Daniel eleven verse twenty-four identifies the period which pagan Rome would rule supremely with the word “time.” A “time” represents 360 years in prophetic application, and those years began at the most famous naval battle of ancient history, the battle of Actium in 31 BC. There were other naval battles that were larger and strategically more sophisticated, but Actium was the most iconic naval battle through its association with Marc Antony and Cleopatra. Similar in historical significance to the collapse of the Berlin Wall in fulfillment of Daniel 11:40, and the Twin Towers of 9/11 in fulfillment of Revelation eighteen; for when God chooses the historical events to fulfill His prophetic Word, He does so in a fashion that reaches the attention of the largest possible audience.
Daniel once versículo veinticuatro ohechauka pe período Roma pagana oguerekótahague pe ipu’akakue yvatevéva ñe’ẽ “tiempo” rupive. Peteĩ “tiempo” he’ise 360 ary aplicación profética-pe, ha umi ary oñepyrũkuri pe ñorairõ guasu yguatagua herakuãvévape ymaguare rembiasakuepe, pe ñorairõ de Actium-pe ary 31 a. C.-pe. Oĩkuri ambue ñorairõ yguatagua tuichavéva ha estrategia rehegua iporãve hag̃uáva, ha upéicharõ jepe Actium ha’eva’ekue pe ñorairõ yguatagua ta’angamýi ha imandu’arãvéva, ojoajúgui Marc Antony ha Cleopatra ndive. Ojogua significado histórico-pe pe Muro de Berlín ho’apa rehe Daniel 11:40 oñekumpli ramo guáicha, ha pe Torres Gemelas 9/11-pe Apocalipsis dieciocho oñekumpli ramo guáicha; Ñandejára oiporavóramo umi mba’e oikóva tembiasakuepegua omoañete hag̃ua Iñe’ẽ profética, upéva ojapo peteĩ hendáicha oguahẽ hag̃ua pe audiencia tuichavéva ikatúva hag̃uápe.
And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people. He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers’ fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches: yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strong holds, even for a time. Daniel 11:23, 24.
Ha upe joaju ojapóva hendive rire, haʼe ombaʼapóta mbotavýpe; og̃uahẽtaha ha mbaretevéta peteĩ tetãʼi michĩ reheve. Oikéta pyʼaguapýpe jepe pe provínsia rembiasakue iporãvévape; ha ojapóta mbaʼe nojejapóivaʼekue itúva kuéra, ni itúva kuéra ru kuéra; omyasãíta ijapytépekuéra mbaʼe ojegueraha vaʼekue, mbaʼe oñemonda vaʼekue, ha mbaʼeta; ha upéi omohendáta iñemoĩmbyrekuéra umi mbareteha ári, peteĩ ára peve. Daniel 11:23, 24.
Uriah Smith concludes his observations of the league between Rome and the Maccabees of verse twenty-three by commenting upon the small people of the verse.
Uriah Smith omohu’ã ijesa’ỹijo pe joaju rehe Roma ha umi Macabeo-kuéra apytépe pe versíkulo mokõipa mbohapy-pe, ha upéi he’i umi tetãygua mbovymi rehe oñeñe’ẽva pe versíkulope.
“At this time the Romans were a small people, and began to work deceitfully, or with cunning, as the word signifies. And from this point they rose by a steady and rapid ascent to the height of power which they afterward attained.
“Ko tiémpope umi Romano-kuéra ha’e va’ekue peteĩ tetã michĩva, ha oñepyrũ omba’apo mbotavy hag̃uáicha, térã ñembotavýpe, he’iséva upe ñe’ẽ. Ha ko’águi guive ojupi hikuái peteĩ jeupípe mbegue ha pya’e hag̃ua, pe pu’aka yvatetereípe upéi ohupytýva’ekue.”
“[Verse twenty-four quoted].
“[Versículo veinticuatro citado].”
“The usual manner in which nations had, before the days of Rome, entered upon valuable provinces and rich territory, was by war and conquest. Rome was now to do what had not been done by the fathers or the fathers’ fathers; namely, receive these acquisitions through peaceful means. The custom, before unheard of, was now inaugurated, of kings’ leaving by legacy their kingdoms to the Romans. Rome came into possession of large provinces in this manner.
“Pe tape jepive umi tetãnguéra, Roma mboyvegua árape, oike hague yvy porãiterei ha tetã rembikuaágui henyhẽvape, ha’e vaʼekue ñorairõ ha ñemombaʼe rupi. Koʼág̃a Roma ojapótava hína pe mbaʼe ndojejapóivaʼekue túva kuéra térã itúva kuéra túva kuéra reheve; upéva hína, oguereko koʼã mbaʼe pyahu pyʼaguapýpe. Ko jepokuaa, arakaʼeve noñehendúivaʼekue, oñepyrũ koʼág̃a: mburuvicha guasu kuéra oheja hag̃ua hembiguái ramo irreino kuéra umi Romano-pe. Péicha Roma oguereko heta provincia tuicháva.”
“And those who thus came under the dominion of Rome derived no small advantage therefrom. They were treated with kindness and leniency. It was like having the prey and spoil distributed among them. They were protected from their enemies, and rested in peace and safety under the aegis of the Roman power.
“Ha umi péicha oike vaʼekue Róma poguýpe ndojapyhýi mbaʼeve michĩva upegui. Ojehecha porã ha pyʼaporãme hesekuéra. Haʼete vaʼekue umi mbaʼe ojepokuaa hag̃ua ha umi mbaʼe ojeipeʼáva oñembojaʼo hag̃ua ijapytepekuéra. Oñeñangareko hesekuéra iñenemigokuéragui, ha opytuʼu pyʼaguapy ha tekorosãme Róma pokatu ryguasu guýpe.
“To the latter portion of this verse, Bishop Newton gives the idea of forecasting devices from strongholds, instead of against them. This the Romans did from the strong fortress of their seven-hilled city. ‘Even for a time;’ doubtless a prophetic time, 360 years. From what point are these years to be dated? Probably from the event brought to view in the following verse.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 272, 273.
“Ko versíkulo pehẽngue pahápe, Obispo Newton ome’ẽ pe idea umi tembiaporã jehechakuaa hag̃ua tenonderã guasuha guive, ndaha’éi hesekuéra oñe’ẽ hag̃uáicha. Kóva umi Romano ojapo vaekue pe mbarete guasu imbaretevévagui, hóga táva oguerekóva pokõi yvyty. ‘Jepe peteĩ aravo peve;’ katuete peteĩ aravo profétikova, 360 ary. Mba’e punto guivepa ko’ã ary oñeha’ãva’erã? Ikatu hag̃uáicha, pe mba’e ojehechaukáva versíkulo oúva upe rire guive.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 272, 273.
Smith continues and identifies the battle of Actium in 31 BC as the starting point for the three hundred and sixty years. After quoting verse twenty-five Smith states the following.
Smith osegue ha he’i pe ñorairõ Actium-pe, ary 31 Cristo mboyve, ha’eha pe ñepyrũrã umi mbohapy sua ha saĩ ary guarã. Oñemongeta rire pe versíkulo mokõipa po rehe, Smith he’i ko’ãva.
“By verses 23 and 24 we are brought down this side of the league between the Jews and the Romans, BC 161, to the time when Rome had acquired universal dominion. The verse now before us brings to view a vigorous campaign against the king of the south, Egypt, and the occurrence of a notable battle between great and mighty armies. Did such events as these transpire in the history of Rome about this time? — They did. The war was the war between Egypt and Rome; and the battle was the battle of Actium. Let us take a brief view of the circumstances that led to this conflict.
“Umi versíkulo 23 ha 24 rupi ñanembohasáva pe alianza ojejapova’ekue umi judío ha romano-kuéra apytépe, ary mboyve Cristo 161 guive, pe ára peve Roma oguahẽ haguépe opavave ári ipu’aka hag̃ua. Ko versíkulo ñane renondépe oĩva ogueru ñandéve peteĩ ñorairõ mbarete pe mburuvicha yvate gotyo pegua, Egipto, rehe, ha peteĩ ñorairõ tuichaitereíva oikova’ekue ehérsito guasu ha mbarete apytépe. Oiko piko ko’ãichagua mba’e Roma rembiasakue ryepýpe upe tiémpope? — Oiko. Pe ñorairõ ha’e va’ekue Egipto ha Roma apytégua; ha pe ñorairõ guasu ha’e va’ekue Actium pegua. Jahechamína mbykymi umi circunstancia ogueru va’ekue ko joavy peve.”
“[Marc] Antony, Augustus Caesar, and Lepidus constituted the triumvirate which had sworn to avenge the death of Julius Caesar. This Antony became the brother-in-law of Augustus by marrying his sister, Octavia. Antony was sent into Egypt on government business, but fell a victim to the arts and charms of Cleopatra, Egypt’s dissolute queen. So strong was the passion he conceived for her, that he finally espoused the Egyptian interests, rejected his wife, Octavia, to please Cleopatra, bestowed province after province upon the latter to gratify her avarice, celebrated a triumph at Alexandria instead of Rome, and otherwise so affronted the Roman people that Augustus had no difficulty in leading them to engage heartily in a war against this enemy of their country. This war was ostensibly against Egypt and Cleopatra; but it was really against Antony, who now stood at the head of Egyptian affairs. And the true cause of their controversy was, says Prideaux, that neither of them could be content with only half of the Roman empire; for Lepidus having been deposed from the triumvirate, it now lay between them, and each being determined to possess the whole, they cast the die of war for its possession.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 273.
“[Marc] Antonio, Augusto César ha Lépido omoheñói pe triumvirato ojura vaʼekue ovengata hag̃ua Julio César ñemano. Ko Antonio oiko Augusto tovaja omenda rupi iñermána, Octavia rehe. Antonio oñemondo Egipto-pe umi mbaʼe Estado rehegua rehehápe, péro hoʼa víctima ramo Cleopatra pyʼaguapyʼỹ ha porãite rehegua poguýpe, haʼe ningo Egipto rréina tekovai. Tuicha eterei vaʼekue pe mborayhu oikóva ipype hese, ipahápe oñemoirũ pehẽngue Egipto-pegua ndive, omboyke hembireko Octavia-pe oipota hag̃uáicha Cleopatra-pe, omeʼẽ chupe peteĩ provincia rapykuéri ambue hag̃ua omyenyhẽ hag̃ua iñembyasy rei mbaʼerepy rehe, oguerovia peteĩ triunfo Alejandría-pe Roma rangue, ha ambue hendáicha avei ombohory eterei umi romano-kuérape upévare Augusto ndaipóri vaʼekue ijetuʼu hag̃ua omyakã chupekuéra oike hag̃ua pyʼaite guive peteĩ ñorairõme koʼã tetã rayhuʼỹ rehe. Ko ñorairõ ojehechauka ramo jepe Egipto ha Cleopatra rehe; añetépe katu Antonio rehe ae vaʼekue, haʼe niko koʼág̃a oĩva Egipto mbaʼeapokuéra akãme. Ha pe añetegua iñapañuãivai haguére, heʼi Prideaux, haʼe vaʼekue ndaikatuihague mavave ijapytepekuéra ovyʼa pe Imperio Romano mbyte rehe añónte; Lépido oñemboyke rire pe triumvirato-gui, upéva opyta vaʼekue mokõivéva apytépe, ha káda peteĩ odesidíma hag̃ua oguereko hag̃ua opaite mbaʼe, omombo hikuái pe dado ñorairõme hesehápe.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 273.
Prophetically the battle of Actium identifies the Sunday law, for it represented the third conquering of the three geographical obstacles which established pagan Rome’s “universal dominion,” as Smith describes it. As with pagan Rome, it was when the third obstacle of papal Rome was driven from the city of Rome that the “universal dominion” of papal Rome began in 538. Those two witnesses address the Sunday law where and when modern Rome overcomes both the sixth and seventh kingdoms of Bible prophecy, and in doing so, overcomes its third obstacle; thus, establishing “universal dominion” for forty-two symbolic months.
Marandu-profétikamente, Actium ñorairõ ohechauka pe léi domingo rehegua, pórke upéva orrepresenta vaʼekue pe mbohapyha ñemombaʼe umi mbohapy jeografikagui ojokóva, omoañetéva Roma pagana “poguýpe opavave rekove” rehegua, Smith omombeʼuháicha. Oiko haguéicha Roma pagana ndive, upéicha avei pe mbohapyha ojokoha Roma papal rehegua oñemosẽ jave tavaguasu Rómagui, upérõ oñepyrũ Roma papal “poguýpe opavave rekove” rehegua ary 538-pe. Koʼã mokõi testígo oñeʼẽ pe léi domingo rehe, moõ ha arakaʼépa Roma moderna ipuʼaka mokõivéva, pe sexto ha séptimo rréino Biblia profesía rehegua, ha upéicha ojepytaso hag̃ua imbohapyha ojokoha ári; ha upéicha omopyenda “poguýpe opavave rekove” cuarenta y dos jasy simbóliko aja.
And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. Revelation 13:5.
Ha oñeme’ẽ chupe peteĩ juru oñeʼẽ hag̃ua mbaʼe guasúre ha ñeʼẽ vai Ñandejára rehe; ha oñemeʼẽ chupe pokatu ombaʼapo hag̃ua irundypa mokõi jasy pukukue. Apocalipsis 13:5.
Rome Against Egypt
Róma Egipto Kóntrape
The prophetic dynamics of the war of Augustus of Rome, against Egypt and Cleopatra was motivated by the rebellion of Marc Antony, and those prophetic dynamics must of prophetic necessity represent the prophetic dynamics that are represented at the Sunday law.
Pe dinámica profética ñorairõ Augusto de Roma ojapóva Egipto ha Cleopatra rehe, omýi vaʼekue Marco Antonio reñemoĩ rehe; ha umi dinámica profética, tekotevẽ profética rupi, ohechauka vaʼerã umi dinámica profética ojehechaukáva pe léi domingope.
At Actium Rome conquered Egypt, a power which consisted of an alliance between a rebellious man and an unholy woman. The alliance of Antony and Cleopatra is the combination of church and state. At Actium, Augustine’s Rome conquered a power represented by an unholy combination of church and state.
Ácciope, Roma oj conquista Egíptope, peteĩ pu’aka ojejapóva peteĩ kuimba’e opu’ãva ha peteĩ kuña ñaña joajuhágui. Antonio ha Cleopatra joaju hína pe tupão ha Estado ñembojoaju. Ácciope, Agustino Roma oj conquista peteĩ pu’aka ojehechaukáva peteĩ joaju ñaña rupive, tupão ha Estado rehegua.
Image of the Beast
Ta'ãnga Mymba Rymba Rehegua
Cleopatra represents a corrupted church aligned with Antony, a symbol of Rome. Cleopatra was the ruler over their relationship, as represented by Uriah Smith, when he stated that Antony “fell a victim to the arts and charms of Cleopatra, Egypt’s dissolute queen.” The alliance of church and state represented by Antony and Cleopatra identified Cleopatra as the power ruling in the relationship; so, the combination of church and state represented by their relationship meets the definition of the image of the beast—which is the combination of church and state with the woman in control of the relationship. Actium typified the soon-coming Sunday law.
Cleopatra orrepresenta peteĩ iglesia oñembyaíva oñembojoajúva Antonio ndive, ha’éva peteĩ símbolo Roma rehegua. Cleopatra hína pe oisãmbyhýva ijoajuha ári, Uriah Smith ohechauka haguéicha upéva, he’írõ guare Antonio “ho’a hague víctima ramo Cleopatra, Egipto reína tekoavyetereíva, ñembotavy ha iporãnguéra poguýpe.” Pe joaju iglesia ha estado rehegua, ojehechaukáva Antonio ha Cleopatra rupive, ohechauka Cleopatra ha’eha pe mbarete oisãmbyhýva pe joajuha; upévare, pe joaju iglesia ha estado rehegua ojehechaukáva irelación rupive ombohovái pe mymba ra’anga rembiapokue ñemyesakã — ha’éva pe joaju iglesia ha estado rehegua, kuña oisãmbyhývo pe relación. Actium ohechaukaraka pe ley dominical og̃uahẽ hag̃uáva pya’e.
Augustus, represents the papal power conquering the United States at the soon-coming Sunday law. Marc Antony is the Republican horn of the earth beast and Cleopatra is the Protestant horn. Antony and Cleopatra come together and speak as a dragon at the soon-coming Sunday law. Both Cleopatra and Antony are symbols of a dragon power, and when they are fully joined together at the Sunday law—they speak as a dragon.
Augusto ohechauka pe pokatu papal oityva Estados Unidos-pe pe léi domingo oútava pya’évape. Marco Antonio ha’e pe asta republicano pe mymba yvy pegua rehegua, ha Cleopatra ha’e pe asta protestante. Antonio ha Cleopatra oñondivepa ha oñe’ẽ peteĩ dragónicha pe léi domingo oútava pya’évape. Mokõivéva, Cleopatra ha Antonio, ha’e umi ta’anga peteĩ pokatu dragón rehegua, ha oñembojoaju hag̃ua hikuái ite pe léi domingo-pe — oñe’ẽ peteĩ dragónicha.
Dragons
Mbói guasu kuéra
Both Greece and Egypt prophetically represent a dragon power, and Antony also represented a dragon power. Egypt was the south in Daniel eleven and Greece was the west. Egypt was taken by Ptolemy I after Alexander’s kingdom divided into four parts. Ptolemy I then became the first prophetic king of the south and Cleopatra was the last Ptolemaic ruler in Egypt. Ptolemy was born in Macedon, the birth place of Alexander the Great.
Táva Grecia ha Egipto profétikamente ohechauka peteĩ pokatu dragón rehegua, ha Antonio avei ohechaukákuri peteĩ pokatu dragón rehegua. Egipto ha’eva’ekue yvy gotyo sur Daniel 11-pe, ha Grecia ha’eva’ekue yvy gotyo kuarahyreike. Egipto ojegueraha Ptolomeo I pópe Alejandro rréino oñemboja’o rire irundy hendápe. Upéi Ptolomeo I oiko va’ekue mburuvicha guasu profétiko peteĩha yvy gotyo sur pegua, ha Cleopatra ha’e va’ekue pahague mburuvicha Ptolemaico Egíptope. Ptolomeo onase va’ekue Macedóniape, Alejandro Magno heñoihaguepe.
Macedon was in northern Greece, and claimed their ancestral origins were from Greek mythical heroes. The southern Greek city-states considered the Macedonians as more barbaric than the Hellenists of southern Greece. The Macedonians were a monarchy, and the southern city-states (poleis) like Athens, Sparta, Thebes, Corinth, etc., were in southern and central Greece and the Aegean islands. These poleis often had democratic, oligarchic, or mixed governments, while Macedon was a centralized monarchy with a strong royal dynasty (the Argeads). Still, they were all Hellenists, and when Rome came into history, they labelled the Hellenists Greek. Cleopatra was the last Ptolemaic ruler, which represented the northern kingdom’s monarchial tribe of Greeks from the area of Macedon, or northern Greece.
Macedonia oĩva Grecia yvate gotyope, ha he’i iñemoñare ypykue ouha héroe mítico griegogui. Táva-estado griego kuéra oĩva ñemby gotyope ohecha vaʼekue umi macedonio-kuérape ipuʼakaveha barbarie rehe umi helenista Grecia ñemby gotyopegua-gui. Umi macedonio-kuéra niko peteĩ monarquía, ha umi táva-estado ñemby ha mbyte gotyogua (póleis) — Atenas, Esparta, Tebas, Corinto, hambaʼe — oĩva Grecia ñemby ha mbyte gotyope ha umi isla Mar Egeo-pe, heta jey oguereko vaʼekue gobierno democrático, oligárquico térã oñembojeheʼapyréva, ha katu Macedonia katu peteĩ monarquía mbytetépe oñembyatýva vaʼekue, oguerekóva peteĩ dinastía mburuvicha guasu mbarete (umi Argéada). Upéicharõ jepe, opavave umíva niko helenista vaʼekue, ha Roma oike rire tembiasakuepe, ombohéra umi helenista-kuérape griego. Cleopatra haʼe vaʼekue mburuvicha Ptolemaico pahague, ha upéva orrepresenta pe reino yvate gotyogua ñemoñare monárquica griega oúva Macedonia térã Grecia yvate gotyogui.
King of the South
Rréi yvy gotyo pegua
Cleopatra was the final ruler of the Ptolemaic kingdom that began with Ptolemy I when Alexander’s kingdom divided into four. At the battle of Actium the Ptolemaic kingdom, the literal king of the south, reached its end. The next king of the south would be spiritual Egypt, represented by atheistic France during the French Revolution history.
Cleopatra ha’e vaekue pe mburuvicha paha Reino Ptolemaico-pegua, oñepyrũ va’ekue Ptolomeo I ndive, Alejandro rréino oñemboja’o ramo guare irundyve. Batalla de Accio-pe, pe Reino Ptolemaico, pe mburuvicha yvy gotyo pegua tee, og̃uahẽ ipahápe. Pe mburuvicha yvy gotyo pegua oúta hag̃ua upéi ha’éta Egipto espiritual, ojehechaukáva Francia atea-rõguáicha Revolución Francesa rembiasakue aja.
And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. Revelation 11:8.
Ha hetekue omanóta pe távape guasúpe, pe oñembohérava ñemongu’etee rupi Sodoma ha Egipto, upépe avei ñande Ruvicha ojejuka kurusúre. Apocalipsis 11:8.
Literal Egypt was the literal king of the south as related to the division of Alexander’s kingdom, but spiritual Egypt is represented as the king of the south by the prophetic attributes of Egypt, not a literal direction.
Egipto literal ha’e va’ekue pe mburuvicha guasu yvy gotyo pegua tee, ojoajúva Alejandro rréino oñemboja’o haguére; ha Egipto espiritual katu ojehechauka pe mburuvicha guasu yvy gotyo pegua ramo Egipto mba’ekuaarã marandu hag̃uáicha rupi, ndaha’éi peteĩ dirección literal.
South and West
Yvy gotyo ha kuarahyreike gotyo
Cleopatra being the last Ptolemaic ruler of the kingdom was prophetically a twofold power of Greek (west) and Egypt (south), whereas; the next, and then spiritual king of the south would be France, also a twofold power represented in Revelation eleven as Egypt and Sodom. The licentiousness of Sodom aligns with the licentiousness of Cleopatra of the west, and Cleopatra of the south aligns with the atheism of Egypt. The last literal king of the south’s twofold nature aligned with the first spiritual king of the south.
Cleopatra, ha’évo hína pe ruvicha paha Ptolemaico pe tetãme, maranduháicha ohechauka peteĩ pokatu mokõi hendáicha gua, griego (kuarahyreike) ha Egipto (yvy gotyo), ha upéi pe oúva, ha upéi pe ruvicha yvy gotyo espiritual va’erã Francia, avei peteĩ pokatu mokõi hendáicha, ojehechaukáva Apocalipsis 11-pe Egipto ha Sodoma ramo. Sodoma rekovaíva oñembojoja pe tekovai rehegua Cleopatra kuarahyreikegua ndive, ha Cleopatra yvy gotyogua oñembojoja Egipto rehegua tupã’ỹme. Pe ruvicha paha literal yvy gotyogua rekotee mokõi hendáicha ojoaju va’ekue pe ruvicha peteĩha espiritual yvy gotyogua ndive.
The battle of Actium was the unholy alliance of Antony’s dragon of Rome and Cleopatra’s dragon of the south and west. Antony and Cleopatra represent a church and a state, so the conquering of Actium by Augustus of Rome, represents a conquering where Rome prevails over an unholy twofold union typifying the image of the beast. Three hundred and sixty years later, in fulfillment of Daniel 11:24, Constantine divided Rome into east and west, leaving the woman of Rome in the west and moving the man of Rome to the east. A conquering of south and west typified the division of east and west after a “time” of three hundred and sixty years, at the battle of Actium. In an earlier encounter Antony was given eastern Rome and Augustus the west, so Actium brought together east and west, but only for a “time.”
Pe ñorairõ hérava Actium-pe ha’eva’ekue peteĩ ñe’ẽme’ẽ ky’a’ỹ Antony, Roma mbói guasu ndive, ha Cleopatra, ñemby ha kuarahyreikegua mbói guasu ndive. Antony ha Cleopatra ohechauka peteĩ tupao ha peteĩ tetã, upévare Actium ñemomba’e Augusto de Roma rupive ohechauka peteĩ ñemomba’e Roma ipu’aka hag̃ua peteĩ joaju mokõi hendáicha ky’a’ỹ ári, ha’éva mymba ñaña ra’ãnga rehegua techapyrã. Mbohapy sua poteĩ ary rire, Daniel 11:24 oñekumpli hag̃ua, Constantino omboja’o Roma kuarahyresẽ ha kuarahyreike-pe, ohejávo kuña Roma-gua kuarahyreike-pe ha omyasãivo kuimba’e Roma-gua kuarahyresẽ gotyo. Peteĩ ñemomba’e ñemby ha kuarahyreike rehegua ohechauka kuri kuarahyresẽ ha kuarahyreike ñemboja’o, peteĩ “ára” mbohapy sua poteĩ ary pukukue rire, pe ñorairõ Actium-pe. Peteĩ joaju mboyveguápe Antony oñeme’ẽ kuri chupe Roma kuarahyresẽgua ha Augusto-pe kuarahyreikegua, upévare Actium ombyaty kuarahyresẽ ha kuarahyreike, hákatu peteĩ “ára” hag̃uánte.
31 BC and 330
31 a.C. ha 330 d.C.
Jesus always illustrates the end with the beginning, so the conquering of Actium in 31 BC typifies the division of the empire into east and west in 330. Actium of 31 BC was the alpha of the omega in the 360 years that concluded in 330. Both 31 BC and 330 typify the soon-coming Sunday law as represented in verse sixteen and forty-one of Daniel eleven.
Jesús tapiaite ohechauka pe pahápe oikotaha pe ñepyrũ reheve; upévare, pe jejopy Actium-pe ary 31 a.C. ohechaukaramo pe mburuvicha guasu ñemboja’o kuarahyreike ha kuarahyresẽ gotyo ary 330-pe. Actium ary 31 a.C. pe alpha pe omega rehegua umi 360 ary apytépe, opa vaekue ary 330-pe. Mokõivéva, 31 a.C. ha 330, ohechaukaramo pe araka’eve’ẽ Sunday law oúvape pya’e, oñerrepresentáva versíkulo 16 ha 41 Daniel 11-pe.
Another Symbol
Ambue Ta’ãnga’ẽry hag̃ua
Antony of Rome, aligned with Cleopatra of the south and of the west represents a threefold alliance within their twofold union of the image of the beast. The cross also aligns with the Sunday law, and therefore with Actium and 330. At the cross a twofold union of church and state is represented by the Jews (corrupted church) joining with Rome (state) to murder Christ. The third party in the union at the cross is represented by Barabbas, a false Christ, whose name means “son of the father.” Barabbas is symbolically a false prophet when contrasted with Christ as the true prophet. Rome was Antony, and Cleopatra of the south and west represented the Jews and Barabbas.
Antonio de Roma, alineado con Cleopatra del sur y del oeste, representa una alianza triple dentro de su unión doble de la imagen de la bestia. La cruz también se alinea con la ley dominical, y por lo tanto con Actium y 330. En la cruz, una unión doble de iglesia y estado es representada por los judíos (iglesia corrompida) uniéndose con Roma (estado) para asesinar a Cristo. El tercer participante en la unión en la cruz es representado por Barrabás, un falso Cristo, cuyo nombre significa “hijo del padre”. Barrabás es simbólicamente un falso profeta cuando se le contrasta con Cristo como el verdadero profeta. Roma era Antonio, y Cleopatra del sur y del oeste representaba a los judíos y a Barrabás.
The cross also aligns with Elijah on Mount Carmel where the choice was over who was the true or false prophet. The false prophet then was a twofold symbol consisting of the prophets of Baal and the priests of the grove. Baal is a male deity and the priests of the grove represented Ashtaroth, a female deity. The Jews at the cross were Ashtaroth, the female deity and Barabbas, the counterfeit of the Man of Sorrows, was the male deity Baal.
Kurusu avei ojoaju Elías ndive Monte Carmelo-pe, pe poravópe oĩva mávapa proféta añetegua térã proféta japu. Proféta japu upérõ ha’e va’ekue peteĩ símbolo mokõi hendáicha, ojejapóva Baal profetakuéragui ha ka’aguy pa’ikuéragui. Baal ha’e peteĩ tupã kuimba’e, ha umi ka’aguy pa’ikuéra orrepresenta va’ekue Astarot-pe, peteĩ tupã kuña. Umi judío kurusupe ha’e va’ekue Astarot, pe tupã kuña, ha Barrabás, pe japukuaa pe Karai Mboasy rehegua renda gua’u, ha’e va’ekue pe tupã kuimba’e Baal.
Cleopatra was both the queen of the south and the queen of the west. Antony was the image of Rome, part of the threefold triumvirate sworn to avenge the assassination of Julius. Julius death by twenty-three wounds represented the papacies deadly wound in 1798, in fulfillment of verse forty of Daniel eleven. Augustine at Actium represents the healing of that deadly wound. The wound is healed when Antony and Cleopatra die. Antony and Cleopatra represent the image of the beast in the United States that is a threefold prophetic entity, consisting of the earth beast and its two horns. Antony is one part and Cleopatra represents the other two parts. Whether it is Antony’s Rome, or Cleopatra’s Egypt and Greece, they die together at the Sunday law when the sixth kingdom of Bible prophecy ends. Prophetically Cleopatra in relation to Antony is the mixture of church craft and statecraft, with the church craft seducing and controlling the statecraft.
Cleopatra ha’e va’ekue mokõivéva ñemby ruvicha kuña ha kuarahyreike ruvicha kuña. Antonio ha’e va’ekue Roma ra’ãnga, pe triunvirato mbohapy aty rehegua peteĩ, ojuramentáva ovengata hag̃ua Julio jejukágui. Julio mano, mokõipa mbohapy kytĩ rupive, ohechauka pe papakuéra ñekytĩ vaiete 1798-pe, oñemoañetévo Daniel 11, versíkulo 40-pe. Augusto, Actium-pe, ohechauka pe ñekytĩ vaiete jehupyty jey. Pe ñekytĩ oñemonguera Antonio ha Cleopatra omanóramo. Antonio ha Cleopatra ohechauka pe mymba ra’ãnga Estados Unidos-pe, ha’éva peteĩ entidad profética mbohapy hendáva, oguerekóva pe yvy mymba ha mokõi hatĩ. Antonio ha’e peteĩ henda, ha Cleopatra ohechauka ambue mokõi henda. Taha’e Antonio Roma, térã Cleopatra Egipto ha Grecia, omano oñondive pe léi domingo jave, opa ramo pe poteĩha mburuvicharenda marandu’ẽ marangatupegua. Proféticamente, Cleopatra, Antonio rehegua, ha’e tupao ñembokatupyry ha tetã ñembokatupyry jehe’a, upépe pe tupao ñembokatupyry ombotavy ha oguereko ipoguýpe pe tetã ñembokatupyry.
The Second Death Typified
Pe Mokõiha Ñemano Ojehechauka hag̃uáicha peteĩ techaukaha hag̃ua
At another prophetic level Cleopatra’s relation to Julius Caesar and Marc Antony represents two times that the church craft of Cleopatra is in a relationship with the statecraft of the Roman Empire. She was left by Julius in 1798 at her first symbolic death, in fulfillment of verse forty of Daniel eleven; and then she comes to her end with none to help, at Actium in fulfillment of verse forty-five of Daniel eleven. Verse forty is the alpha of her first deadly wound that is to be healed and the omega of verse forty-five is where she receives her second and final death.
Ambue nivel profético-pe, Cleopatra joaju Julio César ha Marc Antonio ndive ohechauka mokõi jey pe iglesia rembiapokue Cleopatra oguerekoha peteĩ relación pe Estado rembiporú rehe pe Imperio Romano-pe. Julio oheja chupe ary 1798-pe, iñemano simbólico peteĩhárõ, oñekumpli hag̃ua Daniel 11, versículo cuarenta; ha upéi oguahẽ ipahápe avave pytyvõ’ỹre, Actium-pe, oñekumpli hag̃ua Daniel 11, versículo cuarenta y cinco. Pe versículo cuarenta ha’e pe alfa iherida mortal peteĩha rehegua, upéva ojekuera va’erã; ha pe omega pe versículo cuarenta y cinco-pe ha’e pe tenda oñeme’ẽhápe chupe iñemano mokõiha ha paha.
As with the four Roman powers of verse sixteen through twenty-two, Cleopatra as a biblical symbol has more than one meaning, based upon the context. Julius left her in 1798 when kingly support was removed, and then her deadly wound is healed at the Sunday law, but the ten kings of Revelation seventeen ultimately destroy her with fire, when she meets her second and final death.
Umi poteĩha irundy romagua versíkulo 16 guive 22 peveicha, Cleopatra símbolo bíblico ramo oguereko hetave peteĩ he’iséva, oñemopyendáva contexto rehe. Julio oheja chupe 1798-pe, ojeipe’árõ guare pe pytyvõ mburuvicha guasu rehegua, ha upéi pe ijai vai oporojukáva oñemboguejy jey pe léi domingo-pe; ha katu pe diez mburuvicha guasu Apocalipsis 17-pegua ipahápe ohundi chupe tata rupive, ha upépe ojuhu hag̃ua iñemano mokõiha ha paha.
Cleopatra is a symbol of the twofold nature represented by the atheism of Pharoah’s Egypt, and the religious philosophy of Greece. Her twofold nature represents the statecraft of Egypt and the church craft of Greece. Greek religious philosophy is represented by the Greek goddess Athena, who was enshrined as a statue in her temple, called the Parthenon. Athena is the symbol of wisdom, and as a woman she represents a religion of human education, in contrast with Divine education.
Cleopatra ha’e peteĩ símbolo pe mokõi hendáicha oĩva, ojehechaukáva Faraón Egipto rehegua ateísmo rupive, ha Grecia rembiapokue filosofía religiosa rupive. Ijeguata mokõi hendáicha ohechauka Egipto retã ñangareko py’aguasu ha Grecia iglésia ñangareko py’aguasu. Grecia filosofía religiosa ojehechauka pe diosa griega Atenea rupive, ha’éva oñemoĩva’ekue ta’anga ramo itemplópe, hérava Partenón. Atenea ha’e arandu símbolo, ha kuña ramo ohechauka peteĩ religión yvypóra mbo’e rehegua, oñembojojáva’ỹ Tekojoja Divina rehegua mbo’e ndive.
The two horns of the United States are Republicanism and Protestantism, which were typified in France by Egypt and Sodom. Egypt is statecraft and Sodom is church craft; thus, Republicanism aligns with Egypt and Protestantism with Sodom. Republicanism is Egypt and Protestantism is Sodom and Greece. The symbol of human education is the Greek goddess Athena, whose temple was the Parthenon that finds its modern twin in Nashville, Tennessee’s Parthenon temple. The symbol of the corrupt church that aligns with the Republican horn in the United States at the Sunday law is represented as Cleopatra, Ashtaroth, Salome and Sodom.
Estados Unidos mokõi hatĩ ha’e Republicanismo ha Protestantismo, oñembojoguáva Francia-pe Egipto ha Sodoma rehe. Egipto he’ise Estado rembiapo ha Sodoma he’ise iglesia rembiapo; upévare, Republicanismo ojoaju Egipto ndive ha Protestantismo Sodoma ndive. Republicanismo ha’e Egipto ha Protestantismo ha’e Sodoma ha Grecia. Tekombo’e yvypóra rehegua símbolo ha’e Atenea, diosa griega, ha itupaópe héra va’ekue Partenón, ojuhúva ko árape ijojaha pyahu Nashville, Tennessee-pe, Partenón róga tupãope. Iglesia ivaíva símbolo, ojoajúva hatĩ republicano ndive Estados Unidos-pe pe léi domingo jave, oñerrepresenta Cleopatra, Astarot, Salomé ha Sodoma ramo.
Cleopatra portrays the atheism of Pharoah and the religion of the Greeks. The religion that accompanies the philosophy of atheism is the worship of Greek education. Jesus always illustrates the end with the beginning and the tree in the garden that was forbidden to eat was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, typifying the religion of Greek philosophy that Sister White calls, “higher education.” It identifies and emphasizes Cleopatra’s Greek religion of wisdom as the corrupted and counterfeit of true education in the great controversy between Christ and Satan.
Cleopatra ohechauka Faraón ateísmo ha pe griego-kuéra religión. Umi religión omoĩva ateísmo filosofía ndive ha’e pe ñemomba’e guasu griego tekombo’e rehe. Jesús akóinte ohechauka pe paha pe iñepyrũme, ha pe yvyramáta huertape ojejokóva he’u hag̃ua ha’eva’ekue pe yvyramáta porã ha vai kuaa rehegua, ohechaukáva griego filosofía religión-pe, Sister White ohenóiva “tekombo’e yvate”. Kóva omombe’u ha omomba’eguasu Cleopatra arandu rehegua griego religiónramo pe oñembyaíva ha añetegua’ỹva tekombo’e añetéva rehegua pe ñorairõ guasúpe Cristo ha Satanás apytépe.
Nashville, Tennessee is called the “Athens of the south,” and Cleopatra was the last literal queen of the south. The last queen of the south typified the next and first spiritual king of the south, fulfilled by atheistic France. Atheistic France typifies the United States, where in Nashville, Tennessee, “Athens of the south” the Parthenon temple for the goddess Athena is symbolically represented. The temple is located at 2500 West End in Nashville. The number twenty-five represents the closed door of Matthew twenty-five’s three parables. Cleopatra as both the queen of the “south” and “west” comes to her “end” in Athens of the south.
Nashville, Tennessee ohenói pe “Atenas del sur”, ha Cleopatra katu vaʼekue pe mburuvicha guasu kuña pahaite añetehápe pe sur rehegua. Pe mburuvicha guasu kuña pahaite pe sur rehegua ohechauka hag̃ua peteĩ tipo ramo pe mburuvicha guasu yvypóraʼỹ peteĩha ha oúva pe sur rehegua, oñemohuʼãva Francia atea-pe. Francia atea ohechauka tipo ramo Estados Unidos-pe, moõ Nashville, Tennessee-pe, “Atenas del sur”-pe, pe tupão Parthenon pe tupãnguéra kuña Atenea rehegua ojehechauka simbólikamente. Pe tupão oĩ 2500 West End-pe Nashville-pe. Pe papapy mokõipa po peteĩha oreko heʼiséva pe okẽ oñembotýva Mateo mokõipa po pegua mbohapy techapyrã ñeʼẽme. Cleopatra, haʼe hag̃uáicha pe mburuvicha guasu kuña pe “sur” ha pe “oeste” rehegua, og̃uahẽ ijapýrape i “end”-pe Atenas del sur-pe.
With these considerations of Actium, Cleopatra, Augustus and Antony we return to verse twenty-four through verse thirty of Daniel eleven. Perhaps, the vaguest part of the passage is when they speak lies at one table.
Koʼã jehechakuaa Actium, Cleopatra, Augusto ha Antonio rehe, jajevy Daniel 11, versículo 24 guive 30 peve. Ikatu hag̃uáicha, pe pasaje pehẽngue ivaive hag̃uáicha hesakãʼỹvéva haʼe upe ojeʼehápe haʼekuéra oñeʼẽ japu peteĩ mesa ári.
And both these kings’ hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall not prosper: for yet the end shall be at the time appointed. Daniel 11:27.
Ha mokõivéva mburuvicha guasu py’a oĩta ojapo hag̃ua ivaíva, ha peteĩ mesápe oñondive’ẽta japu; hákatu ndoho porãmo’ãi upéva, pe paha gueteri og̃uahẽta ára oñemoĩmava’ekuépe. Daniel 11:27.
The time appointed in the verse is 330, the end of the “time” of verse twenty-four. The time appointed represents the Sunday law for the United States and it also represents the close of human probation for the world. Before the Sunday law the two kings, whose hearts were to do mischief will speak lies to one another at one table. Before the Sunday law of verses sixteen and forty-one of Daniel eleven, two kings will speak lies at one table, but their lies do not prosper. Who are the two kings that speak lies to one another? Before we answer that thought, I will remind us of some symbolism we have previously addressed in this series.
Pe ára oñemoĩva ko versíkulope ha’e 330, pe “ára” paha pe versíkulo mokõipa irundyguápe. Pe ára oñemoĩva orrepresenta pe léi domingo Estados Unidos-pe ha avei orrepresenta pe ñemboty paha yvyporakuéra gracia rehegua ko yvy tuichakuére. Oguahẽ mboyve pe léi domingo, umi mokõi mburuvicha guasu, ikorasõva ojapo hag̃ua mba’e vai, oñe’ẽta japu ojupe peteĩ mesápe. Oguahẽ mboyve pe léi domingo pe versíkulo pa’ẽ ha irundy pa’ẽ peteĩgui Daniel once-pe, mokõi mburuvicha guasu oñe’ẽta japu peteĩ mesápe, ha katu ijapu ndosẽporãi. Mávapa umi mokõi mburuvicha guasu oñe’ẽva japu ojupe? Jahasa mboyve upe pensamiento, amandu’ase ñandéve peteĩva umi símbolo rehe oñehesa’ỹijómava’ekue ko serie-pe.
The four Roman rulers represent a variety of prophetic symbols depending on what context they are considered. Though Roman rulers, as a symbol they essentially represent the prophetic history of ancient Judah as they transitioned from the Seleucid domination into the domination of the Romans.
Umi irundy mburuvicha Romano ohechauka opaichagua símbolokuéra profético, ojehecháramo mba’e contexto-pepa oñekonsidera hikuái. Jepe ha’e hag̃ua mburuvichakuéra Romano, símbolo ramo ijojaha’ỹre ohechauka hikuái Judá yma guaréva rembiasakue profética, ojerehápe hikuái pe ñesãmbyhy Seleúcida guive pe ñesãmbyhy Romano-pe.
Pompey was a general and the next three Roman rulers were all Caesars. Julius in relation to Augustus represented two threefold unions with the two triumvirates, the first unofficial, the second official. All four rulers represent the Sunday law in certain contexts. Pompey conquered the glorious land, Julius, represented by twenty-three stab wounds is the first angel, for he is the first Caesar, and he typifies the third angel, which was Tiberias. Tiberias at the cross, which is the Sunday law is also represented by twenty-three, for twenty-three represents the at-one-ment; and the cross is a most essential part of the work of Christ in combining His Divinity with our humanity. So, Julius and Tiberias are the first and third message, represented by twenty-three.
Pompeyo ha’e peteĩ jenerál, ha umi mbohapy mburuvicha Romagua oúva upe rire ha’e opavave César-kuéra. Julio, Augusto rehegua joajupe, orrepresenta mokõi joaju mbohapyvegua umi mokõi triunvirato ndive, pe peteĩha ndaha’éi oficial, pe mokõiha katu oficial. Umi irundy mburuvicha opavave orrepresenta pe léi domingo ciertos contexto-pe. Pompeyo ogana pe yvy hechapyrãva; Julio, ojehechaukáva veintitrés kysevukuérapy, ha’e pe ánhel peteĩha, ha’égui pe César peteĩha, ha ha’e peteĩ tipo pe ánhel mbohapyhagua rehegua, upéva ha’éva Tiberias. Tiberias, kurusúre, upéva ha’éva pe léi domingo, avei ojehechauka veintitrés rupive, pórke veintitrés orrepresenta pe at-one-ment; ha pe kurusu ha’e peteĩ iñimportantetereíva Cristo rembiapo-pe ombojoajúvo Idivinida ñande yvypóra reko ndive. Upévare, Julio ha Tiberias ha’e pe marandu peteĩha ha mbohapyha, ojehechaukáva veintitrés rupive.
Julius was not the romantic figure he is often portrayed as in Hollywood lore; he was a ruthless man bent on power. Tiberias was worse than Julius, for his vileness is even addressed in the verse, for the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet is twenty-two and the first letter is one. The alpha is smaller than the omega and Tiberias’ vileness is located in verse twenty-two, which is the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and in between the two vile persons represented by Julius and Tiberias was Augustus. Augustus represents the height of the glory of Rome’s power and prestige. As the opposite of the first and third message he is represented by the letter thirteen, which is a symbol of rebellion. Augustus secured his kingdom by subduing the rebellion of Antony and Cleopatra, the most famous rebellion of Rome’s history.
Júlio ndaha’éi pe figura romántica oñepresentáva jepi chupe Hollywood rembiasakuepe; ha’e va’ekue peteĩ kuimba’e ipy’ahatãva oñeme’ẽmbaitéva poder rehe. Tiberias ivaive va’ekue Júliogui, pórke heko ky’a jepe oñemombe’u pe versículope, pórke pe letra paha alfabeto hebreopegua ha’e mokõi ha mokõi, ha pe letra peteĩha ha’e peteĩ. Pe alfa michĩve pe ómegagui, ha Tiberias reko ky’a oĩ pe versículo mokõi ha mokõi-pe, upéva ha’éva pe letra paha alfabeto hebreopegua; ha mbytépe umi mokõi kuimba’e heko vaíva, ojejoguáva Júlio ha Tiberias rehe, oĩkuri Augusto. Augusto orrepresenta pe yvatevéva Romagua poder ha prestígio mimbipa rehegua. Oñemoĩvo peteĩ mba’e ojoavyháicha pe ñe’ẽmondo peteĩha ha mbohapyhágui, ha’e ojejoguáva letra trece rehe, peteĩ símbolo opu’ãva rehegua. Augusto omopyenda hembiguairã guasu omoĩ hag̃ua ipoguýpe pe opu’ãva Antonio ha Cleopatra, pe opu’ãkue herakuãvéva Roma rembiasakuepe.
Augustus is the Roman power who conquered the third obstacle and in doing so he represented the Sunday law, and the Roman power who reigns during the forty-two symbolic months of Revelation thirteen’s chapter of rebellion. When placed before the Sunday law Pompey is both 1798 and 1989, making Pompey a symbol of Antiochus Magnus ending the fourth Syrian War from 219 unto 217 BC, in fulfillment of verse ten of chapter eleven. Julius Caesar is then aligned with verses eleven and twelve and the battle of the borderline, the battle of Raphia in 217 BC. There Julius is also Antiochus Magnus, and Augustus Caesar is also Antiochus Magnus in verse fifteen’s battle of Panium. Then in verse sixteen Tiberias is the Sunday law, but he is not Antiochus Magnus, for there he is Pompey, for Jesus always illustrates the end with the beginning. The verse marks the end of the Seleucid Empire typifying the end of the United States as the sixth kingdom of Bible prophecy.
Augusto ha’e pe pu'aka romano ojapóva ipo guýpe pe mbohapyha jejokoha, ha upéicha rupi ha’e orrepresenta pe léi domingo rehegua, ha pe pu'aka romano oguapýva mburuvicha guasu ramo umi mokõi ha irundy jasy simbólico aja Apocalipsis capítulo trece pegua ñemoĩ hag̃ua. Oñemoĩ jave pe léi domingo renondépe, Pompeyo ha’e mokõivéva 1798 ha 1989, upévare Pompeyo ha’e peteĩ símbolo Antíoco Magno rehegua, omohu’ãva pe irundyha ñorairõ sirio ary 219 guive 217 a.C. peve, oñekumpli hag̃uáicha pe versículo diez capítulo once pegua. Upéi Julio César oñemohenda versículo once ha doce rehe, ha pe ñorairõ frontera pegua rehe, pe ñorairõ Rafia pegua ary 217 a.C.-pe. Upépe Julio avei ha’e Antíoco Magno, ha Augusto César avei ha’e Antíoco Magno pe versículo quince pegua ñorairõ Panio reheguápe. Upéi pe versículo dieciséis-pe Tiberias ha’e pe léi domingo, ha katu ndaha’éi Antíoco Magno, upépe ha’e Pompeyo, Jesús akóinte ohechauka haguére pe paha pe ñepyrũ rupive. Pe versículo ohechauka pe Imperio Seléucida paha, oikóva techaukaha ramo pe Estados Unidos paha rehegua Biblia profecía pegua poteĩha rréino ramo.
There are more alignments to be made of the four Roman rulers, and the line represents the hidden history of verse forty. The Maccabean line of verse twenty-three also illustrates the hidden history of verse forty. Then in verses twenty-four, the story of pagan Imperial Rome is represented by a time—three hundred and sixty years. The line of Roman history represented from verse twenty-four through to verse thirty is also an illustration of the hidden history of verse forty. It ends in verse thirty-one when the subject changes from pagan to papal Rome. Pagan Rome is still in the verse, but there it is not represented as the fourth kingdom of Bible prophecy, but as the political power that placed the papacy on the throne in 538. In 538 the papacy passed a Sunday law, so verse thirty-one is aligning with verses sixteen and forty-one. Verse twenty-four introduced the battle of Actium and the history associated with the line.
Oĩve heta hag̃ua gueteri oñembojoajútava umi irundy mburuvicha guasu Romagua rehe, ha pe línea orrepresenta pe tembiasakue kañymby versíkulo cuarenta pegua. Pe línea macabeagua versíkulo veintitrés pegua avei ohechauka pe tembiasakue kañymby versíkulo cuarenta pegua. Upéi, umi versíkulo veinticuatro-pe, pe tembiasakue Roma Imperial pagana rehegua ojehechauka peteĩ tiempo rupive—mbohapycientos sesenta ary. Pe línea tembiasakue Romagua rehegua ojerrepresentáva versíkulo veinticuatro guive peve versíkulo treinta, avei ha’e peteĩ ta’anga pe tembiasakue kañymby versíkulo cuarenta pegua. Upéva opa versíkulo treinta y uno-pe, oñemoambuévo pe tema Roma pagana-gui Roma papal-pe. Roma pagana oĩ gueteri pe versíkulo-pe, péro upépe ndojehechaukái chupe pe irundýha mburuvichagua profecía bíblica pegua ramo, síno pe poder político omoĩ va’ekue papado-pe pe tróno ári ary 538-pe. Ary 538-pe pe papado ombohasa peteĩ léi domingo rehegua, upévare versíkulo treinta y uno oñembojoaju versíkulo dieciséis ha cuarenta y uno ndive. Versíkulo veinticuatro omoñepyrũ va’ekue pe ñorairõ Actium pegua ha pe tembiasakue pe línea rehegua.
Verse twenty-four is identifying when pagan Rome began to rule supremely for three hundred and sixty years, and then in verse thirty-one papal Rome begins to rule supremely for twelve hundred and sixty-years. The beginning and ending of the line bear the signature of Christ, the Alpha and Omega. In the verses we have the history of Marc Antony, Cleopatra and Augustus Caesar. In verse sixteen pagan Rome conquered the Seleucid Empire in 65 BC, and then Judah in 63 BC. The third obstacle of Actium in 31 BC identified the end of the kingdom of Egypt, as typified by the first obstacles of the Seleucid’s in 65 BC. Once again, we find the signature of the First and the Last. 65 BC was the first of three obstacles and it represented the conquering of the king of the north and 31 BC represented the third of three obstacles and it represented the conquering of the king of the south. Judah, as the middle obstacle of the three obstacles, was having a civil war within the walls of Jerusalem when Pompey arrived in 63 BC. The second obstacle is a symbol of rebellion.
Pe ñe’ẽjoapy mokõipa irundyha ohechauka araka’épa Roma pagana oñepyrũ oisãmbyhy hag̃ua ipu’akapavẽme mbohapy sa ary poapypa, ha upéi, pe ñe’ẽjoapy mbohapypa peteĩhápe, Roma papal oñepyrũ oisãmbyhy hag̃ua ipu’akapavẽme mil mokõi sa ary poapypa pukukue. Pe línea ñepyrũ ha paha oguereko Cristo réra añeteguáva, pe Alfa ha Omega. Umi ñe’ẽjoapýpe jaguereko Marc Antony, Cleopatra ha Augusto César rembiasakue. Pe ñe’ẽjoapy papaha oĩháme, Roma pagana ojapyhy pe Imperio Seléucida 65 ary Cristo mboyve, ha upéi Judá 63 ary Cristo mboyve. Pe mbohapyha ñepyta’ỹrã, Actium-pe, 31 ary Cristo mboyve, ohechauka Egipto reino paha, yma guaréicha ojehechauka va’ekue pe peteĩha ñepyta’ỹrãme umi Seléucida rehegua 65 ary Cristo mboyve. Jey jevýma, jajuhu Pe Peteĩha ha Pe Pahaitépe ojehechaukáva héra. 65 ary Cristo mboyve ha’e va’ekue pe peteĩha umi mbohapy ñepyta’ỹrã apytégui ha upéva ohechauka va’ekue pe mburuvicha yvategua jejapyhy; ha 31 ary Cristo mboyve orrepresenta va’ekue pe mbohapyha umi mbohapy ñepyta’ỹrã apytégui ha upéva ohechauka va’ekue pe mburuvicha yvy gotyogua jejapyhy. Judá, ha’éva pe mbytegua ñepyta’ỹrã umi mbohapy ñepyta’ỹrã apytépe, ohasa hína kuri peteĩ ñorairõ oporomoĩva ijehegui Jerusalén táva murálla ryepýpe, Pompeyo oguahẽ jave 63 ary Cristo mboyve. Pe mokõiha ñepyta’ỹrã ha’e peteĩ tembiapo vai ñemoĩ reko ra’ãnga.
In 538, the third obstacle for papal Rome was driven out of the City of Rome. That obstacle was the Goths, and there the fifth kingdom of Bible prophecy began; right where the fourth kingdom ended. And just as the fourth kingdom began at its third obstacle, the kingdom of Egypt was defeated, as had been typified in the first obstacle of the Seleucid kingdom. This identifies that the prophetic testimony found in verses twenty-four through to verse thirty, represent a line that is also to be located in the hidden history of verse forty. For this reason, it is essential to consider the various prophetic relationships that are represented by Marc Antony, Cleopatra, Julius Caesar, Pompey and Augustus Caesar.
Áño 538-pe, mbohapyha mba’e ojokóva Roma papal rehe oñemosẽ Tetã Roma-gui. Upéva hína umi Gótas, ha upépe oñepyrũ pe poha reino marandu hag̃uáme ojeguerekóva Biblia-pe; upe cuarta reino opa haguépe voi. Ha pe cuarta reino oñepyrũ haguéicha imbohapyha mba’e ojokóvape, Egipto retã oñemongu’e ha oñehundi, ojehechaukahaguéicha pe peteĩha mba’e ojokóvape reino Seléucida-pe. Kóva ohechauka pe ñe’ẽmarandu profético ojejuhúva umi versíkulo mokõi pa irundy guive pe versíkulo mbohapypa peve, orepresenta peteĩ línea avei ojejuhuva’erã pe tembiasakue kañymby versíkulo cuarenta-pe. Upévare, tekotevẽiterei oñehesa’ỹijo umi joaju profético opaichagua ojehechaukáva Marc Antony, Cleopatra, Julius Caesar, Pompey ha Augustus Caesar rupive.
So is the vaguest part of the passage of verse twenty-four unto thirty, when they speak lies at one table?
Upéicharamo avei pe pehẽngue hesakã’ỹvéva pe pasáhepe, versíkulo mokoĩpa irundy guive mbohapypa peve, oñe’ẽ jave hikuái japu peteĩ mesápe?
And both these kings’ hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall not prosper: for yet the end shall be at the time appointed. Daniel 11:27.
Ha mokõi mburuvicha guasu py’a oĩta ivaíva ojapo hag̃ua, ha peteĩ mesa ári oñondive ijapuíta; péro ndosẽporãmo’ãi, pe paha gueteri oikóta pe ára oñemoĩmava’ekuépe. Daniel 11:27.
Uriah Smith identifies the two kings as Marc Antony and Augustus Caesar.
Uriah Smith ombojekuaa umi mokõi mburuvicha guasuha ha’eha Marc Antony ha Augusto César.
“Verse twenty-seven quoted
“Pe versíkulo mokõipa porundy ojepurahéi vaʼekue”
“Antony and Caesar were formerly in alliance. Yet under the garb of friendship they were both aspiring and intriguing for universal dominion. Their protestations of deference to, and friendship for, each other, were the utterances of hypocrites. They spoke lies at one table. Octavia, the wife of Antony and sister of Caesar, declared to the people of Rome at the time Antony divorced her, that she had consented to marry him solely with the hope that it would prove a pledge of union between Caesar and Antony. But that counsel did not prosper. The rupture came; and in the conflict that ensued, Caesar came off entirely victorious.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 276.
“Antonio ha César yma guarépe oñemoirũ vaʼekue. Upéicharõ jepe, angirũramo ojehechaukáva ryguýpe, mokõivéva oheka ha oñembokatupyry vaʼekue opavave ári ipoguýpe oguereko hag̃ua mburuvicha guasu hag̃ua. Iñeʼẽnguéra ohechaukáva omombaʼeha ha ohayhuha ojupe, tekopyʼamokõi ñeʼẽnte vaʼekue. Oñeʼẽ japu peteĩ mesa ári. Octavia, Antonio rembireko ha César reindy, heʼi Roma retãygua kuérape, upe jave Antonio ohejárõ guare chupe, omoneĩ hague omenda hag̃ua hendive peteĩ mbaʼe añoite reheve: ohaʼarõgui upéva oiko hag̃ua peteĩ ñeʼẽmeʼẽ joaju rehegua César ha Antonio apytépe. Ha upe ñemoñeʼẽ noñakãrapuʼãi. Pe joavy guasu ou; ha pe ñorairõ oúva upe rirepe, César osẽ ipuʼakaite hag̃uáicha.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 276.
When Octavia identified that her marriage to Antony was as a pledge of union, it identified the marital alliance which had been typified earlier in chapter eleven with the Hellenistic-era marriage of Berenice to the Seleucid king Antiochus II Theos around 252 BC. Berenice was the daughter of Ptolemy II Philadelphus. Octavia and Berenice represent diplomatic marriages or prophetically, treaties. Verses five through ten identify the history of the diplomatic marriage between the southern and northern kingdoms, and when Marc Antony and Octavian, later known as Augustus Caesar, arranged the marriage, they also divided the kingdom into east and west.
Octavia ohechakuaa ramo guare iména ndive Antony rehegua ha’eha peteĩ ñe’ẽme’ẽ joaju rehegua, upéva ohechauka pe joaju ñemendápeguápe yma ojehechaukava’ekue capítulo once-pe pe ñemenda oikóva helenístico arapýpe Berenice rehegua pe mburuvicha Seleúcida Antiochus II Theos ndive ary 252 a.C. rupi. Berenice ha’e va’ekue Ptolemy II Philadelphus rajy. Octavia ha Berenice orrepresenta ñemenda diplomática térã, proféticamente, ñe’ẽme’ẽnguéra. Versículo cinco guive diez peve ohechauka pe tembiasakue pe ñemenda diplomática rehegua pe reino yvate gotyo ha pe reino yvy gotyo apytépe, ha Marc Antony ha Octavian, upéi ojekuaáva Augusto César ramo, omohenda ramo guare pe ñemenda, ha’ekuéra avei omboja’o pe reino kuarahyresẽ ha kuarahyreike gotyo.
The Pact of Brundisium (40 BC) was a negotiated settlement between Marc Antony and Octavian (later Augustus) to resolve tensions in the Second Triumvirate after near-civil war. It involved dividing Roman territories (Antony east, Octavian west) and was sealed by Antony’s marriage to Octavia (Octavian’s sister). In 39 BC the original five-year Triumvirate term expired, Antony sailed to Italy with 300+ ships that were initially denied to land at Brundisium, so they ultimately docked at Tarentum. Octavian met him there after prolonged mediations produced by an unwillingness of Antony’s army to fight with Octavian’s army and vise versa. Octavia played a key mediating role, persuading Antony to support Octavian against Sextus Pompey. They renewed the Triumvirate for another five years (to 32 BC), with Antony providing Octavian 120 ships in exchange for promised troops (which Octavian later withheld).
Pe Akytã Brundisiumgua (40 ary oĩ mboyve Cristo) ha’e va’ekue peteĩ ñe’ẽme’ẽ ojejoguáva Marc Antony ha Octavian (upéi Augusto) apytépe, oñesolusiona hag̃ua pe tensión oĩva’ekue Mokõiha Triunvirato-pe, peteĩ guerra civil-rã hi’aguĩ rire. Upépe ojejapo va’ekue Roma retãnguéra ñemboja’o (Antony kuarahyresẽ gotyo, Octavian kuarahyreike gotyo), ha oñembotapykuévo va’ekue Antony omenda rupi Octavia rehe (Octavian reindy). Ary 39 oĩ mboyve Cristo-pe, pe Triunvirato ñepyrũrã po ary hag̃uava opa rire, Antony oguata yguasu ári Itália-pe hetave 300 váso ndive, ha iñepyrũme ndojehejái va’ekue og̃uahẽ hag̃ua Brundisium-pe; upévare ipahápe oñemboja va’ekue Tarentum-pe. Octavian ojotopa hendive upépe, are hag̃ua oñeñe’ẽ rire mbytépe, oúva pe ndopy’aguasúi rupi Antony ehérsito oñorairõ hag̃ua Octavian ehérsito ndive, ha upéicha avei pe ambue gotyo. Octavia oguereko va’ekue peteĩ tembiapo tuicha mba’éva mbytépe oñemoĩ hag̃ua, omokyre’ỹvo Antony-pe oipytyvõ hag̃ua Octavian-pe Sextus Pompey rovái. Ha’ekuéra ombopyahu pe Triunvirato ambue po ary hag̃ua (32 ary peve oĩ mboyve Cristo), Antony ome’ẽvo Octavian-pe 120 váso, umi soldádo oñepromete va’ekue oñeme’ẽtaha hag̃ua hekópe (umi Octavian upéi nome’ẽi va’ekue).
In 32 BC there was an open break between the two antagonists. Relations had deteriorated through propaganda, Antony’s eastern focus (with Cleopatra), and Octavian’s consolidation in the west. Octavian rejected later conference proposals from Antony before Actium.
Ary 32 a.C.-pe oiko peteĩ ñembyai hesakãva umi mokõi oñomoirũ'ỹvape apytépe. Umi joaju oñembyai kuri propaganda rupive, Antonio ojepytaso haguére Kuarahyresẽ gotyo (Cleopatra ndive), ha Octaviano omombaretevévo iñemopyenda Kuarahyreike gotyo. Octaviano omboyke umi propuesta upe riregua oñemongeta hag̃ua Antonio ndive Actium mboyve.
In the diplomatic marriage with the king of the north (Antiochus) and the king of the south (Ptolemy), it was the southern king that supplied the bride, with the diplomatic marriage of Antony (the east) and Octavian (the west); the bride was supplied by the west. Both diplomatic marriages failed and the supplier of the daughter or sister was ultimately victorious over the power who broke the treaty.
Pe ñemenda diplomátika mburuvicha yvate pegua ndive (Antiochus) ha mburuvicha ñemby pegua ndive (Ptolemy), mburuvicha ñemby pegua voi ome’ẽ vaʼekue pe novia; pe ñemenda diplomátika Antonio rehegua (kuarahyresẽ gotyo) ha Octaviano rehegua (kuarahyreike gotyo) katu, kuarahyreike gotyo ome’ẽ vaʼekue pe novia. Mokõivéva ñemenda diplomátika ndoikoporãi, ha pe ome’ẽ vaʼekue pe tajýra térã pe hermana ipahápe ogana pe puʼaka rehe pe ombohovái ha omopẽ vaʼekue pe ñeʼẽmeʼẽ.
The Testimony of Three
Mbohapy Reko’ẽ Tee hag̃ua hag̃uáicha
At the end of the Seleucid Empire there was a third treaty where lies were spoke at one table. This occurred in the context of the Fifth Syrian War (202–195 BC), when Antiochus III Magnus exploited the weakness of the Ptolemaic Kingdom after Ptolemy IV Philopator’s death in 204 BC. Ptolemy V Epiphanes (Ptolemy V) ascended the throne as a child (around age 5–6), leaving Egypt under regents and vulnerable to internal chaos, native revolts, and external threats.
Imperio Seléucida paha opávo oĩ peteĩ mbohapyha ñe’ẽme’ẽ, upépe japu oñeñe’ẽ peteĩ mesápe. Kóva oiko kuri Ñorairõ Sirio Poha Irundyha (202–195 JC mboyve) ryepýpe, Antioco III Magno oiporavo hag̃ua Ptolemaico Rréino kangy, Ptolomeo IV Filopátor omanóma rire ary 204 JC mboyve. Ptolomeo V Epífanes (Ptolomeo V) ojupi guive trónore mitã ramo (5–6 ary rupi), ha upéicha Egipto opyta vaʼekue regente kuéra poguýpe ha ikangy hag̃ua sarambi hyepypegua, puʼakaʼỹ ñemoĩ ypykuéra rehegua ha ñeñorairõ okapegua renondépe.
Antiochus Magnus had already invaded and seized much of the Ptolemaic territories in Coele-Syria, Palestine, and Asia Minor after victories like the Battle of Panium (200 BC). Rather than fully conquering Egypt (which risked Roman intervention, as Rome was pressuring him to stay out of certain areas), he pursued a diplomatic marriage alliance as a “protector” figure. In 197/195 BC, as part of the peace treaty ending the war, Antiochus Magnus betrothed and then married his young daughter Cleopatra I Syra (also called Cleopatra Syra) to the child Ptolemy V (the marriage took place in 193 BC at Raphia; Ptolemy was 16, Cleopatra 10).
Antíoco Magno oikéma vaʼekue ha oipeʼáma heta hendágui umi tetã Ptolemaikokuéra mbaʼe Coele-Síriape, Palestina-pe ha Asia Menor-pe, umi jejopy vaiʼỹ guasu rupive Panium Ñorairõháicha (200 a.C.). Upévare, Egipto rehe ipuʼakaite hag̃ua rangue (upéva ikatu hag̃uáicha omoingepáta Roma-pe, Roma niko ojopy hína chupe ani hag̃ua oike ciertos hendápe), haʼe oheka peteĩ ñemenda joaju diplomática peteĩ tapicha “ñangarekoha” ramo. Ary 197/195 a.C.-pe, pyʼaguapy ñeʼẽmeʼẽ omohuʼãva ñorairõ ryepýpe, Antíoco Magno omeʼẽ ñemendarã ha upéi omomenda itajýra mitã Cleopatra I Syra-pe (avei ojehero Cleopatra Syra) mitãrusu Ptolomeo V ndive; pe ñemenda oiko vaʼekue ary 193 a.C.-pe Raphia-pe; Ptolomeo oguereko vaʼekue 16 ary ha Cleopatra 10.
This was framed as a generous gesture: Antiochus positioned himself as an ally and “protector” of the young king, securing peace while retaining gains in Asia. The marriage gave him indirect influence over Egypt through his daughter (he hoped she would remain loyal to her Seleucid roots and act as a pro-Syrian voice in the Ptolemaic court). The ploy backfired for Cleopatra sided with her husband and Egypt, not her father, undermining Antiochus’s long-term control. This mirrors the Pact of Brundisium (40 BC) and related to Roman events in several ways.
Kóva ojehechauka vaʼekue peteĩ jehecharamóva pytyvõ tuicháva ramo: Antíoco omoĩ ijupe peteĩ irũ ha “ñangarekohára” ramo pe mburuvicha guasu mitãme, omboaje hag̃ua pyʼaguapy ha opyta aja ipópe umi mbaʼe ohupyty vaʼekue Ásiape. Pe ñemenda omeʼẽ chupe pokatu hag̃ua indirektamente Egipto ári itaʼýra rupive (haʼe ohaʼarõ kuri haʼe opytata hag̃ua jerovia hag̃ua iñakãrapuʼã Seléucida rehe ha ojapóta hag̃ua peteĩ ñeʼẽ Siria rehegua pytyvõharáva Ptolemaico róga mburuvichakuérape). Pe ñuhã ndaikatúi osẽ porã, Cleopatra ojekytígui iména ha Egipto ndive, ndahaʼéi itúva ndive; upéicha ombyaipa Antíoco poguypukuaa are hag̃ua. Kóva ojogua pe Pákto de Brundisium (40 a.C.) rehe ha ojoaju heta hendáicha umi mbaʼe oikóva Roma reheguáre.
Just as Antony married Octavia (sister of Octavian) to bind rival powers after near-war, Antiochus used his daughter’s marriage to Ptolemy V to formalize a temporary peace and territorial division (Seleucids kept conquests in the north, Ptolemy retained Egypt the south).
Antony omenda haguéicha Octavia ndive (Octaviano reindy) ombojoaju hag̃ua pu’aka oñemoĩva joavy’ỹ hag̃ua peteĩ ñorairõ hi’aguïetéva rire, upéicha avei Antíoco oiporu ita’ýra kuña ñemendáre Ptolomeo V ndive ombohape hag̃ua peteĩ py’aguapy sapy’aguáva ha peteĩ territorio ñemboja’o ñemohenda hag̃ua (Seleúcida-kuéra oguereko hag̃ua umi tetãnguéra ogana vaʼekue yvate gotyo, ha Ptolomeo opyta hag̃ua Egipto rehe, yvy gotyo).
Antiochus acted as a de facto guardian over the child-king Ptolemy V (via family ties), similar to how Octavian (and the Triumvirate) positioned themselves amid power vacuums or rivalries. In both cases, the “stronger” figure (Antiochus/Octavian) sought leverage over a vulnerable counterpart through kinship. Both arrangements brought short-term stability but ‘did not prosper’ long-term due to underlying distrust—Cleopatra favored Egypt (undermining Antiochus), while Antony’s eastern focus (Cleopatra VII) led to the breakdown with Octavian.
Antíoco oñemombaʼapo vaʼekue peteĩ ñangarekohára de facto ramo mitã-rréi Ptolomeo V ári (joaju ogayguáre rupive), ojoguaháicha Octaviano-pe (ha Triunvirato-pe) omoĩ vaʼekue ijehekuéra mbareteʼỹ renda térã joavy mbytépe. Mokõivéva kásope, pe tapicha “imbarakavevéva” (Antíoco/Octaviano) oheka vaʼekue peteĩ ventaja pe iñirũ ikangyvéva ári ogaygua joaju rupive. Mokõivéva ñemyatyrõ omeʼẽ vaʼekue pyʼaguapy sapyʼagua, péro ndaoporãri arakaʼeve ipuku hag̃uáicha pe jojeroviaʼỹ oĩva iñapytĩme rupi—Cleopatra omombaʼeguasu Egipto-pe (ombohasyvévo Antíoco rembiapo), ha Antonio kuarahyresẽ gotyo oñembojaʼeterei hague (Cleopatra VII ndive) ogueru vaʼekue ipahápe jeity Octaviano ndive.
Ptolemy V’s minority under regents parallels the instability after Julius Caesar’s death (leading to the Triumvirate’s formation and power struggles). The marriage of Berenice to Antiochus marked the beginning of the Seleucid Empire’s history in Daniel eleven, and the marriage of Antiochus Magnus daughter to the Egyptian child king, marked the ending of the Seleucid Empire. The ending of the marriage of Marc Antony to Octavia marked the ending of the Ptolemaic kingdom. The ending of Judah as God’s covenant people took place at the cross, and that Judean kingdom began with the Maccabees and the league they made with Rome. All of these prophetic lines are represented within the narrative of Daniel chapter eleven, and they all align with the hidden history of verse forty. Beginning in verse five we have the treaty of Berenice, that leads to Antiochus the Great and the treaty of his daughter Cleopatra Syra, that takes place in the history of the Maccabees of verse twenty-three. The Maccabees become part of the line based upon their rebellion against Antiochus Epiphanes, one of the last of the Seleucid Dynasty.
Tolomeo V imitãme guive ipoguýpe umi omyakãva rehe ojoguaiterei pe ndaipytũporãivéi oiko vaʼekue Julio César omanó rire (oguerojeráva Triunvirato ñemoheñóipe ha puʼakareko rehe ñorairõme). Berenice ñemenda Antíoco ndive heʼi pe oñepyrũ hague Imperio Seléucida rembiasakue Daniel kapítulo once-pe, ha Antíoco Magno rajy ñemenda pe mitã rréi Egipto-gua ndive, heʼi pe opa hague Imperio Seléucida. Marco Antonio ñemenda paha Octavia ndive heʼi pe opa hague pe rréino ptolemaico. Judá opa hag̃ua Tupã konvénio tavayguakuéra ramo oiko kurusu rehe, ha upe rréino judeo oñepyrũ Maccabeo-kuéra ndive ha pe joaju ojapo vaʼekue Roma ndive. Koʼã marandu profétika maymáva ojehechauka Daniel kapítulo once ñeʼẽmondohápe, ha maymáva ojoaju pe tembiasakue kañymby versículo cuarenta-pe. Oñepyrũvo versículo cinco guive, jajuhu pe ñeʼẽmeʼẽ Berenice rehegua, ogueraháva Antíoco el Grande peve ha pe ñeʼẽmeʼẽ irajy Cleopatra Syra rehegua, oikóva Maccabeo-kuéra rembiasakuépe versículo veintitrés-pe. Umi Maccabeo oike pe línea-pe iñaranduka rupi iñepuʼã haguére Antíoco Epífanes rehe, peteĩ umi pahaguéva Dinastía Seléucida-pe.
Antiochus Epiphanes is the Antiochus who was in Egypt in 168 BC near Alexandria during the Sixth Syrian War. Antiochus Epiphanes had invaded Egypt and was on the verge of capturing Alexandria. The Ptolemaic rulers appealed to Rome for help. Rome sent Popillius Laenas (with just a small entourage—no army) to deliver an ultimatum from the Senate; Antiochus must immediately withdraw from Egypt and Cyprus, or face war with Rome. When Antiochus received the letter and asked for time to consult his advisors, Popillius—described as stern and imperious—took his walking stick and drew a circle in the sand around the king’s feet. He then declared, “Before you step out of that circle, give me a reply to lay before the Senate.”
Antíoco Epífanes ha’e pe Antíoco oĩ va’ekue Egíptope ary 168 a.C. rupi, Alejandría ypýpe, Ñorairõ Siria Mbohapyha Riregua mboyveha. Antíoco Epífanes oike va’ekue Egíptope ha hi’aguĩiterei ojagarra hag̃ua Alejandría. Umi mburuvicha Ptolemaico ojerure pytyvõ Rómape. Róma omondo va’ekue Pompilio Laenaspe (peteĩ aty michĩmínte ndive—ndaha’éi peteĩ ehérsito) ogueraha hag̃ua peteĩ ñe’ẽ paha Senado-gui; Antíoco osẽva’erã pya’e Egiptogui ha Chípregui, térã ombohováita ñorairõ Róma ndive. Antíoco ogueru jave pe kuatiañe’ẽ ha ojerure ramo itiémpo oñemongeta hag̃ua hemimbo’e’aty ndive, Pompilio—oje’e hese ha’eha hatã ha mburuvicha’eterei—ojapyhy va’ekue iwata yvyra ha omboguapy peteĩ círculo yvyku’ípe mburuvicha py jerére. Upéi he’i: “Neresẽ mboyve upe círculo-gui, eme’ẽ chéve peteĩ mbohovái agueraha hag̃uáicha Senado renondépe.”
The implication was clear; Antiochus could not leave the circle without committing to Rome’s demands—crossing it without agreement would mean war. Stunned and humiliated, Antiochus hesitated briefly but then agreed to comply, withdrew his forces from Egypt, and returned to Syria. This bold act of diplomacy (backed by Rome’s growing reputation for power) forced the retreat without a battle, showcasing Rome’s emerging dominance in the eastern Mediterranean. It’s widely cited as an origin for the phrase “drawing a line in the sand” (though it was literally a circle).
Pe mba’e ojehechakuaáva oĩ porãiterei va’ekue; Antíoco ndaikatúi osẽ upe mbytéguio ojecompromete’ỹre Roma rembijerure rehe—ohasáramo upe mbytépe ñe’ẽme’ẽ’ỹ reheve, upéva he’iséta ñorairõ. Oñemondýi ha oñemotĩmbaitévo, Antíoco opyta sapy’ami kyhyjépe, ha upéi omoneĩ ojapótaha upe ojejeruréva, oguenohẽ ijehérsito Egíptogui, ha ojevy Siria-pe. Ko tembiapo py’a guasu diplomaciapegua (oñemombaretéva Roma herakuã okakuaáva pokatu rehe) ombojerovia jey hag̃ua pe jevy joa peteĩ ñorairõ’ỹre, ohechaukávo Roma pu’aka osẽramo hína Kuarahyresẽ gotyo Mediterráneo-pe. Heta jey oñecita ko mba’e peteĩ ñepyrũrãicha ñe’ẽjoaju “ojerévo peteĩ línea yvyku’ípe” rehegua (jepe tuichaháicha ndaha’éi va’ekue peteĩ línea, síno peteĩ círculo).
Antiochus Epiphanes also became the Protestant understanding of the power that exalts himself, falls and establishes the vision in verse fourteen of Daniel eleven.
Antíoco Epífanes avei oiko pe entendimiento protestántepe pe mbarete oñembotuicháva ijehegui rehe, ho’áva ha omoĩva pe visión, versíkulo catorce-pe Daniel once-pe.
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 opuʼãta ñemby gotyo pe mburuvicha guasu rehe; avei nde retãygua vai apoha kuéra oñemopuʼãta omopyendá hag̃uáicha pe visión; ha katu hoʼáta hikuái. Daniel 11:14.
Antiochus IV Epiphanes reigned 175–164 BC, and was the eighth of thirteen Seleucid kings. He sought to impose Hellenistic culture and unify his empire under Greek religious practices. He plundered the Temple in 169 BC, banned Jewish practices (circumcision, Sabbath observance, Torah study), and forced sacrifices to pagan gods. In December 167 BC he erected a pagan altar (to Zeus) on top of the Jewish altar of burnt offerings in the Temple and sacrificed a pig, along with other profane acts. The desecration was the final straw for observant Jews, who saw it as the ultimate violation of the Temple’s sanctity and God’s law. It sparked immediate resistance when Mattathias (a priest from Modein) refused a Seleucid officer’s order to sacrifice to pagan gods and killed an apostate Jew and the officer, then fled to the hills with his sons (the future Maccabees). This ignited guerrilla warfare and revolt from 167–160 BC which aimed to restore Jewish worship, leading to the rededication of the Temple (Hanukkah) in 164 BC under Judas Maccabeus.
Antíoco IV Epífanes ogoverna vaʼekue ary 175–164 a.C. peve, ha haʼe vaʼekue peteĩha ochoha umi paʼũme umi trece mburuvicha guasu Seléucida-gui. Haʼe oheka vaʼekue omoĩ hag̃ua cultura helenística ha ombojoaju hag̃ua iñimperio tembiapo religioso griego rupive. Oipeʼa mbaʼe hag̃ua Templo-gui ary 169 a.C.-pe, ombotove hag̃ua umi jepokuaa judaica (circuncisión, pytuʼu ára sábado-pe, ha estudio de la Torá), ha ombojerure vaʼekue sacrificio hag̃ua tupã guaʼu kuérape. Jasypakõi ary 167 a.C.-pe omopuʼã peteĩ altar pagano (Zeus-pe guarã) altar judío ári, pe altar de holocaustos oĩva Templo-pe, ha upépe osacrifika peteĩ kure, ambue tembiapo kyʼa ndive. Pe ñemongyʼa haʼe vaʼekue pe ipaháva umi judío iñeʼẽrendúva peguarã, haʼekuéra ohechávo upéva ramo pe jeheja vaivéva Templo marangatu rehe ha Tupã léi rehe. Upéva omyandy pyaʼe hag̃ua peteĩ ñeñorairõ, Matatías (pái Modein-gua) ombotovévo peteĩ mburuvicha Seléucida rembiapoukapy osacrifica hag̃ua tupã guaʼu kuérape, ha ojukávo peteĩ judío apostata ha pe mburuvicha, upéi okañy yvytykuérape itaʼýra ndive (umi Macabeo oútava). Upéva omyendy peteĩ ñorairõ guerrillera ha peteĩ puʼaka opuʼãva ary 167–160 a.C. aja, ohekáva omyengovia jey hag̃ua ñemombaʼe guasu judaica, ha upévagui ou pe Templo oñembojegua jeyha (Hanukkah) ary 164 a.C.-pe Judas Macabeo poguýpe.
At the beginning and ending of the Seleucid Empire there was a significant treaty represented by a diplomatic marriage that possessed the element of division of either east and west, or north and south. As the Seleucid Empire waned Antiochus Epiphanes becomes the symbol of the rising Roman power, and the focus of the Maccabean’s indignation. Later in history he becomes the counterfeit of the prophetic symbol that establishes the vision. The power in verse twenty-two of chapter eleven is broken when the prince of the covenant was broken.
Pe impyrũ ha pahápe Mburuvicha Seleúcida retãme oĩ kuri peteĩ ñe’ẽme’ẽ tuicha mba’éva, ojehechaukáva peteĩ ñemenda diplomática rupive, oguerekóva pype pe elemento ñemboja’o rehegua, taha’e kuarahyresẽ ha kuarahyreike, térã yvate ha yvýpe. Mburuvicha Seleúcida retã oñemboguejývo, Antíoco Epífanes oiko pe símbolo mbarete Romagua opu’ãva rehegua, ha pe Maccabeo-kuéra ñemyrõ mbytegua. Upe rire tembiasakuépe ha’e oiko pe japu ra’ãnga profético rehegua, omoĩva pe visión. Pe pu’aka oĩva versículo mokõipa mokõiha, capítulo once-pe, oñembyai raka’e pe príncipe del pacto oñembyaírõ guare.
And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant. Daniel 11:22.
Ha umi ysyry ati reheve ojeityýta henondégui, ha oñembyaietéta; ha péicha avei pe ñemoĩmbyrã ruvicha. Daniel 11:22.
Antiochus Epiphanes’ reign ended in 164 BC, almost two hundred years before Christ, “the prince of the covenant” was “broken” at the cross. What we wish to note here is that the Seleucid Empire began and ended with a diplomatic treaty marriage where the deceit between the two parties is a matter of the historical record. During the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, the Maccabean revolt began, which typified the American Revolution. In the history of the Maccabees their struggle to throw off the Seleucid power included a significant treaty with Rome. The verse that identifies the treaty directly identifies Rome as working deceitfully, or telling lies at the treaty table.
Antíoco Epífanes rréino opáma 164 a.C.-pe, ha Cristo mboyve amo mokõi sa ary rupi, “pe príncipe del pacto” oñembyai kuri kurusu ári. Ko’ápe jahechakuaaséva ha’e hína kóva: pe Imperio Seléucida oñepyrũ ha opa peteĩ ñemenda de tratado diplomático rupive, upépe mokõive hendáicha ojejapo va’ekue ñembotavy oĩ tembiasakue ñe’ẽme’ẽme. Antíoco Epífanes rréino aja oñepyrũ pe pu’ã Maccabea, ha upéva ohechauka hag̃ua pe Revolución Americana. Maccabeo-kuéra rembiasakuepe, iñorairõ oñemosãso hag̃ua pe pokatu Seléucida-gui oike peteĩ tratado iñimportánteva Roma ndive. Pe versículo omombe’úva pe tratado omombe’u hag̃ua voi Roma ojapo hague ñembotavy, térã he’i hague japu pe mesa de tratado-pe.
And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people. Daniel 11:23.
Ha upe ñemoĩmbyre ojejapóva heseve rire, ha’e omba’apóta ñembotavýpe; oguahẽta yvate gotyo, ha oiko mbaretéta peteĩ tetã michĩva reheve. Daniel 11:23.
Every prophetic line that precedes the time of the end in verse forty contains a broken treaty. Uriah Smith commenting on verse thirty’s “them that forsake the holy covenant” records the following:
Opaite línea profética oĩva pe ára paha mboyve, versíkulo cuarenta-pe, oguereko peteĩ ñe’ẽme’ẽ oñembyai vaʼekue. Uriah Smith, omombeʼúvo versíkulo treinta-pe heʼíva “umi ohejáva pe pacto marangatu”, ohai koʼã mbaʼe:
“‘Indignation against the covenant;’ that is, the Holy Scriptures, the book of the covenant. A revolution of this nature was accomplished in Rome. The Heruli, Goths, and Vandals, who conquered Rome, embraced the Arian faith, and became enemies of the Catholic Church. It was especially for the purpose of exterminating this heresy that Justinian decreed the pope to be the head of the church and the corrector of heretics. The Bible soon came to be regarded as a dangerous book that should not be read by the common people, but all questions in dispute were to be submitted to the pope. Thus was indignity heaped upon God’s word. And the emperors of Rome, the eastern division of which still continued, had intelligence, or connived with the Church of Rome, which had forsaken the covenant, and constituted the great apostasy, for the purpose of putting down ‘heresy.’ The man of sin was raised to his presumptuous throne by the defeat of the Arian Goths, who then held possession of Rome, in A.D.538.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 281.
“‘Pochy ñemoĩrũ pe ñe’ẽme’ẽ rehe’; upéva he’ise, Ñandejára Ñe’ẽ Marangatu, ñe’ẽme’ẽ aranduka. Peteĩ revolución ko’ãichagua ojejapo va’ekue Róma-pe. Umi Hérulo, Gótico ha Vándalo, omboykéva’ekue Róma, omoneĩ pe jerovia arriána, ha oiko Iglesia Católica rembiayhú’ỹramo. Ko herejía hag̃ua hag̃uáicha oñehundipaite hag̃ua, upevarãitéma Justiniano omoĩ va’ekue pápape iglesia akãramo ha hereje-kuéra moĩporãhára ramo. Pya’e hag̃ua, la Biblia oñepyrũ ojehecha hag̃ua peteĩ aranduka ipeligroso hag̃uáicha ani hag̃ua omoñe’ẽ tavayguakuéra, ha opa porandu oĩva joavyhápe oñeme’ẽva’erã pápape. Péicha oñembyai Ñandejára Ñe’ẽ. Ha umi mburuvicha guasu Róma-pegua, pe kakuaarã orientál oikovéva gueteri, oikuaa térã oñemoirũ Iglesia de Roma ndive, upeva’ekue ohejáva’ekue pe ñe’ẽme’ẽ ha ojapóva pe apostasía guasu, umi mba’e hérético oñembogue hag̃ua. Pe kuimba’e angaipa rehegua oñemopu’ã ikatupyry’ỹva guapyhaguasúpe umi Gótico arriáno ñembogue rupi, umíva upe jave oguereko va’ekue Róma, ary 538 d.C.-pe.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 281.
Verse five of Daniel eleven identifies the line of history where the king of the south provides a diplomatic bride as a symbol of a treaty that was thereafter broken by the king of the north. The retaliation of the king of the south typified the retaliation of Napoleon’s spiritual king of the south against the papal king of the north in 1798. The broken treaty of verses five through nine typified Napoleon’s broken treaty of Tolentino, which typified Putin’s claim of a broken treaty by NATO. The retaliation of Napoleon typified the retaliation of Putin against the Ukraine in 2014. Verse ten’s retaliation of Antiochus Magnus ending the fourth Syrian War aligns with Napoleon in 1798 and also Putin in 2014. Following verse fifteen’s battle of Panium n 200 BC, Antiochus arranged a diplomatic marriage with the hidden intent of taking Egypt under his command without employing military boots on the ground. Antiochus Magnus throne was passed to his son, who was assassinated which brought Antiochus Magnus’s youngest son, Antiochus Epiphanes to the throne. His actions in implementing Greek customs and religion brought about the Maccabean revolt, that led to the deceitful treaty with Rome in verse twenty-three. Verse twenty-four introduces pagan Rome and identifies Antony and Augustus’s table of lies. In verse thirty pagan Rome enters into dialogue with the papal church, who are noted as them that had broken the holy covenant.
Pe versíkulo cinco Daniel 11-pe ojekuaa pe línea histórica pe mburuvicha ñemby gotyo ome'ẽhápe peteĩ novia diplomática peteĩ tratado símbolo ramo, upéi upéva omondóva'ekue yvýcha norte gotyogua. Pe ñemby gotyogua mburuvicha ñepyrũ jevy ohechauka typológicamente Napoleón pe mburuvicha espiritual ñemby gotyogua ñepyrũ jevy pe mburuvicha papal norte gotyogua rehe 1798-pe. Pe tratado oñembyai va'ekue versíkulo cinco guive nueve peve ohechauka typológicamente Napoleón tratado Tolentino-gua oñembyaíva, ha upéva avei ohechauka typológicamente Putin he'íva peteĩ tratado NATO rehegua oñembyaihague. Napoleón ñepyrũ jevy ohechauka typológicamente Putin ñepyrũ jevy Ucrania rehe 2014-pe. Versíkulo diez-pe Antiochus Magnus ñepyrũ jevy omohu'ãva pe irundyha Siria Ñorairõ ojoaju Napoleón rehe 1798-pe ha avei Putin rehe 2014-pe. Versíkulo quince rire, pe ñorairõ Panium-pe ary 200 a. C.-pe, Antiochus omohenda peteĩ ñemenda diplomática peteĩ intención kañymby reheve Egipto ogueraha hag̃ua ipoguýpe oiporu'ỹre soldádo botín yvýpe guare. Antiochus Magnus guapyha ohasa ita'ýrape, upéi upéva ojejuka, ha upéva ogueru Antiochus Magnus ra'y pahague, Antiochus Epiphanes, pe trónope. Ijapopyre, omoĩvo costumbre ha religión griega, ogueru pe rebelión macabea, ha upéva ogueraha pe tratado ñembotavy rehegua Roma ndive versíkulo veintitrés-pe. Versíkulo veinticuatro omoinge Roma pagana ha ohechauka Antonio ha Augusto mesa japu rehegua. Versíkulo treinta-pe Roma pagana oike ñemongeta hag̃ua pe iglesia papal ndive, umíva niko umi omboja'óva'ekue pe pacto marangatu.
Verses twenty-four to thirty is the testimony of pagan Rome and verses thirty-one to forty provide the testimony of papal Rome. Every line of Daniel eleven verse one on through verse forty represents a line of prophecy that is applied in the hidden history of verse forty. The line of the Seleucid kingdom, the line of the Ptolemaic kingdom, the line of the Judean kingdom of the Maccabees, the line of pagan Rome and the line of papal Rome all illustrate the history of 1989 unto the Sunday law. Each of those lines identify a broken treaty as a major element of the history.
Umi versíkulo mokõiha irundy guive mbohapypa peve niko pagáno Róma rembiasakue; ha umi versíkulo mbohapypa peteĩ guive irundypa peve ome’ẽ pe testimonio papál Róma rehegua. Káda línea Daniel 11:1 guive 11:40 peve ohechauka peteĩ línea profesía rehegua ojeaplikáva pe tembiasakue kañymby 11:40-pe. Pe línea rréino seléusida rehegua, pe línea rréino ptolemáiko rehegua, pe línea rréino judéa rehegua umi Macabeo-kuéra mba’éva, pe línea pagáno Róma rehegua ha pe línea papál Róma rehegua opavave ohechauka pe tembiasakue 1989 guive pe léi dominikál peve. Káda peteĩva umi línea-gui ombojekuaa peteĩ ñe’ẽme’ẽ jejoka hag̃ua peteĩ elemento tuichaitéva pe tembiasakuépe.
It is Rome that establishes the vision of Daniel eleven, and both pagan and papal Rome’s prophetic treaties of deceit are marked as progressive and as occurring before Rome ruled supremely for their respective and distinct prophetic periods. Both powers marked the beginning of the prophetic period of supremacy as beginning when their third obstacle was overcome. Before the soon coming Sunday law in the United States there will be a treaty of deceit between two powers. Four times the two powers have been the kings of the south and the north, once between the glorious land of Judah and Rome, once between two parts of the Roman triumvirate and once between pagan and papal Rome. In both deceitful treaties concerning Rome it amounted to a treaty between one half of the Roman empire, whether Antony of the east, Augustus of the west, or pagan Rome of the east and papal Rome of the west. Four treaties of deceit between the kings of the north and south, two between the kings of the east and west and one between the soon-to-be king of the north and the glorious land.
Ha’e Roma omoñepyrũva Daniel 11-pe pe visión, ha mokõivéva Roma pagano ha Roma papal rehegua ñe’ẽme’ẽ ñembotavy profético oñemarkáva progresivo ramo ha oikóva Roma ogoverna mbaretevéva mboyve hikuái ipehẽngue ha ijojaha’ỹva período profético-pe g̃uarã. Mokõivéva mbarete ohechauka pe período profético ijyvatetereíva oñepyrũha guive oñehundi rire iñakãrã mbohapýha. Pe léi domingo pya’e oútava Estados Unidos-pe mboyve oĩta peteĩ ñe’ẽme’ẽ ñembotavy mokõi mbarete apytépe. Irundy jey umi mokõi mbarete ha’e va’ekue pe ñembyasýpe pe sur ruvicha ha pe norte ruvicha, peteĩ jey Judá yvy jeguata porãva ha Roma apytépe, peteĩ jey pe triunvirato romano mokõi vore apytépe ha peteĩ jey Roma pagano ha Roma papal apytépe. Mokõivéva ñe’ẽme’ẽ ñembotavy rehegua Roma ndive, upéva oguahẽ peteĩ ñe’ẽme’ẽ ramo pe imperio romano peteĩ mitad apytépe, taha’e Antonio pe kuarahyresẽ gotyopegua, Augusto pe kuarahyreike gotyopegua, térã Roma pagano pe kuarahyresẽ gotyopegua ha Roma papal pe kuarahyreike gotyopegua. Irundy ñe’ẽme’ẽ ñembotavy pe norte ha pe sur ruvichakuéra apytépe, mokõi pe kuarahyresẽ ha pe kuarahyreike ruvichakuéra apytépe ha peteĩ pe norte ruvicha hag̃ua oikótava ha pe yvy jeguata porãva apytépe.
This concludes our initial presentation of the book of Daniel. The Panium series represents the conclusion of the series on the book of Daniel, which is the introduction to the hidden history of verse forty which we will continue to consider in the next article.
Kóicha ñamohu’ã ñane ñe’ẽmondo ypykuéva Daniel aranduka rehegua. Pe atyguasu Panium herava opa hag̃ua pe atyguasu Daniel aranduka rehegua, ha upéva hína pe jeike hag̃ua pe tembiasakue kañymby versíkulo irundy pa rehegua, jajepy’amongetáta hag̃ua hese pe artíkulo oútavape.