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

Ouria Smith te ekri: “Wòm te vin konekte ak pèp Bondye a, Jwif yo, pa mwayen yon alyans, an 162 av. J.-K.” Pifò istoryen modèn yo bay dat la kòm 161 av. J.-K., epi Smith li menm fè referans a 161 av. J.-K. de fwa nan menm liv la. Sipozisyon mwen se ke referans sa a a 162 av. J.-K. se yon erè tipografik.

“By verses 23 and 24 we are brought down this side of the league between the Jews and the Romans, BC 161, to the time when Rome had acquired universal dominion.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 273.

“Pa vèsè 23 ak 24 yo, yo mennen nou desann bò sa a nan alyans ki te fèt ant Jwif yo ak Women yo, anvan Jezikri 161, rive nan epòk kote Wòm te vin gen dominasyon inivèsèl.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 273.

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

Vèsè onz ak douz yo idantifye viktwa a ak konsekans Batay Rafya a, ki te fèt an 217 anvan Jezikri, ant Anpi Selesid la, anba direksyon Antiòk III Gran an, ak Wayòm Ptolemeyik Ejip la, anba direksyon wa Ptolemey IV Filopatò.

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

Batay Panium lan, ki te fèt disèt ane pi ta, an 200 av. J.-K., te ankò ant wayòm Seleusid la ak wayòm Ptoleme a.

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

Rebelyon Makabe a te kòmanse an 167 anvan Jezikri, e se te soulèvman jwif yo kont tantativ Anpi Seleusid la pou siprime pratik relijye jwif yo epi enpoze kilti grèk la.

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

Rededikasyon Dezyèm Tanp lan nan Jerizalèm, ki make evènman istorik yo selebre pandan Hanouka a, te fèt an 164 anvan Kris, twa ane anvan “lig” vèsè venntwa a. Evènman sa a te vini apre kanpay militè Makkabe yo te mennen avèk siksè kont fòs Anpi Seleusid la, anba direksyon Antiòkis IV Epifan, nonm trist sa a ki te pwofane Tanp lan epi ki te entèdi pratik relijye jwif yo. Antiòkis IV Epifan te mouri yon ti tan apre viktwa yo komemore pa Hanouka a, e sa make dechènman puisans siryen an depi pwen sa a nan listwa.

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

Nan ane 200 av. J.-K., (ki te tou tan batay Panium nan), Wòm, pou premye fwa, te antre tèt li nan istwa pwofetik Danyèl chapit onz la. Men senbòl ki tabli vizyon an. Enfliyans entansyonèl li nan istwa sa a idantifye travay Jezabèl la, yon senbòl yon legliz ki rale fisèl an kachèt. Jezabèl te lakay li nan Samari pandan mari li Akab t ap gade pwofèt li yo ap touye anba men Eli. Ewodyad pa t nan fèt anivèsè Ewòd la, kote pitit fi li Salome te sedui Ewòd. Nan istwa Etazini, papote a, ki reprezante pa pwostitiye Tir la, tonbe nan bliye, jouk nan fen swasanndis ane senbolik yo. Lè sa a, li kòmanse chante chan twonpri li yo bay wa latè yo. Ane 200 av. J.-K. a se yon tip ki montre lè li kòmanse chante ouvètman bay wa yo nan dènye jou yo, jis anvan lwa dimanch ki prèt pou vini an, jan sa reprezante nan vèsè sèz la.

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

Anvan “alyans” Jwif yo ant 161 av. J.-K. ak 158 av. J.-K., Makabe yo te rededye tanp lan, jan Hanouka fè komemorasyon sa an 164 av. J.-K. Apre sa, twa ane pi ta, pandan yo te toujou nan yon lit k ap kontinye kont Siriyen yo, Jwif Makabe yo te chèche sipò lavil Wòm. “Alyans” ak Wòm ki te fòme lè sa a vin tounen yon tès pwofetik pou etidyan pwofesi Bondye yo nan dènye jou yo.

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

Istwa idantifye ane 161 anvan Kris kòm moman kote “alyans” lan te fèt, men pyonye yo idantifye istwa sa a kòm 158 anvan Kris. Èske Miller te gen rezon, oswa èske istoryen modèn yo gen rezon? Miller te ajoute sis san swasant-sis ane (666) sou ane 158 anvan Kris la, epi li te rive nan ane 508, lè “sakrifis tout tan an” te wete. Kèlkeswa jan ou ta chèche, sa ap trè difisil, si se pa menm enposib nèt, pou jwenn yon sipò istorik pou 158 anvan Kris kòm alyans ki te fèt ant Jwif yo ak Women yo.

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

Vèsè sèz la se lwa dimanch lan, men anvan istwa sa a, Wòm antre nan istwa a pou tabli vizyon an nan ane 200 anvan Jezikri. Revòlt Makabe yo te kòmanse nan Moden an 167 anvan Jezikri, epi finalman yo te re-konsakre tanp lan an 164 anvan Jezikri. Apre sa, depi 161 anvan Jezikri rive 158 anvan Jezikri, Jwif yo antre nan yon alyans avèk pouvwa women an. Peryòd 161 anvan Jezikri rive 158 anvan Jezikri a reprezante yon espas tan ki te nesesè pou tabli “alyans” lan. Konpreyansyon sa a idantifye “alyans” lan an akò avèk temwayaj istoryen yo, epi tou avèk tablo ki te dirije pa men Senyè a e ki pa ta dwe chanje.

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

Istoryen yo fè nou konnen pwosesis negosyasyon trete ant nasyon ansyen yo tankou Jida ak Wòm nan dezyèm syèk anvan Jezikri a te varye selon sikonstans patikilye yo, pwotokòl diplomatik yo, ak rapò fòs ki te angaje yo. Anjeneral, pwosesis la te konn kòmanse lè youn nan pati yo te manifeste enterè pou tabli yon trete oswa yon alyans ak lòt la. Nan ka Jida ak Wòm, se Jida ki te pran inisyativ pou antre an kontak ak Wòm pou pwopoze yon alyans fòmèl.

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

Yo t ap sèvi ak chanèl diplomatik yo pou transmèt pwopozisyon an epi kòmanse negosyasyon yo. Sa te dwe mande voye anbasadè oswa anvwaye lavil Wòm pou rankontre ak dirijan li yo oswa reprezantan li yo. Yon fwa negosyasyon yo te kòmanse, toude pati yo t ap diskite kondisyon trete yo te pwopoze a. Sa te kapab enplike yon seri reyinyon, echanj mesaj diplomatik, epi petèt patisipasyon entèmedyè oswa medyatè pou fasilite diskisyon yo. Pandan negosyasyon yo, chak pati t ap konsidere kondisyon lòt la te pwopoze yo, epi li te kapab fè kont-pwopozisyon oswa chèche amannman pou kèk kondisyon. Pwosesis sa a te kapab mande anpil refleksyon, konsiltasyon ak konseye yo, ansanm ak evalyasyon sou avantaj ak dezavantaj potansyèl trete yo te pwopoze a.

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

Si toude pati yo te rive jwenn yon akò sou kondisyon trete a, yo t ap prepare yon dokiman fòmèl ki t ap tabli kondisyon ak dispozisyon yo toude te dakò sou yo. Apre sa, trete a t ap bezwen ratifye pa otorite ki konsène yo nan chak nasyon. Nan ka Wòm, sa te kapab mande apwobasyon Sena a oswa lòt kò gouvènan yo. Menm jan an tou, nan Jida, trete a ta sanble mande apwobasyon lidèchip li oswa konsèy gouvènan li. Yon fwa trete a ratifye, yo t ap mete li an aplikasyon, epi toude pati yo t ap gen obligasyon respekte kondisyon li yo. Sa te kapab enplike divès fòm koperasyon, akò sou defans mityèl, relasyon komèsyal, oswa lòt fòm angajman diplomatik ki te tabli nan trete a.

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

Nan dezyèm syèk anvan Jezikri, vwayaje soti Jide (ki sitiye nan rejyon lès Mediterane a) pou ale lavil Wòm (ki sitiye nan sant Itali) t ap yon demach difisil e ki t ap pran anpil tan, sitou lè yo konsidere limit mwayen transpò yo nan tan lontan. Distans ant Jide ak lavil Wòm se apeprè 1,500 rive 2,000 kilomèt (930 rive 1,240 mil), selon wout espesifik yo te pran an. Nan tan lontan, vwayaj pa lanmè te souvan pi rapid e pi efikas pase vwayaj pa tè, men vwayaj pa lanmè te depann de van dominan yo. Vwayaje pa bato soti nan yon pò nan Jide pou rive nan yon pò ann Itali (tankou Ostia, pò lavil Wòm) te kapab pran plizyè semèn, selon faktè tankou kondisyon van yo, kouran lanmè yo, ak kalite bato yo te itilize a.

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

Vwayaj pa tè soti Jide pou ale lavil Wòm t ap pi ralanti e pi difisil. Vwayajè yo t ap oblije travèse divès kalite tèren, tankou mòn, vale, ak rivyè, epi fè fas ak obstak tankou bandi ak teritwa ostil. Yo estime ke vwayaj a pye oswa nan cha rale pa chwal te kapab pran plizyè mwa. Tan vwayaj la t ap enfliyanse tou pa faktè tankou eta wout yo, disponiblite kote pou rete ak kote pou repoze, ansanm ak nesesite pou repoze epi renouvle pwovizyon yo sou wout la.

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

Lè Jwif Makabe yo t ap chèche fè yon alyans ak Wòm, yo ta dwe voye anbasadè ale Wòm. Yon fwa otorite women yo te resevwa anbasadè sa yo, ta gen yon peryòd negosyasyon. Nan teyori istorik, paske pa gen okenn dosye presi ki disponib, yon fwa yon trete te vin ofisyèlman etabli, li ta bezwen pote tounen Jide pou konfimasyon, epi apre sa, sanble, li ta bezwen retounen Wòm pou konfime akseptasyon Jwif yo. Li prèske enposib pou kwè ke pwosesis fòmasyon yon alyans nan peryòd tan sa a ta ka akonpli nan yon sèl ane; konsa, konpreyansyon ke “alyans” lan reprezante yon pwosesis soti nan 161 av. J.-K. rive 158 av. J.-K. ann amoni ak lòt liy pwofesi ki idantifye istwa ki mennen nan lwa dimanch vèsè sèz la.

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

Yon “alyans” ke tout istoryen dakò te inisye pa Jwif Makabe yo, te kòmanse nan Jide an 161 anvan Jezikri. Objektif la se te pou Jwif yo jwenn sipò kont Siriyen yo, ak sila yo yo t ap goumen depi revòlt yo te kòmanse an 167 anvan Jezikri. Revòlt la te pran nesans nan efò Matatya, yon prèt jwif, ansanm ak senk pitit gason li yo, sitou Jida Makabe, pou yo te reziste politik elenizasyon chèf seleusid Antiòk IV Epifan te enpoze. Politik sa yo te gen ladan tantativ pou siprime pratik relijye jwif yo epi fòse yo adopte koutim ak kwayans grèk yo.

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

Katalis revòlt la se te yon ensidan ki te fèt nan vilaj Modein, kote Matatya te refize obeyi yon dekrè ki te egzije pou yo ofri yon sakrifis bay yon divinite grèk. “Modein” sòti nan mo ebre “modi’a,” ki vle di “deklare” oswa “pwoteste.” Nan pwotestasyon li a, Matatya te touye yon Jwif aposta ki te prèt pou akonpli sakrifis la, epi li menm ansanm ak pitit gason li yo te kouri al nan mòn yo, konsa yo te lanse yon kanpay lagè geriya kont fòs Selesid yo. Revòlt Makabe a te dire pandan plizyè ane, pandan tan sa a Makabe yo te mennen anpil batay kont Selesid yo ak alye pa yo. Malgre yo te depase anpil nan kantite epi yo te gen anpil mwens ekipman, Makabe yo te ranpòte plizyè viktwa enpòtan.

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

Anpi Selesid la t ap chèche enpoze relijyon Lagrès sou Juif yo, e Grèk yo reprezante globalis yo nan dènye jou yo. Relijyon yo eksprime nan woke-ism yo ap fòse kounye a sou Etazini ak sou mond lan, pa mwayen fòs globalis sistèm bankè a, medya dominan yo, sant edikatif yo, ansanm ak demantèlman diferans nasyonal yo atravè imigrasyon fòse etranje ilegal yo. Lè Antiochus Epiphanes t ap fòse relijyon grèk la sou Juif yo, te gen Juif ki t ap kolabore avèk efò li yo. Makabe yo reprezante yon klas Juif aposta, ki t ap reziste relijyon Lagrès la, men te genyen tou yon lòt klas Juif aposta ki t ap soutni travay pou fè respekte relijyon grèk la.

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

Vèsè sèz la se lwa dimanch k ap vini talè a, ansanm ak inyon an twa fwa ant dragon an, bèt la, ak fo pwofèt la. Istwa sa a vini apre vèsè trèz rive kenz yo, kote twa batay vèsè karant lan rive apati vèsè dis la (1989), vèsè onz ak douz yo (lagè Ikrenyen an), ak Batay Panium nan. Batay Panium nan reprezante yon batay kote bèt tè a ki gen de kòn nan genyen laviktwa sou filozofi relijye ak politik globalis yo.

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

Nan batay sa a, dènye prezidan Etazini dwe fè fas ak konsekans viktwa Putin nan ak efondreman ki vini apre a, jan sa reprezante nan vèsè onz ak douz yo. Li pral fòme yon alyans ak Òganizasyon Trete Nò Atlantik la (OTAN), oswa avèk Nasyonzini, pou rezoud retonbe ki soti nan efondreman Larisi a; e nan istwa alyans sa a, li pral angaje Nasyonzini nan Batay Panium nan. Twazyèm batay vèsè karant lan pral tankou premye batay vèsè karant lan. Menm jan Inyon Sovyetik la te efondre anba fòs ekonomik ak militè Etazini, mondyalis Nasyonzini yo pral oblije repete “perestroika”, eleman kle nan efò Gorbachev yo pou refòme Inyon Sovyetik la, byenke efò sa yo te finalman kontribye nan demantibilasyon sistèm sovyetik la ak nan disolisyon final Inyon Sovyetik la.

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

Twazyèm batay la ilistre pa premye batay la, epi atravè presyon ekonomik ak militè, Trump, jan Reagan reprezante l la, pral fòse Nasyonzini antre nan “perestroika,” ki vle di restriktirasyon oswa refòm. Restriktirasyon sa a pral mete Etazini sou tèt sistèm dis wa yo, ki se Nasyonzini. Nan batay la, lè sa a, papote a pral prezante tèt li nan listwa, pandan l ap pretann li se defandè sistèm Trump ap konkeri nan moman sa a.

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

Nan menm istwa a, Trump pral fè fas ak yon Gè Sivil entèn ke li pral oblije konfwonte, menm jan Abraham Lincoln te oblije konfwonte l. Gè Sivil la pral fèt ant de faksyon opoze ki tonbe nan apostazi anndan Etazini. Yon gwoup, ki reprezante pa sila yo ki te aksepte relijyon ak filozofi woke-ism, yo menm ki se globalis pwogresis nan toude pati politik yo. Lòt gwoup la (MAGA-ism) deklare yo se vrè Pwotestan, byenke yo te pèdi tit sa a an 1844.

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

Faksyon Prezidan an reprezante pa MAGA-is, epi li chita sou reklamasyon egare ki pretann soutni vrè Pwotestantis ak Konstitisyon an. Reklamasyon Woke-is la se relijyon Manman Latè, New Age la, ak kwayans ke Konstitisyon an dwe aplike selon sikonstans ki egziste nan nòmal sosyete a, pa selon lide demode papa fondatè yo.

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

Matatya (Trump) pral mete fen nan tantativ Demokrat pwogresis-globalis yo anndan Etazini, jan rebelyon ki te kòmanse nan Modein an 167 anvan Jezikri a te reprezante sa. Apre sa, Trump pral repete istwa 164 anvan Jezikri a, lè Makabe yo te rededye tanp lan, jan sa komemore nan obsèvans Hanouka a. Ansuit, nan peryòd ki reprezante soti 161 anvan Jezikri rive 158 anvan Jezikri, Trump pral kòmanse dènye pouse a pou leve imaj papote a, ki se yon imaj ki idantifye yon relasyon ilegal ant pouvwa relijye a ak pouvwa politik la. An 158 anvan Jezikri, lig la pral tabli pandan lwa dimanch ki pral vini byento a nan vèsè sèz la ap vin aplike.

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

Danyèl onz premye idantifye kijan Wòm pran kontwòl politikman, epi apre sa Danyèl repete epi elaji menm istwa a avèk yon liy ki idantifye kijan Wòm aji avèk pèp Bondye a nan menm istwa sa a. Soti nan vèsè sèz rive nan vèsè diznèf, twa obstak ki te anpeche Wòm payen pran kontwòl mond lan yo ilistre. Nan vèsè sèz, Siri te konkeri pa Wòm payen an 65 av. J.-K., epi apre sa Jide te konkeri pa Pompée an 63 av. J.-K. Vèsè sèz la idantifye moman kote Wòm te dwe kanpe nan peyi glwa a, e lè li fè sa, li ap sèvi kòm tip lwa dimanch ki nan vèsè karanteyèn nan menm chapit la.

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

Li enpòtan pou nou remake ke istwa konkèt la te fèt an 63 av. J.-K. [an paralèl ak 1863], nan mitan yon lagè sivil ki t ap dewoule anndan Jerizalèm. Uriah Smith te deklare: “Lè Pompée te retounen soti nan ekspedisyon li kont Mithridate, wa Ponto a, de rival, Hyrcanus ak Aristobulus, t ap lite pou kouwòn Jide a.”

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

Non « Hyrcanus » ak « Aristobulus » yo toude se non ki soti nan lang grèk e yo gen enpòtans istorik, sitou nan kontèks istwa jwif yo pandan peryòd elenistik la ak dinasti Asmone an. « Hyrcanus » sòti nan mo grèk « Hurkanos », ki sanble li menm soti nan mo « hurkan », ki vle di « lou » nan lang pèsik la. Hyrcanus te yon non plizyè chèf asmoneyen te pote. « Aristobulus » vle di « pi bon konseye » oswa « pi bon avize ». Aristobulus te yon lòt non plizyè chèf asmoneyen te pote. Toude « Hyrcanus » ak « Aristobulus » se non ki asosye ak pèsonaj enpòtan nan istwa jwif yo pandan peryòd asmoneyen an. Yo te chèf ki te jwe wòl enpòtan nan gouvènans ak agrandisman Wayòm Asmone an nan Jide. Desandan ak reprezantan pwofetik wayòm asmoneyen an nan epòk Kris la se te Farizyen yo.

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

Lè Pompée te konkeri Jerizalèm, te gen de pati politik ki toude remonte orijin yo rive nan epòk rebelyon Modayin te senbolize an 167 anvan Kris la. Yon fwa Pompée te antre nan rebelyon an, li te pran desizyon pou l pran Jerizalèm, epi pati politik Aristoboulis la te pran desizyon pou reziste kont li; men pati Ikanis la te pran desizyon pou l louvri pòtay yo bay Pompée. Lè sa a, Pompée te lanse atak li sou Jerizalèm, epi twa mwa apre sa Jerizalèm te vin pou tout tan anba jiridiksyon Wòm.

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

Pa vèsè diznèf, peyi Lejip, twazyèm ak dènye obstak la, te tonbe anba men Wòm. Apre sa, nan vèsè ven, nesans Kris la idantifye pandan Danyèl kòmanse esplike kijan Wòm t ap aji anvè pèp Bondye a nan istwa sa a. Nan vèsè vennen ak vennnde, Kris la kloure sou kwa a. Nan vèsè vennntwa, alyans ki te kòmanse soti 161 anvan Jezikri rive 158 anvan Jezikri a idantifye imedyatman apre vèsè ki dekri kwa a, kote Jwif aposta yo te pwoklame yo “pa t gen okenn wa, eksepte Seza.” Liy Jwif aposta yo, ke Makabe yo reprezante, ki te reziste anvayisman filozofi relijye grèk la, epi, lè yo te fè sa, te fòme yon relasyon enpi ak Wòm, vini apre vèsè ki idantifye istwa kwa a, kote fwi relasyon enpi yo a te manifeste nèt.

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

Chékina pa t janm retounen nan tanp ki te bati apre swasanndis ane kaptivite yo. Dènye temwayaj pwofetik la, Malachi te pwoklame, te bay anviwon mitan senkyèm syèk anvan Jezikri. Pa t gen okenn prezans vizib Bondye, ni okenn temwayaj pwofetik, pandan plizyè santèn ane anvan Makabe yo leve kanpe kont enfliyans grèk mondyalis la. Nan kòmansman revòlt yo a, yo te akonpli menm rebelyon ni Ptolome ni wa Ozyas te eseye fè, lè toude wa yo t ap chèche ranpli fonksyon prèt la epi fè yon ofrann nan tanp lan.

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

Jonatan Apfis (ke yo rele tou Jonatan Makabe), te youn nan pitit gason Matatya, ki te inisye Revòlt Makabe a, e li te jwe yon wòl enpòtan nan dirije rebelyon jwif la kont Anpi Selesid la. Apre lanmò frè li a, Jida Makabe, nan batay, Jonatan te pran direksyon fòs makabe yo. Anplis lidèchip militè ak politik li, Jonatan te pran sou li tou fonksyon gran prèt, kote li te sèvi kòm lidè espirityèl pèp jwif la. Doub fonksyon Jonatan an kòm alafwa chèf ak gran prèt te make yon devlopman enpòtan nan istwa jwif la, paske sa te rasanble ansanm ni otorite politik ni otorite relijye nan dinasti Asmone an. Lidèchip li te ede ranfòse otonomi jwif la epi tabli dominasyon Asmone an nan Jide.

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

Peche menm Ptolome te eseye fè apre viktwa Rafya a te rive fèt dèske nan kòmansman menm revòlt Makabe yo. Se te menm peche prèt yo te opoze nan tan wa Ozyas la, men defans Makabe yo te deklare pou sèvis tanp Bondye a se te yon manifestasyon egare e rebèl nan melanj legliz ak leta a; konsa, li sèvi kòm yon tip rebelyon Pwotestan apostas yo ki kounye a ap rasanble pou soutni Trump kont avansman woke-is mondyalis Biden nan.

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

Bib la anseye ke n ap rekonèt yo dapre fwi yo, e Farizyen yo nan epòk Kris la te dènye rès dinasti Asmone a ki te kòmanse avèk Matatya. Matatya, ansanm ak rebelyon li te kòmanse a, te pote fwi Farizyenis, menm jan ak pwotestan aposta yo k ap soutni konsèp “Make America Great Again” nan. Amerik te gran lè Konstitisyon an te konprann kòm yon mwayen pou kenbe legliz ak leta separe youn ak lòt; men, nan mirak kontrefè ki reprezante pa viktwa yo komemore nan fèt Hanukkah la, mouvman pou lejislasyon dimanch lan pral parèt aklè.

We will continue this study in the next article.

N ap kontinye etid sa a nan atik ki vin apre a.

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

“Jiskaprezan, moun ki te prezante verite mesaj twazyèm zanj lan yo te souvan konsidere kòm senp moun k ap simen laperèz. Prediksyon yo, ki te di entolerans relijye t ap pran kontwòl Ozetazini, epi legliz ak leta t ap ini pou pèsekite moun ki kenbe kòmandman Bondye yo, yo te deklare yo san fondman e absid. Yo te deklare avèk anpil konfyans peyi sa a pa t ap janm ka vin yon lòt bagay pase sa li te ye a—defansè libète relijye. Men, pandan kestyon pou fòse obsèvans dimanch lan ap brase toupatou, evènman yo te tèlman lontan doute e pa t kwè a parèt ap pwoche, epi twazyèm mesaj la pral pwodui yon efè li pa t ap kapab genyen anvan.”

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

“Nan chak jenerasyon, Bondye voye sèvitè li yo pou repwoche peche, ni nan mond lan ni nan legliz la. Men pèp la anvi pou yo pale bagay dous nan zòrèy yo, e verite ki pi a, san okenn anbelisman, pa akseptab pou yo. Anpil refòmatè, lè yo t ap antre nan travay yo, te deside sèvi ak anpil pridans lè yo t ap atake peche legliz la ak nasyon an. Yo te espere, grasa egzanp yon lavi kretyèn ki pwòp, pou mennen pèp la tounen nan doktrin Bib la. Men Lespri Bondye te desann sou yo menm jan li te desann sou Eli, pouse l pou l repwoche peche yon wa mechan ak yon pèp aposta; yo pa t kapab anpeche tèt yo preche deklarasyon klè Bib la—doktrin yo te ezite prezante. Yo te pouse yo pou yo deklare verite a avèk anpil zèl, ansanm ak danje ki t ap menase nanm yo. Pawòl Seyè a te ba yo, se pawòl sa yo yo te pwononse, san yo pa pè konsekans yo, e pèp la te oblije tande avètisman an.”

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

“Konsa, mesaj twazyèm zanj lan ap pwoklame. Lè tan an rive pou yo bay li avèk pi gwo pouvwa, Senyè a ap travay atravè enstriman imil, pandan li ap dirije lespri moun ki konsakre tèt yo pou sèvis Li. Moun k ap travay yo ap vin kalifye plis pa onksyon Lespri Li pase pa fòmasyon enstitisyon literè yo. Gason ki gen lafwa ak lapriyè ap santi yo oblije soti avèk yon zèl sen, pou yo deklare pawòl Bondye ba yo. Peche Babilòn yo ap devwale. Rezilta terib ki genyen lè yo fòse obsèvans legliz la pa otorite sivil, envazyon espirityalis la, pwogrè kache men rapid pouvwa papal la—tout sa ap demaske. Pa avètisman solanèl sa yo, pèp la ap souke. Dè milye sou dè milye ap koute, moun ki pa t janm tande pawòl konsa. Se avèk sezisman yo tande temwayaj la ki di Babilòn se legliz la, ki tonbe poutèt erè li yo ak peche li yo, poutèt li rejte verite ki te voye ba li soti nan syèl la. Pandan pèp la ale kot ansyen anseyan yo avèk kestyon prese sa a, Èske bagay sa yo vre? minis yo prezante fab, yo pwofetize bagay dous, pou kalme laperèz yo epi fè konsyans ki te reveye a tounen trankil. Men, paske anpil moun refize satisfè ak senp otorite lèzòm epi yo mande yon klè ‘Men sa Senyè a di,’ ministè popilè a, tankou Farizyen yo nan tan lontan, ranpli ak kòlè dèske yo mete otorite yo an kestyon, ap denonse mesaj la kòm soti nan Satan epi yo ap pouse foul moun ki renmen peche yo pou yo joure epi pèsekite sila yo ki pwoklame li.”

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

“Pandan konfli a ap pwolonje nan nouvo domèn e lespri pèp la ap rele pou li tounen sou lwa Bondye a yo te meprize, Satan pran lari. Pouvwa ki akonpaye mesaj la va sèlman fè moun ki opoze li yo vin pi fache toujou. Kleren yo pral fè efò prèske sipèimen pou anpeche limyè a rive, pou li pa klere sou twoupo yo. Pa tout mwayen ki nan pouvwa yo, yo pral chache fèmen diskisyon sou kestyon enpòtan sa yo. Legliz la fè apèl ak bra fò pouvwa sivil la, epi, nan travay sa a, papis ak Pwotestan mete tèt yo ansanm. Pandan mouvman an pou fè respekte dimanch la ap vin pi odasye e pi deside, yo pral sèvi ak lalwa kont moun k ap kenbe kòmandman yo. Yo pral menase yo ak amann ak prizon, e yo pral ofri kèk nan yo pozisyon enfliyans, ansanm ak lòt rekonpans ak avantaj, kòm ankourajman pou yo renonse lafwa yo. Men repons fèm yo va sa: ‘Montre nou nan Pawòl Bondye a kote erè nou an ye’—menm agiman Luther te fè nan menm kalite sikonstans yo. Moun yo mennen devan tribinal yo bay yon defans solid pou laverite a, e gen kèk nan moun ki tande yo ki vin pran pozisyon pou yo kenbe tout kòmandman Bondye yo. Konsa, limyè a pral prezante devan plizyè milye moun ki, otreman, pa t ap konnen anyen sou verite sa yo.” The Great Controversy, 605, 606.