We will now address some of the implications of verse twelve of Daniel eleven, and thereafter, bring the three lines of “250” years into the history of verses eleven through fifteen, that was fulfilled at the battle of Panium in 200 BC. The line of “250” years that began in 457 BC ends in 207 BC in the middle of the period that begins with the battle of Raphia and ends with the battle of Panium. The “250” years in the line of Nero ends with the three-step history of Constantine, represented by the years 313, 321 and 330. The “250” years of the United States ends on July 4, 2026.
Anyị ga-atụle ugbu a ụfọdụ n’ime ihe ndị si na amaokwu nke iri na abụọ nke Daniel iri na otu pụta, ma emesịa, tinye ahịrị atọ nke afọ “250” n’ime akụkọ ihe mere eme nke amaokwu iri na otu ruo iri na ise, nke mezuru n’agha Panium na 200 BC. Ahịrị nke afọ “250” nke malitere na 457 BC na-akwụsị na 207 BC n’etiti oge ahụ nke malitere n’agha Raphia ma kwụsị n’agha Panium. Afọ “250” ndị dị n’ahịrị Nero na-akwụsị na akụkọ ihe mere eme nke nzọụkwụ atọ nke Constantine, nke afọ 313, 321 na 330 nọchiri anya ya. Afọ “250” nke United States na-akwụsị na Julaị 4, 2026.
Nero’s line represents the history of the image of the beast testing time, first in the United States, and then in the world. The line of 457 BC places Trump at a midpoint militarily between two battles. The period that extends from 1776 also marks a midpoint for Trump’s final presidency. In order to place these lines in their proper place we will first address verse twelve, and the demise of Russia and Putin. Then the three lines of “250” years, then the line of the Hasmonean Dynasty. With those lines in place, we will place Peter in alignment with Panium. When those lines are in place we should be able to recognize how the message of July 18, 2020 is to be corrected and proclaimed, and that it is the message of the book of Joel.
Ahịrị Nero na-anọchi anya akụkọ ihe mere eme nke oge nnwale nke oyiyi anụ ọhịa ahụ, mbụ na United States, ma emesia n’ụwa. Ahịrị nke 457 BC na-edobe Trump n’ebe etiti, n’usoro agha, n’etiti ọgụ abụọ. Oge ahụ nke sitere na 1776 na-akọwapụtakwa ebe etiti maka ọchịchị ikpeazụ nke Trump. Iji dobe ahịrị ndị a n’ọnọdụ ha kwesịrị ekwesị, anyị ga-ebu ụzọ tụlee amaokwu nke iri na abụọ, na ọdịda Russia na Putin. Mgbe ahụ, ahịrị atọ nke afọ “250”, emesịa ahịrị nke Ọchịchị Hasmonean. Mgbe ahịrị ndị ahụ dịrị n’ọnọdụ ha, anyị ga-edobe Peter ka ọ kwekọọ na Panium. Mgbe ahịrị ndị ahụ dịrị n’ọnọdụ ha, anyị kwesịrị inwe ike ịmata otú ozi nke July 18, 2020 kwesịrị isi bụrụ nke a ga-agbazi ma kwusaa, nakwa na ọ bụ ozi nke akwụkwọ Joel.
King Uzziah of Judah & Ptolemy King of Egypt
Eze Uzaịa nke Juda na Ptolemaị, Eze nke Ijipt
The history that fulfilled verse eleven at the battle of Raphia aligns with the history of king Uzziah. When Isaiah is purified and empowered to proclaim the message of the latter rain, his calling came in the year that Uzziah died.
Akụkọ ihe mere eme nke mezuru amaokwu nke iri na otu n’agha Raphia kwekọrọ n’akụkọ ihe mere eme nke eze Uzaya. Mgbe e sachara Aịzaya ma nye ya ike ikwusa ozi nke mmiri ozuzo ikpeazụ, ọkpụkpọ ya bịara n’afọ ahụ Uzaya nwụrụ.
In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. Isaiah 6:1.
N’afọ eze Uzaịa nwụrụ ka m hụkwara Onyenweanyị ka Ọ nọ ọdụ n’ocheeze, nke dị elu ma bulie elu, na uwe-nsọ Ya juputara n’ụlọ nsọ. Aịzaya 6:1.
Uzziah’s death was preceded by the rebellion he manifested that paralleled and aligned with the rebellion of Ptolemy just after the victory at the battle of Raphia. Uzziah and Ptolemy are symbols of a southern king whose heart has been lifted up, who rebel by seeking to combining their state authority with church authority. When Uzziah attempted to combine church and state, the leprosy on his forehead typified the mark of the beast.
Ọnwụ Uzaịa ka nnupụisi o gosipụtara butere ụzọ, nnupụisi nke yiri ma kwekọọ na nnupụisi Ptolemy ozugbo mmeri e nwetara n’agha Raphia. Uzaịa na Ptolemy bụ akara nke eze ndịda nke e buliri obi ya elu, onye na-enupụ isi site n’ịchọ ijikọta ikike ọchịchị ala ya na ikike ụka. Mgbe Uzaịa nwara ijikọta ụka na ọchịchị ala, ekpenta ahụ dị n’egedege ihu ya ghọrọ ihe nnọchianya nke akara anụ ọhịa ahụ.
And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. Revelation 14:9–11.
Mmụọ-ozi nke atọ sochiri ha, na-ekwu n’oké olu, Ọ bụrụ na onye ọ bụla akpọọ anụ ọhịa ahụ na oyiyi ya isiala, ma nata akara ya n’egedege ihu ya, ma ọ bụ n’aka ya, onye ahụ ga-aṅụkwa mmanya nke iwe Chineke, nke a wụsara n’enweghị ngwakọta n’ime iko nke ọnụma ya; a ga-erekwa ya ahụhụ n’ọkụ na brimstone n’ihu ndị mmụọ-ozi dị nsọ, nakwa n’ihu Nwa Atụrụ ahụ: Anwụrụ nke ahụhụ ha na-arịgo ruo mgbe ebighị ebi ebi: ha enweghịkwa izu ike ehihie ma ọ bụ abalị, ndị na-akpọ anụ ọhịa ahụ na oyiyi ya isiala, na onye ọ bụla na-anata akara aha ya. Mkpughe 14:9–11.
Uzziah then represents a progressive death from the time of his rebellious attempt to combine church and state. He then represents a lame-duck co-regency with his son for eleven years. Uzziah lived for eleven years after his rebellion. The beginning of his rebellion symbolizes the Sunday law, where church and state are combined and the mark of the beast is enforced. Eleven years later he died, representing the end of his reign as king of the southern kingdom of Judah, which was the glorious land, which is the United States.
Ya mere, Uzaịa nọchiri anya ọnwụ na-aga n’ihu site n’oge mgbalị nnupụisi ya ime ijikọta ụka na ọchịchị. O mechakwara nọchiri anya ọchịchị mmekọ ya na nwa ya nwoke ruo afọ iri na otu, ebe ike ọchịchị ya adịkwaghị n’aka ya nke ọma. Uzaịa biri afọ iri na otu mgbe nnupụisi ya gasịrị. Mbido nnupụisi ya na-anọchi anya iwu Ụka, ebe a na-ejikọta ụka na ọchịchị, a na-amanyekwa akara anụ ọhịa. Afọ iri na otu ka e mesịrị, ọ nwụrụ, nke na-anọchi anya njedebe ọchịchị ya dịka eze nke alaeze ndịda Juda, nke bụ ala ebube ahụ, nke bụ United States.
In prophetic relation to Ptolemy, Uzziah represents Judah, the glorious land and apostate Protestantism, whereas; Ptolemy represents Egypt, which is the dragon power, whose religion is spiritualism. When the two kings are considered as parallel lines, Uzziah ceases to be an illustration of the glorious land and together they become a symbol of two nations. Egypt and Judah are symbols of the religions of spiritualism and apostate Protestantism. They are a symbol of the state and the church. The statecraft and the churchcraft they represent when they are aligned as one symbol contain two nations, as was the Medes and Persians, as was France’s Egypt and Sodom, as is the United States Republican and Protestant horns, as were the northern and southern kingdoms of Israel and Judah, as well as pagan Rome and papal Rome. As a symbol of two kingdoms, they are prophetically tied together by the temple in Jerusalem where both Uzziah and Ptolemy sought to sacrifice at the temple in Jerusalem. Two nations who both rebel at the same sanctuary.
N’ihe metụtara amụma gbasara Ptolemy, Uzaịa na-anọchi anya Juda, ala ahụ dị ebube na Protestantism dapụrụ n’okwukwe, ebe; Ptolemy na-anọchi anya Ijipt, nke bụ ike dragọn ahụ, nke okpukpe ya bụ spiritizim. Mgbe a na-ele ndị eze abụọ ahụ anya dịka ahịrị abụọ na-aga n’otu ntụzịaka, Uzaịa akwụsị ịbụ ihe atụ nke ala ahụ dị ebube, ma ọnụ ha abụọ aghọọ ihe nnọchianya nke mba abụọ. Ijipt na Juda bụ ihe nnọchianya nke okpukpe spiritizim na Protestantism dapụrụ n’okwukwe. Ha bụ ihe nnọchianya nke steeti na ụka. Ọchịchị steeti na ọchịchị ụka nke ha na-anọchi anya mgbe e jikọtara ha dị ka otu ihe nnọchianya nwere mba abụọ, dịka ọ dị na ndị Midia na ndị Peshia, dịka ọ dị na Ijipt na Sọdọm nke France, dịka ọ dị na mpi Republican na Protestant nke United States, dịka ọ dị na alaeze ugwu na ndịda nke Izrel na Juda, nakwa dịka ọ dị na Rom ọgọ mmụọ na Rom papal. Dị ka ihe nnọchianya nke alaeze abụọ, e jikọtara ha ọnụ n’amụma site n’ụlọ nsọ dị na Jerusalem ebe ma Uzaịa ma Ptolemy chọpụtara ịchụ aja n’ụlọ nsọ dị na Jerusalem. Mba abụọ ndị na-enupụ isi n’otu ebe nsọ ahụ.
It is important to notice that the rebellion of both kings was in relation to the temple at Jerusalem, which is a symbol of the temple where Daniel saw Christ in chapter ten. Both these king’s histories align at the Ukrainian War, and in so doing they begin their testimony in 2014. They both were lifted up with military victories represented by the battle of Raphia in verse eleven. Raphia marks the borderland of the sixth kingdom of Bible prophecy and the threefold union of the Sunday law. It is also the border of the transition of the church militant unto the church triumphant.
Ọ dị mkpa ịrịba ama na nnupụisi nke ndị eze abụọ ahụ metụtara ụlọ nsọ dị na Jerusalem, nke bụ ihe nnọchianya nke ụlọ nsọ ahụ ebe Daniel hụrụ Kraịst n’isi nke iri. Akụkọ ihe mere eme nke ndị eze abụọ a kwekọrọ n’Agha Ukraine, ma site n’ime nke a ha na-amalite ịgba àmà ha n’afọ 2014. A buliri ha abụọ elu site n’emeri agha nke e ji agha Raphia nọchite anya ya n’amaokwu nke iri na otu. Raphia na-akara ókè ala-eze nke isii n’amụma Bible na njikọ atọ nke iwu Sunday. Ọ bụkwa ókè nke mgbanwe nke ụka na-alụ ọgụ gaa n’ụka mmeri.
After 2014, the richest king announced his intention to run for the presidency in 2015. In 2020 the richest king, representing the Republican horn received its deadly wound that would later be healed. In 2022 the Ukrainian War escalated. Trump then returned in fulfillment of verse thirteen, in the election of 2024. In July of 2023, a voice in the wilderness was sounded. December 31, 2023 the Protestant horn was resurrected, as was the Republican horn in the election of 2024, when Trump returned and then in 2025 the foundation test ended with the arrival of the temple test.
Mgbe afọ 2014 gasịrị, eze kasị baa ọgaranya kwupụtara ebumnuche ya ịzọ ọkwa onye isi ala n’afọ 2015. N’afọ 2020 eze kasị baa ọgaranya ahụ, nke na-anọchi anya mpi Republican, natara ọnyá ọnwụ ya nke a ga-emesịa gwọọ. N’afọ 2022, Agha Ukraine ka njọwanye. Mgbe ahụ Trump laghachiri na mmezu nke amaokwu nke iri na atọ, n’ntuli aka nke 2024. N’ọnwa Julaị nke afọ 2023, e mere ka a nụ olu n’ọzara. N’ụbọchị Disemba 31, 2023, e mere ka mpi Protestant bilie ọzọ, dịka e mere ka mpi Republican bilie ọzọkwa n’ntuli aka nke 2024, mgbe Trump laghachiri, ma mgbe ahụ n’afọ 2025 ule ntọala ahụ kwụsịrị site n’ịbịarute nke ule ụlọ nsọ.
1989
1989
The truths which were unsealed in 1989 was twofold. The prophetic parallels of the reform movements and the last six verses of Daniel eleven were unsealed at the same time. There are certain prophetic rules that were employed to establish the initial message of verse forty. Some of those very truths are now the key to the hidden history of the very same verse where those prophetic gems were discovered. I’ll give you an example.
Eziokwu ndị e meghere akara ha n’afọ 1989 bụ nke akụkụ abụọ. E meghere n’otu oge ahụ myirịta amụma nke mmegharị ndozigharị dị iche iche na amaokwu isii ikpeazụ nke Daniel iri na otu. E nwere ụfọdụ iwu amụma e jiri guzobe ozi mbụ nke amaokwu nke iri anọ. Ụfọdụ n’ime eziokwu ndị ahụ ka bụ ugbu a mkpịsị-igodo nke akụkọ ihe mere eme zoro ezo nke otu amaokwu ahụ ebe a chọpụtara nkume bara uru amụma ndị ahụ. Aga m enye unu otu ihe atụ.
In 1989, there was no unified understanding in Adventism as to what the last six verses of Daniel represented. That lack of unification was twofold. There was no consensus of the meaning of the verses. Those who professed to have understanding of the verses presented human ideas mixed the theology of apostate Protestantism and Catholicism, the birthright heritage they received from their forefathers of the rebellion of 1863, when they fulfilled the role of the disobedient prophet at Jeroboam’s foundational rebellion. Those individual ideas of what the verses were private interpretations, at best. Their ideas of the verses were either contradictory to basic prophetic application, and often contrary to the very premise they themselves identified of the verses.
N’afọ 1989, e nweghị nghọta e jikọtara ọnụ n’ime Adventism banyere ihe amaokwu isii ikpeazụ nke Daniel nọchiri anya ya. Enweghị njikọta ahụ bụ nke ụzọ abụọ. E nweghị nkwekọrịta ọ bụla banyere ihe amaokwu ndị ahụ pụtara. Ndị kwuru na ha nwere nghọta banyere amaokwu ndị ahụ wetara echiche mmadụ e gwakọtara na nkà mmụta okpukpe nke Protestantism dapụ n’ezi okwukwe na Katọlik, bụ́ ihe nketa ọkpara ha natara n’aka nna nna ha site na nnupụisi nke 1863, mgbe ha mezuru ọrụ onye amụma ahụ na-erubeghị isi n’oge nnupụisi ntọala nke Jeroboam. Echiche ndị ahụ nke onye n’otu n’otu banyere ihe amaokwu ndị ahụ bụ nkọwa nzuzo nke onwe onye, ma ọ bụrụgodị na ewere ya n’ụzọ kacha mma. Echiche ha banyere amaokwu ndị ahụ ma ọ bụ na-emegide itinye amụma n’ọrụ nke bụ isi, ma ọtụtụ mgbe na-emegidekwa nnọọ ntọala ahụ nke amaokwu ndị ahụ nke ha onwe ha kpọrọ aha.
What we saw in the verses was a consistent understanding of all six verses. It was the consistency of the message we saw that encouraged me to present my understanding, even when I knew all of Adventism rejected what I understood. What we understood of those verses was published first in 1996, and the understanding there set forth has only grown stronger as time has marched out over thirty years!
Ihe anyị hụrụ n’ime amaokwu ndị ahụ bụ nghọta kwekọrọ nke ọma banyere amaokwu isii ahụ niile. Ọ bụ nkwụsi-ike nke ozi ahụ anyị hụrụ ka gbara m ume iweta nghọta m, ọbụna mgbe m maara na ndị Adventist niile jụrụ ihe ahụ m ghọtara. E bipụtara ihe anyị ghọtara banyere amaokwu ndị ahụ mbụ n’afọ 1996, ma nghọta e gosipụtara n’ebe ahụ anọwo na-esiwanye ike naanị ka oge na-aga n’ime afọ iri atọ!
If you consider the very first reference in the magazine The Time of the End, you find Testimonies, volume 9, page 11. Five years before 9/11, the magazine starts with 9/11. One of those understandings that encouraged me was in understanding that at “the time of the end” in verse forty, the kings of the north and south were spiritual, not literal powers. At that time, I already knew that Sister White said that the books of Daniel and Revelation are the same book, and that the same line of prophecy that is in Daniel, is taken up by John in the Revelation. I had found that in Revelation eleven, which was fulfilled in the history surrounding the time of the end in 1798; Sister White’s commentary upon the chapter clearly teaches that France was spiritual Egypt, and she was just as clear that in Revelation seventeen, the whore upon the beast was spiritual Babylon.
Ọ bụrụ na ị tụlee ntụaka mbụ kpamkpam dị na magazin ahụ bụ *The Time of the End*, ị ga-ahụ *Testimonies*, mpịakọta nke 9, ibe nke 11. Afọ ise tupu 9/11, magazin ahụ na-amalite na 9/11. Otu n’ime nghọta ndị ahụ nke gbara m ume bụ n’ịghọta na n’oge “njedebe” dị n’amaokwu nke iri anọ, ndị eze nke ugwu na nke ndịda bụ ike ime mmụọ, ọ bụghị ike nkịtị. N’oge ahụ, amaworị m na Nwanneanyị White kwuru na akwụkwọ Daniel na Mkpughe bụ otu akwụkwọ ahụ, nakwa na otu ahịrị amụma ahụ dị na Daniel, bụ nke Jọn weghaara n’Akwụkwọ Mkpughe. Achọpụtala m na n’ime Mkpughe nke iri na otu, nke mezuru n’akụkọ ihe mere eme gbara oge njedebe na 1798 gburugburu; nkọwa Nwanneanyị White banyere isi ahụ na-akụzi n’ụzọ doro anya na France bụ Ijipt ime mmụọ, ma o dokwara anya n’ụzọ ahụkwa na n’ime Mkpughe nke iri na asaa, akwụna ahụ nọkwasịrị n’elu anụ ọhịa ahụ bụ Babịlọn ime mmụọ.
Sister White’s identification of those two powers is in The Great Controversy, and those comments tie together John and Daniel’s testimony. The definition of the king of the south in Daniel chapter eleven is the power that controls Egypt, and the king of the north is the power who controls Babylon. When the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy worked in tandem to establish a truth by bringing Daniel and Revelation together to prove the point, was something I could never surrender to any misguided theologian, or misguided self-appointed leader of a self-supporting ministry.
Nne White kọwara njirimara nke ike abụọ ahụ n’akwụkwọ *The Great Controversy*, ma okwu ndị ahụ jikọtara ọnụ àmà Jọn na Daniel. Nkọwa nke eze nke ndịda na Daniel isi nke iri na otu bụ ike ahụ nke na-achị Ijipt, ma eze nke ugwu bụ ike ahụ nke na-achị Babilọn. Mgbe Akwụkwọ Nsọ na Mmụọ nke Amụma rụrụkọ ọrụ ọnụ iji guzosie eziokwu ike site n’ịchịkọta Daniel na Mkpughe ọnụ iji gosi isi okwu ahụ, ọ bụ ihe m na-apụghị inye n’aka onye ọkà mmụta okpukpe ọ bụla a duhiere, ma ọ bụ onye ndu ọ bụla a duhiere nke họpụtara onwe ya nke ozi nkwado onwe ya.
To understand Ptolemy and Uzziah as symbols of the battle of Raphia and the fallout that occurs after their hearts are lifted up, is to be governed by the fact that Ptolemy represents the dragon power who defeats the proxy power of Rome, only to lose to the proxy power who had defeated Ptolemy in verse ten and in 1989. The historical distinctions are purposeful and important.
Iji ghọta Ptolemy na Uzziah dịka ihe nnọchianya nke agha Raphia na nsonaazụ ya nke na-eme mgbe obi ha buliri elu, bụ ka eziokwu a chịkwaa mmadụ na Ptolemy na-anọchi anya ike dragọn ahụ nke na-emeri ike nnọchi anya nke Rome, ma emesịa tufuo n’aka ike nnọchi anya ahụ nke meriri Ptolemy n’amaokwu nke iri na n’afọ 1989. Nkewa dị n’akụkọ ihe mere eme ndị a bụ nke e ji ebumnuche mee ma bụrụkwa ndị dị mkpa.
Uzziah receives the mark of the beast when he attempts to bring church and state together, Uzziah is the glorious land, and the glorious land was a major argument in the beginning of the message in 1989. Is the glorious land the United States, or is it the Seventh-day Adventist church? Those who then held to the erroneous idea that the glorious land is the Adventist church, along with any who still do—would argue that the glorious holy mountain of verse forty-five was clearly God’s church, so that meant to them, that a mountain and a land were the same symbol. Standard human reasoning, I suppose.
Uzaịa na-anata akara nke anụ ọhịa ahụ mgbe ọ na-anwa ime ka nzukọ-ukwu na ọchịchị steeti bụrụ otu; Uzaịa bụ ala ahụ dị ebube, ma ala ahụ dị ebube bụ isi arụmụka dị mkpa ná mmalite nke ozi ahụ n’afọ 1989. Ala ahụ dị ebube ọ̀ bụ United States, ka ọ bụ ụka Seventh-day Adventist? Ndị n’oge ahụ jidesiri echiche na-ezighị ezi ike na ala ahụ dị ebube bụ ụka Adventist, tinyere ndị ọ bụla ka na-eme otú ahụ ruo ugbu a—ga-arụ ụka na ugwu nsọ ahụ dị ebube nke amaokwu nke iri anọ na ise doro anya na ọ bụ ụka Chineke, nke mere na nke ahụ pụtara n’ebe ha nọ na ugwu na ala bụ otu ihe nnọchianya ahụ. Echiche mmadụ nkịtị, ka m chere.
Uzziah is the glorious land, and Ptolemy is Egypt. Uzziah, as the glorious land has the two horns of Protestantism and Republicanism. The political manifestation of Ptolemy is communism and its varied forms, and the religious manifestation of Ptolemy is spiritualism and its varied forms. A characteristic of the dragon power is that it is a confederacy, but the false prophet, who is the glorious land is a single nation with two horns.
Uzaịa bụ ala ahụ dị ebube, Ptolemi bụkwa Ijipt. Uzaịa, dịka ala ahụ dị ebube, nwere mpi abụọ nke Protestantism na Republicanism. Ngosipụta ndọrọ ndọrọ ọchịchị nke Ptolemi bụ komunizim na ụdị ya dị iche iche, ngosipụta okpukpe nke Ptolemi bụkwa ime mmụọ na ụdị ya dị iche iche. Otu njirimara nke ike dragọn ahụ bụ na ọ bụ njikọ aka, ma onye amụma ụgha ahụ, nke bụ ala ahụ dị ebube, bụ otu mba nwere mpi abụọ.
Daniel eleven verse forty established that the United States was the proxy power of the papacy when the Soviet Union was swept away in 1989. This truth aligns with the role of the two-horned earth beast of Revelation thirteen, for the two books are the same.
Daniel isi iri na otu amaokwu iri anọ gosiri na United States bụ ike nnọchi anya nke papacy mgbe a kpochapụrụ Soviet Union n’afọ 1989. Eziokwu a kwekọrọ na ọrụ anụ ọhịa nke nwere mpi abụọ nke sitere n’ụwa, nke e kwuru banyere ya na Mkpughe isi iri na atọ, n’ihi na akwụkwọ abụọ ahụ bụ otu.
And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. Revelation 13:11, 12.
M wee hụ anụ ọhịa ọzọ ka ọ na-apụta n’ala; o nwekwara mpi abụọ dịka nwa atụrụ, ọ na-ekwu okwu dị ka dragọn. Ọ na-arụkwa ike nile nke anụ ọhịa mbụ ahụ n’ihu ya, ma na-eme ka ụwa na ndị bi n’ime ya kpọọ isiala nye anụ ọhịa mbụ ahụ, onye e gwọrọ ọnya ọnwụ ya. Mkpughe 13:11, 12.
Revelation thirteen identifies the United States as the proxy power of the Papacy, for the earth beast “exerciseth al the power of the” beast out of the sea that came “before him.” In verse two the dragon of pagan Rome had given the Papacy its power, seat and great authority. The word translated as “power” means power, but in verse twelve it is a different word that is translated as “power,” meaning “delegated authority.”
Mkpughe iri na atọ nke Mkpughe na-akọwa United States dị ka ike nnọchi anya nke Papacy, n’ihi na anụ ọhịa nke si n’ala “na-emezu ike nile nke” anụ ọhịa nke si n’oké osimiri nke bịara “n’ihu ya.” N’amaokwu nke abụọ, dragọn nke Rome ndị ọgọ mmụọ enyela Papacy ike ya, oche ya, na nnukwu ọchịchị ya. Okwu a sụgharịrị dịka “ike” pụtara ike, ma n’amaokwu nke iri na abụọ ọ bụ okwu ọzọ ka a sụgharịrị dịka “ike,” nke pụtara “ikike e nyefere n’aka.”
The United States is the proxy power of the papacy, who has been typified by pagan Rome, who gave its military and economic support to the papacy as set forth in verse two. In doing so pagan Rome typified the United States who would also give its “chariots, ships and horsemen” to do the dirty-work of the papal power.
United States bụ ike nnọchi anya nke ọchịchị papacy, nke e jirila Rom ndị ọgọ mmụọ kọwaa n’ụdị ihe atụ, bụ́ onye nyere papacy nkwado ya n’ihe agha na n’ihe akụ na ụba dịka e depụtara ya n’amaokwu nke abụọ. N’ime ime nke a, Rom ndị ọgọ mmụọ gosipụtara United States n’ụdị ihe atụ, nke ga-enyekwa “ụgbọ ịnyịnya agha, ụgbọ mmiri na ndị na-agba ịnyịnya” ya iji rụọ ọrụ ọjọọ nke ike papal ahụ.
When the three battles of verse ten, eleven and fifteen were fulfilled in history, Antiochus Magnus was at each battle. This fact identifies that the power represented in the three battles is a proxy power of the beast, for it is always Antiochus, and Antiochus in 1989 was the proxy power of the United States.
Mgbe agha atọ nke amaokwu nke iri, nke iri na otu, na nke iri na ise mezuru n’akụkọ ihe mere eme, Antiochus Magnus nọ n’agha nke ọ bụla. Eziokwu a na-akọwapụta na ike a na-anọchi anya n’agha atọ ahụ bụ ike nnọchi anya nke anụ ọhịa ahụ, n’ihi na ọ bụ Antiochus mgbe niile, ma Antiochus n’afọ 1989 bụ ike nnọchi anya nke United States.
The three battles that lead to the Sunday law of verse sixteen bear the signature of Alpha and Omega, and also the structure of truth. It is the United States in the first battle and the third battle, identifying an alpha and omega in the first and last battle. The three battles that lead to the Sunday law of verse sixteen also bear the signature of truth. The proxy power of Nazi Ukraine is the battle in the middle that represents the rebellion of the middle waymark in the framework of the Hebrew word truth. The three battles represent 1989 unto the Sunday law, which means they represent the “hidden history” of verse forty.
Agha atọ ahụ nke na-eduga n’iwu Sọnde nke amaokwu iri na isii na-ebu akara nke Alfa na Omega, nakwa usoro nke eziokwu. Ọ bụ United States nọ n’agha nke mbụ na nke atọ, na-akọwapụta alfa na omega n’agha mbụ na nke ikpeazụ. Agha atọ ahụ nke na-eduga n’iwu Sọnde nke amaokwu iri na isii na-ebukwa akara nke eziokwu. Ike nnọchi anya nke Nazi Ukraine bụ agha dị n’etiti nke na-anọchi anya nnupụisi nke waymark etiti n’usoro okwu Hibru ahụ bụ eziokwu. Agha atọ ahụ na-anọchi anya 1989 ruo n’iwu Sọnde, nke pụtara na ha na-anọchi anya “akụkọ ihe mere eme zoro ezo” nke amaokwu iri anọ.
Verse eleven of Revelation eleven identifies 2023, as the point where both horns are resurrected. Daniel eleven, verse eleven identifies the very same period of history. The internal line of prophecy and the external line of prophecy align in 2023. The internal line is the “thing” Daniel understood and the external line is the “vision” he understood.
Amaokwu nke iri na otu nke Mkpughe iri na otu na-akọwapụta afọ 2023 dịka oge a kpọlitere mpi abụọ ahụ n’ọnwụ. Daniel iri na otu, amaokwu nke iri na otu, na-akọwapụtakwa kpọmkwem otu oge ahụ n’akụkọ ihe mere eme. Ahịrị ime nke amụma na ahịrị mpụta nke amụma na-adaba ọnụ n’afọ 2023. Ahịrị ime bụ “ihe” ahụ Daniel ghọtara, ahịrị mpụta bụkwa “ọhụ” ahụ ọ ghọtara.
The temple test that Daniel illustrates began at the twenty-second day, and twenty-two years after 9/11, which is the point that Isaiah entered the temple brings you to 2023. Isaiah identifies the death of Uzziah after living with leprosy for eleven years at 9/11. The work of erecting the temple consists of first laying the foundation, and thereafter erecting the temple and placing the cap stone which then leads to the third litmus test, represented by the feast of trumpets in the line of Leviticus twenty-three. The internal work of the everlasting gospel is accomplished during the history of the external line. In verse eleven Putin has been typified by Ptolemy, and king Uzziah provides a second witness to the illustration of the king of the south who is lifted up through military success, who thereafter attempts to insert themselves into the realm of religion.
Nnwale ụlọ nsọ nke Daniel na-akọwa malitere n’ụbọchị nke iri abụọ na abụọ, ma afọ iri abụọ na abụọ mgbe 9/11 gasịrị, nke bụ oge Aịzaịa banyere n’ụlọ nsọ, na-eduga gị ruo n’afọ 2023. Aịzaịa na-akọwa ọnwụ Uzaya mgbe o biri na ekpenta afọ iri na otu n’oge 9/11. Ọrụ iwulite ụlọ nsọ ahụ gụnyere, mbụ, ịtọ ntọala ya, ma emesịa iwulite ụlọ nsọ ahụ na itinye nkume mkpuchi, nke n’ime ya na-eduga n’nnwale litmus nke atọ, nke emume opi na-anọchi anya ya n’ahịrị nke Levitikọs iri abụọ na atọ. A na-arụzu ọrụ dị n’ime nke ozi-ọma ebighị ebi n’oge akụkọ ihe mere eme nke ahịrị dị n’èzí. N’amaokwu nke iri na otu, e gosipụtala Putin site n’ihe atụ nke Ptolemy, ma eze Uzaya na-enye akaebe nke abụọ nye ihe atụ banyere eze ndịda bụ onye e buliri elu site n’ọganihu agha, onye mechara nwaa itinye onwe ya n’ógbè okpukpe.
And the king of the south shall be moved with choler, and shall come forth and fight with him, even with the king of the north: and he shall set forth a great multitude; but the multitude shall be given into his hand. And when he hath taken away the multitude, his heart shall be lifted up; and he shall cast down many ten thousands: but he shall not be strengthened by it. Daniel 11:11, 12.
Eze nke ndịda ga-ewe oke iwe, ọ ga-apụkwa ịga buso ya agha, ọbụna eze nke ugwu; ọ ga-achịkọtakwa oke ìgwè mmadụ dị ukwuu; ma a ga-enye ìgwè ahụ n’aka ya. Ma mgbe o wepụsịrị ìgwè ahụ, obi ya ga-ebuli elu; ọ ga-adakwakwa ọtụtụ puku iri mmadụ: ma nke a agaghị eme ka ọ sie ike. Daniel 11:11, 12.
Uriah Smith addresses Ptolemy Philopator’s history and his attempt to offer sacrifices in Jerusalem’s temple.
Uraịa Smit na-ekwu banyere akụkọ Ptolemy Philopator na mgbalị ya ime àjà n’ụlọ nsọ Jerusalem.
“Ptolemy lacked the prudence to make a good use of his victory. Had he followed up his success, he would probably have become master of the whole kingdom of Antiochus; but content with making only a few menaces and a few threats, he made peace that he might be able to give himself up to the uninterrupted and uncontrolled indulgence of his brutish passions. Thus, having conquered his enemies, he was overcome by his vices, and, forgetful of the great name which he might have established, he spent his time in feasting and lewdness.
“Ptolemy enweghi amamihe zuru ezu iji jiri mmeri ya mee ihe n’ụzọ kwesịrị ekwesị. Ọ bụrụ na ọ gbasoro ihe ịga nke ọma ya nke ọma, o yikarịrị ka ọ gaara abụ onye nwe alaeze Antiochus dum; ma n’ịbụ onye afọ juputara n’ime nanị ikwupụta ntakịrị iyi egwu na ntakịrị nkwutọ, o mere udo ka o wee nwee ike inyefe onwe ya n’ịṅụrịrị agụụ anụ ọhịa ya n’enweghị nkwụsị na n’enweghị njikwa. N’ụzọ dị otu a, mgbe o merichara ndị iro ya, agwa ọjọọ ya meriri ya, ma, n’ichefu nnukwu aha ahụ ọ pụrụ ịbụ na ọ gaara eguzobe, o tinyere oge ya n’oriri na ịkwa iko.”
“His heart was lifted up by his success, but he was far from being strengthened by it; for the inglorious use he made of it caused his own subjects to rebel against him. But the lifting up of his heart was more especially manifested in his transactions with the Jews. Coming to Jerusalem, he there offered sacrifices, and was very desirous of entering into the most holy place of the temple, contrary to the law and religion of that place; but being, though with great difficulty, restrained, he left the place burning with anger against the whole nation of the Jews, and immediately commenced against them a terrible and relentless persecution. In Alexandria, where the Jews had resided since the days of Alexander, and enjoyed the privileges of the most favored citizens, forty thousand according to Eusebius, sixty thousand according to Jerome, were slain in this persecution. The rebellion of the Egyptians, and the massacre of the Jews, certainly were not calculated to strengthen him in his kingdom, but were sufficient rather almost totally to ruin it.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 254.
“E buliri obi ya elu n’ihi ihe ịga nke ọma ya, ma nke ahụ anọghị nso ime ka o sie ike; n’ihi na ojiji ihere na-adịghị na ya o jiri ya mee ka ndị obodo ya n’onwe ha nupụ isi megide ya. Ma ibuli elu nke obi ya pụtara ìhè karịsịa n’ihe ọ rụrụ n’ihe metụtara ndị Juu. Mgbe ọ bịarutere na Jerusalem, ọ chụpụrụ àjà n’ebe ahụ, ma nwee oké ọchịchọ ịbanye n’Ebe Kasị Nsọ nke ụlọ nsọ ahụ, megide iwu na okpukpe nke ebe ahụ; ma ebe e gbochiri ya, ọ bụ ezie na ọ bụ naanị site n’oke ihe isi ike, o hapụrụ ebe ahụ na iwe na-enwu ọkụ megide mba niile nke ndị Juu, ma ozugbo ọ malitere imegide ha mkpagbu dị egwu na nke na-enweghị mgbaghara. N’Alexandria, ebe ndị Juu biri kemgbe ụbọchị Alexander, ma na-enweta uru na ikike nke ụmụ amaala a kacha elebara anya, e gburu puku iri anọ, dịka Eusebius siri kwuo, puku iri isii, dịka Jerome siri kwuo, n’ime mkpagbu a. Nnupụisi nke ndị Ijipt, na mgbuchapụ nke ndị Juu, n’ezie, abụghị ihe e tụrụ ime ka o sie ike n’alaeze ya, kama ha zuru ezu karị ịkpata mbibi ya fọrọ nke nta ka ọ bụrụ kpamkpam.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 254.
Ptolemy Philopator’s military victory at Raphia in 217 BC, did not strengthen Ptolemy, but it caused “his heart to be lifted up.” Victory in the Ukrainian War will not strengthen Putin, but it will “lift up his heart,” as did military success cause king Uzziah to lift up his heart.
Mmeri agha Ptolemy Philopator meriri na Raphia n’afọ 217 BC esighị n’ime ya mee ka Ptolemy sie ike, kama o mere ka “obi ya bulie elu.” Mmeri n’Agha Ukraine agaghị eme ka Putin sie ike, kama ọ ga “ebuli obi ya elu,” dịka ihe ịga nke ọma n’agha mere ka eze Uzziah bulie obi ya elu.
And Uzziah prepared for them throughout all the host shields, and spears, and helmets, and habergeons, and bows, and slings to cast stones. And he made in Jerusalem engines, invented by cunning men, to be on the towers and upon the bulwarks, to shoot arrows and great stones withal. And his name spread far abroad; for he was marvellously helped, till he was strong. But when he was strong, his heart was lifted up to his destruction: for he transgressed against the Lord his God, and went into the temple of the Lord to burn incense upon the altar of incense. 2 Chronicles 26:14–16.
Uzaya wee dobere ha n’aka ha nile ngwa-agha maka agha ahụ dum: ọta, na ube, na okpu agha, na uwe-agha, na ụta, na èbè iji tụọ nkume. O mekwara na Jerusalem igwe-ọrụ agha, ndị ndị mmadụ nwere amamihe siri chepụta, ka e tinye ha n’elu ụlọ nche na n’elu mgbidi e wusiri ike, ka ha si na ha agba àkụ na nkume ukwu. Aha ya wee gbasaa ebe dị anya nke ukwuu; n’ihi na e nyere ya aka n’ụzọ dị ịtụnanya, ruo mgbe o siri ike. Ma mgbe o siri ike, obi ya weliri elu ruo na mbibi ya: n’ihi na o mehiere megide Jehova bụ Chineke ya, wee banye n’ụlọ nsọ Jehova isure ihe nsure-ísì ụtọ n’elu ebe ịchụàjà nke ihe nsure-ísì ụtọ. 2 Ihe E Mere 26:14–16.
Two southern kings whose hearts were lifted up from military victories, attempted to enter the same temple and offer and offering, which only a priest was allowed to do. In both cases, the priests resisted the proud kings attempts to do so. One king then initiated a retaliation upon the Jews, and the other was struck in the forehead with leprosy.
Ndị eze abụọ nke ndịda, ndị obi ha weliri elu n’ihi mmeri ndị agha, nwara ịbanye n’otu ụlọ nsọ ahụ ma chụọ àjà, bụ ihe e nyere naanị onye nchụàjà ikike ime. N’ihe abụọ ahụ, ndị nchụàjà guzogidere mbọ ndị eze nganga ahụ ime nke a. Otu eze wee malite imegwara megide ndị Juu, ebe onye nke ọzọ e ji ekpenta tụọ ya n’egedege ihu.
And Azariah the priest went in after him, and with him fourscore priests of the Lord, that were valiant men: And they withstood Uzziah the king, and said unto him, It appertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah, to burn incense unto the Lord, but to the priests the sons of Aaron, that are consecrated to burn incense: go out of the sanctuary; for thou hast trespassed; neither shall it be for thine honour from the Lord God. Then Uzziah was wroth, and had a censer in his hand to burn incense: and while he was wroth with the priests, the leprosy even rose up in his forehead before the priests in the house of the Lord, from beside the incense altar. And Azariah the chief priest, and all the priests, looked upon him, and, behold, he was leprous in his forehead, and they thrust him out from thence; yea, himself hasted also to go out, because the Lord had smitten him. And Uzziah the king was a leper unto the day of his death, and dwelt in a several house, being a leper; for he was cut off from the house of the Lord: and Jotham his son was over the king’s house, judging the people of the land. Now the rest of the acts of Uzziah, first and last, did Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, write. 2 Chronicles 26:17–22.
Ma Azaraịa, bụ onye nchụàjà, sooro ya banye, ya na ndị nchụàjà Jehova iri asatọ, bụ ndị ikom dike: ha wee guzogide eze Uzaya, sị ya, Ọ bụghị ọrụ gị, Uzaya, isurere Jehova ihe nsure-ísì, kama ọ bụ nke ndị nchụàjà, ụmụ Erọn, ndị e doro nsọ isure ihe nsure-ísì: pụọ n’ebe nsọ; n’ihi na i mehiere; nke a agaghịkwa abụrụ gị nsọpụrụ sitere n’aka Onyenweanyị Chineke. Mgbe ahụ Uzaya wee were iwe, o jidekwa ihe nsure-ísì n’aka ya ka o sure ya: ma mgbe ọ ka na-ewe iwe megide ndị nchụàjà, ekpenta wee pụta n’egedege ihu ya n’ihu ndị nchụàjà n’ụlọ Jehova, n’akụkụ ebe ịchụàjà ihe nsure-ísì. Azaraịa, onye isi nchụàjà, na ndị nchụàjà niile wee lee ya anya, ma, le, ọ bụ onye ekpenta n’egedege ihu ya, ha wee chụpụ ya ngwa ngwa n’ebe ahụ; ee, ya onwe ya mekwara ngwa ịpụ, n’ihi na Jehova etiwo ya ihe. Eze Uzaya wee bụrụ onye ekpenta ruo ụbọchị ọnwụ ya, ọ bikwa n’ụlọ pụrụ iche, ebe ọ bụ onye ekpenta; n’ihi na e kewapụrụ ya n’ụlọ Jehova: Jotam nwa ya nwoke nọkwa n’elu ụlọ eze, na-ekpe ndị mmadụ nke ala ahụ ikpe. Ma omume ndị ọzọ nke Uzaya, nke mbụ na nke ikpeazụ, ka Aịzaya onye amụma, nwa Emọz, dere. 2 Ihe Emere Eze 26:17–22.
In 2014, the globalists of Europe and the Obama regime initiated a color revolution upon the nation of the Ukraine. In 2022 Russia began an invasion that will ultimately lead to a victory for Putin and Russia; represented by Ptolemy and Uzziah, the kings of the south. Verse twelve says that after the victory of Putin, “his heart shall be lifted up; and he shall cast down many ten thousands: but he shall not be strengthened by it.” History then records a progressive demise of his kingdom.
N’afọ 2014, ndị otu ụwa ọnụ nke Europe na ọchịchị Obama malitere mgbaaghara agba n’elu mba Ukraine. N’afọ 2022, Russia malitere mwakpo nke ga-eduga n’ikpeazụ n’ọgụ mmeri nke Putin na Russia; nke Ptolemy na Uzziah, ndị eze nke ndịda, nọchiri anya ya. Amaokwu nke iri na abụọ na-ekwu na mgbe mmeri Putin gasịrị, “obi ya ga-ebuli elu; ọ ga-atụfukwa ọtụtụ iri puku mmadụ: ma nke a agaghị eme ka o sie ike.” Mgbe ahụ, akụkọ ihe mere eme na-edekọ mbibi na-aga n’ihu nke alaeze ya.
The progressive demise led to his death, and by the time Antiochus the Great retaliates for his loss at Raphia, Antiochus was no longer engaged with Ptolemy Philopator, Antiochus was then addressing a young child who was then Egypt’s ruler. A child is a symbol of the last generation, so at one level the child king that Antiochus defeats at Panium is the final generation of the kingdom of the south. At the practical level the child king represents weakness in relation to Antiochus’s strength.
Mbibi nwayọọ nwayọọ ahụ dugara n’ọnwụ ya, ma ka ọ na-erule mgbe Antiochus Onye Ukwu ga-emeghachi ihe n’ihi mfu ya na Raphia, Antiochus adịkwaghị n’ịlụso Ptolemy Philopator ọgụ; n’oge ahụ Antiochus na-eche nwa okorobịa ihu, onye bụ eze Ijipt n’oge ahụ. Nwa bụ akara nke ọgbọ ikpeazụ, ya mere, n’otu ọkwa, eze-nwa ahụ Antiochus meriri na Panium bụ ọgbọ ikpeazụ nke alaeze nke ndịda. N’ọkwa nke omume n’eziokwu, eze-nwa ahụ na-anọchi anya adịghị ike n’ihe metụtara ike Antiochus.
“The peace concluded between Ptolemy Philopater and Antiochus lasted fourteen years. Meanwhile Ptolemy died from intemperance and debauchery, and was succeeded by his son, Ptolemy Epiphanes, a child then four or five years old. Antiochus, during the same time, having suppressed rebellion in his kingdom, and reduced and settled the eastern parts in their obedience, was at leisure for any enterprise when young Epiphanes came to the throne of Egypt; and thinking this too good an opportunity for enlarging his dominion to be let slip, he raised an immense army “greater than the former” (for he had collected many forces and acquired great riches in his eastern expedition), and set out against Egypt, expecting to have an easy victory over the infant king. How he succeeded we shall presently see; for here new complications enter into the affairs of these kingdoms, and new actors are introduced upon the stage of history.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 255.
“Udo nke e mechiri n’etiti Ptolemy Philopater na Antiochus dịgidewo afọ iri na anọ. Ka ọ dị ugbu a, Ptolemy nwụrụ n’ihi enweghị njide onwe onye na omume rụrụ arụ, nwa ya nwoke, Ptolemy Epiphanes, bụ́ nwatakịrị dị ihe dị ka afọ anọ ma ọ bụ ise n’oge ahụ, wee nọchie ya. Antiochus, n’otu oge ahụ, mgbe o merisịrị nnupụisi n’alaeze ya, ma meekwa ka akụkụ ọwụwa anyanwụ bụrụ ndị e meriri emeri ma dozie ha n’okpuru nrubeisi, nwere ohere maka ụdị ọrụ agha ọ bụla mgbe Epiphanes na-eto eto rịgoro n’ocheeze Egypt; ma n’iche na nke a bụ ohere dị oke mma maka ịgbasa ọchịchị ya nke a na-ekwesịghị ikwe ka ọ gafee n’efu, o chịkọtara nnukwu ndị agha “karịa nke mbụ” (n’ihi na ọ chịkọtawo ọtụtụ ndị agha ma nweta nnukwu akụnụba n’ọrụ agha ya n’ọwụwa anyanwụ), wee bilie gawa imegide Egypt, na-atụ anya na ọ ga-enwe mmeri dị mfe n’ebe eze ahụ bụ nwata nọ. Otu o si nwee ihe ịga nke ọma ka anyị ga-ahụ ozugbo; n’ihi na n’ebe a, mgbagwoju anya ọhụrụ na-abanye n’ihe omume nke alaeze ndị a, a na-ebubatakwa ndị ọhụrụ n’egwuregwu nke akụkọ ihe mere eme.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 255.
The King of the South
Eze nke Ndịda
To outline the final steps of Russia, is to outline the final steps of the prophetic king of the south. A prophetic characteristic of the spiritual king of the south that arrived in prophetic history at the time of the end in 1798—is how it comes to its end. It is also a prophetic characteristic of the king of the north, and the false prophet. Each of the three powers that lead the world to Armageddon have endings that are specifically identified in God’s Word. Whatever happens to Putin and Russia will have been typified with past lines of the king of the south.
Ịkọwapụta nzọụkwụ ikpeazụ nke Russia bụ ịkọwapụta nzọụkwụ ikpeazụ nke eze amụma nke ndịda. Otu njirimara amụma nke eze ime mmụọ nke ndịda, bụ́ nke bịarutere n’akụkọ ihe mere eme amụma n’oge ọgwụgwụ n’afọ 1798, bụ otú ọ na-abịa na njedebe ya. Nke a bụkwa njirimara amụma nke eze nke ugwu, na onye amụma ụgha. Ike atọ ndị a nke na-eduga ụwa gaa Amagedọn nwere njedebe ndị a kọwara kpọmkwem n’Okwu Chineke. Ihe ọ bụla ga-eme Putin na Russia, a gaara ewere ya dị ka ihe e jiri ahịrị gara aga nke eze nke ndịda gosipụta tupu oge a.
The examples of the spiritual king of the south’s demise were typified by the demise of the first spiritual king of the south, who was atheistic France during the period of the Revolution. The demise of the southern kingdom includes the demise of the southern king. Napoleon’s demise corresponds to the demise of France, and aligns with the demise of the next kingdom of the south, who was Russia. Russia as the modern king of the south began in revolution, just as France, as the king of the south, began with revolution.
E ji ihe atụ nke ọnwụ eze ime mmụọ nke ndịda ka e ji ọnwụ eze ime mmụọ mbụ nke ndịda, bụ Fọdụ France na-ekweghị na Chineke n’oge Mgbanwe ọchịchị ahụ, mee ihe nnọchianya. Ọnwụ alaeze ndịda gụnyere ọnwụ eze ndịda. Ọnwụ Napoleon kwekọrọ n’ọnwụ France, ma na-adabakwa n’otu ahịrị na ọnwụ alaeze ọzọ nke ndịda, nke bụ Russia. Russia, dịka eze ọgbara ọhụrụ nke ndịda, malitere site na mgbanwe ọchịchị, dịka France, dịka eze ndịda, malitere site na mgbanwe ọchịchị.
Revolution is a characteristic of the dragon, who is the symbol of the southern kings. The dragon, the primary symbol of the king of the south is Satan, and as he attempts a revolution at the end of the millennium, fire comes down out of heaven and devours him. His rebellion in heaven at the beginning was the alpha of his rebellion at the conclusion of the millennium.
Mgbanwe ọchịchị site n’ike bụ otu n’ime àgwà dragọn ahụ, onye bụ ihe nnọchianya nke ndị eze ndịda. Dragọn ahụ, bụ isi ihe nnọchianya nke eze ndịda, bụ Setan; ma ka ọ na-anwa ime mgbanwe ọchịchị site n’ike na ngwụcha puku afọ ahụ, ọkụ si n’eluigwe gbadata rie ya. Nnupụisi ya n’eluigwe ná mmalite bụ alfa nke nnupụisi ya n’ọgwụgwụ puku afọ ahụ.
In 1798, France prophetically took the throne as the spiritual king of the south during the French Revolution. That revolution swept through the nations of Europe and ultimately arrived at the Russian Revolution that was quickly followed by the Bolshevik Revolution in the same year.
N’afọ 1798, France n’ụzọ amụma nara ocheeze dịka eze ime mmụọ nke ndịda n’oge Mgbanwe Ọchịchị France. Mgbanwe ahụ gafere n’etiti mba Europe ma n’ikpeazụ ruo na Mgbanwe Ọchịchị Russia, nke Mgbanwe Bolshevik sochiri ngwa ngwa n’otu afọ ahụ.
The Russian Revolution of 1917 consisted of two main steps: the February Revolution (which overthrew the Tsarist monarchy, ended autocracy, and established a provisional government amid a period of dual power with the Soviets) and the October Revolution (also called the Bolshevik Revolution, where the Bolsheviks under Lenin seized power in a coup, leading to the establishment of Soviet rule and the path to socialism/communism).
Mgbanwe Russia nke afọ 1917 nwere nzọụkwụ isi abụọ: Mgbanwe nke Febrụwarị (nke kwaturu ọchịchị eze Tsar, kwụsịkwa ọchịchị aka ike, ma guzobe ọchịchị nwa oge n’etiti oge e nwere ike ọchịchị abụọ ya na ndị Soviet), na Mgbanwe nke Ọktoba (a na-akpọkwa ya Mgbanwe Bolshevik, ebe ndị Bolshevik n’okpuru Lenin jidere ọchịchị site na mgbagha ọchịchị, nke butere ịtọlite ọchịchị Soviet na ụzọ e si ruo n’usoro mmekọrịta mmadụ na ibe ya/kọmunizim).
In historical analyses and revolutionary theory (particularly from Marxist perspectives like those of Trotsky, Luxemburg, and others drawing parallels), the French Revolution (1789–1799) is often seen as typifying or providing a schema for the course of the Russian events. The two steps of the French Revolution that typified these Russian phases are:
N’ime nyocha akụkọ ihe mere eme na echiche mgbanwe ọchịchị (karịsịa site n’echiche Marxist dịka nke Trotsky, Luxemburg, na ndị ọzọ na-adọta myirịta), a na-ahụkarị Mgbanwe Ọchịchị nke France (1789–1799) dịka nke na-anọchi anya ma ọ bụ na-enye ụkpụrụ maka usoro ihe omume Russia. Nzọụkwụ abụọ nke Mgbanwe Ọchịchị France nke na-anọchi anya usoro ndị a nke Russia bụ:
-
The initial moderate/constitutional phase (roughly 1789–1792), which aligns with the February Revolution. This French phase began with the storming of the Bastille, the convening of the Estates-General/National Assembly, the abolition of feudal privileges, the Declaration of the Rights of Man, and the establishment of a constitutional monarchy under the Girondins and moderate reformers. It overthrew absolute monarchy but retained elements of bourgeois/liberal governance and dual/contested power structures (e.g., between the Assembly and the lingering monarchy). Similarly, February 1917 ended Tsarism, but led to a bourgeois provisional government and dual power with the Soviets.
Oge mbido nke ọdịnala/nke iwu nwayọọ nwayọọ (ihe dị ka 1789–1792), nke kwekọrọ na Mgbanwe nke Febrụwarị. Oge a nke France malitere site n’ịkụda Bastille, ịkpọkọta Estates-General/Nzukọ Mba, iwepụ ihe ùgwù ndị feudal, Nkwupụta Maka Ikike nke Mmadụ, na ịtọlite ọchịchị eze nke iwu na-achị n’okpuru ndị Girondins na ndị mmegharị mgbanwe nwayọọ nwayọọ. Ọ kwaturu ọchịchị eze zuru oke, ma debe ụfọdụ akụkụ nke ọchịchị ndị bourgeois/liberal na usoro ike abụọ/nke a na-asọ mpi (dịka ọmụmaatụ, n’etiti Nzukọ ahụ na ọchịchị eze nke ka fọdụrụ). N’otu aka ahụkwa, Febrụwarị 1917 kwụsịrị ọchịchị Tsar, ma duru gaa n’ọchịchị nwa oge nke bourgeois na ike abụọ ya na ndị Soviet.
-
The radical/Jacobin phase (roughly 1792–1794, including the establishment of the First Republic, the execution of Louis XVI, and the Reign of Terror under Robespierre and the Jacobins/Committee of Public Safety) aligns with the October (Bolshevik) Revolution. The Jacobins seized power from the more moderate Girondins through radical action, declared a republic, suppressed counter-revolution, and pushed the revolution toward deeper social transformation and defense against internal/external threats. This mirrors how the Bolsheviks overthrew the provisional government, consolidated proletarian/dictatorship-of-the-proletariat rule, and advanced revolutionary socialism.
Oge mgbagharị siri ike/Jakọbin (ihe dị ka 1792–1794, gụnyere ịtọlite Ncheta Mbụ, igbu Louis XVI, na Ọchịchị Egwu n’okpuru Robespierre na ndị Jakọbin/Kọmitii nke Nzọpụta Ọha) kwekọrọ na Mgbanwe Ọktoba (Bolshevik). Ndị Jakọbin jiri omume mgbagharị siri ike napụ ndị Girondins, ndị dị umeala n’obi karịa ha, ọchịchị, kwupụta repọblik, kụrie mgbanwe mgbochi, ma kpọga mgbanwe ahụ n’ihu ruo n’ime mgbanwe ọha mmadụ miri emi karị na nchebe megide ihe iyi egwu dị n’ime na n’èzí. Nke a na-egosipụta otú ndị Bolshevik si kwatuo ọchịchị nwaoge, mee ka ọchịchị proletariat/ọchịchị aka ike nke proletariat sie ike, ma kwalite socialism mgbagharị.
These parallels emphasize how revolutions often follow a pattern: an initial broad uprising against the old regime (led by moderates/bourgeois forces), followed by a more extreme seizure of power by radicals to ‘save’ and deepen the revolution amid crisis. The Bolsheviks themselves consciously drew on the French example, viewing their October uprising as akin to the Jacobin coup—necessary to prevent counter-revolution and fulfill the revolution’s potential.
Ihe myirịta ndị a na-egosi nke ọma otú mgba mgbanwe ọchịchị si ewerekarị usoro a na-ahụkarị: mbido mmegide sara mbara megide ọchịchị ochie (nke ndị dị n’ọnọdụ etiti/ndị burzhwazi na-edu), nke a na-esote site n’ịnapụta ọchịchị n’ụzọ ka njọ site n’aka ndị ndọrọndọrọ ọchịchị siri ike iji “zọpụta” ma mee ka mgba mgbanwe ahụ mịkwuo emi n’etiti nsogbu. Ndị Bolshevik n’onwe ha jiri uche doro anya were ihe atụ ndị France ahụ, na-elele nnupụisi ha nke October dị ka nke hà na nkwatu ọchịchị ndị Jacobin—ihe dị mkpa iji gbochie mgba iweghachi ọchịchị ochie ma mezuo ikike niile nke mgba mgbanwe ahụ.
This typology appears in works like Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution (which explicitly compares the dual power phase in Russia to similar dynamics in France) and Rosa Luxemburg’s writings on the Russian events, where she notes the Russian Revolution’s first period (March–October) follows the schema of the French (and English) revolutions, with the Bolshevik takeover paralleling the Jacobin ascent.
Ụdị ihe nnọchianya a pụtara ìhè n’ọrụ ndị dị ka Trotsky’s *History of the Russian Revolution* (nke na-atụnyere n’ụzọ doro anya oge ọchịchị ike abụọ dị na Russia na mmegharị yiri ya dị na France) na n’akwụkwọ Rosa Luxemburg dere banyere ihe ndị mere na Russia, ebe ọ na-arịba ama na oge mbụ nke Mgbanwe Russia (March–October) na-agbaso ụkpụrụ nke mgbanwe France (na England), ebe ịnara ọchịchị nke ndị Bolshevik na-adakọ na ịrị elu nke ndị Jacobin.
Jesus always illustrates the end with the beginning, and the demise of Napoleon as the first spiritual king of the south followed the waymarks at the beginning of the revolution, and in so doing represented the demise of the Soviet Union.
Jisọs na-eji mmalite akọwa njedebe mgbe niile, ma ọdịda Napoleon, dị ka eze ime mmụọ mbụ nke ndịda, sochiri ihe-ọrịrị ndị ahụ e debere na mmalite nke mgba ọchịchị ahụ, ma n’ime ime otú ahụ ọ nọchitere ọdịda nke Soviet Union.
Napoleon’s progressive (step-by-step) demise aligns closely with the Soviet Union’s gradual decline and 1991 collapse, in the same typological framework where the French Revolution’s two phases prefigured the Russian Revolution’s February and October 1917 stages. The parallel extends into the post-radical consolidation phase (Bonapartism) and its inevitable unraveling. This draws from both general historical patterns and Marxist analyses (especially Trotsky’s in The Revolution Betrayed and related works), which treat Napoleon as the archetype of Bonapartism: a strongman regime that arises after a revolution’s radical peak, balances between classes, preserves key structural gains of the revolution (while suppressing its democratic thrust), builds a personal/military-bureaucratic empire, overextends, and then suffers a phased collapse leading to partial restoration of the old order.
Ọnwụ nwayọ nwayọ (nke gara n’ụkwụ n’ụkwụ) nke Napoleon na-adabara nke ọma na mbelata nwayọ nwayọ nke Soviet Union na ida ya n’afọ 1991, n’otu usoro ụdị amụma ahụ nke mmegharị French Revolution n’usoro akụkụ ya abụọ buru ụzọ gosipụta akụkụ abụọ nke Russian Revolution, ya bụ nke February na nke October 1917. Myirịta a na-agbatịkwa ruo n’oge nchikota mgbe oge ike mmegharị gasịrị (Bonapartism) na mgbasa ya nke a pụghị izere ezere. Nke a na-esite ma n’ụkpụrụ izugbe nke akụkọ ihe mere eme ma n’ọmụmụ Marxist (karịsịa nke Trotsky n’akwụkwọ The Revolution Betrayed na ọrụ ndị metụtara ya), nke na-ewere Napoleon dị ka ihe nlere anya mbụ nke Bonapartism: ọchịchị onye ike nke na-ebili mgbe mmegharị ruru ọkwa ya kacha ike, nke na-edobe nguzozi n’etiti klaasị dị iche iche, na-echekwa uru isi nhazi nke mmegharị ahụ (ebe ọ na-akụda ume ọchịchị onye kwuo uche ya), na-ewu alaeze nke onwe ya/nke agha/nke ụlọọrụ nchịkwa, na-agbatịkarị ike ya gabiga ókè, ma mesịa daa n’usoro akụkụ dị iche iche nke na-eduga n’ịlọghachi n’akụkụ ụfọdụ nke usoro ochie.
Napoleon’s Bonapartist Rise Parallels the Stalinist Consolidation
Ịrị elu Bonapartist nke Napoleon yiri nhazi ike Stalinist.
After the Jacobin radical phase and Thermidorian reaction (1794), the unstable Directory (1795–1799), Napoleon’s 18 Brumaire coup (1799) establishes the Consulate, then the Empire (1804). He codifies and exports bourgeois revolutionary gains (Napoleonic Code, end of feudal privileges, strong centralized state) but subordinates them to authoritarian rule, military glory, and a new elite.
Mgbe oge mgbanwe siri ike nke ndị Jacobin na mmeghachi omume Thermidorian (1794) gasịrị, Directory nke na-enweghị nkwụsi ike (1795–1799), mmegharị ọchịchị Napoleon nke 18 Brumaire (1799) guzobere Consulate, emesịa Alaeze Ukwu ahụ (1804). O ji iwu doo anya ma kesaa uru mgbanwe bourgeois wetara (Usoro Iwu Napoleonic, njedebe nke ohere pụrụ iche nke usoro feudal, steeti etiti siri ike), ma o tinyere ha n’okpuru ọchịchị aka ike, otuto agha, na òtù ndị isi ọhụrụ.
After the Bolshevik/October radical phase and early Soviet experiments, bureaucratic degeneration sets in (especially from the mid-1920s). Stalin’s consolidation defeats the Left Opposition, enforces “socialism in one country,” and creates a police/military-bureaucratic dictatorship. The planned economy and nationalized property (core gains of October) are preserved but turned into tools of a privileged caste, with internationalism abandoned.
Mgbe oge radikal Bolshevik/Ọktoba na ule mbụ nke Soviet gasịrị, nrụrụ aka nke ọchịchị ndị ọrụ n’ụlọ ọrụ na-amalite ịbanye n’ime usoro ahụ (karịsịa site n’etiti afọ 1920s). Nkwụsi ike Stalin n’ike meriri Nmegide Aka Ekpe, manye “soshializim n’otu mba,” ma kee ọchịchị ọchịchị aka ike nke ndị uwe ojii/ndị agha/ndị ọrụ nchịkwa. E chekwara akụnụba e mere atụmatụ ya na ihe onwunwe e tinyere n’okpuru ọchịchị mba (uru ndị bụ isi nke Ọktoba), ma a gbanwere ha ka ha bụrụ ngwaọrụ nke otu ndị nwere ihe ùgwù, ebe a gbahapụrụ mba ụwa ọnụ.
In both cases, the revolutionary energy is “frozen” and redirected into state power and expansion under a single figure or apparatus (Trotsky explicitly called the Stalin regime a form of “Soviet Bonapartism,” closer to Napoleon’s Empire than the Consulate).
N’ihe abụọ ahụ, a “kpoo” ume mgbanwe ahụ oyi ma tụgharịa ya ka ọ bụrụ ike ọchịchị steeti na mgbasawanye n’okpuru otu onye ma ọ bụ usoro ọchịchị otu ahụ (Trotsky kpọmkwem kpọrọ ọchịchị Stalin ụdị “Bonapartism Soviet,” nke dị nso n’Alaeze Ukwu Napoleon karịa Consulate).
The Step-by-Step Collapse
Mmebi Nke Nzọụkwụ‑nzọụkwụ
This is the core alignment—the decline is not one sudden event but a successive series of erosions driven by overextension, internal contradictions, military quagmires, loss of peripheral control, failed reforms, and final dissolution/restoration.
Nke a bụ nkwekọrịta isi—mbelata ahụ abụghị otu ihe omume mberede, kama ọ bụ usoro na-esochi ibe ya nke mmebi na mbuze, nke ibubiga oke ókè, mmegide dị n’ime, ọgba-aghara agha na-adịghị apụta ụzọ mgbapụ n’ime ya, ọnwụ nke njide n’ókèala mpụta, ndozigharị dara ada, na nkwụsị ikpeazụ/mweghachi na-akpali.
Napoleonic side (1812 to 1815)
Akụkụ Napoleọnik (1812 ruo 1815)
-
1812: Disastrous invasion of Russia—Grande Armée (600,000 men) decimated by logistics, winter, and resistance. Catastrophic turning point; massive loss of prestige and manpower.
1812: Mbuso agha jọgburu onwe ya megide Russia—Grande Armée (ndị agha 600,000) bibiri n’ihi nsogbu ngwa agha na ihe oriri, oyi nke udu mmiri, na nguzogide. Ọ bụ oge ntụgharị dị oke njọ; nnukwu mfu nke ugwu na ike mmadụ.
-
1813: Coalition forms against him; defeat at Leipzig (“Battle of the Nations”)—loss of German allies and territories; empire begins shrinking.
1813: Otu njikọ guzobere imegide ya; mmeri e meriri ya na Leipzig (“Agha nke Mba Dị iche iche”)—ọnwụ nke ndị mmekọ Jaman na mpaghara ala ya; alaeze ukwu ahụ malitere ịkụda ma na-ebelata.
-
1814: Allies invade France proper; Paris falls; Napoleon abdicates and is exiled to Elba.
1814: Ndị Mmekọrịta na-abanye n’ala France n’onwe ya; Paris ada; Napoleon ajụ ocheeze ya ma ebuga ya n’ala mgbaba na Elba.
-
1815: Brief return (Hundred Days), final defeat at Waterloo; permanent exile to St. Helena; Bourbon monarchy restored (reactionary rollback of revolutionary gains, though not total—some legal/administrative changes survived).
1815: Nlọghachi mkpirikpi (Ụbọchị Narị), mmeri ikpeazụ e meriri ya na Waterloo; a chụgara ya n’ala ọzọ ruo mgbe ebighị ebi na St. Helena; e weghachiri ọchịchị eze Bourbon (nlaghachi azụ na-emeghachi omume megide uru ndị mgbanwe ọha ahụ wetara, ọ bụ ezie na ọ bụghị kpamkpam—ụfọdụ mgbanwe iwu na nchịkwa ka nọgidere).
Soviet side (1970s to 1991)
Akụkụ Soviet (site n’afọ 1970 ruo 1991)
-
Late 1970s–1980s: Economic stagnation (“zastoi” under Brezhnev), chronic shortages, technological lag, and crippling arms race with the US/NATO—systemic overextension begins to hollow out the economy.
N’oge ngwụcha afọ 1970 ruo afọ 1980: Nkwụsị akụ na ụba (“zastoi” n’okpuru Brezhnev), ụkọ na-adịgide adịgide, ndalata na nkà na ụzụ, na asọmpi ngwá agha na-agbaji ike ya na US/NATO—ịgbasawanye oke nke usoro ahụ bidoro ime ka akụ na ụba ahụ ghọọ ihe efu n’ime.
-
1979–1989: Afghanistan war—Soviet “Vietnam”; quagmire drains resources, morale, and international standing (note the ironic parallel: Napoleon destroyed in Russia; USSR bled in a rugged, resistant theater).
1979–1989: Agha Afghanistan—“Vietnam” nke Soviet; unyi agha a na-apụtaghị ụzọ doro anya na-adọpụ akụnụba, mmụọ ume, na ọnọdụ aha ọma n’etiti mba dị iche iche (rịba ama myirịta jupụtara n’akụkọ ihe mere eme: e bibiri Napoleon na Rọshịa; USSR kwa gbara ọbara n’ogbo agha siri ike ma na-emegide ike).
-
1985–1989: Gorbachev’s perestroika/glasnost reforms (attempted “saving” of the system, like some late Napoleonic adjustments) instead expose and accelerate contradictions; Eastern Bloc satellites revolt and break free (Berlin Wall falls November 9, 1989, regimes collapse across 1989–1990)—loss of the “outer empire,” exactly like Napoleon’s loss of allied states.
1985–1989: Ndozigharị perestroika/glasnost nke Gorbachev (mbọ e mere iji “zọpụta” usoro ahụ, dị ka ụfọdụ mmezigharị e mere n’oge ikpeazụ nke Napoleon) kama ha kpughee ma mee ka mmegide dị n’ime ya gbasie ọsọ; steeti satịlaịtị nke Mpaghara Ọwụwa Anyanwụ Europe nupụrụ isi ma tọhapụ onwe ha (Mgbidi Berlin dara na Nọvemba 9, 1989, ọchịchị dị iche iche dara n’ofe 1989–1990)—ọnwụ nke “alaeze mpụta,” kpọmkwem dị ka ọnwụ Napoleon nke steeti ndị mmekọ ya.
-
1990–1991: Internal nationalist crises, republics declare sovereignty; August 1991 hardliner coup fails spectacularly; Gorbachev resigns December 25, 1991; USSR dissolves into 15 states. Capitalist restoration follows (Yeltsin-era shock therapy, oligarchs, privatization)—analogous to the Bourbon restoration: prerevolutionary class elements (or their equivalents) return, rolling back full revolutionary property relations while keeping some administrative forms.
1990–1991: Nsogbu mba n’ime ala, ndị republịk na-ekwupụta ọchịchị onwe ha; mgbalị ọchịchị ike nke ndị nkwụsi ike n’Ọgọọst 1991 dara n’ụzọ ihere dị ukwuu; Gorbachev gbara arụkwaghịm na Disemba 25, 1991; USSR gbasasịrị bụrụ steeti iri na ise. Mweghachi nke ikeketeorie sochiri (usoro ọgwụgwọ mberede nke oge Yeltsin, ndị oligak, nkeonwe ihe onwunwe)—nke yiri mweghachi Bourbon: ihe ndị otu klaasị dị tupu mgbanwe ọchịchị (ma ọ bụ ndị ha na ha hà) laghachiri, na-akagbu njikọ ihe onwunwe zuru oke nke mgbanwe ọchịchị wetara, ebe ha ka na-edobe ụfọdụ ụdị nhazi ọchịchị.
In both, the “empire” (French Continental System vs. Soviet Eastern Bloc/COMECON influence) fragments outward-in, internal decay accelerates, a final crisis exposes the hollowness, and the old social forces reassert (monarchy/capitalism). Bonapartism proves unsustainable—a “pyramid balanced on its point,” as Trotsky put it—because it rests on suppressing the revolution’s democratic base while defending (but distorting) its economic base amid hostile external pressures. The Soviet collapse was not “sudden” in the long view but the culmination of progressive internal rot, just as Napoleon’s empire did not vanish overnight but eroded through successive defeats until restoration.
N’ime ha abụọ ahụ, “alụso ọchịchị ukwu” ahụ (Usoro Kọntinentị France megide mmetụta Soviet Eastern Bloc/COMECON) na-ekewa ma na-agbasa site n’èzí ruo n’ime, mmebi nke dị n’ime ya na-agba ọsọ ngwa ngwa, nsogbu ikpeazụ na-ekpughe ịdị efu ya, ma ndị agha mmekọrịta mmadụ na ibe ya ochie na-alaghachi iwulite onwe ha ọzọ (ọchịchị eze/kapitalizim). Bonapartism na-egosi na ọ gaghị adịgide—“piramid e debere ka ọ kwụ n’ọnụ ya,” dịka Trotsky siri kwuo—n’ihi na ọ dabere n’ịkwụsị ntọala ọchịchị onye kwuo uche ya nke mmegharị ahụ, ebe ọ na-echekwa (ma na-agbagọ) ntọala akụ na ụba ya n’etiti nrụgide mpụga ndị iro. Ndakpọ Soviet abụghị ihe “mere na mberede” n’echiche ogologo oge, kama ọ bụ njedebe nke ire ure nke na-aga n’ihu n’ime ya, dịka alaeze Napoleon ahụ adịghị efu n’otu abalị kama ọ tara ahụhụ site n’imeri ya ugboro ugboro ruo mgbe mweghachi bịara.
The beginning and ending of France and the Soviet Union align with the testimony of king Uzziah and Ptolemy. Ptolemy IV Philopator wins a decisive victory at the Battle of Raphia (217 BC) against the king of the north (Antiochus III), but “he shall not be strengthened by it”—he makes peace instead of pressing the advantage, returns to luxury and self-exaltation, then (per the record preserved in 3 Maccabees 1–2) Ptolemy visits Jerusalem after his triumph. His heart lifted up, he attempts to enter the Holy of Holies and offer sacrifice himself—an act of usurpation and defiance against the true God. He is divinely struck (paralysis), humiliated, and turns to persecution of God’s people. His reign thereafter is one of progressive decline: moral corruption, internal revolts, and loss of strength until his death. This is the exact mirror of King Uzziah (2 Chronicles 26:16–21) whose heart was lifted up after military success., who then entered the temple to burn incense (usurping the priests) and was struck with leprosy in the forehead, which was a public, visible judgment. From then on Uzziah lived in isolation, cut off from the house of the Lord, until death—a slow, lingering demise rather than instant destruction.
Mbido na njedebe nke France na Soviet Union kwekọrọ na àmà nke eze Uzaịa na Ptolemy. Ptolemy IV Philopator meriri mmeri doro anya n’Agha Raphia (217 BC) megide eze ugwu (Antiochus III), ma “a gaghị eme ka ọ sie ike site na ya”—ọ na-eme udo kama ịgbaso uru ahụ ruo n’ókè ya, ọ laghachiri n’ibi ndụ okomoko na n’ịkwalite onwe ya, mgbe ahụkwa (dị ka ndekọ e chekwara na 3 Maccabees 1–2 si kwuo) Ptolemy gara Jerusalem mgbe mmeri ya gasịrị. Obi ya buliri elu, ọ nwara ịbanye n’Ebe Nsọ Kachasị Nsọ ma chụọrọ onwe ya àjà—omume nke ịnapụ ikike na ịjụ isi megide ezi Chineke. A tiri ya ihe n’aka Chineke (nkwarụ ahụ́), e wedara ya ala, o wee tụgharịa n’ịkpagbu ndị Chineke. Site n’oge ahụ gaa n’ihu, ọchịchị ya ghọrọ nke ọdịda na-arịwanye elu: nrụrụ aka omume, nnupụisi dị n’ime, na ida ike ruo ọnwụ ya. Nke a bụ nnọọ onyinyo ziri ezi nke Eze Uzaịa (2 Ihe E Mere 26:16–21), onye obi ya buliri elu mgbe ọganihu agha gasịrị, onye mechara banye n’ụlọ nsọ iji kpọọ ihe nsure ọkụ na-esi ísì ụtọ (na-anapụ ndị nchụàjà ọrụ ha), a wee tụọ ya ekpenta n’egedege ihu ya, nke bụ ikpe ọha na eze pụrụ ịhụ anya. Site n’oge ahụ gawa, Uzaịa biri n’iche iche, e kewapụrụ ya n’ụlọ Jehova, ruo ọnwụ—njedebe nwayọọ nwayọọ na-adigide kama mbibi ozugbo.
Both are southern kings whose pride manifests in a temple intrusion at Jerusalem, followed by a progressive, erosive ending instead of immediate collapse. This is the typological template for every later “king of the south.”
Ha abụọ bụ ndị eze ndịda nke nganga ha na-apụta ìhè n’ịbanye n’ụlọ nsọ dị na Jerusalem n’enweghị ikike, nke na-esochi njedebe na-aga n’ihu nwayọọ nwayọọ ma na-ere ere, kama ọdịda mberede ozugbo. Nke a bụ ụkpụrụ oyiyi amụma maka “eze ndịda” ọ bụla nke ga-abịa n’oge e mesịrị.
1798: France Becomes the Spiritual King of the South
1798: France Ghọọrọ Eze Ndịda nke Mmụọ
At “the time of the end” (1798), atheistic France (the power that had just manifested the spiritual characteristics of Egypt—open denial of God, as in Revelation 11:8) pushes at the king of the north (the Papacy) by taking the Pope captive. Napoleon is the military embodiment of that push. France wears the crown of the south in 1798, because it exalts the same atheistic spirit that ancient Egypt embodied.
N’“oge ọgwụgwụ” (1798), France ekweghị na Chineke (ike ahụ nke gosipụtara n’oge ahụ àgwà ime mmụọ nke Ijipt—ịgọnarị Chineke n’ihu ọha, dịka dị na Mkpughe 11:8) na-awakpo eze nke ugwu (Ọchịchị Papal) site n’ịkpọrọ Pọopu n’agha. Napoleon bụ nnọchite agha nke mwakpo ahụ. France yi okpueze nke ndịda na 1798, n’ihi na ọ na-ebuli elu otu mmụọ ekweghị na Chineke ahụ nke Ijipt oge ochie nọchiri anya ya.
But just as Ptolemy could not “make the most of his victory,” the French Revolution’s radical phase could not sustain or fully export its gains. The crown of the south passes onward as the philosophy of atheism matures and finds a new governmental voice.
Ma dị nnọọ ka Ptolemy enweghị ike “iji mmeri ya mee ihe nke ọma n’uju,” otu a ka oge ike ike nke Mgbanwe Ọchịchị France enweghị ike ịkwado ma ọ bụ ibuputa n’uju uru ọ rụpụtara. Okpueze nke ndịda na-agafe n’ihu ka nkà ihe ọmụma nke ịgọnarị Chineke na-eto eto ma na-achọta olu ọchịchị ọhụrụ.
Progressive Leadership Symbols: Napoleon to Lenin to Stalin
Akara Ndu Nduzị Na-aga n’ihu: Napoleon ruo Lenin ruo Stalin
These three are not random; they are progressive endings—each representing a further stage in the king of the south’s trajectory toward its own slow dissolution. Napoleon—the first great symbol after 1798. Victorious in Egypt (the literal south), he overreaches (Russian campaign of 1812 was a disaster beginning a series of losses to his peripheral empire step by step (1813–1814), suffers final defeat (Waterloo 1815), and is exiled twice. Napoleon represents a progressive, phased demise—exactly like unto the Ptolemy and Uzziah.
Ndị a atọ abụghị ndị mere na mberede; ha bụ njedebe na-aga n’ihu n’usoro—onye ọ bụla na-anọchite anya ọkwa ọzọ n’ụzọ eze nke ndịda si eje n’iru ruo n’ịla n’iyi nke ya nwayọọ nwayọọ. Napoleon—akara ukwu mbụ mgbe afọ 1798 gachara. N’ịbụ onye meriri n’Ijipt (ndịda n’ezi-okwu), ọ gara karịa oke ya (ọgụ Russia nke 1812 bụ ọdachi nke malitere usoro mfu), tufuo alaeze ya nke dị n’akụkụ-ala ya nwayọọ nwayọọ site n’otu nzọụkwụ ruo n’ọzọ (1813–1814), nata mmeri ikpeazụ megide ya (Waterloo 1815), ma chụpụ ya gaa n’ala ọzọ ugboro abụọ. Napoleon na-anọchite anya ọnwụ na-aga n’ihu n’usoro na n’ọkwa dị iche iche—kpamkpam dịka Ptolemy na Uzziah.
Lenin seized the crown in the 1917 October Revolution. The Bolshevik “push” continues the war against the old order (including religious power). But the radical phase cannot stabilize; Lenin’s own health fails early, and the system begins to bureaucratize.
Lenin jidere okpueze ahụ n’Mgbanwe Ọktoba nke afọ 1917. “Mbutu” Bolshevik ahụ na-aga n’ihu n’agha ya megide usoro ochie ahụ (gụnyere ike ọchịchị okpukpe). Ma ogbo mgbagwoju anya ahụ enweghị ike iweta ịdịgidesi ike; ahụike Lenin n’onwe ya dara mbà n’oge na-adịghị anya, usoro ahụ wee malite ịghọ nke ọchịchị ụlọọrụ jupụtara na iwu.
Stalin, the consolidator (Soviet Bonapartism) “freezes” the revolution into a military-bureaucratic empire, preserves the core gains (nationalized economy the anti-feudal parallel to Napoleon’s Code), but turns the power inward (purges) and outward (expansion). Yet the heart is lifted up in atheism; the system cannot truly “make the most of its victory.” Overextension (Afghanistan parallel to Napoleon’s Russia), stagnation, failed reforms (perestroika was the last desperate attempt), loss of satellites (1989–90 = loss of “allies”), and final dissolution (1991).
Stalin, onye na-achịkọta ma na-eme ka ihe guzosie ike (Bonapartism Soviet), “na-ajụ oyi” mgbanwe ahụ ka ọ bụrụ alaeze agha-na-ọrụ ọchịchị, na-echekwa uru ndị bụ isi a ritere (akụ na ụba e mere ka ọ bụrụ nke mba, nke bụ ihe yiri nke Iwu Napoleon n’usoro mgbochi-feudal), ma na-atụgharị ike ahụ n’ime (mkpochapụ) na n’èzí (mgbasawanye). Otú ọ dị, a na-ebuli obi elu n’ekweghị na Chineke; usoro ahụ apụghị n’eziokwu “ime ka o jiri mmeri ya mee ihe n’uju.” Ịgbasa oke (Afghanistan dị ka ihe yiri Russia nke Napoleon), ịnọgide n’otu ọnọdụ na-enweghị ọganihu, mmezigharị ndị dara ada (perestroika bụ mgbalị ikpeazụ nke nnọọ ntụmanya agwụla), ọnwụ nke satịlaịtị ya (1989–90 = ọnwụ nke “ndị otu”), na mgbasa ikpeazụ ya (1991).
The Soviet Union’s collapse was not sudden—it was progressive, exactly as Napoleon’s empire eroded step by step and as Ptolemy’s and Uzziah’s reigns withered after their temple-pride moment. The “spiritual” king of the south (atheism in governmental form) received its own lingering judgment: hollowed out from within, unable to sustain the lie, swept away in the counter-movement of the king of the north (the Papacy’s resurgence in the vacuum).
Ọdachi nke Soviet Union abụghị ihe bịara na mberede—ọ bụ nke gara n’ihu n’usoro, kpọmkwem dịka alaeze Napoleon ji nwayọọ nwayọọ na-emebi nzọụkwụ site na nzọụkwụ, nakwa dịka ọchịchị Ptolemy na Uzaịa siri akpọnwụ mgbe oge mpako-ha n’ụlọ nsọ ahụ gasịrị. “Eze” ime mmụọ nke ndịda (ekweghị na Chineke n’ụdị ọchịchị) natakwara ikpe nke ya na-adịte aka: a kpọrọ ya nkụ site n’ime, ọ ghara inwe ike ịkwado ụgha ahụ, e wee kpochapụ ya n’ịtụgharị mmegharị nke eze nke ugwu (ịlọghachi ike nke Papacy n’ime oghere ahụ).
The French Revolution (two steps) typifies the Russian Revolution (February and October/Bolshevik). Napoleonic Bonapartism and progressive demise typify Stalinist consolidation and Soviet progressive demise. All of it is the modern outworking of Daniel 11’s king of the south line, from Ptolemy’s Raphia failure and temple arrogance, through Uzziah’s identical sin and slow end, to France in 1798 and its atheistic heir (Lenin–Stalin era) that could not strengthen itself by its victories.
Mgbagharị ọchịchị France (nzọụkwụ abụọ) na-anọchi anya Mgbagharị ọchịchị Russia (Febrụwarị na Ọktoba/Bolshevik). Bonapartism nke Napoleonic na mbelata ya na-aga n’ihu na-anọchi anya nkwụsi ike Stalinist na mbelata Soviet na-aga n’ihu. Ihe a niile bụ mmezu nke oge a nke ahịrị eze ndịda nke Daniel 11, site n’ọdịda Ptolemy na Raphia na mpako ya megide ụlọ nsọ, gafee nmehie yiri nke Uzaịa na njedebe ya nwayọ nwayọ, ruo France na 1798 na onye nketa ya na-ekweghị na Chineke (oge Lenin–Stalin) nke na-apụghị ime ka onwe ya sie ike site n’mmeri ya.
Lenin, the radical founder or seizer of power (parallel to the Jacobin/Bolshevik ascent; the “push” phase post-1917, is akin to Napoleon’s early Consulate after Brumaire). Stalin was the Bonapartist consolidator (Soviet empire builder, purges, WWII victory, Cold War peak; heart lifted up in atheism, but unable to fully “strengthen” the victory long-term—overextension begins).
Lenin, onye malitere ihe n’oke nkwụsị ike ma ọ bụ jidere ọchịchị site n’ike (nke yiri ịrị elu nke Jacobin/Bolshevik; oge “ịkwagide” ahụ mgbe 1917 gasịrị, dị ka Konsulet mbụ nke Napoleon mgbe Brumaire gasịrị). Stalin bụ onye nchịkọta na nkwụsi ike ụdị Bonapartist (onye wuru alaeze Soviet, mkpochapụ, mmeri n’Agha Ụwa nke Abụọ, elu nke Agha Oyi; obi ya weliri elu n’ekweghị na Chineke, ma o nweghị ike n’ụzọ zuru ezu “ime ka” mmeri ahụ sie ike ruo ogologo oge—ịgabiga oke malitere).
Khrushchev was the post-peak “thaw” leader (1953–1964): denounces Stalin (Secret Speech 1956), exposes some corruption, attempts limited reforms, but fails to resolve systemic contradictions. This parallels a “Thermidorian” or early-decline phase—loosening terror while the core atheist structure remains, yet prestige erodes (e.g., Cuban Missile Crisis humiliation 1962 mirrors minor Napoleonic setbacks before the big ones).
Khrushchev bụ onye ndu “ndakwụsị oyi” nke oge sochirinụ elu ọgụgụ ya (1953–1964): ọ na-akatọ Stalin (Okwu Nzuzo 1956), ọ na-ekpughe ụfọdụ nrụrụ aka, na-anwa ime mgbanwe ole na ole, ma ọ naghị edozi mmegide ndị dị n’usoro ahụ n’onwe ya. Nke a yiri ogbo “Thermidorian” ma ọ bụ ogbo mbido ọdịda—ibelata ụjọ na iyi egwu ka isi nhazi ekweghị na Chineke ahụ ka dị, ma ugwu ya na-ebelata (dịka ọmụmaatụ, ihere nke Nsogbu Misaịl Cuba nke 1962 na-egosipụta obere ndọghachi azụ Napoleonic tupu ndị ukwu ahụ abịa).
Gorbachev was the desperate reformer (1985–1991) with perestroika (restructuring) and glasnost (openness) as last-ditch efforts to “save” the system, but they accelerate collapse—loss of the Eastern Bloc (1989 Berlin Wall), internal revolts. This is the clearest “progressive ending” marker: like unto Napoleon’s late attempts at adjustment before the 1814 invasion, or Ptolemy/Uzziah’s lingering decline after temple-pride. Gorbachev’s 1989 concordat/meeting with Pope John Paul II (king of the north) symbolizes the spiritual defeat—the southern king’s atheism yielding to papal resurgence.
Gorbachev bụ onye ndozigharị nọ ná nhụjuanya (1985–1991), onye jiri perestroika (ịhazigharị usoro) na glasnost (mmeghe) dị ka mbọ ikpeazụ iji “zọpụta” usoro ahụ, ma ha mere ka ọdịda ya gbaa ọsọ—ọnwụfu nke Eastern Bloc (1989 Berlin Wall), na nnupụisi dị n’ime. Nke a bụ akara “njedebe na-aga n’ihu” kacha doo anya: dịka mgbalị Napoleon mere n’oge ikpeazụ iji mezie ihe tupu mbuso agha nke 1814, ma ọ bụ dịka ọdịda na-adịte aka nke Ptolemy/Uzziah mgbe nganga nke ụlọ nsọ gasịrị. Nkwekọrịta/nzukọ Gorbachev mere na 1989 ya na Pope John Paul II (eze ugwu) na-anọchi anya mmeri ime mmụọ—ekweghị na Chineke nke eze ndịda na-enye ụzọ nye ịrịghachi ike nke papacy.
Yeltsin was the final dissolution figure (1991 onward) who led to the August 1991 coup resistance, becomes president of Russia, oversees USSR breakup (December 1991), shock therapy privatization, capitalist restoration. He embodies the chaotic end and partial “restoration” of prerevolutionary elements (oligarchic capitalism, like Bourbon’s return post-Napoleon). The southern king’s palace is swept away, fulfilling Daniel 11:40’s whirlwind conquest by the north (Papacy via US alliance).
Yeltsin bụ onye ikpeazụ nke mgbasa kpamkpam ahụ (site na 1991 gawa n’ihu) onye duuru nguzogide megide mgbalị nnupu isi nke Ọgọọst 1991, ghọọ onye isi ala Russia, lekọta nkewa USSR (Disemba 1991), imepụta onwe ụlọ akụ na azụmahịa n’okpuru “shock therapy,” na mweghachi nke ikeketeorie. Ọ na-anọchi anya njedebe juru n’ọgbaaghara na “mweghachi” akụkụ ụfọdụ nke ihe ndị dị tupu mgbanwe ọchịchị (ikeketeorie ndị oligarch, dịka nlọghachi Bourbon mgbe Napoleon gasịrị). A na-ekpochapụ obí eze nke eze ndịda, si otú a mezue mmeri ifufe nke ugwu ahụ dị na Daniel 11:40 (Ụka Papacy site n’ime njikọ aka na US).
The typology emphasizes lingering, step-by-step judgment rather than instant fall, just as Ptolemy IV’s Raphia victory led to pride, temple intrusion, divine striking, and slow decay; Uzziah’s leprosy isolation until death; Napoleon’s phased losses (Russia, Leipzig, Paris, Elba, Waterloo). The Soviet line identifies the peak strength under Stalin, the progressive hollowing during Khrushchev’s thaw that exposes the cracks in the system. Then the Brezhnev-era stagnation and then Gorbachev’s reforms become accelerants; Yeltsin’s era completes the sweep (USSR dissolved, atheism’s governmental form ends). The “heart lifted up” manifests across the line (atheistic defiance), but none “makes the most of victory.”
Ụdị ihe atụ ahụ na-emesi ikpe na-adịte aka, nke na-aga n’ụzọ n’ụzọ, ike, kama ọdịda mberede, dịka mmeri Ptolemy IV na Raphia dugara n’ịdị mpako, nbata n’ụlọ nsọ n’enweghị ikike, iti site n’aka Chineke, na ire ere nwayọọ nwayọọ; ikewapụ Uzziah n’ihi ekpenta ruo ọnwụ ya; mfu Napoleon nke mere n’ogbo dị iche iche (Russia, Leipzig, Paris, Elba, Waterloo). Ahịrị Soviet ahụ na-akọwapụta elu ike ya n’okpuru Stalin, ntọgbọ n’ime ya nke na-aga n’ihu n’oge “thaw” Khrushchev nke na-ekpughe mgbawa dị n’usoro ahụ. Mgbe ahụ nkwụsị Brezhnev-era, ma emesịa ndozigharị Gorbachev, ghọọ ndị na-eme ka ọsọ ya bawanye; oge Yeltsin mezuru ikpochapụ ahụ (USSR agbazee, ọdịdị ọchịchị nke ekweghị na Chineke akwụsị). “Obi e weliri elu” na-apụta n’ahịrị ahụ dum (nnupụisi ekweghị na Chineke), ma ọ dịghị onye n’ime ha “na-eme ka mmeri ahụ baa uru nke ukwuu.”
The end of the southern kings are progressive, Satan’s demise began at the cross, and he is ultimately sent into exile for 1,000 years and then he dies.
Ọgwụgwụ nke ndị eze ndịda bụ nke na-aga n’ihu n’ọkwa dị iche iche; mbibi Setan malitere n’obe, a ga-emesị kwa ziga ya n’ọpụpụ ruo afọ 1,000, mgbe ahụ ọ ga-anwụ.
And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
M hụkwara mmụọ-ozi ka o si n’eluigwe rịdata, o ji mkpịsị-igodo nke olulu ahụ nke na-enweghị nsọtụ, na nnukwu agbụ n’aka ya. O wee jide dragọn ahụ, agwọ ochie ahụ, nke bụ Ekwensu na Setan, kee ya agbụ otu puku afọ, tụba ya n’ime olulu ahụ nke na-enweghị nsọtụ, mechie ya n’ime ya, tinyekwa akara n’elu ya, ka ọ ghara iduhie mba ndị ọzọ ọzọ ruo mgbe otu puku afọ ahụ ga-ezu; ma mgbe nke ahụ gasịrị, a ga-atọhapụ ya obere oge.
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.
M hụkwara ocheeze dị iche iche, ndị mmadụ wee nọdụ n’elu ha, e wee nye ha ikpe: m hụkwara mkpụrụ obi ndị e gbupụrụ isi n’ihi ịgba ama Jisọs, na n’ihi okwu Chineke, na ndị ahụ na-efeghị anụ ọhịa ahụ ofufe, ma ọ bụ onyinyo ya, ha anataghịkwa akara ya n’egedege ihu ha ma ọ bụ n’aka ha; ha wee dị ndụ, soro Kraịst chịa otu puku afọ. Ma ndị fọdụrụ n’ime ndị nwụrụ anwụ alaghachighịkwa n’ndụ ruo mgbe otu puku afọ ahụ zuru ezu.
This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.
Nke a bụ mbilite n’ọnwụ nke mbụ. Ngọzị na ịdị nsọ dị n’ebe onye ahụ nọ nke nwere òkè na mbilite n’ọnwụ nke mbụ: n’ebe ndị dị otú ahụ nọ ọnwụ nke abụọ enweghị ike ọ bụla, kama ha ga-abụ ndị nchụàjà nke Chineke na nke Kraịst, ha ga-esokwa ya chịa otu puku afọ.
And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. Revelation 20:1–10.
Mgbe afọ puku ahụ ga-agwụ, a ga-atọhapụ Setan n’ụlọ mkpọrọ ya, ọ ga-apụkwa ịghọgbu mba ndị nọ n’akụkụ anọ nke ụwa, Gog na Magog, ka ọ kpọkọta ha ọnụ n’ọgụ: ọnụ ọgụgụ ha dị ka ájá dị n’akụkụ osimiri. Ha wee rigoro n’obosara ụwa, gbaa ogige ndị nsọ na obodo ahụ a hụrụ n’anya gburugburu: ọkụ wee si n’eluigwe sitere n’aka Chineke daa, rie ha. Ekwensu ahụ nke ghọgburu ha ka a tụbara n’ime ọdọ ọkụ na brimstone, ebe anụ ọhịa ahụ na onye-amụma ụgha ahụ nọ, a ga-emekwa ka a na-ata ha ahụhụ ehihie na abalị ruo mgbe ebighị ebi. Mkpughe 20:1–10.
We will continue our considerations of the southern king in Daniel eleven, verses eleven through fifteen in the next article.
Anyi ga-aga n’ihu n’ịtụle eze nke ndịda n’ime Daniel isi nke iri na otu, amaokwu iri na otu ruo iri na ise, n’isiokwu na-esonụ.
The Time of the End magazine was published in 1996 and it represents the prophecy from the book of Daniel that was unsealed in 1989. Recently the magazine was read by ChatGPT and asked to evaluate the role of Ukraine in the history of verse forty represented in the magazine. The following is the breakdown of the magazine that has been in the public record for thirty years. The first passage from the writings of Ellen White in the magazine is Testimonies, volume 9, 11.
E bipụtara magazin The Time of the End n’afọ 1996, ọ na-anọchikwa amụma sitere n’akwụkwọ Daniel nke e kpughere n’afọ 1989. N’oge na-adịbeghị anya, ChatGPT gụrụ magazin ahụ, a jụrụkwa ya ka ọ nyochaa ọrụ Ukraine n’akụkọ ihe mere eme nke amaokwu nke iri anọ dị ka e gosiri ya n’ime magazin ahụ. Ihe ndị a sochirinụ bụ nkewa nke magazin ahụ nke nọworo n’akwụkwọ ndekọ ọha kemgbe afọ iri atọ. Amaokwu mbụ sitere n’ihe odide Ellen White dị n’ime magazin ahụ bụ Testimonies, volume 9, 11.
Overview: Ukraine in the Prophetic Framework
Nchịkọta: Ukraine n’Ụkpụrụ Amụma
Within the magazine’s prophetic outline of Daniel 11:40–45, Ukraine is discussed in connection with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the struggle between the Papacy (king of the north) and atheistic communism (king of the south). Ukraine is presented as a key religious and geopolitical battleground during the closing stages of the proxy wars, particularly in relation to the Ukrainian Catholic Church and its legalization after decades of suppression under Soviet rule.
N’ime nkọwa amụma nke magazin ahụ banyere Daniel 11:40–45, a na-atụle Ukraine n’ihe gbasara ọdịda nke Soviet Union na ọgụ dị n’etiti Papacy (eze ugwu) na komunizim ekweghị na Chineke (eze ndịda). A na-egosi Ukraine dị ka ebe ọgụ dị mkpa n’akụkụ okpukpe na ndọrọ ndọrọ ọchịchị n’oge mmechi nke agha nnọchi anya ndị ọzọ, ọkachasị n’ihe metụtara Ụka Katọlik nke Ukraine na ime ka ọ bụrụ nke iwu kwadoro mgbe ọtụtụ iri afọ nke mkpagbu gasịrị n’okpuru ọchịchị Soviet.
The magazine presents Ukraine as part of the broader prophetic fulfillment of Daniel 11:40, describing the sweeping away of the king of the south through a Vatican–United States alliance. Ukraine is shown as evidence of the weakening of Soviet atheism and the resurgence of Catholic influence in Eastern Europe.
Akwụkwọ akụkọ ahụ na-egosi Ukraine dịka akụkụ nke mmezu amụma sara mbara nke Daniel 11:40, na-akọwa ikpochapụ eze nke ndịda site n’ọgbakọ njikọta Vatican–United States. E gosipụtara Ukraine dịka ihe àmà nke adịghị ike na-abawanye nke ekweghị na Chineke nke Soviet na nlọghachi ike nke mmetụta Katọlik na Eastern Europe.
Ukraine in the War Between the King of the North and South
Ukraine n’Agha Dị n’etiti Eze nke Ugwu na Eze nke Ndịda
The magazine teaches that the king of the south is atheism, embodied first by France (1798) and later by Soviet Russia. The king of the north is the papacy and Daniel 11:40 describes a spiritual war beginning in 1798 and culminating in the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989. Ukraine appears within this context as part of the Soviet bloc that is swept away in fulfillment of Daniel 11:40. The publication presents the collapse of the Soviet Union as the first step in the healing of the Papacy’s deadly wound (Revelation 13).
Akwụkwọ akụkọ ahụ na-akụzi na eze nke ndịda bụ ekweghị na Chineke, nke e gosipụtara mbụ n’ime France (1798) ma emesịa n’ime Rọshịa Soviet. Eze nke ugwu bụ ọchịchị papacy, ma Daniel 11:40 na-akọwa agha ime mmụọ nke malitere na 1798 ma ruo n’ọgwụgwụ ya n’ime ọdịda nke Soviet Union n’afọ 1989. Ukraine pụtara n’ime ọnọdụ a dịka akụkụ nke òtù Soviet nke a na-ekpochapụ n’ime mmezu nke Daniel 11:40. Mbipụta ahụ na-egosi ọdịda nke Soviet Union dịka nzọụkwụ mbụ n’ịgwọ ọnya ahụ na-egbu egbu nke Papacy (Mkpughe 13).
Suppression of the Ukrainian Catholic Church (Quoted Sources)
Mmechibido Ụka Katọlik nke Ukraine (Isi Mmepụta E Kwutere)
The magazine includes secular documentation of Catholic persecution under Soviet rule.
Akwụkwọ akụkọ ahụ nwere akwụkwọ ndekọ nke sitere n’ụwa nkịtị gbasara mkpagbu ndị Katọlik nwetara n’okpuru ọchịchị Soviet.
From Time Magazine, December 4, 1989:
Site na magazin Time, Disemba 4, 1989:
“After World War II, fierce but generally less bloody persecution spread into the Ukraine and the new Soviet bloc, affecting millions of Roman Catholics and Protestants as well as Orthodox.”
“Mgbe Agha Ụwa nke Abụọ gasịrị, mkpagbu kpụ ọkụ n’ọnụ ma nke n’ozuzu ya na-adịkarị obere ọbara ọgbụgba gbasara ruo Ukraine na ngọngọ Soviet ọhụrụ, na-emetụta ọtụtụ nde ndị Roman Katọlik na ndị Protestant tinyere ndị Ọtọdọks.”
Ukraine is identified as a major area where Catholicism was suppressed under communism.
A na-amata Ukraine dị ka otu n’ime mpaghara ndị dị mkpa ebe a gbochiri okpukpe Katọlik n’okpuru ọchịchị kọmunizim.
Legalization of the Ukrainian Catholic Church
Nkwado Iwu nke Chọọchị Katọlik nke Ukraine
A major focus of the Ukraine discussion is the legalization of the long-banned Ukrainian Catholic Church.
Ihe bụ isi a na-elekwasị anya nke ukwuu n’ihe a na-atụle banyere Ukraine bụ ime ka Chọọchị Katọlik nke Ukraine, nke e machibidoro ogologo oge, bụrụ nke iwu kwadoro.
From Life Magazine, December 1989:
Site na Life Magazine, Disemba 1989:
“Three new Catholic bishops have recently been named in Czechoslovakia. And this month Gorbachev meets Pope John Paul II during a visit to Italy—the first face-to-face encounter between leaders of the Kremlin and the Vatican. The sessions may lead to legalization of the long-banned Ukrainian Catholic Church in the U.S.S.R.”
“A kpọpụtala ndị bishọp Katọlik ọhụrụ atọ n’oge na-adịbeghị anya na Czechoslovakia. Ma n’ọnwa a Gorbachev ga-ezute Pope John Paul II n’oge ọ gara Italy—nke a bụ izute ihu na ihu mbụ n’etiti ndị ndu Kremlin na Vatican. O nwere ike ịbụ na mkparịta ụka ndị ahụ ga-eduga n’ịkwado n’iwu Chọọchị Katọlik Ukraine nke a machibidoro ogologo oge iwu na U.S.S.R.”
From U.S. News & World Report, December 11, 1989:
Site na U.S. News & World Report, Disemba 11, 1989:
“The revival of religious freedom is expected to include lifting of an official ban on the five-million-member Ukraine Catholic Church, which has survived underground since 1946 when Stalin ordered it absorbed into the Russian Orthodox Church. Winning legalization for the Ukrainian Church has been a primary aim of the pope’s.”
“A na-atụ anya na mmelite nke nnwere onwe okpukpe ga-agụnye iwepụ mmachibido iwu gọọmenti tinyere n’elu Chọọchị Katọlik Ukraine nke nwere nde mmadụ ise n’otu ya, nke dịgidewo n’ala nzuzo kemgbe 1946 mgbe Stalin nyere iwu ka e tinye ya n’ime Chọọchị Ọtọdọks Rọshịa. Inweta nkwado iwu maka Chọọchị Ukraine abụwo otu n’ime ebumnuche isi nke poopu.”
The magazine presents this as evidence of the weakening of atheistic control, the restoration of Catholic power. It is identified as a direct outcome of Vatican diplomatic pressure and a milestone in Daniel 11:40’s fulfillment is set forth as the Ukraine as a visible example of the Papacy regaining influence in former communist territory.
Akwụkwọ akụkọ ahụ na-egosi nke a dị ka ihe àmà nke adịghị ike na-achịkwa nke ekweghị na Chineke, na mweghachi nke ike Katọlik. A na-akọwa ya dị ka nsonaazụ kpọmkwem nke nrụgide ndọrọ ndọrọ ọchịchị Vatikan, ma a na-ewepụta ya dị ka ihe dị mkpa na mmezu Daniel 11:40, ebe a na-egosi Ukraine dị ka ihe atụ a na-ahụ anya nke otú ọchịchị Pope si na-enwetaghachi mmetụta n’ókèala ndị bụbu ndị Kọmunist.
Ukraine as Evidence of the Papacy’s Advance
Yukren Dị ka Ihe Nà-egosi Ọganihu Nkwụ Ọrụ Pope Rom
The collapse of communism not merely as political change but as a spiritual defeat of atheism, a geopolitical advance of the Papacy and the beginning of the Papacy’s return to world dominance. The Ukraine becomes a case study in the dismantling of Soviet religious suppression and a strategic victory of Rome in Eastern Europe. It represents the visible shift from enforced atheism to restored Catholic authority and the legalization of the Ukrainian Catholic Church is treated as prophetic confirmation that the king of the north was sweeping away the king of the south “like a whirlwind.”
Ọdida nke komunizim abụghị nanị dịka mgbanwe ndọrọ ndọrọ ọchịchị, kama dịka mmeri ime mmụọ megide ekweghị na Chineke, ọganihu ndọrọ ndọrọ ụwa nke Ocheeze Papal, na mmalite nlọghachi nke Ocheeze Papal n’ịchị ụwa ọzọ. Ukraine ghọrọ ihe ọmụmụ pụrụ iche banyere ibibi mkpagbu okpukpe nke Soviet na mmeri atụmatụ Rome n’Ebe Ọwụwa Anyanwụ Europe. Ọ na-anọchi anya mgbanwe a na-ahụ anya site n’ekweghị na Chineke a manyere manyere gaa n’ịweghachi ikike Katọlik, a na-ewerekwa ime ka Chọọchị Katọlik nke Ukraine bụrụ nke iwu kwadoro dịka nkwenye amụma na eze ugwu na-ekpochapụ eze ndịda “dị ka ifufe-oke.”
Ukraine and the Broader Prophetic Sequence
Yukren na Usoro Amụma Ka Sara Mbara
-
1798 – Papacy receives deadly wound.
1798 – Alaeze Papacy natara ọnyá na-egbu egbu.
-
1917 – Atheism relocates to Russia (Bolshevik Revolution).
1917 – Ekweghị na Chineke na-akwaga na Rọshịa (Mgbanwe Bolshevik).
-
1989 – Soviet Union collapses.
1989 – Soviet Union dara.
-
Ukraine – Catholic Church legalized.
Ukraine – Chọọchị Katọlik kwadoro n’iwu.
-
Papacy regains geopolitical influence.
Ọchịchị Pope na-enwetaghachi mmetụta ndọrọ ndọrọ ọchịchị ụwa.
-
United States eventually comes under Papal influence (Daniel 11:41).
United States n’ikpeazụ na-abata n’okpuru mmetụta nke Pope (Daniel 11:41).
-
Entire world follows (Daniel 11:42–43).
Ụwa niile na-eso (Daniel 11:42–43).
Ukraine fits into stages 3–4 as part of the transition between Soviet atheism and restored Papal influence.
Ukraine dabara n’ọkwa nke 3–4 dịka akụkụ nke mgbanwe dị n’etiti ekweghị na Chineke nke Soviet na mweghachi nke mmetụta Papal.
Sources Referenced in Ukraine Discussion
Isi mmalite e zoro aka n’Mkparịta ụka gbasara Ukraine
-
Jeff Pippenger (primary theological framework)
Jeff Pippenger (usoro nkà mmụta okpukpe bụ isi)
Spirit of Prophecy
Mmụọ nke Amụma
-
The Great Controversy
Nnukwu Esemokwu ahụ
-
Selected Messages
Ozi Ahọpụtara
-
Testimonies for the Church
Àmà Ndịàmà Nye Nzukọ Kraịst
Secular Press
Akwụkwọ akụkọ nke ụwa
-
Time Magazine
Akwụkwọ akụkọ *Time*
-
Life Magazine
Akwụkwọ Akụkọ Ndụ
-
U.S. News & World Report
Akụkọ U.S. & Akụkọ Ụwa
Ukraine is mentioned in connection with:
A kpọrọ Ukraine n’ihe metụtara:
-
Post-World War II Catholic persecution
Mkpagbu ndị Katọlik mgbe Agha Ụwa nke Abụọ gasịrị
-
Underground survival of the Ukrainian Catholic Church
Ịlanarị Chọọchị Katọlik nke Ukraine n’okpuru ala
-
Gorbachev–Vatican diplomacy
Mmekọrịta ndọrọ ndọrọ ọchịchị Gorbachev–Vatican
-
Legal restoration of Catholic hierarchy
Mweghachi iwu nke usoro ọchịchị ndị ụkọchukwu Katọlik
Summary of Ukraine’s Role in the Newsletter
Nchịkọta Banyere Ọrụ Ukraine N’ime Akwụkwọ Akụkọ Ahụ
The Ukraine was a stronghold of suppressed Catholicism under Soviet atheism. The legalization of the Ukrainian Catholic Church signaled the weakening of the king of the south. The Vatican’s influence in the Ukraine demonstrated the Papacy’s resurgence and the Ukraine’s religious shift served as tangible evidence that Daniel 11:40 was being fulfilled. The events surrounding Ukraine formed part of the first step in the healing of the Papacy’s deadly wound. The Ukraine is therefore presented not as an isolated political event, but as a prophetic marker within the final movements of Daniel 11.
Ukraine bụ ebe e wusiri ike nke Katọlik e gbochiri n’okpuru ekweghị na Chineke nke Soviet. Ikwado ya n’iwu nke Chọọchị Katọlik nke Ukraine gosiri na eze nke ndịda na-ada ike. Mmetụta Vatican nọ na Ukraine gosipụtara mweghachi nke Papacy, mgbanwe okpukpe nke Ukraine wee bụrụ ihe akaebe a pụrụ ịhụ anya na Daniel 11:40 nọ na-emezu. Ihe omume gbara Ukraine gburugburu so n’akụkụ nzọụkwụ mbụ nke ịgwọ ọnya ọnwụ nke Papacy. Ya mere, a na-egosi Ukraine ọ bụghị dịka ihe omume ndọrọ ndọrọ ọchịchị nke kewapụrụ iche, kama dịka akara amụma n’ime mmegharị ikpeazụ nke Daniel 11.