We are now on sacred ground, in terms of the book of Daniel, for we have arrived at the verses which represent the Midnight Cry for the one hundred and forty-four thousand. The verses also identify the sealing of the ensign who are lifted up. These are the verses that are the portion from the book of Daniel that relates to the last days that is unsealed, and represent Daniel’s expression of the Revelation of Jesus Christ that is unsealed when the “time is at hand,” just before probation closes in verse sixteen.

Ankehitriny isika dia eo amin’ny tany masina, araka ny bokin’i Daniela, satria efa tonga amin’ireo andininy izay maneho ny Antso amin’ny Misasakalina ho an’ny iray hetsy sy efatra alina amby efatra arivo. Ireo andininy ireo koa dia manondro ny fanisiana tombo-kase ny faneva izay asandratra. Ireo no andininy izay ampahany avy amin’ny bokin’i Daniela mifandray amin’ny andro farany ka voavaha ny tombo-kaseny, ary maneho ny filazan’i Daniela ny Fanambaran’i Jesosy Kristy izay voavaha ny tombo-kaseny rehefa “akaiky ny fotoana,” talohan’ny hifaranan’ny fahasoavana ao amin’ny andininy fahenina ambin’ny folo.

It is Rome that establishes the vision, as represented in verse fourteen of chapter eleven, and it is therefore important to look closely at Rome as we navigate through verses eleven through fifteen, for where there is “no vision, the people perish,” and if you will not believe Isaiah chapter seven, verses eight and nine, “surely you will not be established.”

I Roma no manangana ny fahitana, araka izay aseho ao amin’ny andininy fahaefatra ambin’ny folo amin’ny toko fahairaika ambin’ny folo, koa noho izany dia zava-dehibe ny mandinika akaiky an’i Roma eo am-pamakivakiana ny andininy fahairaika ambin’ny folo ka hatramin’ny faha dimy ambin’ny folo, fa izay tsy misy “fahitana” dia levona ny olona; ary raha tsy mino an’i Isaia toko faha fito, andininy faha valo sy faha sivy ianareo, dia “tsy ho tafatoetra tokoa ianareo.”

Uriah Smith references a prophetic rule at least four times in his book, Daniel and the Revelation. That rule identifies that a prophetic power is not identified in prophecy until it becomes “connected” with the people of God. The first reference he addresses it is in connection with the introduction of Babylon into the prophetic testimony.

I Uriah Smith dia manonona fitsipika ara-paminaniana farafahakeliny in-efatra ao amin’ny bokiny, Daniel and the Revelation. Io fitsipika io dia manondro fa ny hery ara-paminaniana iray dia tsy asiana famantarana ao amin’ny faminaniana mandra-pahatongany ho “mifandray” amin’ny vahoakan’Andriamanitra. Ny filazana voalohany anaovany azy dia mifandray amin’ny fampidirana an’i Babylona ao amin’ny fijoroana ho vavolombelona ara-paminaniana.

“It is a manifest rule of interpretation that we may look for nations to be noticed in prophecy when they become so far connected with the people of God that mention of them becomes necessary to make the records of sacred history complete.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 46.

“Fitsipika miharihary amin’ny fandikana izany, fa azo antenaina ho voamarika ao amin’ny faminaniana ny firenena, rehefa tonga mifandray amin’ny olon’Andriamanitra izy ireo ka ilaina ny filazana azy mba hahatontosa ny firaketana ny tantara masina.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 46.

At least three other times, Smith addresses the rule, and he points to the “league” of the Jews in each of the three, but in one reference he identifies the league as being fulfilled in 162 BC, but the other two references are in agreement with the modern historians, who identify the fulfillment of the “league” of the Jews and Rome as 161 BC.

Farafahakeliny in-telo hafa koa no iresahan’i Smith io fitsipika io, ary tondroiny ao amin’ireo telo ireo ny “ligin’ny” Jiosy; kanefa amin’ny andininy iray dia amantariny fa tanteraka tamin’ny 162 tal. J.K. izany ligy izany, fa ny andininy roa hafa kosa dia mifanaraka amin’ny mpahay tantara maoderina, izay mamantatra fa ny fahatanterahan’ny “ligin’ny” Jiosy sy Roma dia tamin’ny 161 tal. J.K.

“It is unnecessary to remind the reader that earthly governments are not introduced into prophecy till they become in some way connected with the people of God. Rome became connected with the Jews, the people of God at that time, by the famous Jewish League, BC 161. 1 Maccabees 8; Josephus’s Antiquities, book 12, chapter 10, section 6; Prideaux, Vol. II, page 166. But seven years before this, that is, in BC 168, Rome had conquered Macedonia, and made that country a part of its empire. Rome is therefore introduced into prophecy just as, from the conquered Macedonian horn of the goat, it is going forth to new conquests in other directions. It therefore appeared to the prophet, or may be properly spoken of in this prophecy, as coming forth from one of the horns of the goat.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 175.

“Tsy ilaina ny mampahatsiahy ny mpamaky fa ny fitondram-panjakana eto an-tany dia tsy ampidirina ao amin’ny faminaniana raha tsy rehefa mifandray amin’ny vahoakan’Andriamanitra amin’ny fomba iray izy. Roma dia nifandray tamin’ny Jiosy, izay vahoakan’Andriamanitra tamin’izany fotoana izany, tamin’ny alalan’ilay Fifanekena jiosy malaza, tamin’ny 161 tal. J.K. 1 Makkabeo 8; Antiquités-n’i Josèphe, boky faha-12, toko faha-10, fizarana faha-6; Prideaux, Boky II, pejy 166. Kanefa fito taona talohan’izany, izany hoe tamin’ny 168 tal. J.K., dia nandresy an’i Makedonia i Roma, ka nanao io tany io ho isan’ny fanjakany. Koa dia ampidirina ao amin’ny faminaniana i Roma indrindra amin’ilay fotoana izay, rehefa avy amin’ilay tandroka makedoniana resin’ny osilahy izy no miroso ho amin’ny fandresena vaovao any amin’ny lalana hafa. Noho izany dia niseho tamin’ny mpaminany izy, na azo lazaina ara-drariny ao amin’ity faminaniana ity, ho mivoaka avy amin’ny iray amin’ireo tandroky ny osilahy.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 175.

But Smith also states that it was 162 BC.

Fa ambaran’i Smith koa fa tamin’ny 162 talohan’i Kristy izany.

“The same power was also to stand in the Holy Land, and consume it. Rome became connected with the people of God, the Jews, by alliance, BC 162, from which date it holds a prominent place in the prophetic calendar. It did not, however, acquire jurisdiction over Judea by actual conquest till BC 63; and then in the following manner.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 259.

“Io hery io ihany koa no hitsangana ao amin’ny Tany Masina ka handany azy. Nifandray tamin’ny vahoakan’Andriamanitra, dia ny Jiosy, i Roma tamin’ny alalan’ny fanekena, tamin’ny taona 162 talohan’i Kristy, ary hatramin’io daty io dia mitana toerana manan-danja eo amin’ny tetiandro ara-paminaniana izy. Tsy nahazo fahefana hitsara an’i Jodia tamin’ny alalan’ny fandresena ara-miaramila anefa izy raha tsy tamin’ny taona 63 talohan’i Kristy; ary izao no fomba nitrangan’izany avy eo.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 259.

And then the third time he references the event, he again says 161 BC.

Ary rehefa manonona izany zava-nitranga izany fanintelony izy, dia milaza indray hoe 161 BC.

“Having taken us down through the secular events of the empire to the end of the seventy weeks, the prophet, in verse 23, takes us back to the time when the Romans became directly connected with the people of God by the Jewish league, BC 161: from which point we are then taken down in a direct line of events to the final triumph of the church, and the setting up of God’s everlasting kingdom. The Jews, being grievously oppressed by the Syrian kings, sent an embassy to Rome, to solicit the aid of the Romans, and to join themselves in ‘a league of amity and confederacy with them.’ 1 Maccabees 8; Prideaux, II, 234; Josephus’s Antiquities, book 12, chapter 10, section 6. The Romans listened to the request of the Jews, and granted them a decree, couched in these words:—

«Rehefa nentin’ny mpaminany nidina namakivaky ny zava-nitranga ara-panjakana teo amin’ny fanjakam-be ka hatramin’ny fiafaran’ireo fito-polo herinandro, dia averiny any aoriana isika ao amin’ny andininy faha-23, ho amin’ny fotoana izay nifandraisan’ny Romanina mivantana tamin’ny olon’Andriamanitra tamin’ny alalan’ilay fanekena jiosy, tamin’ny 161 tal. J.K.; ary hatreo dia entina midina amin’ny filaharana mivantana amin’ny zava-mitranga isika mandra-pahatongan’ny fandresena faratampon’ny fiangonana sy ny fanorenana ny fanjakana mandrakizain’Andriamanitra. Koa satria nampahorina mafy tamin’ireo mpanjaka Syriana ny Jiosy, dia nandefa iraka tany Roma izy ireo mba hangataka ny fanampian’ny Romanina sy mba hiray amin’izy ireo amin’ny ‘fanekem-pihavanana sy firaisam-pikambanana.’ 1 Maccabees 8; Prideaux, II, 234; Josephus’s Antiquities, boky faha-12, toko faha-10, fizarana faha-6. Nohenoan’ny Romanina ny fangatahan’ny Jiosy, ary nomeny didy izy ireo, voasoratra amin’izao teny izao:—»

“‘The decree of the senate concerning a league of assistance and friendship with the nation of the Jews. It shall not be lawful for any that are subject to the Romans, to make war with the nation of the Jews, nor to assist those that do so, either by sending them corn, or ships, or money; and if any attack be made upon the Jews, the Romans shall assist them as far as they are able; and again, if any attack be made upon the Romans, the Jews shall assist them. And if the Jews have a mind to add to, or to take from, this league of assistance, that shall be done with the common consent of the Romans. And whatever addition shall thus be made, it shall be of force.’ ‘This decree,’ says Josephus, ‘was written by Eupolemus, the son of John, and by Jason, the son of Eleazer, when Judas was high priest of the nation, and Simon, his brother, was general of the army. And this was the first league that the Romans made with the Jews, and was managed after this manner.’” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 271.

“‘Ny didin’ny antenimieran-doholona momba ny fanekem-pihavanana amin’ny fifanampiana sy ny finamanana amin’ny firenen’ny Jiosy. Tsy ho azo atao amin’izay rehetra eo ambanin’ny Romana ny miady amin’ny firenen’ny Jiosy, na ny manampy izay manao izany, na amin’ny fandefasana vary, na sambo, na vola; ary raha misy fanafihana atao amin’ny Jiosy, dia hanampy azy ny Romana araka izay tratry ny heriny; ary koa, raha misy fanafihana atao amin’ny Romana, dia hanampy azy ny Jiosy. Ary raha manana saina hanampy na hanaisotra amin’ity fanekem-pihavanana amin’ny fifanampiana ity ny Jiosy, dia hatao izany amin’ny faneken’ny Romana iombonana. Ary izay rehetra fanampiny atao araka izany dia hanan-kery.’ ‘Io didy io,’ hoy i Josephus, ‘dia nosoratan’i Eupolemus, zanak’i Jaona, sy i Jasona, zanak’i Eleazara, tamin’ny andro naha-mpisoronabe ny firenena an’i Jodasy, ary Simona rahalahiny no komandin’ny tafika. Ary io no fanekem-pihavanana voalohany nataon’ny Romana tamin’ny Jiosy, ary toy izany no nandaminana azy.’” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 271.

It is not my burden to explain why Smith cited 162 BC, other than my assumption it was a typo. My point is in referencing the emphasis he places upon what he identifies as “a manifest rule of interpretation that we may look for nations to be noticed in prophecy when they become so far connected with the people of God that mention of them becomes necessary to make the records of sacred history complete.” When Smith emphasizes that rule, he identifies that Rome became connected with the people of God at the “league,” of verse twenty-three in 161 BC, but Smith identifies that Rome is first introduced into the prophetic narrative in 200 BC, thirty-nine years before 161 BC.

Tsy adidiko ny manazava ny antony nanononan’i Smith ny 162 tal. J.K., afa-tsy ny fiheverako fa hadiso-tsoratra izany. Ny tiako hambara dia ny amin’ny firesahana ny fanamafisana apetrany amin’izay faritany ho “fitsipika mazava eo amin’ny fandikana, izay ahafahantsika manantena fa ho tsikaritra ao amin’ny faminaniana ny firenena rehefa tonga mifandray amin’ny vahoakan’Andriamanitra izy ireo ka lasa ilaina ny filazana azy mba hahatonga ny rakitsoratry ny tantara masina ho feno.” Rehefa manamafy izany fitsipika izany i Smith, dia ambarany fa nifandray tamin’ny vahoakan’Andriamanitra i Roma tamin’ilay “fanekena,” ao amin’ny andininy faha-roa-polo amby roa-polo, tamin’ny 161 tal. J.K., nefa i Smith kosa milaza fa i Roma dia nampidirina voalohany tao amin’ny fitantarana ara-paminaniana tamin’ny 200 tal. J.K., sivy amby telopolo taona talohan’ny 161 tal. J.K.

“A new power is now introduced,—‘the robbers of thy people;’ literally, says Bishop Newton, ‘the breakers of thy people.’ Far away on the banks of the Tiber, a kingdom had been nourishing itself with ambitious projects and dark designs. Small and weak at first, it grew with marvelous rapidity in strength and vigor, reaching out cautiously here and there to try its prowess, and test the vigor of its warlike arm, till, conscious of its power, it boldly reared its head among the nations of the earth, and seized with invincible hand the helm of their affairs. Henceforth the name of Rome stands upon the historic page, destined for long ages to control the affairs of the world, and exert a mighty influence among the nations even to the end of time.

“Hery vaovao iray indray no ampidirina eto,—‘ny mpandroba amin’ny firenenao;’ ara-bakiteny, hoy ny Eveka Newton, ‘ireo mpandrava amin’ny firenenao.’ Tany lavitra teo amoron’ny Tiber, nisy fanjakana iray namelona ny tenany tamin’ny tetikasa feno fanirian-daza sy fikendrena maizina. Kely sy osa izy tamin’ny voalohany, nefa nitombo tamin’ny hafainganam-pahagagana tamin-kery sy tanjaka, naninjitra tamim-pitandremana etsy sy eroa mba hizaha ny heriny sy hitsapa ny tanjaky ny sandriny mpiady, mandra-pahatsapany ny heriny ka nanandratra tamim-pahasahiana ny lohany teo anivon’ny firenen’ny tany, ary naka tamin’ny tanana tsy hay toherina ny familiana ny raharahany. Hatramin’izay dia mitoetra eo amin’ny pejin’ny tantara ny anaran’i Roma, voatendry hifehy ny raharahan’izao tontolo izao mandritra ny vanim-potoana lava, sy hampihatra hery miezinezina eo amin’ny firenena, eny hatramin’ny faran’ny andro.”

“Rome spoke; and Syria and Macedonia soon found a change coming over the aspect of their dream. The Romans interfered in behalf of the young king of Egypt, determined that he should be protected from the ruin devised by Antiochus and Philip. This was BC 200, and was one of the first important interferences of the Romans in the affairs of Syria and Egypt.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 256.

“Niteny Roma; ary tsy ela dia hitan’i Syria sy Makedonia fa nisy fiovana nanatona teo amin’ny toetry ny nofinofiny. Niditra an-tsehatra ny Romanina ho fiarovana ny mpanjakan’i Egypta mbola tanora, sady tapa-kevitra fa harovana izy mba tsy ho tratran’ny fandringanana nokasain’i Antiokosy sy Filipo. Tamin’ny taona 200 tal. J.K. izany, ary isan’ny fidirana an-tsehatra lehibe voalohany nataon’ny Romanina tamin’ny raharahan’i Syria sy Egypta.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 256.

Rome is first introduced into the prophetic narrative in the year 200 BC, and that introduction in verse fourteen, is the most significant reference of Rome in all of Daniel, for it is the very verse that defines Rome as the symbol that establishes the vision. Why Smith could emphasize such a rule of prophecy, then cite 161 BC, while also identifying the year 200 BC, as the point where the power of Rome was “introduced,” is not a problem I wish to resolve. If I have a question that needs to be resolved, it would be whether the rule as defined by Smith is valid or not. If it is valid, then I would argue that verse fourteen, must have a connection with the Jews, that occurred before the league of 161 BC.

Nampidirina voalohany ao amin’ny fitantarana ara-paminaniana i Roma tamin’ny taona 200 talohan’i Kristy, ary io fampidirana io ao amin’ny andininy fahaefatra ambin’ny folo io no firesahana manan-danja indrindra momba an’i Roma ao amin’ny bokin’i Daniela manontolo, satria io indrindra no andininy mamaritra an’i Roma ho tandindona izay mampiorina ny fahitana. Ny antony nahafahan’i Smith nanasongadina fitsipika ara-paminaniana toy izany, avy eo nitanisa ny taona 161 talohan’i Kristy, sady mbola namaritra ny taona 200 talohan’i Kristy ho teboka nampidirana ny herin’i Roma, dia tsy olana izay iriko hovahana. Raha misy fanontaniana tokony hovahana amiko, dia izao: manankery sa tsia ilay fitsipika araka ny namaritan’i Smith azy? Raha manankery izany, dia hiady hevitra aho fa ny andininy fahaefatra ambin’ny folo dia tsy maintsy manana fifandraisana amin’ny Jiosy, izay nitranga talohan’ilay fanekena tamin’ny taona 161 talohan’i Kristy.

I understand that the history of verses thirteen to fifteen, are identifying a history in the last days when papal Rome intrudes herself into prophetic history, and she does so in connection with the United States, who are God’s people in that history. Because Jesus always illustrates the end with the beginning, the year 200 BC, when pagan Rome came into history, must have a connection with people of God in that history. Therefore, I agree with Smith’s rule, even if he found no direct connection between Rome and the Jews in the year 200 BC.

Azoko fa ny tantaran’ny andininy fahatelo ambin’ny folo ka hatramin’ny fahadimy ambin’ny folo dia manondro tantara iray amin’ny andro farany, izay idiran’i Roma papaly ao anatin’ny tantara ara-paminaniana, ary manao izany izy mifandraika amin’i Etazonia, izay vahoakan’Andriamanitra ao amin’izany tantara izany. Satria i Jesosy dia maneho mandrakariva ny farany amin’ny alalan’ny fiandohana, ny taona 200 talohan’i Kristy, tamin’ny nidiran’i Roma jentilisa tao amin’ny tantara, dia tsy maintsy manana fifandraisana amin’ny vahoakan’Andriamanitra tao amin’izany tantara izany. Noho izany, manaiky ny fitsipik’i Smith aho, na dia tsy nahita fifandraisana mivantana teo amin’i Roma sy ny Jiosy aza izy tamin’ny taona 200 talohan’i Kristy.

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 Magnus, or “The Great”, and the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt, led by King Ptolemy IV Philopator. This battle occurred during the struggle for control over Coele-Syria (southern Syria) and southern Palestine, territories contested between the Ptolemaic and Seleucid kingdoms. Ptolemy IV Philopator’s victory at Raphia allowed him to maintain control over Coele-Syria and southern Palestine for a time.

Ny andininy faha-iraika ambin’ny folo sy faha-roa ambin’ny folo dia manondro ny fandresena sy ny tohiny taorian’ny Adin’i Raphia, izay nitranga tamin’ny 217 talohan’i Kristy, teo amin’ny Empira Seleokida, notarihin’i Antiokosy III Magnus, na “Ilay Lehibe”, sy ny Fanjakana Ptolemaika tao Egypta, notarihin’i Mpanjaka Ptolemaiosy IV Philopator. Niseho io ady io nandritra ny tolona ho amin’ny fifehezana an’i Koile-Syria (Syria atsimo) sy ny faritra atsimon’i Palestina, izay faritany nifandroritan’ny fanjakana Ptolemaika sy Seleokida. Ny fandresen’i Ptolemaiosy IV Philopator tao Raphia dia nahafahany nitana ny fifehezana an’i Koile-Syria sy ny faritra atsimon’i Palestina nandritra ny fotoana iray.

The Battle of Panium, which occurred seventeen years later in 200 BC, also known as the Battle of Mount Panium or the Battle of Paneas, was between the Seleucid Empire, led by King Antiochus III, and the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt, led by King Ptolemy V.

Ny Adin’i Panium, izay nitranga fito ambin’ny folo taona tatỳ aoriana tamin’ny 200 tal. J.K., sady fantatra koa amin’ny hoe Adin’ny Tendrombohitra Panium na Adin’i Paneas, dia nifanaovan’ny Fanjakana Seleokida, notarihin’i Mpanjaka Antiochus III, sy ny Fanjakana Ptolemaika tao Egypta, notarihin’i Mpanjaka Ptolemy V.

Thirty-one years later, in 167 BC, the Maccabean Revolt, a Jewish rebellion against the Seleucid Empire’s attempts to suppress Jewish religious practices and impose Hellenistic culture, began in the town of Modein, a small town located in the region of Judea, in what is now modern-day Israel.

Taona iraika amby telopolo tatỳ aoriana, tamin’ny 167 tal. J.K., dia nanomboka tao an-tanànan’i Modein ny fikomiana Makabeana, fikomian’ny Jiosy nanohitra ny fiezahan’ny Fanjakana Seleokida hanafoana ny fanao ara-pivavahana jiosy sy hampanjaka ny kolontsaina helenistika; i Modein dia tanàna kely ao amin’ny faritanin’i Jodia, ao amin’ilay faritra izay ankehitriny antsoina hoe Israely maoderina.

The event in question involved the infamous Greek Seleucid ruler, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who had imposed strict Hellenistic practices on the Jewish population, including the prohibition of Jewish religious observances and the desecration of the Temple in Jerusalem. In an effort to enforce his decrees, Antiochus sent representatives to various towns and villages to compel the Jewish inhabitants to comply with his orders.

Ny zava-nitranga resahina eto dia nahakasika ilay mpanjaka grika Seleokida malaza ratsy, Antiokosa IV Epifana, izay nametraka fanao helenistika henjana tamin’ny vahoaka jiosy, anisan’izany ny fandraràna ny fankatoavana ara-pivavahana jiosy sy ny fanamasinana ny Tempoly tao Jerosalema. Ho fanatanterahana ny didiny, dia nandefa solontena tany amin’ny tanàna sy vohitra samihafa i Antiokosa mba hanery ny mponina jiosy hanaraka ny baikony.

In Modein, one of the Seleucid officials arrived to enforce the king’s decree by commanding the Jewish inhabitants to participate in pagan rituals and make offerings to Greek gods. An elderly Jewish priest named Mattathias refused to comply with the order and killed both a Jew who stepped forward to offer the sacrifice and the Seleucid official. This act of defiance by Mattathias and his family marked the beginning of the Maccabean Revolt against Seleucid rule.

Tao Modein, dia tonga ny iray tamin’ireo manam-pahefana seleokida mba hampihatra ny didin’ny mpanjaka amin’ny alalan’ny fandidiana ny mponina Jiosy handray anjara amin’ny fombafomba jentilisa sy hanatitra fanatitra ho an’ireo andriamanitra grika. Nandà tsy hankatò izany didy izany ny mpisorona Jiosy zokiolona iray atao hoe Matatia, ka novonoiny niaraka tamin’izay na ilay Jiosy nandroso hanao ny fanatitra na ilay manam-pahefana seleokida. Io asa fanoherana nataon’i Matatia sy ny ankohonany io no nanamarika ny fiandohan’ny fikomiana Makabeana hanohitra ny fitondrana seleokida.

Mattathias and his five sons, including Judas Maccabee, fled to the hills and began a guerrilla war against the Seleucid forces. The revolt eventually grew in strength and support, leading to a series of military victories against the Seleucids.

Matatiasy sy ny zanany dimy lahy, anisan’izany i Jodasy Makabeo, dia nandositra nankany an-tendrombohitra ka nanomboka ady anaty akata nanohitra ny tafika Seleokida. Nihanahery sy nahazo fanohanana hatrany ilay fikomiana tatỳ aoriana, ka nitarika ho amin’ny fandresena ara-tafika nifanesy nanoloana ny Seleokida.

The events at Modein in 167 BC, were a pivotal moment in Jewish history, marking the beginning of the Maccabean Revolt and the struggle for religious freedom and independence against foreign rule. 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.

Ny zava-nitranga tao Modein tamin’ny 167 tal. J.K. dia fotoana nanan-danja lehibe teo amin’ny tantaran’ny Jiosy, nanamarika ny fiandohan’ny fikomiana Makabeana sy ny tolona ho amin’ny fahalalahana ara-pivavahana ary ny fahaleovantena manoloana ny fanapahan’ny vahiny. Ny fanokanana indray ny tempoly faharoa tao Jerosalema, izay manamarika ilay zava-nitranga ara-tantara ankalazaina mandritra ny Hanukkah, dia nitranga tamin’ny 164 tal. J.K., telo taona talohan’ilay “fifanekena” ao amin’ny andininy faha-telo amby roapolo.

After reclaiming Jerusalem and the Temple, the Maccabees cleansed the Temple of the pagan defilements and restored it to its proper religious use. According to tradition, they found only a single cruse of consecrated oil, enough to light the menorah for only one day. Actually, no contemporary historical witness of that event exists, and it was not until the sixth century that the Jewish fable is found in literature. Sister White compares the apostate Jewish church with the Catholic church, especially emphasizing that both churches base the religion upon human customs and traditions. As with the many various fabricated miracles within the history of the papal Church, the fable of the one days oil lasting for eight days has no historical witness.

Rehefa azony indray i Jerosalema sy ny Tempoly, dia nanadio ny Tempoly tamin’ny fandotoana jentilisa ny Makabeo ary namerina azy ho amin’ny fampiasana ara-pivavahana sahaza azy. Araka ny lovantsofina, dia sinibe iray monja misy diloilo voahasina no hitany, ka ampy handrehitra ny menora mandritra ny iray andro ihany izany. Raha ny marina anefa, tsy misy vavolombelona ara-tantara tamin’izany andro izany momba io zava-nitranga io, ary tamin’ny taonjato fahenina vao hita ao amin’ny haisoratra ilay anganongano jiosy. Mampitaha ny fiangonana jiosy nihemotra Sister White amin’ny fiangonana katolika, ka asongadiny manokana fa samy manoren-drakitra ny fivavahany eo ambonin’ny fomba amam-panao sy lovantsofina nentin’olombelona ireo fiangonana roa ireo. Tahaka ireo fahagagana maro samihafa noforonina ao anatin’ny tantaran’ny fiangonana papaly, dia tsy manana vavolombelona ara-tantara koa ilay anganongano momba ny diloilo iray andro naharitra valo andro.

Verse ten, of Daniel chapter eleven, identifies the first battle of the three battles of verse forty, which I have previously identified as three battles of a cold war, as well as, three proxy wars. A sister questioned my defining the Ukrainian War, which is the second of these three wars as cold wars, for as she correctly pointed out there has been abundant death and destruction. What I have been defining in previous articles as the three battles of the “cold war”, was defined in those terms to draw a distinction between these three battles and the three World Wars that occur during the history of the earth beast of Revelation thirteen. These three wars are proxy wars and have also been defined that way.

Ny andininy faha‑folo ao amin’ny Daniela toko faha‑iraika ambin’ny folo dia manondro ny ady voalohany amin’ireo ady telo ao amin’ny andininy faha‑efapolo, izay efa nofaritako teo aloha ho ady telo amin’ny “ady mangatsiaka”, ary koa ho ady solontena telo. Nisy rahavavy iray nanontany ny famaritako ny Ady any Okraina, izay ady faharoa amin’ireo ady telo ireo, ho ady mangatsiaka, satria, araka ny nambarany marina, dia be ny fahafatesana sy ny fandringanana. Izay nofaritako tao amin’ireo lahatsoratra teo aloha ho ady telo amin’ny “ady mangatsiaka” dia nofaritana tamin’izany voambolana izany mba hanavahana ireo ady telo ireo amin’ireo Ady Lehibe Maneran-tany telo izay miseho mandritra ny tantaran’ilay biby avy amin’ny tany ao amin’ny Apokalypsy telo ambin’ny folo. Ireo ady telo ireo dia ady solontena ary efa nofaritana tamin’izany fomba izany koa.

I intend to identify those three battles as “the three battles of verse forty” or proxy wars, from this point onward in these articles, to remove the discrepancy of identifying a hot war as a cold war. By my definition, the three battles of verse forty, do not include the battle of 1798, which is part of verse forty, but only the three battles from the time of the end in 1989 unto the Sunday law of verse forty-one. The three battles are more correctly identified as proxy wars, that are accomplished within the context of the warfare between the king of the north and the king of the south, which in the history of verse forty, represent the warfare between Catholicism (the king of the north) and Communism (the king of the south).

Manomboka eto amin’ireto lahatsoratra ireto dia kasako ny hamantatra ireo ady telo ireo ho “ireo ady telo ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo” na ady ifanoloana, mba hanafoanana ny tsy fitoviana ateraky ny fanondroana ady mafana ho toy ny ady mangatsiaka. Araka ny famaritako, ireo ady telo ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo dia tsy ahitana ny ady tamin’ny 1798, izay isan’ny andininy faha-efapolo, fa ireo ady telo ihany manomboka amin’ny fotoanan’ny farany tamin’ny 1989 ka hatramin’ny lalàn’ny Alahady ao amin’ny andininy faha-iraika amby efapolo. Ireo ady telo ireo dia marina kokoa raha faritana ho ady ifanoloana, izay tanterahina ao anatin’ny tontolon’ny ady misy eo amin’ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra sy ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo, izay ao amin’ny tantaran’ny andininy faha-efapolo dia maneho ny ady misy eo amin’ny Katôlisima (ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra) sy ny Kominisma (ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo).

The first of those three battles identifies the victory of Catholicism over Communism in 1989, as the papacy joined with its proxy army, represented by the United States, in sweeping away the Soviet Union in 1989, though Russia, the head (or “fortress”), was left standing. The current Ukrainian War is once again a battle between Catholicism and Communism, with the papacy employing the Ukrainian government as its proxy against Russia, along with the support of the papacy’s previous proxy power, the United States, including the rest of the globalist western world. That war is represented in verses eleven and twelve, and identifies that Communism (Russia), will prevail over Catholicism.

Ny voalohany amin’ireo ady telo ireo dia manondro ny fandresen’ny Katolisisma ny Kominisma tamin’ny 1989, satria niara-nientana tamin’ny tafika solontenany, izay asehon’i Etazonia, ny fahefana papaly tamin’ny famafana ny Firaisana Sovietika tamin’ny 1989, na dia mbola nijoro aza i Rosia, ilay loha (na “fiarovana mafy”). Ny Ady Okrainiana amin’izao fotoana izao dia indray ady eo amin’ny Katolisisma sy ny Kominisma, ka ampiasain’ny fahefana papaly ho solontenany hanohitra an’i Rosia ny governemanta Okrainiana, miaraka amin’ny fanohanan’ilay hery solontena nampiasain’ny fahefana papaly taloha, dia i Etazonia, mbamin’ny sisa amin’ny tontolo tandrefana maneran-tany. Izany ady izany dia aseho ao amin’ny andininy faha-iraika ambin’ny folo sy faha-roa ambin’ny folo, ary manambara fa ny Kominisma (Rosia) no handresy ny Katolisisma.

The third of those three proxy battles is represented in verse fifteen, as the Battle of Panium. The battle was between the Ptolemaic kingdom (the king of the south) and the Seleucid kingdom (the king of the north). In that battle the proxy army of Catholicism is once again the United States.

Ny fahatelo amin’ireo ady telo natao tamin’ny alalan’ny solontena ireo dia aseho ao amin’ny andininy faha-dimy ambin’ny folo, dia ny Adin’i Panium. Teo amin’ny fanjakan’ny Ptolemaika (ilay mpanjaka avy any atsimo) sy ny fanjakan’ny Seleokida (ilay mpanjaka avy any avaratra) no nisy izany ady izany. Ao amin’izany ady izany, ny tafika solontenan’ny Katolisisma dia i Etazonia indray.

In the first battle in 1989, the proxy army of the Republican horn of the United States was employed by the papacy to bring down the political structure of the Soviet Union, while leaving intact, its head (Russia). In the second battle, which is the Ukrainian war, the proxy army of the Nazi’s is defeated by Russia. In the third battle the United States, the proxy army of the papacy again defeats the king of the south.

Tamin’ny ady voalohany tamin’ny 1989, ny tafika solon-tenan’ilay tandroka repoblikana an’i Etazonia dia nampiasain’ny papa mba handrava ny rafitra ara-politikan’ny Firaisana Sovietika, nefa navelany ho tsy simba ny lohany (Rosia). Tamin’ny ady faharoa, izay ady any Okraina, ny tafika solon-tenan’ny Nazi dia resin’i Rosia. Tamin’ny ady fahatelo, i Etazonia, dia ny tafika solon-tenan’ny papa indray, no mandresy ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo.

The three battles bear the signature of “Truth”, with the first and last battles being carried out by the victorious proxy army of the United States. In the first battle the head of the king of the south was left intact, and in the third battle the proxy army of the United States, becomes the head of the king of the south. The second proxy army was also the proxy army of the papacy in the Second World War. In both instances the proxy army of Nazism was and will be defeated. The papacy fully subdues all her enemies before verse sixteen, when the threefold union is accomplished.

Ny ady telo dia mitondra ny mariky ny “Fahamarinana”, ka ny ady voalohany sy ny ady farany dia tanterahin’ny tafika mpisolo tena mandresin’i Etazonia. Tamin’ny ady voalohany dia navela tsy voakitika ny lohan’ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo, ary amin’ny ady fahatelo dia ny tafika mpisolo tena an’i Etazonia no tonga ho lohan’ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo. Ny tafika mpisolo tena faharoa dia tafika mpisolo tena an’ny fahefana papaly ihany koa tamin’ny Ady Lehibe Faharoa. Amin’ireo tranga roa ireo dia resy, ary mbola ho resy, ny tafika mpisolo tena an’ny Nazisma. Ny fahefana papaly dia mampilefitra tanteraka ny fahavalony rehetra alohan’ny andininy faha-enina ambin’ny folo, rehefa tontosa ny firaisana in-telo.

“Ptolemy [Putin] 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.

“Tsy nanana fahamalinana hanaovana fampiasana tsara ny fandreseny i Ptolemy [Putin]. Raha nanohy nanararaotra ny fahombiazany izy, dia azo inoana fa ho tonga tompon’ny fanjakana manontolon’i Antiochus; nefa, afa-po tamin’ny fanaovana fandrahonana vitsivitsy sy fampitahorana vitsivitsy monja, dia nanao fihavanana izy mba hahafahany manolo-tena amin’ny fanomezana fahafaham-po tsy tapaka sy tsy voafehy ny filàny biby. Koa, rehefa avy nandresy ny fahavalony izy, dia resin’ny fahazaran-dratsiny kosa, ary, nanadino ny anarana lehibe izay mety ho naoriny, dia nandany ny fotoanany tamin’ny fanasana sy ny fijangajangana.”

“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.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 254.

“Nirehareha noho ny fahombiazany ny fony, nefa lavitra ny mba ho nampaherezina tamin’izany izy; fa ny fampiasana tsy mendrika nataony izany no nahatonga ny olom-peheziny ihany hikomy taminy.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 254.

A second witness that the victory of Putin marks his end, is with the southern kingdom of Judah’s king Uzziah, whose heart was also lifted up by his military victories, and thereafter, as with Ptolemy, sought to perform the work of the priests in the sanctuary, and was struck with leprosy and immediately removed from power. Putin’s victory in the Ukrainian war marks the beginning of his end as the king of the south (the king of atheism). His end was typified with the beginning of verse forty’s prophetic king of the south (France), which identified a revolution that overthrew the leadership, as happened with Ptolemy. Putin’s end was also represented with the end of the Soviet Union, where the leader (Gorbachev), dissolved the Soviet Union, and immediately took a job with the United Nations, the last-day globalist symbol of atheism, the king of the south. After Putin’s victory in the Ukraine, he is also typified by Napoleon at Waterloo, and the exile that followed; and also, king Uzziah, with his leprosy, and the exile that followed, as well as Ptolemy’s drunken end and the end of the Soviet Union in 1989.

Ny vavolombelona faharoa fa ny fandresen’i Putin no manamarika ny fiafarany dia hita ao amin’i Ozia, mpanjakan’i Joda any atsimo, izay nisandratra koa ny fony noho ny fandresena ara-tafika azony, ary taorian’izany, tahaka an’i Ptolemaiosy, dia nitady hanao ny asan’ny mpisorona tao amin’ny fitoerana masina, ka voakapoka tamin’ny habokana ary nesorina avy hatrany teo amin’ny fahefana. Ny fandresen’i Putin tamin’ny ady tany Okraina no manamarika ny fiandohan’ny fiafarany amin’ny maha-mpanjakan’ny atsimo azy (mpanjakan’ny tsy finoana an’Andriamanitra). Ny fiafarany dia nasehon’ny tandindona niaraka tamin’ny fiandohan’ilay mpanjakan’ny atsimo ara-paminaniana ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo (Frantsa), izay nanondro revolisiona iray nanongana ny fitarihana, tahaka izay nitranga tamin’i Ptolemaiosy. Ny fiafaran’i Putin dia naseho koa tamin’ny fiafaran’ny Firaisana Sovietika, izay nanafoanan’ilay mpitarika (Gorbachev) ny Firaisana Sovietika, ary avy hatrany dia nandray asa tao amin’ny Firenena Mikambana, ilay tandindona maneran-tany amin’ny andro farany momba ny tsy finoana an’Andriamanitra, dia ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo. Aorian’ny fandresen’i Putin tany Okraina dia aseho amin’ny tandindona koa izy amin’i Napoléon tao Waterloo, sy ny sesitany izay nanaraka izany; ary koa amin’i Ozia mpanjaka, miaraka amin’ny habokany sy ny sesitany izay nanaraka izany, ary koa ny fiafarana feno fahamamoan’i Ptolemaiosy sy ny fiafaran’ny Firaisana Sovietika tamin’ny 1989.

The Battle of Panium occurred in 200 BC, and in that very year Rome openly intercedes into history. Their insertion into the prophetic narrative precedes the conquering of Jerusalem represented in verse sixteen, and fulfilled in 63 BC. at the time she proclaimed that she was the defender of the child king in Egypt. In the third battle of verse forty, involving the kings of the north and south, the papacy will insert itself into history again, pretending to be the protector of Russia. At that same time Seleucus, in the type, defeated Ptolemy in the battle of Panium, thus identifying that the United States, the proxy army of the papacy in the first and last battles of verse forty, defeats “Egypt” (the king of the south).

Ny Adin’i Panium dia nitranga tamin’ny 200 talohan’i K.K., ary tamin’io taona io indrindra no nidiran’i Roma an-karihary teo amin’ny tantara. Ny fidirany ao anatin’ny fitantarana ara-paminaniana dia mialoha ny fandresena an’i Jerosalema izay aseho ao amin’ny andininy faha-enina ambin’ny folo, ary tanteraka tamin’ny 63 talohan’i K.K., tamin’ny fotoana nanambarany fa izy no mpiaro ilay mpanjaka zaza tao Egypta. Ao amin’ny ady fahatelo ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo, izay mahakasika ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra sy ny atsimo, dia hiditra an-tsehatra eo amin’ny tantara indray ny fahefana papaly, ka hiseho ho mpiaro an’i Rosia. Tamin’izany fotoana izany ihany koa, i Seleokosy, ao amin’ilay tandindona, dia nandresy an’i Ptolemaiosy tamin’ny adin’i Panium, ka izany no manondro fa i Etazonia, tafika solontenan’ny fahefana papaly ao amin’ny ady voalohany sy farany ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo, no mandresy an’i “Egypta” (ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo).

In the year 200 BC, we symbolically find the papacy, as the whore of Tyre begins to sing her songs of fornication in advance of the threefold union at the Sunday law of verse sixteen. At the same time the United States prevails over the United Nations, thus securing its position as the premier king of the ten kings. All the dynamics of the threefold union that are accomplished at the Sunday law, are settled before verse sixteen.

Tamin’ny taona 200 talohan’i Kristy, dia hitantsika ara-panoharana ny fahefana papaly, raha manomboka mihira ny hiran’ny fijangajangany ilay vehivavy janga avy any Tyro, mialoha ny firaisana avo telo heny amin’ny lalàn’ny Alahady ao amin’ny andininy fahenina ambin’ny folo. Amin’izany fotoana izany koa, dia mandresy an’i Firenena Mikambana i Etazonia, ka amin’izany dia miantoka ny toerany ho mpanjaka lehibe indrindra amin’ireo mpanjaka folo. Ny firindrana rehetra ao amin’ilay firaisana avo telo heny izay tanterahina amin’ny lalàn’ny Alahady dia efa voafaritra mialoha ny andininy fahenina ambin’ny folo.

The dragon power’s political structure, as represented by the United Nations, agrees, in verse sixteen, to give its political structure to the beast, but before it does so the papacy conquers the religion of the dragon. Paganism must once again, be taken away. Protestantism was removed in the Reagan years, in the first battle of verse forty, and in the time of the last Republican president the religion of the dragon will also be placed into subjection to the religion of Catholicism, as it was in the year 508. The process of removing any religious resistance to the papacy being placed upon the throne began in the Reagan years, and it ends in the Trump years. The resistance of apostate Protestantism against Catholicism was removed in the first battle of verse forty, and the resistance of spiritualism will be removed in the last battle of verse forty.

Ny rafitra ara-politikan’ilay herin’ny dragona, araka ny asehon’ny Firenena Mikambana, dia manaiky, ao amin’ny andininy fahenina ambin’ny folo, hanolotra ny rafitra ara-politikany ho an’ilay bibidia; kanefa, alohan’ny hanaovany izany, ny fahefan’ny papa dia mandresy ny fivavahan’ilay dragona. Tsy maintsy esorina indray ny fanompoan-tsampy. Ny Protestanta dia nesorina tamin’ny taona nanjakan’i Reagan, tamin’ny ady voalohany ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo, ary amin’ny andron’ilay filoha Repoblikana farany dia hampanaiky koa ny fivavahan’ilay dragona ho eo ambanin’ny fivavahana katolika, tahaka ny tamin’ny taona 508. Ny dingana fanesorana izay rehetra fanoherana ara-pivavahana ny fametrahana ny fahefan’ny papa eo ambonin’ny seza fiandrianana dia nanomboka tamin’ny taona nanjakan’i Reagan, ary mifarana amin’ny taona nanjakan’i Trump. Ny fanoheran’ny Protestanta nihemotra tamin’ny Katolisisma dia nesorina tamin’ny ady voalohany ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo, ary ny fanoheran’ny spiritisma dia hesorina amin’ny ady farany ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo.

In the same complicated interplay of human events, apostate Protestantism must establish itself as the religious and political authority over the ten kings of Revelation chapter seventeen. Thus, the Battle of Panium is identifying when the United States prevails over the United Nations, just before the Sunday law of verse sixteen.

Ao anatin’io fifaneraseran-javatra sarotra eo amin’ny zava-mitranga maha-olombelona io ihany, ny Protestantisma nihemotra dia tsy maintsy mametraka ny tenany ho fahefana ara-pivavahana sy ara-politika manapaka ireo mpanjaka folo ao amin’ny Apokalypsy toko fahafito ambin’ny folo. Araka izany, ny Adin’i Panium dia manondro ny fotoana handresen’i Etazonia ny Firenena Mikambana, mialoha indrindra ny lalàn’ny Alahady ao amin’ny andininy fahenina ambin’ny folo.

It is an established rule of prophecy that the dragon, the beast and the false prophet each have their own peculiar prophetic characteristics. One of those prophetic characteristics is that the beast (Catholicism), is always prophetically located in the city of Rome. The False Prophet is always prophetically located in the United States. But with the dragon, the characteristic of where the dragon is prophetically located is that it always moves. The dragon began in heaven, then came to the Garden of Eden, and eventually the dragon is located in Egypt.

Fitsipika efa miorina ao amin’ny faminaniana ny hoe ny dragona sy ny bibidia ary ny mpaminany sandoka dia samy manana ny toetra faminaniana manokana azy avy. Anisan’ireo toetra faminaniana ireo ny hoe ny bibidia (Katolisisma) dia hita ara-paminaniana mandrakariva ao amin’ny tanànan’i Roma. Ny Mpaminany Sandoka kosa dia hita ara-paminaniana mandrakariva ao Etazonia. Fa amin’ny dragona, ny toetra mampiavaka ny toerana isehoany ara-paminaniana dia ny hoe mihetsika hatrany izy. Ny dragona dia nanomboka tany an-danitra, avy eo tonga tao amin’ny Sahan’i Edena, ary nony farany dia hita any Egypta ny dragona.

Speak, and say, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against thee, Pharaoh king of Egypt, the great dragon that lieth in the midst of his rivers, which hath said, My river is mine own, and I have made it for myself. Ezekiel 29:3.

Mitenena, ka lazao hoe: Izao no lazain’i Jehovah Tompo: Indro, avy hamely anao Aho, ry Farao, mpanjakan’i Egypta, ilay dragona lehibe izay mandry eo afovoan’ny onin-drainy, dia ilay nanao hoe: Ahy ny oniko, ary izaho no nanao azy ho ahy. Ezekiela 29:3.

The prophetic location of the dragon moves. In the time of John, the seat of the dragon, which represents its throne, was identified as being in Pergamos.

Miova ny toerana ara-paminanian’ny dragona. Tamin’ny andron’i Jaona, ny sezan’ny dragona, izay maneho ny fiandrianany, dia voamarika ho tao Pergamosy.

And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges; I know thy works and where thou dwellest, even where Satan’s seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth. Revelation 2:12, 13.

Ary ho amin’ny anjelin’ny fiangonana any Pergamosy manorata hoe: Izao no lazain’ilay manana ny sabatra maranitra roa lela; Fantatro ny asanao sy izay onenanao, dia eo amin’izay misy ny sezan’i Satana; ary mihazona mafy ny anarako ianao ka tsy mba nandà ny finoako, dia tamin’ireny andro ireny aza, izay namonoana an’i Antipasy, maritiora mahatoky Ahy, teo aminareo, izay onenan’i Satana. Apokalypsy 2:12, 13.

The practice of pagan Rome was to bring all the pagan deities they became associated with back to the city of Rome, and represent them in the Pantheon Temple. This is why Daniel records that the “place of his sanctuary was cast down.” The place of pagan Rome’s sanctuary was the city of Rome, which was cast down by Constantine in the year 330, but the sanctuary that was “in” Rome was the Pantheon Temple, Pan-Theon meaning, “the temple of all the gods”. The Romans moved the location of Satan’s seat to the Pantheon Temple from Pergamos. Sister White informs us that pagan Rome is the dragon.

Ny fanaon’i Roma jentilisa dia ny nitondrany niverina tao an-tanànan’i Roma ireo andriamanitra jentilisa rehetra izay nifamatotra taminy, ka nasehony tao amin’ny Tempolin’ny Pantheon. Izany no antony anoratan’i Daniela fa “nariana ny fitoeran’ny fitoerany masina.” Ny toerana nisy ny fitoeran’i Roma jentilisa dia ny tanànan’i Roma, izay narian’i Constantin tamin’ny taona 330, fa ny fitoerana masina izay “tao” Roma kosa dia ny Tempolin’ny Pantheon, Pan-Theon izay midika hoe, “tempolin’ny andriamanitra rehetra”. Nafindran’ny Romanina ho ao amin’ny Tempolin’ny Pantheon avy any Pergamos ny toerana misy ny sezan’i Satana. Mampahafantatra antsika Rahavavy White fa i Roma jentilisa no dragona.

“Thus while the dragon, primarily, represents Satan, it is, in a secondary sense, a symbol of pagan Rome.” The Great Controversy, 439.

“Noho izany, raha ny dragona, amin’ny heviny voalohany indrindra, dia maneho an’i Satana, amin’ny heviny faharoa kosa dia tandindon’i Roma jentilisa.” The Great Controversy, 439.

Pagan Rome divided into ten nations, and France became the king of the south when it introduced the atheism of Egypt during the French Revolution. By 1917, the dragon had moved from France to Russia. Verse ten represents 1989, and verses eleven and twelve, represent the battles of “the borderline” (Raphia and Ukraine), and the battle of Panium represents the third step the papacy accomplishes as she secures the threefold union in verse sixteen. It represents the hidden history of verse forty.

Nizara ho firenena folo i Roma mpanompo sampy, ary i Frantsa no tonga mpanjakan’ny atsimo rehefa nampiditra ny tsy finoana an’Andriamanitra avy any Egypta nandritra ny Revolisiona Frantsay izy. Tamin’ny 1917, dia nifindra avy tany Frantsa ho any Rosia ilay dragona. Ny andininy faha‑folo dia maneho ny taona 1989, ary ny andininy faha‑iraika ambin’ny folo sy faha‑roa ambin’ny folo kosa dia maneho ny adin’ny “sisintany” (Rafia sy Okraina), ary ny adin’i Paniona dia maneho ny dingana fahatelo tanterahin’ny fahefana papaly rehefa mampiorina ilay firaisana telo sosona ao amin’ny andininy faha‑enina ambin’ny folo izy. Izany dia maneho ny tantara miafina ao amin’ny andininy faha‑efapolo.

We will continue this study in the next article.

Hanohy ity fandalinana ity isika ao amin’ny lahatsoratra manaraka.

When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi [Panium], he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. From that time forth began Jesus to show unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. Matthew 16:13–21.

Ary rehefa tonga tany amin’ny faritanin’i Kaisaria Filipy [Panium] Jesosy, dia nanontany ny mpianany Izy ka nanao hoe: Ataon’ny olona ho iza moa Aho, dia Izaho, Zanak’olona? Ary hoy ireo: Ny sasany manao Anao ho Jaona Mpanao-batisa; ny sasany kosa Elia; ary ny sasany Jeremia, na anankiray amin’ny mpaminany. Hoy Izy taminy: Fa ianareo kosa, manao Ahy ho iza? Dia namaly Simona Petera ka nanao hoe: Hianao no Kristy, Zanak’Andriamanitra velona. Ary Jesosy namaly ka nanao taminy hoe: Sambatra hianao, ry Simona Barjona; fa tsy nofo aman-dra no nanambara izany taminao, fa ny Raiko Izay any an-danitra. Ary Izaho kosa milaza aminao ihany koa fa hianao no Petera, ary eo ambonin’ity vatolampy ity no haoriko ny fiangonako; ary ny vavahadin’ny helo tsy haharesy azy. Ary homeko anao ny fanalahidin’ny fanjakan’ny lanitra; koa na inona na inona fehezinao etỳ ambonin’ny tany dia ho voafehy any an-danitra; ary na inona na inona vahanao etỳ ambonin’ny tany dia ho voavaha any an-danitra. Ary tamin’izany Izy dia nandrara ny mpianany mba tsy hilaza amin’olona na iray aza fa Izy no Jesosy Kristy. Hatramin’izany no nanombohan’i Jesosy nanambara tamin’ny mpianany fa tsy maintsy hankany Jerosalema Izy, ka hijaly zavatra maro avy amin’ny loholona sy ny lohan’ny mpisorona ary ny mpanora-dalàna, dia hovonoina, ary hatsangana amin’ny andro fahatelo indray. Matio 16:13–21.