Article

# The Book of Daniel - Number One-Hundred and Seventy-Nine

Knjiga proroka Daniela - Sto sedamdeset i deveti

The Midnight Cry and Rome’s Prophetic Role: Unveiling the Last Days in the Book of Daniel

Ponoćni poklič i proročka uloga Rima: razotkrivanje posljednjih dana u Knjizi proroka Daniela

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

April 9, 2024

Formats

PDF
Word
Song MP3

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

Sada smo na svetom tlu, u smislu Danielove knjige, jer smo stigli do redaka koji predstavljaju Ponoćni poklič za sto četrdeset i četiri tisuće. Ti redci također prepoznaju zapečaćenje stijega onih koji su podignuti. To su redci koji su dio iz Danielove knjige što se odnosi na posljednje dane i koji je otpečaćen, te predstavljaju Danielov izraz Otkrivenja Isusa Krista koje se otpečaćuje kada je „vrijeme blizu“, neposredno prije nego što se vrijeme milosti zatvori u šesnaestom retku.

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

Rim uspostavlja viđenje, kako je prikazano u četrnaestom retku jedanaestoga poglavlja, te je stoga važno pomno promotriti Rim dok prolazimo kroz retke jedanaest do petnaest, jer gdje nema „viđenja, narod propada“, a ako ne budete vjerovali Izaiji, sedmom poglavlju, recima osam i devet, „doista se nećete održati“.

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

Uriah Smith upućuje na jedno proročko pravilo najmanje četiri puta u svojoj knjizi Daniel and the Revelation. To pravilo utvrđuje da se neka proročka sila u proročanstvu ne prepoznaje sve dok ne postane „povezana” s Božjim narodom. U prvom navratu on ga razmatra u vezi s uvođenjem Babilona u proročko svjedočanstvo.

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

> „Očito je pravilo tumačenja da možemo očekivati da će narodi biti spomenuti u proročanstvu onda kada postanu toliko povezani s Božjim narodom da njihovo spominjanje postane nužno kako bi zapisi svete povijesti bili potpuni.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 46.

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

Smith se najmanje još tri puta osvrće na to pravilo i u svakom od ta tri slučaja upućuje na „savez“ Židova, ali u jednom navodu utvrđuje da se savez ispunio 162. pr. Kr., dok su druga dva navoda u suglasju s modernim povjesničarima, koji ispunjenje „saveza“ Židova i Rima smještaju u 161. pr. Kr.

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

> „Nije potrebno podsjećati čitatelja da se zemaljske vlasti ne uvode u proročanstvo sve dok na neki način ne postanu povezane s Božjim narodom. Rim je postao povezan sa Židovima, Božjim narodom u to vrijeme, po znamenitom Židovskom savezu, 161. pr. Kr. 1. Makabejcima 8; Josipove Starine, knjiga 12, poglavlje 10, odjeljak 6; Prideaux, sv. II, str. 166. No sedam godina prije toga, to jest 168. pr. Kr., Rim je bio osvojio Makedoniju i učinio tu zemlju dijelom svojega carstva. Rim se stoga uvodi u proročanstvo upravo onda kada, polazeći od osvojenoga makedonskog roga jarca, ide dalje u nova osvajanja u drugim smjerovima. Stoga se proroku prikazao, ili se o njemu u ovom proročanstvu može ispravno govoriti, kao da izlazi iz jednoga od rogova jarca.“ Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 175.

But Smith also states that it was 162 BC.

No Smith također navodi da je to bilo 162. pr. Kr.

> “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.

> „Ista je sila također trebala stati u Svetoj zemlji i proždrijeti je. Rim se povezao s Božjim narodom, Židovima, savezom 162. g. pr. Kr., od kojega datuma zauzima istaknuto mjesto u proročkom kalendaru. Ipak, stvarnu vlast nad Judejom nije stekao stvarnim osvajanjem sve do 63. g. pr. Kr.; a tada na sljedeći način.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 259.

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

A kada se potom treći put poziva na taj događaj, ponovno kaže 161. pr. Kr.

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

> „Pošto nas je kroz svjetovne događaje carstva doveo do završetka sedamdeset tjedana, prorok nas u 23. retku vraća u vrijeme kada su Rimljani, židovskim savezom godine 161. pr. Kr., postali izravno povezani s narodom Božjim; od te se točke potom nizom izravnih događaja vodimo sve do konačne pobjede crkve i uspostave Božjega vječnog kraljevstva. Židovi su, budući da su bili teško ugnjetavani od sirijskih kraljeva, poslali poslanstvo u Rim da zatraže pomoć Rimljana i da s njima stupe ‘u savez prijateljstva i savezništva’. 1. Makabejcima 8; Prideaux, II, 234; Josipove Starine, knjiga 12, poglavlje 10, odjeljak 6. Rimljani su uslišali molbu Židova i izdali im odredbu sastavljenu ovim riječima:—”

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

> „‘Odluka senata o savezu pomoći i prijateljstva s narodom Židova. Neće biti dopušteno ikome tko je podložan Rimljanima voditi rat protiv naroda Židova, niti pomagati onima koji to čine, bilo da im šalje žito, brodove ili novac; i ako se poduzme kakav napad na Židove, Rimljani će im pomoći koliko god budu mogli; a isto tako, ako se poduzme kakav napad na Rimljane, Židovi će pomoći njima. A ako Židovi budu željeli što dodati ovom savezu pomoći ili što od njega oduzeti, to će biti učinjeno uz zajednički pristanak Rimljana. I kakav god dodatak tako bude učinjen, bit će na snazi.’ ‘Ovu odluku’, kaže Josip, ‘zapisali su Eupolem, sin Ivanov, i Jason, sin Eleazarov, kada je Juda bio veliki svećenik naroda, a Šimun, njegov brat, vojskovođa vojske. I to je bio prvi savez koji su Rimljani sklopili sa Židovima, i bio je uređen na ovaj način.’” Uriah Smith, Daniel i Otkrivenje, 271.

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

Nije moja zadaća objašnjavati zašto je Smith naveo 162. pr. Kr., osim moje pretpostavke da je to bila tiskarska pogreška. Moja je poanta u upućivanju na naglasak koji on stavlja na ono što prepoznaje kao „očito pravilo tumačenja da možemo očekivati da će narodi biti zamijećeni u proročanstvu kada postanu toliko povezani s Božjim narodom da njihovo spominjanje postane nužno kako bi zapisi svete povijesti bili potpuni.” Kada Smith naglašava to pravilo, on utvrđuje da se Rim povezao s Božjim narodom kod „saveza” iz dvadeset trećeg retka 161. pr. Kr., ali Smith utvrđuje da se Rim prvi put uvodi u proročki prikaz 200. pr. Kr., trideset i devet godina prije 161. pr. Kr.

> “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.

> „Sada se uvodi nova sila — ‘nasilnici tvoga naroda’; doslovno, kako kaže biskup Newton, ‘razbijači tvoga naroda’. Daleko, na obalama Tibera, jedno se kraljevstvo hranilo častohlepnim naumima i mračnim zamislima. Isprva maleno i slabo, raslo je čudesnom brzinom u snazi i sili, oprezno pružajući se ovamo i onamo da okuša svoju moć i ispita jakost svoje ratničke ruke, sve dok, svjesno svoje sile, nije smjelo podignulo glavu među narodima zemlje i nepobjedivom rukom zgrabilo kormilo njihovih poslova. Odsada ime Rima stoji na stranicama povijesti, određeno da kroz duga vijekove upravlja poslovima svijeta i vrši silan utjecaj među narodima sve do svršetka vremena.

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

> „Rim je progovorio; i Sirija i Makedonija uskoro su uvidjele da se u izgledu njihova sna zbiva promjena. Rimljani su intervenirali u korist mladoga egipatskog kralja, odlučni da on bude zaštićen od propasti koju su smislili Antioh i Filip. Bilo je to 200. pr. Kr., i to je bilo jedno od prvih važnih upletanja Rimljana u poslove Sirije i Egipta.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 256.

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

Rim se prvi put uvodi u proročki narativ godine 200. pr. Kr., a to uvođenje u četrnaestom retku predstavlja najznačajniju referencu na Rim u čitavoj Danielovoj knjizi, jer je upravo to redak koji definira Rim kao simbol kojim se uspostavlja viđenje. Zašto je Smith mogao naglasiti takvo pravilo proroštva, a zatim navesti 161. pr. Kr., dok je istodobno i godinu 200. pr. Kr. prepoznavao kao točku u kojoj je sila Rima bila „uvedena“, nije problem koji želim razriješiti. Ako imam pitanje koje treba razriješiti, onda bi to bilo je li pravilo, kako ga Smith definira, valjano ili nije. Ako jest valjano, tada bih ustvrdio da četrnaesti redak mora imati vezu sa Židovima, koja se dogodila prije saveza iz 161. pr. Kr.

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

Razumijem da povijest redaka trinaest do petnaest označuje povijest u posljednjim danima, kada papinski Rim zadire u proročku povijest, i to čini u vezi sa Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama, koje su Božji narod u toj povijesti. Budući da Isus uvijek svršetak prikazuje početkom, godina 200. pr. Kr., kada je poganski Rim stupio na povijesnu scenu, mora imati vezu s Božjim narodom u toj povijesti. Stoga se slažem sa Smithovim pravilom, premda on nije našao izravnu vezu između Rima i Židova godine 200. pr. Kr.

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

Jedanaesti i dvanaesti redak opisuju pobjedu i posljedice Bitke kod Rafije, koja se odigrala 217. pr. Kr., između Seleukidskoga Carstva, predvođenoga Antiohom III. Magnom, odnosno „Velikim“, i Ptolemejskoga Kraljevstva Egipta, predvođenoga kraljem Ptolemejem IV. Filopatorom. Ta se bitka odigrala tijekom borbe za nadzor nad Koile-Sirijom (južnom Sirijom) i južnom Palestinom, područjima oko kojih su se sporila ptolemejsko i seleukidsko kraljevstvo. Pobjeda Ptolemeja IV. Filopatora kod Rafije omogućila mu je da neko vrijeme zadrži nadzor nad Koile-Sirijom i južnom Palestinom.

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

Bitka kod Panija, koja se dogodila sedamnaest godina kasnije, 200. pr. Kr., također poznata kao Bitka kod gore Panij ili Bitka kod Paneasa, vodila se između Seleukidskoga Carstva, predvođenog kraljem Antiohom III., i Ptolemejskoga Kraljevstva Egipta, predvođenog kraljem Ptolemejem V.

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

Trideset i jednu godinu kasnije, 167. pr. Kr., makabejski ustanak, židovska pobuna protiv pokušaja Seleukidskoga Carstva da suzbije židovske vjerske običaje i nametne helenističku kulturu, započeo je u gradu Modeinu, malom mjestu smještenom u judejskom području, na prostoru današnjega Izraela.

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

Događaj o kojem je riječ uključivao je zloglasnog grčkog seleukidskog vladara, Antioha IV. Epifana, koji je židovskom stanovništvu nametnuo stroge helenističke običaje, uključujući zabranu židovskih vjerskih obreda i oskvrnuće Hrama u Jeruzalemu. U nastojanju da provede svoje odredbe, Antioh je slao predstavnike u razne gradove i sela kako bi prisilili židovske stanovnike da se pokore njegovim zapovijedima.

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

U Modeinu je jedan od seleukidskih službenika došao provesti kraljev dekret naredivši židovskim stanovnicima da sudjeluju u poganskim obredima i prinose žrtve grčkim bogovima. Stariji židovski svećenik imenom Matatija odbio je pokoriti se toj zapovijedi te je ubio i Židova koji je istupio da prinese žrtvu i seleukidskog službenika. Taj čin prkosa Matatije i njegove obitelji označio je početak Makabejskog ustanka protiv seleukidske vlasti.

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

Matatija i njegovih pet sinova, uključujući Judu Makabejca, pobjegli su u brda i započeli gerilski rat protiv seleukidskih snaga. Pobuna je s vremenom rasla u snazi i potpori, što je dovelo do niza vojnih pobjeda protiv Seleukida.

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

Događaji u Modeinu 167. pr. Kr. bili su prijelomni trenutak u židovskoj povijesti, označivši početak Makabejskog ustanka i borbe za vjersku slobodu i neovisnost protiv strane vlasti. Ponovno posvećenje drugoga hrama u Jeruzalemu, koje označava povijesni događaj što se slavi tijekom Hanuke, dogodilo se 164. pr. Kr., tri godine prije „saveza” iz dvadeset i trećega retka.

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

Nakon što su ponovno osvojili Jeruzalem i Hram, Makabejci su očistili Hram od poganskih onečišćenja i vratili ga njegovoj ispravnoj vjerskoj uporabi. Prema predaji, pronašli su samo jednu posudicu posvećenoga ulja, dostatnu da menora gori samo jedan dan. Ustvari, ne postoji nijedno suvremeno povijesno svjedočanstvo o tom događaju, a tek se u šestom stoljeću ta židovska basna pojavljuje u književnosti. Sestra White uspoređuje otpalu židovsku crkvu s Katoličkom crkvom, osobito naglašavajući da obje crkve temelje vjeru na ljudskim običajima i predajama. Kao i mnogobrojna razna izmišljena čudesa u povijesti papinske Crkve, tako i basna o tome da je ulje za jedan dan trajalo osam dana nema nikakva povijesnog svjedočanstva.

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

Deseti redak jedanaestog poglavlja Daniela prepoznaje prvu bitku od triju bitaka iz četrdesetoga retka, koje sam prethodno označio kao tri bitke hladnoga rata, kao i kao tri posrednička rata. Jedna je sestra dovela u pitanje moje određivanje ukrajinskoga rata, koji je drugi od ta tri rata, kao hladnoga rata, jer je, kako je ispravno istaknula, bilo obilja smrti i razaranja. Ono što sam u prethodnim člancima određivao kao tri bitke „hladnoga rata“, bilo je tako određeno kako bi se povukla razlika između tih triju bitaka i triju svjetskih ratova koji se zbivaju tijekom povijesti zvijeri iz zemlje iz Otkrivenja trinaest. Ta su tri rata posrednički ratovi i tako su također bili određeni.

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

Namjeravam od sada u ovim člancima ta tri sukoba označavati kao „tri sukoba četrdesetoga retka” ili posredničke ratove, kako bi se uklonilo neslaganje koje nastaje kada se vrući rat poistovjećuje s hladnim ratom. Prema mojoj definiciji, tri sukoba četrdesetoga retka ne uključuju bitku iz 1798., koja jest dio četrdesetoga retka, nego samo tri sukoba od vremena svršetka 1989. pa do nedjeljnoga zakona iz četrdeset i prvoga retka. Ta se tri sukoba ispravnije određuju kao posrednički ratovi, koji se odvijaju u okviru ratovanja između kralja sjevera i kralja juga, što u povijesti četrdesetoga retka predstavlja ratovanje između katolicizma (kralja sjevera) i komunizma (kralja juga).

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

Prva od tih triju bitaka označava pobjedu katolicizma nad komunizmom 1989. godine, kada se papinstvo udružilo sa svojom posredničkom vojskom, predstavljenom Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama, u pometanju Sovjetskog Saveza 1989. godine, premda je Rusija, glava (ili „tvrđava“), ostala stajati. Sadašnji ukrajinski rat ponovno je bitka između katolicizma i komunizma, pri čemu papinstvo koristi ukrajinsku vladu kao svojeg posrednika protiv Rusije, uz potporu prethodne posredničke sile papinstva, Sjedinjenih Američkih Država, uključujući i ostatak globalističkog zapadnog svijeta. Taj je rat prikazan u jedanaestom i dvanaestom retku te pokazuje da će komunizam (Rusija) prevladati nad katolicizmom.

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

Treća od te tri posrednička sukoba prikazana je u petnaestom retku kao Bitka kod Panija. Bitka se vodila između Ptolemejskog kraljevstva (kralja juga) i Seleukidskog kraljevstva (kralja sjevera). U toj je bitci posrednička vojska katolicizma ponovno Sjedinjene Američke Države.

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

U prvoj bitci 1989. godine, posrednička vojska republikanskoga roga Sjedinjenih Država bila je upotrijebljena od strane papinstva kako bi srušila političku strukturu Sovjetskoga Saveza, dok je njegova glava (Rusija) ostala netaknuta. U drugoj bitci, koja je ukrajinski rat, posrednička vojska nacista poražena je od Rusije. U trećoj bitci Sjedinjene Države, posrednička vojska papinstva, ponovno poražavaju kralja juga.

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

Tri bitke nose pečat „Istine“, pri čemu su prvu i posljednju bitku vodile pobjedničke posredničke vojske Sjedinjenih Država. U prvoj je bitki glava kralja juga ostala netaknuta, a u trećoj bitki posrednička vojska Sjedinjenih Država postaje glavom kralja juga. Druga posrednička vojska bila je također posrednička vojska papinstva u Drugom svjetskom ratu. U oba je slučaja posrednička vojska nacizma bila i bit će poražena. Papinstvo potpuno podvrgava sve svoje neprijatelje prije šesnaestoga retka, kada se ostvaruje trostruki savez.

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

> „Ptolemeju [Putinu] nedostajalo je razboritosti da svoju pobjedu dobro iskoristi. Da je nastavio slijediti svoj uspjeh, vjerojatno bi postao gospodarom čitavoga Antiohova kraljevstva; no, zadovoljan time da iznese tek nekoliko prijetnji i nekoliko zastrašivanja, sklopio je mir kako bi se mogao prepustiti nesmetanom i neobuzdanom udovoljavanju svojim bestijalnim strastima. Tako je, nakon što je pobijedio svoje neprijatelje, bio nadvladan svojim porocima te je, zaboravljajući veliko ime koje je mogao uspostaviti, provodio vrijeme u gozbama i razvratu.

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

> „Srce mu se uzoholilo zbog njegova uspjeha, ali bio je daleko od toga da njime bude osnažen; jer je neslavna uporaba koju je od njega učinio navela njegove vlastite podanike da se pobune protiv njega.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 254.

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

Drugi svjedok da Putinova pobjeda označava njegov kraj nalazi se u Uziji, kralju južnoga kraljevstva Jude, čije se srce također uzoholilo zbog njegovih vojnih pobjeda, te je potom, kao i Ptolemej, nastojao obavljati djelo svećenikâ u Svetištu, pa je bio pogođen gubom i odmah uklonjen s vlasti. Putinova pobjeda u ukrajinskom ratu označava početak njegova kraja kao kralja juga (kralja ateizma). Njegov je kraj bio predočen početkom proročkoga kralja juga iz četrdesetoga retka (Francuske), koji je označavao revoluciju što je svrgnula vodstvo, kao što se dogodilo s Ptolemejem. Putinov je kraj također bio prikazan krajem Sovjetskoga Saveza, kada je vođa (Gorbačov) raspustio Sovjetski Savez i odmah prihvatio službu pri Ujedinjenim narodima, posljednjodnevnom globalističkom simbolu ateizma, kralju juga. Nakon Putinove pobjede u Ukrajini, on je također predočen Napoleonom kod Waterlooa i progonstvom koje je uslijedilo; kao i kraljem Uzijom, s njegovom gubom i progonstvom koje je uslijedilo, kao i Ptolemejevim pijanim krajem te krajem Sovjetskoga Saveza 1989.

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

Bitka kod Panija dogodila se 200. pr. Kr., i upravo te iste godine Rim se otvoreno umiješao u povijest. Njegovo uvođenje u proročki narativ prethodi osvajanju Jeruzalema prikazanom u šesnaestom retku i ispunjenom 63. pr. Kr., u vrijeme kada je objavio da je branitelj dječaka-kralja u Egiptu. U trećoj bitki četrdesetoga retka, koja uključuje kraljeve sjevera i juga, papinstvo će se ponovno umetnuti u povijest, pretvarajući se da je zaštitnik Rusije. U isto to vrijeme Seleuk, u predslikavanju, porazio je Ptolemeja u bitki kod Panija, čime se utvrđuje da Sjedinjene Države, zamjenska vojska papinstva u prvoj i posljednjoj bitki četrdesetoga retka, pobjeđuju „Egipat” (kralja juga).

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

Godine 200. pr. Kr. simbolično nalazimo papinstvo, dok bludnica iz Tira počinje pjevati svoje pjesme bludnosti uoči trostrukog saveza kod nedjeljnog zakona iz šesnaestog retka. U isto vrijeme Sjedinjene Američke Države nadvladavaju Ujedinjene narode, osiguravajući tako svoj položaj kao vrhovni kralj desetorice kraljeva. Sva dinamika trostrukog saveza koja se ostvaruje kod nedjeljnog zakona utvrđena je prije šesnaestog retka.

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

Politička struktura zmajeve sile, kako je predstavljena Ujedinjenim narodima, u šesnaestom retku pristaje dati svoju političku strukturu zvijeri, ali prije nego što to učini papinstvo pokorava religiju zmaja. Poganstvo ponovno mora biti uklonjeno. Protestantizam je bio uklonjen u Reaganovim godinama, u prvoj bitci četrdesetog retka, a u vrijeme posljednjega republikanskog predsjednika religija zmaja također će biti podvrgnuta religiji katolicizma, kao što je to bilo godine 508. Proces uklanjanja svakoga vjerskog otpora postavljanju papinstva na prijestolje započeo je u Reaganovim godinama, a završava u Trumpovim godinama. Otpor otpaloga protestantizma protiv katolicizma bio je uklonjen u prvoj bitci četrdesetog retka, a otpor spiritualizma bit će uklonjen u posljednjoj bitci četrdesetog retka.

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

U istoj složenoj međuigri ljudskih događaja, otpadnički protestantizam mora se uspostaviti kao vjerska i politička vlast nad deset kraljeva iz sedamnaestog poglavlja Otkrivenja. Tako Bitka kod Panija označuje trenutak kada Sjedinjene Američke Države nadvladaju Ujedinjene narode, neposredno prije zakona o nedjelji iz šesnaestog retka.

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

Utvrđeno je pravilo proročanstva da zmaj, zvijer i lažni prorok svaki imaju svoje vlastite osobite proročanske značajke. Jedna od tih proročanskih značajki jest da se zvijer (katolicizam) proročanski uvijek nalazi u gradu Rimu. Lažni prorok proročanski je uvijek smješten u Sjedinjenim Državama. No sa zmajem je obilježje mjesta na kojem se proročanski nalazi to da se uvijek kreće. Zmaj je započeo na nebu, zatim došao u Edenski vrt, a na koncu se zmaj nalazi u Egiptu.

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

> Govori i reci: Ovako veli Gospodin Bog: Evo, ja sam protiv tebe, faraone, kralju egipatski, veliki zmaju koji leži usred svojih rijeka, koji govori: Moja je rijeka moja, i ja sam je sebi načinio. Ezekiel 29:3.

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

Proročko mjesto zmaja se premješta. U vrijeme Ivana sjedište zmaja, koje predstavlja njegovo prijestolje, bilo je identificirano kao da se nalazi u Pergamu.

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

> I anđelu crkve u Pergamu napiši: Ovo govori onaj koji ima oštar mač s dvije oštrice: Znam tvoja djela i gdje prebivaš, ondje gdje je prijestolje Sotonino; i čvrsto držiš moje ime te nisi zatajio moju vjeru, ni u one dane kada je Antipa, moj vjerni mučenik, bio pogubljen među vama, gdje Sotona prebiva. Otkrivenje 2:12, 13.

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

Praksa poganskoga Rima bila je da sva poganska božanstva s kojima bi došli u doticaj vrate u grad Rim i predstave ih u hramu Panteonu. Zato Daniel bilježi da je „mjesto njegova svetišta oboreno“. Mjesto svetišta poganskoga Rima bio je grad Rim, koji je Konstantin oborio godine 330., ali svetište koje je bilo „u“ Rimu bio je hram Panteon, Pan-Theon u značenju „hram svih bogova“. Rimljani su premjestili sjedište Sotonino iz Pergama u hram Panteon. Sestra White obavještava nas da je poganski Rim zmaj.

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

> „Dakle, premda zmaj prvenstveno predstavlja Sotonu, on je, u drugotnom smislu, simbol poganskoga Rima.“ The Great Controversy, 439.

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

Poganski Rim podijelio se na deset naroda, a Francuska je postala kraljem juga kada je tijekom Francuske revolucije uvela egipatski ateizam. Do 1917. zmaj se preselio iz Francuske u Rusiju. Deseti redak predstavlja 1989. godinu, a jedanaesti i dvanaesti redak predstavljaju bitke „graničnoga područja” (Rafija i Ukrajina), dok bitka kod Panija predstavlja treći korak koji papinstvo ostvaruje dok u šesnaestom retku učvršćuje trostruki savez. To predstavlja skrivenu povijest četrdesetoga retka.

We will continue this study in the next article.

Nastavit ćemo ovo proučavanje u sljedećem članku.

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

> Kad Isus dođe u krajeve Cezareje Filipove [Panij], upita svoje učenike govoreći: Što govore ljudi, tko sam ja, Sin čovječji? A oni rekoše: Jedni kažu da si Ivan Krstitelj; drugi Ilija; a drugi Jeremija ili jedan od proroka. Reče im: A vi, što vi kažete, tko sam ja? Šimun Petar odgovori i reče: Ti si Krist, Sin Boga živoga. A Isus odgovori i reče mu: Blago tebi, Šimune Barjona, jer ti to nisu objavili tijelo i krv, nego Otac moj koji je na nebesima. A ja tebi kažem: ti si Petar, i na toj stijeni sagradit ću svoju crkvu, i vrata paklena neće je nadvladati. I dat ću ti ključeve kraljevstva nebeskoga: i što god svežeš na zemlji, bit će svezano na nebesima; i što god odriješiš na zemlji, bit će odriješeno na nebesima. Tada zapovjedi svojim učenicima da nikomu ne kazuju da je on Isus Krist. Otada poče Isus pokazivati svojim učenicima kako mora poći u Jeruzalem i mnogo pretrpjeti od starješina i glavara svećeničkih i pismoznanaca, i biti ubijen, i treći dan uskrsnuti. Matej 16:13–21.

Back to Articles