Article

# Panium - Number Eighteen

Panij – broj osamnaest

Three Times 250

Tri puta 250

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

February 25, 2026

Formats

PDF
Word
Song MP3

We will now address some of the implications of verse twelve of Daniel eleven, and thereafter, bring the three lines of “250” years into the history of verses eleven through fifteen, that was fulfilled at the battle of Panium in 200 BC. The line of “250” years that began in 457 BC ends in 207 BC in the middle of the period that begins with the battle of Raphia and ends with the battle of Panium. The “250” years in the line of Nero ends with the three-step history of Constantine, represented by the years 313, 321 and 330. The “250” years of the United States ends on July 4, 2026.

Sada ćemo se osvrnuti na neke od implikacija dvanaestog retka jedanaestog poglavlja Daniela te potom u povijest redaka jedanaest do petnaest, koja se ispunila u bitci kod Panija 200. pr. Kr., unijeti tri linije od „250” godina. Linija od „250” godina koja je započela 457. pr. Kr. završava 207. pr. Kr., usred razdoblja koje započinje bitkom kod Rafije i završava bitkom kod Panija. „250” godina u Neronovoj liniji završava trostupanjskom poviješću Konstantina, predstavljenom godinama 313., 321. i 330. „250” godina Sjedinjenih Država završava 4. srpnja 2026.

Nero’s line represents the history of the image of the beast testing time, first in the United States, and then in the world. The line of 457 BC places Trump at a midpoint militarily between two battles. The period that extends from 1776 also marks a midpoint for Trump’s final presidency. In order to place these lines in their proper place we will first address verse twelve, and the demise of Russia and Putin. Then the three lines of “250” years, then the line of the Hasmonean Dynasty. With those lines in place, we will place Peter in alignment with Panium. When those lines are in place we should be able to recognize how the message of July 18, 2020 is to be corrected and proclaimed, and that it is the message of the book of Joel.

Neronova linija predstavlja povijest vremena kušnje slike zvijeri, najprije u Sjedinjenim Državama, a zatim u svijetu. Linija iz 457. pr. Kr. postavlja Trumpa u vojnom smislu na sredinu između dviju bitaka. Razdoblje koje se proteže od 1776. također označava sredinu Trumpova posljednjeg predsjedničkog mandata. Da bismo te linije postavili na njihovo pravo mjesto, najprije ćemo se pozabaviti dvanaestim retkom i propašću Rusije i Putina. Zatim trima linijama od „250” godina, a potom linijom Hašmonejske dinastije. Kada te linije budu postavljene, dovest ćemo Petra u poravnanje s Panijem. Kada te linije budu postavljene, trebali bismo moći prepoznati kako poruku od 18. srpnja 2020. treba ispraviti i proglasiti te da je to poruka knjige o Joelu.

## King Uzziah of Judah & Ptolemy King of Egypt

Kralj Uzija od Jude i Ptolemej, kralj Egipta

The history that fulfilled verse eleven at the battle of Raphia aligns with the history of king Uzziah. When Isaiah is purified and empowered to proclaim the message of the latter rain, his calling came in the year that Uzziah died.

Povijest koja je ispunila jedanaesti redak u bitci kod Rafije podudara se s poviješću kralja Uzije. Kada je Izaija očišćen i osposobljen naviještati poruku pozne kiše, njegov je poziv došao one godine kad je Uzija umro.

> In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. Isaiah 6:1.

> One godine kad umrije kralj Uzija, vidjeh i Gospodina gdje sjedi na prijestolju, visoku i uzvišenu, a skut njegove haljine ispunjavao je hram. Izaija 6,1.

Uzziah’s death was preceded by the rebellion he manifested that paralleled and aligned with the rebellion of Ptolemy just after the victory at the battle of Raphia. Uzziah and Ptolemy are symbols of a southern king whose heart has been lifted up, who rebel by seeking to combining their state authority with church authority. When Uzziah attempted to combine church and state, the leprosy on his forehead typified the mark of the beast.

Uzijinu smrt prethodila je pobuna koju je očitovao, a koja je bila usporedna i podudarna s pobunom Ptolemeja neposredno nakon pobjede u bitci kod Rafije. Uzija i Ptolemej simboli su južnoga kralja kojemu se srce uzoholilo, koji se bune nastojeći sjediniti svoju državnu vlast s crkvenom vlašću. Kada je Uzija pokušao sjediniti crkvu i državu, guba na njegovu čelu predoznačivala je žig zvijeri.

> And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. Revelation 14:9–11.

> I za njima pođe treći anđeo, govoreći snažnim glasom: Ako se tko klanja Zvijeri i njezinu kipu te primi žig na svoje čelo ili na svoju ruku, i on će piti vino gnjeva Božjega, natočeno nerazblaženo u čašu srdžbe njegove; i bit će mučen ognjem i sumporom pred svetim anđelima i pred Janjetom. I dim njihove muke uzlazi u vijeke vjekova; i nemaju počinka ni danju ni noću oni koji se klanjaju Zvijeri i njezinu kipu, i tko god primi žig njezina imena. Otkrivenje 14:9–11.

Uzziah then represents a progressive death from the time of his rebellious attempt to combine church and state. He then represents a lame-duck co-regency with his son for eleven years. Uzziah lived for eleven years after his rebellion. The beginning of his rebellion symbolizes the Sunday law, where church and state are combined and the mark of the beast is enforced. Eleven years later he died, representing the end of his reign as king of the southern kingdom of Judah, which was the glorious land, which is the United States.

Uzija zatim predstavlja postupnu smrt od vremena svojega buntovnog pokušaja da sjedini crkvu i državu. Potom predstavlja nemoćno suregentstvo sa svojim sinom tijekom jedanaest godina. Uzija je živio jedanaest godina nakon svoje pobune. Početak njegove pobune simbolizira nedjeljni zakon, kada se crkva i država sjedinjuju i kada se nameće žig zvijeri. Jedanaest godina kasnije umro je, predstavljajući kraj svoje vladavine kao kralja južnoga kraljevstva Jude, koje je bilo slavna zemlja, a to su Sjedinjene Američke Države.

In prophetic relation to Ptolemy, Uzziah represents Judah, the glorious land and apostate Protestantism, whereas; Ptolemy represents Egypt, which is the dragon power, whose religion is spiritualism. When the two kings are considered as parallel lines, Uzziah ceases to be an illustration of the glorious land and together they become a symbol of two nations. Egypt and Judah are symbols of the religions of spiritualism and apostate Protestantism. They are a symbol of the state and the church. The statecraft and the churchcraft they represent when they are aligned as one symbol contain two nations, as was the Medes and Persians, as was France’s Egypt and Sodom, as is the United States Republican and Protestant horns, as were the northern and southern kingdoms of Israel and Judah, as well as pagan Rome and papal Rome. As a symbol of two kingdoms, they are prophetically tied together by the temple in Jerusalem where both Uzziah and Ptolemy sought to sacrifice at the temple in Jerusalem. Two nations who both rebel at the same sanctuary.

U proročkom odnosu prema Ptolemeju, Uzija predstavlja Judu, slavnu zemlju i otpali protestantizam, dok Ptolemej predstavlja Egipat, koji je zmajeva sila, čija je religija spiritualizam. Kada se ta dva kralja promatraju kao usporedne linije, Uzija prestaje biti prikaz slavne zemlje i zajedno postaju simbol dvaju naroda. Egipat i Juda simboli su religija spiritualizma i otpalog protestantizma. Oni su simbol države i crkve. Državničko umijeće i crkveno umijeće koje predstavljaju, kada su sjedinjeni kao jedan simbol, obuhvaćaju dva naroda, kao što bijahu Medijci i Perzijanci, kao što bijahu francuski Egipat i Sodoma, kao što su republikanski i protestantski rogovi Sjedinjenih Američkih Država, kao što bijahu sjeverno i južno kraljevstvo Izraela i Jude, kao i poganski Rim i papinski Rim. Kao simbol dvaju kraljevstava, oni su proročki povezani Hramom u Jeruzalemu, gdje su i Uzija i Ptolemej nastojali prinijeti žrtvu u Hramu u Jeruzalemu. Dva naroda koji se oba bune protiv istoga Svetišta.

It is important to notice that the rebellion of both kings was in relation to the temple at Jerusalem, which is a symbol of the temple where Daniel saw Christ in chapter ten. Both these king’s histories align at the Ukrainian War, and in so doing they begin their testimony in 2014. They both were lifted up with military victories represented by the battle of Raphia in verse eleven. Raphia marks the borderland of the sixth kingdom of Bible prophecy and the threefold union of the Sunday law. It is also the border of the transition of the church militant unto the church triumphant.

Važno je uočiti da je pobuna obaju kraljeva bila u odnosu prema hramu u Jeruzalemu, koji je simbol hrama u kojemu je Daniel u desetom poglavlju vidio Krista. Povijesti obaju tih kraljeva podudaraju se u Ukrajinskom ratu, te time započinju svoje svjedočanstvo 2014. godine. Obojica su bila uzdignuta vojnim pobjedama koje su u jedanaestom retku predstavljene bitkom kod Rafije. Rafija označuje pogranično područje šestoga kraljevstva biblijskog proroštva i trostrukoga saveza nedjeljnoga zakona. Ona je također granica prijelaza crkve vojujuće u crkvu pobjedonosnu.

After 2014, the richest king announced his intention to run for the presidency in 2015. In 2020 the richest king, representing the Republican horn received its deadly wound that would later be healed. In 2022 the Ukrainian War escalated. Trump then returned in fulfillment of verse thirteen, in the election of 2024. In July of 2023, a voice in the wilderness was sounded. December 31, 2023 the Protestant horn was resurrected, as was the Republican horn in the election of 2024, when Trump returned and then in 2025 the foundation test ended with the arrival of the temple test.

Nakon 2014. najbogatiji kralj objavio je svoju namjeru da se kandidira za predsjednika 2015. Godine 2020. najbogatiji kralj, koji predstavlja republikanski rog, zadobio je svoju smrtonosnu ranu koja će poslije biti iscijeljena. Godine 2022. ukrajinski rat eskalirao je. Trump se potom vratio u ispunjenju trinaestog retka, na izborima 2024. U srpnju 2023. oglasio se glas u pustinji. Dana 31. prosinca 2023. protestantski rog bio je uskrišen, kao i republikanski rog na izborima 2024., kada se Trump vratio, a zatim je 2025. temeljni ispit završio s dolaskom ispita Hrama.

## 1989

1989.

The truths which were unsealed in 1989 was twofold. The prophetic parallels of the reform movements and the last six verses of Daniel eleven were unsealed at the same time. There are certain prophetic rules that were employed to establish the initial message of verse forty. Some of those very truths are now the key to the hidden history of the very same verse where those prophetic gems were discovered. I’ll give you an example.

Istine koje su bile otpečaćene 1989. bile su dvojake. Proročanske paralele reformnih pokreta i posljednjih šest redaka jedanaestog poglavlja Daniela bile su otpečaćene u isto vrijeme. Postoje određena proročanska pravila koja su bila primijenjena kako bi se uspostavila početna poruka četrdesetog retka. Neke od tih istih istina sada su ključ za skrivenu povijest upravo toga istoga retka u kojemu su ti proročanski dragulji bili otkriveni. Dat ću vam primjer.

In 1989, there was no unified understanding in Adventism as to what the last six verses of Daniel represented. That lack of unification was twofold. There was no consensus of the meaning of the verses. Those who professed to have understanding of the verses presented human ideas mixed the theology of apostate Protestantism and Catholicism, the birthright heritage they received from their forefathers of the rebellion of 1863, when they fulfilled the role of the disobedient prophet at Jeroboam’s foundational rebellion. Those individual ideas of what the verses were private interpretations, at best. Their ideas of the verses were either contradictory to basic prophetic application, and often contrary to the very premise they themselves identified of the verses.

Godine 1989. u adventizmu nije postojalo jedinstveno razumijevanje o tome što predstavlja posljednjih šest redaka Daniela. Taj nedostatak jedinstva bio je dvostruk. Nije postojalo suglasje o značenju tih redaka. Oni koji su tvrdili da razumiju te retke iznosili su ljudske zamisli pomiješane s teologijom otpaloga protestantizma i katolicizma, baštinskim nasljeđem prvorodstva koje su primili od svojih praotaca iz pobune 1863. godine, kada su ispunili ulogu neposlušnog proroka u Jeroboamovoj temeljnoj pobuni. Te pojedinačne zamisli o tome što ti redci znače bile su, u najboljem slučaju, privatna tumačenja. Njihove zamisli o tim redcima bile su ili proturječne osnovnoj proročkoj primjeni, a često i protivne samoj premisi tih redaka koju su oni sami utvrdili.

What we saw in the verses was a consistent understanding of all six verses. It was the consistency of the message we saw that encouraged me to present my understanding, even when I knew all of Adventism rejected what I understood. What we understood of those verses was published first in 1996, and the understanding there set forth has only grown stronger as time has marched out over thirty years!

Ono što smo vidjeli u tim redcima bilo je dosljedno razumijevanje svih šest redaka. Dosljednost poruke koju smo vidjeli ohrabrila me da iznesem svoje razumijevanje, premda sam znao da sav adventizam odbacuje ono što sam razumio. Ono što smo razumjeli o tim redcima prvi je put objavljeno 1996. godine, a ondje izloženo razumijevanje samo je postajalo sve snažnije kako je vrijeme odmicalo tijekom trideset godina!

If you consider the very first reference in the magazine The Time of the End, you find Testimonies, volume 9, page 11. Five years before 9/11, the magazine starts with 9/11. One of those understandings that encouraged me was in understanding that at “the time of the end” in verse forty, the kings of the north and south were spiritual, not literal powers. At that time, I already knew that Sister White said that the books of Daniel and Revelation are the same book, and that the same line of prophecy that is in Daniel, is taken up by John in the Revelation. I had found that in Revelation eleven, which was fulfilled in the history surrounding the time of the end in 1798; Sister White’s commentary upon the chapter clearly teaches that France was spiritual Egypt, and she was just as clear that in Revelation seventeen, the whore upon the beast was spiritual Babylon.

Ako razmotrite sasvim prvu referencu u časopisu The Time of the End, nalazite Testimonies, svezak 9, stranica 11. Pet godina prije 11. rujna, časopis započinje s 9/11. Jedno od onih razumijevanja koja su me ohrabrila bilo je to što sam shvatio da su u „vremenu svršetka” u četrdesetom retku kraljevi sjevera i juga bili duhovne, a ne doslovne sile. U to sam vrijeme već znao da je sestra White rekla kako su knjige Daniela i Otkrivenja ista knjiga te da istu proročku liniju koja se nalazi u Danielu preuzima Ivan u Otkrivenju. Ustanovio sam da u jedanaestom poglavlju Otkrivenja, koje se ispunilo u povijesti povezanoj s vremenom svršetka 1798. godine, komentar sestre White na to poglavlje jasno uči da je Francuska bila duhovni Egipat, a bila je jednako tako jasna i da je u sedamnaestom poglavlju Otkrivenja bludnica na Zvijeri bila duhovni Babilon.

Sister White’s identification of those two powers is in The Great Controversy, and those comments tie together John and Daniel’s testimony. The definition of the king of the south in Daniel chapter eleven is the power that controls Egypt, and the king of the north is the power who controls Babylon. When the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy worked in tandem to establish a truth by bringing Daniel and Revelation together to prove the point, was something I could never surrender to any misguided theologian, or misguided self-appointed leader of a self-supporting ministry.

Identifikacija tih dviju sila od strane sestre White nalazi se u Velikoj borbi, a ti komentari povezuju svjedočanstvo Ivana i Daniela. Definicija kralja juga u jedanaestom poglavlju Daniela jest sila koja upravlja Egiptom, a kralj sjevera jest sila koja upravlja Babilonom. Kada su Biblija i Duh Proroštva djelovali zajednički kako bi uspostavili istinu, dovodeći Daniela i Otkrivenje zajedno da dokažu tu tvrdnju, to je bilo nešto što nikada nisam mogao prepustiti bilo kojem zabludjelom teologu ili zabludjelom samopostavljenom vođi samouzdaržavajuće službe.

To understand Ptolemy and Uzziah as symbols of the battle of Raphia and the fallout that occurs after their hearts are lifted up, is to be governed by the fact that Ptolemy represents the dragon power who defeats the proxy power of Rome, only to lose to the proxy power who had defeated Ptolemy in verse ten and in 1989. The historical distinctions are purposeful and important.

Razumjeti Ptolemeja i Uziju kao simbole bitke kod Rafije i posljedica koje nastupaju nakon što im se srca uzohole, znači biti vođen činjenicom da Ptolemej predstavlja zmajsku silu koja pobjeđuje posredničku silu Rima, samo da bi potom bila poražena od posredničke sile koja je porazila Ptolemeja u desetom retku i 1989. godine. Povijesne su razlike namjerne i važne.

Uzziah receives the mark of the beast when he attempts to bring church and state together, Uzziah is the glorious land, and the glorious land was a major argument in the beginning of the message in 1989. Is the glorious land the United States, or is it the Seventh-day Adventist church? Those who then held to the erroneous idea that the glorious land is the Adventist church, along with any who still do—would argue that the glorious holy mountain of verse forty-five was clearly God’s church, so that meant to them, that a mountain and a land were the same symbol. Standard human reasoning, I suppose.

Uzija prima žig zvijeri kada pokuša sjediniti crkvu i državu; Uzija je krasna zemlja, a krasna je zemlja bila glavni argument na početku poruke 1989. godine. Je li krasna zemlja Sjedinjene Američke Države ili je to Crkva adventista sedmoga dana? Oni koji su tada zastupali pogrešnu zamisao da je krasna zemlja Adventistička crkva, zajedno sa svima koji to još uvijek čine, tvrdili bi da je krasna sveta gora iz četrdeset i petog retka očito bila Božja crkva, pa je to za njih značilo da su gora i zemlja isti simbol. Pretpostavljam, uobičajeno ljudsko razmišljanje.

Uzziah is the glorious land, and Ptolemy is Egypt. Uzziah, as the glorious land has the two horns of Protestantism and Republicanism. The political manifestation of Ptolemy is communism and its varied forms, and the religious manifestation of Ptolemy is spiritualism and its varied forms. A characteristic of the dragon power is that it is a confederacy, but the false prophet, who is the glorious land is a single nation with two horns.

Uzija je slavna zemlja, a Ptolemej je Egipat. Uzija, kao slavna zemlja, ima dva roga protestantizma i republikanizma. Politička manifestacija Ptolemeja jest komunizam i njegovi raznoliki oblici, a religijska manifestacija Ptolemeja jest spiritizam i njegovi raznoliki oblici. Obilježje zmajeve sile jest da je ona konfederacija, ali lažni prorok, koji je slavna zemlja, jest jedna jedina nacija s dva roga.

Daniel eleven verse forty established that the United States was the proxy power of the papacy when the Soviet Union was swept away in 1989. This truth aligns with the role of the two-horned earth beast of Revelation thirteen, for the two books are the same.

Daniel 11, redak 40, utvrdio je da su Sjedinjene Američke Države bile posrednička sila papinstva kada je Sovjetski Savez bio pometen 1989. godine. Ta se istina podudara s ulogom zvijeri iz zemlje s dva roga iz Otkrivenja 13, jer su te dvije knjige iste.

> And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. Revelation 13:11, 12.

> I vidjeh drugu Zvijer gdje izlazi iz zemlje; imala je dva roga poput janjećih, a govorila je kao zmaj. I vrši svu vlast prve Zvijeri pred njom te čini da se zemlja i oni koji na njoj prebivaju klanjaju prvoj Zvijeri, kojoj je smrtonosna rana bila iscijeljena. Otkrivenje 13,11.12.

Revelation thirteen identifies the United States as the proxy power of the Papacy, for the earth beast “exerciseth al the power of the” beast out of the sea that came “before him.” In verse two the dragon of pagan Rome had given the Papacy its power, seat and great authority. The word translated as “power” means power, but in verse twelve it is a different word that is translated as “power,” meaning “delegated authority.”

Trinaesto poglavlje Otkrivenja prepoznaje Sjedinjene Države kao opunomoćenu silu Papinstva, jer zvijer iz zemlje „vrši svu vlast“ zvijeri iz mora koja je došla „pred njim“. U drugom retku zmaj poganskoga Rima dao je Papinstvu njegovu silu, prijestolje i veliku vlast. Riječ prevedena kao „sila“ znači silu, ali je u dvanaestom retku to druga riječ koja je prevedena kao „vlast“, a znači „delegirana vlast“.

The United States is the proxy power of the papacy, who has been typified by pagan Rome, who gave its military and economic support to the papacy as set forth in verse two. In doing so pagan Rome typified the United States who would also give its “chariots, ships and horsemen” to do the dirty-work of the papal power.

Sjedinjene Države su opunomoćena sila papinstva, koje je bilo predočeno poganskim Rimom, koji mu je dao svoju vojnu i gospodarsku potporu, kao što je izloženo u drugom retku. Time je poganski Rim predočavao Sjedinjene Države, koje će također dati svoja „kola, lađe i konjanike” da obave prljavi posao papinske vlasti.

When the three battles of verse ten, eleven and fifteen were fulfilled in history, Antiochus Magnus was at each battle. This fact identifies that the power represented in the three battles is a proxy power of the beast, for it is always Antiochus, and Antiochus in 1989 was the proxy power of the United States.

Kada su se tri bitke iz desetoga, jedanaestoga i petnaestoga retka ispunile u povijesti, Antioh Veliki bio je prisutan u svakoj od tih bitaka. Ta činjenica pokazuje da je sila predstavljena u tim trima bitkama posrednička sila Zvijeri, jer je to uvijek Antioh, a Antioh je 1989. godine bio posrednička sila Sjedinjenih Država.

The three battles that lead to the Sunday law of verse sixteen bear the signature of Alpha and Omega, and also the structure of truth. It is the United States in the first battle and the third battle, identifying an alpha and omega in the first and last battle. The three battles that lead to the Sunday law of verse sixteen also bear the signature of truth. The proxy power of Nazi Ukraine is the battle in the middle that represents the rebellion of the middle waymark in the framework of the Hebrew word truth. The three battles represent 1989 unto the Sunday law, which means they represent the “hidden history” of verse forty.

Tri bitke koje vode do nedjeljnog zakona iz šesnaestog retka nose obilježje Alfe i Omege, a također i strukturu istine. U prvoj i trećoj bitki to su Sjedinjene Američke Države, što prepoznaje alfu i omegu u prvoj i posljednjoj bitki. Tri bitke koje vode do nedjeljnog zakona iz šesnaestog retka također nose obilježje istine. Posrednička sila nacističke Ukrajine jest bitka u sredini koja predstavlja pobunu srednjeg putokaza u okviru hebrejske riječi istina. Te tri bitke predstavljaju razdoblje od 1989. do nedjeljnog zakona, što znači da predstavljaju „skrivenu povijest” četrdesetog retka.

Verse eleven of Revelation eleven identifies 2023, as the point where both horns are resurrected. Daniel eleven, verse eleven identifies the very same period of history. The internal line of prophecy and the external line of prophecy align in 2023. The internal line is the “thing” Daniel understood and the external line is the “vision” he understood.

Jedanaesti redak jedanaestog poglavlja Otkrivenja označava 2023. godinu kao trenutak u kojem oba roga uskrsavaju. Jedanaesti redak jedanaestog poglavlja Daniela označava upravo isto razdoblje povijesti. Unutarnja proročka linija i vanjska proročka linija usklađuju se 2023. godine. Unutarnja linija jest „stvar“ koju je Daniel razumio, a vanjska linija jest „viđenje“ koje je razumio.

The temple test that Daniel illustrates began at the twenty-second day, and twenty-two years after 9/11, which is the point that Isaiah entered the temple brings you to 2023. Isaiah identifies the death of Uzziah after living with leprosy for eleven years at 9/11. The work of erecting the temple consists of first laying the foundation, and thereafter erecting the temple and placing the cap stone which then leads to the third litmus test, represented by the feast of trumpets in the line of Leviticus twenty-three. The internal work of the everlasting gospel is accomplished during the history of the external line. In verse eleven Putin has been typified by Ptolemy, and king Uzziah provides a second witness to the illustration of the king of the south who is lifted up through military success, who thereafter attempts to insert themselves into the realm of religion.

Hramska kušnja koju Daniel prikazuje započela je dvadeset i drugoga dana, a dvadeset i dvije godine nakon 11. rujna, što je trenutak kada je Izaija ušao u hram, dovodi vas do 2023. godine. Izaija poistovjećuje smrt Uzije, nakon što je jedanaest godina živio s gubom, s 11. rujna. Djelo podizanja hrama sastoji se najprije od polaganja temelja, a potom od podizanja hrama i postavljanja zaglavnoga kamena, što zatim vodi do treće lakmus-kušnje, predstavljene blagdanom truba u nizu Levitskog zakonika dvadeset i tri. Unutarnje djelo vječnoga evanđelja izvršava se tijekom povijesti vanjske linije. U jedanaestom retku Putin je bio predočen Ptolemejem, a kralj Uzija pruža drugoga svjedoka za prikaz kralja juga koji se uzvisuje vojnim uspjehom, a koji se potom pokušava umetnuti u područje religije.

> And the king of the south shall be moved with choler, and shall come forth and fight with him, even with the king of the north: and he shall set forth a great multitude; but the multitude shall be given into his hand. And when he hath taken away the multitude, his heart shall be lifted up; and he shall cast down many ten thousands: but he shall not be strengthened by it. Daniel 11:11, 12.

> I kralj juga razjari se i iziđe te se pobije s njim, s kraljem sjevera; i on će podići veliko mnoštvo, ali mnoštvo će biti predano u njegovu ruku. A kad ukloni mnoštvo, srce će mu se uzoholiti; i oborit će mnoge desetke tisuća, ali se time neće osnažiti. Daniel 11:11, 12.

Uriah Smith addresses Ptolemy Philopator’s history and his attempt to offer sacrifices in Jerusalem’s temple.

Urija Smith govori o povijesti Ptolemeja Filopatora i njegovu pokušaju da prinese žrtve u jeruzalemskom hramu.

> “Ptolemy 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 je nedostajalo razboritosti da svoju pobjedu dobro iskoristi. Da je nastavio slijediti svoj uspjeh, vjerojatno bi postao gospodarom čitava kraljevstva Antiohova; no, zadovoljan time da uputi tek nekoliko prijetnji i nekoliko zastrašivanja, sklopio je mir kako bi se mogao predati neprekinutom i neobuzdanom udovoljavanju svojim životinjskim strastima. Tako je, pobijedivši svoje neprijatelje, bio svladan svojim porocima te je, zaboravivši na veliko ime koje je mogao steći, 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. But the lifting up of his heart was more especially manifested in his transactions with the Jews. Coming to Jerusalem, he there offered sacrifices, and was very desirous of entering into the most holy place of the temple, contrary to the law and religion of that place; but being, though with great difficulty, restrained, he left the place burning with anger against the whole nation of the Jews, and immediately commenced against them a terrible and relentless persecution. In Alexandria, where the Jews had resided since the days of Alexander, and enjoyed the privileges of the most favored citizens, forty thousand according to Eusebius, sixty thousand according to Jerome, were slain in this persecution. The rebellion of the Egyptians, and the massacre of the Jews, certainly were not calculated to strengthen him in his kingdom, but were sufficient rather almost totally to ruin it.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 254.

> „Njegovo se srce uzoholilo zbog njegova uspjeha, ali bio je daleko od toga da se njime učvrsti; jer je neslavna uporaba koju je od njega načinio navela čak i njegove vlastite podanike na pobunu protiv njega. No uzdignuće njegova srca osobito se očitovalo u njegovim postupcima prema Židovima. Došavši u Jeruzalem, ondje je prinio žrtve i silno je želio ući u presveto mjesto Hrama, protivno zakonu i vjeri toga mjesta; ali budući da je, premda s velikom mukom, bio spriječen, napustio je to mjesto goreći od gnjeva protiv cijeloga židovskog naroda te je odmah započeo nad njima strašan i neumoljiv progon. U Aleksandriji, gdje su Židovi prebivali još od dana Aleksandra i uživali povlastice najpovlaštenijih građana, u tome je progonu pobijeno četrdeset tisuća prema Euzebiju, šezdeset tisuća prema Jeronimu. Pobuna Egipćana i pokolj Židova zacijelo nisu bili takvi da bi ga učvrstili u njegovu kraljevstvu, nego su bili dostatni da ga radije gotovo posve upropaste.” Uriah Smith, Daniel i Otkrivenje, 254.

Ptolemy Philopator’s military victory at Raphia in 217 BC, did not strengthen Ptolemy, but it caused “his heart to be lifted up.” Victory in the Ukrainian War will not strengthen Putin, but it will “lift up his heart,” as did military success cause king Uzziah to lift up his heart.

Vojna pobjeda Ptolemeja Filopatora kod Rafije 217. pr. Kr. nije ojačala Ptolemeja, nego je uzrokovala da se „uzvisi njegovo srce”. Pobjeda u ukrajinskom ratu neće ojačati Putina, nego će „uzvisiti njegovo srce”, kao što je vojni uspjeh naveo kralja Uziju da uzvisi svoje srce.

> And Uzziah prepared for them throughout all the host shields, and spears, and helmets, and habergeons, and bows, and slings to cast stones. And he made in Jerusalem engines, invented by cunning men, to be on the towers and upon the bulwarks, to shoot arrows and great stones withal. And his name spread far abroad; for he was marvellously helped, till he was strong. But when he was strong, his heart was lifted up to his destruction: for he transgressed against the Lord his God, and went into the temple of the Lord to burn incense upon the altar of incense. 2 Chronicles 26:14–16.

> I Uzija im pripravi po svoj vojsci štitove, i koplja, i kacige, i oklope, i lukove, i praćke za bacanje kamenja. I načini u Jeruzalemu sprave, izum vještih ljudi, da budu na kulama i na bedemima, kako bi se njima odapinjale strijele i veliko kamenje. I ime se njegovo raširi nadaleko; jer mu bijaše čudesno pomognuto, dok ne ojača. Ali kad ojača, uzvisi se srce njegovo na vlastitu propast: jer prijestupi protiv Gospodina, Boga svojega, i uđe u hram Gospodnji da kadi na kadionome žrtveniku. 2 Ljetopisa 26:14–16.

Two southern kings whose hearts were lifted up from military victories, attempted to enter the same temple and offer and offering, which only a priest was allowed to do. In both cases, the priests resisted the proud kings attempts to do so. One king then initiated a retaliation upon the Jews, and the other was struck in the forehead with leprosy.

Dvojica južnih kraljeva, kojima su se srca uzoholila zbog vojnih pobjeda, pokušala su ući u isti hram i prinijeti žrtvu, što je bilo dopušteno samo svećeniku. U oba su se slučaja svećenici usprotivili oholim pokušajima kraljeva da to učine. Jedan je kralj potom započeo odmazdu protiv Židova, a drugoga je na čelu pogodila guba.

> And Azariah the priest went in after him, and with him fourscore priests of the Lord, that were valiant men: And they withstood Uzziah the king, and said unto him, It appertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah, to burn incense unto the Lord, but to the priests the sons of Aaron, that are consecrated to burn incense: go out of the sanctuary; for thou hast trespassed; neither shall it be for thine honour from the Lord God. Then Uzziah was wroth, and had a censer in his hand to burn incense: and while he was wroth with the priests, the leprosy even rose up in his forehead before the priests in the house of the Lord, from beside the incense altar. And Azariah the chief priest, and all the priests, looked upon him, and, behold, he was leprous in his forehead, and they thrust him out from thence; yea, himself hasted also to go out, because the Lord had smitten him. And Uzziah the king was a leper unto the day of his death, and dwelt in a several house, being a leper; for he was cut off from the house of the Lord: and Jotham his son was over the king’s house, judging the people of the land. Now the rest of the acts of Uzziah, first and last, did Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, write. 2 Chronicles 26:17–22.

> I svećenik Azarja uđe za njim, i s njim osamdeset svećenika Gospodnjih, hrabrih ljudi. Oni se usprotiviše kralju Uziji i rekoše mu: Nije tvoje, Uzija, da kadiš Gospodu, nego svećenika, sinova Aronovih, koji su posvećeni da kade. Izađi iz Svetišta, jer si sagriješio; i to ti neće biti na čast od Gospoda Boga. Tada se Uzija razgnjevi; a u ruci mu bijaše kadionica da kadi. I dok se gnjevio na svećenike, guba mu izbi na čelu pred svećenicima u Domu Gospodnjem, pokraj kadionoga žrtvenika. I poglavar svećenika Azarja i svi svećenici pogledaše ga, i gle, bijaše gubav na čelu; i istjeraše ga odande. A i sam je žurno izašao, jer ga je Gospod udario. I kralj Uzija bijaše gubav do dana svoje smrti i prebivao je u izdvojenoj kući, jer bijaše gubav; bio je, naime, isključen iz Doma Gospodnjega. A njegov sin Jotam bijaše nad kraljevskim domom i sudio je narodu zemlje. A ostala djela Uzijina, prva i posljednja, zapisa prorok Izaija, sin Amosov. 2 Ljetopisa 26:17–22.

In 2014, the globalists of Europe and the Obama regime initiated a color revolution upon the nation of the Ukraine. In 2022 Russia began an invasion that will ultimately lead to a victory for Putin and Russia; represented by Ptolemy and Uzziah, the kings of the south. Verse twelve says that after the victory of Putin, “his heart shall be lifted up; and he shall cast down many ten thousands: but he shall not be strengthened by it.” History then records a progressive demise of his kingdom.

Godine 2014. europski globalisti i Obamin režim pokrenuli su obojenu revoluciju protiv naroda Ukrajine. Godine 2022. Rusija je započela invaziju koja će naposljetku dovesti do pobjede Putina i Rusije; prikazanih Ptolemejem i Uzijom, kraljevima juga. Dvanaesti redak kaže da će nakon Putinove pobjede „srce njegovo uzoholiti se; i oborit će mnogo desetaka tisuća, ali se time neće osnažiti.” Povijest zatim bilježi postupnu propast njegova kraljevstva.

The progressive demise led to his death, and by the time Antiochus the Great retaliates for his loss at Raphia, Antiochus was no longer engaged with Ptolemy Philopator, Antiochus was then addressing a young child who was then Egypt’s ruler. A child is a symbol of the last generation, so at one level the child king that Antiochus defeats at Panium is the final generation of the kingdom of the south. At the practical level the child king represents weakness in relation to Antiochus’s strength.

Postupno propadanje dovelo je do njegove smrti, i u vrijeme kada Antioh Veliki uzvraća za svoj poraz kod Rafije, Antioh više nije bio u sukobu s Ptolemejem Filopatorom; Antioh se tada suočavao s malim djetetom koje je u to vrijeme bilo vladar Egipta. Dijete je simbol posljednjega naraštaja, pa je na jednoj razini dječak-kralj kojega Antioh pobjeđuje kod Panija završni naraštaj kraljevstva juga. Na praktičnoj razini dječak-kralj predstavlja slabost nasuprot Antiohovoj snazi.

> “The peace concluded between Ptolemy Philopater and Antiochus lasted fourteen years. Meanwhile Ptolemy died from intemperance and debauchery, and was succeeded by his son, Ptolemy Epiphanes, a child then four or five years old. Antiochus, during the same time, having suppressed rebellion in his kingdom, and reduced and settled the eastern parts in their obedience, was at leisure for any enterprise when young Epiphanes came to the throne of Egypt; and thinking this too good an opportunity for enlarging his dominion to be let slip, he raised an immense army “greater than the former” (for he had collected many forces and acquired great riches in his eastern expedition), and set out against Egypt, expecting to have an easy victory over the infant king. How he succeeded we shall presently see; for here new complications enter into the affairs of these kingdoms, and new actors are introduced upon the stage of history.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 255.

> „Mir sklopljen između Ptolemeja Filopatora i Antioha trajao je četrnaest godina. U međuvremenu je Ptolemej umro zbog neumjerenosti i razvrata, a naslijedio ga je njegov sin, Ptolemej Epifan, dijete od četiri ili pet godina. Antioh je, u isto vrijeme, pošto je ugušio pobunu u svome kraljevstvu te pokorio i učvrstio istočne krajeve u njihovoj poslušnosti, bio slobodan za svaki pothvat kada je mladi Epifan stupio na egipatsko prijestolje; i smatrajući da je to predobra prilika za proširenje svoje vlasti da bi je propustio, podigao je golemu vojsku „veću od prijašnje“ (jer je tijekom svoga istočnog pohoda prikupio mnoge čete i stekao veliko bogatstvo) te krenuo protiv Egipta, očekujući laku pobjedu nad kraljem-djetetom. Kako je u tome uspio, uskoro ćemo vidjeti; jer ovdje u poslove tih kraljevstava ulaze nove složenosti i na pozornicu povijesti stupaju novi akteri.“ Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 255.

## The King of the South

Kralj Juga

To outline the final steps of Russia, is to outline the final steps of the prophetic king of the south. A prophetic characteristic of the spiritual king of the south that arrived in prophetic history at the time of the end in 1798—is how it comes to its end. It is also a prophetic characteristic of the king of the north, and the false prophet. Each of the three powers that lead the world to Armageddon have endings that are specifically identified in God’s Word. Whatever happens to Putin and Russia will have been typified with past lines of the king of the south.

Ocrtati završne korake Rusije znači ocrtati završne korake proročkoga kralja juga. Proročko obilježje duhovnoga kralja juga, koji se pojavio u proročkoj povijesti u vrijeme svršetka 1798. godine, jest način na koji dolazi svome kraju. To je također proročko obilježje kralja sjevera i lažnoga proroka. Svaka od tih triju sila koje vode svijet prema Armagedonu ima svršetak koji je u Božjoj Riječi izričito označen. Što god se dogodilo Putinu i Rusiji, to će biti predoznačeno prijašnjim linijama kralja juga.

The examples of the spiritual king of the south’s demise were typified by the demise of the first spiritual king of the south, who was atheistic France during the period of the Revolution. The demise of the southern kingdom includes the demise of the southern king. Napoleon’s demise corresponds to the demise of France, and aligns with the demise of the next kingdom of the south, who was Russia. Russia as the modern king of the south began in revolution, just as France, as the king of the south, began with revolution.

Primjeri propasti duhovnoga kralja juga bili su predoznačeni propašću prvoga duhovnog kralja juga, a to je bila ateistička Francuska u razdoblju Revolucije. Propast južnoga kraljevstva uključuje propast južnoga kralja. Napoleonova propast odgovara propasti Francuske i podudara se s propašću sljedećega kraljevstva juga, a to je bila Rusija. Rusija je kao suvremeni kralj juga započela revolucijom, baš kao što je i Francuska, kao kralj juga, započela revolucijom.

Revolution is a characteristic of the dragon, who is the symbol of the southern kings. The dragon, the primary symbol of the king of the south is Satan, and as he attempts a revolution at the end of the millennium, fire comes down out of heaven and devours him. His rebellion in heaven at the beginning was the alpha of his rebellion at the conclusion of the millennium.

Revolucija je obilježje zmaja, koji je simbol južnih kraljeva. Zmaj, glavni simbol kralja juga, jest Sotona, i dok na svršetku tisućljeća pokušava izvesti revoluciju, oganj silazi s neba i proždire ga. Njegova pobuna na nebu na početku bila je alfa njegove pobune na završetku tisućljeća.

In 1798, France prophetically took the throne as the spiritual king of the south during the French Revolution. That revolution swept through the nations of Europe and ultimately arrived at the Russian Revolution that was quickly followed by the Bolshevik Revolution in the same year.

Godine 1798. Francuska je proročki preuzela prijestolje kao duhovni kralj juga tijekom Francuske revolucije. Ta je revolucija zahvatila narode Europe i na koncu dovela do Ruske revolucije, koju je iste godine ubrzo slijedila Boljševička revolucija.

The Russian Revolution of 1917 consisted of two main steps: the February Revolution (which overthrew the Tsarist monarchy, ended autocracy, and established a provisional government amid a period of dual power with the Soviets) and the October Revolution (also called the Bolshevik Revolution, where the Bolsheviks under Lenin seized power in a coup, leading to the establishment of Soviet rule and the path to socialism/communism).

Ruska revolucija 1917. sastojala se od dvaju glavnih koraka: Veljačke revolucije (koja je srušila carsku monarhiju, okončala samovlašće i uspostavila privremenu vladu usred razdoblja dvojne vlasti sa sovjetima) i Oktobarske revolucije (također nazvane boljševičkom revolucijom, u kojoj su boljševici pod Lenjinovim vodstvom državnim udarom preuzeli vlast, što je dovelo do uspostave sovjetske vlasti i puta prema socijalizmu/komunizmu).

In historical analyses and revolutionary theory (particularly from Marxist perspectives like those of Trotsky, Luxemburg, and others drawing parallels), the French Revolution (1789–1799) is often seen as typifying or providing a schema for the course of the Russian events. The two steps of the French Revolution that typified these Russian phases are:

U povijesnim analizama i revolucionarnoj teoriji (osobito iz marksističkih perspektiva poput onih Trockoga, Luxemburg i drugih koji povlače paralele), Francuska revolucija (1789.–1799.) često se smatra onom koja utjelovljuje ili pruža obrazac za tijek ruskih događaja. Dva koraka Francuske revolucije koji su bili tipski za te ruske faze jesu:

- The initial moderate/constitutional phase (roughly 1789–1792), which aligns with the February Revolution. This French phase began with the storming of the Bastille, the convening of the Estates-General/National Assembly, the abolition of feudal privileges, the Declaration of the Rights of Man, and the establishment of a constitutional monarchy under the Girondins and moderate reformers. It overthrew absolute monarchy but retained elements of bourgeois/liberal governance and dual/contested power structures (e.g., between the Assembly and the lingering monarchy). Similarly, February 1917 ended Tsarism, but led to a bourgeois provisional government and dual power with the Soviets.

  Početna umjerena/ustavna faza (otprilike 1789.–1792.), koja odgovara Veljačkoj revoluciji. Ova francuska faza započela je jurišem na Bastillu, sazivanjem Generalnih staleža/Nacionalne skupštine, ukidanjem feudalnih povlastica, Deklaracijom o pravima čovjeka i uspostavom ustavne monarhije pod Žirondincima i umjerenim reformatorima. Svrgnula je apsolutnu monarhiju, ali je zadržala elemente građanske/liberalne vlasti i dvojnih/spornih struktura moći (npr. između Skupštine i preostale monarhije). Slično tomu, veljača 1917. okončala je carizam, ali je dovela do građanske privremene vlade i dvojne vlasti sa sovjetima.

- The radical/Jacobin phase (roughly 1792–1794, including the establishment of the First Republic, the execution of Louis XVI, and the Reign of Terror under Robespierre and the Jacobins/Committee of Public Safety) aligns with the October (Bolshevik) Revolution. The Jacobins seized power from the more moderate Girondins through radical action, declared a republic, suppressed counter-revolution, and pushed the revolution toward deeper social transformation and defense against internal/external threats. This mirrors how the Bolsheviks overthrew the provisional government, consolidated proletarian/dictatorship-of-the-proletariat rule, and advanced revolutionary socialism.

  Radikalna/jakobinska faza (otprilike 1792.–1794., uključujući uspostavu Prve Republike, pogubljenje Luja XVI. te Vladavinu terora pod Robespierreom i jakobincima/Odborom javnoga spasa) podudara se s Listopadskom (boljševičkom) revolucijom. Jakobinci su radikalnim djelovanjem preuzeli vlast od umjerenijih žirondinaca, proglasili republiku, ugušili proturevoluciju i usmjerili revoluciju prema dubljoj društvenoj preobrazbi i obrani od unutarnjih/vanjskih prijetnji. To odražava način na koji su boljševici zbacili privremenu vladu, učvrstili vlast proletarijata/diktature proletarijata i unaprijedili revolucionarni socijalizam.

These parallels emphasize how revolutions often follow a pattern: an initial broad uprising against the old regime (led by moderates/bourgeois forces), followed by a more extreme seizure of power by radicals to ‘save’ and deepen the revolution amid crisis. The Bolsheviks themselves consciously drew on the French example, viewing their October uprising as akin to the Jacobin coup—necessary to prevent counter-revolution and fulfill the revolution’s potential.

Te paralele naglašavaju kako revolucije često slijede određeni obrazac: početni široki ustanak protiv staroga režima (pod vodstvom umjerenih/buržoaskih snaga), nakon čega slijedi ekstremnije preuzimanje vlasti od strane radikala kako bi se „spasila“ i produbila revolucija usred krize. Sami boljševici svjesno su se oslanjali na francuski primjer, promatrajući svoj Listopadski ustanak kao srodan jakobinskom prevratu — nužan da spriječi kontrarevoluciju i ostvari potencijal revolucije.

This typology appears in works like Trotsky’s History of the Russian Revolution (which explicitly compares the dual power phase in Russia to similar dynamics in France) and Rosa Luxemburg’s writings on the Russian events, where she notes the Russian Revolution’s first period (March–October) follows the schema of the French (and English) revolutions, with the Bolshevik takeover paralleling the Jacobin ascent.

Ta se tipologija pojavljuje u djelima kao što je Trockijeva Povijest ruske revolucije (koja izričito uspoređuje fazu dvojne vlasti u Rusiji sa sličnom dinamikom u Francuskoj) te u spisima Rose Luxemburg o ruskim zbivanjima, gdje ona primjećuje da prvo razdoblje Ruske revolucije (ožujak–listopad) slijedi obrazac Francuske (i Engleske) revolucije, pri čemu boljševičko preuzimanje vlasti odgovara usponu jakobinaca.

Jesus always illustrates the end with the beginning, and the demise of Napoleon as the first spiritual king of the south followed the waymarks at the beginning of the revolution, and in so doing represented the demise of the Soviet Union.

Isus uvijek kraj prikazuje pomoću početka, a propast Napoleona kao prvoga duhovnog kralja juga slijedila je orijentire na početku revolucije te je time predstavljala propast Sovjetskog Saveza.

Napoleon’s progressive (step-by-step) demise aligns closely with the Soviet Union’s gradual decline and 1991 collapse, in the same typological framework where the French Revolution’s two phases prefigured the Russian Revolution’s February and October 1917 stages. The parallel extends into the post-radical consolidation phase (Bonapartism) and its inevitable unraveling. This draws from both general historical patterns and Marxist analyses (especially Trotsky’s in The Revolution Betrayed and related works), which treat Napoleon as the archetype of Bonapartism: a strongman regime that arises after a revolution’s radical peak, balances between classes, preserves key structural gains of the revolution (while suppressing its democratic thrust), builds a personal/military-bureaucratic empire, overextends, and then suffers a phased collapse leading to partial restoration of the old order.

Napoleonova postupna (korak-po-korak) propast usko se podudara s postupnim opadanjem Sovjetskoga Saveza i njegovim slomom 1991. godine, unutar istoga tipološkog okvira u kojemu su dvije faze Francuske revolucije predoznačile februarsku i oktobarsku etapu Ruske revolucije 1917. godine. Ta se paralela proteže i na porazdoblje konsolidacije nakon radikalne faze (bonapartizam) te na njegovo neizbježno rasplitanje. To proizlazi i iz općih povijesnih obrazaca i iz marksističkih analiza (osobito Trockijevih u djelu Izdana revolucija i srodnim radovima), koje Napoleona smatraju arhetipom bonapartizma: režima snažnoga vođe koji nastaje nakon radikalnoga vrhunca revolucije, održava ravnotežu među klasama, čuva ključne strukturne stečevine revolucije (dok potiskuje njezin demokratski zamah), izgrađuje osobno/vojno-birokratsko carstvo, pretjerano se širi, a potom trpi fazni slom koji vodi djelomičnoj obnovi staroga poretka.

## Napoleon’s Bonapartist Rise Parallels the Stalinist Consolidation

Bonapartistki uspon Napoleona usporedan je sa staljinističkom konsolidacijom

After the Jacobin radical phase and Thermidorian reaction (1794), the unstable Directory (1795–1799), Napoleon’s 18 Brumaire coup (1799) establishes the Consulate, then the Empire (1804). He codifies and exports bourgeois revolutionary gains (Napoleonic Code, end of feudal privileges, strong centralized state) but subordinates them to authoritarian rule, military glory, and a new elite.

Nakon jakobinske radikalne faze i termidorske reakcije (1794.), nestabilni Direktorij (1795.–1799.), Napoleonov državni udar 18. brumaira (1799.) uspostavlja Konzulat, a zatim Carstvo (1804.). On kodificira i izvozi građanske revolucionarne stečevine (Napoleonski zakonik, kraj feudalnih povlastica, snažna centralizirana država), ali ih podređuje autoritarnoj vlasti, vojnoj slavi i novoj eliti.

After the Bolshevik/October radical phase and early Soviet experiments, bureaucratic degeneration sets in (especially from the mid-1920s). Stalin’s consolidation defeats the Left Opposition, enforces “socialism in one country,” and creates a police/military-bureaucratic dictatorship. The planned economy and nationalized property (core gains of October) are preserved but turned into tools of a privileged caste, with internationalism abandoned.

Nakon boljševičke/listopadske radikalne faze i ranih sovjetskih eksperimenata nastupa birokratska degeneracija (osobito od sredine 1920-ih). Staljinova konsolidacija poražava Lijevu opoziciju, nameće „socijalizam u jednoj zemlji” i stvara policijsko-vojno-birokratsku diktaturu. Planska ekonomija i nacionalizirano vlasništvo (temeljne stečevine Listopada) očuvani su, ali pretvoreni u oruđa privilegirane kaste, pri čemu je internacionalizam napušten.

In both cases, the revolutionary energy is “frozen” and redirected into state power and expansion under a single figure or apparatus (Trotsky explicitly called the Stalin regime a form of “Soviet Bonapartism,” closer to Napoleon’s Empire than the Consulate).

U oba slučaja revolucionarna energija biva „zamrznuta“ i preusmjerena u državnu moć i ekspanziju pod jednom osobom ili aparatom (Trocki je Staljinov režim izrijekom nazvao oblikom „sovjetskog bonapartizma“, bližim Napoleonovu Carstvu nego Konzulatu).

## The Step-by-Step Collapse

Postupni slom

This is the core alignment—the decline is not one sudden event but a successive series of erosions driven by overextension, internal contradictions, military quagmires, loss of peripheral control, failed reforms, and final dissolution/restoration.

To je središnje podudaranje — opadanje nije jedan iznenadan događaj, nego uzastopni niz erozija potaknutih pretjeranim širenjem, unutarnjim proturječjima, vojnim kaljužama, gubitkom nadzora nad periferijom, neuspjelim reformama te konačnim raspadom/obnovom.

## Napoleonic side (1812 to 1815)

Napoleonska strana (1812. do 1815.)

- 1812: Disastrous invasion of Russia—Grande Armée (600,000 men) decimated by logistics, winter, and resistance. Catastrophic turning point; massive loss of prestige and manpower.

  1812.: Pogubna invazija na Rusiju — Grande Armée (600.000 ljudi) desetkovana logistikom, zimom i otporom. Katastrofalna prekretnica; golem gubitak ugleda i ljudstva.

- 1813: Coalition forms against him; defeat at Leipzig (“Battle of the Nations”)—loss of German allies and territories; empire begins shrinking.

  1813.: Protiv njega se stvara koalicija; poraz kod Leipziga („Bitka naroda“) — gubitak njemačkih saveznika i teritorija; carstvo se počinje smanjivati.

- 1814: Allies invade France proper; Paris falls; Napoleon abdicates and is exiled to Elba.

  1814.: Saveznici napadaju samu Francusku; Pariz pada; Napoleon abdicira i biva prognan na Elbu.

- 1815: Brief return (Hundred Days), final defeat at Waterloo; permanent exile to St. Helena; Bourbon monarchy restored (reactionary rollback of revolutionary gains, though not total—some legal/administrative changes survived).

  1815.: Kratak povratak (Sto dana), konačan poraz kod Waterlooa; trajno progonstvo na Svetu Helenu; obnovljena burbonska monarhija (reakcionarno poništenje revolucionarnih stečevina, premda ne potpuno — neke su pravne/upravne promjene opstale).

## Soviet side (1970s to 1991)

Sovjetska strana (1970-ih do 1991.)

- Late 1970s–1980s: Economic stagnation (“zastoi” under Brezhnev), chronic shortages, technological lag, and crippling arms race with the US/NATO—systemic overextension begins to hollow out the economy.

  Kasne 1970-e – 1980-e: gospodarska stagnacija („zastoj” pod Brežnjevom), kronične nestašice, tehnološko zaostajanje i paralizirajuća utrka u naoružanju sa SAD-om/NATO-om — sustavno prenaprezanje počinje iznutra izjedati gospodarstvo.

- 1979–1989: Afghanistan war—Soviet “Vietnam”; quagmire drains resources, morale, and international standing (note the ironic parallel: Napoleon destroyed in Russia; USSR bled in a rugged, resistant theater).

  1979.–1989.: rat u Afganistanu — sovjetski „Vijetnam”; močvara iscrpljuje resurse, moral i međunarodni ugled (zamijetite ironičnu paralelu: Napoleon uništen u Rusiji; SSSR iskrvaren na surovom, otporu sklonom bojištu).

- 1985–1989: Gorbachev’s perestroika/glasnost reforms (attempted “saving” of the system, like some late Napoleonic adjustments) instead expose and accelerate contradictions; Eastern Bloc satellites revolt and break free (Berlin Wall falls November 9, 1989, regimes collapse across 1989–1990)—loss of the “outer empire,” exactly like Napoleon’s loss of allied states.

  1985.–1989.: Gorbačovljeve reforme perestrojke/glasnosti (pokušaj „spašavanja” sustava, poput nekih kasnih napoleonskih prilagodbi) umjesto toga razotkrivaju i ubrzavaju proturječja; sateliti Istočnog bloka bune se i oslobađaju (Berlinski zid pada 9. studenoga 1989., režimi se urušavaju tijekom 1989.–1990.) — gubitak „vanjskog carstva”, upravo poput Napoleonova gubitka savezničkih država.

- 1990–1991: Internal nationalist crises, republics declare sovereignty; August 1991 hardliner coup fails spectacularly; Gorbachev resigns December 25, 1991; USSR dissolves into 15 states. Capitalist restoration follows (Yeltsin-era shock therapy, oligarchs, privatization)—analogous to the Bourbon restoration: prerevolutionary class elements (or their equivalents) return, rolling back full revolutionary property relations while keeping some administrative forms.

  1990.–1991.: Unutarnje nacionalističke krize, republike proglašavaju suverenost; kolovoški puč tvrdolinijaša 1991. doživljava spektakularan neuspjeh; Gorbačov podnosi ostavku 25. prosinca 1991.; SSSR se raspada na 15 država. Slijedi kapitalistička restauracija (šok-terapija iz Jeljcinova doba, oligarsi, privatizacija) — analogna burbonskoj restauraciji: predrevolucionarni klasni elementi (ili njihovi ekvivalenti) vraćaju se, poništavajući pune revolucionarne vlasničke odnose, dok zadržavaju neke upravne oblike.

In both, the “empire” (French Continental System vs. Soviet Eastern Bloc/COMECON influence) fragments outward-in, internal decay accelerates, a final crisis exposes the hollowness, and the old social forces reassert (monarchy/capitalism). Bonapartism proves unsustainable—a “pyramid balanced on its point,” as Trotsky put it—because it rests on suppressing the revolution’s democratic base while defending (but distorting) its economic base amid hostile external pressures. The Soviet collapse was not “sudden” in the long view but the culmination of progressive internal rot, just as Napoleon’s empire did not vanish overnight but eroded through successive defeats until restoration.

U oba slučaja „carstvo” (francuski Kontinentalni sustav nasuprot sovjetskom istočnom bloku/utjecaju COMECON-a) raspada se od periferije prema središtu, unutarnje propadanje se ubrzava, završna kriza razotkriva njegovu ispraznost, a stare se društvene sile ponovno potvrđuju (monarhija/kapitalizam). Bonapartizam se pokazuje neodrživim — „piramida uravnotežena na svojem vrhu”, kako je to rekao Trocki — jer počiva na potiskivanju demokratske osnove revolucije, dok istodobno brani (ali izobličuje) njezinu ekonomsku osnovu usred neprijateljskih vanjskih pritisaka. Sovjetski slom, promatran u dugoj perspektivi, nije bio „iznenadan”, nego vrhunac postupnoga unutarnjeg truljenja, kao što ni Napoleonovo carstvo nije nestalo preko noći, nego se trošilo kroz uzastopne poraze sve do restauracije.

The beginning and ending of France and the Soviet Union align with the testimony of king Uzziah and Ptolemy. Ptolemy IV Philopator wins a decisive victory at the Battle of Raphia (217 BC) against the king of the north (Antiochus III), but “he shall not be strengthened by it”—he makes peace instead of pressing the advantage, returns to luxury and self-exaltation, then (per the record preserved in 3 Maccabees 1–2) Ptolemy visits Jerusalem after his triumph. His heart lifted up, he attempts to enter the Holy of Holies and offer sacrifice himself—an act of usurpation and defiance against the true God. He is divinely struck (paralysis), humiliated, and turns to persecution of God’s people. His reign thereafter is one of progressive decline: moral corruption, internal revolts, and loss of strength until his death. This is the exact mirror of King Uzziah (2 Chronicles 26:16–21) whose heart was lifted up after military success., who then entered the temple to burn incense (usurping the priests) and was struck with leprosy in the forehead, which was a public, visible judgment. From then on Uzziah lived in isolation, cut off from the house of the Lord, until death—a slow, lingering demise rather than instant destruction.

Početak i svršetak Francuske i Sovjetskog Saveza usklađuju se sa svjedočanstvom kralja Uzije i Ptolemeja. Ptolemej IV. Filopator odnosi odlučujuću pobjedu u Bitki kod Rafije (217. pr. Kr.) protiv kralja sjevera (Antioha III.), ali „neće se njome osnažiti” — sklapa mir umjesto da iskoristi prednost, vraća se raskoši i samouzvisivanju, a potom (prema zapisu sačuvanom u 3 Makabejcima 1–2) Ptolemej nakon svojega trijumfa posjećuje Jeruzalem. Uzoholjena srca, pokušava ući u Svetinju nad svetinjama i sam prinijeti žrtvu — čin uzurpacije i prkosa protiv pravoga Boga. Biva božanski pogođen (paraliza), ponižen te se okreće progonu Božjega naroda. Njegova je vladavina nakon toga obilježena postupnim propadanjem: moralnom iskvarenošću, unutarnjim pobunama i gubitkom snage sve do smrti. To je upravo zrcalna slika kralja Uzije (2 Ljetopisa 26:16–21), kojemu se srce uzoholilo nakon vojnih uspjeha, koji je potom ušao u hram da pali kad (uzurpirajući svećenike) i bio pogođen gubom na čelu, što je bila javna, vidljiva osuda. Otada je Uzija živio u osami, odsječen od Doma Gospodnjega, sve do smrti — spora, dugotrajna propast, a ne trenutačno uništenje.

Both are southern kings whose pride manifests in a temple intrusion at Jerusalem, followed by a progressive, erosive ending instead of immediate collapse. This is the typological template for every later “king of the south.”

Obojica su južni kraljevi čija se oholost očituje upadom u Hram u Jeruzalemu, nakon čega slijedi postupni, razorni završetak umjesto neposrednog sloma. To je tipološki obrazac za svakoga kasnijeg „kralja juga”.

## 1798: France Becomes the Spiritual King of the South

1798: Francuska postaje duhovni kralj Juga

At “the time of the end” (1798), atheistic France (the power that had just manifested the spiritual characteristics of Egypt—open denial of God, as in Revelation 11:8) pushes at the king of the north (the Papacy) by taking the Pope captive. Napoleon is the military embodiment of that push. France wears the crown of the south in 1798, because it exalts the same atheistic spirit that ancient Egypt embodied.

U „vrijeme svršetka“ (1798.), ateistička Francuska (sila koja je upravo očitovala duhovna obilježja Egipta — otvoreno nijekanje Boga, kao u Otkrivenju 11,8) napada kralja sjevera (Papinstvo) zarobivši Papu. Napoleon je vojno utjelovljenje toga napada. Francuska 1798. nosi krunu juga, jer uzvisuje isti ateistički duh koji je utjelovljivao drevni Egipat.

But just as Ptolemy could not “make the most of his victory,” the French Revolution’s radical phase could not sustain or fully export its gains. The crown of the south passes onward as the philosophy of atheism matures and finds a new governmental voice.

Ali kao što Ptolemej nije mogao „u potpunosti iskoristiti svoju pobjedu“, tako ni radikalna faza Francuske revolucije nije mogla održati ni u cijelosti izvesti svoja postignuća. Kruna juga prelazi dalje kako filozofija ateizma sazrijeva i nalazi novi državni glas.

## Progressive Leadership Symbols: Napoleon to Lenin to Stalin

Simboli progresivnoga vodstva: od Napoleona preko Lenjina do Staljina

These three are not random; they are progressive endings—each representing a further stage in the king of the south’s trajectory toward its own slow dissolution. Napoleon—the first great symbol after 1798. Victorious in Egypt (the literal south), he overreaches (Russian campaign of 1812 was a disaster beginning a series of losses to his peripheral empire step by step (1813–1814), suffers final defeat (Waterloo 1815), and is exiled twice. Napoleon represents a progressive, phased demise—exactly like unto the Ptolemy and Uzziah.

Ova tri nisu nasumična; ona su progresivni završeci — svaki predstavlja daljnji stadij u putanji kralja juga prema njegovu vlastitom sporom rasulu. Napoleon — prvi veliki simbol nakon 1798. Pobjedonosan u Egiptu (doslovnom jugu), prekoračuje mjeru (ruski pohod 1812. bio je katastrofa koja je započela niz gubitaka njegova perifernog carstva, korak po korak [1813.–1814.]), trpi konačni poraz (Waterloo 1815.) i dvaput biva prognan. Napoleon predstavlja progresivnu, faznu propast — upravo poput Ptolemeja i Uzije.

Lenin seized the crown in the 1917 October Revolution. The Bolshevik “push” continues the war against the old order (including religious power). But the radical phase cannot stabilize; Lenin’s own health fails early, and the system begins to bureaucratize.

Lenjin je prigrabio krunu u Oktobarskoj revoluciji 1917. Boljševički „nalet” nastavlja rat protiv staroga poretka (uključujući religijsku vlast). Ali radikalna se faza ne može stabilizirati; Lenjinovo vlastito zdravlje rano posustaje, a sustav se počinje birokratizirati.

Stalin, the consolidator (Soviet Bonapartism) “freezes” the revolution into a military-bureaucratic empire, preserves the core gains (nationalized economy the anti-feudal parallel to Napoleon’s Code), but turns the power inward (purges) and outward (expansion). Yet the heart is lifted up in atheism; the system cannot truly “make the most of its victory.” Overextension (Afghanistan parallel to Napoleon’s Russia), stagnation, failed reforms (perestroika was the last desperate attempt), loss of satellites (1989–90 = loss of “allies”), and final dissolution (1991).

Staljin, učvrstitelj (sovjetski bonapartizam), „zamrzava“ revoluciju u vojno-birokratsko carstvo, čuva temeljne stečevine (nacionalizirano gospodarstvo kao antifeudalnu usporednicu Napoleonovu Zakoniku), ali usmjerava vlast prema unutra (čistke) i prema van (ekspanzija). Ipak, srce se uznosi u ateizmu; sustav ne može uistinu „najbolje iskoristiti svoju pobjedu“. Pretjerano širenje (Afganistan kao usporednica Napoleonovoj Rusiji), stagnacija, neuspjele reforme (perestrojka je bila posljednji očajnički pokušaj), gubitak satelita (1989.–90. = gubitak „saveznika“) i konačni raspad (1991.).

The Soviet Union’s collapse was not sudden—it was progressive, exactly as Napoleon’s empire eroded step by step and as Ptolemy’s and Uzziah’s reigns withered after their temple-pride moment. The “spiritual” king of the south (atheism in governmental form) received its own lingering judgment: hollowed out from within, unable to sustain the lie, swept away in the counter-movement of the king of the north (the Papacy’s resurgence in the vacuum).

Raspad Sovjetskoga Saveza nije bio iznenadan — bio je postupan, upravo kao što se Napoleonovo carstvo urušavalo korak po korak i kao što su vladavine Ptolemeja i Uzije kopnjele nakon svojega trenutka oholosti prema hramu. „Duhovni” kralj juga (ateizam u državnome obliku) primio je vlastiti dugotrajni sud: iznutra ispražnjen, nesposoban održati laž, odnesen protupokretom kralja sjevera (ponovni uspon Papinstva u nastalom vakuumu).

The French Revolution (two steps) typifies the Russian Revolution (February and October/Bolshevik). Napoleonic Bonapartism and progressive demise typify Stalinist consolidation and Soviet progressive demise. All of it is the modern outworking of Daniel 11’s king of the south line, from Ptolemy’s Raphia failure and temple arrogance, through Uzziah’s identical sin and slow end, to France in 1798 and its atheistic heir (Lenin–Stalin era) that could not strengthen itself by its victories.

Francuska revolucija (u dva koraka) predoznačuje Rusku revoluciju (veljača i listopad/boljševička). Napoleonovski bonapartizam i postupna propast predoznačuju staljinističku konsolidaciju i postupnu propast Sovjetskog Saveza. Sve je to moderno očitovanje niza kralja juga iz Daniela 11, od Ptolemejeva neuspjeha kod Rafije i oholosti prema hramu, preko Uzijina istovjetnog grijeha i njegova sporog kraja, do Francuske 1798. i njezina ateističkog nasljednika (razdoblje Lenjin–Staljin), koji se nije mogao učvrstiti svojim pobjedama.

Lenin, the radical founder or seizer of power (parallel to the Jacobin/Bolshevik ascent; the “push” phase post-1917, is akin to Napoleon’s early Consulate after Brumaire). Stalin was the Bonapartist consolidator (Soviet empire builder, purges, WWII victory, Cold War peak; heart lifted up in atheism, but unable to fully “strengthen” the victory long-term—overextension begins).

Lenjin, radikalni utemeljitelj ili preuzimač vlasti (paralela s jakobinskim/boljševičkim usponom; faza „guranja“ nakon 1917. nalik je Napoleonovu ranom Konzulatu nakon Brumairea). Staljin je bio bonapartistički konsolidator (graditelj sovjetskog carstva, čistke, pobjeda u Drugom svjetskom ratu, vrhunac Hladnoga rata; srce mu se uzoholilo u ateizmu, ali nije bio kadar dugoročno potpuno „učvrstiti“ pobjedu — započinje prenaprezanje).

Khrushchev was the post-peak “thaw” leader (1953–1964): denounces Stalin (Secret Speech 1956), exposes some corruption, attempts limited reforms, but fails to resolve systemic contradictions. This parallels a “Thermidorian” or early-decline phase—loosening terror while the core atheist structure remains, yet prestige erodes (e.g., Cuban Missile Crisis humiliation 1962 mirrors minor Napoleonic setbacks before the big ones).

Hruščov je bio vođa postvršnog „otapanja” (1953.–1964.): osuđuje Staljina (Tajni govor 1956.), razotkriva dio korupcije, pokušava provesti ograničene reforme, ali ne uspijeva razriješiti sustavne proturječnosti. To odgovara „termidorskoj” ili fazi ranog opadanja — popuštanju terora dok temeljna ateistička struktura ostaje, ali ugled slabi (npr. poniženje u Kubanskoj raketnoj krizi 1962. odražava manja napoleonska nazadovanja prije velikih).

Gorbachev was the desperate reformer (1985–1991) with perestroika (restructuring) and glasnost (openness) as last-ditch efforts to “save” the system, but they accelerate collapse—loss of the Eastern Bloc (1989 Berlin Wall), internal revolts. This is the clearest “progressive ending” marker: like unto Napoleon’s late attempts at adjustment before the 1814 invasion, or Ptolemy/Uzziah’s lingering decline after temple-pride. Gorbachev’s 1989 concordat/meeting with Pope John Paul II (king of the north) symbolizes the spiritual defeat—the southern king’s atheism yielding to papal resurgence.

Gorbačov je bio očajnički reformator (1985.–1991.) s perestrojkom (preustrojem) i glasnošću (otvorenošću) kao posljednjim očajničkim nastojanjima da „spasi” sustav, ali oni ubrzavaju slom — gubitak Istočnog bloka (1989., Berlinski zid), unutarnje pobune. To je najjasniji pokazatelj „postupnoga svršetka”: nalik Napoleonovim kasnim pokušajima prilagodbe prije invazije 1814., ili Ptolemejevu/Ozijinu dugotrajnom opadanju nakon oholosti u hramu. Gorbačovljev konkordat/susret s papom Ivanom Pavlom II. (kraljem sjevera) 1989. simbolizira duhovni poraz — ateizam južnoga kralja uzmiče pred papinskim preporodom.

Yeltsin was the final dissolution figure (1991 onward) who led to the August 1991 coup resistance, becomes president of Russia, oversees USSR breakup (December 1991), shock therapy privatization, capitalist restoration. He embodies the chaotic end and partial “restoration” of prerevolutionary elements (oligarchic capitalism, like Bourbon’s return post-Napoleon). The southern king’s palace is swept away, fulfilling Daniel 11:40’s whirlwind conquest by the north (Papacy via US alliance).

Jeljcin je bio konačna figura raspada (od 1991. nadalje) koja je dovela do otpora kolovoškom puču 1991., postaje predsjednik Rusije, nadzire raspad SSSR-a (prosinac 1991.), privatizaciju putem „šok-terapije” i kapitalističku restauraciju. On utjelovljuje kaotičan svršetak i djelomičnu „obnovu” predrevolucionarnih elemenata (oligarhijski kapitalizam, poput povratka Bourbona nakon Napoleona). Palača južnoga kralja biva pometena, ispunjavajući osvajanje vihorom sa sjevera iz Daniela 11:40 (Papinstvo putem saveza sa SAD-om).

The typology emphasizes lingering, step-by-step judgment rather than instant fall, just as Ptolemy IV’s Raphia victory led to pride, temple intrusion, divine striking, and slow decay; Uzziah’s leprosy isolation until death; Napoleon’s phased losses (Russia, Leipzig, Paris, Elba, Waterloo). The Soviet line identifies the peak strength under Stalin, the progressive hollowing during Khrushchev’s thaw that exposes the cracks in the system. Then the Brezhnev-era stagnation and then Gorbachev’s reforms become accelerants; Yeltsin’s era completes the sweep (USSR dissolved, atheism’s governmental form ends). The “heart lifted up” manifests across the line (atheistic defiance), but none “makes the most of victory.”

Tipologija naglašava zadržanu, postupnu osudu, a ne trenutačan pad, kao što je Ptolemejeva IV. pobjeda kod Raphije dovela do oholosti, prodora u Hram, božanskog udara i polagana propadanja; Uzijina gubava izdvojenost sve do smrti; Napoleonovi stupnjeviti gubici (Rusija, Leipzig, Pariz, Elba, Waterloo). Sovjetska linija prepoznaje vrhunac snage pod Staljinom, postupno izdubljivanje tijekom Hruščovljeva otopljavanja, koje razotkriva pukotine u sustavu. Zatim brežnjevljevska stagnacija, a potom Gorbačovljeve reforme postaju ubrzavatelji; Jeljcinovo razdoblje dovršava zahvat (SSSR je raspušten, završava državni oblik ateizma). „Srce se uzoholi“ očituje se duž cijele te linije (ateističko prkošenje), ali nitko „ne iskorištava pobjedu do kraja“.

The end of the southern kings are progressive, Satan’s demise began at the cross, and he is ultimately sent into exile for 1,000 years and then he dies.

Svršetak južnih kraljeva odvija se postupno; Sotonska propast započela je na križu, i on je na koncu poslan u izgnanstvo na 1.000 godina, a zatim umire.

> And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

> I vidjeh anđela gdje silazi s neba, koji je imao ključ bezdana i velik lanac u ruci svojoj. I uhvati zmaja, onu staru zmiju, koja je Đavao i Sotona, i sveza ga na tisuću godina, i baci ga u bezdan, i zatvori ga, i stavi pečat na nj, da više ne zavodi narode dok se ne navrši tisuću godina; a poslije toga valja da bude odriješen nakratko.

> And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.

> I vidjeh prijestolja, i sjedoše na njih, i njima bi dana vlast suđenja; i vidjeh duše onih koji bijahu pogubljeni zbog svjedočanstva Isusova i zbog riječi Božje, i koji se ne pokloniše Zvijeri ni njezinu liku, niti primiše njezin žig na svoja čela ili na svoje ruke; i oživješe te kraljevaše s Kristom tisuću godina. A ostali mrtvi ne oživješe dok se nije navršilo tisuću godina.

> This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

> To je prvo uskrsnuće. Blažen i svet onaj koji ima udjela u prvom uskrsnuću: nad takvima druga smrt nema vlasti, nego će biti svećenici Božji i Kristovi te će s njime kraljevati tisuću godina.

> And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. Revelation 20:1–10.

> A kad se navrši tisuću godina, Sotona će biti pušten iz svoje tamnice, i izići će da zavede narode koji su na četiri kraja zemlje, Goga i Magoga, da ih sabere za boj; njihov je broj kao pijesak morski. I uzađoše na širinu zemlje te opkoliše tabor svetih i ljubljeni grad; i oganj siđe od Boga s neba i proždre ih. A đavao koji ih je zavodio bio je bačen u jezero ognjeno i sumporno, gdje su zvijer i lažni prorok; i bit će mučeni dan i noć u vijeke vjekova. Otkrivenje 20:1–10.

We will continue our considerations of the southern king in Daniel eleven, verses eleven through fifteen in the next article.

U sljedećem ćemo članku nastaviti naša razmatranja o južnom kralju u jedanaestom poglavlju Daniela, od jedanaestog do petnaestog retka.

The Time of the End magazine was published in 1996 and it represents the prophecy from the book of Daniel that was unsealed in 1989. Recently the magazine was read by ChatGPT and asked to evaluate the role of Ukraine in the history of verse forty represented in the magazine. The following is the breakdown of the magazine that has been in the public record for thirty years. The first passage from the writings of Ellen White in the magazine is Testimonies, volume 9, 11.

Časopis Vrijeme svršetka objavljen je 1996. godine i predstavlja proročanstvo iz knjige proroka Daniela koje je bilo otpečaćeno 1989. godine. Nedavno je časopis pročitao ChatGPT te mu je postavljeno pitanje da ocijeni ulogu Ukrajine u povijesti četrdesetoga retka, kako je prikazana u časopisu. Slijedi raščlamba časopisa koji je već trideset godina u javnom zapisu. Prvi odlomak iz spisa Ellen White u časopisu jest Svjedočanstva, svezak 9, 11.

## Overview: Ukraine in the Prophetic Framework

Pregled: Ukrajina u proročkom okviru

Within the magazine’s prophetic outline of Daniel 11:40–45, Ukraine is discussed in connection with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the struggle between the Papacy (king of the north) and atheistic communism (king of the south). Ukraine is presented as a key religious and geopolitical battleground during the closing stages of the proxy wars, particularly in relation to the Ukrainian Catholic Church and its legalization after decades of suppression under Soviet rule.

Unutar proročkog prikaza Daniela 11,40–45 u časopisu, o Ukrajini se raspravlja u vezi s raspadom Sovjetskoga Saveza i sukobom između Papinstva (kralja sjevera) i ateističkog komunizma (kralja juga). Ukrajina je prikazana kao ključno vjersko i geopolitičko bojište tijekom završnih faza posredničkih ratova, osobito u odnosu na Ukrajinsku Katoličku Crkvu i njezinu legalizaciju nakon desetljeća potiskivanja pod sovjetskom vlašću.

The magazine presents Ukraine as part of the broader prophetic fulfillment of Daniel 11:40, describing the sweeping away of the king of the south through a Vatican–United States alliance. Ukraine is shown as evidence of the weakening of Soviet atheism and the resurgence of Catholic influence in Eastern Europe.

Časopis prikazuje Ukrajinu kao dio širega proročkog ispunjenja Daniela 11:40, opisujući zbacivanje kralja juga putem saveza Vatikana i Sjedinjenih Država. Ukrajina je prikazana kao dokaz slabljenja sovjetskoga ateizma i ponovnoga jačanja katoličkoga utjecaja u istočnoj Europi.

## Ukraine in the War Between the King of the North and South

Ukrajina u ratu između kralja sjevera i juga

The magazine teaches that the king of the south is atheism, embodied first by France (1798) and later by Soviet Russia. The king of the north is the papacy and Daniel 11:40 describes a spiritual war beginning in 1798 and culminating in the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989. Ukraine appears within this context as part of the Soviet bloc that is swept away in fulfillment of Daniel 11:40. The publication presents the collapse of the Soviet Union as the first step in the healing of the Papacy’s deadly wound (Revelation 13).

Časopis uči da je kralj juga ateizam, utjelovljen najprije u Francuskoj (1798.), a poslije u Sovjetskoj Rusiji. Kralj sjevera jest papinstvo, a Daniel 11,40 opisuje duhovni rat koji započinje 1798. godine i doseže vrhunac u slomu Sovjetskoga Saveza 1989. godine. Ukrajina se pojavljuje u tom kontekstu kao dio sovjetskoga bloka koji je odnesen u ispunjenju Daniela 11,40. Publikacija prikazuje slom Sovjetskoga Saveza kao prvi korak u zacjeljenju smrtonosne rane papinstva (Otkrivenje 13).

## Suppression of the Ukrainian Catholic Church (Quoted Sources)

Gušenje Ukrajinske Katoličke Crkve (citirani izvori)

The magazine includes secular documentation of Catholic persecution under Soviet rule.

Časopis uključuje svjetovnu dokumentaciju o katoličkom progonu pod sovjetskom vlašću.

From Time Magazine, December 4, 1989:

Iz časopisa Time Magazine, 4. prosinca 1989.:

> “After World War II, fierce but generally less bloody persecution spread into the Ukraine and the new Soviet bloc, affecting millions of Roman Catholics and Protestants as well as Orthodox.”

> „Nakon Drugoga svjetskog rata, žestok, ali općenito manje krvav progon proširio se na Ukrajinu i novi sovjetski blok, zahvativši milijune rimokatolika i protestanata, kao i pravoslavnih.“

Ukraine is identified as a major area where Catholicism was suppressed under communism.

Ukrajina se prepoznaje kao jedno od glavnih područja u kojima je katoličanstvo bilo potiskivano pod komunizmom.

## Legalization of the Ukrainian Catholic Church

Legalizacija Ukrajinske Katoličke Crkve

A major focus of the Ukraine discussion is the legalization of the long-banned Ukrainian Catholic Church.

Jedno od glavnih težišta rasprave o Ukrajini jest legalizacija Ukrajinske katoličke crkve, koja je dugo bila zabranjena.

From Life Magazine, December 1989:

Iz časopisa Life, prosinac 1989.:

> “Three new Catholic bishops have recently been named in Czechoslovakia. And this month Gorbachev meets Pope John Paul II during a visit to Italy—the first face-to-face encounter between leaders of the Kremlin and the Vatican. The sessions may lead to legalization of the long-banned Ukrainian Catholic Church in the U.S.S.R.”

> „Nedavno su u Čehoslovačkoj imenovana tri nova katolička biskupa. A ovoga se mjeseca Gorbačov susreće s papom Ivanom Pavlom II. tijekom posjeta Italiji — prvoga izravnog susreta između vođa Kremlja i Vatikana. Ti bi razgovori mogli dovesti do legalizacije dugo zabranjivane Ukrajinske katoličke Crkve u SSSR-u.”

From U.S. News & World Report, December 11, 1989:

Iz U.S. News & World Reporta, 11. prosinca 1989.:

> “The revival of religious freedom is expected to include lifting of an official ban on the five-million-member Ukraine Catholic Church, which has survived underground since 1946 when Stalin ordered it absorbed into the Russian Orthodox Church. Winning legalization for the Ukrainian Church has been a primary aim of the pope’s.”

> „Očekuje se da će obnova vjerske slobode obuhvatiti i ukidanje službene zabrane Ukrajinske katoličke crkve, koja broji pet milijuna članova i koja je opstala u podzemlju od 1946., kada je Staljin naredio da bude pripojena Ruskoj pravoslavnoj crkvi. Postizanje ozakonjenja Ukrajinske crkve bilo je jedan od papinih glavnih ciljeva.“

The magazine presents this as evidence of the weakening of atheistic control, the restoration of Catholic power. It is identified as a direct outcome of Vatican diplomatic pressure and a milestone in Daniel 11:40’s fulfillment is set forth as the Ukraine as a visible example of the Papacy regaining influence in former communist territory.

Časopis to prikazuje kao dokaz slabljenja ateističke kontrole i obnove katoličke moći. To se označava kao izravan ishod diplomatskog pritiska Vatikana, a kao prekretnica u ispunjenju Daniela 11:40 iznosi se Ukrajina kao vidljiv primjer kako papinstvo ponovno stječe utjecaj na nekadašnjem komunističkom području.

## Ukraine as Evidence of the Papacy’s Advance

Ukrajina kao dokaz napredovanja papinstva

The collapse of communism not merely as political change but as a spiritual defeat of atheism, a geopolitical advance of the Papacy and the beginning of the Papacy’s return to world dominance. The Ukraine becomes a case study in the dismantling of Soviet religious suppression and a strategic victory of Rome in Eastern Europe. It represents the visible shift from enforced atheism to restored Catholic authority and the legalization of the Ukrainian Catholic Church is treated as prophetic confirmation that the king of the north was sweeping away the king of the south “like a whirlwind.”

Slom komunizma ne tek kao politička promjena, nego kao duhovni poraz ateizma, geopolitičko napredovanje papinstva i početak povratka papinstva svjetskoj prevlasti. Ukrajina postaje studija slučaja u razgradnji sovjetskoga vjerskog potiskivanja i strateška pobjeda Rima u Istočnoj Europi. Ona predstavlja vidljivi prijelaz od nametnutog ateizma k obnovljenom katoličkom autoritetu, a legalizacija Ukrajinske Katoličke Crkve smatra se proročkom potvrdom da je kralj sjevera odnosio kralja juga „kao vihorom“.

## Ukraine and the Broader Prophetic Sequence

Ukrajina i širi proročki slijed

- 1798 – Papacy receives deadly wound.

  1798. – Papinstvo prima smrtonosnu ranu.

- 1917 – Atheism relocates to Russia (Bolshevik Revolution).

  1917. – Ateizam se seli u Rusiju (Boljševička revolucija).

- 1989 – Soviet Union collapses.

  1989. – Sovjetski Savez se raspada.

- Ukraine – Catholic Church legalized.

  Ukrajina – Katolička Crkva legalizirana.

- Papacy regains geopolitical influence.

  Papinstvo ponovno stječe geopolitički utjecaj.

- United States eventually comes under Papal influence (Daniel 11:41).

  Sjedinjene Države na kraju dolaze pod papinski utjecaj (Daniel 11,41).

- Entire world follows (Daniel 11:42–43).

  Sav svijet slijedi (Daniel 11,42–43).

Ukraine fits into stages 3–4 as part of the transition between Soviet atheism and restored Papal influence.

Ukrajina se uklapa u etape 3–4 kao dio prijelaza između sovjetskog ateizma i obnovljenog papinskog utjecaja.

## Sources Referenced in Ukraine Discussion

Izvori navedeni u raspravi o Ukrajini

- Jeff Pippenger (primary theological framework)

  Jeff Pippenger (primarni teološki okvir)

Spirit of Prophecy

Duh proroštva

- The Great Controversy

  Velika borba

- Selected Messages

  Odabrane poruke

- Testimonies for the Church

  Svjedočanstva za Crkvu

Secular Press

Svjetovni tisak

- Time Magazine

  Time Magazine

- Life Magazine

  časopis Life

- U.S. News & World Report

  U.S. News & World Report

Ukraine is mentioned in connection with:

Ukrajina se spominje u vezi s:

- Post-World War II Catholic persecution

  Katolički progon nakon Drugoga svjetskog rata

- Underground survival of the Ukrainian Catholic Church

  Preživljavanje Ukrajinske Katoličke Crkve u podzemlju

- Gorbachev–Vatican diplomacy

  Diplomacija Gorbačov–Vatikan

- Legal restoration of Catholic hierarchy

  Pravna obnova katoličke hijerarhije

## Summary of Ukraine’s Role in the Newsletter

Sažetak uloge Ukrajine u biltenu

The Ukraine was a stronghold of suppressed Catholicism under Soviet atheism. The legalization of the Ukrainian Catholic Church signaled the weakening of the king of the south. The Vatican’s influence in the Ukraine demonstrated the Papacy’s resurgence and the Ukraine’s religious shift served as tangible evidence that Daniel 11:40 was being fulfilled. The events surrounding Ukraine formed part of the first step in the healing of the Papacy’s deadly wound. The Ukraine is therefore presented not as an isolated political event, but as a prophetic marker within the final movements of Daniel 11.

Ukrajina je bila uporište potisnutoga katolicizma pod sovjetskim ateizmom. Legalizacija Ukrajinske katoličke Crkve označila je slabljenje kralja juga. Utjecaj Vatikana u Ukrajini pokazao je ponovni uspon papinstva, a vjerski zaokret u Ukrajini poslužio je kao opipljiv dokaz da se ispunjava Daniel 11,40. Događaji povezani s Ukrajinom činili su dio prvoga koraka u iscjeljenju smrtonosne rane papinstva. Stoga se Ukrajina ne prikazuje kao izdvojen politički događaj, nego kao proročki pokazatelj unutar završnih zbivanja Daniela 11.

Back to Articles