Uriah Smith wrote, “Rome became connected with the people of God, the Jews, by alliance, BC 162.” Most modern historians mark the date as 161 BC, and Smith twice references 161 BC, in the same book. My assumption is that this reference to 162 BC, is a typo.

Uriah Smith ohai vaʼekue: “Roma oñembojoaju Tupã tavayguakuéra, judío kuéra ndive, peteĩ ñemboguata rupive, ary 162 a.C.” Hetave historiadór moderno kuéra omoĩ upe ára 161 a.C.-pe, ha Smith mokõi jey omombeʼu 161 a.C., pe lívro peteĩchape. Che aime hag̃ua, ko ñeʼẽ 162 a.C. rehegua haʼeha peteĩ jejavy jehaípe.

“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.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 273.

“Umi versíkulo 23 ha 24 rupive ñanemboguejy pe ko’águio pe ñemoĩmbyre guive judío kuéra ha romano kuéra apytépe, ary a.C. 161-pe, pe ára peve Roma oguereko hague mburuvicha guasu opaite ári.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 273.

Verses eleven and twelve, identify the victory and aftermath of the Battle of Raphia, which occurred in 217 BC, between the Seleucid Empire, led by Antiochus III the Great, and the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt, led by King Ptolemy IV Philopator.

Umi versíkulo once ha doce-pe ohechauka pe jehu porã ha upe riregua Raphia Ñorairõme, oikova’ekue ary 217 Cristo mboyve, pe Império Seléucida apytépe, omoakãva Antiochus III pe Tuichavéva, ha pe Reino Ptolemaico Egiptogua, omoakãva mburuvicha guasu Ptolomeo IV Filópator.

The Battle of Panium, which occurred seventeen years later in 200 BC, was again between the Seleucid kingdom, and the Ptolemaic kingdom.

Pe Ñorairõ Paniumpegua, oiko vaʼekue paʼa porundy arýgui rire, ary 200 a.C.-pe, oiko jey vaʼekue Reino Seléucida ha Reino Ptolemaico apytépe.

The Maccabean Revolt, began in 167 BC, and was the Jewish rebellion against the Seleucid Empire’s attempts to suppress Jewish religious practices and impose Greek culture.

Pe Revuelta Macabea oñepyrũ ary 167 a.C.-pe, ha upéva vaekue pe ñemoĩ peteĩcha judío kuéra rehegua pe Imperio Seléucida rembipota ombogue hag̃ua umi práctica religiosa judía ha omoĩ hag̃ua cultura griega.

The rededication of the Second Temple in Jerusalem, which marks the historical event celebrated during Hanukkah, occurred in 164 BC, three years before the “league” of verse twenty-three. This event followed the successful military campaign of the Maccabees against the forces of the Seleucid Empire, led by the infamous Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who had desecrated the Temple and outlawed Jewish religious practices. Antiochus IV Epiphanes died shortly after the victory that is commemorated by Hanukkah, and marks the descent of Syrian power from that point onward in history.

Mokõiha Tupaópe Jerusalénpe oñemboyke jeýramo, ohechaukáva pe mba’e oiko va’ekue yma guare oñemomorãva Hanukkah aja, oiko va’ekue ary 164 a.C.-pe, mbohapy ary mboyve pe “joaju” oñeñe’ẽva versíkulo 23-pe. Ko tembiasakue oiko pe campaña militar osẽ porã va’ekue rire umi Macabeo kuéra omotenondéva pe Imperio Seléucida mbarete rehe, oguenohẽva pe herakuã vaietereíva Antíoco IV Epífanes, ha’e va’ekue omongyʼa vaʼekue pe Tupaópe ha ombotove va’ekue umi judío kuéra rembiapo jeroviapy rehegua. Antíoco IV Epífanes omano are mboyve’ỹ pe jejopy porã oñemomorãva Hanukkah rupive, ha upéva ohechauka Siria mbarete ñemboguejy upe guive tenonderãite pe tembiasápe.

In 200 BC, (which was also the time of the Battle of Panium), Rome, for the first time inserted itself into the prophetic history of Daniel chapter eleven. There is the symbol which establishes the vision. Its purposeful influence in that history identifies the work of Jezebel, a symbol of a church that pulls strings from behind the scenes. Jezebel was home in Samaria when her husband Ahab watched her prophets get slain by Elijah. Herodias was not at Herod’s birthday party, where her daughter Salome seduced Herod. In the history of the United States, the papacy, represented by the whore of Tyre, is forgotten, until the end of the symbolic seventy years. She then begins to sing her songs of deception to the kings of the earth. The year 200 BC typifies when she begins to openly sing to the kings in the last days, just before the soon coming Sunday law, as represented in verse sixteen.

Áño 200 a.C.-pe, (upéva avei hína pe Batalla de Panium tiémpo), Roma, peteîha jey, omoinge ijupe Daniel capítulo once-pe pe tembiasakue proféticape. Upépe oî pe símbolo omopyendáva pe visión. Ipu’akapáva upe tembiasakuépe ohechauka Jezabel rembiapo, peteĩ símbolo tupaogua omongu’éva umi hilo kañyhápe guive. Jezabel oĩkuri hógape Samaria-pe, iména Acab ohecháramo guare Elías ojuka hag̃ua iprofétakuérape. Herodías ndorĩri Herodes aramboty aretépe, upépe imembykuña Salomé ombotavy hag̃ua Heródespe. Estados Unidos rembiasakuépe, papado, ojehechaukáva Tiro kuña rekovai rupive, oñembyesarái hese, pe setenta áño simbólico paha peve. Upéi ha’e oñepyrũ opurahéi hag̃ua itavysẽ purahéi yvy ruvichakuérape. Pe áño 200 a.C. ohechaukarã mba’éichapa ha’e oñepyrũ opurahéi hag̃ua hesakã hag̃uáicha umi mburuvichakuérape umi ára pahápe, pe léi domingo og̃uahẽmbotaitéva mboyve, oñerepresentaháicha pe versículo dieciséis-pe.

Before the “league” of the Jews in 161 BC to 158 BC, the Maccabees rededicated the temple, as is commemorated by Hanukkah in 164 BC. Then three years later, still in an ongoing struggle with the Syrians, the Maccabean Jews reached out to Rome for support. The “league” with Rome that was then formed becomes a prophetic test for God’s last-day students of prophecy.

Pe “joaju” umi hudío kuéra rehegua ary 161 a.C. guive 158 a.C. peve mboyve, umi Macabeo kuéra omopeteĩ jey pe templo, ojehechaukaháicha Hanukkah mandu’ápe ary 164 a.C.-pe. Upéi mbohapy ary rire, gueteri peteĩ ñorairõ oikóva hína umi sirio ndive, umi hudío Macabeo kuéra oheka Roma pytyvõ. Pe “joaju” Roma ndive upérõ oñemoheñóiva oiko peteĩ prueba profética ramo Tupã ára pahapegua profesía rehegua temimbo’e kuérape g̃uarã.

History identifies 161 BC as the point where the “league” took place, but the pioneers identify that history as 158 BC. Was Miller right, or are the modern historians right? Miller added six hundred and sixty-six years (666), to the year 158 BC, and arrived at the year 508, when “the daily” was taken away. Search as you might, it will be extremely difficult, if not actually impossible to find a historical support for 158 BC as the league between the Jews and the Romans.

Tem biasỹmby ohechauka ary 161 ary mboyve Cristo-guiha pe ára oiko hague pe “joaju”, ha umi pionéro katu ohechauka upe tembiasakue 158 ary mboyve Cristo-guiha. ¿Miller piko hekoitépe, térãpa umi tembiasakuaahára ko’ágagua hekoitépe? Miller omoĩve seisientos sesenta y seis ary (666) pe ary 158 mboyve Cristo-guipe, ha og̃uahẽ pe ary 508-pe, upérõ “pe ára ha ára pegua” oñemboyke haguépe. Reheka hag̃ua ikatuháicha, hasyetereíta ndéve, ndaha’éiramoite ndaikatumo’ãi, rejuhu hag̃ua peteĩ pytyvõ tembiasakue rehegua ohechaukáva 158 ary mboyve Cristo-guiha pe joaju oikova’ekue judío ha romano-kuéra apytépe.

Verse sixteen is the Sunday law, but before that history Rome enters into history to establish the vision in the year 200 BC. The Maccabean revolt began at Modein in 167 BC, and eventually they rededicated the temple in 164 BC. Then from 161 BC, to 158 BC, the Jews enter into a covenant with the Roman power. 161 BC to 158 BC represents a period of time which was required to establish the “league.” This understanding identifies the “league” in agreement with the historians’ testimony, and also with the chart that was directed by the hand of the Lord and should not be altered.

Pe versíkulo 16 ha’e pe léi dominical, ha upe mboyve Roma oike pe tembiasápe omopyenda hag̃ua pe visión áño 200 a.C. Pe Maccabeo kuéra pu’ã Modein-pe áño 167 a.C., ha ipahápe ha’ekuéra omyenyhẽ jey pe témplo áño 164 a.C. Upéi, guive áño 161 a.C. peve 158 a.C., umi hudío oike peteĩ pacto-pe pe pokatu romano ndive. Áño 161 a.C. guive 158 a.C. peve ohechauka peteĩ ára paha oñekotevẽva’ekue oñemopyenda hag̃ua pe “joaju”. Ko entendimiento ombojekuaa pe “joaju” ojoajúvo umi historiador kuéra testimonio rehe, ha avei pe gráfico rehe oñembohapéva’ekue Ñandejára po rupive ha ndovaléi oñemoambue.

The historians inform us that the process of negotiating treaties between ancient nations like Judah and Rome in the second century BC, varied depending on the specific circumstances, diplomatic protocols, and power dynamics involved. Typically, the process would begin with one party expressing interest in establishing a treaty or alliance with the other. In the case of Judah and Rome, Judah initiated contact with Rome to propose a formal alliance.

Umi historiadór ñanemombe’u umi tetã yma guare apytépe—Judá ha Romaicha, ary siglo mokõiha Cristo mboyve jave—pe tembiapo oñeñomongeta hag̃ua ñe’ẽme’ẽ térã joaju rehegua iñambuehague pe situación particular, umi protocolo diplomático ha umi mbarete jojaha’ỹva oikóva rehehápe. Jepiveguáicha, upe proceso oñepyrũ peteĩva ohechauka ramo iñeinterés omoĩ hag̃ua peteĩ ñe’ẽme’ẽ térã peteĩ joaju ambuéva ndive. Judá ha Roma rehe, Judá voi omoñepyrũ pe ñembojoaju Roma ndive opropone hag̃ua peteĩ joaju formal.

Diplomatic channels would have been utilized to convey the proposal and initiate negotiations. This had to involve sending ambassadors or envoys to Rome to meet with its leaders or representatives. Once negotiations commenced, both parties would discuss the terms of the proposed treaty. This could involve a series of meetings, exchanges of diplomatic messages, and possibly the involvement of intermediaries or mediators to facilitate discussions. During negotiations, each party would consider the terms proposed by the other and may offer counter-proposals or seek amendments to certain terms. This process could involve careful deliberation, consultation with advisors, and assessments of the potential benefits and drawbacks of the proposed treaty.

Ojeiporu hag̃ua ko propuesta ha oñepyrũ hag̃ua ñomongeta, ojeporavova’erãmo’ã kuri tape diplomático. Kóva tekotevẽva’erãmo’ã kuri oike hag̃ua embahadór térã enviado-kuéra oñemondo hag̃ua Róma-pe, ojojuhu hag̃ua hikuái umi ituvicha térã irepresentántekuéra ndive. Oñepyrũ rire ñomongeta, mokõive hendáva oñe’ẽva’erãmo’ã kuri umi condición rehe pe tratado ojeproponéva. Kóva ikatuva’erãmo’ã kuri oike peteĩ aty aty peve, marandu diplomático ñembohasa, ha ikatúramo avei umi mbytépe omba’apóva térã mediador-kuéra oike hag̃ua ombohape hag̃ua umi ñomongeta. Umi ñomongeta aja, káda hendáva ohesa’ỹijova’erãmo’ã kuri umi condición ambue opropóniva, ha ikatuva’erãmo’ã avei ome’ẽ contrapropuesta térã oheka oñemoambue hag̃ua ciertos términos. Ko proceso ikatuva’erãmo’ã kuri oike peteĩ ñemoĩ porã ha arandu rehegua ñehesa’ỹijo mbeguekatúpe, asesor-kuéra ndive ñomongeta, ha jehechapyrã umi mba’eporã ha mba’e vai ikatúva ogueru pe tratado ojeproponéva.

If both parties reached an agreement on the terms of the treaty, formal documentation would be prepared outlining the terms and conditions agreed upon by both sides. The treaty would then need to be ratified by the respective authorities of each nation. In the case of Rome, this might involve approval by the Senate or other governing bodies. Similarly, in Judah, the treaty would likely require approval by its leadership or governing council. Once ratified, the treaty would be implemented, and both parties would be expected to adhere to its terms. This might involve various forms of cooperation, mutual defense agreements, trade relations, or other forms of diplomatic engagement outlined in the treaty.

Mokõive mokõive oguahẽ rire peteĩ ñe’ẽme’ẽme ñe’ẽjopyre mba’éichapa pe joajuva’erã, oñembosako’íta kuatia tee hekopete ohechaukáva umi ñe’ẽme’ẽ ha umi condición ojejapóva mokõive hendáicha. Upéi, pe ñe’ẽme’ẽkue tekotevẽta oñemoneĩ ha oñemboaje umi mburuvicha tee rupive peteĩteĩ tetãgui. Roma rehegua kásope, kóva ikatu va’erã oikotevẽ Senado térã ambue aty governante-kuéra ñemoneĩ. Upéicha avei, Judá-pe, pe ñe’ẽme’ẽkue ikatu hag̃uáicha oike hag̃ua mbaretepe, oikotevẽne iñakãrapu’ãhára térã consejo governante ñemoneĩ. Oñemboaje rire, pe ñe’ẽme’ẽ oñemoañetéta, ha mokõive hendáicha ojejeruréta tojapo hekopete umi mba’e oĩva ipype. Kóva ikatu va’erã oike opaichagua ñopytyvõ, oñondive ñemo’ã ñe’ẽme’ẽ, ñemuha ha ñemuharã rehegua joaju, térã ambue hendáicha jeiko diplomátiko ojehaiháicha pe ñe’ẽme’ẽme.

In the second century BC, travel from Judea (located in the eastern Mediterranean region) to Rome (located in central Italy) would have been a challenging and time-consuming endeavor, especially considering the limitations of ancient transportation methods. The distance between Judea and Rome is approximately 1,500 to 2,000 kilometers (930 to 1,240 miles) depending on the specific route taken. Sea travel was often faster and more efficient than overland travel in ancient times, but sea travel was subject to the prevailing winds. Traveling by ship from a port in Judea to a port in Italy (such as Ostia, the port of Rome) could take several weeks, depending on factors like wind conditions, sea currents, and the type of vessel used.

Mokõiha ary BC-pe, peteĩ viaje Judeágui (oĩva Mediterráneo rembe’y kuarahyresẽ gotyo) Róma peve (oĩva Itália mbytépe) ha’éta kuri tembiapo hasýva ha oguerahaháta heta tiémpo, ko’ýte ojehechávo umi mba’e ojejokóva transporte yma guarépe. Pe mombyry oĩva Judea ha Róma apytépe ha’e amo 1,500 guive 2,000 kilómetro peve (930 guive 1,240 milla peve), tape ojejapóva rehegua. Yma guarépe, jeguata y rupive py’ỹive pya’eve ha iporãve va’ekue jeguata yvy rupive rangue, péro yguata oĩkuri umi yvytu oguerekóva pu’aka guýpe. Ojeho hag̃ua va’ekue peteĩ várkope peteĩ puérto Judea-pegua guive peteĩ puérto Itália-pegua peve (ha’eháicha Ostia, Róma puérto), ikatúkuri ohasa heta semána, odependeháicha umi mba’e rehe yvytu rekóicha, ysyry guasu rembiapo ha mba’eichagua várkopa ojeporu.

Overland travel from Judea to Rome would have been slower and more arduous. Travelers would have to navigate through various terrains, including mountains, valleys, and rivers, and contend with obstacles such as bandits and hostile territories. It’s estimated that travel by foot or by horse-drawn carriage could take several months. Travel time would have also been influenced by factors such as the condition of roads, availability of accommodations and rest stops, and the need to rest and resupply along the way.

Pe yvy ári Judeágui Róma peve ijeguata hag̃ua vaʼerãmoʼã ikangyve ha hasyve. Umi viajéro ohasavaʼerãmoʼã opaichagua yvy reko rupi, umíva apytépe yvytykuéra, yvyuguykuéra ha ysyrýkuéra, ha ombohováivaʼerãmoʼã avei ojokóva chupekuéra, por ehémplo mondaha ha tetãnguéra iñañáva. Ojeʼe oikoha hag̃ua peteĩ kuatia yvyraguata térã kavaju oisãmbyhýva kárro rupi sapyʼánte oguerahakuaa heta jasy. Pe aravo ojepurúva hag̃ua oguahẽ hag̃ua odependevaʼerãmoʼã avei mbaʼekuaarãicha tape kuéra oĩpa, oporomoheñói hag̃ua renda ha pytuʼu hag̃uáicha renda ojejuhúpa, ha tekotevẽha ojepyʼaguapy ha oñembyaty jey tembiʼu ha tembiporu tape pukukue javeve.

When the Maccabean Jews sought a league with Rome, they would have needed to send ambassadors to Rome. Once those ambassadors were received by the Roman authorities, there would be a period of negotiation. In historical theory, for no precise record is available, once a treaty was formalized, it would need to be taken back to Judea for confirmation, and then probably it would need to be returned to Rome to confirm the acceptance of the Jews. It is almost impossible to believe that the process of forming an alliance in that period of time would have been accomplished in one year, so the understanding that the “league” represents a process from 161 BC to 158 BC fits other lines of prophecy that identify the history that leads to the Sunday law of verse sixteen.

Umi judío maccabeo-kuéra oheka ramo guare peteĩ ñemonguéta Roma ndive, tekotevẽne kuri omondo hikuái mbajador-kuéra Róma-pe. Umi mbajador-kuéra oñemoguahẽ rire mburuvicha románo-kuérape, oikóne kuri peteĩ ára ñomongeta rehegua. Teoría histórica-pe, ndaipórigui marandu hekopete ojehaíva, peteĩ ñe’ẽme’ẽ oñemboheko rire, tekotevẽne kuri ojegueraha jey Judea-pe oñemoneĩ hag̃ua, ha upéi, ikatu hag̃uáicha, tekotevẽne kuri ojegueraha jey Róma-pe oñemoneĩ hag̃ua judío-kuéra ñemoneĩ. Haimete ndaikatúi jajerovia pe proceso oñemopyenda hag̃ua peteĩ joaju upe aravope ojejapóne hague peteĩ áño-pente; upévare pe entendimiento “ñemonguéta” ohechaukaha peteĩ proceso 161 a.C. guive 158 a.C. peve oñemohenda porã ambue línea profecía rehegua ndive ohechaukáva pe tembiasakue ogueraháva pe léi domingo rehegua versículo dieciséis-pe.

A “league” that all historians agree was initiated by the Maccabean Jews, began in Judea in 161 BC. The purpose was that the Jews wanted support against the Syrians who they had been struggling with since their revolt began in 167 BC. The revolt was sparked by the efforts of Mattathias, a Jewish priest, and his five sons, particularly Judas Maccabee, to resist the Hellenization policies imposed by the Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes. These policies included attempts to suppress Jewish religious practices and force the adoption of Greek customs and beliefs.

Peteĩ “joaju” opavave historiador-kuéra omoneĩva oñepyrũ hague judío Maccabeo-kuéra rupi, oñepyrũ Judea-pe ary 161 a.C. Upe joaju rembipota ha’e vaekue umi judío oipotágui pytyvõ umi sirio-kuéra rehe, ha’ekuéra ndive oñorairõ hague guive oñepyrũ ramo guare iñepu’ã ary 167 a.C. Pe ñepu’ã oñemoñepyrũ Mattathias rembiapo rupi, peteĩ pa’i judío, ha umi po ita’ýra rupi, ko’ýte Judas Maccabeo, ojokoségui umi política helenización rehegua omoĩ va’ekue mburuvicha Seleúcida Antiochus IV Epiphanes. Ko’ã política apytépe oĩ vaekue ñeha’ã ojoko hag̃ua umi judío rembiapo jerovia rehegua ha ombopoguy hag̃ua chupekuéra ogueraha hag̃ua umi griego jepokuaa ha jerovia.

The catalyst for the revolt was an incident in the village of Modein, where Mattathias refused to comply with a decree to offer a sacrifice to a Greek deity. “Modein” is derived from the Hebrew word “modi’a,” which means “to declare” or “to protest.” In his protest, Mattathias killed a Jewish apostate who was about to perform the sacrifice, and he and his sons fled to the hills, initiating a guerrilla warfare campaign against the Seleucid forces. The Maccabean Revolt lasted for several years, during which the Maccabees engaged in numerous battles against the Seleucids and their allies. Despite being vastly outnumbered and out-equipped, the Maccabees achieved several significant victories.

Pe ñemoñepyrũ omoheñóiva pe pu’aka’ỹme’ẽrã ha’e va’ekue peteĩ mba’e oikóva tavaguasu Modein-pe, upépe Matatías ndojejapói hag̃ua peteĩ decreto omandáva oñeme’ẽ hag̃ua peteĩ mymbajuka sakrifísioramo peteĩ tupã griego-pe guarã. “Modein” ou pe ñe’ẽ hebreo “modi’a”-gui, he’iséva “omombe’u hag̃ua” térã “oñeprotesta hag̃ua”. Iñeprotestápe, Matatías ojuka peteĩ judío apostata oĩmava’ekue ojapo hag̃uáicha pe sakrifísio, ha ha’e ha ita’ýra kuéra okañy yvytykuérape, omoñepyrũvo peteĩ ñorairõ guerrilla rehegua umi fuerza seléucida rehe. Pe Pu’aka Maccabea ipuku heta áño aja, upe jave umi Macabeo oike heta ñorairõme umi Seléucida ha iñirũnguéra rehe. Jepémo oĩ mbareteve’ỹeterei papapy ha tembiporu rupive, umi Macabeo ohupyty heta jehupyty guasu iñimportánteva.

The Seleucid Empire was seeking to impose the religion of Greece upon the Jews, and the Greeks represent the globalists of the last days. Their religion is expressed in the woke-ism that is currently being forced upon the United States and the world, by the globalist forces of the banking system, the mainstream media, the educational centers, and the tearing down of national distinctions through the forced immigration of illegal aliens. When Antiochus Epiphanes was forcing the Greek religion upon the Jews, there were Jews who were cooperating with his efforts. The Maccabees represent one class of apostate Jews, who were resisting the religion of Greece, but there was also another class of apostate Jews who were supporting the work of enforcing the Greek religion.

Pe império Seléucida oheka ombojehe’a hag̃ua umi hudíope kuéra rehe Grécia religión, ha umi griego ohechauka umi globalista-kuérape ára pahápe guare. Ijerovia rehegua ojehechauka pe “woke-ismo”-pe, ko’ág̃a oñemoĩ mbaretehápe Tetã peteĩ reko Amérika Joaju ha arapýpe, umi fuerza globalista reheve sistema bancario-gua, umi medio de comunicación principal, umi centro educativo, ha pe oñembyai hag̃ua umi tetãnguéra jehechakuaa peteĩteĩva, ojejapóva pe inmigración forzada extranjero ilegal-kuéra reheve. Antiochus Epiphanes ombojoja mbaretépe ramo guare pe griego religión umi hudíope kuéra rehe, oĩ va’ekue hudío-kuéra oipytyvõva hembiapo. Umi Macabeo ohechauka peteĩ aty hudío apóstata-kuéra rehegua, omboykéva pe Grécia religión; hákatu avei oĩ ambue aty hudío apóstata-kuéra rehegua, oipytyvõva pe tembiapo omoĩ hag̃ua mbaretépe pe griego religión.

Verse sixteen is the soon coming Sunday law, and the threefold union of the dragon, the beast and false prophet. That history is preceded by verses thirteen through fifteen, where the three battles of verse forty occur from verse ten (1989), verses eleven and twelve (the Ukrainian war), and the Battle of Panium. The Battle of Panium represents a battle in which the two-horned earth beast prevails over the globalist’s religious and political philosophies.

Pe versíkulo pa’ẽteĩha hína pe léi pya’e oútava arateĩ rehegua, ha pe mbohapy joaju pe teju jagua, pe mymba ha pe maranduhára japu rehegua. Upe tembiasakue mboyve oĩ umi versíkulo paapyha guive pundy peve, upépe umi mbohapy ñorairõ versíkulo irundy pa rehegua oiko versíkulo pahápe guive (1989), versíkulo peteĩha ha mokõiha (pe ñorairõ Ucrania-pe), ha pe Ñorairõ Panium-pe. Pe Ñorairõ Panium ohechauka peteĩ ñorairõ, upépe pe mymba yvy rehegua mokõi hatĩva ipu’aka umi globalista rembi’ejerovia ha tekoporã ñangareko rehegua ári.

In that battle the final president of the United States must deal with the aftermath of Putin’s victory and subsequent collapse represented in verses eleven and twelve. He will form an alliance with NATO, or the United Nations, in order to resolve the fallout from the collapse of Russia, and within the history of that alliance he will engage the United Nations in the Battle of Panium. The third battle of verse forty, will be as the first battle of verse forty. As the Soviet Union collapsed under the economic and military force of the United States, the globalists of the United Nations will be forced to repeat “perestroika” the key component of Gorbachev’s efforts to reform the Soviet Union, though they ultimately contributed to the unraveling of the Soviet system and the eventual dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Upe ñorairõme Estados Unidos ruvicha pahaiteva’erã ombohovái Putin pu’aka rire oikóva ha upe rire ho’apa va’ekue, oñemombe’úva versíkulo once ha doce-pe. Ha’e omopyendáta peteĩ joaju OTAN ndive, térã Naciones Unidas ndive, ikatu hag̃uáicha oñemyatyrõ umi mba’e vai osẽva Rusia ho’apa haguére; ha upe joaju rembiasakue ryepýpe oikeva’erãta Naciones Unidas ndive ñorairõ Panium-pe. Pe mbohapyha ñorairõ versíkulo cuarenta-pe, ha’éta pe peteĩha ñorairõicha versíkulo cuarenta-pe. Yma Unión Soviética ho’apa haguéicha Estados Unidos pu’aka económico ha militar poguýpe, upéicha avei Naciones Unidas globalista-kuéra ojejopýta ojapo jey hag̃ua “perestroika”, pe mba’e iñimportantevéva Gorbachev rembiapo’apykuépe oñemoambue hag̃ua Unión Soviética; jepe ipahápe umi mba’e oipytyvõ kuri oñembyai hag̃ua pe sistema soviético ha oñembogue hag̃ua ipaha hag̃uáicha Unión Soviética.

The third battle is illustrated by the first battle, and through economics and military pressure Trump, as represented by Reagan, will force the United Nations into “perestroika,” which means restructuring or reformation. The restructuring will place the United States upon the head of the ten kings’ system that is the United Nations. In the battle the papacy will then introduce itself into history, claiming to be the defender of the system that Trump is then conquering.

Pe mbohapyha ñorairõ ojehechauka pe peteĩha ñorairõ rupive, ha economía ha mbarete militar rupive Trump, Reagan ohechaukaháicha chupe, ombohape jeýta Tetãnguéra Joajupe “perestroika”-pe, he’iséva ñemohenda pyahu térã ñemoambue. Pe ñemohenda pyahu omoĩta Tetã Unidos-pe umi diez mburuvicha guasu rembiapo apytépe, ha upéva hína Tetãnguéra Joaju. Upéi pe ñorairõme papado oike jeýta tembiasakue ryepýpe, he’ívo ha’eha pe sistema ñangarekoha, pe sistema Trump upe jave oĩva ipoguýpe hag̃ua.

In the same history Trump will face an internal Civil War that he will be forced to address, just as Abraham Lincoln was forced to address. The Civil War will be among two opposing apostate factions within the United States. One class represented by those who have accepted the religion and philosophy of woke-ism, who are the progressive globalists of both political parties. The other class (MAGA-ism) professes to be genuine Protestants, though they lost that mantle in 1844.

Pe tembiasakue peteĩchagua rupive, Trump ombohovái va’erã peteĩ guerra civil hyepypegua, ha upéva oñembohováikuaa hag̃ua oñembojovake va’erã, Abraham Lincoln oñembojovake hagueichaite. Pe guerra civil oikóta mokõi aty apóstata ojoavyetereíva apytépe Estados Unidos ryepýpe. Peteĩ hendápe oĩ umi omoneĩ vaʼekue woke-ismo religión ha filosofía, haʼéva umi globalista progresista mokõive partido político-gua. Ambue aty (MAGA-ismo) heʼi haʼeha protestánte añete, jepémo okañy chuguikuéra upe teratee ary 1844-pe.

The President’s faction is represented by MAGA-ism, and is based upon the misguided claim of upholding true Protestantism and the Constitution. Woke-ism’s claim is the religion of Mother Earth, the New Age and the belief that the Constitution is applied by the existing circumstances of society’s norms, not by the archaic ideas of the founding fathers.

Pe Presidente aty rehegua ojehechauka MAGA-ismo rupive, ha oñemopyenda pe je’eko añetegua’ỹre ogueroviaha omombareteha pe Protestantísmo añetegua ha pe Constitución. Woke-ismo rembiclaim ha’e sy Yvy jerovia, pe Nueva Era ha pe jerovia pe Constitución ojeporuha tekoha guasu ko’ág̃agua normakuéra he’iháicha, ndaha’éi umi idea yma guare umi túva omoñepyrũva tetãme rehegua rupive.

Mattathias (Trump) will end the attempts of the globalist-progressive Democrats within the United States as represented by the revolt that began in Modein in 167 BC. Trump will then repeat the history of 164 BC, when the Maccabees rededicated the temple, as commemorated by the observance of Hanukkah. Then in the period represented from 161 BC to 158 BC, Trump will begin the final push for erecting the image of the papacy, which is an image that identifies an illicit relationship between the religious power and the political power. In 158 BC the league will be implemented as the soon coming Sunday law of verse sixteen is enforced.

Matatías (Trump) omohuʼãta umi ñehaʼã umi demócrata globalista-progresista Estados Unidos ryepýpe, ojehechaukaháicha pe puʼakaʼỹ oñepyrũvaʼekue Modeínpe ary 167 a.C. peguápe. Upéi Trump ojapóta jey pe tembiasakue ary 164 a.C. pegua, arakaʼe umi Macabeo omopuʼãjey ha omarangatujey pe tupaópe, oñemomanduʼaháicha pe jejapo hag̃ua Hanukkah. Upéi, pe periodo ojehechaukáva ary 161 a.C. guive 158 a.C. peve rupive, Trump oñepyrũta pe ñemotenonde paha omoñepyrũ hag̃ua pe taʼanga papado rehegua, ha upéva hína peteĩ taʼanga ohechaukáva peteĩ joaju ndoikóiva porãva mbarete religioso ha mbarete político apytépe. Ary 158 a.C. peguápe pe joaju oñemoañetéta, pe léi domingo pyaʼe oútava, versíkulo dieciséis pegua, oñembojepévo.

Daniel eleven first identifies how Rome politically takes control, and then Daniel repeats and enlarges the same history with a line identifying how Rome deals with God’s people in the very same history. From verse sixteen unto verse nineteen the three obstacles to pagan Rome taking control of the world are illustrated. In verse sixteen, Syria was conquered by pagan Rome in 65 BC, and then Judea was conquered by Pompey in 63 BC. Verse sixteen identifies when Rome was to stand in the glorious land, and in so doing is typifying the Sunday law of verse forty-one of the same chapter.

Daniel 11-pe ojehechauka raẽ mba’éichapa Roma ojagarra mbarete políticape; ha upéi Daniel omombe’u jey ha omyasãi pe tembiasakue peteĩ línea rupive ohechaukáva mba’éichapa Roma ojapo Tupã tavayguakuéra rehe upe tembiasakue peteĩchaitévape. Versículo 16 guive 19 peve ojehechauka mbohapy jejoko Roma pagana omboguata hag̃ua yvy ape ári ipoguype. Versículo 16-pe, Siria oñemomba’e Roma pagana rehe ary 65 JC mboyve, ha upéi Judea oñemomba’e Pompeyo rupive ary 63 JC mboyve. Versículo 16 ohechauka araka’épa Roma oñembo’y va’erã yvy porãme, ha upéva ojapóvo oiko typificación ramo pe léi domingo rehegua oĩva versículo 41-pe upe capítulo-pe avei.

It is important to note that the history of the conquering occurred in 63 BC [parallel to 1863], in the midst of a Civil War taking place within Jerusalem. Uriah Smith stated, “On Pompey’s return from his expedition against Mithridates, king of Pontus, two competitors, Hyrcanus and Aristobulus, were struggling for the crown of Judea.”

Tuicha mba’e guasu ojehechakuaa hag̃ua pe ñemomba’e guasu rembiasakue oiko hague ary 63 a.C.-pe [ojogueraháva 1863 rehe], peteĩ ñorairõ civil oikóva Jerusalén ryepýpe mbyte rupi. Uriah Smith he’i: “Pompeyo ojevy rire iñembyasyrãgui Mithridates, Ponto ruvicha guasu, rehegua, mokõi oñemoĩva joavy, Hircano ha Aristóbulo, oñorairõ hína Judea ruvicha guasu hag̃ua.”

The names “Hyrcanus” and “Aristobulus’ are both of Greek origin and have historical significance, particularly in the context of Jewish history during the Hellenistic period and the Hasmonean dynasty. “Hyrcanus” is derived from the Greek word “Hurkanos,” which likely originated from the word “hurkan,” meaning “wolf” in the Persian language. Hyrcanus was a name borne by several Hasmonean rulers. “Aristobulus” means “best counselor” or “best adviser.” Aristobulus was another name borne by several Hasmonean rulers. Both “Hyrcanus” and “Aristobulus” are names associated with significant figures in Jewish history during the Hasmonean period. They were rulers who played important roles in the governance and expansion of the Hasmonean Kingdom in Judea. The prophetic descendants and representatives of the Hasmonean kingdom in the time of Christ was the Pharisees.

Téra “Hyrcanus” ha “Aristobulus” mokõivéva oguereko ypy griegopegua ha oreko mba’e he’iséva histórico, ko’ýte judío rembiasakue ryepýpe pe ára helenístico ha pe dinastía hasmonea jave. “Hyrcanus” ou pe ñe’ẽ griego “Hurkanos”-gui, ha ikatu hag̃uáicha upevaite ou pe ñe’ẽ “hurkan”-gui, he’iséva “aguara” ñe’ẽ persa-pe. Hyrcanus hína peteĩ téra oiporúva’ekue heta mburuvicha hasmoneo. “Aristobulus” he’ise “ñemoñe’ẽrã iporãvéva” térã “mohendahára iporãvéva”. Aristobulus avei hína ambue téra oiporúva’ekue heta mburuvicha hasmoneo. Mokõivéva “Hyrcanus” ha “Aristobulus” ha’e téra ojoajúva umi tapicha iñimportánteva judío rembiasakuépe pe período hasmoneo jave. Ha’ekuéra va’ekue mburuvicha omba’apóva tembiapo iñimportántevape pe ñesãmbyhy ha pe mbotuichakue rupi pe Reino Hasmoneo Judéape. Umi ñemoñaréva profético ha umi representante pe reino hasmoneopegua Cristo tiémpope ha’e va’ekue fariseokuéra.

When Pompey conquered Jerusalem, two political parties both traced their origins back to the time of the revolt represented by Modein in 167 BC. Once Pompey was drawn into the rebellion, he determined to take Jerusalem and the political party of Aristobulus determined to resist him, but the party of Hyrcanus determined to open the gates to Pompey. Pompey then mounted his attack upon Jerusalem and three months later Jerusalem was forever under the jurisdiction of Rome.

Pompeyo ojapyhývo Jerusalén, mokõi aty polítiko mokõivéva ombojevy iñepyrũ pe pu’ãrã ojehechaukáva Modein-pe ary 167 a.C.-pe. Pompeyo oike rire pe pu’ãrãme, ha’e odesidi ojapyhy hag̃ua Jerusalén, ha Aristóbulo aty polítiko odesidi oñemoĩ hag̃ua hese; upéicha avei Hircano aty odesidi oipe’a hag̃ua okẽnguéra Pompeyo-pe. Upéi Pompeyo omoñepyrũ iñorairõ Jerusalén rehe, ha mbohapy jasy rire Jerusalén opyta hag̃ua opa ára Roma poguýpe.

By verse nineteen Egypt, the third and final obstacle, was taken by Rome. Then in verse twenty the birth of Christ is identified as Daniel begins to set forth how Rome would deal with God’s people in that history. In verses twenty-one and twenty-two Christ is crucified. In verse twenty-three, the league that began in 161 BC to 158 BC, is identified immediately after the verses that describe the cross where the apostate Jews proclaimed they “had no king, but Caesar.” The line of the apostate Jews, represented by the Maccabees, who had resisted the inroads of Greek religious philosophy, and in so doing formed an unholy relationship with Rome, follows the verse identifying the history of the cross, where the fruit of their unholy relationship was fully manifested.

Pe versíkulo diecinuevepe, Egipto, pe mbohapyha ha paha obstákulo, Roma ojapyhy. Upéi, pe versíkulo veintepe, Cristo reñói ojehechauka, Daniel oñepyrũvo omombe’u mba’éichapa Roma ojapo vaʼekue Tupã retãygua rehe upe tembiasakue ryepýpe. Pe versíkulo veintiunópe ha veintidóspe, Cristo ojekrusifika. Pe versíkulo veintitréspe, pe ñeʼẽmeʼẽ ojoaju vaʼekue ary 161 a.C. guive 158 a.C. peve, ojehechauka pyaʼe voi umi versíkulo rire omombeʼúva kurusu rehegua, moõ umi judío apóstata heʼi kuri hikuái “ndoroguerekói mburuvicha guasu ambue, César añoite.” Pe línea umi judío apóstata rehegua, ojehechaukáva Macabeokuéra rupive, umi ombohovái vaʼekue filosofía rrelihiósa griega oike hag̃ua, ha upéicha ojapóvo omoheñói peteĩ joaju marangatuʼỹva Roma ndive, ou pe versíkulo rire ohechauka hag̃ua kurusu rembiasakue, moõ upe joaju marangatuʼỹva yva ojehechauka hag̃uaite.

The Shekinah never returned to the temple that was erected after the seventy years of captivity. The last prophetic testimony, proclaimed by Malachi, was given about the middle of the fifth century BC. There had been no visible presence of God, nor any prophetic testimony for hundreds of years before the Maccabees stood up against the globalist Greek influence. At the beginning of their revolt, they accomplished the very rebellion that both Ptolemy and King Uzziah had attempted, when both kings sought to fulfill the role of priest and make an offering in the temple.

Pe Shekinah araka’eve ndojevyjeyváikuri pe témplo oñemopu’ã vaʼekuépe umi setenta ary jejapyhýpe rire. Pe marandu profético paha, oikuaaukáva Malakías, omeʼẽkuri pe siglo poha a.C. mbyte rupi. Ndaipóri vaʼekue Tupã ojehecháva oĩha, ha ndaipóri avei marandu profético, hetaite ary aja umi Macabeo opuʼã mboyve pe influencia griega globalista rehe. Iñepyrũme hembiapópekuéra, haʼekuéra ojapo upe rebeliónete Ptolomeo ha mburuvicha guasu Uzías ojapo hag̃ua iporã hag̃ua hembiapo, mokõivéva mburuvicha ohekávo omyenyhẽ pe paʼi rembiaporã ha oguerahávo ofrénda pe témplope.

Jonathan Apphus (also known as Jonathan Maccabeus), was one of the sons of Mattathias, who initiated the Maccabean Revolt, and he played a significant role in leading the Jewish rebellion against the Seleucid Empire. After the death of his brother Judas Maccabee in battle, Jonathan assumed leadership of the Maccabean forces. In addition to his military and political leadership, Jonathan also took on the role of high priest, serving as the spiritual leader of the Jewish people. Jonathan’s dual role as both leader and high priest marked a significant development in Jewish history, as it consolidated both political and religious authority within the Hasmonean dynasty. His leadership helped to strengthen Jewish autonomy and establish the Hasmonean rule in Judea.

Jonatán Áfuso (oikuaáva avei Jonatán Macabeo ramo) haʼe vaʼekue peteĩva Matatías raʼykuéragui, pe omoñepyrũvaʼekue pe Ñemoĩ Maccabea, ha oguereko vaʼekue peteĩ tembiapo tuicha mbaʼéva omotenondévo pe ñorairõ judío kuéra rehegua pe Imperio Seléucida rehe. Ityvýra Judas Macabeo omanóvo ñorairõme rire, Jonatán oguereko hag̃ua pe mburuvicharã pe maccabeo kuéra ñorairõhára rehegua. Ndahaʼéi añónte iñeisãmbyhy militar ha polítikape, Jonatán avei omyenyhẽ pe paʼi guasu rembiapo, oservívo ramo pe mburuvicha espiritual tavayguakuéra judío rehegua. Jonatán rembiapo mokõi hendáicha, mburuvicha ha avei paʼi guasu ramo, ohechauka peteĩ ñemotenonde tuicha mbaʼéva tembiasakue judía ryepýpe, pórke ombojoaju pe pokatu político ha religioso mokõivéva pe dinastía asmonea poguýpe. Iñeisãmbyhy oipytyvõ oñemombarete hag̃ua pe autonomía judía ha oñemoĩ hag̃ua pe ñangareko asmoneo Judea-pe.

The very sin which Ptolemy attempted after the victory of Raphia was accomplished at the very beginning of the revolt of the Maccabees. It was the same sin that was resisted by the priests in the time of king Uzziah, but the Maccabees’ professed defense of God’s temple services was a misguided and rebellious manifestation of the combination of church and state, and as such, typifies the rebellion of apostate Protestantism that is now rallying in support of Trump against the inroads of Biden’s globalist woke-ism.

Pe angaite Ptolomeo oñeha’ã va’ekue ojapo Rafia ñorairõ jehupyty rire, upéva voi ojejapo Maccabeo-kuéra pu’ã ñepyrũrãme. Ha’e va’ekue upe angaipa voi ojehovasa’ỹ ha oñemoĩ hag̃ua hese pa’i kuéra rréi Uzías araka’épe; hákatu Maccabeo-kuéra he’i hag̃uáicha oñedefendeha Tupã tupaópe oñemba’apo hag̃ua, upéva peteĩ jehechauka vai ha pu’ãreíva pe joaju tupao ha estado rehegua, ha upéicha rupi, ohechauka hag̃ua peteĩ techapyrãramo pe pu’ã Protestantísmo apóstata ko’ág̃a oñembyatýva oipytyvõ hag̃ua Trump-pe Biden globalista woke-ismo oike hag̃uáicha rehe.

The Bible teaches that you will know them by their fruits, and the Pharisees during the time of Christ were the final remnants of the Hasmonean dynasty that began with Mattathias. Mattathias, and the rebellion he began, bore the fruits of Pharisee-ism, as does the apostate Protestants that are supporting the concept of “Make America Great Again”. America was great when the Constitution was understood to keep church and state separated from each other, but at the counterfeit miracle represented by the victory that is commemorated by the feast of Hanukkah, the movement for Sunday legislation will come out into the open.

La Biblia ombo’e peikuaataha chupekuéra hi’a rupive, ha umi fariséokuéra Cristo tiempo aja ha’eva’ekue umi pahague rembyre dinastía hasmonea rehegua, oñepyrũva’ekue Matatías ndive. Matatías, ha pe ñorairõ oñepyrũva’ekue hese, ogueru va’ekue umi hi’a fariseísmo rehegua, péicha avei umi protestánte apóstata oipytyvõva pe concepto “Make America Great Again”. América tuicha va’ekue pórke pe Constitución oñentende va’ekue omoĩ hag̃ua iglesia ha Estado ojoavy hag̃uáicha peteĩgui ambue, ha katu pe milagro japu, oñerepresentáva pe jehupytypy ojehecharamóva pe arete Hanukkah rupive, upe jave pe movimiento ojepytasóva legislación dominical rehe osẽta hesakã hag̃uáicha maymávape.

We will continue this study in the next article.

Rojapóta ñaamoinge ko mba’e ñehesa’ỹijo pe artíkulo oúvape.

“Heretofore those who presented the truths of the third angel’s message have often been regarded as mere alarmists. Their predictions that religious intolerance would gain control in the United States, that church and state would unite to persecute those who keep the commandments of God, have been pronounced groundless and absurd. It has been confidently declared that this land could never become other than what it has been—the defender of religious freedom. But as the question of enforcing Sunday observance is widely agitated, the event so long doubted and disbelieved is seen to be approaching, and the third message will produce an effect which it could not have had before.

“Koʼág̃a peve umi oikuaaukáva mbohapyha ánhel marandu pegua añeteguakuéra oñemomorã jepi kuri sapyʼánte umi oñembopyʼaju hag̃uáicha añoite. Iñeʼẽkatuha hikuái pe intoleránsia relijiósava og̃uahẽtaha oisãmbyhy hag̃ua Tetã Unidos-pe, ha tupao ha tetã ojoajúta hag̃ua omuña umi oñangarekóva Tupã rembiapoukapyre, oñehenói vaʼekue mbaʼe ndopytáiva añetére ha hekopeʼỹva. Jerovia mbaretépe oñemombeʼu vaʼekue ko yvy arakaʼeve ndaikatumoʼãi hag̃ua oiko ambue mbaʼéramo ndahaʼéiva pe oikohaguéicha voi ymaite guive—pe ñemoʼãhára sãso relijiósape guarã. Péro pytuʼuʼỹme oñemyasãi rupi pe porandu domingo ñembojerovia mbaretépe oñemotenondévo, pe mbaʼe aréma oñemokyreʼỹʼỹva ha ndogueroviapýiva ojehecha oñemboja hag̃uáicha; ha mbohapyha marandu oguerúta peteĩ tembiapo ndaikatúiva ogueru yma.”

“In every generation God has sent His servants to rebuke sin, both in the world and in the church. But the people desire smooth things spoken to them, and the pure, unvarnished truth is not acceptable. Many reformers, in entering upon their work, determined to exercise great prudence in attacking the sins of the church and the nation. They hoped, by the example of a pure Christian life, to lead the people back to the doctrines of the Bible. But the Spirit of God came upon them as it came upon Elijah, moving him to rebuke the sins of a wicked king and an apostate people; they could not refrain from preaching the plain utterances of the Bible— doctrines which they had been reluctant to present. They were impelled to zealously declare the truth and the danger which threatened souls. The words which the Lord gave them they uttered, fearless of consequences, and the people were compelled to hear the warning.

“Opavave generación-pe Tupã ombou Itavaykuérape oja’o hag̃ua angaipa, ko yvy arýpe ha tupaópe avei. Péro tavayguakuéra oipota oñeñe’ẽ chupekuéra mba’e he’ẽ hag̃uánte, ha pe añetegua ipotĩ ha ndorekóiva mba’eve omoĩporã hag̃uáva ndaha’éi ojeguerohory hag̃uáva. Heta reformador, oñepyrũvo hembiapópe, odesidi oiporu hag̃ua tuicha aranduka ha ñangareko oñorairõvo tupaópe ha tetãme oĩva angaipa rehe. Ha’ekuéra oha’arõ, peteĩ tekove cristiano ipotĩva techapyrã rupive, oguerujey haguã tavayguakuérape Biblia remimbo’épe. Péro Tupã Espíritu ou hi’arikuéra, ou haguéicha Elías ári, omýivo chupe oja’o hag̃ua peteĩ mburuvicha guasu añávape ha peteĩ tetãgua ojehekýivape Tupãgui rembiapo vai; ndaikatúi okirirĩ pe hag̃ua omombe’úvo Biblia ñe’ẽ hekopete ha hesakãva— umi doctrina kuéra ndahasýiva chupekuéra hag̃ua omosarambi. Oñemomýi hag̃ua kyre’ỹme omombe’u pe añetegua ha pe peligro oha’arõva umi ánga. Umi ñe’ẽ Ñandejára ome’ẽ va’ekue chupekuéra, ha’ekuéra he’i, okyhyje’ỹre mba’épa oikóta; ha tavayguakuéra oñembojere ohendu hag̃ua pe ñe’ẽmondo.”

“Thus the message of the third angel will be proclaimed. As the time comes for it to be given with greatest power, the Lord will work through humble instruments, leading the minds of those who consecrate themselves to His service. The laborers will be qualified rather by the unction of His Spirit than by the training of literary institutions. Men of faith and prayer will be constrained to go forth with holy zeal, declaring the words which God gives them. The sins of Babylon will be laid open. The fearful results of enforcing the observances of the church by civil authority, the inroads of spiritualism, the stealthy but rapid progress of the papal power—all will be unmasked. By these solemn warnings the people will be stirred. Thousands upon thousands will listen who have never heard words like these. In amazement they hear the testimony that Babylon is the church, fallen because of her errors and sins, because of her rejection of the truth sent to her from heaven. As the people go to their former teachers with the eager inquiry, Are these things so? the ministers present fables, prophesy smooth things, to soothe their fears and quiet the awakened conscience. But since many refuse to be satisfied with the mere authority of men and demand a plain ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ the popular ministry, like the Pharisees of old, filled with anger as their authority is questioned, will denounce the message as of Satan and stir up the sin-loving multitudes to revile and persecute those who proclaim it.

“Upéicha oñemomarandúta pe mbohapyha ánhel remiandu. Oguahẽvo ára oñeme’ẽ hag̃ua pe tuichavéva pokatu reheve, Ñandejára omba’apóta tembiporu michĩva rupive, ogueraha hag̃ua umi oñemomarangatúva Iservísio-pe ime’ẽva akãme. Umi omba’apóva oñembosako’íta Hetee Espíritu ñemoĩ porã rupive, ha ndaha’éi hag̃ua umi mbo’ehakoty letrakuéra rehegua ñembokatupyry rupive. Kuimba’e jeroviapy ha ñembo’e rehegua oñemokyre’ỹta osẽ hag̃ua tapére marangatúpe, omombe’úvo umi ñe’ẽ Tupã ome’ẽva chupekuéra. Babilonia angaipakuéra oñemoĩta hesakã hag̃uáicha. Umi kyhyjepyrãva mba’e oúva pe tupão rembiapoukapy oñemboguata haguére mburuvicha reko civil rupive, pe espiritismo oike pya’e hag̃uáicha, pe pápakuéra pokatu ñemyasãi kañyhápe ha pya’e hag̃uáicha—opaite umíva ojehechakuaaukáta añetegua hag̃ua. Ko’ã marangatu momarandu rupive tavayguakuéra oñemokyre’ỹta. Miles ha miles ohendúta, araka’eve ndoikuaáiva ko’ãichagua ñe’ẽ. Ñemondýipe ohendu hikuái pe mombe’u he’íva Babiloniaha pe tupão, ho’a hag̃uére ijejavy ha iñangaipa rupi, omboyke haguére pe añetegua oñembouva’ekue chupe yvágagui. Ha tavayguakuéra oho jave umi iñemoaranduha ymave rendápe porandu kyre’ỹme, ¿Añetépa ko’ã mba’e? umi ministrokuéra ogueru mombe’ugua’u, omarandu mba’e iporã hag̃uánteva, omombytu’u hag̃ua ikyhyje ha omokirirĩ hag̃ua pe tekokuaa opáy va’ekue. Péro heta ndoipotái hag̃uáicha oñemyatyrõ kuimba’e kuéra pokatu añónte rehe, ha ojerure peteĩ hesakãva ‘Péicha he’i Ñandejára,’ upévare pe ministerio ojeguerohoryvéva, umi fariséokuéra yma guaréicha, henyhẽ pochy rehe ipokatu ojeaporanduháicha, omombe’úta pe marandu Satanás guaha hag̃ua ha omokyre’ỹta umi aty guasu angaipa rayhúva toñembohory ha toñem persecuti umi omomarandúva upéva.”

“As the controversy extends into new fields and the minds of the people are called to God’s downtrodden law, Satan is astir. The power attending the message will only madden those who oppose it. The clergy will put forth almost superhuman efforts to shut away the light lest it should shine upon their flocks. By every means at their command they will endeavor to suppress the discussion of these vital questions. The church appeals to the strong arm of civil power, and, in this work, papists and Protestants unite. As the movement for Sunday enforcement becomes more bold and decided, the law will be invoked against commandment keepers. They will be threatened with fines and imprisonment, and some will be offered positions of influence, and other rewards and advantages, as inducements to renounce their faith. But their steadfast answer is: ‘Show us from the word of God our error’—the same plea that was made by Luther under similar circumstances. Those who are arraigned before the courts make a strong vindication of the truth, and some who hear them are led to take their stand to keep all the commandments of God. Thus light will be brought before thousands who otherwise would know nothing of these truths.” The Great Controversy, 605, 606.

“Oñembyasy guasu ojepyso aja pyenda pyahúpe ha tavayguakuéra akãme oñemboherakuã aja Ñandejára léi oñemomirĩmava rehe, Satanás oñemýi mbarete. Pe pu’aka omoirũva pe marandu omopochýntevéta umi oñemoĩva hese. Umi pa’i aty ojapóta haimete yvypóra rembipota ári guáva ñeha’ã guasu omboty hag̃ua pe tesape ani hag̃ua ohesape ijatykuéra ári. Opa mba’e orekóva ipope rupive oñeha’ãta ombogue ha oñemboty hag̃ua ñomongeta ko’ã porandu tekovegua rehegua. Pe iglesia ohenói mburuvicha guasu civil poguýpe, ha ko tembiapópe, papista ha protestántekuéra ojoaju. Pe ñemongu’e ojeruréva arateĩ ára ñemomba’eguasu léi rupive oñembareteve ha ojekuaavévo, pe léi ojeiporúta umi oñangarekóva tembiapoukapykuéra rehe kóntrape. Oñemongyhyjéta chupekuéra multa ha ñembotypy rupive, ha ambuekuérame oñekuave’ẽta kuéra tendakuéra ndikatu hag̃uáicha oreko pokatu, ha ambue jehepyme’ẽ ha mba’eporã, oñemoĩ hag̃ua chupekuéra tohejarei hag̃ua ijerovia. Péro iñembohovái mbarete ha’éta: ‘Pehechauka oréve Ñandejára Ñe’ẽgui ore jejavy’—upe jerure ete voi Luther ojapo va’ekue umi circunstancia ojoguávape. Umi ogueraháva’ekue mburuvicha rendápe odefendepaite mbarete pe añetegua, ha umi ohenóiva peteĩteĩ apytégui oĩ ojepytasóva oñangareko hag̃ua opa Ñandejára tembiapoukapy rehe. Péicha pe tesape oguerúta heta tysýipe renondépe, umi ambuéva ndoikuaamo’ãi va’erã ko’ã añeteguakuéra mba’eve.” The Great Controversy, 605, 606.