکگرتن بوو، ئەوە هاوپەیمانیی هاوسەرگیرییەکەی نیشان دەدا کە پێشتر لە بەشی یانزەدا بە هاوسەرگیریی سەردەمی هێلێنیستیی بێرێنیس لەگەڵ پاشای سێلێوکی ئەنتیۆخۆس دووەم تێؤس نزیکەی ساڵی 252 پێش زایین واتادار کرا بوو. بێرێنیس کچی بەتلەمی دووەمی فیلادێلفوس بوو. ئۆكتاۋیا و بێرێنیس نوێنەرایەتیی هاوسەرگیرییە دیپلۆماسییەکان دەکەن یان بە شێوەی پێشبینی، پەیمانەکان. ئایەتەکانی پێنج تا دەیەک مێژووی هاوسەرگیریی دیپلۆماسیی نێوان شانشینی باشوور و باشووری باکوور نیشان دەدەن، و کاتێک مارک ئەنتۆنی و ئۆكتاڤیان، کە دواتر بە ناوی ئاگۆستۆس قەیسەر ناسرا، ئەو هاوسەرگیرییەیان ڕێکخست، هەروەها شانشینەکەیان بە ڕۆژهەڵات و ڕۆژئاوا دابەش کرد.
The Pact of Brundisium (40 BC) was a negotiated settlement between Marc Antony and Octavian (later Augustus) to resolve tensions in the Second Triumvirate after near-civil war. It involved dividing Roman territories (Antony east, Octavian west) and was sealed by Antony’s marriage to Octavia (Octavian’s sister). In 39 BC the original five-year Triumvirate term expired, Antony sailed to Italy with 300+ ships that were initially denied to land at Brundisium, so they ultimately docked at Tarentum. Octavian met him there after prolonged mediations produced by an unwillingness of Antony’s army to fight with Octavian’s army and vise versa. Octavia played a key mediating role, persuading Antony to support Octavian against Sextus Pompey. They renewed the Triumvirate for another five years (to 32 BC), with Antony providing Octavian 120 ships in exchange for promised troops (which Octavian later withheld).
ᎠᎴ ᏋᏁᏗᏏᎥᎻ ᎤᏃᏍᏛ ᎠᏓᏢᏙᏗ (40 BC) ᎠᏥᏃᎮᏍᎬ ᎤᎵᏍᏕᎸᏙᏗ ᎨᏒ ᎨᏎ ᎹᎦ ᎠᏂᏙᏂ ᎠᎴ ᎠᎦᏔᎡᏗᏯᏂ (ᎣᏂᏍᎬ ᎠᎦᏍᏓ) ᎠᏂᏁᎬ, ᎤᎾᏓᏅᏛ ᎤᏂᏋᎭ ᎤᏕᏯᏙᏗ ᎠᏂᏔᎵᏁ ᏦᎢ ᎢᎦᏛ ᎤᎬᏫᏳᎯᏍᏗ ᎠᎾᏓᏛᏁᎲ ᎬᏗ, ᏥᏍᎪ ᎿᎭᏉ ᏗᏓᎿᎭᏩᏛ ᎤᏂᎵᏰᎢ ᎾᏍᎩ ᏱᎩ. ᎾᏍᎩ ᎤᏩᏒᎯ ᏧᎾᏓᏴᎲ ᎶᎻ ᎤᏂᏔᎵᏰ ᏕᎨᏌᏗᏒᎢ (ᎠᏂᏙᏂ ᎢᏗᎢᏗ, ᎠᎦᏔᎡᏗᏯᏂ ᏭᏕᎬ) ᎠᎴ ᎠᏂᏙᏂ ᎤᏓᏬᏍᏗᏱ ᎠᏥᏴᏫᏍᏔᏁ ᎠᎦᏙᏫᎠ, ᎾᏍᎩ ᎠᎦᏔᎡᏗᏯᏂ ᎤᏅᏅ. 39 BC ᎾᏍᎩ ᎤᏓᏟᎶᏍᏗ ᎯᏍᎩ ᎢᏯᏕᏘ ᏓᎾᏓᏛᏁᎲ ᎤᎵᏍᏆᏗᏍᎨ, ᎠᏂᏙᏂ ᎢᏓᎵ ᏭᏥᎳ 300-Ꭲ ᎤᏂᏣᘏ ᏥᏳ ᎠᏁᎯ, ᎠᏎ ᎢᎬᏱᏱ ᏄᏓᏁᎸᎾ ᎨᏎ ᏧᏴᏍᏗᏱ ᏋᏁᏗᏏᎥᎻ, ᎾᏍᎩᏃ ᎤᎾᎵᏍᏆᏗᏍᎬ ᏔᎴᏂᏓᎻ ᏭᏂᏴᎴ. ᎠᎦᏔᎡᏗᏯᏂ ᎾᎿ ᏭᏠᏯᏍᏔᏁ ᎤᎵᏰᎢ ᎠᏂᏬᏂᎭᎸ ᎤᏣᏔ ᎤᎾᏓᏬᏂᏍᎬ ᎤᎵᏍᏔᏅ ᏅᏗᏛ ᎠᏂᏙᏂ ᎤᏂᏯᏫᏍᎩ ᎤᎾᏓᏅᏛ ᏄᎾᏚᎵᏍᎬᎾ ᎨᏎ ᎠᎦᏔᎡᏗᏯᏂ ᎤᏂᏯᏫᏍᎩ ᎠᏂᏓᎿᎭᏩᏛᏗᏱ, ᎠᎴ ᎾᏍᎩ ᎾᏍᏉ ᎢᏤᏃ. ᎠᎦᏙᏫᎠ ᎤᏣᏘ ᎠᏓᏅᏛ ᎠᏓᏚᎵᏍᎩ ᎨᏎ ᎤᏁᎬᎢ, ᎠᏂᏙᏂ ᎤᏔᏲᏎ ᎠᎦᏔᎡᏗᏯᏂ ᎤᏍᏕᎸᏗᏱ ᏎᎦᏗᏍ ᏆᎻᏇ ᎠᏡᎬ. ᎠᏂᏔᎵᏁ ᏦᎢ ᎢᎦᏛ ᎤᎬᏫᏳᎯᏍᏗ ᎠᎾᏓᏛᏁᎲ ᎤᏂᏃᎯᏳᏁ ᏔᎵᏁ ᎯᏍᎩ ᎢᏯᏕᏘ ᎤᏪᎵᎩ (32 BC ᎢᎪᎯᏛ), ᎠᏂᏙᏂ 120 ᏥᏳ ᏚᏁᎴ ᎠᎦᏔᎡᏗᏯᏂ, ᎠᎴ ᎤᏙᎯᏳᎯ ᏗᏂᏯᏫᏍᎩ ᎡᏗᏁᏗᏱ ᎤᏚᎢᏍᏔᏅ ᎡᎬᏗ, ᎾᏍᎩ ᎠᎦᏔᎡᏗᏯᏂ ᎣᏂᏍᎬ ᏄᏍᏛᎾ ᎢᏎ.
In 32 BC there was an open break between the two antagonists. Relations had deteriorated through propaganda, Antony’s eastern focus (with Cleopatra), and Octavian’s consolidation in the west. Octavian rejected later conference proposals from Antony before Actium.
٣٢ قبل الميلاد وقع انفصالٌ علنيّ بين الخصمين المتنازعين. وكانت العلاقات قد تدهورت بفعل الدعاية، وتركيز أنطونيوس على الشرق (مع كليوباترا)، وتوطيد أوكتافيان سلطانه في الغرب. وقد رفض أوكتافيان مقترحاتٍ لاحقة لعقد مؤتمر من أنطونيوس قبل أكتيوم.
In the diplomatic marriage with the king of the north (Antiochus) and the king of the south (Ptolemy), it was the southern king that supplied the bride, with the diplomatic marriage of Antony (the east) and Octavian (the west); the bride was supplied by the west. Both diplomatic marriages failed and the supplier of the daughter or sister was ultimately victorious over the power who broke the treaty.
Шимал падишаһы (Антиох) билән җәнуб падишаһи (Птолемей) арисидики дипломатик никаһта келинни җәнуб падишаһи бәргән; Антоний (шәрқ) билән Октавиан (ғәрб) арисидики дипломатик никаһта болса, келинни ғәрб бәргән. Һәр икки дипломатик никаһму мәғлупийәткә учриған вә қизи яки сиңлисини бәргән тәрәп ақивәттә әһдини бузған һакимийәт үстидин ғалиб чиққан.
The Testimony of Three
तीन साक्ष्यहरू
At the end of the Seleucid Empire there was a third treaty where lies were spoke at one table. This occurred in the context of the Fifth Syrian War (202–195 BC), when Antiochus III Magnus exploited the weakness of the Ptolemaic Kingdom after Ptolemy IV Philopator’s death in 204 BC. Ptolemy V Epiphanes (Ptolemy V) ascended the throne as a child (around age 5–6), leaving Egypt under regents and vulnerable to internal chaos, native revolts, and external threats.
Selewkid imperiyasının sonunda bir masada yalanların söylendiği üçüncü bir antlaşma vardı. Bu, Beşinci Suriye Savaşı’nın (M.Ö. 202–195) bağlamında meydana geldi; o sırada III. Antiochos Magnus, IV. Ptolemaios Philopator’un M.Ö. 204’teki ölümünden sonra Ptolemaios Krallığı’nın zayıflığından yararlandı. V. Ptolemaios Epiphanes (V. Ptolemaios) çocuk yaşta (yaklaşık 5–6 yaşlarında) tahta çıktı ve böylece Mısır, naiplerin yönetimi altında kalarak iç kargaşaya, yerli isyanlara ve dış tehditlere karşı savunmasız bırakıldı.
Antiochus Magnus had already invaded and seized much of the Ptolemaic territories in Coele-Syria, Palestine, and Asia Minor after victories like the Battle of Panium (200 BC). Rather than fully conquering Egypt (which risked Roman intervention, as Rome was pressuring him to stay out of certain areas), he pursued a diplomatic marriage alliance as a “protector” figure. In 197/195 BC, as part of the peace treaty ending the war, Antiochus Magnus betrothed and then married his young daughter Cleopatra I Syra (also called Cleopatra Syra) to the child Ptolemy V (the marriage took place in 193 BC at Raphia; Ptolemy was 16, Cleopatra 10).
Антиох Магнус аллакай Коле-Сириядағы, Палестинадағы және Кіші Азиядағы Птолемей иеліктерінің көп бөлігін Паней шайқасы (б.з.д. 200 ж.) сияқты жеңістерден кейін басып кіріп, өз қолына алған еді. Мысырды толықтай жаулап алудың орнына (бұл Римнің араласу қаупін тудыратын еді, өйткені Рим оны белгілі бір аймақтардан аулақ болуға мәжбүрлеп жатқан болатын), ол «қамқоршы» тұлға ретінде дипломатиялық неке одағын көздеді. Б.з.д. 197/195 жылдары, соғысты аяқтаған бейбітшілік келісімінің бір бөлігі ретінде, Антиох Магнус өзінің жас қызы Клеопатра I Сираны (Клеопатра Сира деп те аталады) бала Птолемей V-ке атастырып, кейін оған ұзатты (неке б.з.д. 193 ж. Рафияда қиылды; Птолемей 16 жаста, Клеопатра 10 жаста еді).
This was framed as a generous gesture: Antiochus positioned himself as an ally and “protector” of the young king, securing peace while retaining gains in Asia. The marriage gave him indirect influence over Egypt through his daughter (he hoped she would remain loyal to her Seleucid roots and act as a pro-Syrian voice in the Ptolemaic court). The ploy backfired for Cleopatra sided with her husband and Egypt, not her father, undermining Antiochus’s long-term control. This mirrors the Pact of Brundisium (40 BC) and related to Roman events in several ways.
Yo fue presentado como un gesto generoso: Antiochus se colocó a sí mismo como aliado y “protector” del joven rey, asegurando la paz mientras retenía sus ganancias en Asia. El matrimonio le dio influencia indirecta sobre Egipto por medio de su hija (él esperaba que ella permaneciera leal a sus raíces seleúcidas y actuara como una voz pro-siria en la corte ptolemaica). La estratagema fracasó, pues Cleopatra se puso del lado de su esposo y de Egipto, no de su padre, socavando el control a largo plazo de Antiochus. Esto refleja el Pacto de Brundisium (40 a.C.) y se relacionaba con los acontecimientos romanos de varias maneras.
Just as Antony married Octavia (sister of Octavian) to bind rival powers after near-war, Antiochus used his daughter’s marriage to Ptolemy V to formalize a temporary peace and territorial division (Seleucids kept conquests in the north, Ptolemy retained Egypt the south).
Andony Oqtavianyñ uýasy Oqtawiany diýen ýaly, ýakyn wagtda uruş bolmak howpyndan soň garşydaş güýçleri baglanyşdyrmak üçin nikalaşşy ýaly, Antiýohus hem wagtlaýyn parahatçylygy we ýerleriň bölünişigini resmileşdirmek üçin öz gyzynyň Ptolemeý V bilen nikasyny ulandy (Selewkiler demirgazykdaky basyp alyşlaryny sakladylar, Ptolemeý bolsa günortadaky Müsüri özünde galdyrdy).
Antiochus acted as a de facto guardian over the child-king Ptolemy V (via family ties), similar to how Octavian (and the Triumvirate) positioned themselves amid power vacuums or rivalries. In both cases, the “stronger” figure (Antiochus/Octavian) sought leverage over a vulnerable counterpart through kinship. Both arrangements brought short-term stability but ‘did not prosper’ long-term due to underlying distrust—Cleopatra favored Egypt (undermining Antiochus), while Antony’s eastern focus (Cleopatra VII) led to the breakdown with Octavian.
Антиох, дамеопатчара Птолемей V-и фицийдул опекунс лубазан иакъе (цIийол тухумлъи ялъуни), Октавиянги (ва Триумвиратги) властиялъул бушилалъул яги данде къеркьелазулъ гьоркьор жидерго бакIалги чIезарурал къагIидаялда релълъон. КIиябго хIалалда, «цIикIкIарав къуватаб» инсанас (Антиох/Октавиян) тухумлъиялъул бицун гIодовей вукIарав рагъсизе данде пайдаялъул гьитIинаб кIвар босизе хIаракат бахъана. КIиябго жураб хIалалъ къокъаяб заманаялъулаб къайи-чIеялъе гIилла ккана, амма тIубанго «битIизе кIоларо» щвана, гьанжехъанго гIуцIараб гъоркьаб шеклъиялъулъ божи къотIун букIиналъухъ: Клеопатра Мисрида рахъ ккун йикIана (Антиохил ниятал къварилъизарун), гьединго Антонийил шаркъияб рахъалде рехсей (Клеопатра VII) Октавиянгун гьоркьоб бугеб хъахIаб къотIиялде рачIине гIилла ккана.
Ptolemy V’s minority under regents parallels the instability after Julius Caesar’s death (leading to the Triumvirate’s formation and power struggles). The marriage of Berenice to Antiochus marked the beginning of the Seleucid Empire’s history in Daniel eleven, and the marriage of Antiochus Magnus daughter to the Egyptian child king, marked the ending of the Seleucid Empire. The ending of the marriage of Marc Antony to Octavia marked the ending of the Ptolemaic kingdom. The ending of Judah as God’s covenant people took place at the cross, and that Judean kingdom began with the Maccabees and the league they made with Rome. All of these prophetic lines are represented within the narrative of Daniel chapter eleven, and they all align with the hidden history of verse forty. Beginning in verse five we have the treaty of Berenice, that leads to Antiochus the Great and the treaty of his daughter Cleopatra Syra, that takes place in the history of the Maccabees of verse twenty-three. The Maccabees become part of the line based upon their rebellion against Antiochus Epiphanes, one of the last of the Seleucid Dynasty.
بطلیموسِ پنجم کی خردسالی، ناظمانِ سلطنت کے زیرِ انتظام، یولیئس قیصر کی موت کے بعد کی بےثباتی کے مماثل ہے، جو ٹرائیم ویریٹ کی تشکیل اور اقتدار کی کشمکشوں پر منتج ہوئی۔ بیرینیس کی انطیوکس سے شادی نے دانی ایل باب گیارہ میں سلوکی سلطنت کی تاریخ کے آغاز کو نشان زد کیا، اور انطیوکسِ اعظم کی بیٹی کی مصری طفل بادشاہ سے شادی نے سلوکی سلطنت کے خاتمہ کو نشان زد کیا۔ مارک انطونی کی اکتاویہ سے شادی کے اختتام نے بطلمیوسی مملکت کے خاتمہ کو نشان زد کیا۔ خدا کے عہد کے لوگ ہونے کے اعتبار سے یہوداہ کا خاتمہ صلیب پر واقع ہوا، اور وہ یہودی مملکت مکابیوں اور اُس معاہدہ سے شروع ہوئی جو انہوں نے روم کے ساتھ کیا۔ یہ تمام نبوتی خطوط دانی ایل باب گیارہ کی حکایت کے اندر ممثل ہیں، اور یہ سب آیت چالیس کی مخفی تاریخ کے ساتھ ہم آہنگ ہیں۔ آیت پانچ سے آغاز کرتے ہوئے ہمارے سامنے بیرینیس کا معاہدہ آتا ہے، جو انطیوکسِ اعظم اور اُس کی بیٹی کلیوپیٹرا سیرا کے معاہدہ تک لے جاتا ہے، جو آیت تیئیس کے مکابیوں کی تاریخ میں وقوع پذیر ہوتا ہے۔ مکابی انطیوکس ایپیفینیس کے خلاف اپنی بغاوت کی بنا پر اس سلسلہ میں شامل ہوتے ہیں، جو سلوکی خاندان کے آخری افراد میں سے ایک تھا۔
Antiochus Epiphanes is the Antiochus who was in Egypt in 168 BC near Alexandria during the Sixth Syrian War. Antiochus Epiphanes had invaded Egypt and was on the verge of capturing Alexandria. The Ptolemaic rulers appealed to Rome for help. Rome sent Popillius Laenas (with just a small entourage—no army) to deliver an ultimatum from the Senate; Antiochus must immediately withdraw from Egypt and Cyprus, or face war with Rome. When Antiochus received the letter and asked for time to consult his advisors, Popillius—described as stern and imperious—took his walking stick and drew a circle in the sand around the king’s feet. He then declared, “Before you step out of that circle, give me a reply to lay before the Senate.”
ئەنتیوخۆس ئەپیفانێس ئەو ئەنتیوخۆسەیە کە لە ساڵی 168 پ.ز. لە میسر بوو، لە نزیکی ئەلەکسەندریە، لە ماوەی جەنگی شەشەمی سووری. ئەنتیوخۆس ئەپیفانێس هێرشی کردبووە سەر میسر و لە ئاستی نزیکبوونەوەی گرتنی ئەلەکسەندریەدا بوو. فەرمانڕەواکانی پطڵیمایەکان داوای یارمەتییان لە ڕۆما کرد. ڕۆما پۆپیلیوس لائێناس نارد (تەنها لەگەڵ ژمارەیەکی کەمی هاودەم—بێ سوپا) بۆ گەیاندنی دواخوازێکی کۆتایی لەلایەن ئەنجومەنی پیرانەوە؛ پێویست بوو ئەنتیوخۆس بێدەرەنگ لە میسر و قوبرس بکشێتەوە، یان ڕووبەڕووی جەنگ لەگەڵ ڕۆما ببێتەوە. کاتێک ئەنتیوخۆس نامەکەی وەرگرت و داوای کاتێکی کرد بۆ ئەوەی ڕاوێژ لەگەڵ ئامۆژگارانیدا بکات، پۆپیلیوس—کە بە توندی و فەرمانڕەوایی وەسف کراوە—دارقەدی پیادەڕۆیی خۆی هەڵگرت و بازنەیەکی لەسەر لمی پاشاکە لە ناو خۆڵدا کێشا. پاشان ڕایگەیاند: «پێش ئەوەی لەو بازنەیە دەربچیت، وەڵامێکم پێ بدە بۆ ئەوەی لەبەردەم ئەنجومەنی پیران دایبنێم.»
The implication was clear; Antiochus could not leave the circle without committing to Rome’s demands—crossing it without agreement would mean war. Stunned and humiliated, Antiochus hesitated briefly but then agreed to comply, withdrew his forces from Egypt, and returned to Syria. This bold act of diplomacy (backed by Rome’s growing reputation for power) forced the retreat without a battle, showcasing Rome’s emerging dominance in the eastern Mediterranean. It’s widely cited as an origin for the phrase “drawing a line in the sand” (though it was literally a circle).
ئەو دەلالەتە ئاشکرا بوو؛ ئەنتیۆخۆس نەیدەتوانی لەو بازنەیە دەرچێت بێ ئەوەی خۆی بە داواکارییەکانی ڕۆما پابەند بکات—تێپەڕبوونی لێی بەبێ ڕێککەوتن واتای جەنگ دەگەیاند. ئەنتیۆخۆس، کە سەرسام و سووکایەتیپێکراو بوو، بۆ ماوەیەکی کورت دوودڵ مایەوە، بەڵام پاشان ڕازی بوو گوێڕایەڵی بکات، هێزەکانی لە میسر کێشایەوە، و بۆ سوریا گەڕایەوە. ئەم کردە دیپلۆماسییە بێباکانەیە (کە بە ناوبانگی زیادبوونی هێزی ڕۆما پشتگیری دەکرا) ئەو پاشەکشەیەی بەبێ شەڕ ناچار کرد، و سەرهەڵدانی زاڵبوونی ڕۆما لە ڕۆژهەڵاتی ناوەڕاستی دەریای سپی پیشان دا. بە فراوانی وەک سەرچاوەی دەرکەوتنی دەستەواژەی «هێڵێک لەسەر لم بدۆزینەوە» ئاماژەی پێ دەکرێت (هەرچەندە بە ڕاستی بازنەیەک بوو).
Antiochus Epiphanes also became the Protestant understanding of the power that exalts himself, falls and establishes the vision in verse fourteen of Daniel eleven.
Antiochus Epiphanes también llegó a ser, en la comprensión protestante, el poder que se ensalza a sí mismo, cae y establece la visión en el versículo catorce de Daniel once.
And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. Daniel 11:14.
Na waɗannan lokuta da yawa za su taso su yi gāba da sarkin kudu; haka kuma, ‘yan fashi daga cikin mutanenka za su ɗaukaka kansu domin su tabbatar da wahayi; amma za su fāɗi. Daniyel 11:14.
Antiochus IV Epiphanes reigned 175–164 BC, and was the eighth of thirteen Seleucid kings. He sought to impose Hellenistic culture and unify his empire under Greek religious practices. He plundered the Temple in 169 BC, banned Jewish practices (circumcision, Sabbath observance, Torah study), and forced sacrifices to pagan gods. In December 167 BC he erected a pagan altar (to Zeus) on top of the Jewish altar of burnt offerings in the Temple and sacrificed a pig, along with other profane acts. The desecration was the final straw for observant Jews, who saw it as the ultimate violation of the Temple’s sanctity and God’s law. It sparked immediate resistance when Mattathias (a priest from Modein) refused a Seleucid officer’s order to sacrifice to pagan gods and killed an apostate Jew and the officer, then fled to the hills with his sons (the future Maccabees). This ignited guerrilla warfare and revolt from 167–160 BC which aimed to restore Jewish worship, leading to the rededication of the Temple (Hanukkah) in 164 BC under Judas Maccabeus.
انتیوکوس چهارم اپیفانِس در سالهای 175–164 پیش از میلاد سلطنت کرد و هشتمین تن از سیزده پادشاه سلوکی بود. او کوشید فرهنگ هلنیستی را تحمیل کند و امپراتوری خود را تحت شعائر دینی یونانی یکپارچه سازد. او در سال 169 پیش از میلاد، هیکل را غارت کرد، اعمال یهودی (ختنه، نگاهداشت سبت، و مطالعهٔ تورات) را ممنوع ساخت، و قربانیکردن برای خدایان بتپرستانه را تحمیل نمود. در دسامبر 167 پیش از میلاد، او مذبحی بتپرستانه (برای زئوس) را بر فراز مذبح یهودیِ قربانیهای سوختنی در هیکل برپا کرد و خوکی را قربانی نمود، همراه با دیگر اعمال ناپاک. این بیحرمتی برای یهودیان متشرع واپسین حد بود، زیرا آن را نهایتِ نقضِ قداست هیکل و شریعت خدا میدیدند. این امر هنگامی مقاومت فوری را برانگیخت که متاتیا (کاهنی از مودعین) فرمانِ یکی از افسران سلوکی را برای قربانیکردن به خدایان بتپرستانه رد کرد و یک یهودیِ مرتد و آن افسر را کشت، سپس با پسرانش (مکابیانِ آینده) به کوهستان گریخت. این رویداد جنگ چریکی و شورشی را در سالهای 167–160 پیش از میلاد برافروخت که هدف آن احیای عبادت یهودی بود، و در نهایت به بازتقدیس هیکل (حنوکا) در سال 164 پیش از میلاد تحت رهبری یهودا مکابی انجامید.
At the beginning and ending of the Seleucid Empire there was a significant treaty represented by a diplomatic marriage that possessed the element of division of either east and west, or north and south. As the Seleucid Empire waned Antiochus Epiphanes becomes the symbol of the rising Roman power, and the focus of the Maccabean’s indignation. Later in history he becomes the counterfeit of the prophetic symbol that establishes the vision. The power in verse twenty-two of chapter eleven is broken when the prince of the covenant was broken.
Seleukidlar imperiyasining boshida ham, oxirida ham sharq va g‘arbning, yoki shimol va janubning bo‘linishi unsurini o‘z ichiga olgan diplomatik nikoh bilan ifodalangan muhim bir ahdnoma mavjud edi. Seleukidlar imperiyasi tanazzulga yuz tutgan sari, Antiox Epifan ko‘tarilayotgan Rim qudratining ramziga, hamda Makkabiylarning g‘azabi markaziga aylanadi. Keyinroq tarixda u vahiyga asos bo‘luvchi bashoratli ramzning soxtasiga aylanadi. O‘n birinchi bobning yigirma ikkinchi oyatidagi qudrat ahdning shahzodasi sindirilganida sindiriladi.
And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant. Daniel 11:22.
Ha imézope ha yvy guive ojeraháta hikuái henondégui, ha oñembyai hag̃uáicha; heẽ, avei pe ñe’ẽme’ẽ ruvicha. Daniel 11:22.
Antiochus Epiphanes’ reign ended in 164 BC, almost two hundred years before Christ, “the prince of the covenant” was “broken” at the cross. What we wish to note here is that the Seleucid Empire began and ended with a diplomatic treaty marriage where the deceit between the two parties is a matter of the historical record. During the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, the Maccabean revolt began, which typified the American Revolution. In the history of the Maccabees their struggle to throw off the Seleucid power included a significant treaty with Rome. The verse that identifies the treaty directly identifies Rome as working deceitfully, or telling lies at the treaty table.
Antiochus Epiphanes’en oraan 164 BC anpa tukukuykuna, Cristomanta ishkay pachak wata ñawpaqta, “pactop apu” nisqaqa cruzpi “pakisqa” karqan. Kaypi qhawariyta munasqanchikqa kaymi: Seleucid Imperioq qallarinanpas tukukuyninpas diplomátic traktowan kasarakuywanmi karqan, maypipas ishkay partikunapurapi llullakuyqa historiapi qillqasqa kasqanmi. Antiochus Epiphanes’en oraanpi Maccabeokunap hatarikuynin qallarikurqan, chaymi Amerikano Revoluciónta rikch’achirqan. Maccabeokunap historiapin Seleucid atiyninta wikch’uyta munaspa maqanakusqankupi Roma wan hatun traktopis karqan. Chay versículoq, mayqin traktota chiqanta reqsichin, chayllataq Romata reqsichin llullakuspa llamk’asqanta, utaq tratadop mesapi llullakunata nisqanta.
And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people. Daniel 11:23.
Уа аньца лигъанцара дыҕэуи, ар алфыбжьын хъыджэу зэрихьэх: сэбэпыр — ар дыкӏуэн, уэ адыгэ цӏыкӏу къызэрихьэу къарыгъэпсалъэу къигъэбжьын. Даниил 11:23.
Every prophetic line that precedes the time of the end in verse forty contains a broken treaty. Uriah Smith commenting on verse thirty’s “them that forsake the holy covenant” records the following:
Aiqutña tunka ñiqin qillqatan tukuy profecía siq’ikuna, pusaq chunka ñiqin qillqapi pacha tukukuypaq manaraq chayamuchkaptin, huk p’akisqa tratadota apamun. Uriah Smithqa, kimsa chunka ñiqin qillqapi “qullana tratadota saqeqkuna” nisqanmanta rimarispa, kay hinatan qillqan:
“‘Indignation against the covenant;’ that is, the Holy Scriptures, the book of the covenant. A revolution of this nature was accomplished in Rome. The Heruli, Goths, and Vandals, who conquered Rome, embraced the Arian faith, and became enemies of the Catholic Church. It was especially for the purpose of exterminating this heresy that Justinian decreed the pope to be the head of the church and the corrector of heretics. The Bible soon came to be regarded as a dangerous book that should not be read by the common people, but all questions in dispute were to be submitted to the pope. Thus was indignity heaped upon God’s word. And the emperors of Rome, the eastern division of which still continued, had intelligence, or connived with the Church of Rome, which had forsaken the covenant, and constituted the great apostasy, for the purpose of putting down ‘heresy.’ The man of sin was raised to his presumptuous throne by the defeat of the Arian Goths, who then held possession of Rome, in A.D.538.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 281.
«“Бо аҳд хашм гирифтан”; яъне бар Навиштаҳои Муқаддас, бар китоби аҳд. Инқилобе аз ин гуна дар Рум ба амал омад. Ҳерулҳо, готҳо ва вандалҳо, ки Румро фатҳ карданд, эътиқоди ориёнӣ را пазируфтанд ва душмани Калисои католикӣ гардиданд. Маҳз барои несту нобуд кардани ин бидъат буд, ки Юстиниён ҳукм кард, то поп сарвари калисо ва ислоҳгари бидъаткорон бошад. Ба зудӣ Китоби Муқаддас ҳамчун китобе хатарнок дониста шуд, ки набояд аз ҷониби мардуми оддӣ хонда шавад, балки ҳамаи масъалаҳои мавриди ихтилоф бояд ба поп пешниҳод мегардид. Ҳамин тавр бар Каломи Худо таҳқир болои таҳқир рехта шуд. Ва императорони Рум, ки бахши шарқии он ҳанӯз боқӣ монда буд, бо Калисои Рум, ки аҳдро тарк гуфта, он иртидоди бузургро ташкил дода буд, ҳамдилӣ доштанд ё бо он созиш мекарданд, то “бидъат”-ро саркӯб намоянд. Одами гуноҳ бо шикасти готҳои ориёнӣ, ки он вақт Румро дар ихтиёр доштанд, дар соли 538 милодӣ ба тахти пурғурури худ бардошта шуд». Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 281.
Verse five of Daniel eleven identifies the line of history where the king of the south provides a diplomatic bride as a symbol of a treaty that was thereafter broken by the king of the north. The retaliation of the king of the south typified the retaliation of Napoleon’s spiritual king of the south against the papal king of the north in 1798. The broken treaty of verses five through nine typified Napoleon’s broken treaty of Tolentino, which typified Putin’s claim of a broken treaty by NATO. The retaliation of Napoleon typified the retaliation of Putin against the Ukraine in 2014. Verse ten’s retaliation of Antiochus Magnus ending the fourth Syrian War aligns with Napoleon in 1798 and also Putin in 2014. Following verse fifteen’s battle of Panium n 200 BC, Antiochus arranged a diplomatic marriage with the hidden intent of taking Egypt under his command without employing military boots on the ground. Antiochus Magnus throne was passed to his son, who was assassinated which brought Antiochus Magnus’s youngest son, Antiochus Epiphanes to the throne. His actions in implementing Greek customs and religion brought about the Maccabean revolt, that led to the deceitful treaty with Rome in verse twenty-three. Verse twenty-four introduces pagan Rome and identifies Antony and Augustus’s table of lies. In verse thirty pagan Rome enters into dialogue with the papal church, who are noted as them that had broken the holy covenant.
دانیال کے باب گیارہ کی پانچویں آیت تاریخ کے اُس سلسلہ کی نشان دہی کرتی ہے جہاں جنوب کا بادشاہ ایک سفارتی دلہن کو ایک ایسے معاہدہ کی علامت کے طور پر پیش کرتا ہے جسے بعد ازاں شمال کے بادشاہ نے توڑ دیا۔ جنوب کے بادشاہ کی جوابی کارروائی نے 1798ء میں نپولین کے روحانی جنوب کے بادشاہ کی طرف سے پاپائی شمال کے بادشاہ کے خلاف کی گئی جوابی کارروائی کی تمثیل پیش کی۔ آیات پانچ تا نو کا ٹوٹا ہوا معاہدہ نپولین کے ٹولینٹینو کے ٹوٹے ہوئے معاہدہ کی تمثیل تھا، اور وہی نیٹو کی طرف سے معاہدہ شکنی کے بارے میں پوتن کے دعویٰ کی بھی تمثیل تھا۔ نپولین کی جوابی کارروائی نے 2014ء میں یوکرین کے خلاف پوتن کی جوابی کارروائی کی تمثیل پیش کی۔ آیت دس میں چوتھی شامی جنگ کے اختتام پر انطیوکس مگنس کی جوابی کارروائی 1798ء میں نپولین کے ساتھ، اور نیز 2014ء میں پوتن کے ساتھ، مطابقت رکھتی ہے۔ 200 قبل مسیح میں آیت پندرہ کی پانیئم کی جنگ کے بعد، انطیوکس نے ایک سفارتی شادی کا انتظام اس پوشیدہ ارادہ کے ساتھ کیا کہ مصر کو اپنی فرمانبرداری میں لے آئے، بغیر اس کے کہ میدانِ جنگ میں فوجی قوت استعمال کرے۔ انطیوکس مگنس کا تخت اس کے بیٹے کو منتقل ہوا، جو قتل کر دیا گیا، اور اس کے نتیجہ میں انطیوکس مگنس کا سب سے چھوٹا بیٹا، انطیوکس ایپی فینس، تخت پر آ بیٹھا۔ یونانی رسوم اور مذہب کو نافذ کرنے میں اس کے اقدامات نے مکابی بغاوت کو جنم دیا، جو آیت تیئس کے رومیوں کے ساتھ فریب پر مبنی معاہدہ تک لے گئی۔ آیت چوبیس بت پرست روم کو متعارف کراتی ہے اور انطونی اور آگسٹس کی جھوٹ کی میز کی نشان دہی کرتی ہے۔ آیت تیس میں بت پرست روم پاپائی کلیسیا کے ساتھ مکالمہ میں داخل ہوتا ہے، جنہیں اُن لوگوں کے طور پر نشان زد کیا گیا ہے جنہوں نے مقدس عہد کو توڑا تھا۔
Verses twenty-four to thirty is the testimony of pagan Rome and verses thirty-one to forty provide the testimony of papal Rome. Every line of Daniel eleven verse one on through verse forty represents a line of prophecy that is applied in the hidden history of verse forty. The line of the Seleucid kingdom, the line of the Ptolemaic kingdom, the line of the Judean kingdom of the Maccabees, the line of pagan Rome and the line of papal Rome all illustrate the history of 1989 unto the Sunday law. Each of those lines identify a broken treaty as a major element of the history.
Ayat dua puluh empat hingga tiga puluh adalah kesaksian Roma kafir, dan ayat tiga puluh satu hingga empat puluh menyajikan kesaksian Roma kepausan. Setiap baris dari Daniel pasal sebelas ayat satu hingga ayat empat puluh merupakan suatu garis nubuat yang diterapkan dalam sejarah tersembunyi dari ayat empat puluh. Garis kerajaan Seleukia, garis kerajaan Ptolemaik, garis kerajaan Yudea dari kaum Makabe, garis Roma kafir, dan garis Roma kepausan semuanya menggambarkan sejarah dari tahun 1989 hingga hukum hari Minggu. Masing-masing dari garis itu menandai suatu perjanjian yang dilanggar sebagai unsur utama dalam sejarah tersebut.
It is Rome that establishes the vision of Daniel eleven, and both pagan and papal Rome’s prophetic treaties of deceit are marked as progressive and as occurring before Rome ruled supremely for their respective and distinct prophetic periods. Both powers marked the beginning of the prophetic period of supremacy as beginning when their third obstacle was overcome. Before the soon coming Sunday law in the United States there will be a treaty of deceit between two powers. Four times the two powers have been the kings of the south and the north, once between the glorious land of Judah and Rome, once between two parts of the Roman triumvirate and once between pagan and papal Rome. In both deceitful treaties concerning Rome it amounted to a treaty between one half of the Roman empire, whether Antony of the east, Augustus of the west, or pagan Rome of the east and papal Rome of the west. Four treaties of deceit between the kings of the north and south, two between the kings of the east and west and one between the soon-to-be king of the north and the glorious land.
Рим аст, ки рӯъёи Дониёл ёздаҳро барқарор месозад, ва аҳдҳои фиреби пешгӯёнаи ҳам Рими бутпараст ва ҳам Рими папавӣ ҳамчун пешравона нишон дода мешаванд ва ҳамчун воқеъшуда пеш аз он ки Рим дар давраҳои пешгӯёнаи мутаносиб ва ҷудогонаи онҳо ба ҳокимияти мутлақ расад. Ҳар ду қудрат оғози давраи пешгӯёнаи бартарии худро аз лаҳзае нишон доданд, ки монеаи сеюми онҳо бартараф гардид. Пеш аз қонуни якшанбеи наздикулвуқӯъ дар Иёлоти Муттаҳида, байни ду қудрат аҳди фиребе хоҳад буд. Чор бор ин ду қудрат подшоҳони ҷануб ва шимол будаанд: як бор байни замини ҷалоли Яҳудо ва Рим, як бор байни ду қисми триумвирати Рим ва як бор байни Рими бутпараст ва Рими папавӣ. Дар ҳар ду аҳди фиребомезе, ки ба Рим марбут буданд, он дар асл ба аҳде байни як нисфи империяи Рим баробар мешуд, хоҳ Антонии шарқ бошад, хоҳ Августи ғарб, ё Рими бутпарасти шарқ ва Рими папавии ғарб. Чор аҳди фиреб миёни подшоҳони шимол ва ҷануб, дуто миёни подшоҳони шарқ ва ғарб, ва яке миёни он подшоҳе, ки ба зудӣ подшоҳи шимол хоҳад шуд, ва замини ҷалол.
This concludes our initial presentation of the book of Daniel. The Panium series represents the conclusion of the series on the book of Daniel, which is the introduction to the hidden history of verse forty which we will continue to consider in the next article.
Ino no mamarana ny famelabelarana voalohany nataontsika momba ny bokin’i Daniela. Ny andiany Panium no famaranana ny andiany momba ny bokin’i Daniela, izay fampidirana ho amin’ny tantara miafina ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo, izay mbola hodinihintsika hatrany ao amin’ny lahatsoratra manaraka.