In the last article, we identified six prophetic lines of controversy which have occurred in the history of Adventism from the Millerite time period until the present day. I contend the first and the last controversy over the “robbers of thy people” in verse fourteen of Daniel chapter eleven are prophetically identical. The Millerites understood the “robbers” to be Rome, and the Protestants taught the “robbers” were a Syrian king named Antiochus Epiphanes.
Pe artíkulo ohasávape, romoheñói hag̃ua seis líña profética de controversia oikovaʼekue Adventismo rembiasakue pukukue pe tiémpo Millerita guive koʼág̃a peve. Che amoneĩ pe peteĩha ha ipahague controversia rehegua umi “nde retayguakuéra apytépe mondaha” rehe, ojeʼéva Daniel kapítulo once, versículo catorce-pe, haʼeha proféticamente peteĩchante. Umi Millerita ontende vaʼekue umi “mondaha” haʼeha Roma, ha umi Protestante omboʼe vaʼekue umi “mondaha” haʼeha peteĩ mburuvicha Siria gua hérava Antiochus Epiphanes.
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.
Ha umi ára-pe heta oñemopuʼãta pe mburuvicha guasu ñemby gotyo guáre; avei ne retayguakuéra apytégui umi oñembotavy ha oporomondáva oñemopuʼãta omoañete hag̃ua pe visión; ha katu hoʼáta hikuái. Daniel 11:14.
Beginning in verse ten, and continuing through verse fifteen a warfare between the kingdoms of Egypt and Syria is represented. Egypt is the king of the south in the passage, and the Syrian king is represented as the king of the north. Verse ten identifies what the historians call the beginning of the Fourth Syrian war in 219 BC, verses eleven and twelve represent the battle of Raphia in 217 BC, and its aftermath. Then verses thirteen through fifteen identify the battle of Panium in 200 BC. In verses ten through fifteen the Syrian king is Antiochus Magnus, ruler of the Seleucid Empire.
Oñepyrũvo versíkulo diez-gui, ha oseguívo pe versíkulo quince peve, oñerrepresenta peteĩ ñorairõ Egipto ha Siria rréino kuéra apytépe. Egipto ha’e pe mburuvicha guasu yvy gotyo pe paso-pe, ha pe mburuvicha guasu sirio oñerrepresenta pe mburuvicha guasu yvate gotyo ramo. Pe versíkulo diez omombe’u umi historiadór ohenóiva pe ñepyrũ pe Irundyha Ñorairõ Siria-pegua ary 219 a.C.-pe, umi versíkulo once ha doce orrepresenta pe ñorairõ Rafia-pe ary 217 a.C.-pe, ha umi mba’e oiko va’ekue upe rire. Upéi umi versíkulo trece guive quince peve omombe’u pe ñorairõ Panio-pe ary 200 a.C.-pe. Umi versíkulo diez guive quince peve, pe mburuvicha guasu sirio ha’e Antíoco Magno, pe oisãmbyhýva pe Imperio Seléucida.
Verse ten represents the history when Antiochus Magnus begins a war to regain territory that was taken from the Seleucid kingdom years before. In the verse he regains the lost territory in 219 BC, but he temporarily ceases his aggressions, and seeks to regroup his military strength. He had regained control of the lost territory, and made it all the way to the border of Egypt, the southern kingdom ruled by the Ptolemy dynasty. Between 219 BC and 217 BC, both the king of the south and the king of the north made plans for the approaching battle of Raphia.
Pe versíkulo diez rehechauka pe tembiasakue oñepyrũhápe Antiochus Magnus peteĩ ñorairõ hag̃ua hag̃ua hag̃ua hag̃ua hag̃ua hag̃ua hag̃ua hag̃ua hag̃ua hag̃ua hag̃ua hag̃ua hag̃uáicha oguerujey hag̃ua yvykuéra ojegueraha vaʼekue pe mburuvicharenda Seléucida-gui arykuéra mboyve. Pe versíkulope haʼe oguerujey pe yvy okañy vaʼekue ary 219 a.C.-pe, ha upéi sapyʼami omboyke iñembyahýi ñorairõme, ha oheka ombyatyjey hag̃ua imbarete ñorairõgua. Oguerekojeyma vaʼekue pe yvy okañy vaʼekue, ha og̃uahẽ peve Egipto rembeʼýpe, pe mburuvicharenda yvy gotyogua oisãmbyhýva pe ñemoñare Ptolemaica. Ary 219 a.C. ha 217 a.C. apytépe, mokõivéva pe mburuvicha yvy gotyogua ha pe mburuvicha yvy yvate gotyogua ojapo umi tembiaporã oñembosakoʼi hag̃ua pe ñorairõ Rafia-pe oñembojávo.
The battle of Raphia took place in 217 BC, and the southern kingdom of Egypt, ruled by Ptolemy prevailed over the Syrian king Antiochus Magnus, king of the north in the prophetic passage. Then in verses thirteen through fifteen, seventeen years later in 200 BC, Antiochus Magnus, who had then formed an alliance with Philip of Macedon engaged Egypt in the battle of Panium. The southern kingdom of Egypt then had a child king of five or six years old, and Antiochus Magnus and Philip could not resist taking advantage of the child king of Egypt, and Antiochus Magnus prevailed in the battle of Panium. The three verses that represent the battle of Panium contain verse fourteen, where a new power is introduced into the prophetic narrative.
Pe ñorairõ guasu Raphia rehegua oiko ary 217 a.C.-pe, ha upe ñembosaráipe Egipto pegua ñeisãmbyhy ñemby gotyo, Ptolomeo oisãmbyhyva, ipu’aka Siria ruvicha Antíoco Magno ári, pe rréi yvate gotyogua, oje’e hag̃ua pe pasáhe profétikope. Upéi, umi versíkulo 13 guive 15 peve, paapy ary rire, ary 200 a.C.-pe, Antíoco Magno, upérõ ojapo vaʼekue peteĩ joaju Felipe Macedoniagua ndive, oike Egipto ndive pe ñorairõ Panium-pe. Upe jave Egipto pegua ñeisãmbyhy ñemby gotyogua oguereko vaʼekue peteĩ mitã rréi cinco térã seis ary añónte oguerekóva, ha Antíoco Magno ha Felipe ndaikatúi okytĩ hag̃ua ijehegui pe juruja oipuru hag̃ua pe mitã rréi Egipto pegua kangyha, ha Antíoco Magno ipu’aka pe ñorairõ Panium-pe. Umi mbohapy versíkulo ohechaukáva pe ñorairõ Panium rehegua oguereko versíkulo 14, upépe oñemoinge hag̃ua peteĩ mbarete pyahu pe narrasión profétikape.
The robbers of thy people are a different power than the Egyptian king of the south, or the Seleucid king of the north, or Philip the Macedonian ruler. The Millerites recognized that Rome is the robbers of thy people. One of the Hebrew root words that is translated as “robbers,” means breaker. Pagan Rome is represented in prophecy as the power who would break in pieces.
Nde retãygua mondaha kuéra ha’e peteĩ pu’aka ambuéva pe mburuvicha guasu Egipto guigua yvýpe gotyogua-gui, térã pe mburuvicha guasu Seleúcida yvýpe yvate gotyogua-gui, térã Felipe, pe mburuvicha guasu macedonio-gui. Umi Millerita ohechakuaa vaekue Roma ha’eha nde retãygua mondaha kuéra. Peteĩva umi ñe’ẽ rapo hebreo-gua oñembohasáva “mondaha” ramo, he’ise avei mba’e omboja’óva térã omondóva. Roma pagana oñerrepresenta profecíape ramo pe pu’aka omoñehundíva ha omboja’óva pehẽnguépe.
After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. Daniel 7:7.
Upéi ahecha pyharekue che visiónpe, ha péina peteĩ mymba irundyha, kyhyje hag̃uáva ha mba’eterei ipohýiva, ha imbarete eterei; ha oguereko hãi guasu fiérrogui: ho’u, omongu’i hag̃ua pehẽnguépe, ha opyrũ umi hembývare ipykuéra reheve; ha iñambue opaite mymbágui umi mboyvegua; ha oguereko pa horn. Daniel 7:7.
When Uriah Smith comments on the robbers, he quotes a historian who points out that robbers represent breakers.
Uriah Smith omombeʼu hag̃ua umi mondaha rehe, heʼi peteĩ historiadór ohechauka vaʼekue umi mondaha ohechauka hag̃ua umi ombyaíva.
“A new power is now introduced,—‘the robbers of thy people;’ literally, says Bishop Newton, ‘the breakers of thy people.’ Far away on the banks of the Tiber, a kingdom had been nourishing itself with ambitious projects and dark designs. Small and weak at first, it grew with marvelous rapidity in strength and vigor, reaching out cautiously here and there to try its prowess, and test the vigor of its warlike arm, till, conscious of its power, it boldly reared its head among the nations of the earth, and seized with invincible hand the helm of their affairs. Henceforth the name of Rome stands upon the historic page, destined for long ages to control the affairs of the world, and exert a mighty influence among the nations even to the end of time.
“Ko'ág̃a oñemoingekuaa ko'ág̃a, — ‘nde retãyguakuéra mondahakuéra’; he'iséva tee, he'i Obispo Newton, ‘nde retãyguakuéra mokañyhárape omboja'óva.’ Mombyry Tíber rembe'ýpe, peteĩ mburuvicha reko oñemongakuaa va'ekue ambición remiandu ha pytũva tembiapo reheve. Michĩ ha kangy ypy guive, okakuaa hechapyrãite pya'ete mbarete ha py'aguapýpe, iñakãrapu'ã porãme ojepyso mbeguekatu ko'ápe ha pépe ohecha hag̃ua ipokatu, ha oha'ã hag̃ua ijehérsito po guasu ñorairõme imbareteha, peve, oikuaávo imbareteha, py'aguasúpe omopu'ã iñakã yvy arigua tetãnguéra apytépe, ha ipo ndaikatúiva oñemboguejýpe ojapyhy ijapysẽme ijokuái. Upe guive Roma réra oĩ tembiasakue rogue kuatiápe, oñemboykéva heta ára pukukue hag̃ua omotenonde yvy arigua mba'eapo, ha oiporu hag̃ua tuichaite mba'epu tetãnguéra apytépe pe ára paha peve.”
“Rome spoke; and Syria and Macedonia soon found a change coming over the aspect of their dream. The Romans interfered in behalf of the young king of Egypt, determined that he should be protected from the ruin devised by Antiochus and Philip. This was BC 200, and was one of the first important interferences of the Romans in the affairs of Syria and Egypt.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 257.
«Roma oñe’ẽ; ha Siria ha Macedonia pya’e ohechakuaa peteĩ ñemoambue og̃uahẽha hína iñepytũmby rekove ra’ãnga rehe. Umi Romano oike hag̃ua pe mitã ruvicha Egiptogua rehehápe, oĩ porãgui ipy’a pe oñeñangareko hag̃ua hese ani hag̃ua ho’a pe ñehundi ojejapóva hese Antiochus ha Felipe rupive. Kóva oiko vaʼekue ary Cristo mboyve 200-pe, ha upéva vaʼekue peteĩva umi peteĩha jeike iñimportánteva umi Romano-kuéra rehegua Siria ha Egipto rembiapokuépe.» Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 257.
The prediction set forth in the verses was fulfilled in roughly twenty years from 219 BC unto 200 BC, but the prophets speak more about the last days than the days in which they lived.
Pe predicción oñemoĩva umi versíkulope oñekumpli mbohapy arýpe rupi 219 a. C. guive 200 a. C. peve, péro umi proféta oñeʼẽ hetave umi ára paháre hag̃ua umi ára oikove hague ipype.
“Each of the ancient prophets spoke less for their own time than for ours, so that their prophesying is in force for us. ‘Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.’ 1 Corinthians 10:11. ‘Not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.’ 1 Peter 1:12. . . .
“Káda maranduhára yma guare ñe’ẽkuri sa’ive ijára ararãgui ñandéve ĝuarã, upévare iñe’ẽmarandu ñanemba’apóva ñanderehe. ‘Ko’ã mba’e ojehu va’ekue chupekuéra techapyrãrõ; ha ojehai ñane’ẽmondýirã, ñande ári og̃uahẽmava ko yvy arapaha.’ 1 Corintios 10:11. ‘Ndaha’éi hag̃ua hag̃ua ijupekuéra, síno ñandéve hag̃uáicha omba’apo umi mba’ére, ko’ág̃a ojeherakuãva peẽme umi opredikáva peẽme evangelio Espíritu Santo yvágagui oñembou va’ekuére rupive; umi mba’e rehe jepe umi ánhel ohechase.’ 1 Pedro 1:12....”
“The Bible has accumulated and bound up together its treasures for this last generation. All the great events and solemn transactions of Old Testament history have been, and are, repeating themselves in the church in these last days.” Selected Messages, book 3, 338, 339.
“La Biblia ombyaty ha ombojoaju ipype hepyetereíva ko generación pahápe guarã. Opaite umi tembiasakue tuicháva ha umi mba’e guasu ha pohýi Tetãgui Tuja rembiasakue rehegua oiko va’ekue, ha oiko jey hína tupaope ko’ã ára pahápe.” Selected Messages, book 3, 338, 339.
Although Daniel did not live in the twenty-year time period we are considering, inspiration through the writings of Sister White informs is that much of the history recorded in Daniel eleven is to be repeated in the final fulfillment of Daniel eleven.
Jepémo Daniel ndoikovéi pe mokõi pa ary jave rojesarekohápe, inspiración, Hermana White jehaípe rupive, ñanemomarandu heta umi tembiasakue ojehaíva Daniel 11-pe ojerepetíva’erã Daniel 11 ñemohu’ã paha guasúpe.
“We have no time to lose. Troublous times are before us. The world is stirred with the spirit of war. Soon the scenes of trouble spoken of in the prophecies will take place. The prophecy in the eleventh of Daniel has nearly reached its complete fulfillment. Much of the history that has taken place in fulfillment of this prophecy will be repeated.” Manuscript Releases, number 13, 394.
“Ndajarekói tiempo ñamombo hag̃uáicha. Ára jejopy rehegua oĩ ñande renondépe. Ko yvytuicha oñemongu’e ñorairõ espíritu reheve. Pya’eterei oikóta umi mba’e vai oje’éva profecía-kuérape. Pe profecía oĩva Daniel capítulo once-pe hi’aguĩma oñemyenyhẽmbaite hag̃uáicha. Heta tembiasakue oikova’ekue ko profecía ñemyenyhẽme jeýta.” Manuscript Releases, número 13, 394.
Verses ten through fifteen of Daniel eleven represent the history of the last days which leads up to the soon-coming Sunday law, for verse sixteen identifies when Rome, for the first time, conquered the “glorious land.”
Daniel kapítulo once-pegua versíkulo diez guive quince peve ohechauka umi ára pahapegua rembiasakue ogueraháva pe léi domingo pya’éma ou hag̃uápe, pórke versíkulo dieciséis ohechauka araka’épa Roma, peteĩhaite jey, ipu’aka hag̃ua pe “yvy porãite” ári.
But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed. Daniel 11:16.
Ha pe oúva hiʼári hese, ojapóta hembipota tee hag̃ua, ha avave ndaikatúi opuʼã hese renondépe; ha opytáta pe yvy hechapyrãetéva ári, ha ipópe oñehundipaitéta. Daniel 11:16.
Daniel employs the expression “glorious land” twice in his writings. The first is verse sixteen, when literal pagan Rome conquered the literal glorious land of Judah.
Daniel oipuru je’ẽ “yvy porãite” mokõi jey hembiapokuépe. Peteĩha ha’e versíkulo dieciséis-pe, Roma pagã tee ogana jave Judá yvy porãite tee.
“Although Egypt could not stand before Antiochus, the king of the north, Antiochus could not stand before the Romans, who now came against him. No kingdoms were longer able to resist this rising power. Syria was conquered, and added to the Roman empire, when Pompey, BC 65, deprived Antiochus Asiaticus of his possessions, and reduced Syria to a Roman province.
“Egipto ndaikatúikuri oñembo’y Antioquio renondépe, pe mburuvicha guasu yvate gotyogua, Antioquio katu ndaikatúi oñembo’y romano-kuéra renondépe, koʼág̃a oúva hese. Mavave tetãnguéra ndoikovéima ikatúva ombohovái ko puʼaka opuʼãva. Siria oñemombaʼe, ha oñembojoaju Imperio Romano-pe, Pompeyo, 65 a.C., oipeʼárõ guare Antioquio Asiático-gui imbaʼekuéra, ha omboguejýramo Siria-pe peteĩ provincia romana-rõ.”
“The same power was also to stand in the Holy Land, and consume it. Rome became connected with the people of God, the Jews, by alliance, BC 162, from which date it holds a prominent place in the prophetic calendar. It did not, however, acquire jurisdiction over Judea by actual conquest till BC 63; and then in the following manner.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 259.
“Pe mbarete peteĩchagua vaʼekue avei oĩ vaʼerã Yvy Marangatupe, ha ohundi hag̃ua upéva. Roma ojoaju Tupã tavayguakuéra ndive, umi judío, peteĩ ñeʼẽmeʼẽ rupive, a.C. 162-pe; upe áragui oguereko peteĩ tenda ijojahaʼỹva maranduhai proféticape. Upéicharõ jepe, ndoguerekói kuri Judea ári poguype hag̃ua añeteguápe ñorairõ rupi a.C. 63 peve; ha upéi oiko upéicha ko yvypórape.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 259.
The other verse where Daniel employs the “glorious land” is in verse forty-one.
Ambue versíkulope Daniel oiporu pe ñeʼẽ “yvy porãite” haʼe versíkulo cuarenta y uno-pe.
He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon. Daniel 11:41.
Ha’e oike hag̃ua pe yvy porãitepe, ha heta tetã oñehundíta; ha koʼãva okañýta ipógui: Edom, Moab ha umi iñimportantevéva Ammón raʼykuéra apytégui. Daniel 11:41.
Verse forty-one of course follows verse forty, and verse forty begins with the words “and at the time of the end.” In The Great Controversy, Sister White identifies 1798 as the “time of the end,” so verse forty-one is identifying history that follows after the time of the end in 1798.
Pe versíkulo cuarenta y uno, por supuesto, osegi pe versíkulo cuarenta, ha pe versíkulo cuarenta oñepyrũ ko'ã ñe'ẽ rehe: “ha pe ára paha jave”. The Great Controversy-pe, Sister White ohechauka 1798 aryha “pe ára paha”, upévare pe versíkulo cuarenta y uno ohechauka tembiasakue oúva upe rire, pe ára paha 1798-pe.
“But at the time of the end, says the prophet, “Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.’ Daniel 12:4. . . . Since 1798 the book of Daniel has been unsealed, knowledge of the prophecies has increased, and many have proclaimed the solemn message of the judgment near.” The Great Controversy, 356.
“Péro ipaha opaha hag̃uápe, he’i maranduhára, ‘Heta oguatáta ko’ápe ha pépe, ha arandu okakuaáta.’ Daniel 12:4.... Ary 1798 guive Daniel kuatiañe’ẽ ojepe’áma hag̃ua, marandu profético rehegua arandu okakuaa, ha heta omombe’u hag̃ua pe marandu ipohyietéva juicio hi’aguĩmava rehegua.” The Great Controversy, 356.
The glorious land of verse forty-one is not literal ancient Judah of old, but spiritual modern Judah. The United States is spiritual modern Judah, and verse forty-one is identifying the soon-coming Sunday law in the United States.
Yvy ñemomba’eguasúva ñe’ẽjoaju irundy pa peteĩ-pe oje’eva’ekue ndaha’éi Judá yma guaréva tee, síno Judá pyahu yvypóra’ỹguáva. Tetã peteĩ reko Joajuha ha’e Judá pyahu yvypóra’ỹguáva, ha ñe’ẽjoaju irundy pa peteĩ ohechauka pe araka’e’ỹre ou hag̃uáicha arapokõindy léi Tetã peteĩ reko Joajuhápe.
Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 1 Corinthians 15:46.
Ndaha’éi ra’e upe espíritu rehegua pe oúva tenonderã, síno upe tekotevẽ yvypóra rehegua; ha upéi katu upe espíritu rehegua. 1 Corintios 15:46.
That Sunday law is typified by verse sixteen, for “much of the history that has taken place” in the fulfillment of Daniel eleven is to be repeated. Verses ten through fifteen in the last days, represents the history preceding and leading up to the Sunday law.
Pe léi domingo rehegua oñemombe’u hag̃ua versíkulo dieciséis-pe, pórke “heta tembiasakue oiko vaʼekue” Daniel once oñekumpli jave ojehu jey vaʼerã. Umi versíkulo diez guive quince peve, ára pahápe, ohechauka pe tembiasakue oúva mboyve ha ogueraháva pe léi domingo peve.
The king of the north in those five verses, as well as the king of the south who were fulfilled by the Seleucid king Antiochus Magnus and the Egyptian kings of the Ptolemaic kingdom, typify powers that are the focus of the history that leads to the soon-coming Sunday law. These verses identify the history of the movement of the one hundred and forty-four thousand, for verse ten identifies the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, and verse sixteen the soon-coming Sunday law.
Umi cinco versículope pe rréi yvategua, ha avei rréi surpegua, oñekumpli vaʼekue rréi seléusida Antíoco Magno ha umi rréi Egiptoygua, reino ptolemaicopegua, rupive, ohechauka mbaretekuérape haʼéva pe tembiasakue mbytépe oúva pe léi domingo og̃uahẽmbotaitévape peve. Koʼã versículo omombeʼu pe tembiasakue pe movimiento cien cuarenta y cuatro milgua rehegua, pórke pe versículo diez ohechauka Unión Soviética hoʼapa hague ary 1989-pe, ha pe versículo dieciséis pe léi domingo og̃uahẽmbotaitévape.
Christ emphasizes these verses by aligning verse ten with verse forty and verse sixteen with verse forty-one. The direct reference to the literal glorious land which typifies the spiritual glorious land of verse forty-one is the end of the six verses, and verse ten is the beginning.
Cristo omomba’e guasu ko’ã versíkulo, ombojoajúvo versíkulo diez versíkulo cuarenta ndive ha versíkulo dieciséis versíkulo cuarenta y uno ndive. Pe ñe’ẽrã peteĩchaite pe tetã hechapyrãetéva tee rehegua, ohechaukáva pe tetã espiritual hechapyrãetéva versíkulo cuarenta y uno-pe, ha’e pe apýra umi seis versíkulo rehegua, ha versíkulo diez ha’e iñepyrũ.
Just as Christ made sure verse sixteen has a direct connection with verse forty-one, and so too, verse ten has a direct connection with verse forty. The expression in verse ten “overflow, and pass through,” is the identical Hebrew phrase that is translated as “overflow and pass over,” in verse forty. The phrase is only found one other place in the Scriptures, but it is translated a little differently than verse ten and verse forty. Still, it is the same Hebrew phrase.
Cristo oasegura haguéicha pe versíkulo dieciséis oguereko hag̃ua peteĩ joaju hag̃ua directamente pe versíkulo cuarenta y uno ndive, upéicha avei pe versíkulo diez oguereko peteĩ joaju directo pe versíkulo cuarenta ndive. Pe ñe’ẽjoaju oĩva pe versíkulo diez-pe, “osyryry ha ohasa hag̃ua”, ha’e pe ñe’ẽ hebréope peteĩchaitéva oñembohasáva “osyryry ha ohasa ári hag̃ua” ramo pe versíkulo cuarenta-pe. Ko ñe’ẽjoaju ojejuhu peteĩ ambue hendápe añoite pe Escrituras-pe, péro oñembohasa michĩmi iñambue hag̃uáicha pe versíkulo diez ha pe versíkulo cuarenta-gui. Upéicharõ jepe, ha’e peẽteĩ ñe’ẽ hebréope.
And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel. Isaiah 8:8.
Ha’e ohasáta Judá rupi; opu’ãta ha ohasáta ári, oguahẽta voi ajúrare peve; ha ipepo kuéra ojepysóramo, omyenyhẽta nde yvy pukukue, Nde, Emanuel. Isaías 8:8.
Isaiah’s “overflow and go over,” is the same as verse ten’s “overflow, and pass through,” and verse forty’s “overflow and pass over.” More than this, each of the three verses are describing an attack from the king of the north upon the king of the south. In Isaiah, the northern king of Assyria, Sennacherib, was attacking Judah, the southern kingdom of Israel. In verse ten Antiochus Magnus, the northern king of the Seleucid Empire was attacking the southern kingdom of Egypt. In verse forty, the king of the north, the papal power, who had received a deadly wound at the beginning of verse forty, was attacking the southern atheistic power of the Soviet Union. Each verse represents the same prophetic structure of a conflict between the kings of the north and south, and in each verse the northern king “overflows and passes over.”
Pe ñe’ẽ “ojejaho’i ha ohasa hag̃ua” Isaíaspe, peteĩchaite versíkulo diez-pe he’ívagui “ojejaho’i ha ohasa”, ha versíkulo cuarenta-pe “ojejaho’i ha ohasa ári”. Ko’ýva ári, umi mbohapy versíkulo peteĩteĩva omombe’u peteĩ ñorairõ ñembosako’i rréi yvateguáguigua ojapóva rréi yvy gotyo peguáre. Isaíaspe, norte pegua Asiria rréi, Senaquerib, oattacka va’ekue Judáre, Israel pe tetãnguéra sur pegua. Versíkulo diez-pe, Antíoco Magno, norte pegua rréi Imperio Seléucida pegua, oattacka va’ekue Egipto retã sur peguáre. Ha versíkulo cuarenta-pe, rréi yvategua, pe pokatu papal, oñeme’ẽ hague ichupe peteĩ jekutu omano hag̃uáicha versíkulo cuarenta ñepyrũme, oattacka va’ekue pe pokatu atea sur pegua Unión Soviética rehe. Káda versíkulo orrepresenta peteĩchagua estructura profética peteĩ conflicto rehegua rréi yvategua ha rréi yvy gotyo pegua apytépe, ha káda versíkulope pe rréi yvategua “ojejaho’i ha ohasa ári.”
Isaiah’s testimony and verse ten both identify that when the northern king attacks he ceases before entering into the capital of the southern kingdom. Sennacherib brought his warfare to the walls of Jerusalem, and no further. In 219 BC, Antiochus Magnus came to the border of Egypt and stopped. Then he lost the battle of Raphia that occurred two years later in 217 BC. Sennacherib came to the walls of Jerusalem and lost the battle as God intervened.
Isaías remimombe’u ha pe versíkulo diez mokõivéva ohechauka porã pe mburuvicha guasu yvateguáguio oattacka jave, opytu’uha oike mboyve táva guasu pe tetã ñemby gotyo pegua. Senaquerib ogueru iñorairõ Jerusalén murálla peve, ha upépe añoite. Áño 219 Cristo mboyve, Antíoco Magno og̃uahẽ Egipto rembe’ýpe ha opyta. Upéi operde pe ñorairõ Rafia pegua, oikóva mokõi áño rire, áño 217 Cristo mboyve. Senaquerib og̃uahẽ Jerusalén murálla peve ha operde pe ñorairõ, Tupã oike hag̃uére hag̃ua.
Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning the king of Assyria, He shall not come into this city, nor shoot an arrow there, nor come before it with shield, nor cast a bank against it. By the way that he came, by the same shall he return, and shall not come into this city, saith the Lord. For I will defend this city, to save it, for mine own sake, and for my servant David’s sake. And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the Lord went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses. So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh. And it came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him with the sword: and they escaped into the land of Armenia. And Esarhaddon his son reigned in his stead. 2 Kings 19:32–37.
Upévare péicha he’i Ñandejára Asíria ruvicha guasu rehegua: “Ndoikemo’ãi ko távape, ni omombo’ãi upépe peteĩ hu’y; ndoumo’ãi henondépe ñemo’ãha reheve, ni omopu’ãmo’ãi hese yvyty guasu ñorãirõrã. Tape oú haguéicha, upe tape rupive jeýnte ojevymo’ãta, ha ndoikemo’ãi ko távape”, he’i Ñandejára. “Che adefendéta ko táva, asave hag̃ua, che réra rehehápe, ha che rembiguái David rehehápe”. Upéi upe pyharekue Ñandejára ánhel osẽ ha ojuka Asíria-kuéra ñorairõhára renda-pe ciento ochenta y cinco mil kuimba’épe; ha opáy mboyve pyhareve, péina, opavave oĩ omanóva retekue ramo. Upévare Senaquerib, Asíria ruvicha guasu, oho, ojere ha opyta Nínivepe. Ha oiko aja ha’e oñemomba’e guasu hag̃ua itupã Nisroc róga-pe, Adramelec ha Sharezer, ita’ýra kuéra, ojuka chupe kysepuku reheve; ha ha’ekuéra okañy Armenia retãme. Ha Esar-hadón, ita’ýra, oguapy hendaguépe mburuvicha guasu ramo. 2 Reyes 19:32–37.
In 1989, the king of the north swept away the Soviet Union, but he did not overcome the capital of the Soviet Union. Russia was left standing. The next battle, typified in verses eleven and twelve, was the battle of Raphia, which was also typified by the overthrow of Sennacherib’s army and his subsequent death which identifies a victory for the southern king, which was Judah in the testimony of Sennacherib, and Raphia in the testimony of Antiochus Magnus.
Áño 1989-pe, pe mburuvicha yvate gotyo gua omboguejy ha omosẽ pe Unión Soviética, ha katu ndojepokuaái pe Unión Soviética táva guasúre. Rusia opyta oñembo’yháicha. Pe ñorairõ oúta upe rire, oñemoha’ãngáva umi versíkulo once ha doce-pe, ha’e pe ñorairõ Ráfia-pe, upéva avei oñemoha’ãngákuri pe ejército Senaquerib-gua oñehundi haguére ha upéi ha’e omano haguére, upéva ohechauka peteĩ jeity pe mburuvicha yvýpe guápe g̃uarã, ha’éva Judá pe testimonio Senaquerib-pe, ha Ráfia pe testimonio Antiochus Magnus-pe.
Verse ten provides a direct connection to verse forty and verse sixteen provides a direct connection with verse forty-one. Verses ten through sixteen represent the history of 1989 unto the Sunday law. The verse represents a hidden history in verse forty that begins with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 and continues unto the Sunday law. Verse ten also directly connects the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six to the hidden history, but that line of truth is outside what we are here setting forth.
Pe versíkulo diez ome’ẽ peteĩ joaju hag̃ua hag̃ua versíkulo cuarenta rehe, ha versíkulo dieciséis ome’ẽ peteĩ joaju hag̃ua hag̃ua versíkulo cuarenta y uno rehe. Umi versíkulo diez guive dieciséis peve ohechauka pe tembiasakue ary 1989 guive pe léi domingo peve. Pe versíkulo ohechauka peteĩ tembiasakue kañymby versíkulo cuarenta-pe, oñepyrũva Unión Soviética ho’águi ary 1989-pe ha oho hag̃ua pe léi domingo peve. Versíkulo diez avei ombojoaju hag̃ua hag̃ua umi “siete tiempos” Levítico veintiséis-pe pe tembiasakue kañymby rehe, hákatu upe líneape añetegua ndaha’éi ko’ápe ñamyesakãva hína.
In Millerite history the first of six primary controversies within Adventism concerning the correct identification of Rome occurred, and it was over who the robbers of verse fourteen represented. The Protestants held they represented Antiochus Epiphanes, and the Millerites identified them as Rome. In the last controversy of Adventism concerning the correct identification of Rome it is also over the robbers of verse fourteen. One class, represented by the Millerites, is upholding the foundational understanding of the Millerites, which was endorsed by the Spirit of Prophecy.
Miller ymaguare, pe peteĩha seis controversia principal Adventismo ryepýpe, oñe’ẽva Roma rehe jehechakuaa hekopete hag̃ua, oiko; ha upéva hína mávapa versíkulo catorce pegua mondaha kuéra rehe. Protestante kuéra he’i kuri umíva ohechauka Antiochus Epiphanes-pe, ha Millerite kuéra ombohéra chupekuéra Roma ramo. Pe ipahápegua controversia Adventismo rehegua, oñe’ẽva avei Roma jehechakuaa hekopete hag̃ua, upéva avei hína versíkulo catorce pegua mondaha kuéra rehe. Peteĩ aty, Millerite kuéra rehe ojehechaukáva, oipytyvõ hína pe ñeikũmby ypykue Millerite kuéra rehegua, pe Espíritu de Profecía omoneĩva’ekue.
“I have seen that the 1843 chart was directed by the hand of the Lord, and that it should not be altered; that the figures were as He wanted them; that His hand was over and hid a mistake in some of the figures, so that none could see it, until His hand was removed.” Early Writings, 74.
“Ahecha kuri pe kárta 1843-pegua oĩhague ñandejára po poguýpe, ha ndojehechaukavéiva’erãha ambueicha; pe ta’angakuaa ha papapykuéra oĩhague Ha’e oipotaháicha; ha Ipo oĩhague hi’ári ha omokañyhague peteĩ jejavy peteĩva umi papapy apytépe, avave ndohechakuaái hag̃uáicha, pe Ipo oñemboyke peve.” Early Writings, 74.
That sacred chart identifies the controversy with the notation of 164 BC.
Upe cuadro marangatú ohechauka pe controversia pe jehai 164 a.C. reheve.
“164 Death of Antiochus Epiphanes, who of course, stood not up against the Prince of Princes, as he had been 164 yrs. dead before the Prince of Princes was born.”
“164 Mano omano Antiochus Epífanes rehegua, ha’e ningo, añetehápe, ndopu’ãi kuri Mburuvicha guasueta Ruvicha rovái, ha’e oĩ haguére 164 ary omano rire Mburuvicha guasueta Ruvicha heñói mboyve.”
The reference of that controversy upon the sacred chart represents the only truth represented upon the sacred chart that is not based upon a prophetic passage from God’s Word. In doing so it identifies a waymark, not of biblical history, but of Advent history, and “it should not be altered,” for the controversy identifies how the prophetic vision is established. To reject that foundational truth is to simultaneously reject the authority of the Spirit of Prophecy’s endorsement of the sacred chart.
Pe ñe’ẽñorairõ rehegua jehechakuaa pe kuatiañe’ẽ marangatu ári ohechauka pe añetegua peteĩnte ojehechaukáva pe kuatiañe’ẽ marangatu ári ndaipóriva ipyahúva peteĩ pasáhe profético Tupã Ñe’ẽgui. Péicha ojapóvo, ohechauka peteĩ techaukaha, ndaha’éiva tembiasakue bíblicopegua, síno tembiasakue adventistapegua, ha “ndovaléiramo oñemoambue hag̃ua”, pe ñe’ẽñorairõgui ojekuaa mba’éichapa oñemopyenda pe visión profética. Oñemboykévo upe añetegua ypykue, peteĩchaite oñemboyke avei pe Espíritu de Profecía ome’ẽva iñe’ẽmboaje pe kuatiañe’ẽ marangatúpe.
“The very last deception of Satan will be to make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God. ‘Where there is no vision, the people perish’ (Proverbs 29:18). Satan will work ingeniously, in different ways and through different agencies, to unsettle the confidence of God’s remnant people in the true testimony. He will bring in spurious visions to mislead, and will mingle the false with the true, and so disgust people that they will regard everything that bears the name of visions as a species of fanaticism; but honest souls, by contrasting false and true, will be enabled to distinguish between them.” Selected Messages, book 2, 78.
“Pe ñembotavy pahaite Satanás rehegua ha’éta omoĩ hag̃ua mba’eve’ỹramo Tupã Espíritu testimonio. ‘Ndaipórihápe visión, tavayguakuéra oñehundi’ (Proverbios 29:18). Satanás omba’apóta katupyry eterei hag̃ua, opaichagua tape rupive ha opaichagua tembiporu rupive, omokangy hag̃ua jerovia Tupã tavaygua hembýva oguerekóva pe testimonio añeteguáre. Omoingéta visión japúva hag̃ua ombotavy, ha ombojehéta pe japu pe añeteguándi; upéicha rupi ombojeguarúta tapichakuérape, ha ha’ekuéra ohecháta opa mba’e oguerekóva visión réra peteĩ fanatismoichagua ramo; péro umi ánga hekopotĩva, omoñondévo pe japu ha pe añetegua, ikatúta oikuaa hag̃ua mba’épa hína peteĩ ha mba’épa ambue.” Selected Messages, libro 2, 78.
The last controversy of “the robbers of thy people”, is the same as the first, and without an understanding of the symbol which establishes the vision, “the people perish.” They “perish” because they “make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God.”
Pe “nde retaty nde tavayguakuéra apytégui”, ha’e upe peteĩhaichaite, ha ndoikuaáiramo mba’éichapa pe techaukaha omoĩ mbarete pe visión, “tetãygua oñehundi.” Ha’ekuéra “oñehundi” pórke “omboyke mba’eve’ỹramo pe testimonio Espíritu Ñandejára rehegua.”
The other class claims that the United States is represented as the robbers of verse fourteen. That class is unable or unwilling to see that Antiochus Magnus in verses ten through fifteen represents the United States. Just as the Protestants of Millerite history claimed the robbers were Antiochus, the class who is unwilling to see identifies the robbers as the power (the United States) that is typified by Antiochus.
Ambue aty he’i Estados Unidos ojehechauka hague mondaha-kuéra ramo versíkulo catorce-pe. Umi va’e ndaikatúi térã ndoipotái ohecha Antiochus Magnus, versíkulo diez guive quince peve, orrepresentaha Estados Unidos-pe. Oiko haguéicha protestánte kuéra historia Millerita-pe he’i va’ekue mondaha-kuéra ha’eha Antiochus, upe aty ndoipotáiva ohecha ombojoaju mondaha-kuérape pe pu’aka rehe (Estados Unidos) ojetipifikáva Antiochus rupive.
Sennacherib’s attack upon Judah that reached to the capital, Jerusalem, and that failed, was led by Sennacherib’s general, Rabshakeh.
Senakerib ojapo Judá rehe, og̃uahẽva pe táva guasu Jerusalén peve ha opytáva’ekue ndojapóikuaái, omoakã vaʼekue hese iñorairõ ruvicha, Rabsaqué.
Now therefore, I pray thee, give pledges to my lord the king of Assyria, and I will deliver thee two thousand horses, if thou be able on thy part to set riders upon them. How then wilt thou turn away the face of one captain of the least of my master’s servants, and put thy trust on Egypt for chariots and for horsemen? Am I now come up without the Lord against this place to destroy it? The Lord said to me, Go up against this land, and destroy it. Then said Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and Shebna, and Joah, unto Rabshakeh, Speak, I pray thee, to thy servants in the Syrian language; for we understand it: and talk not with us in the Jews’ language in the ears of the people that are on the wall. But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you? Then Rabshakeh stood and cried with a loud voice in the Jews’ language, and spake, saying, Hear the word of the great king, the king of Assyria. 2 Kings 18:23–28.
Ko'ág̃a rupi, ajerure ndéve reme'ẽ hag̃ua ñeñeme'ẽ che ruvicha, Asiria ruvicha guasúpe, ha che ame'ẽta ndéve mokõi warã aravo, ikatúramo nde nde rejuhu hag̃ua hi'ári oñemoĩ hag̃uáicha kuimba'e oikuaáva kavaju ári jehejárõ. Mba'éicha piko upéicharõ remomombyryta peteĩ mburuvicha rova, ha'éva michĩvéva jepe che jára rembiguái apytégui, ha rejeroviáta Egipto rehe kárro ñorairõrã ha kavaju arigua rehe? Añetehápe piko ko'ág̃a aju yvate ko tenda rehe Ñandejára'ỹre, ahundipa hag̃ua? Ñandejára he'i chéve: “Eho yvy rehe, ha ehundi.” Upérõ Eliaquim, Hilcías ra'y, ha Sebna, ha Joah, he'i Rabsaquépe: “Rojerure ndéve, eñe'ẽ nde rembiguáipe sirio ñe'ẽme; roikuaa hag̃ua. Ani reñe'ẽ orendive judío ñe'ẽme umi tetãygua oĩvape murálla ári renondépe.” Ha Rabsaqué he'i chupekuéra: “Piko che jára che mbou pene járape ha peẽme añoite hag̃ua ha'e ko'ã ñe'ẽ? Ndajatýi piko umi kuimba'épe oguapývape murálla ári, ha'ekuéra okaru hag̃uáicha ijehegui osẽvagui ha ho'u hag̃ua pende ndive hikuái pende ty?” Upéi Rabsaqué oñembo'y ha osapukái hatã judío ñe'ẽme, ha oñe'ẽ he'ívo: “Pehendúke pe mburuvicha guasu ñe'ẽ, pe rréi Asiria pegua ñe'ẽ.” 2 Reyes 18:23–28.
Rabshakeh was presenting not his words, but the words of Sennacherib, king of Assyria. In Daniel eleven verse forty the king of the north is the papal power who at the time of the end in 1798 received a deadly wound at the hands of atheistic France, the southern king. In the verse the king of the north ultimately retaliates and overflows the southern kingdom (the USSR) in 1989. When the king of the north accomplished that work, he brought with him “chariots, and with horsemen, and many ships.” “Chariots and horsemen” represent military might and “ships” represent economic power. Those symbols identify the United States as papal Rome’s proxy army in the victory of 1989, as typified by Rabshakeh. Antiochus Magnus in verse ten through fifteen represents the United States, and as William Miller correctly identified that the word “also” in verse fourteen establishes a new power entering the prophetic narrative, the “robbers” must represent a power distinct from either the Ptolemaic kings of the south, or Antiochus the king of the north or Philip of Macedon.
Rabsaqué ndohechauka ndaha’éi iñe’ẽnguéra tee, síno Senaquerib, Asiria ruvicha guasu ñe’ẽnguéra. Daniel, capítulo once, versículo cuarenta-pe, pe mburuvicha yvategua ha’e pe pokatu papal, pe ára paha 1798-pe ojapóva peteĩ herida omano hag̃uáicha Francia atea poguýpe, pe mburuvicha yvýguagua. Pe versículo-pe, pe mburuvicha yvategua ipahápe oñepyrũ jey ñorãirõme ha oñembyapapu pe mburuvicha yvýguagua rekoha ári (URSS) ary 1989-pe. Upe tembiapo pe mburuvicha yvategua omboguatárõ guare, ogueru hendive “kárro kuéra, kavaju arigua kuéra ha heta peteĩ barco kuéra.” “Kárro ha kavaju arigua kuéra” ohechauka pokatu militar, ha “barco kuéra” ohechauka pokatu económico. Umi ta’anga simbólico ojekuaa hag̃ua Estados Unidos ha’eha Roma papal rembijokuái ñorãirõme pe jehupyty 1989-peguápe, Rabsaqué rupive oñemombe’uháicha. Antíoco Magno, versículo diez guive quince peve, orrepresenta Estados Unidos-pe; ha William Miller hekopete ohechakuaaháicha pe ñe’ẽ “avei” versículo catorce-pe omopyenda peteĩ pokatu pyahu oikeha pe marandu profético-pe, umi “mondaha kuéra” tekotevẽ orepresenta peteĩ pokatu iñambuéva umi Ptolemeo mburuvicha yvýguaguágui, térã Antíoco pe mburuvicha yvateguágui, térã Felipe Macedonia-gua.
“The king of the south, in this verse, without any doubt, means king of Egypt; but what the robbers of thy people means remains yet a doubt perhaps to some. That it cannot mean Antiochus, or any king of Syria, it is plain; for the angel had been talking about that nation for a number of verses previous, and now says, ‘also the robbers of thy people,’ etc., evidently implying some other nation. I will admit that Antiochus did perhaps rob the Jews; but how could this ‘establish the vision,’ as Antiochus is not spoken of anywhere in the vision as performing any act of that kind; for he belonged to what is called the Grecian kingdom in the vision. Again, ‘to establish the vision,’ must mean to make sure, complete, or fulfill the same.” William Miller, Miller’s Works, Lecture 6, 89.
“Pe rréi ñemby gotyo gua, ko versíkulope, mba’eveichavérõ ndaipóri duda, he’ise Egipto rréi; ha mba’épa he’ise ‘nde retayguakuéra mondahakuéra’, upéva katu oime gueteri, ikatu hag̃uáicha, duda peteĩva ambuépe g̃uarã. Ndaikatúi he’ise Antioquíape, térã Siria rréi mboyve oimeraẽva, upéva hesakã porã; pórke ánhel oñe’ẽ hína kuri upe tetã rehe heta versíkulo mboyve guive, ha ko’ág̃a he’i: ‘avei nde retayguakuéra mondahakuéra’, h.a., ohechauka porã hag̃uáicha ambue tetã. Che amoneĩta Antioquía ikatu hague ra’e omonda umi hudíope; péro mba’éichapa ko mba’e ‘omopyenda pe visión’, Antioquía niko mamove ndañeñe’ẽi hese pe visiónpe ojapo hag̃ua tembiapo péicha; pórke ha’e oike pe oje’éva rréino griegope pe visiónpe. Avei, ‘omopyenda pe visión’, he’iseva’erã ombojerovia hag̃ua, omohu’ã hag̃ua, térã omoañete hag̃ua upéva.” William Miller, Miller’s Works, Lecture 6, 89.
“Antiochus” was a name selected by many of the kings of the Syrian Seleucid Empire. The founder of that empire was Seleucid Nicator, and somewhere between twenty-six to thirty kings made up the entire list of Seleucid kings. Many of those kings chose the name “Antiochus”, just as the many popes choose throne-names when they are selected as popes. The popes are all “antichrist,” which means “against Christ”. The word “anti” meaning “against”. As antichrists they have taken the name of their spiritual forefather, who is Satan. Satan and the popes are both identified as the antichrist in inspiration.
“Antíoco” niko peteĩ téra heta mburuvicha guasu Siria-pegua, imperio seléusida-gua, oiporavova’ekue. Pe imperio moñepyrũhára va’ekue Seléucida Nicator, ha peteĩ hendápe mokõi pa seis guive mbohapypa peve mburuvicha guasu omboapýkuri pe tysýi kompletoite mburuvicha guasu seléusida-kuéra rehegua. Heta umi mburuvicha guasu apytégui oiporavo pe téra “Antíoco”, peteĩcha umi heta papa-kuéra oiporavoháicha téra guapyha rehegua ojeporavóramo chupekuéra papa-rã. Papa-kuéra opavave ha’e “anticristo”, he’iséva “Cristo rehe oñemoĩva”. Pe ñe’ẽ “anti” he’iséva “rehe oñemoĩva”. Anticristo-kuéra ramo ogueraha hikuái itúva espiritual téra, ha’éva Satanás. Satanás ha papa-kuéra mokõivéva oñemombe’u anticristo ramo pe ñe’ẽme’ẽ rupive.
“The determination of antichrist to carry out the rebellion he began in heaven will continue to work in the children of disobedience.” Testimonies, volume 9, 230.
“Anticristo rembipota aty ogueroguatávo pe tembiapo pu’aka’ỹme omoñepyrũ vaekue yvágape, osegíta omba’apo umi ñemomarandu’ỹ ra’ykuérape.” Testimonies, volúmen 9, 230.
A pope is a representative of Satan, and thus they are both against Christ, and therefore are the “antichrist.” They choose a name when they take the position as pope, and become Satan’s earthly representative.
Peteĩ pópape ha’e Satanás remimbou, ha upéicha rupi mokõivéva oĩ Cristo rovái, ha upévare ha’e hikuái “anticristo”. Oiporavo hikuái peteĩ téra oguapy jave pópape ramo, ha upéi oiko Satanás remimbou yvy arigua ramo.
“To secure worldly gains and honors, the church was led to seek the favor and support of the great men of earth; and having thus rejected Christ, she was induced to yield allegiance to the representative of Satan—the bishop of Rome.” The Great Controversy, 50.
“Ombojerure hag̃ua mba’erepy ha yvy ariguáva ñemomba’eguasu, pe tupao oñemboguata oheka hag̃ua yvy arigua kuimba’e guasukuéra ñepytyvõ ha iporavorã; ha péicha, omboykévo Cristo-pe, oñembopy’a guasu ojepytaso hag̃ua iñe’ẽrendúpe Satanás rembiokuáipe — Roma obispo-pe.” The Great Controversy, 50.
By their works you shall know them, and the popes carry on the same work as Satan.
Hembiapokuéra rupi peikuaáta chupekuéra, ha umi pápa omotenonde Satanás rembiapo peteĩchante.
“Through the pope of Rome the same work has been carried on here on earth as was carried on in the courts of heaven before the expulsion of the prince of darkness. Satan sought to correct the law of God in heaven, and to supply an amendment of his own. He exalted his own judgment above that of his Creator, and placed his will above the will of Jehovah, and in this way virtually declared God to be fallible. The pope also takes the same course and, claiming infallibility for himself, seeks to adjust the law of God to meet his own ideas, thinking himself able to correct the mistakes he thinks he sees in the statutes and commands of the Lord of heaven and earth. He virtually says to the world, I will give you better laws than those of Jehovah. What an insult is this to the God of heaven!” Signs of the Times, November 19, 1894.
“Roma pápare rupive ko yvy ape ári ojepytaso hína pe tembiapo peteĩchagua ojeguerekókuri yvágape, mboyve pytũ ruvicha oñemosẽrõ guare. Satanás oheka vaekue omoambue hag̃ua Tupã léi yvágape, ha omoĩ hag̃ua ipromiénda tee. Omomba'eguasu imba'ekuaa tee Ijapoharé mba'ekuaa ári, ha omoĩ ivoluntad Jehová rembipota ári, ha péicha añetehápe he'i Tupã ikatuha ojavy. Páva avei oguata upe tape rupive, ha oguerekoha ndaje jejavy'ỹ, oheka omoĩporã hag̃ua Tupã léi ojokupyty hag̃ua imandu'a tee rehe, oimo'ãvo ikatuha omoĩporã umi jejavy ha'e ohecháva yvágui ha yvy ári Jára estatúto ha mandamiéntope. Añetehápe he'i ko yvy apeguakuérape: Che ame'ẽta peẽme léi iporãvéva Jehová léigui. Mba'eichaitépa peteĩ ñembohory vaiete kóva Yvágapegua Tupã rehe!” Signs of the Times, noviembre 19, 1894.
Though Seleucus Nicator established the Seleucid Empire, many of the following kings chose the name “Antiochus,” in honor, not of Seleucus, but of his father. Seleucus’ father, Antiochus, was a nobleman and a general in the service of King Philip II of Macedon, who was the father of Alexander the Great. This noble status and military background helped establish the foundation for Seleucus’s own prominent role and subsequent rise to power after the death of Alexander the Great.
Seleuco Nicátor omoñepyrũramo jepe pe Imperio seléucida, heta umi mburuvichakuéra oúvava upéi oiporavo héra “Antíoco”, ndaha’éi omomba’eguasúvo Seleúcope, síno itúvape. Seleuco ru, Antíoco, va’ekue peteĩ karai yvate rekove ha peteĩ ñorairõ ruvicha omba’apóva Mburuvicha guasu Felipe II Macedoniagua rembiguáiramo, ha’e va’ekue Alejandro el Grande ru. Ko teko yvate ha pe tembiasakue militar oipytyvõ omoĩ hag̃ua pyenda Seleuco rembiapo tuicháva pegua ha upe rire ipu’aka hag̃ua, Alejandro el Grande omanóvo rire.
Seleucus’ kingdom was established when he took control of three of the four areas of Alexander’s kingdom. Rome also conquers three geographical powers in order to take control and become the king of the north. When Seleucus had secured the east, the west and the north he became the king of the north in the historical narrative, and his capital was the city of Babylon. Many of the following kings chose the name “Antiochus” when they took the northern throne in order to honor their political forefather. The parallel is easy to see, if you choose to see. If you don’t, you don’t.
Seleuco rréino oñemopyenda hag̃ua, haʼe ojagarra jave ipoguýpe mbohapy umi irundy hendágui Alejandro rréinogui. Roma avei ipuʼaka mbohapy mburuvicha guasu jeográfiko ári ikatu hag̃uáicha ojagarra hag̃ua puʼaka ha oiko hag̃ua pe mburuvicha guasu yvate pegua. Seleuco ombohekopyahu rire pe kuarahyresẽ, pe kuarahyreike ha pe yvate, oiko chugui pe mburuvicha guasu yvate pegua pe tembiasakue ñemombeʼúpe, ha itavusu vaʼekue hína táva Babilonia. Heta umi mburuvicha guasu oúva upe rire oiporavo vaʼekue téra “Antíoco” oguapy jave pe yvategua guapyhárupi, hag̃ua omombaʼe hag̃ua iñemoñare politikohárape. Pe joja ojepareáva hesakã hag̃uáicha, reipotáramo rechakuaa. Nereipotáramo, nderehechamoʼãi.
The name “Antiochus” (Ἀντίοχος in Greek) comes from the Greek elements’ “anti” (meaning “against” or “opposite”) and “ocheo” (meaning “to hold fast” or “to maintain”). The northern kings chose the name to maintain their political heritage with the father, just as the antichrist (popes) choose names when they begin to rule. Just as the popes are representatives of their father, the devil, so too the Antiochus’ of the Syrian Empire typify representatives of their father. In this application Antiochus represents a proxy of their father. The proxy of the papal power in 1989 was the United States, and the secular testimony upholds the relationship between the antichrist, Pope John Paul II, and Ronald Reagan in their work to bring down the former Soviet Union.
Téra “Antíoco” (Ἀντίοχος griégope) oujehúva umi elemento griégo “anti” (he’iséva “contra” térã “opuesto”) ha “ocheo” (he’iséva “jajoko mbarete” térã “ñamantene”). Umi mburuvicha guasu yvategua oiporavo ko téra oñongatu hag̃ua hikuái iñemoñare polítika túvandi, péicha avei anticristo (pápa kuéra) oiporavo téra oñepyrũvo ogoverna. Oĩháicha umi pápa ha’e hikuái itúva, Aña, rembiaporãhára, upéicha avei umi Antíoco pe Imperio Siria-gua ohechauka itúva rembiaporãhára-kuérape. Ko aplicación-pe Antíoco orrepresenta peteĩ itúva rehegua representante. Pe representante poder papal rehegua ary 1989-pe ha’e va’ekue Estados Unidos, ha pe testimonio secular omombarete pe relación oĩva anticristo, Papa Juan Pablo II, ha Ronald Reagan apytépe hembiapópe ogueru hag̃ua yvýpe pe antigua Unión Soviética.
In verses ten through sixteen, the first and last verse possess direct references to verses forty and forty-one. Verse ten directly represents verse forty. Verse sixteen directly represents verse forty-one. The verses represent the portion of the prophecy of Daniel that relates to the last days.
Umi versíkulo diez guive dieciséis peve, pe primer ha pe último versíkulo oguereko referencia directa umi versíkulo cuarenta ha cuarenta y uno rehe. Pe versíkulo diez orepresenta directamente pe versíkulo cuarenta. Pe versíkulo dieciséis orepresenta directamente pe versíkulo cuarenta y uno. Umi versíkulo orepresenta pe parte de la profecía de Daniel rehegua ojeporavóva umi ára pahápe guarã.
“The book that was sealed was not the book of Revelation, but that portion of the prophecy of Daniel which related to the last days. The Scripture says, ‘But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased’ (Daniel 12:4). When the book was opened, the proclamation was made, ‘Time shall be no longer.’ (See Revelation 10:6.) The book of Daniel is now unsealed, and the revelation made by Christ to John is to come to all the inhabitants of the earth. By the increase of knowledge a people is to be prepared to stand in the latter days. . . .
“Pe kuatia oñembotyetéva ndaha’éi pe Apocalipsis kuatia, ha katu upe Daniel marandu’ẽ vore ojeguerekóva umi ára pahápe rehe. Ñandejára Ñe’ẽ he’i: ‘Ha nde, Daniel, emboty ko’ã ñe’ẽ, ha embotyetéke pe kuatia pe ára paha peve; heta oikéta ko’ápe ha pépe, ha arandu okakuaáta’ (Daniel 12:4). Pe kuatia oñepe’árõ guare, oñemoherakuã pe marandu: ‘Aravo ndaiporimo’ãvéima.’ (Ehecha Apocalipsis 10:6.) Daniel kuatia ko’ág̃a oñepe’a peteĩva’erã, ha pe jehechauka Cristo ome’ẽva’ekue Juánpe oguahẽva’erã opa yvy ape ári oikóvape. Arandu ñembohetave rupive peteĩ tetãgua oñembosako’íta ikatu hag̃uáicha oñembo’y umi ára pahápe....”
“In the first angel’s message men are called upon to worship God, our Creator, who made the world and all things that are therein. They have paid homage to an institution of the Papacy, making of no effect the law of Jehovah, but there is to be an increase of knowledge on this subject.” Selected Messages, book 2, 105, 106.
“Pe ánhel peteĩha marandupe, oñehenói yvypórape omomba'eguasu hag̃ua Tupã, ñande Apohárape, ojapo va'ekuépe ko yvy ha opa mba'e ipype oĩva. Ha'ekuéra omomba'eguasu peteĩ institución papado rehegua, ombotove hag̃uáicha peiko'ỹ hag̃ua Jehová léi; péro ko mba'ére oĩ va'erã peteĩ jeikuaa okakuaavéva.” Selected Messages, lívro 2, 105, 106.
At the time of the end in 1989 the last six verses of Daniel chapter eleven represent the “portion of the prophecy of Daniel which related to the last days.” It was recognized when it was then unsealed, and that unsealing produced an increase of knowledge on the “institution of the Papacy, making of no effect the law of Jehovah.” The Alpha and Omega always illustrates the end with the beginning, and the testing process that began in 1989, was designed to produce two classes of worshippers.
Paha opaha ára 1989-pe, Daniel capítulo once-pe umi seis versículo pahaguéva ohechauka pe “porción de la profecía de Daniel rehegua, ojoajúva umi ára pahápe.” Ojekuaa kuri upérõ oñemboty’ỹ jave, ha upe jepe’a omoheñói peteĩ aranduka’aty mbohetave pe “institución del Papado, ojapóva mba’eve’ỹ Jehová léi.” Pe Alfa ha Omega akóinte ohechauka pe paha oñepyrũha rupive, ha pe prueba rembiapo oñepyrũva’ekue 1989-pe, oñemoheñói hag̃uáicha mokõi aty omomba’éva.
And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. Daniel 12:9, 10.
Haʼe he’i: Tereho nde rape, Daniel; umi ñeʼẽ niko oñemboty ha oñembotapykue pe ára paha peve. Heta oñemopotĩta, oñemotĩmbáta ha oñehaʼãta; ha umi iñaña oñemombaʼe vaíta gueteri; avave umi iñañáva ndoikũmbymoʼãi; ha umi arandúva katu oikũmbýta. Daniel 12:9, 10.
We are now in the final period of that testing process, for the controversy of the robbers at the beginning of Adventism is now being repeated. To identify the robbers as the United States is to identify Antiochus as the robbers. It is the identical controversy of the Millerites and Protestants.
Koʼág̃a ñaiméma pe período paha upe proceso de prueba rehegua, pe joavy mondahakuéra rehegua oikovaʼekue Adventismo ñepyrũmbýpe koʼág̃a ojehechauka jey rupi. Ojehechakuaáramo umi mondahápe Estados Unidos ramo, upéva hína ojehechakuaa hag̃ua Antiochus-pe umi mondaha ramo. Kóva hína pe joavyete voi umi Millerita ha Protestante-kuéra rehegua.
At the end of the testing process, just as in the beginning of the testing process, which began in 1989, the Lion of the tribe of Judah unseals “that portion of the prophecy of Daniel which related to the last days.” In 1989 it was the last six verses of Daniel eleven, and at the ending it is the hidden history of verse forty, that is typified by verses ten through sixteen.
Pe proceso de prueba paha, oiko hag̃uáicha pe proceso de prueba ñepyrũme, oñepyrũ vaʼekue 1989-pe, Judá ñemoñaregua León omboja’o hag̃ua pe “Daniel profecía pehẽngue oñeʼẽva umi ára paháre” sello. Ary 1989-pe upéva haʼe vaʼekue Daniel capítulo once pehẽngue paha seis versículo, ha ipahápe haʼe pe tembiasakue kañymby versículo cuarenta-peguáva, ojehechauka hag̃uaicha versículo diez guive dieciséis peve.
We will continue our consideration of the six lines of controversies within the history of Adventism in the following articles. The first of those six controversies illustrates the last of those six controversies. We will use the first and last controversies to overlay the other four controversies as we unfold the elements involved with the efforts of the enemy of righteousness to prevent God’s people from rightly dividing “the vision”, which is established with the symbol of Rome.
Romo’ãve ñaneñehesa’ỹijo umi seis línea de controversias rehe Adventismo rembiasakue ryepýpe umi artículo oútavape. Pe peteĩha umi seis controversias apytégui ohechauka pe pahaguéva umi seis controversias apytégui. Jaipurúta pe peteĩha ha pe pahagua controversia jahechauka hag̃ua hi’ári ambue irundy controversia, jaikuaaukávo umi elemento oikeva’ekue pe tekotevẽme pe enemigo tekojoja rehegua ojapóva ani hag̃ua Tupã tavayguakuéra omboja’o hekopete “la visión”, oñemopyendáva Roma símbolo rehe.
“Unless we understand the importance of the moments that are swiftly passing into eternity, and make ready to stand in the great day of God, we shall be unfaithful stewards. The watchman is to know the time of night. Everything is now clothed with a solemnity that all who believe the truth for this time should realize. They should act in reference to the day of God. The judgments of God are about to fall upon the world, and we need to be preparing for that great day.
“Ndajajapóramo ñantende umi ára sapy’aitépe ohasáva pya’e opa’ỹ hag̃uáme, ha ñasãso hag̃uáicha ñaiméirõ ñañembo’y hag̃ua Tupã ára guasúpe, ñande jaikóta tembiguái jerovia’ỹ hag̃uáicha. Pe ñangarekoha oikuaava’erã mba’e aravópa pyhare. Ko’ág̃a opa mba’e oñemonde peteĩ pohýi marangatu reheve, upéva oikuaava’erã opa umi ogueroviáva ko ára añetegua. Ha’ekuéra ojapova’erã hembiapo Tupã ára rehegua rupi. Tupã huísio-kuéra oúma hag̃uáicha ho’a hag̃ua ko yvy ári, ha tekotevẽ ñañembosako’i hag̃ua upe ára guasu rehe.”
“Our time is precious. We have but few, very few days of probation in which to make ready for the future, immortal life. We have no time to spend in haphazard movements. We should fear to skim the surface of the word of God.” Testimonies, volume 6, 407.
“Ñande ára hepyeterei. Jaguereko mbovymi añoite, añetehápe mbovymieterei ára de prueba ñaimbosako’i hag̃ua tekove oútava, opa’ỹva, hag̃ua. Ndajajarekói aravo jajahapa hag̃ua tembiapo vai’ỹre ha ñeñangarekópe’ỹ. Jakyhyjeva’erã japytáramo pe Yvyra Ñe’ẽ Tupãgua ári añoite, pype ndajajepysóigui.” Testimonies, volúmen 6, 407.