Daniel eleven verse twenty-four identifies the period which pagan Rome would rule supremely with the word “time.” A “time” represents 360 years in prophetic application, and those years began at the most famous naval battle of ancient history, the battle of Actium in 31 BC. There were other naval battles that were larger and strategically more sophisticated, but Actium was the most iconic naval battle through its association with Marc Antony and Cleopatra. Similar in historical significance to the collapse of the Berlin Wall in fulfillment of Daniel 11:40, and the Twin Towers of 9/11 in fulfillment of Revelation eighteen; for when God chooses the historical events to fulfill His prophetic Word, He does so in a fashion that reaches the attention of the largest possible audience.
Daniela toko faha-iraika ambin’ny folo, andininy faha-efatra amby roapolo, dia manondro ny vanim-potoana izay hanjakan’i Roma mpanompo sampy amin’ny fahefana fara tampony amin’ny teny hoe “andro.” Ny “andro” iray dia misolo tena 360 taona amin’ny fampiharana ara-paminaniana, ary ireo taona ireo dia nanomboka tamin’ilay ady an-dranomasina malaza indrindra teo amin’ny tantara fahiny, dia ny adin’i Actium tamin’ny 31 tal. J.K. Nisy ady an-dranomasina hafa lehibe kokoa sy nahay paikady kokoa, nefa i Actium no ady an-dranomasina nanan-tantara sy nalaza indrindra noho ny fifandraisany tamin’i Marc Antony sy Cleopatra. Mitovy amin’ny lanjany ara-tantara amin’ny firodanan’ny Rindrin’i Berlin tamin’ny fahatanterahan’i Daniela 11:40, sy ny Tilikambo Kambana tamin’ny 9/11 tamin’ny fahatanterahan’ny Apokalypsy toko faha-valo ambin’ny folo izany; satria rehefa mifidy ireo zava-nitranga ara-tantara Andriamanitra mba hanatanterahana ny Teniny ara-paminaniana, dia ataony amin’ny fomba izay mahasarika ny sain’ny mpihaino betsaka indrindra araka izay azo atao.
And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people. He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers’ fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches: yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strong holds, even for a time. Daniel 11:23, 24.
Ary rehefa vita ny fanekena taminy dia hanao fitaka izy; fa hiakatra izy ka hihamatanjaka amin’ny vahoaka madinika. Hiditra am-pilaminana izy na dia any amin’ny toerana lonaka indrindra amin’ny faritany aza; ary hanao izay tsy nataon’ny rainy sy ny rain’ny razany izy; hampiely eo aminy ny babo sy ny fandrobana ary ny harena izy; eny, hamolavola ny tetiny hanohitra ny fiarovana mafy aza izy, nefa ho amin’ny fotoana voafetra. Daniela 11:23, 24.
Uriah Smith concludes his observations of the league between Rome and the Maccabees of verse twenty-three by commenting upon the small people of the verse.
Uriah Smith dia mamarana ny fanamarihany momba ny fanekena nifanaovan’i Roma sy ny Makabeo ao amin’ny andininy faha-roa amby roapolo amin’ny fanehoan-kevitra nataony momba ilay vahoaka kely ao amin’ilay andininy.
“At this time the Romans were a small people, and began to work deceitfully, or with cunning, as the word signifies. And from this point they rose by a steady and rapid ascent to the height of power which they afterward attained.
“Tamin’izany andro izany dia firenena madinika ny Romana, ary nanomboka nanao tamin-kafetsena izy, na tamin’ny hafetsena, araka ny hevitry ny teny. Ary nanomboka teo dia niakatra tamin’ny fisondrotana tsy miato sy haingana ho amin’ilay tampon’ny fahefana izay notratrariny tatỳ aoriana izy.”
“[Verse twenty-four quoted].
“[Voatonona ny andininy faha-roa-polo amby efatra].”
“The usual manner in which nations had, before the days of Rome, entered upon valuable provinces and rich territory, was by war and conquest. Rome was now to do what had not been done by the fathers or the fathers’ fathers; namely, receive these acquisitions through peaceful means. The custom, before unheard of, was now inaugurated, of kings’ leaving by legacy their kingdoms to the Romans. Rome came into possession of large provinces in this manner.
“Ny fomba fanao mahazatra izay nidiran’ny firenena tamin’ny faritany sarobidy sy ny tany manankarena, talohan’ny andron’i Roma, dia tamin’ny ady sy ny fandresena. Ankehitriny kosa Roma dia hatao izay tsy mbola nataon’ny razana na ny razamben’ny razana; dia ny handray ireny fananana ireny amin’ny alalan’ny fomba milamina. Dia naorina tamin’izany ny fomba iray, izay tsy mbola re hatrizay teo aloha, dia ny famelàn’ny mpanjaka ny fanjakany ho lova ho an’ny Romanina. Tamin’izany fomba izany no nahatongavan’i Roma ho tompon’ny faritany lehibe.”
“And those who thus came under the dominion of Rome derived no small advantage therefrom. They were treated with kindness and leniency. It was like having the prey and spoil distributed among them. They were protected from their enemies, and rested in peace and safety under the aegis of the Roman power.
“Ary izay tonga teo ambanin’ny fanapahan’i Roma tamin’izany fomba izany dia tsy nahazo tombontsoa kely avy tamin’izany. Notsaboina tamin’ny fahamoram-panahy sy ny fandeferana izy ireo. Toy ny nahazo anjara tamin’ny remby sy ny babo nozaraina taminy izany. Narovana tamin’ny fahavalony izy ireo, ary niadana tamim-piadanana sy filaminana teo ambanin’ny fiarovan’ny fahefana romanina.
“To the latter portion of this verse, Bishop Newton gives the idea of forecasting devices from strongholds, instead of against them. This the Romans did from the strong fortress of their seven-hilled city. ‘Even for a time;’ doubtless a prophetic time, 360 years. From what point are these years to be dated? Probably from the event brought to view in the following verse.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 272, 273.
“Momba ny tapany farany amin’ity andininy ity, ny Eveka Newton dia manome ny hevitra hoe famolavolana tetika avy eny amin’ireo fiarovana mafy, fa tsy hanohitra azy ireny. Izany no nataon’ny Romanina avy tao amin’ny tanàna mafy orina misy havoana fito nananany. ‘Na dia mandritra ny fotoana iray aza;’ tsy isalasalana fa fotoana ara-paminaniana izany, dia 360 taona. Manomboka amin’ny teboka inona no tokony hanisana ireo taona ireo? Angamba avy amin’ilay toe-javatra aseho eo amin’ny andininy manaraka.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 272, 273.
Smith continues and identifies the battle of Actium in 31 BC as the starting point for the three hundred and sixty years. After quoting verse twenty-five Smith states the following.
Nanohy i Smith ary amantarany ho fiandohan’ireo telonjato sy enimpolo taona ny adin’i Actium tamin’ny 31 talohan’i Kristy. Rehefa avy nitanisa ny andininy faha-dimy amby roapolo i Smith dia milaza izao manaraka izao.
“By verses 23 and 24 we are brought down this side of the league between the Jews and the Romans, BC 161, to the time when Rome had acquired universal dominion. The verse now before us brings to view a vigorous campaign against the king of the south, Egypt, and the occurrence of a notable battle between great and mighty armies. Did such events as these transpire in the history of Rome about this time? — They did. The war was the war between Egypt and Rome; and the battle was the battle of Actium. Let us take a brief view of the circumstances that led to this conflict.
“Amin’ny andininy faha-23 sy faha-24 dia entina midina mankatỳ an-dafin’ilay fifanekena teo amin’ny Jiosy sy ny Romanina, tamin’ny 161 tal. J.K., isika, ho amin’ny fotoana izay nahazoan’i Roma fanapahana maneran-tany. Ny andininy eo anoloantsika ankehitriny dia mampiseho fampielezan-kevitra mahery vaika hanoherana ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo, dia Egypta, sy ny fisian’ny ady malaza iray teo amin’ny tafika lehibe sy mahery. Moa va niseho teo amin’ny tantaran’i Roma tamin’izany fotoana izany ve ny zava-nitranga tahaka ireo? — Eny, niseho izany. Ny ady dia ny ady teo amin’i Egypta sy Roma; ary ny fifandonana dia ny ady tao Actium. Andeha hodinihintsika vetivety ny toe-javatra nitarika ho amin’io fifanandrinana io.”
“[Marc] Antony, Augustus Caesar, and Lepidus constituted the triumvirate which had sworn to avenge the death of Julius Caesar. This Antony became the brother-in-law of Augustus by marrying his sister, Octavia. Antony was sent into Egypt on government business, but fell a victim to the arts and charms of Cleopatra, Egypt’s dissolute queen. So strong was the passion he conceived for her, that he finally espoused the Egyptian interests, rejected his wife, Octavia, to please Cleopatra, bestowed province after province upon the latter to gratify her avarice, celebrated a triumph at Alexandria instead of Rome, and otherwise so affronted the Roman people that Augustus had no difficulty in leading them to engage heartily in a war against this enemy of their country. This war was ostensibly against Egypt and Cleopatra; but it was really against Antony, who now stood at the head of Egyptian affairs. And the true cause of their controversy was, says Prideaux, that neither of them could be content with only half of the Roman empire; for Lepidus having been deposed from the triumvirate, it now lay between them, and each being determined to possess the whole, they cast the die of war for its possession.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 273.
“[Marc] Antony, Augustus Caesar, ary Lepidus no namorona ilay triumvirate izay efa nianiana hamaly faty ny fahafatesan’i Julius Caesar. Ity Antony ity dia tonga zaodahin’i Augustus tamin’ny nanambadiany an’i Octavia, anabaviny. Nalefa tany Egypta i Antony noho ny raharaham-panjakana, nefa latsaka ho tra-pahavoazana tamin’ny hafetsena sy ny fanintonan’i Cleopatra, mpanjakavavy vetaveta tao Egypta. Mafy dia mafy ny filan-dratsy niforona tao aminy ho azy, ka nony farany dia noraisiny ny tombontsoan’i Egypta ho azy, nolaviny i Octavia vadiny mba hampifaly an’i Cleopatra, nomeny faritany nifandimby ity farany mba hanomezana fahafaham-po ny fitiavam-bolany, nankalaza fandresena tany Alexandria fa tsy tany Roma, ary tamin’ny fomba hafa koa dia nanao faniratsirana lehibe tamin’ny vahoaka romana ka tsy nanahirana an’i Augustus ny nitarika azy ireo hiditra amim-pahavitrihana amin’ny ady hanohitra ity fahavalon’ny taniny ity. Raha ny fiseho ivelany, dia ady tamin’i Egypta sy Cleopatra izany; nefa raha ny marina, dia ady tamin’i Antony, izay nijoro teo amin’ny lohan’ny raharahan’i Egypta ankehitriny. Ary ny tena anton’ny fifandiran’izy ireo, hoy i Prideaux, dia satria samy tsy afa-po na iray aza tamin’izy ireo raha antsasaky ny fanjakana romana ihany no azony; fa rehefa nesorina tsy ho ao amin’ny triumvirate i Lepidus, dia teo anelanelan’izy roa izany, ary samy tapa-kevitra handray ny manontolo izy roa tonta, ka natsipiny ny anjaran’ny ady mba hahazoany izany.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 273.
Prophetically the battle of Actium identifies the Sunday law, for it represented the third conquering of the three geographical obstacles which established pagan Rome’s “universal dominion,” as Smith describes it. As with pagan Rome, it was when the third obstacle of papal Rome was driven from the city of Rome that the “universal dominion” of papal Rome began in 538. Those two witnesses address the Sunday law where and when modern Rome overcomes both the sixth and seventh kingdoms of Bible prophecy, and in doing so, overcomes its third obstacle; thus, establishing “universal dominion” for forty-two symbolic months.
Ara-paminaniana, ny adin’i Actium dia manondro ny lalàna Alahady, satria izy no naneho ny fandresena fahatelo tamin’ireo sakana ara-jeografika telo izay nametraka ny “fanjakana maneran-tany” an’i Roma mpanompo sampy, araka ny ilazan’i Smith azy. Tahaka ny tamin’i Roma mpanompo sampy, dia rehefa nesorina hiala tao amin’ny tanànan’i Roma ny sakana fahatelo an’i Roma papaly no nanombohan’ny “fanjakana maneran-tany” an’i Roma papaly tamin’ny taona 538. Ireo vavolombelona roa ireo dia miresaka ny lalàna Alahady eo amin’ny toerana sy amin’ny fotoana izay handresen’i Roma maoderina ny fanjakana fahenina sy fahafito ao amin’ny faminanian’ny Baiboly, ary amin’ny fanaovana izany dia handresy ny sakany fahatelo izy; ka hanorina “fanjakana maneran-tany” mandritra ny roa amby efapolo volana ara-paminaniana.
And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. Revelation 13:5.
Dia nomena vava niteny zava-dehibe sy fitenenan-dratsy; ary nomena azy ny fahefana haharitra roa amby efa-polo volana. Apokalypsy 13:5.
Rome Against Egypt
Roma manohitra an’i Egypta
The prophetic dynamics of the war of Augustus of Rome, against Egypt and Cleopatra was motivated by the rebellion of Marc Antony, and those prophetic dynamics must of prophetic necessity represent the prophetic dynamics that are represented at the Sunday law.
Ny dinamika ara-paminaniana tamin’ny adin’i Aogosto avy any Roma tamin’i Egypta sy Kleopatra dia natosiky ny fikomian’i Marka Antonio, ary ireo dinamika ara-paminaniana ireo dia tsy maintsy, noho ny filàna ara-paminaniana, misolo tena ireo dinamika ara-paminaniana izay aseho amin’ny lalàna alahady.
At Actium Rome conquered Egypt, a power which consisted of an alliance between a rebellious man and an unholy woman. The alliance of Antony and Cleopatra is the combination of church and state. At Actium, Augustine’s Rome conquered a power represented by an unholy combination of church and state.
Tao Actium dia nandresy an’i Egypta i Roma, hery izay nisy fifanekena teo amin’ny lehilahy mpikomy iray sy vehivavy tsy masina iray. Ny firaisan’i Antony sy Cleopatra dia fitambaran’ny fiangonana sy ny fanjakana. Tao Actium, ny Roman’i Auguste dia nandresy hery iray izay nasehon’ny fitambarana tsy masina teo amin’ny fiangonana sy ny fanjakana.
Image of the Beast
Sarin’ny Bibidia
Cleopatra represents a corrupted church aligned with Antony, a symbol of Rome. Cleopatra was the ruler over their relationship, as represented by Uriah Smith, when he stated that Antony “fell a victim to the arts and charms of Cleopatra, Egypt’s dissolute queen.” The alliance of church and state represented by Antony and Cleopatra identified Cleopatra as the power ruling in the relationship; so, the combination of church and state represented by their relationship meets the definition of the image of the beast—which is the combination of church and state with the woman in control of the relationship. Actium typified the soon-coming Sunday law.
Kleopatra dia maneho fiangonana simba niara-dia tamin’i Antony, tandindon’i Roma. Kleopatra no mpanapaka teo amin’ny fifandraisan’izy ireo, araka ny nasehon’i Uriah Smith, raha nilaza izy fa i Antony dia “lasa niharan’ny hafetsena sy ny hatsaran’i Kleopatra, ilay mpanjakavavy vetaveta tao Egypta.” Ny firaisan’ny fiangonana sy ny fanjakana, izay asehon’i Antony sy Kleopatra, dia nanondro an’i Kleopatra ho hery manjaka ao amin’ilay fifandraisana; koa ny fitambaran’ny fiangonana sy ny fanjakana asehon’ny fifandraisan’izy ireo dia mahafeno ny famaritana ny sarin’ny bibidia—dia ny fitambaran’ny fiangonana sy ny fanjakana, ka ny vehivavy no mifehy ilay fifandraisana. Aktioma dia tandindon’ny lalàn’ny Alahady izay ho avy tsy ho ela.
Augustus, represents the papal power conquering the United States at the soon-coming Sunday law. Marc Antony is the Republican horn of the earth beast and Cleopatra is the Protestant horn. Antony and Cleopatra come together and speak as a dragon at the soon-coming Sunday law. Both Cleopatra and Antony are symbols of a dragon power, and when they are fully joined together at the Sunday law—they speak as a dragon.
Augustus dia maneho ny fahefan’ny papa mandresy an’i Etazonia amin’ilay lalàna alahady ho avy tsy ho ela. I Marka Antonio no tandroka Repoblikana an’ilay bibidia avy amin’ny tany, ary i Kleopatra no tandroka Protestanta. Antonio sy Kleopatra dia miara-mivondrona ka miteny tahaka ny dragona amin’ilay lalàna alahady ho avy tsy ho ela. Samy tandindon’ny fahefana dragona i Kleopatra sy Antonio, ary rehefa tafaray tanteraka izy roa tonta amin’ny lalàna alahady—dia miteny tahaka ny dragona.
Dragons
Mga Dragona
Both Greece and Egypt prophetically represent a dragon power, and Antony also represented a dragon power. Egypt was the south in Daniel eleven and Greece was the west. Egypt was taken by Ptolemy I after Alexander’s kingdom divided into four parts. Ptolemy I then became the first prophetic king of the south and Cleopatra was the last Ptolemaic ruler in Egypt. Ptolemy was born in Macedon, the birth place of Alexander the Great.
Na Gresy na Egypta dia samy maneho ara-paminaniana ny herin’ny dragona, ary i Antony koa dia naneho ny herin’ny dragona. Egypta no atsimo ao amin’ny Daniela toko fahiraika ambin’ny folo ary Gresy no andrefana. Lasan’i Ptolemaios I i Egypta rehefa nizara ho fizarana efatra ny fanjakan’i Aleksandra. Dia tonga mpanjaka ara-paminaniana voalohany avy any atsimo i Ptolemaios I ary i Cleopatra no mpanapaka Ptolemaika farany tao Egypta. Teraka tany Makedonia i Ptolemaios, izay toerana nahaterahan’i Aleksandra Lehibe.
Macedon was in northern Greece, and claimed their ancestral origins were from Greek mythical heroes. The southern Greek city-states considered the Macedonians as more barbaric than the Hellenists of southern Greece. The Macedonians were a monarchy, and the southern city-states (poleis) like Athens, Sparta, Thebes, Corinth, etc., were in southern and central Greece and the Aegean islands. These poleis often had democratic, oligarchic, or mixed governments, while Macedon was a centralized monarchy with a strong royal dynasty (the Argeads). Still, they were all Hellenists, and when Rome came into history, they labelled the Hellenists Greek. Cleopatra was the last Ptolemaic ruler, which represented the northern kingdom’s monarchial tribe of Greeks from the area of Macedon, or northern Greece.
Macedon dia tany avaratr’i Gresy, ary nilaza fa avy amin’ireo mahery fo angano grika ny razambeny. Ny tanàna-fanjakana grika tany atsimo dia nihevitra ny Makedoniana ho baribary kokoa noho ny Helenista tany atsimon’i Gresy. Fanjaka-mpanjaka ny Makedoniana, ary ireo tanàna-fanjakana (poleis) tany atsimo toa an’i Athena, Sparta, Thebes, Korinto, sy ny sisa, dia tany atsimo sy afovoan’i Gresy ary tany amin’ireo nosy Egée. Ireo poleis ireo dia matetika nanana fitondrana demokratika, oligarkika, na mifangaro, fa i Macedon kosa dia fanjaka-mpanjaka foibe iray nisy tarana-mpanjaka matanjaka (ny Argeads). Na izany aza, dia Helenista avokoa izy rehetra, ary rehefa niditra teo amin’ny tantara i Roma, dia nantsoiny hoe Grika ny Helenista. I Cleopatra no mpanapaka Ptolemaika farany, izay nisolo tena ny foko mpanjaka grika an’ny fanjakana avaratra avy amin’ny faritr’i Macedon, na avaratr’i Gresy.
King of the South
Mpanjakan’ny Atsimo
Cleopatra was the final ruler of the Ptolemaic kingdom that began with Ptolemy I when Alexander’s kingdom divided into four. At the battle of Actium the Ptolemaic kingdom, the literal king of the south, reached its end. The next king of the south would be spiritual Egypt, represented by atheistic France during the French Revolution history.
I Kleopatra no mpanapaka farany tamin’ilay fanjakana Ptolemaika izay nanomboka tamin’i Ptolemaiosy Voalohany, rehefa nizara ho efatra ny fanjakan’i Aleksandra. Tamin’ny ady tao Actium dia tonga tamin’ny farany ilay fanjakana Ptolemaika, dia ilay tena mpanjakan’ny atsimo ara-bakiteny. Ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo manaraka dia i Egypta ara-panahy, izay nasehon’i Frantsa tsy mino an’Andriamanitra nandritra ny tantaran’ny Revolisiona Frantsay.
And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. Revelation 11:8.
Ary ny fatin’izy roa dia hiampatrampatra eo amin’ny kianjan’ilay tanàna lehibe, izay atao hoe ara-panahy Sôdoma sy Egypta, izay toerana nanomboana ny Tompontsika koa. Apokalypsy 11:8.
Literal Egypt was the literal king of the south as related to the division of Alexander’s kingdom, but spiritual Egypt is represented as the king of the south by the prophetic attributes of Egypt, not a literal direction.
Ny Ejipta ara-bakiteny no tena mpanjakan’ny atsimo ara-bakiteny mifandray amin’ny fizarazarana ny fanjakan’i Aleksandra, kanefa i Ejipta ara-panahy kosa dia aseho ho mpanjakan’ny atsimo amin’ny alalan’ny toetra ara-paminaniana ananan’i Ejipta, fa tsy amin’ny lafin-toerana ara-bakiteny.
South and West
Atsimo sy Andrefana
Cleopatra being the last Ptolemaic ruler of the kingdom was prophetically a twofold power of Greek (west) and Egypt (south), whereas; the next, and then spiritual king of the south would be France, also a twofold power represented in Revelation eleven as Egypt and Sodom. The licentiousness of Sodom aligns with the licentiousness of Cleopatra of the west, and Cleopatra of the south aligns with the atheism of Egypt. The last literal king of the south’s twofold nature aligned with the first spiritual king of the south.
I Cleopatra, izay mpanapaka farany tamin’ny fanjakana Ptolemaika, dia naneho ara-paminaniana hery roa sosona, dia ny Grika (andrefana) sy Egypta (atsimo); kanefa ny manaraka azy, ary avy eo ilay mpanjakan’ny atsimo ara-panahy, dia Frantsa, izay hery roa sosona koa, aseho ao amin’ny Apokalypsy toko fahairaika ambin’ny folo ho Egypta sy Sodoma. Ny fahavetavetana ara-pitondran-tenan’i Sodoma dia mifanaraka amin’ny fahavetavetana ara-pitondran-tenan’i Cleopatra tandrefana, ary i Cleopatra atsimo kosa dia mifanaraka amin’ny tsy finoan’Andriamanitra ao Egypta. Ny toetra roa sosona nananan’ilay mpanjakan’ny atsimo ara-bakiteny farany dia nifanaraka tamin’ilay mpanjakan’ny atsimo ara-panahy voalohany.
The battle of Actium was the unholy alliance of Antony’s dragon of Rome and Cleopatra’s dragon of the south and west. Antony and Cleopatra represent a church and a state, so the conquering of Actium by Augustus of Rome, represents a conquering where Rome prevails over an unholy twofold union typifying the image of the beast. Three hundred and sixty years later, in fulfillment of Daniel 11:24, Constantine divided Rome into east and west, leaving the woman of Rome in the west and moving the man of Rome to the east. A conquering of south and west typified the division of east and west after a “time” of three hundred and sixty years, at the battle of Actium. In an earlier encounter Antony was given eastern Rome and Augustus the west, so Actium brought together east and west, but only for a “time.”
Ny adin’i Actium dia ilay firaisana tsy masina nisy teo amin’ilay dragonan’i Roma an’i Antony sy ilay dragona avy any atsimo sy andrefana an’i Cleopatra. Antony sy Cleopatra dia misolo tena fiangonana iray sy fanjakana iray, koa ny fandresen’i Aogosto avy any Roma tao Actium dia misolo fandresena iray izay anjakan’i Roma amin’ny firaisana roa sosona tsy masina, maneho mialoha ny sarin’ny bibidia. Telo amby enimpolo amby telonjato taona tatỳ aoriana, tamin’ny fahatanterahan’ny Daniela 11:24, Constantin dia nizara an’i Roma ho atsinanana sy andrefana, ka navelany tany andrefana ilay vehivavin’i Roma ary nafindrany tany atsinanana ilay lehilahin’i Roma. Ny fandresena ny atsimo sy ny andrefana dia naneho mialoha ny fizarana ho atsinanana sy andrefana rehefa afaka “fotoana” iray, dia telonjato sy enimpolo taona, tamin’ny adin’i Actium. Tamin’ny fihaonana teo aloha dia nomena an’i Antony i Roma atsinanana ary an’i Aogosto ny andrefana, koa Actium no nampitambatra ny atsinanana sy ny andrefana, nefa “fotoana” iray ihany.
31 BC and 330
31 tal. J.K. sy 330
Jesus always illustrates the end with the beginning, so the conquering of Actium in 31 BC typifies the division of the empire into east and west in 330. Actium of 31 BC was the alpha of the omega in the 360 years that concluded in 330. Both 31 BC and 330 typify the soon-coming Sunday law as represented in verse sixteen and forty-one of Daniel eleven.
I Jesosy mandrakariva mandrakariva ny farany amin’ny fiandohana, koa ny fandresena tao Actium tamin’ny 31 talohan’i Kristy dia manondro ara-tandindona ny fizaràn’ny fanjakana ho atsinanana sy andrefana tamin’ny 330. Ny Actium tamin’ny 31 talohan’i Kristy no alfa-n’ny omega tao anatin’ireo 360 taona izay nifarana tamin’ny 330. Samy manondro ara-tandindona ny lalàn’ny Alahady ho avy tsy ho ela, araka ny aseho ao amin’ny andininy faha-enina ambin’ny folo sy faha-iray amby efapolo ao amin’ny Daniela toko faha-iraika ambin’ny folo, ny 31 talohan’i Kristy sy ny 330.
Another Symbol
Sary Anankiray Hafa
Antony of Rome, aligned with Cleopatra of the south and of the west represents a threefold alliance within their twofold union of the image of the beast. The cross also aligns with the Sunday law, and therefore with Actium and 330. At the cross a twofold union of church and state is represented by the Jews (corrupted church) joining with Rome (state) to murder Christ. The third party in the union at the cross is represented by Barabbas, a false Christ, whose name means “son of the father.” Barabbas is symbolically a false prophet when contrasted with Christ as the true prophet. Rome was Antony, and Cleopatra of the south and west represented the Jews and Barabbas.
Antoine avy any Roma, miray laharana amin’i Kleopatra avy any atsimo sy any andrefana, dia maneho firaisana telo sosona ao anatin’ny firaisana roa sosona an’ilay sarin’ny bibidia. Ny hazo fijaliana koa dia mifandray amin’ny lalàn’ny Alahady, ary noho izany amin’i Actium sy 330. Eo amin’ny hazo fijaliana dia aseho ny firaisana roa sosona misy eo amin’ny fiangonana sy ny fanjakana amin’ny alalan’ny Jiosy (fiangonana voageja) izay miray amin’i Roma (fanjakana) hamono an’i Kristy. Ny antoko fahatelo ao amin’ilay firaisana teo amin’ny hazo fijaliana dia asehon’i Barabasy, Kristy sandoka, izay midika hoe “zanaky ny ray” ny anarany. Barabasy dia tandindon’ny mpaminany sandoka raha ampitahaina amin’i Kristy izay Mpaminany marina. Roma dia i Antoine, ary Kleopatra avy any atsimo sy andrefana no naneho ny Jiosy sy Barabasy.
The cross also aligns with Elijah on Mount Carmel where the choice was over who was the true or false prophet. The false prophet then was a twofold symbol consisting of the prophets of Baal and the priests of the grove. Baal is a male deity and the priests of the grove represented Ashtaroth, a female deity. The Jews at the cross were Ashtaroth, the female deity and Barabbas, the counterfeit of the Man of Sorrows, was the male deity Baal.
Ny hazo fijaliana koa dia mifanaraka amin’i Elia teo an-tendrombohitra Karmela, izay ny safidy tamin’izany dia ny hoe iza no mpaminany marina ary iza no mpaminany sandoka. Ny mpaminany sandoka tamin’izany dia tandindona roa sosona, dia ny mpaminanin’i Bala sy ny mpisoron’ny ala masina. Bala dia andriamanitra lahy, ary ny mpisoron’ny ala masina dia nisolo tena an’i Astarta, andriamanitra vavy. Ny Jiosy teo amin’ny hazo fijaliana no Astarta, ilay andriamanitra vavy, ary Barabasy, ilay sandoka manahaka ny Lehilahin’ny Fahoriana, no Bala, ilay andriamanitra lahy.
Cleopatra was both the queen of the south and the queen of the west. Antony was the image of Rome, part of the threefold triumvirate sworn to avenge the assassination of Julius. Julius death by twenty-three wounds represented the papacies deadly wound in 1798, in fulfillment of verse forty of Daniel eleven. Augustine at Actium represents the healing of that deadly wound. The wound is healed when Antony and Cleopatra die. Antony and Cleopatra represent the image of the beast in the United States that is a threefold prophetic entity, consisting of the earth beast and its two horns. Antony is one part and Cleopatra represents the other two parts. Whether it is Antony’s Rome, or Cleopatra’s Egypt and Greece, they die together at the Sunday law when the sixth kingdom of Bible prophecy ends. Prophetically Cleopatra in relation to Antony is the mixture of church craft and statecraft, with the church craft seducing and controlling the statecraft.
Kleopatra dia sady mpanjakavavin’ny atsimo no mpanjakavavin’ny andrefana. Antonio no sarin’i Roma, ampahany amin’ilay triumvirata telo sosona izay nianiana hamaly faty ny famonoana an’i Jolio. Ny fahafatesan’i Jolio tamin’ny ratra telo amby roapolo dia naneho ny ratra mahafaty nahazo ny fahefan’ny papa tamin’ny 1798, ho fahatanterahan’ny andininy faha-efapolo ao amin’ny Daniela iraika ambin’ny folo. Aogostosy tao Aktioma dia maneho ny fanasitranana izany ratra mahafaty izany. Sitrana ilay ratra rehefa maty i Antonio sy Kleopatra. Antonio sy Kleopatra dia maneho ny sarin’ilay bibidia ao Etazonia, izay antokon-javatra ara-paminaniana telo sosona, ahitana ilay bibidia avy amin’ny tany sy ny tandrony roa. Antonio no ampahany iray ary Kleopatra no maneho ireo ampahany roa hafa. Na ny Roman’i Antonio izany, na ny Egypta sy Gresin’i Kleopatra, dia miara-maty amin’ny lalàn’ny Alahady rehefa mifarana ny fanjakana fahenina amin’ny faminanian’ny Baiboly. Ara-paminaniana, Kleopatra eo amin’ny fifandraisany amin’i Antonio dia ny fifangaroan’ny hafetsen’ny fiangonana sy ny hafetsen’ny fanjakana, ka ny hafetsen’ny fiangonana no mamitaka sy mifehy ny hafetsen’ny fanjakana.
The Second Death Typified
Ny Fahafatesana Faharoa izay Nampitondraina Endrika Mialoha
At another prophetic level Cleopatra’s relation to Julius Caesar and Marc Antony represents two times that the church craft of Cleopatra is in a relationship with the statecraft of the Roman Empire. She was left by Julius in 1798 at her first symbolic death, in fulfillment of verse forty of Daniel eleven; and then she comes to her end with none to help, at Actium in fulfillment of verse forty-five of Daniel eleven. Verse forty is the alpha of her first deadly wound that is to be healed and the omega of verse forty-five is where she receives her second and final death.
Amin’ny ambaratonga ara-paminaniana iray hafa, ny fifandraisan’i Cleopatra tamin’i Julius Caesar sy Marc Antony dia maneho fotoana roa izay ihavian’ny rafitra fiangonana an’i Cleopatra ao anatin’ny fifandraisana amin’ny rafitra fanjakana an’ny Fanjakana Romanina. Navelan’i Julius izy tamin’ny 1798, tamin’ny fahafatesany ara-tandindona voalohany, ho fahatanterahan’ny andininy faha-efapolo ao amin’ny Daniela toko fahiraika ambin’ny folo; ary avy eo dia tonga amin’ny farany izy ka tsy misy hanampy azy, tao Actium, ho fahatanterahan’ny andininy faha-dimy amby efapolo ao amin’ny Daniela toko fahiraika ambin’ny folo. Ny andininy faha-efapolo no alfa amin’ny ratra mahafaty voalohany nahazo azy izay hositranina, ary ny omega ao amin’ny andininy faha-dimy amby efapolo no toerana andraisany ny fahafatesany faharoa sy farany.
As with the four Roman powers of verse sixteen through twenty-two, Cleopatra as a biblical symbol has more than one meaning, based upon the context. Julius left her in 1798 when kingly support was removed, and then her deadly wound is healed at the Sunday law, but the ten kings of Revelation seventeen ultimately destroy her with fire, when she meets her second and final death.
Tahaka ireo fahefana romana efatra ao amin’ny andininy fahenina ambin’ny folo ka hatramin’ny faharoa amby roapolo, i Kleopatra amin’ny maha-marika ara-Baiboly azy dia manana heviny mihoatra ny iray, araka ny tontolon-kevitra misy azy. Nandao azy i Jolio tamin’ny taona 1798 rehefa nesorina ny fanohanana mpanjaka, ary avy eo dia sitrana ny feriny mahafaty amin’ny lalàn’ny Alahady; nefa ireo mpanjaka folo ao amin’ny Apokalypsy fahafito ambin’ny folo no handringana azy amin’ny afo amin’ny farany, rehefa mihaona amin’ny fahafatesany faharoa sady farany izy.
Cleopatra is a symbol of the twofold nature represented by the atheism of Pharoah’s Egypt, and the religious philosophy of Greece. Her twofold nature represents the statecraft of Egypt and the church craft of Greece. Greek religious philosophy is represented by the Greek goddess Athena, who was enshrined as a statue in her temple, called the Parthenon. Athena is the symbol of wisdom, and as a woman she represents a religion of human education, in contrast with Divine education.
Kleopatra dia tandindon’ny toetra roa sosona izay asehon’ny tsy finoan’Andriamanitra tao amin’ny Egyptan’i Farao sy ny filozofia ara-pivavahan’i Gresy. Ny toetra roa sosona ananany dia maneho ny tetik’asan’ny fanjakana tao Egypta sy ny tetik’asan’ny fiangonana tao Gresy. Ny filozofia ara-pivavahana grika dia asehon’i Athena, andriamanibavy grika, izay natsangana ho sarivongana tao amin’ny tempoliny, antsoina hoe Parthenon. Athena dia tandindon’ny fahendrena, ary amin’ny maha-vehivavy azy dia maneho fivavahana miorina amin’ny fanabeazana avy amin’ny olombelona izy, mifanohitra amin’ny fanabeazana avy amin’Andriamanitra.
The two horns of the United States are Republicanism and Protestantism, which were typified in France by Egypt and Sodom. Egypt is statecraft and Sodom is church craft; thus, Republicanism aligns with Egypt and Protestantism with Sodom. Republicanism is Egypt and Protestantism is Sodom and Greece. The symbol of human education is the Greek goddess Athena, whose temple was the Parthenon that finds its modern twin in Nashville, Tennessee’s Parthenon temple. The symbol of the corrupt church that aligns with the Republican horn in the United States at the Sunday law is represented as Cleopatra, Ashtaroth, Salome and Sodom.
Ny tandroka roa an’i Etazonia dia ny Repoblikanisma sy ny Protestantisma, izay naseho mialoha tao Frantsa tamin’i Egypta sy Sodoma. Egypta dia ny tetik’asan’ny fanjakana ary Sodoma dia ny tetik’asan’ny fiangonana; koa ny Repoblikanisma dia mifanaraka amin’i Egypta ary ny Protestantisma amin’i Sodoma. Ny Repoblikanisma dia Egypta ary ny Protestantisma dia Sodoma sy Grisia. Ny mariky ny fanabeazana maha-olombelona dia i Athena, andriamanibavin’ny Grika, izay ny tempoliny dia ny Parthenon, ka ny mitovy aminy amin’izao andro izao dia hita ao Nashville, Tennessee, dia ny tempolin’ny Parthenon. Ny mariky ny fiangonana simba izay miray amin’ilay tandroka repoblikana ao Etazonia amin’ny lalànan’ny Alahady dia aseho ho Kleopatra, Astarta, Salome ary Sodoma.
Cleopatra portrays the atheism of Pharoah and the religion of the Greeks. The religion that accompanies the philosophy of atheism is the worship of Greek education. Jesus always illustrates the end with the beginning and the tree in the garden that was forbidden to eat was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, typifying the religion of Greek philosophy that Sister White calls, “higher education.” It identifies and emphasizes Cleopatra’s Greek religion of wisdom as the corrupted and counterfeit of true education in the great controversy between Christ and Satan.
I Cleopatra dia maneho ny tsy finoan’Andriamanitra an’i Farao sy ny fivavahan’ny Grika. Ny fivavahana izay manaraka ny filozofian’ny tsy finoan’Andriamanitra dia ny fanompoam-pivavahana amin’ny fanabeazana grika. Mandrakariva i Jesosy no mampiseho ny fiafarana amin’ny fiandohana, ary ilay hazo tao amin’ny saha izay voarara tsy hohanina dia ny hazon’ny fahalalana ny tsara sy ny ratsy, izay tandindon’ny fivavahan’ny filozofia grika, antsoin’i Rahavavy White hoe: “fanabeazana ambony.” Izany no mampahafantatra sy manasongadina ny fivavahana grika momba ny fahendrena an’i Cleopatra ho toy ny fanimbàna sy sandoka manoloana ny fanabeazana marina ao amin’ilay fifanandrinana lehibe eo amin’i Kristy sy Satana.
Nashville, Tennessee is called the “Athens of the south,” and Cleopatra was the last literal queen of the south. The last queen of the south typified the next and first spiritual king of the south, fulfilled by atheistic France. Atheistic France typifies the United States, where in Nashville, Tennessee, “Athens of the south” the Parthenon temple for the goddess Athena is symbolically represented. The temple is located at 2500 West End in Nashville. The number twenty-five represents the closed door of Matthew twenty-five’s three parables. Cleopatra as both the queen of the “south” and “west” comes to her “end” in Athens of the south.
Nashville, Tennessee dia antsoina hoe “Athens an’ny atsimo,” ary i Cleopatra no mpanjakavavin’ny atsimo ara-bakiteny farany. Ilay mpanjakavavin’ny atsimo farany dia tandindon’ilay mpanjakan’ny atsimo ara-panahy manaraka sady voalohany, izay tanteraka tamin’i Frantsa tsy mino an’Andriamanitra. I Frantsa tsy mino an’Andriamanitra dia tandindon’i Etazonia, izay ao Nashville, Tennessee, “Athens an’ny atsimo,” no isehoan’ny tempolin’ny Parthenon ho an’ilay andriamanibavy Athena amin’ny endrika tandindona. Any amin’ny 2500 West End ao Nashville no misy io tempoly io. Ny isa dimy amby roapolo dia maneho ny varavarana mihidy ao amin’ny fanoharana telo ao amin’ny Matio dimy amby roapolo. I Cleopatra, amin’ny maha-mpanjakavavin’ny “atsimo” sy ny “andrefana” azy, dia tonga amin’ny “farany” ao Athens an’ny atsimo.
With these considerations of Actium, Cleopatra, Augustus and Antony we return to verse twenty-four through verse thirty of Daniel eleven. Perhaps, the vaguest part of the passage is when they speak lies at one table.
Amin’ireo fandinihana ireo momba an’i Actium, Kleopatra, Aogosto ary Antonio dia miverina amin’ny andininy faha-efatra amby roapolo ka hatramin’ny andininy faha-telopolo ao amin’ny Daniela toko faha-iraika ambin’ny folo isika. Angamba, ny ampahany manjavozavo indrindra amin’ity andalan-teny ity dia ilay milaza fa miteny lainga eo amin’ny latabatra iray izy ireo.
And both these kings’ hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall not prosper: for yet the end shall be at the time appointed. Daniel 11:27.
Ary samy hanjakan’ireto mpanjaka roa ireto dia samy hirona hanao ratsy; ary hifandainga eo amin’ny latabatra iray ihany izy; nefa tsy hambinina izany; fa mbola ho amin’ny fotoana voatendry ihany ny farany. Daniela 11:27.
The time appointed in the verse is 330, the end of the “time” of verse twenty-four. The time appointed represents the Sunday law for the United States and it also represents the close of human probation for the world. Before the Sunday law the two kings, whose hearts were to do mischief will speak lies to one another at one table. Before the Sunday law of verses sixteen and forty-one of Daniel eleven, two kings will speak lies at one table, but their lies do not prosper. Who are the two kings that speak lies to one another? Before we answer that thought, I will remind us of some symbolism we have previously addressed in this series.
Ny fotoana voatendry ao amin’ilay andininy dia 330, dia ny fiafaran’ilay “fotoana” ao amin’ny andininy faha-efatra amby roapolo. Io fotoana voatendry io dia maneho ny lalàna Alahady ho an’i Etazonia ary maneho koa ny fifaranan’ny fotoam-pitsarana ho an’ny olombelona maneran-tany. Alohan’ny lalàna Alahady, ireo mpanjaka roa, izay ny fony dia hanao ratsy, dia hifampiteny lainga eo amin’ny latabatra iray. Alohan’ny lalàna Alahady ao amin’ny andininy faha-enina ambin’ny folo sy faha-iray amby efapolo ao amin’ny Daniela 11, mpanjaka roa no hifampiteny lainga eo amin’ny latabatra iray, nefa tsy mandroso ny laingany. Iza moa ireo mpanjaka roa mifampiteny lainga? Alohan’ny hamaliantsika izany hevitra izany, dia hampahatsiahy antsika ny sasantsasany amin’ireo tandindona efa nodinihintsika teo aloha ato amin’ity andian-dahatsoratra ity aho.
The four Roman rulers represent a variety of prophetic symbols depending on what context they are considered. Though Roman rulers, as a symbol they essentially represent the prophetic history of ancient Judah as they transitioned from the Seleucid domination into the domination of the Romans.
Ny mpitondra romana efatra dia maneho tandindona ara-paminaniana samihafa arakaraka ny tontolo ijerena azy. Na dia mpitondra romana aza izy ireo, amin’ny maha-tandindona azy dia maneho indrindra ny tantara ara-paminaniana momba an’i Joda fahiny izy ireo, tamin’ny fotoana nifindrany avy teo ambanin’ny fanapahan’ny Seleokida ho eo ambanin’ny fanapahan’ny Romanina.
Pompey was a general and the next three Roman rulers were all Caesars. Julius in relation to Augustus represented two threefold unions with the two triumvirates, the first unofficial, the second official. All four rulers represent the Sunday law in certain contexts. Pompey conquered the glorious land, Julius, represented by twenty-three stab wounds is the first angel, for he is the first Caesar, and he typifies the third angel, which was Tiberias. Tiberias at the cross, which is the Sunday law is also represented by twenty-three, for twenty-three represents the at-one-ment; and the cross is a most essential part of the work of Christ in combining His Divinity with our humanity. So, Julius and Tiberias are the first and third message, represented by twenty-three.
Pompey dia jeneraly, ary Kaisara avokoa ireo mpitondra romana telo nanaraka azy. Julius, raha ampitahaina amin’i Augustus, dia naneho firaisana roa samy telo sosona tamin’ireo triumvirate roa, ny voalohany tsy ofisialy, ny faharoa ofisialy. Ireo mpitondra efatra ireo dia samy maneho ny lalàn’ny Alahady ao anatin’ny toe-javatra sasany. Pompey no nandresy ny tany be voninahitra; Julius, izay asehon’ny ratra fanindronana telo amby roapolo, no anjely voalohany, satria izy no Kaisara voalohany, ary maneho tandindona ny amin’ny anjely fahatelo, izay Tiberias. Tiberias teo amin’ny hazo fijaliana, izay ilay lalàn’ny Alahady, dia aseho amin’ny isa telo amby roapolo koa, fa ny telo amby roapolo dia maneho ny fampihavanana ho iray; ary ny hazo fijaliana dia ampahany tena ilaina indrindra amin’ny asan’i Kristy amin’ny fampiraisana ny Maha-Andriamanitra Azy amin’ny maha-olombelona antsika. Koa i Julius sy Tiberias dia ny hafatra voalohany sy fahatelo, asehon’ny isa telo amby roapolo.
Julius was not the romantic figure he is often portrayed as in Hollywood lore; he was a ruthless man bent on power. Tiberias was worse than Julius, for his vileness is even addressed in the verse, for the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet is twenty-two and the first letter is one. The alpha is smaller than the omega and Tiberias’ vileness is located in verse twenty-two, which is the last letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and in between the two vile persons represented by Julius and Tiberias was Augustus. Augustus represents the height of the glory of Rome’s power and prestige. As the opposite of the first and third message he is represented by the letter thirteen, which is a symbol of rebellion. Augustus secured his kingdom by subduing the rebellion of Antony and Cleopatra, the most famous rebellion of Rome’s history.
Julius dia tsy ilay olo-malaza ara-pitiavana aseho matetika ao amin’ny lovantsofina hollywoodiana; lehilahy tsy nisy indrafo, nikendry fahefana, izy. Tiberias dia ratsy noho Julius aza, satria ny fahavetavetany dia voaresaka ao amin’ilay andininy mihitsy; fa ny litera farany amin’ny abidy hebreo dia roa amby roa-polo, ary ny litera voalohany dia iray. Ny alpha dia kely noho ny omega, ary ny fahavetavetan’i Tiberias dia hita ao amin’ny andininy faha-roa amby roa-polo, izay litera farany amin’ny abidy hebreo; ary teo anelanelan’ireo olona roa vetaveta ireo, izay asehon’i Julius sy Tiberias, dia nisy an’i Augustus. Augustus dia maneho ny tampon’ny voninahitra sy ny hasin’ny fahefana romanina. Amin’ny maha-mifanohitra amin’ny hafatra voalohany sy fahatelo azy, dia asehon’ny litera telo ambin’ny folo izy, izay famantarana ny fikomiana. Augustus dia nanamafy ny fanjakany tamin’ny fampietrena ny fikomian’i Antony sy Cleopatra, ilay fikomiana malaza indrindra teo amin’ny tantaran’i Roma.
Augustus is the Roman power who conquered the third obstacle and in doing so he represented the Sunday law, and the Roman power who reigns during the forty-two symbolic months of Revelation thirteen’s chapter of rebellion. When placed before the Sunday law Pompey is both 1798 and 1989, making Pompey a symbol of Antiochus Magnus ending the fourth Syrian War from 219 unto 217 BC, in fulfillment of verse ten of chapter eleven. Julius Caesar is then aligned with verses eleven and twelve and the battle of the borderline, the battle of Raphia in 217 BC. There Julius is also Antiochus Magnus, and Augustus Caesar is also Antiochus Magnus in verse fifteen’s battle of Panium. Then in verse sixteen Tiberias is the Sunday law, but he is not Antiochus Magnus, for there he is Pompey, for Jesus always illustrates the end with the beginning. The verse marks the end of the Seleucid Empire typifying the end of the United States as the sixth kingdom of Bible prophecy.
Aogosto no fahefana romana izay nandresy ny sakana fahatelo, ary tamin’ny fanaovany izany dia naneho ny lalàn’ny Alahady izy, sady izy koa no fahefana romana izay manjaka mandritra ny roa amby efapolo volana ara-tandindona ao amin’ny toko fahatelo ambin’ny folo amin’ny Apokalypsy, dia ilay toko momba ny fikomiana. Rehefa apetraka eo alohan’ny lalàn’ny Alahady i Pompée dia samy 1798 sy 1989 izy, ka mahatonga an’i Pompée ho tandindon’i Antiochus Magnus izay namarana ny Ady Siriana fahefatra nanomboka tamin’ny 219 ka hatramin’ny 217 tal. J.K., ho fanatanterahana ny andininy faha‑folo ao amin’ny toko faha‑iraika ambin’ny folo. I Jolio Kaisara kosa dia ampifanarahana amin’ny andininy faha‑iraika ambin’ny folo sy faha‑roa ambin’ny folo ary amin’ny ady teo amin’ny sisintany, dia ny adin’i Raphia tamin’ny 217 tal. J.K. Ao i Jolio dia Antiochus Magnus koa, ary Aogosto Kaisara dia Antiochus Magnus koa ao amin’ny adin’i Panium ao amin’ny andininy faha‑dimy ambin’ny folo. Ary amin’ny andininy faha‑enina ambin’ny folo dia i Tiberias no lalàn’ny Alahady, nefa tsy Antiochus Magnus izy eo, fa i Pompée izy, satria i Jesosy mandrakariva maneho ny farany amin’ny alalan’ny fiandohana. Io andininy io no manamarika ny fiafaran’ny Fanjakana Seleokida, izay manondro mialoha ny fiafaran’i Etazonia amin’ny maha-fanjakana fahenina ao amin’ny faminaniana ara-Baiboly azy.
There are more alignments to be made of the four Roman rulers, and the line represents the hidden history of verse forty. The Maccabean line of verse twenty-three also illustrates the hidden history of verse forty. Then in verses twenty-four, the story of pagan Imperial Rome is represented by a time—three hundred and sixty years. The line of Roman history represented from verse twenty-four through to verse thirty is also an illustration of the hidden history of verse forty. It ends in verse thirty-one when the subject changes from pagan to papal Rome. Pagan Rome is still in the verse, but there it is not represented as the fourth kingdom of Bible prophecy, but as the political power that placed the papacy on the throne in 538. In 538 the papacy passed a Sunday law, so verse thirty-one is aligning with verses sixteen and forty-one. Verse twenty-four introduced the battle of Actium and the history associated with the line.
Mbola misy fampifanarahana hafa tsy maintsy atao momba ireo mpanapaka romana efatra, ary io tsipika io dia maneho ny tantara miafina ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo. Ny tsipika makabeana ao amin’ny andininy faha-telo amby roapolo dia mampiseho koa ny tantara miafina ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo. Avy eo, ao amin’ny andininy faha-efatra amby roapolo, ny tantaran’i Roma Imperialy jentilisa dia aseho amin’ny alalan’ny fe-potoana iray—telonjato sy enimpolo taona. Ny tsipika amin’ny tantara romana aseho hatramin’ny andininy faha-efatra amby roapolo ka hatramin’ny andininy faha-telopolo dia sary ihany koa maneho ny tantara miafina ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo. Mifarana ao amin’ny andininy faha-iraika amby telopolo izany, rehefa miova avy amin’i Roma jentilisa ho amin’i Roma papaly ny lohahevitra. Mbola ao anatin’ilay andininy ihany i Roma jentilisa, nefa eo dia tsy aseho ho fanjakana fahefatra amin’ny faminanian’ny Baiboly izy, fa ho hery politika izay nametraka ny papa teo amin’ny seza fiandrianana tamin’ny taona 538. Tamin’ny 538 dia namoaka lalàna alahady ny fahefana papaly, ka ny andininy faha-iraika amby telopolo dia mifanaraka amin’ny andininy faha-enina ambin’ny folo sy faha-iraika amby efapolo. Ny andininy faha-efatra amby roapolo dia nampiditra ny adin’i Actium sy ny tantara mifandray amin’io tsipika io.
Verse twenty-four is identifying when pagan Rome began to rule supremely for three hundred and sixty years, and then in verse thirty-one papal Rome begins to rule supremely for twelve hundred and sixty-years. The beginning and ending of the line bear the signature of Christ, the Alpha and Omega. In the verses we have the history of Marc Antony, Cleopatra and Augustus Caesar. In verse sixteen pagan Rome conquered the Seleucid Empire in 65 BC, and then Judah in 63 BC. The third obstacle of Actium in 31 BC identified the end of the kingdom of Egypt, as typified by the first obstacles of the Seleucid’s in 65 BC. Once again, we find the signature of the First and the Last. 65 BC was the first of three obstacles and it represented the conquering of the king of the north and 31 BC represented the third of three obstacles and it represented the conquering of the king of the south. Judah, as the middle obstacle of the three obstacles, was having a civil war within the walls of Jerusalem when Pompey arrived in 63 BC. The second obstacle is a symbol of rebellion.
Ny andininy faha-roa amby roapolo dia manondro ny fotoana nanombohan’i Roma jentilisa nanapaka tamim-pahamboniana nandritra ny enimpolo amby telonjato taona, ary avy eo ao amin’ny andininy faha-iray amby telopolo dia manomboka manapaka tamim-pahamboniana mandritra ny enimpolo amby roanjato sy arivo taona i Roma papaly. Ny fiandohana sy ny fiafaran’ilay tsipika dia mitondra ny sonian’i Kristy, dia ny Alfa sy Omega. Ao amin’ireo andininy ireo no ahitantsika ny tantaran’i Marc Antony sy Cleopatra ary Augustus Caesar. Ao amin’ny andininy faha-enina ambin’ny folo dia nandresy ny Fanjakana Seleokida i Roma jentilisa tamin’ny 65 talohan’i Kristy, ary avy eo Joda tamin’ny 63 talohan’i Kristy. Ilay sakana fahatelo tao Actium tamin’ny 31 talohan’i Kristy dia nanamarika ny faran’ny fanjakan’i Egypta, araka ny nasehon’ireo sakana voalohany tamin’ny Seleokida tamin’ny 65 talohan’i Kristy. Indray mandeha indray dia hitantsika ny sonian’ny Voalohany sy ny Farany. Ny 65 talohan’i Kristy no voalohany tamin’ireo sakana telo ary naneho ny fandresena ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra, ary ny 31 talohan’i Kristy no fahatelo tamin’ireo sakana telo ary naneho ny fandresena ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo. Joda, amin’ny maha-sakana afovoany azy ao anatin’ireo sakana telo, dia tao anatin’ny ady an-trano tao anatin’ny mandan’i Jerosalema tamin’ny fotoana nahatongavan’i Pompée tamin’ny 63 talohan’i Kristy. Ny sakana faharoa dia tandindon’ny fikomiana.
In 538, the third obstacle for papal Rome was driven out of the City of Rome. That obstacle was the Goths, and there the fifth kingdom of Bible prophecy began; right where the fourth kingdom ended. And just as the fourth kingdom began at its third obstacle, the kingdom of Egypt was defeated, as had been typified in the first obstacle of the Seleucid kingdom. This identifies that the prophetic testimony found in verses twenty-four through to verse thirty, represent a line that is also to be located in the hidden history of verse forty. For this reason, it is essential to consider the various prophetic relationships that are represented by Marc Antony, Cleopatra, Julius Caesar, Pompey and Augustus Caesar.
Tamin’ny taona 538, dia nesorina niala tao amin’ny Tanànan’i Roma ny sakana fahatelo ho an’i Roma pápaly. Io sakana io dia ny Goths, ary teo no nanombohan’ny fanjakana fahadimy araka ny faminanian’ny Baiboly; teo indrindra izay nifaranan’ny fanjakana fahefatra. Ary tahaka ny nanombohan’ny fanjakana fahefatra tamin’ny sakana fahatelony, dia resin’ny fanjakan’i Egypta, araka izay efa naseho ho tandindona tamin’ny sakana voalohan’ny fanjakan’ny Seleokida. Izany no manondro fa ny fijoroana vavolombelona ara-paminaniana hita ao amin’ny andininy faha-efatra amby roapolo ka hatramin’ny andininy faha-telopolo, dia maneho tsipika iray izay tsy maintsy apetraka koa ao amin’ny tantara miafina ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo. Noho izany antony izany dia zava-dehibe ny mandinika ireo fifandraisana ara-paminaniana samihafa izay asehon’i Marc Antony, Cleopatra, Julius Caesar, Pompey ary Augustus Caesar.
So is the vaguest part of the passage of verse twenty-four unto thirty, when they speak lies at one table?
Koa ny ampahany manjavozavo indrindra amin’io andalan-teny io ve dia ny andininy faha-roapolo amby efatra ka hatramin’ny faha-telopolo, raha mandainga eo amin’ny latabatra iray izy ireo?
And both these kings’ hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall not prosper: for yet the end shall be at the time appointed. Daniel 11:27.
Ary samy hanjakan’ireto mpanjaka roa ireto dia samy hifantoka amin’ny fanaovan-dratsy, ary hifampilaza lainga eo am-pihinanana eo amin’ny latabatra iray; nefa tsy hambinina izany, fa mbola ho amin’ny fotoana voatendry ihany ny farany. Daniela 11:27.
Uriah Smith identifies the two kings as Marc Antony and Augustus Caesar.
I Uriah Smith dia manondro ireo mpanjaka roa ireo ho i Marc Antony sy i Augustus Caesar.
“Verse twenty-seven quoted
“Andininy fahafito amby roa-polo nalaina”
“Antony and Caesar were formerly in alliance. Yet under the garb of friendship they were both aspiring and intriguing for universal dominion. Their protestations of deference to, and friendship for, each other, were the utterances of hypocrites. They spoke lies at one table. Octavia, the wife of Antony and sister of Caesar, declared to the people of Rome at the time Antony divorced her, that she had consented to marry him solely with the hope that it would prove a pledge of union between Caesar and Antony. But that counsel did not prosper. The rupture came; and in the conflict that ensued, Caesar came off entirely victorious.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 276.
“I Antony sy Caesar dia niombona firaisana taloha. Kanefa, teo ambanin’ny fitafian’ny finamanana, izy roa tonta dia samy nikatsaka sy nanao teti-dratsy hahazoany fanapahana maneran-tany. Ny fanambaràny ho maneho fanajana sy finamanana amin’ny andaniny sy ny ankilany dia tenin’ny mpihatsaravelatsihy. Niteny lainga teo am-pizaràna latabatra iray izy ireo. Octavia, vadin’i Antony sady anabavin’i Caesar, dia nanambara tamin’ny vahoakan’i Roma tamin’ny fotoana nisarahan’i Antony taminy, fa nanaiky hanambady azy izy noho ny fanantenana tokana fa izany dia ho porofon’ny firaisana eo amin’i Caesar sy Antony. Nefa tsy nahomby izany saina izany. Tonga ny fisarahana; ary tamin’ny ady izay nanaraka, dia i Caesar no nivoaka ho mpandresy tanteraka.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 276.
When Octavia identified that her marriage to Antony was as a pledge of union, it identified the marital alliance which had been typified earlier in chapter eleven with the Hellenistic-era marriage of Berenice to the Seleucid king Antiochus II Theos around 252 BC. Berenice was the daughter of Ptolemy II Philadelphus. Octavia and Berenice represent diplomatic marriages or prophetically, treaties. Verses five through ten identify the history of the diplomatic marriage between the southern and northern kingdoms, and when Marc Antony and Octavian, later known as Augustus Caesar, arranged the marriage, they also divided the kingdom into east and west.
Rehefa nanondro i Octavia fa ny fanambadiany tamin’i Antony dia toy ny antoka fanakambanana, dia nanondro ilay firaisam-panambadiana ara-panambadiana izay efa naseho ho tandindona tany aloha tao amin’ny toko fahiraika ambin’ny folo tamin’ny alalan’ny fanambadian’i Berenice tamin’ny vanim-potoana helenistika tamin’i Antiokosy II Theos, mpanjaka Seleokida, manodidina ny taona 252 tal. JK. Berenice dia zanakavavin’i Ptolemaiosy II Philadelphos. I Octavia sy Berenice dia maneho fanambadiana ara-diplomatika na, ara-paminaniana, fifanekena. Ny andininy faha-dimy ka hatramin’ny faha-folo dia manondro ny tantaran’ilay fanambadiana ara-diplomatika teo amin’ny fanjakana atsimo sy avaratra, ary rehefa nandamina izany fanambadiana izany i Marka Antony sy Oktaviana, izay nantsoina tatỳ aoriana hoe Aogosto Kaisara, dia nozarainy ho atsinanana sy andrefana koa ny fanjakana.
The Pact of Brundisium (40 BC) was a negotiated settlement between Marc Antony and Octavian (later Augustus) to resolve tensions in the Second Triumvirate after near-civil war. It involved dividing Roman territories (Antony east, Octavian west) and was sealed by Antony’s marriage to Octavia (Octavian’s sister). In 39 BC the original five-year Triumvirate term expired, Antony sailed to Italy with 300+ ships that were initially denied to land at Brundisium, so they ultimately docked at Tarentum. Octavian met him there after prolonged mediations produced by an unwillingness of Antony’s army to fight with Octavian’s army and vise versa. Octavia played a key mediating role, persuading Antony to support Octavian against Sextus Pompey. They renewed the Triumvirate for another five years (to 32 BC), with Antony providing Octavian 120 ships in exchange for promised troops (which Octavian later withheld).
Ny Fifanekena tao Brundisium (40 tal. J.K.) dia fifanarahana nifampiraharahana teo amin’i Marc Antony sy Octavian (izay nantsoina tatỳ aoriana hoe Augustus) mba hamahana ny fifanenjanana tao anatin’ny Triumvirate Faharoa taorian’ny ady an-trano saika nipoaka. Tafiditra tao anatin’izany ny fizarana ny faritany romana (i Antony tany atsinanana, i Octavian tany andrefana), ary nohamafisina tamin’ny fanambadian’i Antony an’i Octavia (anabavin’i Octavian) izany. Tamin’ny 39 tal. J.K. dia tapitra ny fe-potoana dimy taona voalohan’ny Triumvirate; niondrana an-tsambo nankany Italia i Antony niaraka tamin’ny sambo mihoatra ny 300, nefa nolavina tsy hahazo hiditra an-tanety tao Brundisium ireo tamin’ny voalohany, ka niafara tamin’ny fidirana tao Tarentum izy ireo. Nifanena taminy tany i Octavian taorian’ny fanelanelanana naharitra ela, izay vokatry ny tsy fahavononan’ny tafik’i Antony hiady amin’ny tafik’i Octavian, ary torak’izany koa ny mifanohitra amin’izany. I Octavia dia nandray anjara lehibe tamin’ny fanelanelanana, ka nandresy lahatra an’i Antony hanohana an’i Octavian hiady amin’i Sextus Pompey. Nohavaozin’izy ireo indray ny Triumvirate haharitra dimy taona fanampiny (hatramin’ny 32 tal. J.K.), ka nanome sambo 120 an’i Octavian i Antony ho takalon’ny tafika nampanantenaina (izay notazonin’i Octavian tatỳ aoriana).
In 32 BC there was an open break between the two antagonists. Relations had deteriorated through propaganda, Antony’s eastern focus (with Cleopatra), and Octavian’s consolidation in the west. Octavian rejected later conference proposals from Antony before Actium.
Tamin’ny taona 32 talohan’i Kristy dia nisy fisarahana mibaribary teo amin’ireo mpifaninana roa tonta. Niharatsy ny fifandraisana noho ny fampielezan-kevitra, ny fifantohan’i Antony tany atsinanana (niaraka tamin’i Cleopatra), ary ny fanamafisan’i Octavian ny fahefany tany andrefana. Nolavin’i Octavian ireo tolo-kevitra tatỳ aoriana momba ny fihaonambe avy tamin’i Antony talohan’i Actium.
In the diplomatic marriage with the king of the north (Antiochus) and the king of the south (Ptolemy), it was the southern king that supplied the bride, with the diplomatic marriage of Antony (the east) and Octavian (the west); the bride was supplied by the west. Both diplomatic marriages failed and the supplier of the daughter or sister was ultimately victorious over the power who broke the treaty.
Tamin’ny fanambadiana ara-diplomatika nifanaovan’ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra (Antiochus) sy ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo (Ptolemy), dia ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo no nanome ny ampakarina; fa tamin’ny fanambadiana ara-diplomatika nifanaovan’i Antony (ny atsinanana) sy Octavian (ny andrefana), dia ny andrefana no nanome ny ampakarina. Samy tsy nahomby ireo fanambadiana ara-diplomatika roa ireo, ary ilay nanome ny zanakavavy na ny anabavy no nony farany nandresy ny hery izay nandika ny fanekena.
The Testimony of Three
Ny Fijoroana ho Vavolombelon’ny Telo
At the end of the Seleucid Empire there was a third treaty where lies were spoke at one table. This occurred in the context of the Fifth Syrian War (202–195 BC), when Antiochus III Magnus exploited the weakness of the Ptolemaic Kingdom after Ptolemy IV Philopator’s death in 204 BC. Ptolemy V Epiphanes (Ptolemy V) ascended the throne as a child (around age 5–6), leaving Egypt under regents and vulnerable to internal chaos, native revolts, and external threats.
Tamin’ny faran’ny Fanjakana Seleokida dia nisy fanekena fahatelo izay nilazana lainga teo amin’ny latabatra iray. Izany dia niseho tao anatin’ny tontolon’ny Ady Siriana Fahadimy (202–195 tal. J.K.), rehefa nanararaotra ny fahalemen’ny Fanjakana Ptolemaika i Antiochus III Magnus taorian’ny nahafatesan’i Ptolemaiosy IV Philopator tamin’ny 204 tal. J.K. Niakatra teo amin’ny seza fiandrianana mbola zaza i Ptolemaiosy V Epiphanes (Ptolemaiosy V) (eo amin’ny faha-5–6 taonany), ka namela an’i Egypta ho eo ambany fitondran’ny mpitantana mpisolo toerana sady mora tratran’ny korontana anatiny, ny fikomian’ny tompon-tany, ary ny fandrahonana avy any ivelany.
Antiochus Magnus had already invaded and seized much of the Ptolemaic territories in Coele-Syria, Palestine, and Asia Minor after victories like the Battle of Panium (200 BC). Rather than fully conquering Egypt (which risked Roman intervention, as Rome was pressuring him to stay out of certain areas), he pursued a diplomatic marriage alliance as a “protector” figure. In 197/195 BC, as part of the peace treaty ending the war, Antiochus Magnus betrothed and then married his young daughter Cleopatra I Syra (also called Cleopatra Syra) to the child Ptolemy V (the marriage took place in 193 BC at Raphia; Ptolemy was 16, Cleopatra 10).
Taorian’ny fandresena toy ny Adin’i Panium (200 tal. J.K.) dia efa nanafika sy nahazo ny ampahany betsaka tamin’ireo faritany Ptolemaika tao Coele-Syria, Palestina, ary Azia Minora i Antiokosa Magnus. Raha tokony handresy tanteraka an’i Egypta izy (izay mety hiteraka fidiran’i Roma an-tsehatra, satria nanery azy tsy hiditra amin’ny faritra sasany i Roma), dia nitady firaisana amin’ny alalan’ny fanambadiana ara-diplomatika izy tamin’ny fisehoana ho toy ny “mpiaro”. Tamin’ny 197/195 tal. J.K., ho anisan’ny fifanarahana fandriampahalemana namarana ny ady, dia nanambady i Antiokosa Magnus ny zanany vavy mbola tanora, Cleopatra I Syra (antsoina koa hoe Cleopatra Syra), ho vady fofombadin’i Ptolemaiosy V mbola zaza, ary avy eo dia nampaka-bady azy taminy (ny fanambadiana dia natao tamin’ny 193 tal. J.K. tao Raphia; 16 taona i Ptolemaiosy, ary 10 taona i Cleopatra).
This was framed as a generous gesture: Antiochus positioned himself as an ally and “protector” of the young king, securing peace while retaining gains in Asia. The marriage gave him indirect influence over Egypt through his daughter (he hoped she would remain loyal to her Seleucid roots and act as a pro-Syrian voice in the Ptolemaic court). The ploy backfired for Cleopatra sided with her husband and Egypt, not her father, undermining Antiochus’s long-term control. This mirrors the Pact of Brundisium (40 BC) and related to Roman events in several ways.
Natolotra ho toy ny fihetsika feno fahalalahan-tanana izany: nametraka ny tenany ho mpiara-dia sy “mpiaro” an’ilay mpanjaka tanora i Antiochus, ka niantoka ny fihavanana sady nitahiry ny tombony azony tany Azia. Nomen’io fanambadiana io hery mitaona ankolaka teo amin’i Egypta izy tamin’ny alalan’ny zanany vavy (nanantena izy fa hitoetra ho mahatoky amin’ny fakany Seleokida izy ka hiasa ho feo manohana an’i Syria ao amin’ny lapan’ny Ptolemaika). Nivadika tamin’izay nokasaina anefa izany tetika izany, fa i Cleopatra dia niandany tamin’ny vadiny sy i Egypta, fa tsy tamin-drainy, ka nandrava ny fanaraham-pahefan’i Antiochus maharitra. Mampitovy amin’ny Fifanarahan’i Brundisium (40 tal. J.K.) izany ary mifandray amin’ny zava-nitranga romana amin’ny lafiny maro.
Just as Antony married Octavia (sister of Octavian) to bind rival powers after near-war, Antiochus used his daughter’s marriage to Ptolemy V to formalize a temporary peace and territorial division (Seleucids kept conquests in the north, Ptolemy retained Egypt the south).
Tahaka ny nanambadian’i Antony an’i Octavia (anabavin’i Octavian) mba hampifamatotra ireo hery nifandrafy taorian’ny saika nisian’ny ady, dia nampiasain’i Antiochus ny fanambadian’ny zanany vavy tamin’i Ptolemaios V mba hanamafisana amim-pomba ofisialy fihavanam-potoana sy fizarana faritany (ny Seleokida nitana ny fandresena tany avaratra, ary i Ptolemaios nitana an’i Egypta tany atsimo).
Antiochus acted as a de facto guardian over the child-king Ptolemy V (via family ties), similar to how Octavian (and the Triumvirate) positioned themselves amid power vacuums or rivalries. In both cases, the “stronger” figure (Antiochus/Octavian) sought leverage over a vulnerable counterpart through kinship. Both arrangements brought short-term stability but ‘did not prosper’ long-term due to underlying distrust—Cleopatra favored Egypt (undermining Antiochus), while Antony’s eastern focus (Cleopatra VII) led to the breakdown with Octavian.
Niasa tahaka ny mpiambina ara-draharaha an’ilay mpanjaka mbola zaza, Ptolemaiosy V, i Antiokosy (noho ny fatoram-pihavanana ara-pianakaviana), mitovy amin’ny fomba nametrahan’i Oktaviana (sy ny Triumvirate) ny tenany teo anivon’ny banga ara-pahefana na ny fifandrafiana. Tamin’ireo tranga roa ireo, ilay olona “mahery kokoa” (Antiokosy/Oktaviana) dia nitady hanana fahefana mifehy eo ambonin’ilay ankilany marefo amin’ny alalan’ny fihavanana. Samy nitondra fitoniana vetivety ireo fandaminana ireo, nefa “tsy nahomby” tamin’ny fotoana maharitra noho ny tsy fifampitokisana tao ifotony—i Kleopatra dia niandany tamin’i Egypta (ka nanohintohina an’i Antiokosy), raha ny fitodihan’i Antony tany atsinanana kosa (Kleopatra VII) no nitarika ho amin’ny faharavan’ny fifandraisany tamin’i Oktaviana.
Ptolemy V’s minority under regents parallels the instability after Julius Caesar’s death (leading to the Triumvirate’s formation and power struggles). The marriage of Berenice to Antiochus marked the beginning of the Seleucid Empire’s history in Daniel eleven, and the marriage of Antiochus Magnus daughter to the Egyptian child king, marked the ending of the Seleucid Empire. The ending of the marriage of Marc Antony to Octavia marked the ending of the Ptolemaic kingdom. The ending of Judah as God’s covenant people took place at the cross, and that Judean kingdom began with the Maccabees and the league they made with Rome. All of these prophetic lines are represented within the narrative of Daniel chapter eleven, and they all align with the hidden history of verse forty. Beginning in verse five we have the treaty of Berenice, that leads to Antiochus the Great and the treaty of his daughter Cleopatra Syra, that takes place in the history of the Maccabees of verse twenty-three. The Maccabees become part of the line based upon their rebellion against Antiochus Epiphanes, one of the last of the Seleucid Dynasty.
Ny fanjakan’i Ptolemaios V mbola zaza teo ambanin’ny fitondran’ny mpitondra mpisolo toerana dia mifanandrify amin’ny tsy fahamarinan-toetra niseho taorian’ny nahafatesan’i Julius Caesar (izay nitarika tamin’ny niforonan’ny Triumvirate sy ny ady fifanolanana momba ny fahefana). Ny fanambadian’i Berenice tamin’i Antiochus no nanamarika ny fiandohan’ny tantaran’ny Fanjakana Seleokida ao amin’ny Daniela toko fahiraika ambin’ny folo, ary ny fanambadian’ny zanakavavin’i Antiochus Magnus tamin’ilay mpanjaka zaza ejipsiana no nanamarika ny fiafaran’ny Fanjakana Seleokida. Ny fiafaran’ny fanambadian’i Marc Antony tamin’i Octavia no nanamarika ny fiafaran’ny fanjakana Ptolemaika. Ny fiafaran’i Joda amin’ny maha-vahoakan’ny faneken’Andriamanitra azy dia nitranga teo amin’ny hazo fijaliana, ary io fanjakana jodeana io dia nanomboka tamin’ny Makabeo sy ny fanekena nataon’izy ireo tamin’i Roma. Ireo tsipika ara-paminaniana rehetra ireo dia aseho ao anatin’ny fitantarana ao amin’ny Daniela toko fahiraika ambin’ny folo, ary izy rehetra dia mifanaraka amin’ny tantara miafina ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo. Manomboka amin’ny andininy fahadimy dia hitantsika ny fifanarahan’i Berenice, izay mitondra mankany amin’i Antiochus Lehibe sy ny fifanarahana momba an’i Cleopatra Syra zanany vavy, izay miseho ao amin’ny tantaran’ny Makabeo ao amin’ny andininy faha-telo amby roa-polo. Lasa ampahany amin’io tsipika io ny Makabeo noho ny fikomian’izy ireo tamin’i Antiochus Epiphanes, iray amin’ireo farany tamin’ny Tarana-mpanjaka Seleokida.
Antiochus Epiphanes is the Antiochus who was in Egypt in 168 BC near Alexandria during the Sixth Syrian War. Antiochus Epiphanes had invaded Egypt and was on the verge of capturing Alexandria. The Ptolemaic rulers appealed to Rome for help. Rome sent Popillius Laenas (with just a small entourage—no army) to deliver an ultimatum from the Senate; Antiochus must immediately withdraw from Egypt and Cyprus, or face war with Rome. When Antiochus received the letter and asked for time to consult his advisors, Popillius—described as stern and imperious—took his walking stick and drew a circle in the sand around the king’s feet. He then declared, “Before you step out of that circle, give me a reply to lay before the Senate.”
Antiochus Epiphanes dia ilay Antiochus izay tany Egypta tamin’ny 168 tal. J.K., teo akaikin’i Alexandria, nandritra ny Ady Syriana Fahenina. Antiochus Epiphanes dia nanafika an’i Egypta ary efa saiky haka an’i Alexandria. Niantso vonjy tamin’i Roma ireo mpanjaka Ptolemaika. Nalefan’i Roma i Popillius Laenas (niaraka tamin’ny mpanaraka vitsy monja—tsy nitondra tafika akory) hitondra didy farany avy amin’ny Antenimieran-doholona; tsy maintsy miala avy hatrany ao Egypta sy Sipra i Antiochus, raha tsy izany dia hiatrika ady amin’i Roma. Rehefa nandray ilay taratasy i Antiochus ka nangataka fotoana hifampidinihana amin’ireo mpanolo-tsainy, i Popillius—izay lazaina fa henjana sy mpibaiko—dia naka ny tehiny ka nanao faribolana teo amin’ny fasika manodidina ny tongotry ny mpanjaka. Avy eo dia nanambara izy hoe: “Alohan’ny hivoahanao avy ao anatin’io faribolana io, omeo ahy ny valin-teninao mba hoentiko eo anatrehan’ny Antenimieran-doholona.”
The implication was clear; Antiochus could not leave the circle without committing to Rome’s demands—crossing it without agreement would mean war. Stunned and humiliated, Antiochus hesitated briefly but then agreed to comply, withdrew his forces from Egypt, and returned to Syria. This bold act of diplomacy (backed by Rome’s growing reputation for power) forced the retreat without a battle, showcasing Rome’s emerging dominance in the eastern Mediterranean. It’s widely cited as an origin for the phrase “drawing a line in the sand” (though it was literally a circle).
Mazava ny hevitra nentin’izany; tsy nahazo nivoaka ny faribolana i Antiochus raha tsy nanolo-tena hanaiky ny fitakian’i Roma—ny fiampitana azy tsy misy fifanarahana dia hidika ady. Talanjona sy afa-baraka i Antiochus, ka nisalasala vetivety, nefa avy eo dia nanaiky hanaraka izany, nanaisotra ny tafiny avy tany Egypta, ary niverina tany Syria. Ity asa diplaomatika feno fahasahiana ity (notohanan’ny laza nitomboan’i Roma teo amin’ny hery nananany) no nanery ny fihemorana tsy nisy ady, ka naneho ny fiakaran’ny fanjakazakan’i Roma tany amin’ny faritra atsinanan’ny Ranomasina Mediteranea. Matetika izy io no tononina ho niandohan’ilay fomba fiteny hoe “manao tsipika eo amin’ny fasika” (na dia faribolana ara-bakiteny aza no natao).
Antiochus Epiphanes also became the Protestant understanding of the power that exalts himself, falls and establishes the vision in verse fourteen of Daniel eleven.
Antiokosa Epifana koa dia nanjary tao amin’ny fahatakarana protestanta ho ilay fahefana manandra-tena, lavo ary manorina ny fahitana ao amin’ny andininy fahaefatra ambin’ny folo ao amin’ny Daniela toko fahiraika ambin’ny folo.
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 maro no hitsangana hanohitra ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo; ary ny mpangalatra amin’ny firenenao kosa hanandra-tena hampiorina ny fahitana; nefa ho lavo izy. Daniela 11:14.
Antiochus IV Epiphanes reigned 175–164 BC, and was the eighth of thirteen Seleucid kings. He sought to impose Hellenistic culture and unify his empire under Greek religious practices. He plundered the Temple in 169 BC, banned Jewish practices (circumcision, Sabbath observance, Torah study), and forced sacrifices to pagan gods. In December 167 BC he erected a pagan altar (to Zeus) on top of the Jewish altar of burnt offerings in the Temple and sacrificed a pig, along with other profane acts. The desecration was the final straw for observant Jews, who saw it as the ultimate violation of the Temple’s sanctity and God’s law. It sparked immediate resistance when Mattathias (a priest from Modein) refused a Seleucid officer’s order to sacrifice to pagan gods and killed an apostate Jew and the officer, then fled to the hills with his sons (the future Maccabees). This ignited guerrilla warfare and revolt from 167–160 BC which aimed to restore Jewish worship, leading to the rededication of the Temple (Hanukkah) in 164 BC under Judas Maccabeus.
Antiochus IV Epiphanes dia nanjaka tamin’ny 175–164 tal. J.K., ary izy no fahavalo tamin’ireo mpanjaka Seleosida telo ambin’ny folo. Niezaka hampihatra ny kolontsaina helenistika izy sy hampiray ny fanjakany teo ambanin’ny fombam-pivavahana grika. Norobainy ny Tempoly tamin’ny 169 tal. J.K., norarany ny fomba fanao jiosy (famorana, fitandremana ny Sabata, fianarana ny Torah), ary noterena hanao fanatitra ho an’ireo andriamani-tsampy ny olona. Tamin’ny Desambra 167 tal. J.K. dia nanorina alitara mpanompo sampy (ho an’i Zeus) teo ambonin’ny alitara jiosin’ny fanatitra dorana tao amin’ny Tempoly izy, ary nanatitra kisoa ho sorona, mbamin’ny fanaovana asa fandotoana hafa. Io fanamasinana io no teboka farany tsy zaka ho an’ireo Jiosy nitandrina ny lalàna, izay nahita izany ho fandikana faratampony ny fahamasinan’ny Tempoly sy ny lalàn’Andriamanitra. Niteraka fanoherana avy hatrany izany, raha nandà ny didin’ny manamboninahitra Seleosida mba hanao sorona ho an’ireo andriamani-tsampy i Matatiasa (mpisorona avy any Modeina), ka namono Jiosy nihemotra tamin’ny finoana iray sy ilay manamboninahitra, avy eo nandositra nankany an-tendrombohitra niaraka tamin’ny zanany lahy (ireo izay ho Makabeo tatỳ aoriana). Izany no nandrehitra ady anaty akata sy fikomiana nanomboka tamin’ny 167–160 tal. J.K., izay nikendry ny hamerenana amin’ny laoniny ny fanompoam-pivavahana jiosy, ka nitarika ho amin’ny fanokanana indray ny Tempoly (Hanoka) tamin’ny 164 tal. J.K. teo ambany fitarihan’i Jodasy Makabeo.
At the beginning and ending of the Seleucid Empire there was a significant treaty represented by a diplomatic marriage that possessed the element of division of either east and west, or north and south. As the Seleucid Empire waned Antiochus Epiphanes becomes the symbol of the rising Roman power, and the focus of the Maccabean’s indignation. Later in history he becomes the counterfeit of the prophetic symbol that establishes the vision. The power in verse twenty-two of chapter eleven is broken when the prince of the covenant was broken.
Tamin’ny fiandohana sy ny fiafaran’ny Fanjakana Seleokida dia nisy fanekena lehibe iray, nasehon’ny fanambadiana ara-diplômasia, izay nitondra ny singan’ny fizarazarana na ho amin’ny atsinanana sy andrefana, na ho amin’ny avaratra sy atsimo. Rehefa nihena ny Fanjakana Seleokida, i Antiokosy Epifana dia tonga tandindon’ny fahefana romanina miakatra, sady ivon’ny hatezeran’ny Makabeo. Tatỳ aoriana teo amin’ny tantara dia tonga sandoka amin’ilay tandindona ara-paminaniana izay mametraka ny fahitana izy. Ny hery ao amin’ny andininy faha-roa amby roa-polo amin’ny toko fahiraika ambin’ny folo dia torotoro rehefa torotoro ilay andrianan’ny fanekena.
And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant. Daniel 11:22.
Ary ny sandrin’ny safodrano dia hofafan’izany eo anatrehany ka ho torotoro; eny, ary koa ny andrianan’ny fanekena. Daniela 11:22.
Antiochus Epiphanes’ reign ended in 164 BC, almost two hundred years before Christ, “the prince of the covenant” was “broken” at the cross. What we wish to note here is that the Seleucid Empire began and ended with a diplomatic treaty marriage where the deceit between the two parties is a matter of the historical record. During the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes, the Maccabean revolt began, which typified the American Revolution. In the history of the Maccabees their struggle to throw off the Seleucid power included a significant treaty with Rome. The verse that identifies the treaty directly identifies Rome as working deceitfully, or telling lies at the treaty table.
Nifarana tamin’ny taona 164 tal. J.K. ny fanapahan’i Antiochus Epiphanes, efa ho roanjato taona talohan’i Kristy, “ilay andrianan’ny fanekena,” izay “notapahina” teo amin’ny hazo fijaliana. Ny tiana homarihina eto dia izao: ny Fanjakana Seleokida dia nanomboka sy nifarana tamin’ny fanambadiana ara-diplomatika niorina tamin’ny fifanarahana, izay voarakitry ny tantara fa nisy fitaka teo amin’ireo antoko roa tonta. Nandritra ny fanapahan’i Antiochus Epiphanes no nanombohan’ny fikomian’ny Makabeo, izay tandindon’ny Revolisiona Amerikana. Ao amin’ny tantaran’ny Makabeo, ny tolona nataon’izy ireo hanafahana tena tamin’ny fahefan’ny Seleokida dia nahitana fifanarahana lehibe iray tamin’i Roma. Ilay andininy izay manondro mivantana izany fifanarahana izany dia manondro mivantana an’i Roma ho miasa amim-pitaka, na milaza lainga eo amin’ny latabatry ny fifanarahana.
And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people. Daniel 11:23.
Ary rehefa vita ny fanekena natao taminy, dia hanao fitaka izy; fa hiakatra izy, ary ho tonga mahery amin’ny olona vitsy. Daniela 11:23.
Every prophetic line that precedes the time of the end in verse forty contains a broken treaty. Uriah Smith commenting on verse thirty’s “them that forsake the holy covenant” records the following:
Ny tsipika ara-paminaniana rehetra izay mialoha ny fotoanan’ny farany ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo dia ahitana fanekena voahitsakitsaka. Uriah Smith, raha naneho hevitra momba ireo “izay mahafoy ny fanekena masina” ao amin’ny andininy faha-telopolo, dia manoratra izao manaraka izao:
“‘Indignation against the covenant;’ that is, the Holy Scriptures, the book of the covenant. A revolution of this nature was accomplished in Rome. The Heruli, Goths, and Vandals, who conquered Rome, embraced the Arian faith, and became enemies of the Catholic Church. It was especially for the purpose of exterminating this heresy that Justinian decreed the pope to be the head of the church and the corrector of heretics. The Bible soon came to be regarded as a dangerous book that should not be read by the common people, but all questions in dispute were to be submitted to the pope. Thus was indignity heaped upon God’s word. And the emperors of Rome, the eastern division of which still continued, had intelligence, or connived with the Church of Rome, which had forsaken the covenant, and constituted the great apostasy, for the purpose of putting down ‘heresy.’ The man of sin was raised to his presumptuous throne by the defeat of the Arian Goths, who then held possession of Rome, in A.D.538.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 281.
“‘Fahatezerana amin’ny fanekena;’ izany hoe, ny Soratra Masina, dia ny bokin’ny fanekena. Revolisiona tahaka izany no tanteraka tany Roma. Ny Heruli, ny Goths, ary ny Vandals, izay nandresy an’i Roma, dia nandray ny finoana Arianina ka tonga fahavalon’ny Fiangonana Katolika. Indrindra indrindra dia noho ny tanjona hamongorana izany hevi-diso izany no namoahan’i Justinian didy nanendry ny papa ho lohan’ny fiangonana sy mpanitsy ny mpivadi-pinoana. Tsy ela dia noheverina ho boky mampidi-doza ny Baiboly ka tsy tokony hovakian’ny sarambabem-bahoaka, fa ny raharaha rehetra iadian-kevitra kosa dia tsy maintsy atolotra amin’ny papa. Dia toy izany no nanangonan-baraka ny tenin’Andriamanitra. Ary ny emperoran’i Roma, izay mbola nitohy ny fizarana tatsinanan’izany, dia nifandray, na niray tetika, tamin’ny Fiangonan’i Roma, izay efa nahafoy ny fanekena ka nahatonga ilay fialam-pinoana lehibe, mba hampietrena ny ‘hevi-diso.’ Natsangana ho eo amin’ny seza fiandrianany feno fireharehana ilay lehilahin’ota tamin’ny alalan’ny fandresena ny Goths Arianina, izay mbola nitana an’i Roma tamin’izany, tamin’ny A.D.538.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 281.
Verse five of Daniel eleven identifies the line of history where the king of the south provides a diplomatic bride as a symbol of a treaty that was thereafter broken by the king of the north. The retaliation of the king of the south typified the retaliation of Napoleon’s spiritual king of the south against the papal king of the north in 1798. The broken treaty of verses five through nine typified Napoleon’s broken treaty of Tolentino, which typified Putin’s claim of a broken treaty by NATO. The retaliation of Napoleon typified the retaliation of Putin against the Ukraine in 2014. Verse ten’s retaliation of Antiochus Magnus ending the fourth Syrian War aligns with Napoleon in 1798 and also Putin in 2014. Following verse fifteen’s battle of Panium n 200 BC, Antiochus arranged a diplomatic marriage with the hidden intent of taking Egypt under his command without employing military boots on the ground. Antiochus Magnus throne was passed to his son, who was assassinated which brought Antiochus Magnus’s youngest son, Antiochus Epiphanes to the throne. His actions in implementing Greek customs and religion brought about the Maccabean revolt, that led to the deceitful treaty with Rome in verse twenty-three. Verse twenty-four introduces pagan Rome and identifies Antony and Augustus’s table of lies. In verse thirty pagan Rome enters into dialogue with the papal church, who are noted as them that had broken the holy covenant.
Ny andininy fahadimin’ny Daniela toko faha‑iraika ambin’ny folo dia manondro ilay tsipika ara‑tantara izay anomezan’ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo ampakarina ara‑diplomatika ho mariky ny fanekena iray izay novakian’ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra tatỳ aoriana. Ny famalian’ny mpanjakan’ny atsimo dia naneho mialoha ny famalian’ilay mpanjakan’ny atsimo ara‑panahin’i Napoléon tamin’ilay mpanjakan’ny avaratra papaly tamin’ny 1798. Ilay fanekena novakiana ao amin’ny andininy dimy ka hatramin’ny sivy dia naneho mialoha ny fanekena tao Tolentino izay novakian’i Napoléon, izay naneho mialoha ny filazan’i Putin momba ny fanekena novakin’ny OTAN. Ny famalian’i Napoléon dia naneho mialoha ny famalian’i Putin tamin’i Okraina tamin’ny 2014. Ny famalian’i Antiochus Magnus ao amin’ny andininy faha‑folo, izay namarana ny Ady Siriana fahefatra, dia mifanaraka amin’i Napoléon tamin’ny 1798 ary koa amin’i Putin tamin’ny 2014. Taorian’ny adin’i Panium ao amin’ny andininy faha‑dimy ambin’ny folo, tamin’ny 200 talohan’i Kristy, dia nandamina fanambadiana ara‑diplomatika i Antiochus tamin’ny fikasana miafina hampiditra an’i Egypta eo ambanin’ny fahefany nefa tsy hampiasa tafika an‑tanety. Ny seza fiandrianan’i Antiochus Magnus dia nolovain’ny zanany lahy, izay novonoina, ka izany no nampiakatra an’i Antiochus Epiphanes, zanaka faravavin’i Antiochus Magnus, ho eo amin’ny seza fiandrianana. Ny asany tamin’ny fampiharana ny fomba amam‑panao sy ny fivavahana grika dia niteraka ny fikomian’ny Makabeo, izay nitarika ho amin’ilay fanekena feno fitaka tamin’i Roma ao amin’ny andininy faha‑roa amby roa-polo. Ny andininy faha‑efatra amby roapolo dia mampiditra an’i Roma jentilisa ary manondro ny latabatry ny laingan’i Antoine sy Aogosto. Ao amin’ny andininy faha‑telopolo, i Roma jentilisa dia miditra amin’ny fifampiresahana amin’ny fiangonana papaly, izay lazaina ho ireo izay nandika ny fanekena masina.
Verses twenty-four to thirty is the testimony of pagan Rome and verses thirty-one to forty provide the testimony of papal Rome. Every line of Daniel eleven verse one on through verse forty represents a line of prophecy that is applied in the hidden history of verse forty. The line of the Seleucid kingdom, the line of the Ptolemaic kingdom, the line of the Judean kingdom of the Maccabees, the line of pagan Rome and the line of papal Rome all illustrate the history of 1989 unto the Sunday law. Each of those lines identify a broken treaty as a major element of the history.
Ny andininy faha-24 ka hatramin’ny faha-30 no fijoroana vavolombelon’i Roma jentilisa, ary ny andininy faha-31 ka hatramin’ny faha-40 kosa no manome ny fijoroana vavolombelon’i Roma papaly. Ny andalana tsirairay ao amin’i Daniela 11:1 ka hatramin’ny andininy faha-40 dia maneho andalana faminaniana izay ampiharina ao amin’ny tantara miafina ao amin’ny andininy faha-40. Ny andalan’ny fanjakana Seleokida, ny andalan’ny fanjakana Ptolemaika, ny andalan’ny fanjakana Jodeana an’ny Makabeo, ny andalan’i Roma jentilisa ary ny andalan’i Roma papaly dia samy maneho ny tantara manomboka amin’ny 1989 ka hatramin’ny lalàn’ny Alahady. Ny iray sy ny iray amin’ireo andalana ireo dia samy manondro fanekena voahitsakitsaka ho singa lehibe iray ao amin’ny tantara.
It is Rome that establishes the vision of Daniel eleven, and both pagan and papal Rome’s prophetic treaties of deceit are marked as progressive and as occurring before Rome ruled supremely for their respective and distinct prophetic periods. Both powers marked the beginning of the prophetic period of supremacy as beginning when their third obstacle was overcome. Before the soon coming Sunday law in the United States there will be a treaty of deceit between two powers. Four times the two powers have been the kings of the south and the north, once between the glorious land of Judah and Rome, once between two parts of the Roman triumvirate and once between pagan and papal Rome. In both deceitful treaties concerning Rome it amounted to a treaty between one half of the Roman empire, whether Antony of the east, Augustus of the west, or pagan Rome of the east and papal Rome of the west. Four treaties of deceit between the kings of the north and south, two between the kings of the east and west and one between the soon-to-be king of the north and the glorious land.
I Roma no manangana ny fahitana ao amin’ny Daniela iraika ambin’ny folo, ary samy voamarika ho mandroso sy ho mitranga alohan’ny nanjakan’i Roma tamin’ny fahefana fara tampony nandritra ny vanim-potoana ara-paminaniana miavaka sy samy hafa azy avy, na ny fifanekena feno fitaka ara-paminaniana nataon’i Roma jentilisa na ny an’i Roma papaly. Samy nanamarika ny fiandohan’ny vanim-potoana ara-paminaniana momba ny fanapahana fara tampony ireo fahefana roa ireo ho manomboka tamin’ny fotoana naharesena ny sakana fahatelo nanohitra azy. Alohan’ny lalàna Alahady izay ho avy tsy ho ela any Etazonia dia hisy fifanekena feno fitaka eo amin’ny fahefana roa. In-efatra ireo fahefana roa ireo no efa mpanjakan’ny atsimo sy ny avaratra: indray mandeha teo amin’ny tany be voninahitr’i Joda sy Roma, indray mandeha teo amin’ny ampahany roa amin’ny triumvirata romana, ary indray mandeha teo amin’i Roma jentilisa sy Roma papaly. Tamin’ireo fifanekena feno fitaka roa mahakasika an’i Roma dia nifarana ho fifanekena teo amin’ny tapany iray amin’ny fanjakana romana izany, na i Antony tany atsinanana, na i Aogosto tany andrefana, na i Roma jentilisa tany atsinanana sy Roma papaly tany andrefana. Firenena efatra misy fitaka teo amin’ny mpanjakan’ny avaratra sy ny atsimo, roa teo amin’ny mpanjakan’ny atsinanana sy ny andrefana, ary iray teo amin’ilay ho tonga tsy ho ela ho mpanjakan’ny avaratra sy ny tany be voninahitra.
This concludes our initial presentation of the book of Daniel. The Panium series represents the conclusion of the series on the book of Daniel, which is the introduction to the hidden history of verse forty which we will continue to consider in the next article.
Izany no mamarana ny fampahafantarana voalohany nataontsika ny bokin’i Daniela. Ny andian-dahatsoratra Panium no maneho ny famaranana ny andian-dahatsoratra momba ny bokin’i Daniela, izay fampidirana ho amin’ilay tantara miafina ao amin’ny andininy faha-efapolo, izay mbola hodinihintsika hatrany ao amin’ny lahatsoratra manaraka.