more fully, but we at least need to touch verse 36 here, and you'll see why in a moment. I would suggest to you that Sister White here clearly gives us a history that will be a pattern for the end of the world, for the final fulfillment of Daniel 11, and if you're familiar with Uriah Smith's position, he would have us believe that basically this history is concluded all the way through verse 44, and all we're waiting for now is verse 45, and he was basing his position upon a rule that James White vigorously opposed, and this was the controversy that was going on between them during that time period, and the concept that James White was opposing is using historical events that are taking place around us to determine how you understand the prophecies instead of letting the Word of God be the guide for determining the prophecies, and when Uriah Smith came up with his conclusion up to verse 44, he was basing that upon a war that was going on in Russia and Turkey, and the final thing that he thought would take place in that war would be the fulfillment of verse 45, and of course the conclusion of that war over and gone over a hundred years ago certainly didn't bring about any kind of fulfillment of verse 45, and if you go through and look at how he was applying the verses prior to that, it was very unsound reasoning anyway, even though verse 45 isn't fulfilled, but we're not looking at that right now, I just want to start with verse 36 and make some observations, and I want to start with an observation that Uriah Smith acknowledges in his book on page 292, and it's very important to recognize this, in the beginning of verse 36 it says, and the king, and it's going to discuss a king, and it's going to describe the characteristics I believe of the papacy, and Uriah Smith says, no, no, no, this is the French Revolution, and many of the people that have, through the years, that have been involved with this controversy between Smith and White over these things, or been involved with commentating on their controversy long after the fact, point out that what Uriah Smith is identifying the king is the French assembly in France that was bringing about the atheism that brought on and contributed to the French Revolution, and they would say, you know, this is a singular king here, and France, the time period and the fulfillment that Uriah Smith is pointing to isn't a king, it's the assembly, but that isn't even the major point in my mind, and Uriah Smith knew what the major point was.