In the last article, we identified six prophetic lines of controversy which have occurred in the history of Adventism from the Millerite time period until the present day. I contend the first and the last controversy over the “robbers of thy people” in verse fourteen of Daniel chapter eleven are prophetically identical. The Millerites understood the “robbers” to be Rome, and the Protestants taught the “robbers” were a Syrian king named Antiochus Epiphanes.
Tamin’ny lahatsoratra farany, dia namantatra tsipika ara-paminaniana enina momba ny fifanandrinana isika, izay niseho tao amin’ny tantaran’ny Advantisma hatramin’ny vanim-potoanan’ny Millerita ka mandraka ankehitriny. Manamafy aho fa ny fifanandrinana voalohany sy farany momba ireo “mpandroba amin’ny vahoakanao” ao amin’ny andininy faha-efatra ambin’ny folo ao amin’ny Daniela toko faha-iraika ambin’ny folo dia mitovy ara-paminaniana. Ny Millerita dia nahatakatra fa i Roma no “mpandroba,” ary ny Protestanta kosa dia nampianatra fa ny “mpandroba” dia mpanjaka Syriana iray atao hoe Antiochus Epiphanes.
And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. Daniel 11:14.
Ary amin’izany andro izany dia hisy maro hitsangana hanohitra ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo; ary ny mpandroba amin’ny firenenao dia hanandratra ny tenany hampitoetra ny fahitana; nefa ho lavo izy. Daniela 11:14.
Beginning in verse ten, and continuing through verse fifteen a warfare between the kingdoms of Egypt and Syria is represented. Egypt is the king of the south in the passage, and the Syrian king is represented as the king of the north. Verse ten identifies what the historians call the beginning of the Fourth Syrian war in 219 BC, verses eleven and twelve represent the battle of Raphia in 217 BC, and its aftermath. Then verses thirteen through fifteen identify the battle of Panium in 200 BC. In verses ten through fifteen the Syrian king is Antiochus Magnus, ruler of the Seleucid Empire.
Manomboka eo amin’ny andininy faha‑folo, ka mitohy hatramin’ny andininy faha‑dimy ambin’ny folo, dia aseho ny ady nifanaovan’ny fanjakan’i Egypta sy Syria. Egypta no mpanjakan’ny atsimo ao amin’io andalana io, ary ny mpanjakan’i Syria no aseho ho mpanjakan’ny avaratra. Ny andininy faha‑folo dia manondro izay antsoin’ny mpahay tantara hoe fiandohan’ny Ady Syriana fahefatra tamin’ny 219 tal. J.K., ny andininy faha‑iraika ambin’ny folo sy faha‑roa ambin’ny folo kosa dia maneho ny adin’i Raphia tamin’ny 217 tal. J.K. sy ny vokany. Avy eo ny andininy faha‑telo ambin’ny folo ka hatramin’ny faha‑dimy ambin’ny folo dia manondro ny adin’i Panium tamin’ny 200 tal. J.K. Ao amin’ny andininy faha‑folo ka hatramin’ny faha‑dimy ambin’ny folo, ny mpanjakan’i Syria dia i Antiochus Magnus, mpanapaka ny Empira Seleokida.
Verse ten represents the history when Antiochus Magnus begins a war to regain territory that was taken from the Seleucid kingdom years before. In the verse he regains the lost territory in 219 BC, but he temporarily ceases his aggressions, and seeks to regroup his military strength. He had regained control of the lost territory, and made it all the way to the border of Egypt, the southern kingdom ruled by the Ptolemy dynasty. Between 219 BC and 217 BC, both the king of the south and the king of the north made plans for the approaching battle of Raphia.
Ny andininy fahafolo dia maneho ny tantara tamin’ny nanombohan’i Antiochus Magnus ady mba hamerenana ny faritany izay nalaina tamin’ny fanjakan’ny Seleucida taona maro talohan’izany. Ao amin’io andininy io dia azony indray ny faritany very tamin’ny 219 tal. J.K., nefa nitsahatra vetivety tamin’ny fanafihany izy ka nitady ny hanangona indray ny herin’ny tafiny. Efa azony indray ny fanaraha-maso ny faritany very, ary tonga hatrany amin’ny sisin-tanin’i Egypta, ilay fanjakana atsimo izay notapahin’ny tarana-mpanjaka Ptolemaiosy. Teo anelanelan’ny 219 tal. J.K. sy 217 tal. J.K. dia samy nanao drafitra ho amin’ilay adin’i Raphia izay efa nanakaiky na ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo na ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra.
The battle of Raphia took place in 217 BC, and the southern kingdom of Egypt, ruled by Ptolemy prevailed over the Syrian king Antiochus Magnus, king of the north in the prophetic passage. Then in verses thirteen through fifteen, seventeen years later in 200 BC, Antiochus Magnus, who had then formed an alliance with Philip of Macedon engaged Egypt in the battle of Panium. The southern kingdom of Egypt then had a child king of five or six years old, and Antiochus Magnus and Philip could not resist taking advantage of the child king of Egypt, and Antiochus Magnus prevailed in the battle of Panium. The three verses that represent the battle of Panium contain verse fourteen, where a new power is introduced into the prophetic narrative.
Ny adin’i Raphia dia nitranga tamin’ny 217 tal. J.K., ary ny fanjakana atsimon’i Egypta, izay notarihin’i Ptolemaiosy, no nandresy an’i Antiokosy Magnus, mpanjakan’i Syria, dia ilay mpanjakan’ny avaratra ao amin’ilay andalan-teny ara-paminaniana. Avy eo, ao amin’ny andininy faha-telo ambin’ny folo ka hatramin’ny faha-dimy ambin’ny folo, fito ambin’ny folo taona tatỳ aoriana, tamin’ny 200 tal. J.K., Antiokosy Magnus, izay tamin’izany dia efa nanao fanekena niaraka tamin’i Filipo avy any Makedonia, dia niady tamin’i Egypta tao amin’ny adin’i Panium. Tamin’izany fotoana izany, ny fanjakana atsimon’i Egypta dia nanana mpanjaka mbola zaza, dimy na enin-taona monja, ary tsy nahatohitra ny fakàna tombony tamin’ilay mpanjaka zaza tao Egypta i Antiokosy Magnus sy Filipo, ka dia nandresy tamin’ny adin’i Panium i Antiokosy Magnus. Ireo andininy telo izay maneho ny adin’i Panium dia ahitana ny andininy faha-efatra ambin’ny folo, izay ampidirana hery vaovao iray ao amin’ny fitantarana ara-paminaniana.
The robbers of thy people are a different power than the Egyptian king of the south, or the Seleucid king of the north, or Philip the Macedonian ruler. The Millerites recognized that Rome is the robbers of thy people. One of the Hebrew root words that is translated as “robbers,” means breaker. Pagan Rome is represented in prophecy as the power who would break in pieces.
Ny mpandroba amin’ny firenenao dia hery hafa noho ny mpanjakan’i Egypta any atsimo, na ny mpanjaka Seleokida any avaratra, na Filipo mpanapaka Makedoniana. Neken’ny Millerita fa i Roma no mpandroba amin’ny firenenao. Ny iray amin’ireo fototeny Hebreo nadika hoe “mpandroba” dia midika hoe mpamaky. Roma jentilisa dia aseho ao amin’ny faminaniana ho ilay hery izay hamaky ho potipotika.
After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. Daniel 7:7.
Rehefa izany dia nahita tamin’ny fahitana tamin’ny alina aho; ary, indro, bibidia fahefatra iray, mahatahotra sy mahatsiravina, ary tena mahery indrindra; ary nanana nify vy lehibe izy; nitelina sy namotipotika izy, ary nanosihosy ny sisa tamin’ny tongony; ary hafa noho ny bibidia rehetra izay talohany izy; ary nanana tandroka folo izy. Daniela 7:7.
When Uriah Smith comments on the robbers, he quotes a historian who points out that robbers represent breakers.
Rehefa naneho hevitra momba ireo jiolahy i Uriah Smith, dia naka teny avy tamin’ny mpahay tantara iray izy, izay nanamarika fa ireo jiolahy dia maneho ireo mpandika.
“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.
“Misy hery vaovao iray ampidirina eto ankehitriny,—‘ireo jiolahin’ny vahoakanao;’ ara-bakiteny, hoy i Eveka Newton, ‘ireo mpandrava ny vahoakanao.’ Tany lavitra, teny amoron’ny Tiber, dia nisy fanjakana iray namelona ny tenany tamin’ny tetik’ady feno faniriana fatratra sy fikendrena maizina. Kely sy osa izy tamin’ny voalohany, nefa nitombo tamin’ny hafainganam-pahagagana teo amin’ny hery sy ny tanjaka, nanitatra tamim-pitandremana etsy sy eroa mba hizaha ny heriny sy hitsapa ny tanjaky ny sandriny mpiady, mandra-pahatsapany ny heriny, ka nanandratra ny lohany tamin-kahasahiana teo amin’ny firenen’ny tany izy, ary nandray tamin’ny tanana tsy hay tohaina ny familiana ny raharahan’izy ireo. Hatramin’izay, ny anaran’i Roma dia mijoro eo amin’ny pejin’ny tantara, voatendry hifehy ny raharahan’izao tontolo izao mandritra ny taona maro lava, sy hampihatra fiantraikany mahery eo amin’ny firenena, 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, 257.
“Niteny i Roma; ary tsy ela dia hitan’i Siria sy Masedonia fa nisy fiovana nanatona ny endriky ny nofinofiny. Niditra an-tsehatra ny Romanina ho fiarovana ny mpanjaka tanoran’i Egypta, tapa-kevitra ny hiaro azy amin’ny fandringanana nokasain’i Antiokosa sy Filipo. Tamin’ny 200 tal. J.K. izany, ary anisan’ireo fidirana an-tsehatra manan-danja voalohany nataon’ny Romanina teo amin’ny raharahan’i Siria sy Egypta izany.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 257.
The prediction set forth in the verses was fulfilled in roughly twenty years from 219 BC unto 200 BC, but the prophets speak more about the last days than the days in which they lived.
Ny faminaniana voalaza ao amin’ireo andininy ireo dia tanteraka teo ho eo tao anatin’ny roapolo taona, hatramin’ny 219 tal. J.K. ka hatramin’ny 200 tal. J.K., nefa ny mpaminany dia miresaka bebe kokoa momba ny andro farany noho ny andro niainany.
“Each of the ancient prophets spoke less for their own time than for ours, so that their prophesying is in force for us. ‘Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.’ 1 Corinthians 10:11. ‘Not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.’ 1 Peter 1:12. . . .
“Ny mpaminany fahiny tsirairay avy dia tsy dia niteny loatra ho an’ny androny manokana fa ho an’ny androntsika, ka izany no maha-manankery ny faminaniany ho antsika. ‘Ary izany zavatra rehetra izany dia nanjo azy ho fianarana; ary voasoratra izany ho fananarana ho antsika, izay tratrin’ny faran’izao tontolo izao.’ 1 Korintiana 10:11. ‘Tsy ho an’ny tenany, fa ho antsika no nanompoany tamin’ireo zavatra izay izao no ambara aminareo amin’ny alalan’izay nitory ny filazantsara taminareo tamin’ny Fanahy Masina nirahina avy any an-danitra; dia zavatra irian’ny anjely hojerena lalina ireo.’ 1 Petera 1:12....”
“The Bible has accumulated and bound up together its treasures for this last generation. All the great events and solemn transactions of Old Testament history have been, and are, repeating themselves in the church in these last days.” Selected Messages, book 3, 338, 339.
“Ang Biblia ay nagtipon at nagbuklod na magkakasama ng mga kayamanan nito para sa huling salinlahing ito. Lahat ng dakilang pangyayari at mga banal na pakikipag-ugnayan ng kasaysayan ng Lumang Tipan ay naulit na, at inuulit, sa iglesia sa mga huling araw na ito.” Selected Messages, aklat 3, 338, 339.
Although Daniel did not live in the twenty-year time period we are considering, inspiration through the writings of Sister White informs is that much of the history recorded in Daniel eleven is to be repeated in the final fulfillment of Daniel eleven.
Na dia tsy niaina tao anatin’ilay fe-potoana roapolo taona izay dinihintsika aza Daniela, dia ampahafantarin’ny tsindrimandry ao amin’ny asa soratr’i Sister White antsika fa ny ankamaroan’ny tantara voarakitra ao amin’ny Daniela iraika ambin’ny folo dia haverina indray amin’ny fahatanterahana farany ny Daniela iraika ambin’ny folo.
“We have no time to lose. Troublous times are before us. The world is stirred with the spirit of war. Soon the scenes of trouble spoken of in the prophecies will take place. The prophecy in the eleventh of Daniel has nearly reached its complete fulfillment. Much of the history that has taken place in fulfillment of this prophecy will be repeated.” Manuscript Releases, number 13, 394.
“Tsy manam-potoana ho very isika. Fotoana feno fahoriana no eo anoloantsika. Voahozongozon’ny fanahin’ny ady izao tontolo izao. Tsy ho ela dia hiseho ireo zava-nitranga mampahory izay voalaza ao amin’ny faminaniana. Ny faminaniana ao amin’ny Daniela toko faha‑11 dia saika tonga amin’ny fahatanterahany tanteraka. Haverina indray ny ampahany betsaka amin’ny tantara izay efa nitranga ho fahatanterahan’ity faminaniana ity.” Manuscript Releases, number 13, 394.
Verses ten through fifteen of Daniel eleven represent the history of the last days which leads up to the soon-coming Sunday law, for verse sixteen identifies when Rome, for the first time, conquered the “glorious land.”
Ang mga bersikulo sampu hanggang labinlima ng Daniel onse ay kumakatawan sa kasaysayan ng mga huling araw na umaakay hanggang sa malapit nang dumating na batas ng Linggo, sapagkat tinutukoy ng bersikulo labing-anim kung kailan, sa unang pagkakataon, sinakop ng Roma ang “maluwalhating lupain.”
But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed. Daniel 11:16.
Fa izay tonga hamely azy kosa dia hanao araka ny sitrapony ihany; ary tsy hisy hahatohitra eo anatrehany; ary hijanona eo amin’ny tany be voninahitra izy, izay ho levona eo an-tànany. Daniela 11:16.
Daniel employs the expression “glorious land” twice in his writings. The first is verse sixteen, when literal pagan Rome conquered the literal glorious land of Judah.
Indroa i Daniela dia mampiasa indroa ny fiteny hoe “tany be voninahitra” ao amin’ny asa sorany. Ny voalohany dia ao amin’ny andininy faha-enina ambin’ny folo, rehefa nandresy ny tany ara-bakiteny be voninahitr’i Joda i Roma mpanompo sampy ara-bakiteny.
“Although Egypt could not stand before Antiochus, the king of the north, Antiochus could not stand before the Romans, who now came against him. No kingdoms were longer able to resist this rising power. Syria was conquered, and added to the Roman empire, when Pompey, BC 65, deprived Antiochus Asiaticus of his possessions, and reduced Syria to a Roman province.
“Na dia tsy nahatohitra an’i Antiochus, mpanjakan’ny avaratra, aza i Egypta, dia tsy nahatohitra ny Romana kosa i Antiochus, izay tonga nanafika azy tamin’izany. Tsy nisy fanjakana afaka nanohitra intsony io hery misandratra io. Resy i Syria ka nampidirina ho anisan’ny empira romana, rehefa nesorin’i Pompey, tamin’ny taona 65 tal. J.K., tamin’i Antiochus Asiaticus ny fananany, ary nahenany an’i Syria ho faritany romana.”
“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.
“Hery iray ihany koa no efa hiorina tao amin’ny Tany Masina, ka handany azy. Nifandray tamin’ny vahoakan’Andriamanitra, dia ny Jiosy, tamin’ny alalan’ny fanekena i Roma, tamin’ny taona 162 tal. J.K., ary hatramin’izany fotoana izany dia nitana toerana misongadina teo amin’ny tetiandro ara-paminaniana izy. Kanefa tsy nahazo fahefana hitsara an’i Jodia tamin’ny alalan’ny fandresena mivantana izy raha tsy tamin’ny taona 63 tal. J.K.; ary izao no fomba nitrangan’izany tatỳ aoriana.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 259.
The other verse where Daniel employs the “glorious land” is in verse forty-one.
Ny andininy iray hafa izay ampiasan’i Daniela ny hoe “tany be voninahitra” dia ao amin’ny andininy faha‑iraika amby efapolo.
He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon. Daniel 11:41.
Hiditra ao amin’ilay tany be voninahitra koa izy, ary firenena maro no ho lavon’ny fandravana; nefa ireto kosa no ho afa-mandositra amin’ny tànany, dia Edoma sy Moaba ary ny lehibe indrindra amin’ny taranak’i Amona. Daniela 11:41.
Verse forty-one of course follows verse forty, and verse forty begins with the words “and at the time of the end.” In The Great Controversy, Sister White identifies 1798 as the “time of the end,” so verse forty-one is identifying history that follows after the time of the end in 1798.
Mazava ho azy fa ny andininy faha‑iraika amby efapolo dia manaraka ny andininy faha‑efapolo, ary ny andininy faha‑efapolo dia manomboka amin’ireto teny ireto: “ary amin’ny andro farany.” Ao amin’ny The Great Controversy, i Rahavavy White dia manondro ny taona 1798 ho “andro farany,” koa ny andininy faha‑iraika amby efapolo dia manondro tantara izay manaraka aorian’ny andro farany tamin’ny 1798.
“But at the time of the end, says the prophet, “Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.’ Daniel 12:4. . . . Since 1798 the book of Daniel has been unsealed, knowledge of the prophecies has increased, and many have proclaimed the solemn message of the judgment near.” The Great Controversy, 356.
“Fa amin’ny andro farany, hoy ny mpaminany, dia ‘maro no hihazakazaka etsy sy eroa, ary hitombo ny fahalalana.’ Daniela 12:4.... Hatramin’ny taona 1798 dia voaseho ny bokin’i Daniela, nitombo ny fahalalana ny faminaniana, ary maro no nanambara ny hafatra manetriketrika momba ny fitsarana efa akaiky.” Ilay Ady Lehibe, 356.
The glorious land of verse forty-one is not literal ancient Judah of old, but spiritual modern Judah. The United States is spiritual modern Judah, and verse forty-one is identifying the soon-coming Sunday law in the United States.
Ny tany be voninahitra ao amin’ny andininy faha-iraika amby efapolo dia tsy Joda fahiny ara-bakiteny, fa Joda ara-panahy ankehitriny. I Etazonia no Joda ara-panahy ankehitriny, ary ny andininy faha-iraika amby efapolo dia manondro ny lalàna alahady izay ho avy tsy ho ela any Etazonia.
Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 1 Corinthians 15:46.
Nefa tsy ny ara-panahy no voalohany, fa ny ara-nofo; ary aorian’izany ny ara-panahy. 1 Korintiana 15:46.
That Sunday law is typified by verse sixteen, for “much of the history that has taken place” in the fulfillment of Daniel eleven is to be repeated. Verses ten through fifteen in the last days, represents the history preceding and leading up to the Sunday law.
Ang batas ng Linggo na iyon ay itinatanghal ng talatang labing-anim, sapagkat “marami sa kasaysayang naganap” sa katuparan ng Daniel labing-isa ay mauulit. Ang mga talata sampu hanggang labinlima sa mga huling araw ay kumakatawan sa kasaysayang nauuna at humahantong sa batas ng Linggo.
The king of the north in those five verses, as well as the king of the south who were fulfilled by the Seleucid king Antiochus Magnus and the Egyptian kings of the Ptolemaic kingdom, typify powers that are the focus of the history that leads to the soon-coming Sunday law. These verses identify the history of the movement of the one hundred and forty-four thousand, for verse ten identifies the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, and verse sixteen the soon-coming Sunday law.
Ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra ao amin’ireo andininy dimy ireo, ary koa ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo izay tanteraka tamin’i Antiochus Magnus, mpanjaka Seleosida, sy ireo mpanjaka egyptiana tao amin’ny fanjakan’ny Ptolemaiosy, dia tandindon-kery izay ifantohan’ny tantara mitondra ho amin’ny lalàna Alahady izay ho avy tsy ho ela. Ireo andininy ireo dia manondro ny tantaran’ny fihetsehan’ny iray hetsy sy efatra arivo amby efatra alina, fa ny andininy faha-folo dia manondro ny firodanan’ny Firaisana Sovietika tamin’ny 1989, ary ny andininy faha-enina ambin’ny folo kosa ny lalàna Alahady izay ho avy tsy ho ela.
Christ emphasizes these verses by aligning verse ten with verse forty and verse sixteen with verse forty-one. The direct reference to the literal glorious land which typifies the spiritual glorious land of verse forty-one is the end of the six verses, and verse ten is the beginning.
Nanasongadina ireo andininy ireo i Kristy amin’ny fampifandraisana ny andininy faha‑folo amin’ny andininy faha‑efapolo sy ny andininy faha‑enina ambin’ny folo amin’ny andininy faha‑iray amby efapolo. Ny firesahana mivantana ny amin’ilay tany be voninahitra ara-bakiteny, izay tandindon’ilay tany be voninahitra ara-panahy ao amin’ny andininy faha‑iray amby efapolo, no faran’ireo andininy enina, ary ny andininy faha‑folo no fiandohany.
Just as Christ made sure verse sixteen has a direct connection with verse forty-one, and so too, verse ten has a direct connection with verse forty. The expression in verse ten “overflow, and pass through,” is the identical Hebrew phrase that is translated as “overflow and pass over,” in verse forty. The phrase is only found one other place in the Scriptures, but it is translated a little differently than verse ten and verse forty. Still, it is the same Hebrew phrase.
Tahaka ny nanaovan’i Kristy antoka fa misy fifandraisana mivantana eo amin’ny andininy fahenina ambin’ny folo sy ny andininy fahiraika amby efapolo, dia toy izany koa, ny andininy fahafolo dia manana fifandraisana mivantana amin’ny andininy fahaefapolo. Ny fiteny ao amin’ny andininy fahafolo hoe “hihoatra ka handalo” dia ilay andian-teny hebreo mitovy indrindra izay nadika hoe “hihoatra ka handeha eo amboniny” ao amin’ny andininy fahaefapolo. Indray mandeha monja any amin’ny Soratra Masina no mbola ahitana io andian-teny io any an-kafa, kanefa nadika amin’ny fomba somary hafa noho ny ao amin’ny andininy fahafolo sy ny andininy fahaefapolo izy. Na izany aza, dia io ihany no andian-teny hebreo mitovy.
And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel. Isaiah 8:8.
Ary izy handeha hamaky an’i Joda; hisandratra ka hihoatra izy, eny, hahatratra hatreo amin’ny vozona; ary ny fivelaran’ny elany dia hameno ny sakan’ny taninao, ry Imanoela. Isaia 8:8.
Isaiah’s “overflow and go over,” is the same as verse ten’s “overflow, and pass through,” and verse forty’s “overflow and pass over.” More than this, each of the three verses are describing an attack from the king of the north upon the king of the south. In Isaiah, the northern king of Assyria, Sennacherib, was attacking Judah, the southern kingdom of Israel. In verse ten Antiochus Magnus, the northern king of the Seleucid Empire was attacking the southern kingdom of Egypt. In verse forty, the king of the north, the papal power, who had received a deadly wound at the beginning of verse forty, was attacking the southern atheistic power of the Soviet Union. Each verse represents the same prophetic structure of a conflict between the kings of the north and south, and in each verse the northern king “overflows and passes over.”
Ny hoe “hihoatra ka handroso” ao amin’i Isaia dia mitovy amin’ilay hoe “hihoatra ka hamaky” ao amin’ny andininy faha‑folo, ary amin’ilay hoe “hihoatra ka handalo” ao amin’ny andininy faha‑efapolo. Mihoatra noho izany, samy maneho fanafihan’ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra amin’ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo ireo andininy telo ireo. Ao amin’i Isaia, i Sankeriba, mpanjakan’i Asyria avy any avaratra, dia nanafika an’i Joda, ilay fanjakana atsimon’ny Isiraely. Ao amin’ny andininy faha‑folo, i Antiochus Magnus, ilay mpanjaka avaratra tamin’ny Fanjakana Seleokida, dia nanafika ny fanjakana atsimon’i Egypta. Ao amin’ny andininy faha‑efapolo, ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra, dia ny fahefana papaly, izay naharay ratra mahafaty teo am-piandohan’ny andininy faha‑efapolo, no nanafika ilay fahefana atsimo tsy mino an’Andriamanitra, dia ny Firaisana Sovietika. Ny andininy tsirairay dia samy maneho rafitra ara-paminaniana iray ihany, dia fifanandrinana eo amin’ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra sy ny atsimo; ary ao amin’ny andininy tsirairay, ny mpanjaka avaratra dia “mihoatra ka mandalo.”
Isaiah’s testimony and verse ten both identify that when the northern king attacks he ceases before entering into the capital of the southern kingdom. Sennacherib brought his warfare to the walls of Jerusalem, and no further. In 219 BC, Antiochus Magnus came to the border of Egypt and stopped. Then he lost the battle of Raphia that occurred two years later in 217 BC. Sennacherib came to the walls of Jerusalem and lost the battle as God intervened.
Ny fijoroana vavolombelon’i Isaia sy ny andininy faha‑folo dia samy manambara fa rehefa manafika ny mpanjaka avy any avaratra dia mijanona izy alohan’ny hidirany ao an-drenivohitry ny fanjakana any atsimo. Nentin’i Sankeriba hatreny amin’ny mandan’i Jerosalema ny adiny, ary tsy nihoatra izany intsony. Tamin’ny 219 tal. J.K., Antiokosa Magnus dia tonga teo amin’ny sisin-tanin’i Egypta ka nijanona. Avy eo dia resy tamin’ny ady tao Rafia izy, izay nitranga roa taona tatỳ aoriana, tamin’ny 217 tal. J.K. Sankeriba dia tonga hatreny amin’ny mandan’i Jerosalema ka resy tamin’ny ady, satria niditra an-tsehatra Andriamanitra.
Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning the king of Assyria, He shall not come into this city, nor shoot an arrow there, nor come before it with shield, nor cast a bank against it. By the way that he came, by the same shall he return, and shall not come into this city, saith the Lord. For I will defend this city, to save it, for mine own sake, and for my servant David’s sake. And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the Lord went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses. So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh. And it came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him with the sword: and they escaped into the land of Armenia. And Esarhaddon his son reigned in his stead. 2 Kings 19:32–37.
Koa izao no lazain’i Jehovah momba ny mpanjakan’i Asyria: Tsy hiditra amin’ity tanàna ity izy, na handefa zana-tsipìka ao, na hanatona azy amin’ny ampinga, na hanorina fefiloha hiadiana aminy. Ny làlana izay nalehany no hiverenany ihany, ary tsy hiditra amin’ity tanàna ity izy, hoy Jehovah. Fa hiaro ity tanàna ity Aho mba hamonjy azy, noho ny amiko, sy noho ny amin’i Davida mpanompoko. Ary tamin’izany alina izany dia nivoaka ny anjelin’i Jehovah ka namely dimy arivo amby valopolo sy iray hetsy tamin’ny tobin’ny Asyriana; ary nony nifoha maraina koa ny olona, indreo, faty avokoa izy rehetra. Dia niainga Sankeriba, mpanjakan’i Asyria, ka lasa nody, ary nonina tany Ninive. Ary raha mbola niankohoka tao an-tranon’i Nisroka andriamaniny izy, dia namely azy tamin’ny sabatra Adrameleka sy Sarezera zanany; ary nandositra ho any amin’ny tanin’i Armenia ireo. Ary Esar-hadona zanany no nanjaka nandimby azy. 2 Mpanjaka 19:32–37.
In 1989, the king of the north swept away the Soviet Union, but he did not overcome the capital of the Soviet Union. Russia was left standing. The next battle, typified in verses eleven and twelve, was the battle of Raphia, which was also typified by the overthrow of Sennacherib’s army and his subsequent death which identifies a victory for the southern king, which was Judah in the testimony of Sennacherib, and Raphia in the testimony of Antiochus Magnus.
Tamin’ny 1989, ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra dia nandripaka ny Firaisana Sôvietika, nefa tsy naharesy ny renivohitry ny Firaisana Sôvietika izy. Nijanona ho nijoro i Rosia. Ny ady manaraka, izay tandindonin’ny andininy faha iraika ambin’ny folo sy faha roa ambin’ny folo, dia ny adin’i Rafia, izay notandindonin’ny faharesen’ny tafik’i Sankeriba sy ny fahafatesany tatỳ aoriana koa; izany no manondro fandresena ho an’ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo, izay i Joda ao amin’ny fanambaran’i Sankeriba, ary Rafia ao amin’ny fanambaran’i Antiokosa Magnus.
Verse ten provides a direct connection to verse forty and verse sixteen provides a direct connection with verse forty-one. Verses ten through sixteen represent the history of 1989 unto the Sunday law. The verse represents a hidden history in verse forty that begins with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 and continues unto the Sunday law. Verse ten also directly connects the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six to the hidden history, but that line of truth is outside what we are here setting forth.
Ny andininy faha‑folo dia manome fifandraisana mivantana amin’ny andininy faha‑efapolo, ary ny andininy faha‑enina ambin’ny folo dia manome fifandraisana mivantana amin’ny andininy faha‑iraika amby efapolo. Ny andininy faha‑folo ka hatramin’ny faha‑enina ambin’ny folo dia maneho ny tantara nanomboka tamin’ny 1989 ka hatramin’ny lalàna Alahady. Io andininy io dia maneho tantara miafina iray ao amin’ny andininy faha‑efapolo, izay manomboka amin’ny firodanan’ny Firaisana Sovietika tamin’ny 1989 ary mitohy mandra‑pahatongan’ny lalàna Alahady. Ny andininy faha‑folo koa dia mampifandray mivantana ny “impito” ao amin’ny Levitikosy enina amby roapolo amin’io tantara miafina io, saingy io lalan‑kevitra momba ny fahamarinana io dia ivelan’izay atolotray eto.
In Millerite history the first of six primary controversies within Adventism concerning the correct identification of Rome occurred, and it was over who the robbers of verse fourteen represented. The Protestants held they represented Antiochus Epiphanes, and the Millerites identified them as Rome. In the last controversy of Adventism concerning the correct identification of Rome it is also over the robbers of verse fourteen. One class, represented by the Millerites, is upholding the foundational understanding of the Millerites, which was endorsed by the Spirit of Prophecy.
Tao amin’ny tantaran’ny Millerita no niseho ny voalohany tamin’ireo adihevitra lehibe enina tao anatin’ny Advantisma mikasika ny famantarana marina an’i Roma, ary ny olana dia ny amin’izay tondroin’ireo jiolahy ao amin’ny andininy faha-efatra ambin’ny folo. Ny Protestanta dia nihevitra fa i Antiokosy Epifana no tondroiny, ary ny Millerita kosa namantatra izany ho Roma. Ao amin’ny adihevitra farany ao amin’ny Advantisma mikasika ny famantarana marina an’i Roma, dia mbola ny amin’ireo jiolahy ao amin’ny andininy faha-efatra ambin’ny folo ihany koa no iadian-kevitra. Ny antokon’olona iray, izay asehon’ny Millerita, dia manohana ny fahatakarana fototra napetraky ny Millerita, izay nankatoavin’ny Fanahin’ny Faminaniana.
“I have seen that the 1843 chart was directed by the hand of the Lord, and that it should not be altered; that the figures were as He wanted them; that His hand was over and hid a mistake in some of the figures, so that none could see it, until His hand was removed.” Early Writings, 74.
“Nahita ko nga ang 1843 nga tsart gitumong pinaagi sa kamot sa Ginoo, ug nga kini dili angay usabon; nga ang mga numero mao gayud ang Iyang gitinguha nga maingon niana; nga ang Iyang kamot diha ibabaw niini ug mitabon sa usa ka sayop sa pipila sa mga numero, aron walay bisan kinsa nga makakita niini, hangtod nga ang Iyang kamot gikuha.” Early Writings, 74.
That sacred chart identifies the controversy with the notation of 164 BC.
Io tabilao masina io dia manondro ilay fifanandrinana amin’ny fanamarihana hoe 164 TK.
“164 Death of Antiochus Epiphanes, who of course, stood not up against the Prince of Princes, as he had been 164 yrs. dead before the Prince of Princes was born.”
“164 Fahafatesan’i Antiokosy Epifana, izay mazava ho azy fa tsy nitsangana hanohitra ny Andrianan’ny andriana, satria efa 164 taona izy no maty talohan’ny nahaterahan’ilay Andrianan’ny andriana.”
The reference of that controversy upon the sacred chart represents the only truth represented upon the sacred chart that is not based upon a prophetic passage from God’s Word. In doing so it identifies a waymark, not of biblical history, but of Advent history, and “it should not be altered,” for the controversy identifies how the prophetic vision is established. To reject that foundational truth is to simultaneously reject the authority of the Spirit of Prophecy’s endorsement of the sacred chart.
Ang pagbanggit sa kontrobersiyang iyon sa banal na tsart ay kumakatawan sa tanging katotohanang inilalarawan sa banal na tsart na hindi nakasalig sa isang propetikong sipi mula sa Salita ng Diyos. Sa paggawa nito, tinutukoy nito ang isang palatandaan, hindi ng kasaysayang biblikal, kundi ng kasaysayang Adventista, at “ito ay hindi dapat baguhin,” sapagkat itinatakda ng kontrobersiya kung paano pinagtitibay ang propetikong pangitain. Ang pagtanggi sa saligang katotohanang iyon ay kasabay na pagtanggi sa awtoridad ng pagsang-ayon ng Espiritu ng Propesiya sa banal na tsart.
“The very last deception of Satan will be to make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God. ‘Where there is no vision, the people perish’ (Proverbs 29:18). Satan will work ingeniously, in different ways and through different agencies, to unsettle the confidence of God’s remnant people in the true testimony. He will bring in spurious visions to mislead, and will mingle the false with the true, and so disgust people that they will regard everything that bears the name of visions as a species of fanaticism; but honest souls, by contrasting false and true, will be enabled to distinguish between them.” Selected Messages, book 2, 78.
“Ny fitaka farany indrindra hataon’i Satana dia ny hahatonga ny fijoroana vavolombelon’ny Fanahin’Andriamanitra ho zary tsy manan-kery. ‘Raha tsy misy fahitana, dia ringana ny olona’ (Ohabolana 29:18). Hiasa amim-pahakingana i Satana, amin’ny fomba samihafa sy amin’ny alalan’ny fitaovana samihafa, mba hampihontsona ny fitokisan’ny sisa olon’Andriamanitra ny amin’ny fijoroana vavolombelona marina. Hampiditra fahitana sandoka izy mba hamitahana, ary hampifangaro ny lainga amin’ny marina, ka haharikoriko ny olona izany, hany ka hoheveriny ho karazan-kafanam-po tafahoatra avokoa izay rehetra mitondra ny anaran’ny fahitana; nefa ny fanahy tso-po kosa, amin’ny fampitahana ny sandoka sy ny marina, dia ho afa-manavaka izany.” Selected Messages, boky 2, 78.
The last controversy of “the robbers of thy people”, is the same as the first, and without an understanding of the symbol which establishes the vision, “the people perish.” They “perish” because they “make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God.”
Ny fifandirana farany ataon’“ireo jiolahin’ny firenenao” dia mitovy amin’ilay voalohany ihany; ary raha tsy misy fahatakarana ny amin’ilay tandindona izay mampiorina ny fahitana, dia “levona ny olona.” “Levona” izy satria “foanany ny fanambaran’ny Fanahin’Andriamanitra.”
The other class claims that the United States is represented as the robbers of verse fourteen. That class is unable or unwilling to see that Antiochus Magnus in verses ten through fifteen represents the United States. Just as the Protestants of Millerite history claimed the robbers were Antiochus, the class who is unwilling to see identifies the robbers as the power (the United States) that is typified by Antiochus.
Ny sokajy iray hafa dia milaza fa i Etazonia no aseho ho jiolahy voalaza ao amin’ny andininy faha-efatra ambin’ny folo. Tsy mahavita na tsy mety mahita io sokajy io fa i Antiokosy Magnus ao amin’ny andininy faha-folo ka hatramin’ny faha-dimy ambin’ny folo no maneho an’i Etazonia. Tahaka ny nilazan’ny Protestanta tamin’ny tantaran’ny Millerite fa i Antiokosy no jiolahy, dia io sokajy tsy mety mahita io kosa no mamantatra ireo jiolahy ho ilay fahefana (Etazonia) izay tandindonin’i Antiokosy.
Sennacherib’s attack upon Judah that reached to the capital, Jerusalem, and that failed, was led by Sennacherib’s general, Rabshakeh.
Ny fanafihan’i Sankeriba an’i Joda, izay tonga hatrany amin’ny renivohitra, dia Jerosalema, nefa tsy nahomby, dia notarihin’i Rabshake, jeneraly an’i Sankeriba.
Now therefore, I pray thee, give pledges to my lord the king of Assyria, and I will deliver thee two thousand horses, if thou be able on thy part to set riders upon them. How then wilt thou turn away the face of one captain of the least of my master’s servants, and put thy trust on Egypt for chariots and for horsemen? Am I now come up without the Lord against this place to destroy it? The Lord said to me, Go up against this land, and destroy it. Then said Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and Shebna, and Joah, unto Rabshakeh, Speak, I pray thee, to thy servants in the Syrian language; for we understand it: and talk not with us in the Jews’ language in the ears of the people that are on the wall. But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you? Then Rabshakeh stood and cried with a loud voice in the Jews’ language, and spake, saying, Hear the word of the great king, the king of Assyria. 2 Kings 18:23–28.
Koa ankehitriny, miangavy anao aho, manaova antoka amin’ny tompoko, dia ny mpanjakan’i Asyria, ary homeko anao soavaly roa arivo ianao, raha mahay manolotra mpitaingina ho azy kosa ianao. Koa ahoana no hahafahanao mampiverina ny tavan’ny kapiteny iray amin’ny kely indrindra amin’ny mpanompon’ny tompoko, nefa ianao matoky an’i Egypta hahazoana kalesy sy mpitaingin-tsoavaly? Moa va ankehitriny aho niakatra hiady amin’ity tany ity handrava azy nefa tsy avy amin’i Jehovah? Jehovah no niteny tamiko hoe: Miakara hamely ity tany ity, ka ravao izy. Dia hoy Elyakima, zanak’i Hilkia, sy Sebna ary Joaha tamin’i Rabsake: Mitenena amin’ny mpanomponao, masìna ianao, amin’ny teny Syriana; fa azonay izany; ary aza miteny aminay amin’ny fitenin’ny Jiosy eo anatrehan’ny sofin’ny olona izay eo ambonin’ny manda. Fa hoy Rabsake taminy: Moa va ny tompoko no naniraka ahy ho any amin’ny tomponao sy aminao mba hiteny izao teny izao? moa tsy ho any amin’ny lehilahy izay mipetraka eo ambonin’ny manda va, mba hihinanany ny taim-baviny ihany sy hisotroany ny amaniny miaraka aminareo? Dia nitsangana Rabsake ka niantso tamin’ny feo mahery tamin’ny fitenin’ny Jiosy, ary niteny hoe: Henoy ny tenin’ny mpanjaka lehibe, dia ny mpanjakan’i Asyria. 2 Mpanjaka 18:23–28.
Rabshakeh was presenting not his words, but the words of Sennacherib, king of Assyria. In Daniel eleven verse forty the king of the north is the papal power who at the time of the end in 1798 received a deadly wound at the hands of atheistic France, the southern king. In the verse the king of the north ultimately retaliates and overflows the southern kingdom (the USSR) in 1989. When the king of the north accomplished that work, he brought with him “chariots, and with horsemen, and many ships.” “Chariots and horsemen” represent military might and “ships” represent economic power. Those symbols identify the United States as papal Rome’s proxy army in the victory of 1989, as typified by Rabshakeh. Antiochus Magnus in verse ten through fifteen represents the United States, and as William Miller correctly identified that the word “also” in verse fourteen establishes a new power entering the prophetic narrative, the “robbers” must represent a power distinct from either the Ptolemaic kings of the south, or Antiochus the king of the north or Philip of Macedon.
Rabshakeh dia tsy ny teniny no nentiny, fa ny tenin’i Sennacherib, mpanjakan’i Asyria. Ao amin’ny Daniela 11:40, ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra dia ny fahefana papaly izay, tamin’ny fotoan’ny farany tamin’ny 1798, dia nahazo ratra mahafaty teo an-tanan’i Frantsa tsy mino an’Andriamanitra, ilay mpanjaka atsimo. Ao amin’io andininy io, ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra amin’ny farany dia mamaly ka manafotra ny fanjakan’ny atsimo (ny USSR) tamin’ny 1989. Raha nahatanteraka izany asa izany ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra, dia nitondra niaraka taminy “kalesy, sy mpitaingin-tsoavaly, ary sambo maro.” Ny “kalesy sy mpitaingin-tsoavaly” dia maneho hery ara-miaramila, ary ny “sambo” dia maneho hery ara-toekarena. Ireo tandindona ireo dia manondro an’i Etazonia ho tafika solon-tenan’i Roma papaly tamin’ny fandresena tamin’ny 1989, araka ny tandindon’i Rabshakeh. Antiochus Magnus ao amin’ny andininy faha-10 ka hatramin’ny faha-15 dia maneho an’i Etazonia, ary araka ny namaritan’i William Miller tsara fa ny teny hoe “koa” ao amin’ny andininy faha-14 dia mametraka fahefana vaovao miditra ao amin’ny fitantarana ara-paminaniana, ireo “mpandroba” dia tsy maintsy maneho fahefana hafa miavaka amin’ireo mpanjaka Ptolemaika avy any atsimo, na amin’i Antiochus mpanjakan’ny avaratra, na amin’i Filipo avy any Makedonia.
“The king of the south, in this verse, without any doubt, means king of Egypt; but what the robbers of thy people means remains yet a doubt perhaps to some. That it cannot mean Antiochus, or any king of Syria, it is plain; for the angel had been talking about that nation for a number of verses previous, and now says, ‘also the robbers of thy people,’ etc., evidently implying some other nation. I will admit that Antiochus did perhaps rob the Jews; but how could this ‘establish the vision,’ as Antiochus is not spoken of anywhere in the vision as performing any act of that kind; for he belonged to what is called the Grecian kingdom in the vision. Again, ‘to establish the vision,’ must mean to make sure, complete, or fulfill the same.” William Miller, Miller’s Works, Lecture 6, 89.
“Ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo, ao amin’ity andininy ity, tsy misy fisalasalana akory, dia midika ny mpanjakan’i Egypta; fa izay tian’ny hoe jiolahin’ny olonao holazaina dia mbola mampisalasala angamba ny sasany. Miharihary fa tsy azo heverina ho Antiochus izany, na ho mpanjakan’i Syria akory aza; fa ilay anjely dia efa niresaka momba io firenena io nandritra ny andininy maromaro teo aloha, ary ankehitriny dia manao hoe: ‘ary koa ny jiolahin’ny olonao,’ sns., izay manambara mazava fa firenena hafa no tondroiny. Ekenaiko fa mety ho nandroba ny Jiosy tokoa angamba Antiochus; nefa ahoana no hahafahan’izany ‘hampiorina ny fahitana,’ nefa i Antiochus dia tsy resahina na aiza na aiza ao amin’ny fahitana ho manao asa tahaka izany; satria izy dia anisan’izay antsoina ao amin’ny fahitana hoe fanjakana Grika. Ary koa, ny hoe ‘hampiorina ny fahitana,’ dia tsy maintsy midika hoe manamafy, mameno, na manatanteraka izany.” William Miller, Miller’s Works, Lecture 6, 89.
“Antiochus” was a name selected by many of the kings of the Syrian Seleucid Empire. The founder of that empire was Seleucid Nicator, and somewhere between twenty-six to thirty kings made up the entire list of Seleucid kings. Many of those kings chose the name “Antiochus”, just as the many popes choose throne-names when they are selected as popes. The popes are all “antichrist,” which means “against Christ”. The word “anti” meaning “against”. As antichrists they have taken the name of their spiritual forefather, who is Satan. Satan and the popes are both identified as the antichrist in inspiration.
“Antiochus” dia anarana nofidin’ny maro tamin’ireo mpanjakan’ny Fanjakana Seleokida Siriana. Ny mpanorina izany fanjakana izany dia i Seleucid Nicator, ary eo anelanelan’ny enina amby roapolo ka hatramin’ny telopolo ny isan’ireo mpanjaka rehetra ao amin’ny lisitry ny mpanjaka Seleokida. Maro tamin’ireo mpanjaka ireo no nifidy ny anarana hoe “Antiochus”, tahaka ny ataon’ny papa maro izay misafidy anarana fiandrianana rehefa voafidy ho papa izy. Ny papa rehetra dia “antikristy”, izay midika hoe “manohitra an’i Kristy”. Ny teny hoe “anti” dia midika hoe “manohitra”. Amin’ny maha-antikristy azy dia nandray ny anaran’ny razambe ara-panahiny izy ireo, dia Satana. Samy amantarana ho antikristy ao amin’ny tsindrimandry i Satana sy ny papa.
“The determination of antichrist to carry out the rebellion he began in heaven will continue to work in the children of disobedience.” Testimonies, volume 9, 230.
“Ny fahatapahan-kevitry ny antikristy hanatanteraka ny fikomiana izay natombony tany an-danitra dia mbola hiasa hatrany ao amin’ny zanaky ny tsi-fankatoavana.” Testimonies, boky faha-9, 230.
A pope is a representative of Satan, and thus they are both against Christ, and therefore are the “antichrist.” They choose a name when they take the position as pope, and become Satan’s earthly representative.
Ny papa dia solontenan’i Satana, ary noho izany dia samy manohitra an’i Kristy izy sy i Satana, ka izany no maha-“antikristy” azy. Mifidy anarana izy rehefa mandray ny toerana maha-papa azy, ary tonga solontenan’i Satana etỳ an-tany.
“To secure worldly gains and honors, the church was led to seek the favor and support of the great men of earth; and having thus rejected Christ, she was induced to yield allegiance to the representative of Satan—the bishop of Rome.” The Great Controversy, 50.
“Mba hahazoana tombony sy voninahitra araka izao tontolo izao, dia notarihina ny fiangonana hitady ny sitraka sy ny fanohanan’ireo lehibe eto an-tany; ary rehefa nandà an’i Kristy toy izany izy, dia voatarika hanaiky fankatoavana ho an’ilay solontenan’i Satana—ny evekan’i Roma.” Ilay Ady Lehibe, 50.
By their works you shall know them, and the popes carry on the same work as Satan.
Amin’ny asany no hahafantaranareo azy; ary ny papa dia manohy izany asa izany ihany koa tahaka an’i Satana.
“Through the pope of Rome the same work has been carried on here on earth as was carried on in the courts of heaven before the expulsion of the prince of darkness. Satan sought to correct the law of God in heaven, and to supply an amendment of his own. He exalted his own judgment above that of his Creator, and placed his will above the will of Jehovah, and in this way virtually declared God to be fallible. The pope also takes the same course and, claiming infallibility for himself, seeks to adjust the law of God to meet his own ideas, thinking himself able to correct the mistakes he thinks he sees in the statutes and commands of the Lord of heaven and earth. He virtually says to the world, I will give you better laws than those of Jehovah. What an insult is this to the God of heaven!” Signs of the Times, November 19, 1894.
“Tamin’ny alalan’ny papa any Roma no nanohizana teto an-tany ilay asa natao tany amin’ny kianjan’ny lanitra talohan’ny nandroahana ilay andrianan’ny maizina. Satana nitady hanitsy ny lalàn’Andriamanitra tany an-danitra, ary hanampy fanitsiana avy amin’ny tenany ihany. Nasandrany ho ambonin’ny an’ny Mpamorona azy ny fitsarany manokana, ary napetrany ho ambonin’ny sitrapon’i Jehovah ny sitrapony, ka tamin’izany fomba izany dia nambarany tamin’ny tena izy fa mety ho diso Andriamanitra. Ny papa koa dia mandeha amin’io lalana io ihany ary, amin’ny filazany ny tenany ho tsy mety diso, dia mikatsaka hanitsy ny lalàn’Andriamanitra mba hifanaraka amin’ny heviny manokana, ka mihevitra ny tenany ho mahavita manitsy ny fahadisoana izay heveriny fa hitany ao amin’ny didy sy ny baikon’ny Tompon’ny lanitra sy ny tany. Amin’ny tena izy dia hoy izy amin’izao tontolo izao: Homeko anareo lalàna tsara kokoa noho ny an’i Jehovah. Endrey ny faniratsirana ataon’izany amin’Andriamanitry ny lanitra!” Signs of the Times, November 19, 1894.
Though Seleucus Nicator established the Seleucid Empire, many of the following kings chose the name “Antiochus,” in honor, not of Seleucus, but of his father. Seleucus’ father, Antiochus, was a nobleman and a general in the service of King Philip II of Macedon, who was the father of Alexander the Great. This noble status and military background helped establish the foundation for Seleucus’s own prominent role and subsequent rise to power after the death of Alexander the Great.
Na dia i Seleucus Nicator aza no nanorina ny Fanjakana Seleokida, maro tamin’ireo mpanjaka nanaraka no nifidy ny anarana hoe “Antiochus,” ho fanomezam-boninahitra, tsy an’i Seleucus, fa ny rainy kosa. Ny rain’i Seleucus, dia i Antiochus, andriandahy sy jeneraly nanompo an’i Mpanjaka Filipo II avy any Makedonia, izay rainy i Aleksandra Lehibe. Io sata maha-andriana sy io fiaviana ara-tafika io no nanampy tamin’ny fametrahana ny fototra ho an’ny anjara toerana nisongadinan’i Seleucus sy ny fiakarany teo amin’ny fahefana tatỳ aoriana taorian’ny nahafatesan’i Aleksandra Lehibe.
Seleucus’ kingdom was established when he took control of three of the four areas of Alexander’s kingdom. Rome also conquers three geographical powers in order to take control and become the king of the north. When Seleucus had secured the east, the west and the north he became the king of the north in the historical narrative, and his capital was the city of Babylon. Many of the following kings chose the name “Antiochus” when they took the northern throne in order to honor their political forefather. The parallel is easy to see, if you choose to see. If you don’t, you don’t.
Niorina rehefa nahazo fahefana tamin’ny faritra telo tamin’ireo efatra tao amin’ny fanjakan’i Aleksandra i Seleokosy. Toy izany koa, i Roma dia mandresy hery ara-jeografika telo mba hahazoany fifehezana sy hahatongavany ho mpanjakan’ny avaratra. Rehefa voaaro teo am-pelatanany ny atsinanana sy ny andrefana ary ny avaratra i Seleokosy, dia tonga mpanjakan’ny avaratra tao amin’ny fitantarana ara-tantara izy, ary ny renivohiny dia ny tanànan’i Babilona. Maro tamin’ireo mpanjaka nanaraka no nifidy ny anarana hoe “Antiokosy” rehefa nandray ny seza fiandrianana tany avaratra izy ireo, mba hanomezam-boninahitra ilay razambe ara-politika nialoha azy. Mora hita io fitoviana io, raha misafidy ny hahita ianao. Raha tsy izany, dia tsy ho hitanao.
The name “Antiochus” (Ἀντίοχος in Greek) comes from the Greek elements’ “anti” (meaning “against” or “opposite”) and “ocheo” (meaning “to hold fast” or “to maintain”). The northern kings chose the name to maintain their political heritage with the father, just as the antichrist (popes) choose names when they begin to rule. Just as the popes are representatives of their father, the devil, so too the Antiochus’ of the Syrian Empire typify representatives of their father. In this application Antiochus represents a proxy of their father. The proxy of the papal power in 1989 was the United States, and the secular testimony upholds the relationship between the antichrist, Pope John Paul II, and Ronald Reagan in their work to bring down the former Soviet Union.
Ny anarana hoe “Antiochus” (Ἀντίοχος amin’ny teny Grika) dia avy amin’ireo singa grika “anti” (midika hoe “manohitra” na “mifanohitra amin’ny”) sy “ocheo” (midika hoe “mihazona mafy” na “mitahiry”). Ny mpanjaka tany avaratra dia nifidy izany anarana izany mba hitazonana ny lova ara-politikany miaraka amin’ny rainy, tahaka ny anohidian’ny antikristy (ireo papa) anarana rehefa manomboka manjaka izy. Tahaka ny maha-solontenan’ny rainy, dia ny devoly, ny papa, no toy izany koa no anehoan’ireo Antiochus ao amin’ny Fanjakana Syriana ny tandindon’ny solontenan-drainy. Amin’ity fampiharana ity, Antiochus dia maneho mpisolo tena ny rainy. Ny mpisolo tenan’ny fahefana papaly tamin’ny 1989 dia i Etazonia, ary ny fijoroana vavolombelona ara-pivavahana dia manohana ny fifandraisana misy eo amin’ny antikristy, Papa Joany Paoly II, sy Ronald Reagan amin’ny asany hampirodana ilay Firaisana Sovietika teo aloha.
In verses ten through sixteen, the first and last verse possess direct references to verses forty and forty-one. Verse ten directly represents verse forty. Verse sixteen directly represents verse forty-one. The verses represent the portion of the prophecy of Daniel that relates to the last days.
Ao amin’ny andininy faha-folo ka hatramin’ny faha-enina ambin’ny folo, ny andininy voalohany sy ny andininy farany dia manana fanondroana mivantana amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo sy faha-iray amby efapolo. Ny andininy faha-folo dia maneho mivantana ny andininy faha-efapolo. Ny andininy faha-enina ambin’ny folo dia maneho mivantana ny andininy faha-iray amby efapolo. Ireo andininy ireo dia maneho ny ampahan’ny faminanian’i Daniela izay mifandray amin’ny andro farany.
“The book that was sealed was not the book of Revelation, but that portion of the prophecy of Daniel which related to the last days. The Scripture says, ‘But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased’ (Daniel 12:4). When the book was opened, the proclamation was made, ‘Time shall be no longer.’ (See Revelation 10:6.) The book of Daniel is now unsealed, and the revelation made by Christ to John is to come to all the inhabitants of the earth. By the increase of knowledge a people is to be prepared to stand in the latter days. . . .
“Ny boky izay voaisy tombo-kase dia tsy ny bokin’ny Apokalypsy, fa ilay ampahan’ny faminanian’i Daniela izay mahakasika ny andro farany. Hoy ny Soratra Masina: ‘Fa ianao, ry Daniela, afeno ny teny, ary asio tombo-kase ny boky, mandra-pihavin’ny andro farany; maro no hivezivezy etsy sy eroa, ary hitombo ny fahalalana’ (Daniela 12:4). Rehefa nosokafana ny boky, dia natao ny fanambarana hoe: ‘Tsy hisy andro intsony.’ (Jereo Apokalypsy 10:6.) Ny bokin’i Daniela dia efa voavaha tombo-kase ankehitriny, ary ny fanambarana nataon’i Kristy tamin’i Jaona dia tokony ho tonga amin’ny mponina rehetra ambonin’ny tany. Amin’ny fitomboan’ny fahalalana dia hisy vahoaka ho voaomana haharitra amin’ny andro farany....”
“In the first angel’s message men are called upon to worship God, our Creator, who made the world and all things that are therein. They have paid homage to an institution of the Papacy, making of no effect the law of Jehovah, but there is to be an increase of knowledge on this subject.” Selected Messages, book 2, 105, 106.
“Ao amin’ny hafatry ny anjely voalohany dia antsoina ny olona mba hivavaka amin’Andriamanitra, Mpamorona antsika, izay nanao izao tontolo izao sy ny zavatra rehetra ao aminy. Nanome voninahitra andrim-panjakana iray an’ny Fanjakana papaly izy ireo, ka nahatonga ny lalàn’i Jehovah ho tsy manan-kery, nefa mbola hisy fitomboan’ny fahalalana momba io lohahevitra io.” Selected Messages, boky 2, 105, 106.
At the time of the end in 1989 the last six verses of Daniel chapter eleven represent the “portion of the prophecy of Daniel which related to the last days.” It was recognized when it was then unsealed, and that unsealing produced an increase of knowledge on the “institution of the Papacy, making of no effect the law of Jehovah.” The Alpha and Omega always illustrates the end with the beginning, and the testing process that began in 1989, was designed to produce two classes of worshippers.
Tamin’ny fotoan’ny farany tamin’ny 1989, ireo andininy enina farany ao amin’ny Daniela toko faha-iraika ambin’ny folo dia maneho ny “ampahany amin’ny faminanian’i Daniela izay mifandray amin’ny andro farany.” Fantatra izany tamin’ny fotoana namohana azy, ary izany famohana izany dia niteraka fitomboan’ny fahalalana momba ny “fanorenana ny Fanjakana Papaly, fanafoanana ny lalàn’i Jehovah.” Ny Alfa sy Omega dia maneho mandrakariva ny farany amin’ny alalan’ny fiandohana, ary ny fizahan-toetra izay nanomboka tamin’ny 1989 dia nokendrena hamokatra karazany roa amin’ny mpivavaka.
And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. Daniel 12:9, 10.
Ary hoy Izy nanao hoe: Mandehana amin’ny lalanao, ry Daniela; fa mihidy sy voaisy tombo-kase ny teny mandra-pahatongan’ny andro farany. Maro no hodiovina sy hotsaraina ho madio ary hosedraina; fa ny ratsy fanahy kosa hanao ratsy ihany; ary tsy hisy amin’ny ratsy fanahy hahafantatra; fa ny hendry no hahafantatra. Daniela 12:9, 10.
We are now in the final period of that testing process, for the controversy of the robbers at the beginning of Adventism is now being repeated. To identify the robbers as the United States is to identify Antiochus as the robbers. It is the identical controversy of the Millerites and Protestants.
Eo amin’izao vanim-potoana farany amin’izany fizahan-toetra izany isika ankehitriny, satria averina indray izao ny adihevitra momba ireo jiolahy izay nisy tamin’ny fiandohan’ny Advantisma. Ny mamantatra ireo jiolahy ho Etazonia dia ny mamantatra an’i Antiochus ho ireo jiolahy. Izany no adihevitra mitovy tanteraka tamin’ny an’ny Millerita sy ny Protestanta.
At the end of the testing process, just as in the beginning of the testing process, which began in 1989, the Lion of the tribe of Judah unseals “that portion of the prophecy of Daniel which related to the last days.” In 1989 it was the last six verses of Daniel eleven, and at the ending it is the hidden history of verse forty, that is typified by verses ten through sixteen.
Amin’ny faran’ny fizotry ny fizahan-toetra, tahaka ny tamin’ny fiandohan’ny fizotry ny fizahan-toetra, izay nanomboka tamin’ny 1989, dia mamaha ny tombo-kase amin’“ilay ampahan’ny faminanian’i Daniela izay mifandray amin’ny andro farany” ny Liona avy amin’ny firenen’i Joda. Tamin’ny 1989 dia ireo andininy enina farany ao amin’ny Daniela toko faha-11 no novahana, ary amin’ny fiafarana kosa dia ny tantara miafina ao amin’ny andininy faha-40, izay asehon’ny tandindona ao amin’ny andininy faha-10 ka hatramin’ny faha-16.
We will continue our consideration of the six lines of controversies within the history of Adventism in the following articles. The first of those six controversies illustrates the last of those six controversies. We will use the first and last controversies to overlay the other four controversies as we unfold the elements involved with the efforts of the enemy of righteousness to prevent God’s people from rightly dividing “the vision”, which is established with the symbol of Rome.
Ao amin’ireo lahatsoratra manaraka dia hanohy ny fandinihantsika ireo andalana enina amin’ny adihevitra ao anatin’ny tantaran’ny Advantisma isika. Ny voalohany amin’ireo adihevitra enina ireo dia mampiseho mazava ny farany amin’ireo adihevitra enina ireo. Hampiasa ny adihevitra voalohany sy farany isika mba hanakambana sy hampitaha amin’ireo adihevitra efatra hafa, eo am-pamolavolana ireo singa rehetra tafiditra ao amin’ny ezaka ataon’ny fahavalon’ny fahamarinana hanakanana ny olon’Andriamanitra tsy hizara marina “ny fahitana”, izay naorina amin’ny alalan’ny tandindon’i Roma.
“Unless we understand the importance of the moments that are swiftly passing into eternity, and make ready to stand in the great day of God, we shall be unfaithful stewards. The watchman is to know the time of night. Everything is now clothed with a solemnity that all who believe the truth for this time should realize. They should act in reference to the day of God. The judgments of God are about to fall upon the world, and we need to be preparing for that great day.
“Raha tsy takatsika ny maha-zava-dehibe ireo fotoana izay mandalo haingana ho any amin’ny mandrakizay, ary tsy miomana hijoro amin’ny andro lehiben’Andriamanitra isika, dia ho mpitandrina tsy mahatoky. Ny mpiambina dia tsy maintsy mahalala ny fotoan’ny alina. Ny zava-drehetra ankehitriny dia mitafy fahamatorana lehibe izay tokony ho tsapan’izay rehetra mino ny fahamarinana ho an’izao andro izao. Tokony hanao zavatra mifanaraka amin’ny andron’Andriamanitra izy ireo. Efa hihatra amin’izao tontolo izao ny fitsaran’Andriamanitra, ary mila miomana ho amin’izany andro lehibe izany isika.”
“Our time is precious. We have but few, very few days of probation in which to make ready for the future, immortal life. We have no time to spend in haphazard movements. We should fear to skim the surface of the word of God.” Testimonies, volume 6, 407.
“មានតម្លៃវិសេសវិសាលណាស់នូវពេលវេលារបស់យើង។ យើងមានតែប៉ុន្មានថ្ងៃប៉ុណ្ណោះ គឺតិចណាស់ជាទីបំផុត នៃរយៈពេលសាកល្បង ដែលត្រូវរៀបចំខ្លួនសម្រាប់ជីវិតអមតៈនៅអនាគត។ យើងគ្មានពេលណាមួយត្រូវចំណាយទៅក្នុងការប្រព្រឹត្តដោយឥតរបៀបឥតផែនការឡើយ។ យើងគួរភ័យខ្លាចក្នុងការអានព្រះបន្ទូលរបស់ព្រះដោយគ្រាន់តែប៉ះតែផ្ទៃក្រៅប៉ុណ្ណោះ។” Testimonies, volume 6, 407.