In the last article, we identified six prophetic lines of controversy which have occurred in the history of Adventism from the Millerite time period until the present day. I contend the first and the last controversy over the “robbers of thy people” in verse fourteen of Daniel chapter eleven are prophetically identical. The Millerites understood the “robbers” to be Rome, and the Protestants taught the “robbers” were a Syrian king named Antiochus Epiphanes.
Ci mbind mi weesu mujj, nu xamale woon juróom-benn yu yonent yi ci xulóo yi amoon ci jaar-jaaru Taariixu Adantism, dale ko ca jamonoju Millerites ba tey jii. Maa ngi teg ne xulóo bu njëkk ak bu mujj bi ci “saccay sa xeetu nit” yi ci aaya fukki ak ñeent ci Daniel saar fukki ak benn, ñoo yem ci waxi yonent. Millerites yi deggoon ne “saccay” yaa di Room, te Protestants yi jàngale woon ne “saccay” yaa di buur bu Siriya bu tudd Antiochus Epiphanes.
And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. Daniel 11:14.
Te ci jamono, ñu bare dinañu jóg ci bu baax ngir jókku ci buur bu bëj-gànnaar; te itam, ay nit yu sa yoonu yi sëf, dinañu yékkati seen bopp ngir saxal vision bi; waaye dinañu daanu. Daniel 11:14.
Beginning in verse ten, and continuing through verse fifteen a warfare between the kingdoms of Egypt and Syria is represented. Egypt is the king of the south in the passage, and the Syrian king is represented as the king of the north. Verse ten identifies what the historians call the beginning of the Fourth Syrian war in 219 BC, verses eleven and twelve represent the battle of Raphia in 217 BC, and its aftermath. Then verses thirteen through fifteen identify the battle of Panium in 200 BC. In verses ten through fifteen the Syrian king is Antiochus Magnus, ruler of the Seleucid Empire.
Li dale cibaarub fukk, ba agsi ba cibaarub fukk ak juróom-benn, am na fi melokaanu xare bu nekk ci diggante nguur-u Misra ak nguur-u Siri. Ci xët wi, Misra mooy buur bu bëj-gànnaaw bi, te buur-u Siri mooy buur bu bëj-saalum bi. Cibaarub fukk mooy màndargaal li historiye yi di wax ne mooy ndoorte xare bu ñeenteel bu Siri bi ci atum 219 laata Kirist, cibaarub fukk ak benn ak fukk ak ñaar mooy tegtal xareb Rafia bi ci atum 217 laata Kirist, ak li ko topp. Gannaaw loolu, cibaarub fukk ak ñett ba fukk ak juróom mooy màndargaal xareb Panium bi ci atum 200 laata Kirist. Ci cibaarub fukk ba fukk ak juróom, buur-u Siri bi mooy Antiocos Magnus, kilifag Mbooloom Seleucid.
Verse ten represents the history when Antiochus Magnus begins a war to regain territory that was taken from the Seleucid kingdom years before. In the verse he regains the lost territory in 219 BC, but he temporarily ceases his aggressions, and seeks to regroup his military strength. He had regained control of the lost territory, and made it all the way to the border of Egypt, the southern kingdom ruled by the Ptolemy dynasty. Between 219 BC and 217 BC, both the king of the south and the king of the north made plans for the approaching battle of Raphia.
Saar fukki ci benn ñaareel day tegtu ci jaar-jaaru taariix bi Antiochus Magnus tàmbalee xare ngir delloo suuf yi ñu jële woon ci nguurug Seleucid ay at yu jiitu. Ci saar bi, mu delloo suuf yu reer yi ci atum 219 Balaaxu Kirist, waaye mu taxaw ab diir ci ay jëfandikoom yu xare, te seet a dajalewaat dooleem soldaar. Mu yokkoonaat sañ-sañam ci suuf yu reer yi, ba agsi sax ba ci diggante-rey Misra, maanaam nguur gu bëj-saalum gi askanu Ptolemy di yor. Diggante 219 Balaaxu Kirist ak 217 Balaaxu Kirist, buur bu bëj-saalum bi ak buur bu bëj-gànnaar bi ñépp dajaloon nañu pexe ngir xeex bu ñu doon ñëw bi ca Raphia.
The battle of Raphia took place in 217 BC, and the southern kingdom of Egypt, ruled by Ptolemy prevailed over the Syrian king Antiochus Magnus, king of the north in the prophetic passage. Then in verses thirteen through fifteen, seventeen years later in 200 BC, Antiochus Magnus, who had then formed an alliance with Philip of Macedon engaged Egypt in the battle of Panium. The southern kingdom of Egypt then had a child king of five or six years old, and Antiochus Magnus and Philip could not resist taking advantage of the child king of Egypt, and Antiochus Magnus prevailed in the battle of Panium. The three verses that represent the battle of Panium contain verse fourteen, where a new power is introduced into the prophetic narrative.
Xareb Rafiya am na ci atum 217 B.C., te nguur gu bëj-gànnaaru Misra, gi Ptolemy di yore, moo notoon buur bu Siri Antioxus Magnus, buur bu bëj-gànnaaru waxtaanu yonent bi. Gannaaw loolu, ci ay aaya 13 ba 15, fukki at ak juróom-ñaari at gannaaw, maanaam ci atum 200 B.C., Antioxus Magnus, mi defoon benn déggoo ak Filip bu Maseduwan, dafa dugg ak Misra ci xareb Paniyum. Nguur gu bëj-saalumu Misra nag, ca jamono jooju, amoon na buur bu ndaw bu amoon juróom walla juróom-benn at rekk; te Antioxus Magnus ak Filip manuñu woon bañ a jëfandikoo xaalis ak la néewam buur bu ndaw boobu bu Misra. Noonu Antioxus Magnus moo notoon ci xareb Paniyum. Ñetti aaya yi di tekki xareb Paniyum dañuy ëmb aaya 14, fañu dugal benn kàttan gu bees ci nettalib yonent bi.
The robbers of thy people are a different power than the Egyptian king of the south, or the Seleucid king of the north, or Philip the Macedonian ruler. The Millerites recognized that Rome is the robbers of thy people. One of the Hebrew root words that is translated as “robbers,” means breaker. Pagan Rome is represented in prophecy as the power who would break in pieces.
Sàccat sa nit ñi yéen mooy kàttan gu wuutewul ak buur bu bëj-gànnaar bu Misra, walla ak buur bu bëj-gànnaar bu Seleucid yi, walla ak Filib, buur bu Maseduwaan. Millerite yi xamoon nañu ne Rooma mooy sàccat sa nit ñi. Benn ci baat yu cosaan yu Ebrë yi, bi ñu ko tekkee ne “sàccat”, dafay tekki itam kiy damm. Rooma ju pagan, ci kàddug wax ju yàlla, dafa feeñ ni mooy kàttan ga wara damm ay xaaj.
After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. Daniel 7:7.
Gannaaw gi, gis naa ci ay peeñu guddi, te xoolal, rab wu ñeenteel woon fa, di lu ragal ak lu tiis, te amoon na doole lool; te amoon na bëñ yu mag yu fer: dafa lekk ba dagg ay xaaj, ba noyyi leen, te daaneel desit yi ak tànkam; te muwu woon wu wuute ak bépp rab wu ko jiitu woon; te amoon na fukki geñ. Daniel 7:7.
When Uriah Smith comments on the robbers, he quotes a historian who points out that robbers represent breakers.
Bi Uriah Smith di waxe ci mbokk yi, mu nekkal ab tarihkat buy wone ne sàcc yi dañuy tegtal ñi damm.
“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.
“Léegi ab doole bu bees lañuy dugal,—‘sàcc yi ci sa askan wi;’ ci lu leer, ni Évêque Newton waxe, ‘ñi di door askanu yaw, ba tas ko.’ Fu sore ci wetu dexu Tiber, amoon na nguur gu doon yar boppam ci pexe yu réy ak xeetu xalaat yu lëndëm. Ca njàlbéenam dafa doon tuuti te néew doole; waaye mu màgg ak gaaw gu yéeme ci kàttan ak tar, di jox boppam ci fii ak fa ak teey, ngir seet ay doxaloom, te natt kàttanu loxoom bu xare, ba ker, bi mu xam ne am na doole, mu yékkati boppam ak fit ci biir xeeti suuf, te mu jàpp ak loxo gu dul daanu yepp yoonu seeni mbir. Lii ba noppi, turu Room taxaw na ci xët yu jaar-jaari maam, ñu dogal ko ngir moom di yorey mbiri àddina ci ay jamono yu yàgg, te di jëfandikoo doole gu réy ci biir xeet yi ba ci mujju jamono.”
“Rome spoke; and Syria and Macedonia soon found a change coming over the aspect of their dream. The Romans interfered in behalf of the young king of Egypt, determined that he should be protected from the ruin devised by Antiochus and Philip. This was BC 200, and was one of the first important interferences of the Romans in the affairs of Syria and Egypt.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 257.
«Room waxoon na; te Siiri ak Maseduwaan daldi gis lu soppeeku ci melo suñu gént. Waa Room duggu nañu ngir ndimbal buur bu ndaw bu Misra, dogal ne war nañu koo aar ci alkande bi Antiokus ak Filippe fexe woon a ko defal. Loolu moo doon atum 200 lu jiitu Kirist, te kenn ci njëkk yi ci jëf yu am solo yu Waa Room duggule woon ci mbiri Siiri ak Misra.» Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 257.
The prediction set forth in the verses was fulfilled in roughly twenty years from 219 BC unto 200 BC, but the prophets speak more about the last days than the days in which they lived.
Yëgle gi waxe ci ay kàddu yooyu amoon na ci lu ni mel ni ñaar-fukk at, dale ci 219 BC ba 200 BC, waaye yonent yi dañuy wax gën a bari ci fan yu mujj yi ba ci fan yi ñu doon dund.
“Each of the ancient prophets spoke less for their own time than for ours, so that their prophesying is in force for us. ‘Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.’ 1 Corinthians 10:11. ‘Not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.’ 1 Peter 1:12. . . .
«Benn yonent yu mag ya waxoon nekkul woon ci seen jamono rekk, waaye ci sunu jamono la gën a jëm, ba tax na seen yëgle nekk ci doole ngir nun. “Lépp lii xewoon na ci ñoom ngir muy misaal; te bindees na ko ngir sunu artu, ñoom ñi mujjug àddina dikkël.” 1 Korent 10:11. “Jariñuñu woon seen bopp, waaye nun lañu doon jariñoo yooyu, yi léegi yéglees na leen ci yéen jaarale ko ci ñi leen waare xebaar bu baax bi, ak Xel mu Sell mi wàcceeséetu asamaan; te yooyu ay malaaka sax bëgg a xool bu baax.” 1 Piyeer 1:12....»
“The Bible has accumulated and bound up together its treasures for this last generation. All the great events and solemn transactions of Old Testament history have been, and are, repeating themselves in the church in these last days.” Selected Messages, book 3, 338, 339.
“Biibël bi dajale na tegtal mboolem ay alal-jàmmam ngir xeetu jamono mu mujj mii. Bépp xew-xewu mag ak bépp jëf ju tedd ci nettali Yeneen Kóllëre gu Yàlla gi, amoon na, te mu ngi dellu di amaat ci mbooloom gëmkat yi ci fan yii mujj.” Selected Messages, téere 3, 338, 339.
Although Daniel did not live in the twenty-year time period we are considering, inspiration through the writings of Sister White informs is that much of the history recorded in Daniel eleven is to be repeated in the final fulfillment of Daniel eleven.
Naka la Daniel dundul woonul fanweeri at ak ñaar-fukk waxtu yi nuy seet, ngëm gi ñëw ci mbind yi Sister White bind moo nu xamal ne lu bari ci taarix bi ñu bind ci Daniel 11 dina dellu ci matug mujj gi ci Daniel 11.
“We have no time to lose. Troublous times are before us. The world is stirred with the spirit of war. Soon the scenes of trouble spoken of in the prophecies will take place. The prophecy in the eleventh of Daniel has nearly reached its complete fulfillment. Much of the history that has taken place in fulfillment of this prophecy will be repeated.” Manuscript Releases, number 13, 394.
“Amunu jotu benn dara. Jamono yu metti nekk na ci sunu kanam. Àddina bi di yëngu ak xelug xare. Teelul, xew-xewi metit yi waxees na ci ay kàddug yëgle yi dinañu am. Yëgleb ci Daniel, saar wa fukk ak benn, agsi na lu jege ci matug matam. Lu bare ci taarix bi amoon ngir matal yëgleb bii, dinañu ko dellu.” Manuscript Releases, number 13, 394.
Verses ten through fifteen of Daniel eleven represent the history of the last days which leads up to the soon-coming Sunday law, for verse sixteen identifies when Rome, for the first time, conquered the “glorious land.”
Aaya yu fukk ak juróom-benn ci Daniel fukk ak benn dañuy tegtal jaar-jaaru fan yu mujj yi di jëme ba ci yoonu dimaas bu bëgg a ñëw ci lu gaaw, ndaxte aaya fukk ak juróom-benn day won ci ban waxtu la Room, ngir yoon wu njëkk, notoon “réew mu tedd bi.”
But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed. Daniel 11:16.
Waaye ki ñëw ci kawam dina def ni ko soobee, te kenn du taxaw ci kanamam; dina taxaw itam ci suuf su tedd gi, te ci loxoom lay neex. Daniel 11:16.
Daniel employs the expression “glorious land” twice in his writings. The first is verse sixteen, when literal pagan Rome conquered the literal glorious land of Judah.
Danyeel jëfandikoo na waxin “réew mu màgg te tedd” ñaari yoon ci ay bindam. Bi njëkk mooy ci sarax fukki benni, ba Room gu bokk ci xeet yu dul Yàlla nootee réew mu màgg te tedd ci dëgg, mooy Yudaa.
“Although Egypt could not stand before Antiochus, the king of the north, Antiochus could not stand before the Romans, who now came against him. No kingdoms were longer able to resist this rising power. Syria was conquered, and added to the Roman empire, when Pompey, BC 65, deprived Antiochus Asiaticus of his possessions, and reduced Syria to a Roman province.
«Bu Ejjipt mënul a man a taxaw fa kanam Antiyokus, buur bu bëj-gànnaaru, Antiyokus itam mënul a taxaw fa kanam Roomankat yi, ñoom ñi léegi dikk ci moom. Benn nguuratatu mënatul woon a jéema dàq doole jii miy yokku. Sirii dafa neesoon, te yokk ko ci nguur gu mag gu Room, ba bi Pompee, ci atum BC 65, nangoo Antiyokus Asiaticus ay alalam, ba teg Sirii mu nekk ab prowàans bu Room.»
“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.
“Ndo kàttan boobu itam war na taxaw ci Réew mu Sell mi, te yàq ko. Rooma bokkoon na ak askanu Yàlla, mooy Yawut yi, ci benn ngërëmug booloo ci atum kanam Krist 162, te ci fan boobu la jël berab bu mag ci kalandriye waxu yonent yi. Waaye nag, jotoonagul nguur gi ci Yude ci yoonu nangu gu dëgg ba atum kanam Krist 63; te ba noppi ci anam bii di ñëw.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 259.
The other verse where Daniel employs the “glorious land” is in verse forty-one.
Yeneen sarax si Daniel jëfandikoo baat bi “suuf su màgg te tedd” mooy ci aaya ñent-fukk ak benn.
He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon. Daniel 11:41.
Dina dugg ci réew mi tedd ci ndam, te réew yu bare dinañu daanu; waaye ñii dinañu mucc ci ay loxoom, mooy Edom ak Moab ak kilifteef yi gën a mag ci askanu Amon. Daniel 11:41.
Verse forty-one of course follows verse forty, and verse forty begins with the words “and at the time of the end.” In The Great Controversy, Sister White identifies 1798 as the “time of the end,” so verse forty-one is identifying history that follows after the time of the end in 1798.
Ay biir ak benn, ci dëgg, mu ngi topp ay biir ak ñeent-fukk, te ay biir ak ñeent-fukk mi ngi tàmbalee ak kàddu yi ne “te ci waxtu mujj gi.” Ci The Great Controversy, Sister White moom jàllale na 1798 ni mooy “waxtu mujj gi,” ba tax ay biir ak benn mi ngi jox xamle mboolem taarix bi topp gannaaw waxtu mujj gi ci 1798.
“But at the time of the end, says the prophet, “Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.’ Daniel 12:4. . . . Since 1798 the book of Daniel has been unsealed, knowledge of the prophecies has increased, and many have proclaimed the solemn message of the judgment near.” The Great Controversy, 356.
“Waaye ci jamono mujj, yonent bi nee na: ‘Ñu bare dinañu daw fii ak fa, te xam-xam dina yokku.’ Daniel 12:4.... Li dale 1798, téereb Daniel ubbi na, xam-xam ci waxi yonent yi yokku na, te ñu bare yégle nañu bataaxal bu tar bi ci àtte bi jege.” The Great Controversy, 356.
The glorious land of verse forty-one is not literal ancient Judah of old, but spiritual modern Judah. The United States is spiritual modern Judah, and verse forty-one is identifying the soon-coming Sunday law in the United States.
Réew mi tedd ci ndam te ñu wax ci kàddu fukki-ñeent ak benn, du réew Yuda gu mag ga ci jamono yu yàgg ya ci lu ci ñuy jàpp ne mooy dëgg; waaye mooy Yuda gu xel, gu bees ci jamono jii. États-Unis mooy Yuda gu xel, gu bees ci jamono jii, te kàddu fukki-ñeent ak benn moo ngiy tënkoon yoonu Dibéer bu di ñëw léegi ci États-Unis.
Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 1 Corinthians 15:46.
Waaye du li jëkk mooy li sell, waaye li ci jëkk mooy li ci naturel; te gannaaw loolu mooy li sell. 1 Korent 15:46.
That Sunday law is typified by verse sixteen, for “much of the history that has taken place” in the fulfillment of Daniel eleven is to be repeated. Verses ten through fifteen in the last days, represents the history preceding and leading up to the Sunday law.
Sàrmu dundub bés bi mi ngi mel ni la aaya bu fukk ak juróom-benn bi misaalé, ndaxte “lu bari ci jaar-jaari mbir yi xewoon” ci yeggug Danyeel fukki at ak benn dinañu ko delloo. Aaya yi fukk ba fukk ak juróom, ci fan yu mujj yi, dañuy tegtal jaar-jaari lu jiitu te indi ba ci sàrmu dundub bés bi.
The king of the north in those five verses, as well as the king of the south who were fulfilled by the Seleucid king Antiochus Magnus and the Egyptian kings of the Ptolemaic kingdom, typify powers that are the focus of the history that leads to the soon-coming Sunday law. These verses identify the history of the movement of the one hundred and forty-four thousand, for verse ten identifies the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, and verse sixteen the soon-coming Sunday law.
Buuru bëj-gànnaar bi ci juróom-ñetti aaya yooyu, ak noonu itam buurub bëj-saalum bi, yi mataloon ci buurub Seleucid bi Antiochus Magnus ak buur yi Misra ci nguurug Ptolemaic, di misaalal kàttan yu nekk xoolu jaar-jaaru mbootaay mi di jëm ci kàddu Dimaas bu bés bu dëgmal. Aaya yooyu dañuy xamle jaar-jaaru yëngu-yëngu junni ak téeméeri ñeent-fukk ak ñeent-fukk ñaar ña; ndaxte aaya fukk bi di wax mbëjtu Unie Soviétique bi ci 1989, te aaya juróom-benn fukk bi di wax kàddu Dimaas bu bés bu dëgmal.
Christ emphasizes these verses by aligning verse ten with verse forty and verse sixteen with verse forty-one. The direct reference to the literal glorious land which typifies the spiritual glorious land of verse forty-one is the end of the six verses, and verse ten is the beginning.
Kirist mooñ na ay kàddu yooyu ci lool, bi mu yamale saar fukk bi ak saar ñeent-fukk, te saar fukk ak juróom-benn bi ak saar ñeent-fukk ak benn. Jubluwaay bu jub ci suuf su tedd, su dëgg-dëgg, miy misaal suuf su tedd ci xel, bi nekk ci saar ñeent-fukk ak benn, mooy mujjug juróom-benni saar yi, te saar fukk mooy tàmbali.
Just as Christ made sure verse sixteen has a direct connection with verse forty-one, and so too, verse ten has a direct connection with verse forty. The expression in verse ten “overflow, and pass through,” is the identical Hebrew phrase that is translated as “overflow and pass over,” in verse forty. The phrase is only found one other place in the Scriptures, but it is translated a little differently than verse ten and verse forty. Still, it is the same Hebrew phrase.
Naka ni Kirist doonoon na ay wërsëg fukk ak benn ci benn, noonu itam, wërsëg fukk ak benn am na jokkoo bu jub ak wërsëg ñeent-fukk. Kàddu gi nekk ci wërsëg fukk, “di daw ba weesu,” mooy benn kàddu Ebrë bu ni mel te ñu tekki ko ci wërsëg ñeent-fukk ne “di daw ba jall.” Kàddu googu feeñ na benn yoon rekk beneen bérab ci Mbind mi, waaye ñu tekki na ko tuuti lu wuute ak ni ñu ko tekkee ci wërsëg fukk ak wërsëg ñeent-fukk. Terewul, mooy benn kàddu Ebrë bi.
And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel. Isaiah 8:8.
Te mujj Yuda; dina rey ba fees ba ñëw ba romb, dina jot ba ci baat bi; te jëfandikoo ay laafam dina feesal yaatu réewam, yaw Emanuël. Esayi 8:8.
Isaiah’s “overflow and go over,” is the same as verse ten’s “overflow, and pass through,” and verse forty’s “overflow and pass over.” More than this, each of the three verses are describing an attack from the king of the north upon the king of the south. In Isaiah, the northern king of Assyria, Sennacherib, was attacking Judah, the southern kingdom of Israel. In verse ten Antiochus Magnus, the northern king of the Seleucid Empire was attacking the southern kingdom of Egypt. In verse forty, the king of the north, the papal power, who had received a deadly wound at the beginning of verse forty, was attacking the southern atheistic power of the Soviet Union. Each verse represents the same prophetic structure of a conflict between the kings of the north and south, and in each verse the northern king “overflows and passes over.”
“Baaxa leen, te weesu leen” bi ci Esayi mooy benn ak “baaxa, te romb ko” bi nekk ci aaya fukki bi, ak “baaxa te weesu ko” bi nekk ci aaya ñent-fukk bi. Lu gën a am solo mooy ne, ku nekk ci ñetti aaya yii dafay melal ab songe gu joge ci buur bu bëj-gànnaar, jëm ci buur bu bëj-saalum. Ci Esayi, buur bu bëj-gànnaar bu Asiri, Sennacherib, dafay song Yuda, nguur gu bëj-saalum gu Israyil. Ci aaya fukki bi, Antiochus Magnus, buur bu bëj-gànnaar bu Nguurug Seleucid, dafay song nguur gu bëj-saalum gu Misra. Ci aaya ñent-fukk bi, buur bu bëj-gànnaar bi, mooy kàttanug paap bi, mi jott woon ab gaañu-dee ci ndoorte aaya ñent-fukk bi, dafay song kàttanu bees bu bëj-saalum, buy weddi Yàlla, mooy Nguurug Soviet Union. Ku nekk ci aaya yii dafay tegtal benn melokaanu waxu yëgle buy joxe xare diggante buur yi nekk ci bëj-gànnaar ak bëj-saalum, te ci ku nekk ci ñoom buur bu bëj-gànnaar bi “dafa baaxa te weesu.”
Isaiah’s testimony and verse ten both identify that when the northern king attacks he ceases before entering into the capital of the southern kingdom. Sennacherib brought his warfare to the walls of Jerusalem, and no further. In 219 BC, Antiochus Magnus came to the border of Egypt and stopped. Then he lost the battle of Raphia that occurred two years later in 217 BC. Sennacherib came to the walls of Jerusalem and lost the battle as God intervened.
Seede Isaya ak aaya fukki ci benn fànn ne bu buur bu bëj-gànnaar doon xeex, dina taxaw bala muy dugg ci kër gu mag gi ci nguur gu bëj-saalum gi. Sennakérib indi ay xareem ba ci tata yu Yerusalem, te du weesu foofa. Ci atum 219 lu jiitu Kirist, Antiyokus Magnus agsi ba ci diggu Misra, ba noppi taxaw. Gannaaw ñaari at, maanaam ci 217 lu jiitu Kirist, mu yàq ci xareb Rafia. Sennakérib agsi ba ci tata yu Yerusalem, te mu yàq xare ba Yàlla dugg ci biir.
Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning the king of Assyria, He shall not come into this city, nor shoot an arrow there, nor come before it with shield, nor cast a bank against it. By the way that he came, by the same shall he return, and shall not come into this city, saith the Lord. For I will defend this city, to save it, for mine own sake, and for my servant David’s sake. And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the Lord went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses. So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh. And it came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him with the sword: and they escaped into the land of Armenia. And Esarhaddon his son reigned in his stead. 2 Kings 19:32–37.
Kon nag noonu, nii la Boroom bi wax ci buur bu Asiri, ne: du dugg ci dëkk bii, du fa sànni benn bàyyi xale, du ñëw ci kanamam ak pakk, te du fa tabax benn mbedd mu yéeg ngir xeex ko. Yoon wi mu ñëwee, ci moom la dellusee, te du dugg ci dëkk bii, wax na Boroom bi. Ndaxte dinaa aar dëkk bii ngir musal ko, ngir sama bopp, ak ngir sama jaam Daawuda. Te guddi ga nag, malaaka Boroom bi génn, daldi rey ci kër giitu Asiriyen yi téeméer ak juróom-ñent-fukk ak juróom-benni junni nit; te bi ñu yewu suba si ba noppi, gis ñu ne ñoom ñépp ay néew yu dee. Noonu Sennakerib buur bu Asiri dem, dox, dellu, te toog Ninewe. Te amoon na, bi muy jaamu ci kër Nisrok yàllam, ne Adramelek ak Sareser, doomam yi, rey ko ak saafara; te ñu daw ca suufu Armeni. Te Esarhadon doomam buur ci bérabam. 2 Buur Ya 19:32–37.
In 1989, the king of the north swept away the Soviet Union, but he did not overcome the capital of the Soviet Union. Russia was left standing. The next battle, typified in verses eleven and twelve, was the battle of Raphia, which was also typified by the overthrow of Sennacherib’s army and his subsequent death which identifies a victory for the southern king, which was Judah in the testimony of Sennacherib, and Raphia in the testimony of Antiochus Magnus.
Ci atum 1989, buur bët gannaar daanuwaan na Sowiyeeti Yooniyoŋ, waaye moom mosul noot kapitalu Sowiyeeti Yooniyoŋ bi. Risii des na taxaw. Xare bu ci topp, ni ñu ko misaale ci sarax yi fukk ak benn ak fukk ak ñaar, mooy xareb Raphia; te moom itam dafa doon misaal ci sankug xarekat yi Senakerib ak dee ga ca toppam, loolu di won ndam lu buur bu bëj-saalum bi am, moom di Yuda ci seede Senakerib, ak Raphia ci seede Antiochus Magnus.
Verse ten provides a direct connection to verse forty and verse sixteen provides a direct connection with verse forty-one. Verses ten through sixteen represent the history of 1989 unto the Sunday law. The verse represents a hidden history in verse forty that begins with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 and continues unto the Sunday law. Verse ten also directly connects the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six to the hidden history, but that line of truth is outside what we are here setting forth.
Saar fukki bi jëfandikukat gi di joxe lëkkalekaayu jub ci saar ñeent-fukk, te saar juróom-benn ak juróom-ñaar bi di joxe lëkkalekaayu jub ak saar ñeent-fukk ak benn. Saar yi nekk ci diggante fukk ba juróom-benn ak juróom-ñaar dañuy tey jaar-jaaru atum 1989 ba ca yoonu dibeer. Saar bi dafay teewal jaar-jaar bu nëbbu ci saar ñeent-fukk, buy tàmbalee ak daanu Réewum Sowiyet bi ci 1989 te di wéy ba ca yoonu dibeer. Saar fukk bi itam dafay lëkkale bu jub “juróom-ñaari yoon” yi ci Lawiik 26 ak jaar-jaar bu nëbbu bi, waaye jëfandikoo gu dëggu googu nekkul ci li nu ngi fi di joxe.
In Millerite history the first of six primary controversies within Adventism concerning the correct identification of Rome occurred, and it was over who the robbers of verse fourteen represented. The Protestants held they represented Antiochus Epiphanes, and the Millerites identified them as Rome. In the last controversy of Adventism concerning the correct identification of Rome it is also over the robbers of verse fourteen. One class, represented by the Millerites, is upholding the foundational understanding of the Millerites, which was endorsed by the Spirit of Prophecy.
Ci jaar-jaari Milerit, benn bi ci juróom-benni xuloo yu mag yi nekk ci biir Awaantisma ci mbirum ñu xam kan mooy Room bu baax jëfandikoo, am na; te xuloo boobu moo doon ci kan laay sañse “sàcc yi” yu nekk ci aaya fukki ak ñeent. Protestaŋ yi daan nañu ne, ñoom da ñuy tekki Antiochus Epiphanes; waaye Milerit yi wax nañu ne Room lañuy tekki. Ci mujj gi ci xuloo yi Awaantisma am ci mbirum ñu xam kan mooy Room bu baax jëfandikoo, itam ci “sàcc yi” yu aaya fukki ak ñeent la aju. Benn wàll, bi Milerit yi di feeñal, mooy taxawal xam-xam wu njëkk wi Milerit yi sampoon, mi Xel mu Yees wax ci Kàddug Yàlla dëggaloon.
“I have seen that the 1843 chart was directed by the hand of the Lord, and that it should not be altered; that the figures were as He wanted them; that His hand was over and hid a mistake in some of the figures, so that none could see it, until His hand was removed.” Early Writings, 74.
« Gis naa ne, tabalu 1843 ba, loxo Boroom bi moo ko jiitewoon, te waru ko soppi; ay lim yi nekkoon nañu ni Mu leen bëggé woon; loxoom nekk na woon ci kawam te mu nëbb benn njuumte ci yenn ci ay lim yooyu, ba kenn mënu ko gis, ba keraake loxoom dindiwul woon. » Early Writings, 74.
That sacred chart identifies the controversy with the notation of 164 BC.
Xàrtu sell wi teddalee werante gi ak màndarga bu 164 BC.
“164 Death of Antiochus Epiphanes, who of course, stood not up against the Prince of Princes, as he had been 164 yrs. dead before the Prince of Princes was born.”
“164 Deeñu Antiocus Epiphanes, moom mi nag, taxawul ci kanam Boroom Boroom yi, ndaxte dafa dee woon 164 at laata Boroom Boroom yi juddu.”
The reference of that controversy upon the sacred chart represents the only truth represented upon the sacred chart that is not based upon a prophetic passage from God’s Word. In doing so it identifies a waymark, not of biblical history, but of Advent history, and “it should not be altered,” for the controversy identifies how the prophetic vision is established. To reject that foundational truth is to simultaneously reject the authority of the Spirit of Prophecy’s endorsement of the sacred chart.
Li ñëw ci xuloo googu nekk ci karte bu sell bi moo tegu ci dëgg bi kenn rekk a wone ci karte bu sell bi te moomu jógewu ci benn kàddug yëgle ci Kàddug Yàlla. Noonu, mu ngi xamale ab waymark, waaye du bu jaarale ci taariixu Biibël, waaye ci taariixu Advent, te “warul soppeeku,” ndaxte xuloo googu moo wone ni gisug yëgle bi sampoo. Bëgg a bàyyi dëgg boobu buy doxal lëf yi mooy, ci benn yoon, bañ a nangu sañ-sañu dëggalug Xelum Yëgle bi ci mbooloom karte bu sell bi.
“The very last deception of Satan will be to make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God. ‘Where there is no vision, the people perish’ (Proverbs 29:18). Satan will work ingeniously, in different ways and through different agencies, to unsettle the confidence of God’s remnant people in the true testimony. He will bring in spurious visions to mislead, and will mingle the false with the true, and so disgust people that they will regard everything that bears the name of visions as a species of fanaticism; but honest souls, by contrasting false and true, will be enabled to distinguish between them.” Selected Messages, book 2, 78.
“Nax nax ba xel mujjug Seytaane dina doon mooy def ba seedeelu Xelum Yàlla amul njariñ. ‘Fu amul peeñu, nit ñi day sànku’ (Kàddu yu Xelu 29:18). Seytaane dina liggéey ak njàngat, ci anam yu bare ak jaarale ci yeneen jumtukaay, ngir yëngël kóllëreg askanu Yàlla bu des ci seedeel ju dëgg ji. Dina indi ay peeñu yu dul dëgg ngir réeral, te dina jaxase lu dul dëgg ak lu dëgg, ba tax nit ñi mer, ba ñu wara jàppe lépp lu yore turu ay peeñu ne mooy xeetu safara; waaye xol yu jub, bu ñu méngale lu dul dëgg ak lu dëgg, dinañu man a ràññee leen.” Selected Messages, téere 2, 78.
The last controversy of “the robbers of thy people”, is the same as the first, and without an understanding of the symbol which establishes the vision, “the people perish.” They “perish” because they “make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God.”
Jëf ju mujj “sàcc yi bokk ci sa xeet”, mooy benn ak ju njëkk ji, te bu amul xam-xam bu baax ci misaal bi teg doole ci peeñ mi, “xeet wi dina sanku.” Ñu “sanku” ndaxte ñu “fàtteelalul benn njariñ seedes gi Xelmu Yàlla di joxe.”
The other class claims that the United States is represented as the robbers of verse fourteen. That class is unable or unwilling to see that Antiochus Magnus in verses ten through fifteen represents the United States. Just as the Protestants of Millerite history claimed the robbers were Antiochus, the class who is unwilling to see identifies the robbers as the power (the United States) that is typified by Antiochus.
Kur gu yeneen wax ne États-Unis mooy ñi sàcc ñi ñuy wax ci aaya fukk ak ñeent. Kureelu googu mënul walla bëggul gis ne Antiochus Magnus ci aaya fukk ba fukk ak juróom-ñeent mooy tegtal États-Unis. Ni Protestants yi ci jaar-jaaru Millerite waxoon ne ñi sàcc ya mooy Antiochus, noonu it kureel gi bëggul gis di jëfandikoo ñi sàcc ya ngir tuddee doole bi (États-Unis) bi Antiochus di misaalal.
Sennacherib’s attack upon Judah that reached to the capital, Jerusalem, and that failed, was led by Sennacherib’s general, Rabshakeh.
Nebb gu Senakéerib ci Yuda, bi agsee ba ci dëkk bu mag ba, Yerusalem, te mu amul njariñ, Rabshake yi jiite woon ko, moom jeneralub Senakéerib.
Now therefore, I pray thee, give pledges to my lord the king of Assyria, and I will deliver thee two thousand horses, if thou be able on thy part to set riders upon them. How then wilt thou turn away the face of one captain of the least of my master’s servants, and put thy trust on Egypt for chariots and for horsemen? Am I now come up without the Lord against this place to destroy it? The Lord said to me, Go up against this land, and destroy it. Then said Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and Shebna, and Joah, unto Rabshakeh, Speak, I pray thee, to thy servants in the Syrian language; for we understand it: and talk not with us in the Jews’ language in the ears of the people that are on the wall. But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you? Then Rabshakeh stood and cried with a loud voice in the Jews’ language, and spake, saying, Hear the word of the great king, the king of Assyria. 2 Kings 18:23–28.
Léegi nag, maa ngi lay ñaan, nga joxe say kóllëre ci sama sangu buurub Asiri, te dinaa la jébbal ñaari junni fas, su fekkee ne man nga ci sa wetu teg ay boroom-fas ci seen kow. Kon nag, naka nga man a dàq kanamu benn njiitu ndaw ci jaam yi gën a suufe ci sama sang, te nga wéeru Misra ngir ay watiir ak ay boroom-fas? Ndax maa ngi léegi ñëw ci bii dëkkte gu amul Boroom bi ngir alag ko? Boroom bi moo ma wax ne: “Yéegël ci réew mii, te nga alag ko.” Noonu Elyakim doomu Hilkiya, ak Shebna, ak Yoax, ne Rabshakeh: “Maa ngi lay ñaan, waxal ak sa jaam yi ci làkku Siriya, ndaxte nun dégg na ko; te bul wax ak nun ci làkku Yawut yi ci noppi nit ñi nekk ci tata ji.” Waaye Rabshakeh ne leen: “Ndax sama sang yónni na ma ci sa sang rekk ak ci yow, ngir wax wax yii? Ndax yónniwul ma it ci nit ñi toog ci tata ji, ngir ñoom ak yéen lekk seen bopp seen yaram wu tuuru, naan seen bopp seen ndoxum yaram?” Noonu Rabshakeh taxaw, waxe ak baat bu kawe ci làkku Yawut yi, ne: “Dégluleen kàddug buur bu mag bi, buurub Asiri.” 2 Buur Ya 18:23–28.
Rabshakeh was presenting not his words, but the words of Sennacherib, king of Assyria. In Daniel eleven verse forty the king of the north is the papal power who at the time of the end in 1798 received a deadly wound at the hands of atheistic France, the southern king. In the verse the king of the north ultimately retaliates and overflows the southern kingdom (the USSR) in 1989. When the king of the north accomplished that work, he brought with him “chariots, and with horsemen, and many ships.” “Chariots and horsemen” represent military might and “ships” represent economic power. Those symbols identify the United States as papal Rome’s proxy army in the victory of 1989, as typified by Rabshakeh. Antiochus Magnus in verse ten through fifteen represents the United States, and as William Miller correctly identified that the word “also” in verse fourteen establishes a new power entering the prophetic narrative, the “robbers” must represent a power distinct from either the Ptolemaic kings of the south, or Antiochus the king of the north or Philip of Macedon.
Rabshakeh doon waxi moom la waxoon, waaye waxi Sennakerib, buur Asiri, la yéglewoon. Ci Daniel fukk ak benn, sar bañeel ñeent-fukk, buur bi nekk ci bëj-gànnaar mooy dooleb papaa yi, mi ci jamonoy mujj mi ci atum 1798 jël gaañu bu dee ci loxoy Farãs buy weddi Yàlla, moom buur bi nekk ci bëj-saalum. Ci saar bi, buur bi nekk ci bëj-gànnaar dafa mujje feyyu te daldi riir buurug bëj-saalum bi (URSS) ci atum 1989. Bi buur bi nekk ci bëj-gànnaar matalee liggéey boobu, dafa ànd ak “woto yi, ak gawar-kanam yi, ak gaal yu bare.” “Woto yi ak gawar-kanam yi” dañuy tegtal dooley xare, te “gaal yi” dañuy tegtal dooley koom-koom. Màndarga yooyu dañuy wone Mbooloom Réew yi Amerik mooy mbooloom soldaare yu Roomu papaa ji di jëfandikoo ci ndam li amoon ci 1989, ni ko Rabshakeh di misaalal. Antiochus Magnus ci saar yi fukk ba fukk ak juróom benn mooy tegtal Mbooloom Réew yi Amerik, te ni William Miller siiwal ko dëgg ne baat bi “it” ci saar bi fukk ak ñeent day taxawal doole bu bees buy dugg ci nettalug yonent bi, “saccakat yi” war nañu tegtal doole bu wuute ak buur yi Ptolemaic yi nekk ci bëj-saalum, walla ak Antiochus buur bi nekk ci bëj-gànnaar, walla ak Philip bu Maseduwan.
“The king of the south, in this verse, without any doubt, means king of Egypt; but what the robbers of thy people means remains yet a doubt perhaps to some. That it cannot mean Antiochus, or any king of Syria, it is plain; for the angel had been talking about that nation for a number of verses previous, and now says, ‘also the robbers of thy people,’ etc., evidently implying some other nation. I will admit that Antiochus did perhaps rob the Jews; but how could this ‘establish the vision,’ as Antiochus is not spoken of anywhere in the vision as performing any act of that kind; for he belonged to what is called the Grecian kingdom in the vision. Again, ‘to establish the vision,’ must mean to make sure, complete, or fulfill the same.” William Miller, Miller’s Works, Lecture 6, 89.
“Buuru bëj-gànnaar bi, ci aar waale bii, amul benn sikki-sakka ne mooy buurub Misra; waaye li wax ne sàcc yi ci sa xeet, loolu mu ngi des di lu ñenn ñi man naa am ci ay sikki-sakka ba léegi. Ne mënul a tekki Antiokis, mbaa benn buurub Siri, loolu leer na; ndax malaaka bi doon waxoon ci mbirum xeet woowu ay aaya yu bare yu jiitu, te léegi mu ne: ‘itam sàcc yi ci sa xeet,’ ak yeneen, te loolu dafa fésal bu baax ne dafa di jëme ci beneen xeet. Dinaa nangoo ne Antiokis, xeyna, saquewoon na Yawut ya; waaye naka la loolu man a ‘taxawal peeñ mi,’ gannaaw Antiokis waxeesul fenn ci peeñ ma ni def na jëf ju mel noonu; ndaxte moom bokkoon na ci li ñuy wax ne nguurug Gerees ci peeñ ma. Te itam, wax ji ne ‘taxawal peeñ mi,’ war na tekki ne def ko muy wóor, matal ko, walla matale ko.” William Miller, Miller’s Works, Lecture 6, 89.
“Antiochus” was a name selected by many of the kings of the Syrian Seleucid Empire. The founder of that empire was Seleucid Nicator, and somewhere between twenty-six to thirty kings made up the entire list of Seleucid kings. Many of those kings chose the name “Antiochus”, just as the many popes choose throne-names when they are selected as popes. The popes are all “antichrist,” which means “against Christ”. The word “anti” meaning “against”. As antichrists they have taken the name of their spiritual forefather, who is Satan. Satan and the popes are both identified as the antichrist in inspiration.
“Antiochus” mooy tur wu ñu bari buur yu Mbooloom Seleucid bu Siri di tànn. Ki sosoon mbooloo moomu mooy Seleucid Nicator, te fu nekk diggante ñaar-fukk ak juróom-benn ak fanweeri buur ba ñett-fukk la limub gépp buur yu Seleucid di tollu. Bari ci yooyu buur tànn nañu tur wu “Antiochus”, ni itam ni baari paap yi di tànn turu nguur bu bees bu ñu leen fal di paap. Paap yépp ay “antichrist” lañu, li tekki mooy “juuyoo ak Krist”. Kàddu “anti” mooy “juuyoo ak”. Naka ay antichrist, jël nañu turu seen maam wu xel, mooy Seytaane. Seytaane ak paap yi ñoom ñaar ñépp, waxu xel mu sell mi sant leen antichrist.
“The determination of antichrist to carry out the rebellion he began in heaven will continue to work in the children of disobedience.” Testimonies, volume 9, 230.
“Ndogalu antikiris bi am yéene ngir doxal rébbat bi mu tàmbalee woon ci asamaan dina wéy di liggéey ci doom yi déggadi.” Testimonies, volume 9, 230.
A pope is a representative of Satan, and thus they are both against Christ, and therefore are the “antichrist.” They choose a name when they take the position as pope, and become Satan’s earthly representative.
Ab pàpp moo di wuutu Seytaane, te moo tax ñoom ñépp ñu bàyyi Kirist, ba tax nañu leen “antikiriis.” Bu ñu jëlée ndigalug pàpp, ñu tànn tur, te ñu doon wuutuy Seytaane ci suuf.
“To secure worldly gains and honors, the church was led to seek the favor and support of the great men of earth; and having thus rejected Christ, she was induced to yield allegiance to the representative of Satan—the bishop of Rome.” The Great Controversy, 50.
«Ngir am njariñi addina ak teral yi, dañu yóbbu mbooloom gëm gi mu seet xéewal ak ndimbal yu mag ñi ci suuf; te noonu, gannaaw ba mu weddi Kirist, dañu ko xiirtal mu jébbal yoonu déggal ndawug Seytaane bi—biisob Room.» The Great Controversy, 50.
By their works you shall know them, and the popes carry on the same work as Satan.
Ci seen seeni liggéey ngeen di leen xam, te baab yi di wéyal liggéey bi mu Seytaane di def.
“Through the pope of Rome the same work has been carried on here on earth as was carried on in the courts of heaven before the expulsion of the prince of darkness. Satan sought to correct the law of God in heaven, and to supply an amendment of his own. He exalted his own judgment above that of his Creator, and placed his will above the will of Jehovah, and in this way virtually declared God to be fallible. The pope also takes the same course and, claiming infallibility for himself, seeks to adjust the law of God to meet his own ideas, thinking himself able to correct the mistakes he thinks he sees in the statutes and commands of the Lord of heaven and earth. He virtually says to the world, I will give you better laws than those of Jehovah. What an insult is this to the God of heaven!” Signs of the Times, November 19, 1894.
“Jaaral bi paap bu Room, benn liggéey boobu sax na ñu ko def fii ci suuf, ni mu nekkoon ci àtteekaay asamaan yi bala buur bu lëndëm giññee ko. Seytaane dafa doon wut a soppali yoonu Yàlla ci asamaan, te yokk ca ab coppiteem. Mu yékkati ayetoom ci kaw ayetu Kiy ko Bind, te teg coobareem ci kaw coobare Yexowa; te ci noonu mu waxoon ci dëgg-dëgg ne Yàlla man naa juum. Paap bi itam moom dafay jëfandikoo yoon wu mel noonu, te, ndax dafa koy daldi moom boppam ne du man a juum, dafay wut a màndarga yoonu Yàlla ngir méngoo ak xalaataam yu boppam, di xalaat ne man naa jubanti njuumte yi mu gis ne am na ci sart yi ak ndigali Boroom asamaan ak suuf. Ci dëgg-dëgg dafay wax addina bi ne: man maa leen di jox ay yoon yu gën a baax yoyu Yexowa. Ana toroxte gu réy gii ci Yàllay asamaan!” Signs of the Times, November 19, 1894.
Though Seleucus Nicator established the Seleucid Empire, many of the following kings chose the name “Antiochus,” in honor, not of Seleucus, but of his father. Seleucus’ father, Antiochus, was a nobleman and a general in the service of King Philip II of Macedon, who was the father of Alexander the Great. This noble status and military background helped establish the foundation for Seleucus’s own prominent role and subsequent rise to power after the death of Alexander the Great.
Doonte ne Seleucus Nicator samp biir Seleucid Empire, bu bari ci buur yi ko topp tànn nañu turu “Antiochus,” ngir teral ndam, du ci Seleucus, waaye ci baayam. Baayu Seleucus, mooy Antiochus, dafa doon góor gu am daraja ak jeneral ci liggéeyu Buur Philip II bu Macedon, mi doon baayu Alexander the Great. Loolu, maanaam daraja gu mag googu ak jaar-jaaru xare boobu, moo dimbali woon a tabax cosaanu wàllu kàttanam Seleucus ci boppam ak yéegam gu mag gi mu jot gannaaw deeji Alexander the Great.
Seleucus’ kingdom was established when he took control of three of the four areas of Alexander’s kingdom. Rome also conquers three geographical powers in order to take control and become the king of the north. When Seleucus had secured the east, the west and the north he became the king of the north in the historical narrative, and his capital was the city of Babylon. Many of the following kings chose the name “Antiochus” when they took the northern throne in order to honor their political forefather. The parallel is easy to see, if you choose to see. If you don’t, you don’t.
Nguuru Seleucus taxawoon na bi mu jëlee sañ-sañ ci ñetti gox yu nekk ci ñeenti gox yi nekkoon ci nguurug Alexander. Room itam dafa nott ñetti doxalini suuf ngir jëlee sañ-sañ te nekk buur bu bëj-gànnaar. Bi Seleucus dencalee penku, sowwu ak gànnaar, mu nekk buur bu bëj-gànnaar ci nettali jaar-jaar ba, te dëkkam gu magoon moo doon Babilon. Buu bare ci buur yi topp, dañu tann turu “Antiochus” bi ñuy yékkati buurug bëj-gànnaar ngir teral seen maam bu jiite ci politig. Mbooloo mi diggante ñaari mbir yii yomb na a gis, su fekkee ne bëgg nga koo gis. Su ko bëggul, doo ko gis.
The name “Antiochus” (Ἀντίοχος in Greek) comes from the Greek elements’ “anti” (meaning “against” or “opposite”) and “ocheo” (meaning “to hold fast” or “to maintain”). The northern kings chose the name to maintain their political heritage with the father, just as the antichrist (popes) choose names when they begin to rule. Just as the popes are representatives of their father, the devil, so too the Antiochus’ of the Syrian Empire typify representatives of their father. In this application Antiochus represents a proxy of their father. The proxy of the papal power in 1989 was the United States, and the secular testimony upholds the relationship between the antichrist, Pope John Paul II, and Ronald Reagan in their work to bring down the former Soviet Union.
Tur wu “Antiochus” (Ἀντίοχος ci làkku Gereg) jóge na ci jumtukaayi Gereg yi di “anti” (li tekki “ci biir naxar” walla “ju jublu ak”) ak “ocheo” (li tekki “téy bu baax” walla “sax ci”). Buur yu bëj-gànnaar yi tànn nañu tur woowu ngir saxal seen cosaanu politig ak baay bi, ni Almasi biir-bopp bi (paap yi) di tànn turi ndax bu ñuy tàmbali nguur. Naka la paap yi di ay wutalekat yu seen baay, Seytaane, noonu itam Antiochus yi ci Mbooloom Siri yi di misaal yu ay wutalekat yu seen baay. Ci jëfandikoo bii, Antiochus day teewlu ni ab wutale bu seen baay. Wutaleb kàttanu paapal bi ci atum 1989 mooy États-Unis, te seede su àddina saxal na jokkoo gi nekk ci diggante Almasi biir-bopp bi, Paap John Paul II, ak Ronald Reagan ci seen liggéeyu daaneeloon Mbooloom Soviet bu jëkk ba.
In verses ten through sixteen, the first and last verse possess direct references to verses forty and forty-one. Verse ten directly represents verse forty. Verse sixteen directly represents verse forty-one. The verses represent the portion of the prophecy of Daniel that relates to the last days.
Ci ay benn 10 ba benn 16, benn bu njëkk ak bu mujj bi am nañu ay jëfandikoo yu jub ci benn 40 ak benn 41. Benn 10 dafay tegu ci benn 40 ci lu jub. Benn 16 dafay tegu ci benn 41 ci lu jub. Benn yi dañuy firndeel wàllub yëgleb Daniyeel bi jëm ci fan yu mujj yi.
“The book that was sealed was not the book of Revelation, but that portion of the prophecy of Daniel which related to the last days. The Scripture says, ‘But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased’ (Daniel 12:4). When the book was opened, the proclamation was made, ‘Time shall be no longer.’ (See Revelation 10:6.) The book of Daniel is now unsealed, and the revelation made by Christ to John is to come to all the inhabitants of the earth. By the increase of knowledge a people is to be prepared to stand in the latter days. . . .
“ Téere biñ téj woon du téereb Peeñ mi, waaye mooy bérab bu ci waxi yonent Yàlla Daniyel yi jëm ci fan yu mujj ya. Mbind mi nee na: ‘Waaye yaw, Éy Daniyel, tëjël wax yi te tëj téere bi ba ci jamonoy mujj; ñu bare dinañu daw fii ak fale, te xam-xam dina yokku’ (Daniyel 12:4). Bi téere bi ubbee, ñu yégle ne: ‘Jamono du yàggatul.’ (Xoolal Peeñ mi 10:6.) Léegi, téereb Daniyel dees na ko ubbil, te peeñ ga Kirist defal Yowaana war na agsi ci bépp waa kër-suuf. Ci yokkute xam-xam bi, askan war nañu ko waajal ngir taxaw ci fan yu mujj ya....”
“In the first angel’s message men are called upon to worship God, our Creator, who made the world and all things that are therein. They have paid homage to an institution of the Papacy, making of no effect the law of Jehovah, but there is to be an increase of knowledge on this subject.” Selected Messages, book 2, 105, 106.
“Ci bataaxalub malaaka bi jëkk, ñuy woo nit ñi ngir ñu màggal Yàlla, Sunu Bindkat, mi bind adina ak lépp lu nekk ci biiram. Ñoom joxoon nañu màggal ay njébbanaayu Papas, ba tax yoonu Yexowa amul solo, waaye xam-xam dina gën a yokku ci mbir mii.” Selected Messages, téere 2, 105, 106.
At the time of the end in 1989 the last six verses of Daniel chapter eleven represent the “portion of the prophecy of Daniel which related to the last days.” It was recognized when it was then unsealed, and that unsealing produced an increase of knowledge on the “institution of the Papacy, making of no effect the law of Jehovah.” The Alpha and Omega always illustrates the end with the beginning, and the testing process that began in 1989, was designed to produce two classes of worshippers.
Ca jamono mujj ji ci atum 1989, juróom-benn aaya yu mujj ci Daniel saar fukk ak benn ñooy teewlu “wàllu waxu-jàmmu Daniel wi jëm ci fan yu mujj yi.” Dees na ko xamoon ba mu ubbeeku woonat, te ubbeeku googu jur na yokkute gu réy ci xam-xam bu jëm ci “tabaxug Papaa, ci defal lu yàqu yoonu Yexowa.” Alfa ak Omega dafay mas a wone mujj gi ci njàlbéen gi, te jéemantu nattu gi tambalee woon ci 1989, deesoon na ko def ngir jur ñaari xeet yu jaamu.
And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. Daniel 12:9, 10.
Noonu ne ko: “Demal sa yoon, Daniel, ndaxte kàddu yi tëj nañu leen te ràññee ba jamono ji mujj. Ñu bare dinañu leen sellal, setal leen ba weex, te nattu leen; waaye ñu bon ñi dinañu jëf lu bon; kenn ci ñu bon ñi du ko xam; waaye ñu xelal ñi dinañu ko xam.” Daniel 12:9, 10.
We are now in the final period of that testing process, for the controversy of the robbers at the beginning of Adventism is now being repeated. To identify the robbers as the United States is to identify Antiochus as the robbers. It is the identical controversy of the Millerites and Protestants.
Léegi nu ngi nekk ci jamono ju mujj gi ci jéfandikoo gu nattu googu, ndaxte weranteg sàcc ya ca njàlbéenug Adventism bi déy delusi léegi. Buñu jàppale États-Unis ne mooy sàcc ya, mooy it di jàppale Antiochus ne mooy sàcc ya. Mooy benn sax weranteg Millerites ak Protestants.
At the end of the testing process, just as in the beginning of the testing process, which began in 1989, the Lion of the tribe of Judah unseals “that portion of the prophecy of Daniel which related to the last days.” In 1989 it was the last six verses of Daniel eleven, and at the ending it is the hidden history of verse forty, that is typified by verses ten through sixteen.
Ci jeexital xoolug nattu bi, ni ci njàlbéenug xoolug nattu boobu, bi tàmbalee woon ci atum 1989, Gaynde gi bokk ci xeetu Yuda day ubbi “wàll woowu ci yëgleb Daniyel wi jëm ci fan yu mujj yi.” Ci 1989 mooyoon juróom-benn ay aaya yu mujj yi ci Daniyel fukki benn, waaye ci mujj ga mooy jaar-jaaru nettali bu nëbbu bu aaya ñeent-fukk bi, mooyu li ay aaya fukk ba fukk ak juróom-benn yi di misaalal.
We will continue our consideration of the six lines of controversies within the history of Adventism in the following articles. The first of those six controversies illustrates the last of those six controversies. We will use the first and last controversies to overlay the other four controversies as we unfold the elements involved with the efforts of the enemy of righteousness to prevent God’s people from rightly dividing “the vision”, which is established with the symbol of Rome.
Danu yokk sunu seetaan ci njàggaleem juróom-benn yi ci biir jaar-jaaru Advantis ci mbind yi di ñëw. Jëfandikookat bu jëkk boobu ci juróom-benn yooyu di mel ni muy leerloo bu mujj boobu ci juróom-benn yooyu. Danu jëfandikoo xulóo bu jëkk ak bu mujj ngir daldi teg ci kaw yeneen ñeenti xulóo yi, bi nuy ubbi ay cër yu ci nekk ci ñaari jéego yi noonub njubte gi di def ngir tere askanu Yàlla ba ñu xàjjaat “peeñ mi” noonu mu war a deme, te ñu samp ko ak misaalum Room.
“Unless we understand the importance of the moments that are swiftly passing into eternity, and make ready to stand in the great day of God, we shall be unfaithful stewards. The watchman is to know the time of night. Everything is now clothed with a solemnity that all who believe the truth for this time should realize. They should act in reference to the day of God. The judgments of God are about to fall upon the world, and we need to be preparing for that great day.
“Bu nu xam solo yu am njariñ, yi di gaaw a jàll ba duggu ci bàkkan gu dul jeex, te su nu ko xamule, te waajalul ngir taxaw ci bés bu mag bu Yàlla, kon dinañu doon ay ndaw yu wóorul ci li ñu nuy dénk. Ki di sàmm war na xam jamono ji guddi jot. Lépp léegi sol na njàqare gu sell, gu war a dugal xel ñépp ñi gëm dëgg gi ñeel jamonoy tey. War nañu jëfandikoo seen dund ci lu jëm ci bésu Yàlla. Àttey Yàlla ngiy waaj a wàcc ci kaw àddina, te war na nu di waajal sunu bopp ngir bés boobu bu mag.”
“Our time is precious. We have but few, very few days of probation in which to make ready for the future, immortal life. We have no time to spend in haphazard movements. We should fear to skim the surface of the word of God.” Testimonies, volume 6, 407.
“Sunu waxtu am na solo lool. Am nañu rekk ay fan yu néew, néew lool ci xel mu dal ngir waajal sunu bopp ngir dund gu ëllëg, gu dul jeex. Amuñu waxtu bu ñu wara yàq ci doxalin yu teguwul dara. War nañu ragal a diir ci kow rekk baatub Yàlla bi.” Testimonies, volume 6, 407.