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

Kunanqa santu allpapiña kachkanchik, Daniel qillqapa nisqanman hina, chaymanta chayamurqanchikmi chay versículokunaman, mayqenkunachus pachaq tawqa chunka tawa waranqa runakunapaq Chawpi Tuta Qapariyta rikuchin. Chay versículokunallataq reqsichin levantasqa estandartepa sellasqa kayninta. Kaymi chay versículokuna, Daniel qillqamanta qhechwaq pacha p’unchaykunaman tupuq, kichasqa rak’in, hinaspa rikuchin Danielpa nisqanta Jesucristopa Revelaciónninmanta, mayqenchus kichasqa kachkan “tiempoqa qayllaña kachkan” nisqapi, manaña gracia tiempo tukukunankama ñawpaqta, versículo chunka suqtaqpi.

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

Roma llaqtaqa sut’inchawinta sayarichin, chunataqmi chunka hukniyuq qhapaq chunka tawaq kaq versikulopi rikuchisqa kashan; chayraykutaq ancha allinta qhawarinanchik Roma llaqtata, chunka hukniyuqmanta chunka phisqayuqkama versikulokunata purispa, imaraykuchus maypichus “mana rikuykuna kashan chaypi, runakuna chinkapun,” hinallataq mana creenkichikchu Isaias qanchis kaq kapitulum, pusaqniyuq, isqunniyuq versikulokunapi nisqantaqa, “cheqaqtapuni mana sayachisqa kankichikchu.”

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

Uriah Smithqa, Daniel and the Revelation sutiyapin, profétic kaqllarikuy huk kamachikuyta mana aswan pisika tawa kuti churarin. Chay kamachikuyqa reqsichinmi huk profétic kallpa mana profecíapi sut’inchasqa kasqanta, Diospa llaqtanwan “tinkisqa” kanan kama. Ñawpaq kutin chayta rimarin Babilonia profétic testimonioman yaykuchisqa kasqanwan tinkuchispa.

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

“Yachakuypi sut’in rikuchisqa kamachikuymi kayqa: llaktanakunata profecíapi rimarisqa tarikuyta atisun, Diospa llaqtanwan chayhina tupaqllaña tinkisqa kaptinku, paykunamanta rimayqa necesariomanta tukuspa, sagrada historiapa qillqasqankuna hunt’asqa kananpaq.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 46.

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

Kimsa huk kutikunaqpas Smithqa kamachikuyta rimarin, hinaspan chay kimsantinpi Judío runakunaq “liga” nisqanta qhawachin; ichaqa huk citaqpi chay ligata 162 a.C. watapi hunt’akusqa kasqanta reqsichin, ichaqa iskay kaq citakunaqa kunan pacha historiador-kunawan kuska yuyayniyuq kashanku, paykunaqa Judío runakunaq hinaspa Roma llaqtaq “ligan” 161 a.C. watapi hunt’akusqanta reqsichinku.

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

“Manañam manam atoqyachiytaqa mana nisyapaqchu, kay pachapi kamachikuq qhapaq suyu-kunaqa profecíamanqa mana yaykuchisqachu Diospa llaqtanwan imaynachus hukman tinkisqankukama. Romaqa judiokunawan, chay pacha Diospa llaqtanwan, reqsisqa Judiokunapa Huntasqanwanmi tinkikurqan, Cristo manaraq paqariptin 161 watapi. 1 Macabeos 8; Josefoq Antigüedades nisqan, libro 12, capítulo 10, sección 6; Prideaux, Vol. II, página 166. Ichaqa qanchis wata ñawpaqta kaymanta, chayqa Cristo manaraq paqariptin 168 watapi, Romaqa Macedonia-suyuta atiparqan, chay llaqtatataq imperionman huk parteta ruwarqan. Chayrayku Romaqa profecíaman yaykuchisqa kachkan hinallataq, atipasqa machu cabra animalpa Macedoniamanta waqraqninta hina, huk lawkunaman musuq atipanakuykunapaq lluqsishaqtin. Chaymi profetaman rikurqan, utaq kay profecíapi sumaqta rimarisqa kayman hina, cabrapa waqrankunamanta hukninmanta lluqsimusqanta.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 175.

But Smith also states that it was 162 BC.

Ichaqa Smithpas nintaqmi nin: chayqa 162 a.C. watam karqan.

“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.

“Chaylla kikin atiyniyoqpas Santo Allpapi sayarinan karqa, hinaspa chayta tukuruq hina mikhunan karqa. Roma llaqtaqa Diospa runankunawan, judíokunawan, huñunakuywan tinkichisqa karqa, a.C. 162 watapi; chay p’unchawmanta pacha profecía p’unchaw yupaychasqapi hatun chiqanta hap’in. Ichataq mana Judea suyumanta kamachiyta cheqaq atipaywan hap’irqachu a.C. 63 watakama; hinaspataq qhipa hinata ruwarqa.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 259.

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

Hinaspataqmi kimsa kutita chay ruwayta rimarispa, yapamantaqmi nin 161 a.C. nisqanta.

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

“Qanchis chunka semanakuna tukukuyninkama imperiopa secular ruwanakunanta uraykama pusasqanchikmanta qhipaman, profetaqa, versículo 23-pi, kutichiwanchik Roma runakuna Diospa llaqtanwan chiqapmi tupanakusqanku judío alianza nisqawan, Cristo manaraq paqarichkaptin 161 watapi: chay puntomantaqa chaymanta pacha chiqan línea de acontecimientos nisqapi uraykama pusasqa kanchik iglesiapa qhipa atipayninman, hinaspa Diospa wiñay reino-nin sayarichisqa kanankama. Judío runakunaqa, sirio reykunaq ancha ñak’ariywan llump’ay qatiykusqa kachkaspa, Roma llaqtaman huk embajada-ta kacharqunku, Roma runakunaq yanapayninta mañakunanpaq, hinaspa paykunawan ‘munakuywan huntasqa alianza hinallataq confederación’-man hukllaykukunanpaq. 1 Macabeos 8; Prideaux, II, 234; Josephuspa Antigüedades, libro 12, capítulo 10, sección 6. Roma runakunaqa judío runakunaq mañakusqankuta uyarispa, paykunaman huk decreto-ta qokurqanku, kay simikunapi qelqasqa:—”

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

“‘Senadupa kamachisqanmi yanapakuywan kuska kuyaywanpas judío llaqtawan rimanakuymanta. Manan allinchu mayqinpas romano-kunapa kamachisqan kashaqkuna judío llaqtawan maqanakunankupaq, nitaq chayta ruwaqkunata yanapanankupaq, sara apachispa, barkokunata apachispa, otaq qolqeta quspa. Sichus imapas maqanakuy judío-kunapa contranpi ruwasqa kaptin, romano-kuna atisqankuman hina yanapanqaku. Chay hinaqa, sichus imapas romano-kunapa contranpi maqanakuy ruwasqa kaptinpas, judío-kuna yanapanqaku. Judío-kuna kay yanapakuy rimanakuyman imatapas yapayta munaptinku, otaq imatapas qichuyta munaptinku, chayqa romano-kunapa llapaq munayninwanmi ruwasqa kanan. Hinallataq ima yapasqa chayman yapakusqa kaptinpas, kallpayoqmi kanqa.’ ‘Kay kamachikuyta,’ nispa nin Josefo, ‘qillqarqan Eupólemo, Juanpa churin, hinallataq Jasón, Eleazarpa churin, Judas judío llaqtapa hatun sacerdote kaptin, Simonña wawqin kaspa soldado-kunapa apuqnin kaptin. Kaymi romano-kuna judío-kunawan rurashqanku ñawpaq kaq rimanakuy karqan, kay hinataqmi chayqa apasqa karqan.’” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 271.

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

Manam burdenuychu imanrayku Smith 162 a. C. nisqata citarqanman chayta sut’inchayqa, mana huk imatachu niyman, aswanpas pantasqa qillqay kasqanmanta yuyayniyllawan. Ñuqaqa nisqayqa chaymi: paymi qhawarichin aswan kallpachasqanta imatachus “sut’i rikurichisqa hamut’anapa kamachiy, maypin sut’inta suyasun llaqtakunata willakuypi reparasqa kananpaq, Diospa runankunawan chayhina t’aqsaqta tinkisqankurayku, paykunamanta rimayqa munasqa kananpaq ch’in sacred historypa qillqasqankuna hunt’asqa kananpaq” nisqanta. Smith chay kamachiyta kallpachaspam reqsin: Romaqa Diospa runankunawan tinkirqan “liga” nisqapi, iskay chunka kimsayuq versículopi, 161 a. C.-pi; ichaqa Smithmi reqsin hinallataq Romaqa ñawpaq kuti yaykun profecía willakuyman 200 a. C.-pi, 161 a. C. ñawpaqman kimsa chunka isqun watakuna.

“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.

“Kunanqa musuq kallpa rikhurin, —‘llaqtaykipa suwaqkuna;’ chiqaqta nispa, Obispo Newton nin, ‘llaqtaykipa p’akiqkuna.’ Karu Tíber mayu patakunapi, huk qhapaq suyusqa ambición-yuq yuyaykunawan hinaspa tutayaq yuyaychasqakunawan wiñachikusqa karqa. Ñawpaqtaqa huch’uy hinaspa pisi kallpayuq kaspa, mana creyiy atina utqayllawan kallpapi hinaspa sinch’iypi wiñarqa, kaypi chaypi allin yuyaywan maki mast’arispa atiynta mallinapaq, hinaspa maqanakuy makinpam sinch’i kasqanta yachanapaq; chaymanta, kikin kallpanta riqsispa, allin sunquwan umanta oqarirqa kay pachapi nacionkunapurapi, hinaspa mana atipay atina makinwan paykunap ruwayninkunapa timónninta hap’irqa. Chaymanta ñawpaqmanqa Roma sutim historia p’anqapi sayan, unay watakunaq kamachiyninpaq churakusqa kaspa kay pachaq ruwayninkunata kamachinapaq, hinaspa nacionkunapurapi hatun kallpawan llamk’anapaq pacha tukukama.”

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

“Roma rimarqan; hinaspa Siriawan Makedoniawan utqaylla tarirqanku musquyninkupa rikchayninpi huk tikray hamusqanta. Romanokuna yaykurqanku Egipto llaqtapa wayna reyninpa favorninpi, Antiochuswan Philipwan wakichisqan chinkaymanta payta waqaychasqa kananpaq sut’ita munaspa. Kayqa karqan ñawpaq watakunamanta 200 Cristo Manaraq Paqarishaqtin (BC), hinaspa kayqa karqan Romanokunapa huk ñawpaq ancha hatun yaykuyninkum Siriawan Egiptopa asuntunkunapi.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 256.

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

Romaqa ñawpaq kutipiqa 200 a.C. watapi profétika willakuyman yaykuchisqa karqan, chay yaykuchisqapas chunka tawañiqin versículopiqa, Danielpa llapanpi Romamanta qillqasqakunamanta aswan ancha allin riqsichiymi; imaraykuchus chay versículollam Roma-ta rikuchin chay unancha hina, mayqanmi mosqoyta sayachin. Imarayku Smithqa profecíapa hinallata kamachisqan simita sinchita rimarispa, chaymantataq 161 a.C. watata citarispa, chaywan kuska 200 a.C. watatapas Roma kamachiq atipaynin “yaykuchisqa” kasqan punto hina reqsichinman karqan, chayqa mana ñoqa allichayta munasqay sasachakuymi. Sichus huk tapuy kanman allichasqa kananpaq, chayqa kanman Smithpa sut’ita nisqan kamachikuy allinchu manachu nisqa. Sichus allinmi, chayqa ñoqaqa rimanaymi chunka tawañiqin versículoq judíokunawan huk t’inkisqa kananpaq, mayqanmi 161 a.C. watapi ligamanta ñawpaqta pasasqa karqan.

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

Entiendeniqa chunka kimsayuqmanta chunka pisqayuqkama versículokunapa historianta qhipa p’unchaykunapi hina riqsichisqanta, maypachachus papal Roma profétic historia-man yaykun, chaytaq Estados Unidoswan kuska ruwan, paymi chay historiapi Diospa llaqtan. Jesucristoqa sapa kuti qallariymanta tukukuyninta rikuchisqanrayku, wata 200 a. C., maypachachus pagano Roma historiaman yaykurqan, chay historiapipas Diospa llaqtanwan huk t’inkiyoq kanan tiyan. Chayrayku Smithpa kamachikuyninwan acuerdoni, mana payqa wata 200 a. C.-pi Romawan judíokunapa chawpinpi chiqap t’inkiyta tarispa kaptinpas.

Verses eleven and twelve, identify the victory and aftermath of the Battle of Raphia, which occurred in 217 BC, between the Seleucid Empire, led by Antiochus III Magnus, or “The Great”, and the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt, led by King Ptolemy IV Philopator. This battle occurred during the struggle for control over Coele-Syria (southern Syria) and southern Palestine, territories contested between the Ptolemaic and Seleucid kingdoms. Ptolemy IV Philopator’s victory at Raphia allowed him to maintain control over Coele-Syria and southern Palestine for a time.

Chunka iskayniyuq chayniyuq versículokunaqa reqsichin Raphia Maqanakuypa atipayninta hinallataq chaymanta qhipa ruwaykunatapas, mayqinchus watapi 217 ñawpaq Cristo paqarinmanta ñawpaqpi karqan, Imperio Seléucida ukhupi, Antiochus III Magnus, icha “Hatun” nisqaqa umalliqnin kaspa, hinallataq Egipto Ptolemaico Qhapaq Suyupi, Rey Ptolomeo IV Filopátor umalliqnin kaspa, chay iskay suyu ukhupi. Kay maqanakuqqa karqan Coele-Siria (ura Siria) hinaspa ura Palestina nisqa llaqtakunapa kamachiyta hap’inapaq ch’aqwaypi, mayqinkunachus Ptolemaico hinaspa Seléucida qhapaq suyuqkunapura atipanakuspa munasqankuna karqan. Ptolomeo IV Filopátorpa Raphiapi atipayninqa saqerqan paypaq huk p’unchawkamalla Coele-Siria hinaspa ura Palestinata kamachiyta waqaychananpaq.

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

Panium maqanakuy, chayqa chunka qanchis wata qhipaman, 200 a.C. watapi pasaq, hinallataq Monte Panium maqanakuy nisqapas utaq Paneas maqanakuy nisqapas, karqan Imperio Seléucida ukhu, rey Antíoco III pa pusasqan, hinallataq Egipto llaqtapi Ptolemaico qhapaq suyu ukhu, rey Ptolomeo V pa pusasqan, chawpinpi.

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

Kinsa huk watakunamanta qhipaman, 167 a.C. watapi, Macabeokunaq Hatariynin, judíokunaq hatariynin Seleucidakunaq qhapaq suyunkunapaq, judíokunaq yupaychay ruwanakunata ñit’iyta munasqankumanta hinaspa helenístico kawsayta churanankupaq, qallarikurqan Modein llaqtapi, huk huch’uy llaqtapi Judea suyupi churakusqa, kunan p’unchawpi moderno Israel nisqapi.

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

Kaypi rimarisqa tukusqa ruwayqa kasqa mana allin sutinchasqa griego seleúcida kamachiq, Antiochus IV Epífanes, paymi judío runakunapaq sinchi helenista ruwanakunata churarqun, chaykunawanmi judío diniyuyninman hina ruwanakunata hark’arqun, hinallataq Jerusalén llaqtapi Templota qhellicharqun. Kamachisqankunata hunt’achiyta munaspanmi, Antiochusqa t’aqsa llaqtakunaman, ayllukunamanpas kachaqninkunata apachirqan, judío llaqtamasinkunata kamachisqankunaman hina kasukuyta kallpachananpaq.

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

Modein llaqtapi, huk Seleucida kamachiq funcionario chayamurqa reypa decreto-ninta hunt’achinapaq, chaypi judío llaqtamasinkunata kamachispa pagano ritospi partisipanankupaq hinaspa griego dioskunaman ofrendakunanpaq. Huk machu judío sacerdote, Mattathias sutiyuq, chay kamachiyta mana kasukurqachu; hinaspataq wañuchirqa iskayta: huk judíota, qallarimuspa sacrificiota haywananpaq ñawpaqman lluqsimuqtin, hinaspa Seleucida funcionario-tawan. Kay sayaykuy mana kasukuy Mattathiaspa ayllunkupa rurayninwan kuska, qallarichirqa Maccabeo Hatariyta Seleucida kamachiypa contranpi.

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

Matatíasqa pichqa churinkunawan kuska, Judas Macabeotapas chaypi kaqta, urqukunaman ayqekurqanku hinaspan Seleúcidapa soldadokunapa contranpi pakallamanta maqanakuyta qallariqkunku. Chay hatariyqa qhipaman astawan kallpachakurqa hinallataq yanapayninpas mirarqu, chaymanta Seleúcidakunapa contranpi askha awqa atipanakuykunaman pusarqa.

The events at Modein in 167 BC, were a pivotal moment in Jewish history, marking the beginning of the Maccabean Revolt and the struggle for religious freedom and independence against foreign rule. The rededication of the second temple in Jerusalem, which marks the historical event celebrated during Hanukkah, occurred in 164 BC, three years before the “league” of verse twenty-three.

167 a.C. watapi Modein llaqtapi pasaq ruwaykunaqa judío runakunapa historiankupi ancha allin tinkuy karqan, Maccabeokunaq hatariynin qallariyninta, hinallataq wak llaqtamanta kamachiqkunapa contranpi religiónpi qispisqa kayta chaymanta sapaq kayta mask’ayta riqsichispa. Jerusalén llaqtapi iskay ñiqin templota musuqmanta t’aqwirichisqanku, Hanukkah nisqapi yuyarisqa historia ruwayta señalaspa, 164 a.C. watapi ruwakurqan, iskay chunka kimsayoq versículopi nisqa “liga” manaraq chaypi kaptin kimsa wata ñawpaqta.

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

Jerusalén llaqtatawan Templotapas kutichisqankumanta qhipaman, Macabeokunaqa Templota paganokunapa qhellichayninkunamanta picharqanku, hinaspan allin religioso llamk’ayninman kutichirqanku. Yachachisqa ñawpaq rimayman hina, huklla consecrasqa aceitupa phuyullanta tarirqanku, menorá nisqata huk p’unchayllapaq ratachinanpaq hayk’aqta. Chiqaqtaqa, chay ruwaymantaqa mana ima pacha historiapi kawsasqa testigopas kanchu, hinaspapas soqta pachak watakama mana judíokunapa fabulan qillqasqapi rikurirqanchu. Hermana Whiteqa apostatakusqa judiokunapa iglesianta Iglesiapap Católicawan tupachin, aswanpas allinta qhawarichispa iskaynin iglesiakunapas runakunaq costumbrenkunapiwan tradiciónninkunapiwan religionta sayachisqankuta. Imaynan papaq iglesianpa historiapi achka imaymana rurapusqa milagrokuna kasqankuman hina, chay huk p’unchay aceite pusaj p’unchaykama hayk’asqanmanta fabulanpas mana ima historiapi testigoyuqchu.

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

Danielpa chunka hukniyuq qillqapi, chunka hukniyuq t’aqapi, chunka versikuloqa, chunka tawa versikulopi kaq kimsa maqanakuykunamanta ñawpaq kaq maqanakuyta riqsichin; ñawpaq qillqasqaykunapi ñam rikuchirqani kay kimsa maqanakuykunaqa huk chiri awqanakuypi kaq kimsa maqanakuykuna hina kasqanta, chay hinallataq kimsa wakinpa rantinpi ruwasqa awqanakuykuna kasqantapas. Huk panaymi tapuwarqan imarayku Ukrainapi Awqanakuqta—kay kimsa awqanakuykunamanta iskay kaqta—chiri awqanakuypi kaq maqanakuy hina sutichasqaymanta; payqa allinta nirqanmi ancha wañuypas, thuñisqapas kasqanta. Ñawpaq qillqasqaykunapi “chiri awqanakuy” nisqapa kimsa maqanakuykuna hina imata suticharqaniqa, chayna nisqawanmi kay kimsa maqanakuykunata Revelación chunka kimsañiyuqpi kaq allpa uywapa historiampi pasaq kimsa Pacha Llapaq Awqanakuykunamanta sapaqchaspa reqsichiyta munarqani. Kay kimsa awqanakuykunaqa wakinpa rantinpi ruwasqa awqanakuykunam, chay hinatataq sutichasqapas karqan.

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

Kay qillqakunapi kunanmanta ñawpaqman, chay kimsa maqanakuykunata “tawa chunka chiqap simipi kimsa maqanakuykuna” nispa, icha proxy wars nispa sutichayta munani, huk ruphay maqanakuyta chiri maqanakuywan sutichaypi pantasqakuyta chinkachinaypaq. Ñuqaqa sut’inchaynayman hina, tawa chunka chiqap simipi kimsa maqanakuykunaqa mana 1798 watapi maqanakuyta hap’inkuchu, mayqinchus chay tawa chunka chiqap simipa huknin kapun; aswanqa, pacha tukukuymanta 1989 watapi qallarispa, tawa chunka hukniyuq chiqap simipi Domingo kamachikuykama chayaykama kimsa maqanakuyllatan hap’inku. Chay kimsa maqanakuykunaqa aswan allinta proxy wars nispa reqsichisqa kanan, mayqinkunachus Qhichwa Chinchaysuyupa qhapaq reywan Qhichwa Uraysuyupa qhapaq reywan chawpipi maqanakuypa ukhupi hunt’asqa kanku; chay tawa chunka chiqap simipa historiapiqa, chayqa Catolicismo (Qhichwa Chinchaysuyupa qhapaq rey)wan Comunismo (Qhichwa Uraysuyupa qhapaq rey)wan chawpipi maqanakuyta rikuchin.

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

Chay kimsa macanakuykunamanta ñawpaq kaqmi reqsichin 1989 watapi catolicismopa comunismopaq atipayta, imaynachus papadoqa huñunakuspa proxy ejercitonwan, Estados Unidos nisqawan rikuchisqa, 1989 watapi Unión Soviéticata picharirqan, ichaqa Rusia, uman (utaq “fortaleza”), sayasqata saqespa. Kunan pacha Ucraniapi guerraqa huk kutitawan catolicismowan comunismowan macanakuymi, papadoqa gobiernonta Ucraniapi proxy hina llamk’achispa Rusia contra, chaywan kuska yanapayninta papadopa ñawpaq proxy podernin, Estados Unidos, hinallataq tukuynin globalista occidental pacha. Chay guerraqa versículo chunka hukniyuqpi chunka iskayniyuqpiwan rikuchisqam, hinallataq reqsichin comunismoqa (Rusiaqa) catolicismota atipaytata.

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

Kimsa rantikuy maqanakuykunamanta kimsakaqninqa chunka phisqayuq versículopi rikuchisqa kachkan, Panium Maqanakuy hina. Chay maqanakuyqa karqan Ptolemaico qhapaq suyupuraq (uray llaqtapa qhapaqnin)wan Seleúcida qhapaq suyupuraq (hanaq llaqtapa qhapaqnin)wan. Chay maqanakuypi Catolicismopa rantikuy soldadonqa huk kutita Estados Unidosmi kachkan.

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

Ñawpaq maqanakuypi 1989 watapi, Estados Unidospa republicano waqra-ninpa rantisqa ejercito-ninta papakuna llamk’achirqanku Unión Soviéticapa política ruwasqan-ta urmachinankupaq, ichaqa uma-ninta (Rusia-ta) mana tukuchispa saqespanku. Iskay kaq maqanakuypi, Ucraniapa waranpi kasqanpi, Nazi-kunapa rantisqa ejercito-nin Rusia rayku atisqa tukuyninman chayasqa. Kimsa kaq maqanakuypi Estados Unidos, papakunapa rantisqa ejercito-nin yapamanta, uray suyuq rey-ninta atipan.

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

Kimsa maqanakunaqa “Cheqaq kay” nisqapa unanchasqanmi apanku, ñawpaq kaqwan qhipa kaq maqanakunataq Estados Unidospa atipaq rantin soldadokunan ruwanku. Ñawpaq kaq maqanapiqa uray suyupa reyninpa uman mana tukusqachu saqisqa karqan, kimsa kaq maqanapitaq Estados Unidospa rantin soldadonqa uray suyupa reyninpa uman tukupun. Iskay kaq rantin soldadotaq iskay kaq Pacha Maqanakuypi papap simi iglesiapa rantin soldadon karqan. Iskay kaq kutipiqa Nazismopa rantin soldadonqa atipasqa karqan hinaspa atipasqa kanqa. Papapa simi iglesianqa llapa awqankunata hunt’asqata atipan chunca soqtañiqin versiculoman manaraq chayaspa, chaypim kimsa kuti huñusqa hukllachasqa kasqan hunt’akun.

“Ptolemy [Putin] lacked the prudence to make a good use of his victory. Had he followed up his success, he would probably have become master of the whole kingdom of Antiochus; but content with making only a few menaces and a few threats, he made peace that he might be able to give himself up to the uninterrupted and uncontrolled indulgence of his brutish passions. Thus, having conquered his enemies, he was overcome by his vices, and, forgetful of the great name which he might have established, he spent his time in feasting and lewdness.

“Ptolomeo [Putin] manam karqanachu allin yuyayniyuq kaspa atipayninmanta allinta llamk’achinapaq. Sichus atipaynin qhepanta qatirqanman karqan, ichapas tukuy Antiochuspa qhapaq suyunta kamachiq tukusqanman karqan; ichaqa aslla manchakuykunallawan, aslla amenchakunallawan kusisqa kaspa, thañita rurarqun, chayhina mana sayk’uspa mana hark’asqa uywa-sunqu munayninkunaman tukuyta qukunanpaq. Chayhinaqa, awqankunata atispa, paypa millay huchankunawan atisqa karqan; hatun sut’ita sayachiy atisqanmantapas qonqaq, p’unchayninkunata mikhuypi, upyaypi, hinaspa qhelli huchapi usuchispa spendisqan.”

“His heart was lifted up by his success, but he was far from being strengthened by it; for the inglorious use he made of it caused his own subjects to rebel against him.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 254.

“Sunqumiqa allinta ruwasqanrayku hatuncharikusqa karqan, ichaqa chaywan kallpanchasqa kaymanta anchata karqan; imaraykuchus mana yupaychasqa hinallata chayta llamk’achisqanrayku, kikin runankuna paypa contranpi hatarirqanku.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 254.

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

Putinpa atipayayninmi tukukuyninta señalasqanmanta iskay kaq testigokunaqa, uray kaq Judá suyupaq rey Uziyaswanmi kashan; paypa sonqonpas soldadokunaq atipayninkunamanta hatunchasqa karqan, chaymanta qhepaman, Ptolomeo hina, sacerdotekunaq ruwanan llamkayta santuario ukhupi ruwanayta maskharqan, chayraykutaq leprawan maqasqa karqan hinaspa chaylla kamachiyta qechusqa karqan. Putinpa atipaynin Ucrania maqanakuypiqa, uray kaq rey hina (ateísmopaq rey) tukukuynin qallarikuynintam señalasqan. Tukukuyninqa rikuchisqa karqan versículo cuarentapa qallarikuyninpi proféticopaq uray kaq reywan (Francia), mayqinchus huk revoluciónta reqsichirqan, kamachiqkunata urmachiqta, imaynachus Ptolomeowanpas karqan hinata. Putinpa tukukuyninpas Unión Soviéticapa tukukuyninwanmi rikuchisqa karqan, maypichus kamachiq (Gorbachev) Unión Soviéticata chinkachirqan, hinaspa chaylla Naciones Unidaswan llamkanapaq yaykurqan, p’unchaykunaq tukukuyninpi ateísmopaq, uray kaq reypaq, mundialista señalanman. Putinpa atipayninmanta qhepa Ucraniapiqa, paypas Napoleón hinam rikuchisqa kashan Waterloo llaqtapi, chaymanta qatiq qarqukuywan; hinaspapas rey Uziyashina, leprawan, chaymanta qatiq qarqukuywan, hinallataq Ptolomeopa machasqa tukukuyninwan hinaspa 1989 watapi Unión Soviéticapa tukukuyninwan.

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

Panium maqanakuyqa 200 ñawpaq watachapi Cristo Manaraq Paqarishqanmantam karqa, chay wata kikinpitaq Romaqa sut’ita historiaman haykuyta qallarin. Paykunapa yaykuyninqa profétic willakuypi ñawpaqta purin, chunka suqta huch’uy simipi rikuchisqa Jerusalén atipaymanta ñawpaqman, chaymi 63 ñawpaq watachapi hunt’akurqa. Chay pachapin willakurqa Egiptopi wawa qhapaq reypa amachaqnin kasqanta. Chusku chunka huch’uy simipi kinsa kaq maqanakuypi, allichisqa norte qhapaq reywan sur qhapaq reywan, papadoqa yapamanta historiaman yaykunqa, Rusiapa amachaqnin hina tukun. Chay kikin pachapin Seleucoqa, unanchaypi, Panium maqanakuypi Ptolomeota atirqan; chaywanmi reqsichin Estados Unidosqa, papadopa rantin soldadun, chusku chunka huch’uy simipi ñawpaq kaq hinallataq qhipa kaq maqanakuykunapipis, “Egipto” sutiyuqta (sur qhapaq reyta) atisqanta.

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

Watapi 200 ñawpaq Cristo paq, yupaychasqa unanchaypi papakuna kamachiyta tarinchik, Tiro llaqta qollana warmi hina, qhelli huchallikuynin takiyninkunata qallarispan, chunka suqta versículopi Domingo kamachiypi kinsa kutik tinkuyninmanta ñawpaqta. Chaypachallataq, Hukllachasqa Amerikapas Hukllachasqa Nacionkunata atipan, chayhinataq chunka reykunamanta ñawpaq kaq rey hina sayayninta takyakuchin. Tukuy kuyuykuna chay kinsa kutik tinkuymanta, Domingo kamachiypi hunt’akuk, chunka suqta versículomanta ñawpaqtaña allichasqa kanku.

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

Dragonpa atiynin política estructura, Naciones Unidas nisqapi rikuchisqa hina, chunka suqta versiculopi acuerdanmi política estructurantinta uywa-man qoyta; ichaqa chayta rurayta manaraq, papadoqa dragonpa religionninta atipan. Paganismoqa huk kutimantaqa hurqusqaña kanan. Protestantismoqa Reagan watakunapi hurqusqaña karqan, chunka tawa versiculopa ñawpaq maqanakuyñinpi; chay qhepa Republicano presidentepa pacha tiempo-ninpin dragonpa religionninqa Catholicismo religionpa kamachikuyninman churakusqa kanqa hinallataq 508 watapi kasqan hina. Papado tronoman churakusqanpaq ima religión resistenciapas hurquy procesoqa Reagan watakunapi qallarikurqan, Trump watakunapin tukukun. Apostata protestantismopa resistencia Catholicismo contraqa chunka tawa versiculopa ñawpaq maqanakuyñinpi hurqusqaña karqan, espiritualismopa resistenciañataq chunka tawa versiculopa qhepa maqanakuyñinpi hurqusqaña kanqa.

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

Chay kikillan sasachakuy humano ruraykunapa chhapchakuyninpi, apostata Protestantismoqa wiñachikunqa, Apocalipsis chunka qanchisniyuq capítulo nisqapi chunka reykunamanta hawkayninpi, religioso hinallataq político autoridad hinan. Chaymi Panium maqanakuyqa reqsichin maypachachus Estados Unidosqa Naciones Unidasmanta atipachkan, versículo chunka suqtaqpi domingo kamachiy ñawpaqta.

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

Profecíapa huk kamachisqa ruwasqanmi kay: dragón, bestia, hinaspa llulla profeta sapankankupaqmi kanku sapaq profétiko señalninkuwan. Chay profétiko señalakunamanta hukninmi kay: bestia (Catolicismo)qa profecíapi wiñaypaqmi Roma llaqtapi churakusqa tarikullanku. Llulla Profetaqa profecíapi wiñaypaqmi Estados Unidos nisqapi churakusqa tarikullanku. Ichaqa dragónmantaqa, maypichus profecíapi churakusqa kasqan señalninqa kaymi: wiñaypaqmi kuyun. Dragónqa qallarin hanaq pachapi, chaymanta Edén Huertaman hamun, hinaspan qhipamanqa Egiptopi churakusqa tarikullanku.

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

Rimay, hinaspa ninki: Kayhinatan nin Señor Dios: Qhawariy, qanpa contraykipin kani, Faraón, Egipto suyuq rey, mayuyninkunapa chawpinpi sirikuykacha hatun amaru, mayqinchus nirqan: “Mayuyniqa noqapuni kachkan, noqataqmi payta ruwarqani noqapaq.” Ezequiel 29:3.

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

Profecíapi dragónpa maypi kashanqa kuyun. Juanpa tiemponpi, dragónpa tiyanan, chaymi trönonanta rikuchin, Pergamopi kasqanta reqsichisqa karqan.

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

Pergamopi iglesiapa angelninman qillqay: Kaykunatan ni iskay filo-yuq, ñak’aq espada-niyuq: Ruwasqaykikunatan yachani, maypichus tiyankichik chaytapas, Supaypa tiyanan kasqanpi; sutiytapas sinchita hap’ipakunkichik, iñiyniytapas mana ñiqirqankichikchu, Antipas sutiyuq, ñuqap cheqaq testigoy, qankuna ukhupi wañuchisqa karqan chay p’unchaykunapipas, maypichus Supay tiyan chaypi. Apocalipsis 2:12, 13.

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

Roma paganaq rurayninqa karqan tukuy diosninkunata, paykuna pagano kasqankuwan huñusqa kaptinku, Roma llaqtaman kutichiy hinaspa Pantheon Templopi sut’inchay. Chayraykun Daniel qillqarqan “santuarionpa kasqan lugarqa urmachisqa karqan” nispa. Roma paganaq santuarionpa lugarinqa Roma llaqta karqan, chaymi Constantinoqa wata 330 pi urmachirqan; ichaqa chay santuarioqa Roma ukhupi kaq karqan Pantheon Templo, Pan-Theon ninanpas “tukuy dioskunapa templon” ninanmi. Romanokunaqa Satanaspa tiyananta Pergamomanta Pantheon Temploman astarqanku. Hermana White willakuwanchikmi Roma paganaqa dragon kasqanta.

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

“Chayhinaqa dragón nisqaqa, ñawpaqtaqa, Satanás-ta rikuchin; ichaqa iskay ñiqin yuyaypiqa, pagan Roma-pa unanchanmi.” The Great Controversy, 439.

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

Roma pagana chunka nacionkunaman rakikurqan, hinaspa Franciaqa uray llaqtakunapa reyninman tukurqan, Francia Revolucionpi Egiptopa atheismonnta yaykuchisqanrayku. 1917 watakamaqa, dragónqa Franciamanta Rusiaman kuyurqan. Chunka kaq versículoqa 1989 watata reqsichin, hinaspa chunka hukniyuq, chunka iskayniyuq versículokunaqa “frontera” nisqapa maqanakuykunanta reqsichinku (Raphia hinaspa Ucrania), hinaspa Paniumpa maqanakuyninqa kimsa kaq puriyninta reqsichin, papadoqa chayta hunt’aspa, chunka soqtayuq versículopi kimsa kuti huñusqa unionta allinta taqyaykusqanpi. Chayqa tawa chunka kaq versículopa pakasqa historianta reqsichin.

We will continue this study in the next article.

Kay yachayta qatiqninchik huk qipa qillqapi.

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

Jesús Caesarea Filipos [Panium] suyukunaman hamuspa, discipulonkunata tapurqan, nispa: “Runakunaqa pi nisunkichikri ñuqa Runa Churimanta?” Hinaqtin paykuna nirqanku: “Wakinqa ninmi qan Juan Bautista kasqaykita; wakinkunañataq Elías; hukkunataq Jeremías, icha huk profetakunamanta huknin.” Paytaq nirqan: “Qankunaqa, pi niswankichik ñuqa kasqayta?” Chaymi Simón Pedro kutichispa nirqan: “Qanmi Cristo, kawsayniyuq Diospa Churin.” Jesús-taq kutichispa payta nirqan: “Kusisqa kanki, Simón Barjona; kaytaqa manam aycha ni yawarchu qamman rikuchisunki, aswanpas hanaq pachapi kaq Yayáymi. Ñuqapas qanman nini: qanmí Pedro kanki, kay rumi patapitaq iglesiayta hatarichisaq; ukhu pacha punkunkunapas manam atipanqachu chayta atipayta. Qanmanmi hanaq pacha qhapaq kamachikuypa llavenkunata qosqayki; imatataq kay pachapi watanki, chayqa hanaq pachapipas watasqa kanqa; imatataq kay pachapi paskanki, chayqa hanaq pachapipas paskasqa kanqa.” Chaymantataq discipulonkunata kamachirqan, ama pitapas willanankupaq pay Jesús Cristo kasqanta. Chay p’unchawmanta pacha Jesús qallariqan discipulonkunaman rikuchiyta, imaynatas Jerusalénman rinan kasqanta, kurakakunamanta, hatun sacerdotekunamanta, qillqaqkunamantapas achka ñak’ariykunata muchunan kasqanta, wañuchisqa kanan kasqanta, hinaspataq kinsa p’unchaypi kawsarimunan kasqanta. Mateo 16:13–21.