Uriah Smith wrote, “Rome became connected with the people of God, the Jews, by alliance, BC 162.” Most modern historians mark the date as 161 BC, and Smith twice references 161 BC, in the same book. My assumption is that this reference to 162 BC, is a typo.
Uriah Smithqa qillqarqanmi: “Roma llaqtam Diospa runankunawan, judíokunawan, huñunakuspa, manaraq Cristomanta 162 watapi tinkisqa karqan.” Kunan p’unchaw historiador askha runakuna chay p’unchawta manaraq Cristomanta 161 watapi kasqanta señalanku, hinaspataq Smithqa iskay kuti manaraq Cristomanta 161 watata rikuchin, chay kikin libropi. Ñuqaqa yuyani, kay manaraq Cristomanta 162 watamanta rimayqa pantasqa qillqasqa kasqanta.
“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.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 273.
“23 chay 24 versículokunawanmi apamuwanchik judíokunaq románokunawan huñunakuyninkumanta kay ladoman, Cristo Manaraq Naceptin 161 wataman, chay pacha Roma llapan pachapi kamachiyta hap’ikusqan pacha kama.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 273.
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 the Great, and the Ptolemaic Kingdom of Egypt, led by King Ptolemy IV Philopator.
Chunka iskay chunka hukniyuq hinaspa iskay chunka iskayniyuqmi reqsichinku Rafia Maqanakuypa atipayninta hinallataq qhipa ruwayninkunata, kayqa karqan 217 a.C. watapi, Imperio Seléucidawan, Antioquio III Hatun umalliqninwan, hinaspa Egiptomanta Reino Ptolemaicowan, Rey Ptolomeo IV Filopátor umalliqninwan, chawpipi.
The Battle of Panium, which occurred seventeen years later in 200 BC, was again between the Seleucid kingdom, and the Ptolemaic kingdom.
Panium maqanakuy, chunka qanchis watakuna qhipaman, 200 a.C. watapi pasaq, yapamanta Seleucid kamachiypuraqwan Ptolemaic kamachiypuraqwan churanakusqa karqan.
The Maccabean Revolt, began in 167 BC, and was the Jewish rebellion against the Seleucid Empire’s attempts to suppress Jewish religious practices and impose Greek culture.
Rebelión Macabea, 167 a.C. watapi qallarisqa, karqan judíokunapa hatarinakuyninmi Imperio Seléucidaq munayninkunapa contran, judíokunapa riligyus ruwanakuykunañata ñit’ispa chinkachiyta munasqankumanta, hinaspa griego kawsay llaqtachayta churayta munasqankumanta.
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. This event followed the successful military campaign of the Maccabees against the forces of the Seleucid Empire, led by the infamous Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who had desecrated the Temple and outlawed Jewish religious practices. Antiochus IV Epiphanes died shortly after the victory that is commemorated by Hanukkah, and marks the descent of Syrian power from that point onward in history.
Jerusalén llaqtapi Iskay Kaq Templota hukmanta Diosman qusqanmanta, Hanukkahpi yuyarisqa historiapi ruwasqa llamk’ayta señalasqan, 164 a.C. watapi pasakurqan, iskay chunka kimsayoq versiculopi “alianza” nisqamanta kimsa wata ñawpaqta. Kay ruwayqa qatiqnin karqan Macabeokunapa allin chaskisqa soldado kampañan Seleucida Imperiopa kallpankunapa contranpi, mana allin sutichasqa Antiochus IV Epiphanes pusasqan, paymi Templota qhellicharqan hinaspa judíokunapa religionmanta ruwanakuykuna ama ruwasqa kanankupaq kamachirqan. Antiochus IV Epiphanes wañurqan Hanukkahwan yuyarisqa atipayninmanta qhipaman pisi tiempollapi, chaymantapacha historiapi Siria llaqtapa atiynin urayman urmasqanta señalan.
In 200 BC, (which was also the time of the Battle of Panium), Rome, for the first time inserted itself into the prophetic history of Daniel chapter eleven. There is the symbol which establishes the vision. Its purposeful influence in that history identifies the work of Jezebel, a symbol of a church that pulls strings from behind the scenes. Jezebel was home in Samaria when her husband Ahab watched her prophets get slain by Elijah. Herodias was not at Herod’s birthday party, where her daughter Salome seduced Herod. In the history of the United States, the papacy, represented by the whore of Tyre, is forgotten, until the end of the symbolic seventy years. She then begins to sing her songs of deception to the kings of the earth. The year 200 BC typifies when she begins to openly sing to the kings in the last days, just before the soon coming Sunday law, as represented in verse sixteen.
Watapi 200 a.C.-pi, (chaypas Panium Maqanakuy pacha kasqampi), Romaqa ñawpaq kutita Daniel qhelqap chunka hukniyuq t’aqapi willakuy proféticaman churakusqa. Chaypi kachkan chay rikch’aynin visionta sayachiq. Chay historiapi munasqa kallpachakuyninmi Jezabelpa rurayninta reqsichin, payqa iglesiata unanchasqa, qhepa qhepamanta tukuy imata watuchiq. Jezabelqa Samariapi kawsasqa, qosanta Acab qhawashaqtin Elíasqa paypa profetankunata wañuchirqan. Herodíasqa mana Herodpa p’unchaynin raymipi kasqachu, maypichus ususin Saloméqa Herodta llullaywan urmachirqan. Estados Unidospa historiampi, papadoqa, Tiro llaqta warmi q’ara warmiwan unanchasqa, qonqapusqa kachkan, unanchasqa qanchis chunka watakuna tukukunankama. Chaymantataq qallarin kay pachapi reykunaman llullachiy takiyninkunata takiyta. Wata 200 a.C. unanchan ima pachachus payqa qhepa p’unchaykunapi reykunaman sut’ita takiyninkunata takiyta qallarin, utqayllam hamuq domingo kamachiy manaraq chayamuptin, imaynachus chayta chunka suqtayuq versículopi rikuchin.
Before the “league” of the Jews in 161 BC to 158 BC, the Maccabees rededicated the temple, as is commemorated by Hanukkah in 164 BC. Then three years later, still in an ongoing struggle with the Syrians, the Maccabean Jews reached out to Rome for support. The “league” with Rome that was then formed becomes a prophetic test for God’s last-day students of prophecy.
161 a.C. manta 158 a.C. kama judíokunapa “liga”-n manaraq kaptin, Macabeokuna templota yapamanta Diospaq sapaqcharqanku, imaynachus 164 a.C. watapi Hanukkah nisqawan yuyarichisqa kachkan chayhina. Chaymanta kimsa wata qhipaman, siriokunawan mana tukukuq maqanakuypi kashaspankum, Macabeo judíokuna Romaman yanapayninpaq maskharqanku. Chaymanta Romawan rurasqa “liga”-qa Diospa qhipa p’unchaykunapi profeciata yachaq yachaqninkunapaq huk profético pruebam tukupun.
History identifies 161 BC as the point where the “league” took place, but the pioneers identify that history as 158 BC. Was Miller right, or are the modern historians right? Miller added six hundred and sixty-six years (666), to the year 158 BC, and arrived at the year 508, when “the daily” was taken away. Search as you might, it will be extremely difficult, if not actually impossible to find a historical support for 158 BC as the league between the Jews and the Romans.
Historiaqa 161 a.C. watata riqsichin “alianza” kasqaqtaq chaypi kasqanta, ichaqa pionerokunaqa chay historiata 158 a.C. watamanmi riqsichinku. ¿Millerqa allinchu karqa, utaq kunan p’unchaw historiador-kunaqa allinchu? Millerqa soqta pachak soqta chunka soqtayuq watakunata (666) yaparqan 158 a.C. wataman, hinaspataq chayarqan 508 wataman, maypichus “sapa p’unchaw” qichusqa karqa. Mask’ayta atinki hina mask’aspaqa, ancha sasaqmi kanqa, mana chayllaqa atisqa mana kanqachu, 158 a.C. watata judíokunawan romanokunaq chawpinpi alianza kasqanpaq huk historiapi yanapakuyninta tariyta.
Verse sixteen is the Sunday law, but before that history Rome enters into history to establish the vision in the year 200 BC. The Maccabean revolt began at Modein in 167 BC, and eventually they rededicated the temple in 164 BC. Then from 161 BC, to 158 BC, the Jews enter into a covenant with the Roman power. 161 BC to 158 BC represents a period of time which was required to establish the “league.” This understanding identifies the “league” in agreement with the historians’ testimony, and also with the chart that was directed by the hand of the Lord and should not be altered.
Chunka soqtayoq versículonqa domingo leymin, ichaqa chaymanta ñawpaqta Roma historiaman yaykun rikch’ayninta sayachinapaq wata 200 a.C. nisqapi. Macabeokunaq hatarinakuyninqa qallarin Modeinpi 167 a.C. nisqapi, hinaspataq 164 a.C. nisqapi templota hukmanta t’aqespa qusqanku. Chaymantataq, 161 a.C. nisqamanta 158 a.C. nisqakama, judíokuna Roma atiyniyoqwan huk pactoman yaykunku. 161 a.C. nisqamanta 158 a.C. nisqakama huk pacha karqan chay “liga” sayachisqa kananpaq munasqa. Kay yachaymi chay “liga”ta reqsichin historiadorkunaq willakuyninkuwan hina allin hunk’achisqa kasqanta, hinaspataq Señormaq makinwan pusasqa cuadro wanpas, mayqintachus mana tikrachiychu kanan.
The historians inform us that the process of negotiating treaties between ancient nations like Judah and Rome in the second century BC, varied depending on the specific circumstances, diplomatic protocols, and power dynamics involved. Typically, the process would begin with one party expressing interest in establishing a treaty or alliance with the other. In the case of Judah and Rome, Judah initiated contact with Rome to propose a formal alliance.
Historiadorkuna willakunku ñawpaq llaqtakuna, hina Judáwan Romawan iskay ñiqin pachak wata ñawpaq Cristo manaraq hamuq tiempopi tratadokunata rimaykuchiy llank’ayninqa imayna kasqanqa sapa chiqaq kasqankunaman, diplomátic yachayninkunaman, hinaspa atiyninkuna imayna tupasqankuman hina hukniray karqan nispa. Llapanpiqa, chay llank’ayqa qallarikman karqan huk ladoqa hukwan tratadota utaq huñunakuyta sayachiyta munasqanta rikuchispa. Judáwan Romawan kasqanmantaqa, Judámi Romaqman ñawpaqta qayllakuspa huk formal huñunakuyta mañarqan.
Diplomatic channels would have been utilized to convey the proposal and initiate negotiations. This had to involve sending ambassadors or envoys to Rome to meet with its leaders or representatives. Once negotiations commenced, both parties would discuss the terms of the proposed treaty. This could involve a series of meetings, exchanges of diplomatic messages, and possibly the involvement of intermediaries or mediators to facilitate discussions. During negotiations, each party would consider the terms proposed by the other and may offer counter-proposals or seek amendments to certain terms. This process could involve careful deliberation, consultation with advisors, and assessments of the potential benefits and drawbacks of the proposed treaty.
Canales diplomáticos nisqakunaqa llamk’achisqa karqanman karqa chay propuesta apachinapaq hinaspa rimanakuykunata qallarinapaq. Kayqa necesariamenten Roma llaqtaman embajadorkunata icha kachakunaqta apachiyta hina kanan karqa, chaypi kamachiqninkunawan icha rantininkunawan tinkunankupaq. Rimanakuykuna qallarisqanmanta qhipamanqa, iskaynin ladokunaqa chay yuyasqa tratadopa condicionninkunata rimanakuyta ruwankuman karqa. Kayqa atinman karqa achka tinkuykunata, diplomático willaykuna chhalanakuyta, hinaspa ichapas chawpinchakunapaq icha allinchakunaqpaq mediadorkuna icha intermediariokuna kasqankuta, rimanakuykunata facilitanankupaq. Rimanakuykuna ukhupin, sapa ladoqa hukninpa qhawayninmanta propuesta condicionkunata unanchanman karqa, hinaspa ichapas kutichiy-propuestakunata qunman karqa utaq wakin condicionkunapi allinchaykunata maskhanman karqa. Kay procesoqa allin yuyayman churaywan, yachachiqkunawan tapukuywan, hinaspa chay yuyasqa tratadopa atipanakuykunatawan mana allin kayninkunata tupachiywan ruwasqa kanman karqa.
If both parties reached an agreement on the terms of the treaty, formal documentation would be prepared outlining the terms and conditions agreed upon by both sides. The treaty would then need to be ratified by the respective authorities of each nation. In the case of Rome, this might involve approval by the Senate or other governing bodies. Similarly, in Judah, the treaty would likely require approval by its leadership or governing council. Once ratified, the treaty would be implemented, and both parties would be expected to adhere to its terms. This might involve various forms of cooperation, mutual defense agreements, trade relations, or other forms of diplomatic engagement outlined in the treaty.
Sichus iskaynin partikunakuna tratadopa kamachisqan nisqakunapi huk yuyayman chayarqanku chayqa, chaymanta wakichisqa qillqas formalkunata ruwasqa kanman karqa, iskaynin ladoykunapa rimanakusqan kamachisqankunatawan condicionninkunata sut’inchaspa. Chay tratadotaqa sapa nacionpa kikin autoridadninkuna ratificayta munanman karqa. Roma llaqtapa kasqanmantaqa, kayqa Senadopa utaq huk kamachiq cuerpokunapa chaskisqan kananman karqa. Chay hinallataq, Judápiqa, chay tratadoqa probablemente pusariqninkunapa utaq gobiernon consejonpa chaskisqan kanman karqa. Huk kutin ratificasqa kaptinqa, tratadoqa rurachiyman churakunan karqa, hinaspan iskaynin partikunamanta suyasqa kanman karqa chay nisqan kamachisqankunaman hinallataq kasukuyta. Kayqa imaymana yanapanakuykunata, sapanmanta hark’anakuy rimanakuykunata, rantinakuq relacionesninkunata, utaq huk diplomático ruwanakuykunata tratadopi nisqa hina, hap’iqsapaq kananman karqa.
In the second century BC, travel from Judea (located in the eastern Mediterranean region) to Rome (located in central Italy) would have been a challenging and time-consuming endeavor, especially considering the limitations of ancient transportation methods. The distance between Judea and Rome is approximately 1,500 to 2,000 kilometers (930 to 1,240 miles) depending on the specific route taken. Sea travel was often faster and more efficient than overland travel in ancient times, but sea travel was subject to the prevailing winds. Traveling by ship from a port in Judea to a port in Italy (such as Ostia, the port of Rome) could take several weeks, depending on factors like wind conditions, sea currents, and the type of vessel used.
Ñawpa Cristo manaraq paqarisqan iskay ñiqin pachak watakunapi, Judeamanta (inti lluqsimuy lamar qochapi kaq suyu ukhupi tarikukuq) Romakama (Italia chawpi suyu ukhupi tarikukuq) puriyqa sasa, achka pacha hap’iq llamk’aymi kanman karqan, aswanpas ñawpa pacha puriywan apaykacha yachaykunapa pisi atisqanrayku. Judeawan Romawan chawpipi karu kayqa huk waranqa phisqa pachakmanta iskay waranqakama kilometrokuna hinam (930 manta 1,240 millakama), mayqin ñan hap’isqa kasqanman hina. Ñawpa pachakunapi lamar qochanta puriyqa achkallataqmi allinraq, utqayraq ima karqan allpanta puriyqa nisqamanta; ichaqa lamar qochanta puriyqa wayrakunapa apayninmanmi kamachikusqa karqan. Judeapi huk hatun quchapata llaqtamanta Italiapi huk hatun quchapata llaqtakama (Ostia hina, Roma llaqtapa quchapata) barkuwan puriyqa achka semanakunata hap’inman karqan, wayra ima kasqanman, lamar qochapa mayuyninman, chaymanta mayqin barku llamk’achisqa kasqanman hina.
Overland travel from Judea to Rome would have been slower and more arduous. Travelers would have to navigate through various terrains, including mountains, valleys, and rivers, and contend with obstacles such as bandits and hostile territories. It’s estimated that travel by foot or by horse-drawn carriage could take several months. Travel time would have also been influenced by factors such as the condition of roads, availability of accommodations and rest stops, and the need to rest and resupply along the way.
Judeamanta Romakama allpata puriyqa aswan pisi utqhaymi karqan, hinallataq aswan sasachakuq. Purikuqkunaqa imaymana allpakunata chimpanankupaqmi karqan, urqukunata, wayq’okunata, mayukunatawan, hinallataq suwakunamanta hinaspa awqanakuy llaqtakunamanta hamuq hark’aykunawan tupaq. Yuyayman hinaqa, chakillawan utaq kawayuq aysasqa carruajepi puriyqa achka killakuna hap’iqmanmi karqan. Puriypa unayniqqa ñanqakunapa imayna kasqanman, samanakunapa hinaspa puñunayuq wasikunapa atisqanman, chaymantataq ñanta rishaspalla samayta hinaspa mikhuywan wakin munasqakunata yapayta munasqanman hinam churasqa karqan.
When the Maccabean Jews sought a league with Rome, they would have needed to send ambassadors to Rome. Once those ambassadors were received by the Roman authorities, there would be a period of negotiation. In historical theory, for no precise record is available, once a treaty was formalized, it would need to be taken back to Judea for confirmation, and then probably it would need to be returned to Rome to confirm the acceptance of the Jews. It is almost impossible to believe that the process of forming an alliance in that period of time would have been accomplished in one year, so the understanding that the “league” represents a process from 161 BC to 158 BC fits other lines of prophecy that identify the history that leads to the Sunday law of verse sixteen.
Maccabeokuna judíokuna Romawan huk ligata mask’aspaqa, embajadorkunata Romaman kachayta necesitankuman karqa. Chay embajadorkuna autoridadkuna romanokunapa chaskisqa kaptinqa, huk pacha negociación kananpaqmi karqa. Historia yuyayman hina, imaraykuchus mana ima chiqaq qillqasqa registro kanchu, tratadota formalizaspankuñaqa, Judeaman kutichisqa kananpaqmi karqa confirmaciónpaq; chaymanta, ichapas, Romaman yapamanta apasqa kananpaqmi karqa judíokunapa chaskisqankuta confirmanankupaq. Casi mana atiychu creenaypaq chay tiempo pacha ukhupi huk alianza ruwayqa huk wata ukhullapi tukusqa kasqanta; chayrayku “liga” nisqapa yuyaynin, 161 a.C. manta 158 a.C. kama huk proceso kasqanta riqsichiq, profecíapa wakin siq’ikunawan allin tupayta tarin, chaykunaqa versículo dieciséispi domingo kamachikuyman pushaq historiata reqsichinku.
A “league” that all historians agree was initiated by the Maccabean Jews, began in Judea in 161 BC. The purpose was that the Jews wanted support against the Syrians who they had been struggling with since their revolt began in 167 BC. The revolt was sparked by the efforts of Mattathias, a Jewish priest, and his five sons, particularly Judas Maccabee, to resist the Hellenization policies imposed by the Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes. These policies included attempts to suppress Jewish religious practices and force the adoption of Greek customs and beliefs.
Huk “liga” nisqantaqa, tukuy historiadorkunaq acuerdonman hina, Macabeo judíokunaq qallarisqanmi karqa, Judeapi, 161 a.C. watapi. Chaypa munayninqa karqa judíokunaq yanapayninta maskasqanku Siria runakunapaq contranpi, paykunawanmi maqanakusqanku ñawpaqmantaraq, 167 a.C. watapi hatarinanku qallarisqanmantapacha. Chay hatariyqa paqarisqa karqa Matatías sutiyuq judío sacerdotepa, hinaspa pichqa churinkunapa kallpachakusqanrayku, aswanraq Judas Macabeo nisqapa, Seleucida kamachiq Antiochus IV Epiphanespa impueston helenización nisqa políticankunata hark’ayta munasqankurayku. Chay políticakunaqa ukhupi apamurqa judíokunaq religioso rurayninkunata ñit’iyta munayta, hinaspa griego costumbrekunatawan iñiyninkunata chaskiyta kallpachayta.
The catalyst for the revolt was an incident in the village of Modein, where Mattathias refused to comply with a decree to offer a sacrifice to a Greek deity. “Modein” is derived from the Hebrew word “modi’a,” which means “to declare” or “to protest.” In his protest, Mattathias killed a Jewish apostate who was about to perform the sacrifice, and he and his sons fled to the hills, initiating a guerrilla warfare campaign against the Seleucid forces. The Maccabean Revolt lasted for several years, during which the Maccabees engaged in numerous battles against the Seleucids and their allies. Despite being vastly outnumbered and out-equipped, the Maccabees achieved several significant victories.
Hatariy qallarichiqnin karqa huk pasakuy Modein llaqtapi, chaypi Mattatías mana munarqachu hunt’ayta huk kamachikuyta, griego diosman huk sacrificiota haywananpaq. “Modein” sutinqa hamun hebreo simi “modi’a”-manta, mayqinchus nin “willakuyta ruwaspa rikuchiy” utaq “protestakuy.” Chay protestapi, Mattatías wañuchirqa huk judío apostatata, mayqinchus qayllanña karqa sacrificiota ruwanampaq; hinaspan payqa churinwan kuska ayqekurqanku urqukunaman, qallarispa huk guerrilla nisqa maqanakuy kampañata Seleucida kallpakunapaq contranpi. Maccabeokunaq hatarikuyninqa unay watakunata durarqa, chay pacha ukhunpi Maccabeokunaqa achka maqanakuykunapi tinkurqanku Seleucidakunawan hinaspa paykunapa yanapaqmasinkunawan. Ancha achkawan atipachisqa kaspanku hinaspa aswan allin armakunaqa mana paykunapichu kasqanrayku, Maccabeokunaqa askha hatun atipanakuykunata tarirqanku.
The Seleucid Empire was seeking to impose the religion of Greece upon the Jews, and the Greeks represent the globalists of the last days. Their religion is expressed in the woke-ism that is currently being forced upon the United States and the world, by the globalist forces of the banking system, the mainstream media, the educational centers, and the tearing down of national distinctions through the forced immigration of illegal aliens. When Antiochus Epiphanes was forcing the Greek religion upon the Jews, there were Jews who were cooperating with his efforts. The Maccabees represent one class of apostate Jews, who were resisting the religion of Greece, but there was also another class of apostate Jews who were supporting the work of enforcing the Greek religion.
Imperio Seléucidaqa maskasharqan Grecia llaqtapa religionninta judíokunaman churayta; griegokunaqa qhipa p’unchaykunapi globalistakunata rikuchinku. Paykunapa religionninqa rikurin kunan p’unchaypi “woke-ism” nisqapi, Estados Unidosmanpas hinaspa tukuy pachamanpas kallpawan churasqa, sistema bancariopa globalista atiyninkuna, hatun willay yachachiqkuna, yachay wasikuna, hinaspa mana allin yaykukuq forasterokunata kallpawan apamuspanku nacionkunapa sapaq kayninkunata urmachispa. Antiochus Epiphanes griego religionta judíokunaman kallpawan churashaqtin, wakin judíokunaqa paypa rurasqankunawan yanapakuq karqanku. Macabeokunaqa huk clase apostata judíokunata rikuchinku, Grecia religionta hark’achkaqkunata; ichaqa huknin clase apostata judíokunapas karqan, griego religionta kallpawan churachiy llamk’ayta yanapachkaqkuna.
Verse sixteen is the soon coming Sunday law, and the threefold union of the dragon, the beast and false prophet. That history is preceded by verses thirteen through fifteen, where the three battles of verse forty occur from verse ten (1989), verses eleven and twelve (the Ukrainian war), and the Battle of Panium. The Battle of Panium represents a battle in which the two-horned earth beast prevails over the globalist’s religious and political philosophies.
Chunka suqta chunka hukniyuq kaqmi achka utqaylla hamuq domingo p’unchay kamachiy, hinaspa kimsa kuti huñunakuy dragónpa, bestiapa, llulla willakuqpa ima. Chay historiata ñawpaqta qatikun chunka kimsayuqmanta chunka pichqayuqkama chay versículokuna, maypichus tawa chunka versículopi kimsa maqanakuykuna rikhurimun chunka versículomanta (1989), chunka hukniyuq hinaspa chunka iskayniyuq versículokunamanta (guerra ucraniana), hinaspa Panium maqanakuymanta. Panium Maqanakuymi rikuchin huk maqanakuyman, maypichus iskay waqrayuq allpa bestia atipan globalistapa religionniyuq hinaspa políticaniyuq yuyaykayninkunata.
In that battle the final president of the United States must deal with the aftermath of Putin’s victory and subsequent collapse represented in verses eleven and twelve. He will form an alliance with NATO, or the United Nations, in order to resolve the fallout from the collapse of Russia, and within the history of that alliance he will engage the United Nations in the Battle of Panium. The third battle of verse forty, will be as the first battle of verse forty. As the Soviet Union collapsed under the economic and military force of the United States, the globalists of the United Nations will be forced to repeat “perestroika” the key component of Gorbachev’s efforts to reform the Soviet Union, though they ultimately contributed to the unraveling of the Soviet system and the eventual dissolution of the Soviet Union.
Chay ch’aqwaypi, Estados Unidos nisqa llaqtap qhipa umalliqninmi Putinpa atipayninmanta, chaymanta qhipaman urmaynimmanta ima qhipaqa kaqkunata, chunka hukniyuq chaymanta chunka iskayniyuq versikulokunapi rikuchisqa hina, allinta kamachiyta tiyan. Payqa NATOwan, utaq Naciones Unidaswan, huk huñunakuyta ruwanqa Rusia urmasqanmanta paqarisqa qhipaqa kaqkunata allichanapaq; chay huñunakuypa historiankunapiqa Naciones Unidas-ta Panium nisqa Ch’aqwaypi tinkuchinqa. Chusku chunka versikulopa kinsa kaq ch’aqwayninqa, chusku chunka versikulopa ñawpaq kaq ch’aqwaynin hina kanqa. Imanan Unión Soviética nisqa suyuqa Estados Unidospa qullqiwan, hinallataq awqanakuy kallpawan urmarqa, chay hinallataq Naciones Unidaspa globalistakunaqa “perestroika” nisqata kutichiyta munasqa qatikunqaku, chayqa Gorbachevpa Unión Soviética-ta musuqchaspa allinchayta maskhasqanpi hatun saphi kaqmi karqa, ichaqa tukuyninpiqa Unión Soviéticapa sistemanpa paskarikuy hinallataq Unión Soviética nisqa suyupa tukukuyllapaq chinkayninman yanaparqaku.
The third battle is illustrated by the first battle, and through economics and military pressure Trump, as represented by Reagan, will force the United Nations into “perestroika,” which means restructuring or reformation. The restructuring will place the United States upon the head of the ten kings’ system that is the United Nations. In the battle the papacy will then introduce itself into history, claiming to be the defender of the system that Trump is then conquering.
Kimsa kaq maqanakuyqa ñawpaq kaq maqanakuywanmi rikuchisqa kachkan, hinallataq economía nisqawan hinallataq soldadokunaq ñit’isqanwan Trump, Reagan nisqapi sut’inchasqa hina, Naciones Unidas-ta “perestroika” nisqaman yaykuchinqa, chayqa wakmanta kamachiy utaq wakmanta allichay ninmi. Chay wakmanta kamachiyqa Estados Unidos-ta churaykunqa Naciones Unidas nisqa chunka reykunapa sistemaq umanpi. Chay maqanakuypiqa papadokunaq kamachikuyninmi chaymantapacha historiaman yaykuykunqa, chay sistemaq amachaqnin kasqanta nispan, mayqintachus Trump chay p’unchaykunapi atipashan.
In the same history Trump will face an internal Civil War that he will be forced to address, just as Abraham Lincoln was forced to address. The Civil War will be among two opposing apostate factions within the United States. One class represented by those who have accepted the religion and philosophy of woke-ism, who are the progressive globalists of both political parties. The other class (MAGA-ism) professes to be genuine Protestants, though they lost that mantle in 1844.
Chayna kikin historia-pi Trumpqa huk ukhupi Guerra Civil-ta uyariypaqmi rikurinqa, imaynatachus Abraham Lincolnqa uyariypaq rikurisqa karqan hina. Guerra Civilqa Estados Unidos ukhupi iskay chikan apostata huñukunakuna chawpinpi kanqa. Huk claseqa chaykunawan sut’inchasqa, woke-ismopa religionninta hinaspa filosofian chaskiqkunawan, paykunaqa iskaynin partidu politicokunamanta progresista globalistakuna kanku. Huknin claseqa (MAGA-ism) cheqaq protestantekuna kasqankuta niykunku, ichaqa chay mantle-ta 1844 watapiña chinkachirqanku.
The President’s faction is represented by MAGA-ism, and is based upon the misguided claim of upholding true Protestantism and the Constitution. Woke-ism’s claim is the religion of Mother Earth, the New Age and the belief that the Constitution is applied by the existing circumstances of society’s norms, not by the archaic ideas of the founding fathers.
Presidentepa faccionninqa MAGA-ismom sut’inchasqa kashan, hinaspan sayaqachikun pantasqa nisqaman hina, cheqaq Protestantismota chaymanta Constitucionta hark’aspa waqaychasqanmanta. Woke-ismop nisqanqa Mama Pachapa religionninmi, New Age nisqampi hinaspa chay yuyaypi iñiymi, Constitucionqaqa ruwasqa kasqa llapaqaqa kunan kaq pachakuti runakunap normankuna hina churakusqanmanta, manam qallariq taytakunap mawka yuyayninkunaraykuchu.
Mattathias (Trump) will end the attempts of the globalist-progressive Democrats within the United States as represented by the revolt that began in Modein in 167 BC. Trump will then repeat the history of 164 BC, when the Maccabees rededicated the temple, as commemorated by the observance of Hanukkah. Then in the period represented from 161 BC to 158 BC, Trump will begin the final push for erecting the image of the papacy, which is an image that identifies an illicit relationship between the religious power and the political power. In 158 BC the league will be implemented as the soon coming Sunday law of verse sixteen is enforced.
Matatías (Trump)mi tukuychinqa Estados Unidos ukhupi globalista-progresista Demócratakuna ruwasqanku kallpachakuykunata, hina rikuchisqa kachkan Modeinpi 167 a.C. watapi qallarisqa hatarikuypi. Chaymanta Trump yapamanta rurinqa 164 a.C. watapa historianta, maypachachus Macabeokuna temploqa musuqmanta t’aqwisqa karqan, Hanukkah nisqapa waqaychasqan yuyarikuywan. Hinaspan 161 a.C. watamanta 158 a.C. watakama rikuchisqa pachapi, Trump qallariyta ruwanka qhipa kallpachakuyta papadupa rikch’ayninta sayarichinapaq; chay rikch’ayqa reqsichin mana allin kaq huñunakuyta religioso atiyninwan político atiyninwan. 158 a.C. watapi ligaqa hunt’asqa kanqa, versículo chunka suqtayuqpi nisqa utqay hamuq domingo kamachiy churasqa kaptin.
Daniel eleven first identifies how Rome politically takes control, and then Daniel repeats and enlarges the same history with a line identifying how Rome deals with God’s people in the very same history. From verse sixteen unto verse nineteen the three obstacles to pagan Rome taking control of the world are illustrated. In verse sixteen, Syria was conquered by pagan Rome in 65 BC, and then Judea was conquered by Pompey in 63 BC. Verse sixteen identifies when Rome was to stand in the glorious land, and in so doing is typifying the Sunday law of verse forty-one of the same chapter.
Daniel chunka huk ñawpaqta riqsichin imaynatas Roma llaqtap kamachikuywan apaykacharqa kamachiyta, chaymantataq Daniel kutin rimarin hinaspa astawan mast’arin chay kikin willakuyta huk siq’iwanta riqsichispa imaynatas Roma rurarin Diospa llaqtanwan chay kikin willakuyllapi. Chunka soqta versículomanta chunka isqon versículokama kimsa hark’akuna rikuchisqa kanku imaynatas pagano Romaqa kay pachata kamachinankupaq atiparinanpaq. Chunka soqta versículopi, Siriaqa pagano Romawan atipasqa karqa 65 BC watapi, chaymantataq Judeaqa Pompeywan atipasqa karqa 63 BC watapi. Chunka soqta versículo riqsichin hayk’aqmi Romaqa hatun sumaq allpapi sayanqa, chayta ruraspanqa chay kikin capítulopa tawa chunka hukniyoq versículopi domingo kamachikuyta unanchachispa.
It is important to note that the history of the conquering occurred in 63 BC [parallel to 1863], in the midst of a Civil War taking place within Jerusalem. Uriah Smith stated, “On Pompey’s return from his expedition against Mithridates, king of Pontus, two competitors, Hyrcanus and Aristobulus, were struggling for the crown of Judea.”
Ancha allin yuyarinapaqmi kayta qillqay: atipaypa willakuyninqa karqa 63 BC watapi [1863-man tupaq], Jerusalén llaqtapa ukhupin huk llaqta ukhupi awqanakuy kasqan chawpipi. Uriah Smith nerqa: “Pompeyoqa Mitrídates, Ponto suyupa reynin, contra purisqanmantam kutimushaspa, iskay atipanakuypi kaqkuna, Hircano hinaspa Aristóbulo, Judea suyupa coronanpaq maqanakusharqaku.”
The names “Hyrcanus” and “Aristobulus’ are both of Greek origin and have historical significance, particularly in the context of Jewish history during the Hellenistic period and the Hasmonean dynasty. “Hyrcanus” is derived from the Greek word “Hurkanos,” which likely originated from the word “hurkan,” meaning “wolf” in the Persian language. Hyrcanus was a name borne by several Hasmonean rulers. “Aristobulus” means “best counselor” or “best adviser.” Aristobulus was another name borne by several Hasmonean rulers. Both “Hyrcanus” and “Aristobulus” are names associated with significant figures in Jewish history during the Hasmonean period. They were rulers who played important roles in the governance and expansion of the Hasmonean Kingdom in Judea. The prophetic descendants and representatives of the Hasmonean kingdom in the time of Christ was the Pharisees.
Sutikuna “Hyrcanus” nisqapaqpas “Aristobulus” nisqapaqpas iskayninku griego simimanta hamun, hinaspataq hatun historiayuq kanku, aswanpas judío runakunapa historiankupi helenístico pacha hinallataq Hasmoneo ayllukunaq dinastíankupi. “Hyrcanus” sutinqa griego simipi “Hurkanos” nisqamanta hamun, chayqa ichaqa Persia simipi “hurkan” nisqamanta paqarisqa kanman, mayqinchus “atoq” nin. Hyrcanusqa achka Hasmoneo kamachiqkunapa apasqan suti karqan. “Aristobulus” ninqa “aswan allin yuyaychakuq” utaq “aswan allin willaykuq” ninmi. Aristobulusqa huk suti karqan, mayqintachus achka Hasmoneo kamachiqkuna apaqku. “Hyrcanus” nisqapas “Aristobulus” nisqapas iskayninkuqa Hasmoneo pachapi judío historiapi ancha reqsisqa runakunawan tupaq sutikuna kanku. Paykunaqa Judeapi Hasmoneo Qhapaq Suyuq kamachiyninpi hinallataq mast’arikuyninpi ancha hatun ruwanakuyta ruwaspa kamachiqkuna karqanku. Cristoq pacha tiempopi Hasmoneo qhapaq suyuq profético mirayninkuna hinaspa rantinkunaqa Fariseokuna karqanku.
When Pompey conquered Jerusalem, two political parties both traced their origins back to the time of the revolt represented by Modein in 167 BC. Once Pompey was drawn into the rebellion, he determined to take Jerusalem and the political party of Aristobulus determined to resist him, but the party of Hyrcanus determined to open the gates to Pompey. Pompey then mounted his attack upon Jerusalem and three months later Jerusalem was forever under the jurisdiction of Rome.
Pompeyo Jerusalén llaqtata atipakuspanqa, iskay politikapi partido-kunaqa iskayninkupas qallariyninkuta kutichirqanku 167 a. C. watapi Modein llaqtapi rikuchisqa hatarikuymanta. Pompeyo chay hatarikuyman churakusqa kaptinmi, payqa Jerusalén llaqtata hap’iyta yuyarqan; Aristóbuloq partidonnataqmi payta hark’ayta yuyarqan, Hyrcanoq partidonnataqmi punkukunata Pompeyoman kichariyta yuyarqan. Chaymanta Pompeyoqa Jerusalén llaqtapa contranpi maqanakuyta qallariq, kinsa killamanta qhipataqmi Jerusalén llaqta wiñaypaq Romaq kamachikuynin urapi tarikurqan.
By verse nineteen Egypt, the third and final obstacle, was taken by Rome. Then in verse twenty the birth of Christ is identified as Daniel begins to set forth how Rome would deal with God’s people in that history. In verses twenty-one and twenty-two Christ is crucified. In verse twenty-three, the league that began in 161 BC to 158 BC, is identified immediately after the verses that describe the cross where the apostate Jews proclaimed they “had no king, but Caesar.” The line of the apostate Jews, represented by the Maccabees, who had resisted the inroads of Greek religious philosophy, and in so doing formed an unholy relationship with Rome, follows the verse identifying the history of the cross, where the fruit of their unholy relationship was fully manifested.
Chunkaqaq chunka isqunniyuq versículopi Egiptoqa, kinsa kaq hinaspa qhipa hark’ayqa, Romaq makinman urmaykurqan. Chaymanta iskay chunka versículopi Cristoq paqarisqan riqsichisqa kachkan, Daniel qallarisqanrayku Roma imayna Diospa llaqtanwan chay historiapi ruwananpaq nisqanta rikuchiyta. Iskay chunka hukniyuq hinaspa iskay chunka iskayniyuq versículokunapi Cristoqa chakatasqa kachkan. Iskay chunka kimsayuq versículopi, 161 a. C. chhika watamanta 158 a. C. chhika watakama qallarisqa alianzaqa sut’inchasqa kachkan, chay cruzmanta willaq versículokunapa chaylla qhipanpi, maypichus apostata judíokuna willakurqanku: “manam reyniyku kanchu, aswanqa Césarlla.” Apostata judíokunapa miraynin, Macabeokunawan unanchasqa, paykunaqa griegokunapa religioso filosofianpa yaykuyninkunata hark’arqanku, chayta ruwaspanmi Romaqwan mana ch’uyachu kaq t’inkiyta ruwakurqanku, chayqa qatipakun cruzpa historianta riqsichiq versículota, maypichus paykunapa mana ch’uyachu kaq t’inkiyninkupa rurun hunt’asqata rikuchikurqan.
The Shekinah never returned to the temple that was erected after the seventy years of captivity. The last prophetic testimony, proclaimed by Malachi, was given about the middle of the fifth century BC. There had been no visible presence of God, nor any prophetic testimony for hundreds of years before the Maccabees stood up against the globalist Greek influence. At the beginning of their revolt, they accomplished the very rebellion that both Ptolemy and King Uzziah had attempted, when both kings sought to fulfill the role of priest and make an offering in the temple.
Shekinahqa manam kutimanta kutimurqachu chay temploman, qanchis chunka wata watakuna prisionpi kasqanmanta qhipaman sayarichisqa kaqtin. Qhepa profetico willakuy, Malaquiaspa willasqan, qichqa pachak wata ñawpaq Cristomanta chawpinpi qosqasqa karqan. Maccabeokuna hatarirqankukama, griegokunapa llapa pachapi mast’arisqa globalista influyuncunapa contranpi, pachak watakunaña qhipaykuptin Diospa rikuy atisqa presenciaqan mana karqanchu, nitaq ima profetico willakuypas karqanchu. Hatarisqankupa qallariyninpi, iskaynin reykuna—Ptolomeo hinallataq Rey Uzías—imatachus ruranayta munarqanku, chay kikinta paykuna hunt’arqanku, maypachachus sacerdotepa ruwanan ruleta hunt’ayta maskharqanku, templopin ofrenda haywayta munaspa.
Jonathan Apphus (also known as Jonathan Maccabeus), was one of the sons of Mattathias, who initiated the Maccabean Revolt, and he played a significant role in leading the Jewish rebellion against the Seleucid Empire. After the death of his brother Judas Maccabee in battle, Jonathan assumed leadership of the Maccabean forces. In addition to his military and political leadership, Jonathan also took on the role of high priest, serving as the spiritual leader of the Jewish people. Jonathan’s dual role as both leader and high priest marked a significant development in Jewish history, as it consolidated both political and religious authority within the Hasmonean dynasty. His leadership helped to strengthen Jewish autonomy and establish the Hasmonean rule in Judea.
Jonatan Apphus (hinallataq Jonatan Macabeo sutiwanpas riqsisqa), Matatíaspa churinkunamanta huk karqan, paymi qallararqan rebelión macabeata, hinaspan ancha hatun ruwayniyuq karqan judío hatarikuypa pusayninpi, Imperio seléucida contra. Wawqin Judás Macabeo maqanakuypi wañusqan qhipan, Jonatanmi Macabeokunapa fuerzankunapa pusayninta jap’irqan. Mana aswanllachu militar hinallataq política pusayninpi, Jonatanqa sumaq sacerdote hatunpa ruwanasnintapas jap’irqan, judío llaqtapa espiritu pusariqnin hina servispan. Jonatanpa iskay ruwana, pusariq hinallataq sacerdote hatun hina kasqan, judío historiapi hatun wiñayniyuq ruwayta señalarqan, imaraykuchus chaywanmi autoridad políticatawan religiosa autoridadtapas dinastía asmonea ukhupi huñurqan. Paypa pusayninqa yanaparqan judío autonomía aswan kallpachakunanpaq hinaspa Judeapi gobierno asmoneo sayachikunampaq.
The very sin which Ptolemy attempted after the victory of Raphia was accomplished at the very beginning of the revolt of the Maccabees. It was the same sin that was resisted by the priests in the time of king Uzziah, but the Maccabees’ professed defense of God’s temple services was a misguided and rebellious manifestation of the combination of church and state, and as such, typifies the rebellion of apostate Protestantism that is now rallying in support of Trump against the inroads of Biden’s globalist woke-ism.
Raphia atipay chaypi Ptolomeo rurayta munasqan huchaqa, Macabeokuna hatarikuynin qallariyninpiñataq hunt’akurqan. Chayqa kikin hucham karqan, reyeq Uzías p’unchayninpi sacerdotekuna sayarispanku hark’asqanku; ichaqa Macabeokunapa sut’inchasqa amachayninku Diospa templonpi serviciokunataqa pantasqa hinaspa hatarikuq rikuriy karqan iglesiatawan estadota huñuykusqanmanta, chayraykutaq kunan Trump yanapakuyninman tantanakusqanku apostatakunaman tukusqa protestantismopa hatarikuyninta unanchan, Bidenpa globalista woke-ismon yaykuyninkunata hark’anankupaq.
The Bible teaches that you will know them by their fruits, and the Pharisees during the time of Christ were the final remnants of the Hasmonean dynasty that began with Mattathias. Mattathias, and the rebellion he began, bore the fruits of Pharisee-ism, as does the apostate Protestants that are supporting the concept of “Make America Great Again”. America was great when the Constitution was understood to keep church and state separated from each other, but at the counterfeit miracle represented by the victory that is commemorated by the feast of Hanukkah, the movement for Sunday legislation will come out into the open.
Bibliapi yachachin paykunata riksinki rurayninkupa wayunkunamanta, chaymanta Cristopa pacha tiempopi fariseokunaqa Mattatiasmanta qallariq Hasmoneo ayllupa qhipa puchuqninmi karqanku. Mattatiasqa, paypa qallarisqan hatarikuyninwan kuska, fariseísmoq wayunkunata apamurqa, hinallataq “Make America Great Again” nisqa yuyayta yanapashaq apostata protestantekunapas. América hatun karqa Constitución nisqa qelqa iglesiatawan estadotawan hukmanta hukman t’aqayta waqaychananpaq kasqanta allinta entiendisqa kaptin, ichaqa Hanukkah raymipi yuyarisqa atipaywan rikuchisqa llulla milagropiqa, domingo p’unchaw kamachiykunapa kuyuyqa sut’iman lluqsinqa.
We will continue this study in the next article.
Kay yachachiyta qatiq willakuypi mast’arisun.
“Heretofore those who presented the truths of the third angel’s message have often been regarded as mere alarmists. Their predictions that religious intolerance would gain control in the United States, that church and state would unite to persecute those who keep the commandments of God, have been pronounced groundless and absurd. It has been confidently declared that this land could never become other than what it has been—the defender of religious freedom. But as the question of enforcing Sunday observance is widely agitated, the event so long doubted and disbelieved is seen to be approaching, and the third message will produce an effect which it could not have had before.
“Nayra pachanakuna kimsa kaq angelpa willakuyninpa cheqaqkuna willaqkunaqa achka kuti mancharichiqlla runakuna hina qhawasqa karqanku. Paykuna rimarisqankumanta—Estados Unidos llaqtapi religión nisqapi mana muchuy atiyqa kamachiyta hap’inqa, iglesiatawan estadota huñunaykuspa Diospa kamachinkunata waqaychaqkunata qatiykachananpaq—nisqaqa mana ima sapanniyoq, mana yuyayman hina nispa willasqa karqan. Sinchi takyaq sonqowan niq karqanku kay allpaqa hayk’aqpas hukman tukuyta mana atinmanchu, imayna kasqanmantaqa chayllapuni kanman—religiónpi qispisqa kaypa amachaqnin. Ichaqa domingo p’unchaw waqaychanata kallpachaymanta tapuyqa ancha mast’arikusqanrayku, unaymanta iskayrayasqa, mana iñisqa kaq ruwayqa qayllamuyta rikuchikunña, hinaspan kimsa kaq willakuyqa ñawpaqta mana atisqan huk llank’ayta ruwanka.”
“In every generation God has sent His servants to rebuke sin, both in the world and in the church. But the people desire smooth things spoken to them, and the pure, unvarnished truth is not acceptable. Many reformers, in entering upon their work, determined to exercise great prudence in attacking the sins of the church and the nation. They hoped, by the example of a pure Christian life, to lead the people back to the doctrines of the Bible. But the Spirit of God came upon them as it came upon Elijah, moving him to rebuke the sins of a wicked king and an apostate people; they could not refrain from preaching the plain utterances of the Bible— doctrines which they had been reluctant to present. They were impelled to zealously declare the truth and the danger which threatened souls. The words which the Lord gave them they uttered, fearless of consequences, and the people were compelled to hear the warning.
“Sapa miraypaqmi Diosqa kamachin sirviente-kunanta huchata k’aminankupaq, kay pachapipas iglesiapiwan. Ichaqa runakunaqa munanku allinlla simikuna rimarisqa kananta paykuna-man, ch’uya, mana imawanpas sumaqchasqa cheqaq-kaytaq mana chaskisqachu. Achka reformador-kunaqa, llamk’ayninkuta qallarispa, yuyarqanku ancha allin yuyaywan iglesiapaqpas nacionpaqpaspas hucha-kunata atacanankupaq. Paykunaqa suyarqanku, ch’uya cristiano kawsaypa ejemplonwan, runakunata kutichiyta Bibliapa doctrina-kunaman. Ichaqa Diospa Espiritun paykuna-man hamurqan, imayna Eliasman hamusqanta hina, payta kuyuchispa millay rey-pa hucha-kunata hinaspa huk apostata llaqtapa hucha-kunata k’aminanpaq; mana atirqankuchu saqeyta Bibliamanta chiqap rimaykunata willakuyta— doctrina-kunata mayqenkunata rikhuchiyta manchakurqankuña. Paykunaqa kallpachasqa karqanku kusisqa sonqowan cheqaq-kayta hinaspa almapa contranpi hamuq peligrota willanan-kupaq. Señor paykunaman qosqan simikunata rimarqanku, mana ima consecuenciasmanta manchakuspa, hinaspa runakunaqa obligasqa karqanku uyariyta chay amonestacionta.”
“Thus the message of the third angel will be proclaimed. As the time comes for it to be given with greatest power, the Lord will work through humble instruments, leading the minds of those who consecrate themselves to His service. The laborers will be qualified rather by the unction of His Spirit than by the training of literary institutions. Men of faith and prayer will be constrained to go forth with holy zeal, declaring the words which God gives them. The sins of Babylon will be laid open. The fearful results of enforcing the observances of the church by civil authority, the inroads of spiritualism, the stealthy but rapid progress of the papal power—all will be unmasked. By these solemn warnings the people will be stirred. Thousands upon thousands will listen who have never heard words like these. In amazement they hear the testimony that Babylon is the church, fallen because of her errors and sins, because of her rejection of the truth sent to her from heaven. As the people go to their former teachers with the eager inquiry, Are these things so? the ministers present fables, prophesy smooth things, to soothe their fears and quiet the awakened conscience. But since many refuse to be satisfied with the mere authority of men and demand a plain ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ the popular ministry, like the Pharisees of old, filled with anger as their authority is questioned, will denounce the message as of Satan and stir up the sin-loving multitudes to revile and persecute those who proclaim it.
“Chhaynaqa kimsaka angelpa willakuyninqa willasqa kanqa. Chayta aswan hatun kallpawan qusqaypaq pacha chayamuspanqa, Señorqa pisi yachaqkuna nisqakunawanmi llamk’anqa, paypa sirviyninman sapaqchasqakunaq yuyayninkunata pusaspa. Llamk’aqkunaqa manam qillqasqa yachay wasikunapi yachachisqa kasqankuraykuchu allinchasqa kanqaku, aswanpas Paypa Espiritunpa jawk’aywanmi. Iñiyniyuq, mañakuq runakunaqa santo q’apariywan lluqsiyta atinisqa kanqaku, Diospa paykunaman qosqan simikunata willaspa. Babiloniapa huchankunaqa qawachisqa kanqaku. Iglesiapa waqaychanankunata civil autoridadwan kallpachiyuq churasqanmanta manchakuy atiyniyuq rurayninkuna, espiritismopa yaykuykunan, papal poderniypa pakasqa ichaqa usqhaylla wiñayninpas—llapallanmi sut’inchasqa kanqaku. Kay solemnepa willakuyninkunawan runakunaqa kuyuchisqa kanqaku. Waranqa waranqanmi uyarisqanku, mana hayk’aqpas kayhina simikunata uyarisqakuna. Mancharisqa admirakuypi uyariqkanku testimoniota: Babiloniaqa iglesia kasqanta, urmasqa kasqanta pantayninkunarayku huchankunarayku, hanaqpachamanta payman apachisqa cheqaq kayta chaskiyta mana munasqanrayku. Runakuna ñawpaq yachachiqninkuman kusisqa tapukuyniyuq rispanku: ¿Kaykunaqa cheqaqchu? nispa, ministrukunaqa llullakuykuna qawachinku, llamp’u imaymanata rimanku, manchakuykuna samachinankupaq, rikch’arichisqa yuyay sonqokunata thakichinankupaq. Ichaqa achka runakuna manam runakunaq sapa autoridadnillanwan kusikuyta munankuchu, aswanpas sut’i ‘Kayhinan Señor nin’ nisqata mañakuspa, chaymi llapa runakunaq munasqan ministerioqa, ñawpaq fariseokuna hina, autoridadninku tapusqa kasqanrayku phiñasqawan hunt’asqa, willakuyta Satanaspa kasqanta sutichanqaku, hinaspataq huchata munakuq achka runakunata hatarichinqaku, chayta willaqkunata k’amiyta hinaspa qatiykachayta.”
“As the controversy extends into new fields and the minds of the people are called to God’s downtrodden law, Satan is astir. The power attending the message will only madden those who oppose it. The clergy will put forth almost superhuman efforts to shut away the light lest it should shine upon their flocks. By every means at their command they will endeavor to suppress the discussion of these vital questions. The church appeals to the strong arm of civil power, and, in this work, papists and Protestants unite. As the movement for Sunday enforcement becomes more bold and decided, the law will be invoked against commandment keepers. They will be threatened with fines and imprisonment, and some will be offered positions of influence, and other rewards and advantages, as inducements to renounce their faith. But their steadfast answer is: ‘Show us from the word of God our error’—the same plea that was made by Luther under similar circumstances. Those who are arraigned before the courts make a strong vindication of the truth, and some who hear them are led to take their stand to keep all the commandments of God. Thus light will be brought before thousands who otherwise would know nothing of these truths.” The Great Controversy, 605, 606.
“Imayna chay ch’akiy mast’arikuy musuq chakrakunaman mast’arikun, runakunapa yuyayninkunapas Diospa saruchasqa kamachikuyninman qayasqa kachkaptin, Satanásqa kuyurin. Willakuyman kuska atiyninqa payta hark’aqkunallatam aswan phiñachinqa. Clerokunaqa casi mana runapa atiywan tupaq kallpayuq hina llamk’aspanku, mich’akuyta pakayman churayta munanqaku ama qhapaqkuna pataman k’anchayqa lliphipinampaq. Tukuy makinkupi kaq medioswanmi kay kawsayniyuq tapuykunapa rimanakuyninta upallachiyta kallpachakunqaku. Iglesiaraqmi autoridad civilpa sinchi makinta mañakun, hinaspa kay ruwaypi papistaspas protestantespas huñunakunku. Intichaw samana p’unchaw kamachiyta kallpachaspa purichiy aswan sinchi, aswan sut’i kaptin, kamachikuyqa Diospa kamachikuyninkunata waqaychaqkunapa contranpi waqyachisqa kanqa. Qullqi muchuywan, carcelwanpas manchachisqa kanqaku; wakinninkumanqa munayniyuq puestokuna, huk premiokuna hinaspa allinkaykuna qosqa kanqa, iñiyninkuta saqenankupaq watukuy hina. Ichaqa paykunapa takyaq kutichisqankuqa kaymi: ‘Diospa Simi-manta pantasqaykuta qawachiywayku’—Luteroq kikin mañakuyninmi karqa chay hina circunstanciakunapi. Juzgadokunapa ñawpaqenman pusasqa kaqkunaqa cheqaq kayta sinchi kallpawan amachanku, hinaspa paykunata uyariqkunamanta wakinkunaqa Diospa llapa kamachikuyninkunata waqaychanankupaq sayarinku. Chayhinam k’anchayqa waranqa waranqa runakunapa ñawpaqenman apasqa kanqa, mana chayqa kay cheqaqkunamanta imatapas mana yachayman chayanmanchu karqanku.” The Great Controversy, 605, 606.