Article

# The Book of Daniel - Number One-Hundred and Sixty-One

Daniels Bog - Nummer et hundrede og enogtres

Rome’s Role in Establishing the Vision of Bible Prophecy: A Detailed Examination of Daniel Chapter Eleven

Roms rolle i etableringen af det bibelske profetis syn: En detaljeret undersøgelse af Daniel kapitel elleve

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

March 27, 2024

Formats

PDF
Word
Song MP3

The vision of Daniel chapter eleven, is the main point of reference for all the visions of Bible prophecy, and the vision of chapter eleven is established by the symbol of Rome.

Synet i Daniels ellevte kapitel er hovedreferencen for alle syner i Bibelens profetier, og synet i kapitel elleve er stadfæstet ved symbolet Rom.

> And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. Daniel 11:14.

> Og i de tider skal mange rejse sig imod sydens konge; også voldsmændene blandt dit folk skal ophøje sig for at stadfæste synet; men de skal falde. Daniel 11:14.

Jones addresses the previous verse as follows:

Jones omtaler det foregående vers som følger:

> “When the Amorites had filled up the measure of their iniquity, their place was given to Israel, the people of God. When Israel, following the way of the heathen, filled also the cup of iniquity, God brought up the kingdom of Babylon, and took all away. When Babylon had filled up the cup of its iniquity, the power was transferred to Persia. And when the angel was turned away by the wickedness of the Persians, then the prince of Grecia comes in and sweeps it away.”

> "Da amoritterne havde fyldt deres misgernings mål, blev deres plads givet til Israel, Guds folk. Da Israel, idet de fulgte hedningernes vej, også fyldte misgerningens bæger, lod Gud Babylons rige komme frem og tog alt bort. Da Babylon havde fyldt sin misgernings bæger, blev magten overført til Persien. Og når englen blev vendt bort ved persernes ondskab, da kommer fyrsten af Grækenland ind og fejer det bort."

> “And how long was the power of Grecia to continue? When was it to be broken? ‘When the transgressors were come to the full.’ That nation stands until it has filled up the measure of its iniquity, and then the power is transferred to another kingdom. That power to which it was transferred was the Roman, as we learn from Daniel 11:14. ‘And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south; also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall.’ This nation is pointed out as a nation of robbers—the children of robbers, as says the margin of the text.

> „Og hvor længe skulle Grækenlands magt vare? Hvornår skulle den brydes? ‘Når overtræderne er nået til fuldt mål.’ Den nation består, indtil den har fyldt sit misgerningsmål, og derpå overføres magten til et andet rige. Den magt, hvortil den blev overført, var det romerske, som vi lærer af Daniel 11,14. ‘Og i de tider skal mange rejse sig imod Sydens konge; også røverne af dit folk skal ophøje sig for at stadfæste synet; men de skal falde.’ Denne nation udpeges som en røvernation—røveres børn, som tekstens margin siger.“

> “These are the ones to whom the kingdom is now given, and what for?—‘The children of robbers shall exalt themselves to establish the vision.’ When this nation comes upon the scene, then there enters that which establishes the vision, that which is one great object of the vision, the one chief landmark in the line of vision which God has given through the prophets for all time.” A. T. Jones, The Columbian Year and the Meaning of the Four Centuries, 6.

> »Det er dem, som riget nu gives til, og til hvad? — ‘Røveres børn skal ophøje sig for at stadfæste synet.’ Når denne nation træder frem på skuepladsen, da indtræder det, som stadfæster synet, det, som er ét stort mål for synet, det ene vigtigste kendemærke i den synslinje, som Gud til alle tider har givet gennem profeterne.« A. T. Jones, The Columbian Year and the Meaning of the Four Centuries, 6.

Jones says when the Roman power “comes upon the scene, then there enters that which establishes the” … “line of vision which God has given through the prophets for all time.” In Miller’s history the Protestants taught, as Laodicea Adventism now does, that the robbers of thy people represent Antiochus Epiphanes, a Seleucid king who ruled from 175 to 164 BC. He was a member of the Seleucid dynasty, which was one of the Greek successor states which came out of the breakup of Alexander the Great’s empire. The disagreement over this issue was so specific in Millerite history, that the identification of Antiochus Epiphanes is represented upon the 1843 pioneer chart.

Jones siger, at når den romerske magt “træder frem på skuepladsen, da indtræder det, som fastlægger” … “den synslinje, som Gud har givet gennem profeterne for alle tider.” I Millers historie lærte protestanterne, således som Laodikea-adventismen nu gør, at dit folks røvere repræsenterer Antiochos Epifanes, en seleukidisk konge, som regerede fra 175 til 164 f.Kr. Han var medlem af det seleukidiske dynasti, som var en af de græske efterfølgerstater, der opstod ved opløsningen af Alexander den Stores rige. Uenigheden om dette spørgsmål var så specifik i den milleritiske historie, at identifikationen af Antiochos Epifanes er fremstillet på pionerdiagrammet fra 1843.

The reference to Antiochus on the chart represents the only reference to something that is not found in God’s prophetic Word. It is there to refute the false teachings of the Protestants of that period, which is now the false teaching of Laodicean Adventism. Whether William Miller understood the depth of importance in understanding that Rome is the earthly power that establishes the “line of vision which God has given through the prophets for all time,” is doubtful, but it was clear enough to soundly defend the fact that Rome establishes the vision.

Henvisningen til Antiochus på tavlen udgør den eneste henvisning til noget, som ikke findes i Guds profetiske ord. Den er der for at gendrive den tids protestanters falske lære, som nu er Laodikea-adventismens falske lære. Om William Miller forstod den dybtgående betydning af at forstå, at Rom er den jordiske magt, som etablerer den „synslinje, som Gud har givet gennem profeterne for al tid“, er tvivlsomt; men det stod tilstrækkelig klart til på overbevisende vis at forsvare den kendsgerning, at Rom etablerer synet.

> Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he. Proverbs 28:14.

> Hvor der ikke er noget syn, går folket til grunde; men lykkelig er den, som holder loven. Ordsprogene 28,14.

Solomon recorded that where there is no vision, the people perish, and the Hebrew word “vision,” in verse fourteen is the same as in Solomon’s proverb. The vision is a life-or-death proposition, and the “vision” is established by the symbol of Rome. The word “vision” in verse fourteen, is the same word for vision in Habakkuk, chapter two.

Salomon nedskrev, at hvor der ikke er noget syn, går folket til grunde, og det hebraiske ord »syn« i vers fjorten er det samme som i Salomons ordsprog. Synet er et spørgsmål om liv eller død, og »synet« stadfæstes ved symbolet Rom. Ordet »syn« i vers fjorten er det samme ord for syn som i Habakkuk, kapitel to.

> I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what he will say unto me, and what I shall answer when I am reproved. And the Lord answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it. For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie: though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not tarry. Habakkuk 2:1–3.

> Jeg vil stå på min vagtpost og stille mig på tårnet, og jeg vil spejde for at se, hvad han vil sige til mig, og hvad jeg skal svare, når jeg bliver irettesat. Og Herren svarede mig og sagde: Skriv synet og gør det tydeligt på tavler, for at den, som læser det, kan løbe. For synet gælder endnu en fastsat tid, men ved enden skal det tale og ikke lyve; om det tøver, så vent på det, for det skal visselig komme, det vil ikke udeblive. Habakkuk 2:1–3.

The word “reproved” in verse one, means “argued with”. William Miller was the watchman that was set upon the tower in the history of the movement of the first and second angels, and when in prophetic symbolism he asked what he should answer in the debate of his history, he was told to write the vision, which is established by the symbol of Rome. In agreement with this fact, when the Millerites produced the 1843 pioneer chart in fulfillment of these three verses of Habakkuk, they gave reference to the very heart of the debate they engaged in. They no doubt, did not understand that their referencing to the foolish argument that Antiochus Epiphanes was the power who established the vision represents the debate of Habakkuk chapter two, but Sister White said that chart was “directed by the hand of the Lord, and should not be altered,” so the reference to the debate on the chart was from God’s hand.

Ordet „irettesat“ i vers ét betyder „argumenterede med“. William Miller var vægteren, som blev sat på tårnet i historien om den første og den anden engels bevægelse, og da han i profetisk symbolik spurgte, hvad han skulle svare i debatten i sin historie, fik han besked på at nedskrive synet, som stadfæstes ved symbolet Rom. I overensstemmelse med dette forhold henviste Milleritterne, da de udarbejdede pionerkortet for 1843 som opfyldelse af disse tre vers i Habakkuk, til selve kernen i den debat, de førte. De forstod uden tvivl ikke, at deres henvisning til det tåbelige argument, at Antiochus Epiphanes var den magt, som stadfæstede synet, repræsenterer debatten i Habakkuk kapitel to, men Søster White sagde, at det kort var „ledet af Herrens hånd og ikke burde ændres“, så henvisningen til debatten på kortet var fra Guds hånd.

The Millerites came to correctly understand that the first disappointment on April 19, 1844 initiated the tarrying time, referenced by Habakkuk and also Matthew’s parable of the ten virgins. They also came to understand that those two prophecies were directly connected with Ezekiel chapter twelve, where Ezekiel identifies a period of time where the effect of every vision will occur. That word “vision”, is the same Hebrew word we are now considering. This is why Jones is correct when he states, “When” Rome “comes upon the scene, then there enters that which establishes the vision, that which is one great object of the vision, the one chief landmark in the line of vision which God has given through the prophets for all time.” Rome establishes the entire vision of God’s prophetic Word, and more specifically it is Rome that the entire structure of chapter eleven is built upon.

Milleritterne kom til den rette forståelse, at den første skuffelse den 19. april 1844 indledte ventetiden, som omtales af Habakkuk og også i Matthæus’ lignelse om de ti jomfruer. De kom også til at forstå, at disse to profetier stod i direkte forbindelse med Ezekiels tolvte kapitel, hvor Ezekiel angiver en tidsperiode, hvor virkningen af ethvert syn skal indtræffe. Ordet »syn« er det samme hebraiske ord, som vi nu betragter. Derfor har Jones ret, når han siger: »Når« Rom »træder frem på scenen, da indtræder det, som stadfæster synet, det, som er et stort formål med synet, det ene væsentligste kendemærke i den række af syner, som Gud til alle tider har givet gennem profeterne.« Rom stadfæster hele synet i Guds profetiske ord, og mere specifikt er det Rom, som hele strukturen i kapitel elleve er bygget på.

When Sister White refers to the final fulfillment of chapter eleven of Daniel and states that “much of the history that has taken place in fulfillment of this prophecy will be repeated,” she is identifying that the histories of chapter eleven that had already been fulfilled typified the final verses of Daniel chapter eleven. The subject of the final verses of chapter eleven is the king of the north, who there represents modern Rome. Therefore, the histories of Daniel chapter eleven, that are repeated, are histories that represent Rome.

Når søster White henviser til den endelige opfyldelse af Daniels kapitel elleve og erklærer, at »meget af den historie, som har fundet sted i opfyldelsen af denne profeti, vil blive gentaget«, påpeger hun, at de beretninger i kapitel elleve, som allerede var blevet opfyldt, var forbilleder på de sidste vers i Daniels kapitel elleve. Emnet for de sidste vers i kapitel elleve er kongen i nord, som dér repræsenterer det moderne Rom. Derfor er de beretninger i Daniels kapitel elleve, som gentages, beretninger, der repræsenterer Rom.

In the last six verses of chapter eleven modern Rome (the king of the north), conquers three geographical powers. In verse forty he conquers the king of the south (the former Soviet Union in 1989), the glorious land (the United States at the soon coming Sunday law), and Egypt (the entire world as represented by the United Nations.) In Daniel eleven pagan Rome is represented as conquering three geographical powers in order to capture the then-known world, and then papal Rome is represented as conquering three geographical powers in order to capture the earth.

I de sidste seks vers i kapitel elleve erobrer det moderne Rom (kongen i nord) tre geografiske magter. I vers fyrre erobrer han kongen i syd (det tidligere Sovjetunionen i 1989), det herlige land (De Forenede Stater ved den snart kommende søndagslov) og Egypten (hele verden, repræsenteret ved De Forenede Nationer). I Daniel elleve fremstilles det hedenske Rom som erobrende tre geografiske magter for at indtage den dengang kendte verden, og dernæst fremstilles det pavelige Rom som erobrende tre geografiske magter for at indtage jorden.

Pagan Rome is first mentioned in the chapter in verse fourteen, in order to identify it as the symbol that establishes the vision, but its rise to power is not addressed until verse sixteen. Alexander the Great’s kingdom was divided into four parts in fulfillment of God’s prophetic Word, but those four parts quickly consolidated into two primary antagonists that are identified as either the king of the south or the king of the north in the prophetic narrative that continues to the conclusion of the chapter. In verse fourteen the rising power of Rome is mentioned as the power that would establish the vision, but the subjects that are being addressed are the struggles between the remnants of Alexander’s kingdom as represented by the kings of the north and the south.

Det hedenske Rom nævnes første gang i kapitlet i vers fjorten for at identificere det som det symbol, der stadfæster synet, men dets magtovertagelse behandles ikke før vers seksten. Alexander den Stores rige blev delt i fire dele som opfyldelse af Guds profetiske ord, men disse fire dele blev hurtigt samlet i to primære modstandere, som i den profetiske beretning, der fortsætter til kapitlets afslutning, identificeres som enten sydens konge eller nordens konge. I vers fjorten nævnes Roms fremvoksende magt som den magt, der ville stadfæste synet, men de emner, der behandles, er kampene mellem resterne af Alexanders rige, således som de repræsenteres ved nordens og sydens konger.

In verse fifteen, those two kings are still engaged in their struggle, and the king of the north is prevailing. But in verse sixteen Rome arrives and the verse says, “But he that cometh against him,” meaning that when Rome comes against the northern king who has just been prevailing over the southern king, the king of the north will be unable to stand against Rome. Rome prevails, and in verse sixteen, Rome was also to stand in the glorious land of Judah. In verse seventeen Rome shall “set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom.” He took the northern king who was unable to stand before him, then he took Judah, then he entered into Egypt.

I vers femten er disse to konger stadig optaget af deres strid, og nordens konge er ved at få overtaget. Men i vers seksten kommer Rom, og verset siger: „Men den, som kommer imod ham,“ hvilket betyder, at når Rom kommer imod nordens konge, som netop har været ved at få overtaget over sydens konge, vil nordens konge ikke være i stand til at stå imod Rom. Rom sejrer, og i vers seksten skulle Rom også stå i det herlige land Juda. I vers sytten skal Rom „vende sit ansigt mod at trænge ind med styrken af hele sit rige“. Han tog nordens konge, som ikke var i stand til at stå for ham, dernæst tog han Juda, og så trængte han ind i Egypten.

> And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities: and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any strength to withstand. But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed. He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom, and upright ones with him; thus shall he do: and he shall give him the daughter of women, corrupting her: but she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him. Daniel 11:14–17.

> Og i de tider skal mange rejse sig mod sydens konge; også røverne af dit folk skal ophøje sig for at stadfæste synet; men de skal falde. Så skal nordens konge komme og opkaste en vold og indtage de stærkest befæstede byer; og sydens våben skal ikke kunne modstå, heller ikke hans udvalgte folk, og der skal ikke være nogen styrke til at gøre modstand. Men den, som kommer imod ham, skal gøre efter sin egen vilje, og ingen skal kunne stå ham imod; og han skal stå i det herlige land, som ved hans hånd skal fortæres. Han skal også rette sit ansigt mod at trænge ind med styrken af hele sit rige, og de retskafne med ham; således skal han gøre; og han skal give ham kvinders datter for at fordærve hende; men hun skal ikke stå på hans side og heller ikke være for ham. Daniel 11:14–17.

The conquering illustrated in these verses is a fulfillment of Daniel chapter eight.

Den sejr, der skildres i disse vers, er en opfyldelse af Daniels ottende kapitel.

> And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land. Daniel 8:9.

> Og fra en af dem fremkom et lille horn, som blev overmåde stort mod syd og mod øst og mod det herlige land. Daniel 8:9.

The little horn of verse nine is pagan Rome, and verse nine identifies, in agreement with verses fourteen through seventeen of chapter eleven, that pagan Rome would conquer three geographical entities as it took control of the world. Those entities were the south (Egypt), the east (Syria, the king of the north) and the pleasant land (Judah). The history of verses sixteen and seventeen are typifying the historical three-step conquering of modern Rome in verses forty through forty-three, for as Sister White stated, “Much of the history that has taken place in fulfillment of this prophecy will be repeated.”

Det lille horn i vers ni er det hedenske Rom, og vers ni angiver, i overensstemmelse med vers fjorten til sytten i kapitel elleve, at det hedenske Rom ville erobre tre geografiske enheder, efterhånden som det tog verdensherredømmet. Disse enheder var syd (Egypten), øst (Syrien, nordens konge) og det herlige land (Juda). Historien i vers seksten og sytten er et forbillede på det historiske erobring i tre trin af det moderne Rom i vers fyrre til treogfyrre, for som søster White udtalte: „Meget af den historie, som har fundet sted i opfyldelsen af denne profeti, vil blive gentaget.“

> “Although Egypt could not stand before Antiochus, the king of the north, Antiochus could not stand before the Romans, who now came against him. No kingdoms were longer able to resist this rising power. Syria was conquered, and added to the Roman empire, when Pompey, BC 65, deprived Antiochus Asiaticus of his possessions, and reduced Syria to a Roman province.

> „Skønt Egypten ikke kunne stå sig imod Antiokus, kongen i nord, kunne Antiokus ikke stå sig imod romerne, som nu kom imod ham. Ingen riger var længere i stand til at modstå denne fremvoksende magt. Syrien blev erobret og føjet til Romerriget, da Pompejus i 65 f.Kr. berøvede Antiokus Asiaticus hans besiddelser og gjorde Syrien til en romersk provins.

> “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.

> Den samme magt skulle også stå i det Hellige Land og fortære det. Rom blev forbundet med Guds folk, jøderne, ved en alliance i år 162 f.Kr., fra hvilken dato det indtager en fremtrædende plads i den profetiske kalender. Det erhvervede imidlertid ikke herredømmet over Judæa ved egentlig erobring før i år 63 f.Kr.; og da på følgende måde.

> “On Pompey’s return from his expedition against Mithridates, king of Pontus, two competitors, Hyrcanus and Aristobulus, were struggling for the crown of Judea. Their cause came before Pompey, who soon perceived the injustice of the claims of Aristobulus, but wished to defer decision in the matter till after his long-desired expedition into Arabia, promising then to return, and settle their affairs as should seem just and proper. Aristobulus, fathoming Pompey’s real sentiments, hastened back to Judea, armed his subjects, and prepared for a vigorous defense, determined, at all hazards, to keep the crown, which he foresaw would be adjudicated to another. Pompey closely followed the fugitive. As he approached Jerusalem, Aristobulus, beginning to repent of his course, came out to meet him, and endeavored to accommodate matters by promising entire submission and large sums of money. Pompey, accepting this offer, sent Gabinius, at the head of a detachment of soldiers, to receive the money. But when that lieutenant-general arrived at Jerusalem, he found the gates shut against him, and was told from the top of the walls that the city would not stand to the agreement.

> “Ved Pompejus’ tilbagevenden fra hans felttog mod Mithridates, konge af Pontus, kæmpede to rivaler, Hyrkanos og Aristobulos, om Judæas krone. Deres sag blev forelagt Pompejus, som snart indså uretfærdigheden i Aristobulos’ krav, men ønskede at udsætte afgørelsen i sagen til efter sin længe ønskede ekspedition til Arabien, idet han lovede derefter at vende tilbage og ordne deres anliggender, således som det måtte synes ret og proper. Aristobulos, som gennemskuede Pompejus’ virkelige hensigter, skyndte sig tilbage til Judæa, bevæbnede sine undersåtter og forberedte et kraftigt forsvar, fast besluttet på for enhver pris at beholde kronen, som han forudså ville blive tildømt en anden. Pompejus fulgte den flygtende tæt. Da han nærmede sig Jerusalem, kom Aristobulos, idet han begyndte at fortryde sin fremgangsmåde, ud for at møde ham og søgte at ordne forholdene ved at love fuldstændig underkastelse og store pengesummer. Pompejus antog dette tilbud og sendte Gabinius i spidsen for en afdeling soldater for at modtage pengene. Men da denne generalløjtnant nåede frem til Jerusalem, fandt han portene lukkede for sig, og fra murenes top blev det sagt til ham, at byen ikke ville stå ved overenskomsten.”

> “Pompey, not to be deceived in this way with impunity, put Aristobulus, whom he had retained with him, in irons, and immediately marched against Jerusalem with his whole army. The partisans of Aristobulus were for defending the place; those of Hyrcanus, for opening the gates. The latter being in the majority, and prevailing, Pompey was given free entrance into the city. Whereupon the adherents of Aristobulus retired to the mountain of the temple, as fully determined to defend that place as Pompey was to reduce it. At the end of three months a breach was made in the wall sufficient for an assault, and the place was carried at the point of the sword. In the terrible slaughter that ensued, twelve thousand persons were slain. It was an affecting sight, observes the historian, to see the priests, engaged at the time in divine service, with calm hand and steady purpose pursue their accustomed work, apparently unconscious of the wild tumult, though all around them their friends were given to the slaughter, and though often their own blood mingled with that of their sacrifices.

> "Pompejus lod sig imidlertid ikke ustraffet bedrage på denne måde, men lod Aristobulus, som han havde beholdt hos sig, lægge i lænker og marcherede straks mod Jerusalem med hele sin hær. Aristobulus’ tilhængere var indstillede på at forsvare stedet; Hyrcanus’ på at åbne portene. Da de sidstnævnte var i flertal og fik overtaget, blev Pompejus givet fri adgang til byen. Herefter trak Aristobulus’ tilhængere sig tilbage til tempelbjerget, fuldt besluttede på at forsvare dette sted, ligesom Pompejus var besluttet på at undertvinge det. Ved udgangen af tre måneder blev der slået en så stor brèche i muren, at et stormangreb kunne sættes ind, og stedet blev indtaget med sværdet i hånd. I den frygtelige nedslagtning, der fulgte, blev tolv tusind mennesker dræbt. Det var et gribende syn, bemærker historieskriveren, at se præsterne, som på det tidspunkt var optaget af den guddommelige tjeneste, med rolig hånd og urokkeligt forsæt fortsætte deres sædvanlige gerning, tilsyneladende ubevidste om den vilde tumults rasen, skønt deres venner overalt omkring dem blev overgivet til nedslagtning, og skønt ofte deres eget blod blandedes med deres ofres."

> “Having put an end to the war, Pompey demolished the walls of Jerusalem, transferred several cities from the jurisdiction of Judea to that of Syria, and imposed tribute on the Jews. Thus for the first time was Jerusalem placed by conquest in the hands of that power which was to hold the ‘glorious land’ in its iron grasp till it had utterly consumed it.

> "Efter at have gjort ende på krigen nedrev Pompejus Jerusalems mure, overførte adskillige byer fra Judæas myndighedsområde til Syriens og pålagde jøderne skat. Således blev Jerusalem for første gang ved erobring lagt i hænderne på den magt, som skulle holde det ‘herlige land’ i sit jerngreb, indtil den fuldstændig havde fortæret det.

> “‘VERSE 17. He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom, and upright ones with him; thus shall he do: and he shall give him the daughter of women, corrupting her: but she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him.’

> “‘VERS 17. Han skal også rette sit ansigt mod at komme med styrken af hele sit rige, og oprigtige mænd med ham; således skal han gøre; og han skal give ham kvindernes datter for at fordærve hende; men hun skal ikke stå på hans side, ej heller være for ham.’”

> “Bishop Newton furnishes another reading for this verse, which seems more clearly to express the sense, as follows: ‘He shall also set his face to enter by force the whole kingdom.’ Verse 16 brought us down to the conquest of Syria and Judea by the Romans. Rome had previously conquered Macedon and Thrace. Egypt was now all that remained of the ‘whole kingdom’ of Alexander, not brought into subjection to the Roman power, which power now set its face to enter by force into that country.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 258–260.

> „Biskop Newton anfører en anden læsemåde for dette vers, som synes tydeligere at udtrykke meningen, således: ’Han skal også vende sit ansigt mod med magt at trænge ind i hele riget.’ Vers 16 førte os ned til romernes erobring af Syrien og Judæa. Rom havde tidligere erobret Makedonien og Thrakien. Egypten var nu alt, hvad der var tilbage af Alexanders ’hele rige’, som ikke var blevet underlagt den romerske magt, hvilken magt nu vendte sit ansigt mod med magt at trænge ind i dette land.“ Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 258–260.

We have already noted, more than once in these articles, how verse thirty and thirty-one of Daniel eleven align with verses forty and forty-one, and the history of verses thirty and thirty-one also aligns with the plucking up of three horns.

Vi har allerede, mere end én gang i disse artikler, bemærket, hvordan vers tredive og enogtredive i Daniel elleve svarer til vers fyrre og enogfyrre, og historien i vers tredive og enogtredive svarer også til oprykningen af tre horn.

> I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. … And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows. Daniel 7:8, 20.

> Jeg betragtede hornene, og se, der kom et andet lille horn op iblandt dem, foran hvilket tre af de første horn blev revet op med rode; og se, dette horn havde øjne som menneskeøjne og en mund, der talte store ord. … Og om de ti horn, som sad på dets hoved, og om det andet, som kom op, og foran hvilket tre faldt; nemlig det horn, som havde øjne og en mund, der talte meget store ord, og hvis udseende var mere trodsigt end de andres. Daniel 7:8, 20.

Just as Daniel chapter eight, verse nine, represents the three geographical areas of conquering that established pagan Rome on the throne, so too, the plucking up of the horns (representing the Heruli, Ostrogoths and Vandals) represented the three geographical areas of conquering that established papal Rome on the throne. Both those histories align with verses forty to forty-three of Daniel eleven, and the plucking up of the three horns aligns with the history of verses thirty and thirty-one.

Ligesom Daniel kapitel otte, vers ni, fremstiller de tre geografiske områder, hvor erobringen grundfæstede det hedenske Rom på tronen, således fremstillede også oprykningen af hornene (som repræsenterer herulerne, østgoterne og vandalerne) de tre geografiske områder, hvor erobringen grundfæstede det pavelige Rom på tronen. Begge disse historiske forløb stemmer overens med vers fyrre til treogfyrre i Daniel elleve, og oprykningen af de tre horn stemmer overens med historien i vers tredive og enogtredive.

> “‘VERSE 8. I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots; and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.’

> “‘VERS 8. Jeg gav agt på hornene, og se, iblandt dem skød et andet, lille horn op; foran dette blev tre af de første horn rykket op med rode; og se, på dette horn var der øjne som menneskeøjne og en mund, der talte store ord.’

> “Daniel considered the horns. Indications of a strange movement appeared among them. A little horn (at first little, but afterward more stout than its fellows) thrust itself up among them. It was not content quietly to find a place of its own, and fill it; it must thrust aside some of the others, and usurp their places. Three kingdoms were plucked up before it. This little horn, as we shall have occasion to notice more fully hereafter, was the papacy. The three horns plucked up before it were the Heruli, the Ostrogoths, and the Vandals. And the reason why they were plucked up was because they were opposed to the teaching and claims of the papal hierarchy, and hence to the supremacy in the church of the bishop of Rome.

> „Daniel gav agt på hornene. Tegn på en mærkelig bevægelse viste sig iblandt dem. Et lille horn (først lille, men siden større end dets fæller) skød sig op iblandt dem. Det nøjedes ikke med i stilhed at finde sig en plads og udfylde den; det måtte trænge nogle af de andre til side og tilrane sig deres pladser. Tre kongeriger blev rykket op foran det. Dette lille horn var, som vi senere skal få anledning til at bemærke mere udførligt, pavedømmet. De tre horn, som blev rykket op foran det, var herulerne, ostrogoterne og vandalerne. Og grunden til, at de blev rykket op, var, at de modsatte sig den pavelige hierarkis lære og krav og derfor biskoppen af Roms overherredømme i kirken.“

> “And ‘in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things,’ the eyes, a fit emblem of the shrewdness, penetration, cunning, and foresight of the papal hierarchy; and the mouth speaking great things, a fit symbol of the arrogant claims of the bishops of Rome.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 132–134.

> „Og ‘på dette horn var der øjne som menneskeøjne og en mund, der talte store ord’; øjnene er et passende billede på den pavelige hierarkis skarpsindighed, gennemtrængende indsigt, list og fremsynethed; og munden, der talte store ord, er et passende symbol på biskopperne af Roms hovmodige krav.“ Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 132–134.

It is Rome that establishes the vision of Bible prophecy, and especially the vision of Daniel chapter eleven. In that chapter much of the prophetic history that had been fulfilled before the Millerite movement was to be repeated in the last six verses of Daniel eleven. The conquering of three geographical obstacles that established both pagan and papal Rome upon the throne is represented in chapter eleven, and those two representations typify the time when modern Rome is again established upon the throne. It is Rome that establishes the vision, and Paul identifies that papal Rome is revealed in its time.

Det er Rom, der fastlægger synet i Bibelens profeti, og især synet i Daniels bog, kapitel elleve. I dette kapitel skulle en stor del af den profetiske historie, som var blevet opfyldt før Miller-bevægelsen, gentages i de sidste seks vers af Daniel 11. Erobringen af tre geografiske hindringer, som indsatte både det hedenske og det pavelige Rom på tronen, fremstilles i kapitel elleve, og disse to fremstillinger er forbilleder på den tid, hvor det moderne Rom igen indsættes på tronen. Det er Rom, der fastlægger synet, og Paulus identificerer, at det pavelige Rom åbenbares i sin tid.

> Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 2 Thessalonians 2:3–6.

> Lad ingen på nogen måde bedrage jer; for den dag kommer ikke, medmindre frafaldet først kommer, og syndens menneske åbenbares, fortabelsens søn, han som sætter sig op imod og ophøjer sig over alt, hvad der kaldes Gud eller dyrkes, så han sætter sig i Guds tempel som Gud og udgiver sig selv for at være Gud. Husker I ikke, at jeg sagde jer dette, mens jeg endnu var hos jer? Og nu ved I, hvad der holder tilbage, for at han skal blive åbenbaret i sin tid. 2 Thessalonikerbrev 2:3–6.

The papacy took the throne as the fifth kingdom of Bible prophecy in the year 538, and many who consider verse six, would no doubt assume that Paul means that “the Papacy would be revealed in 538.” This may be correct, but it is at minimum a secondary truth of what Paul was identifying. Paul, like all prophets is speaking more about the last days, than his own time period. He was referring to how the papacy would be revealed prophetically, for as a prophet he was in agreement with all the other prophets. Line upon line, those who have not the vision perish, and those who have not the vision, have not the vision because they do not know what establishes the vision. Knowing that Rome establishes the vision is a life-or-death understanding. Paul, in agreement with the other prophets is identifying that what reveals papal Rome, who is the Rome of the last days is “his time.” The prophetic “time” associated with Rome, is what reveals what and who Rome is.

Pavedømmet indtog tronen som det femte rige i Bibelens profeti i året 538, og mange, som betragter vers seks, ville uden tvivl antage, at Paulus mener, at »pavedømmet ville blive åbenbaret i 538«. Dette kan være korrekt, men det er som minimum en sekundær sandhed i forhold til det, Paulus identificerede. Paulus taler, ligesom alle profeter, mere om de sidste dage end om sin egen tidsperiode. Han henviste til, hvordan pavedømmet profetisk ville blive åbenbaret; for som profet var han i overensstemmelse med alle de andre profeter. Linje på linje: de, som ikke har synet, går til grunde, og de, som ikke har synet, har ikke synet, fordi de ikke ved, hvad der fastslår synet. At vide, at Rom fastslår synet, er en forståelse om liv eller død. Paulus identificerer, i overensstemmelse med de andre profeter, at det, som åbenbarer det pavelige Rom, der er de sidste dages Rom, er »hans tid«. Den profetiske »tid«, som er forbundet med Rom, er det, der åbenbarer, hvad og hvem Rom er.

We will continue this study in the next article.

Vi vil fortsætte dette studie i den næste artikel.

> “The apostle Paul, in his second letter to the Thessalonians, foretold the great apostasy which would result in the establishment of the papal power. He declared that the day of Christ should not come, ‘except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.’ And furthermore, the apostle warns his brethren that ‘the mystery of iniquity doth already work.’ 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4, 7. Even at that early date he saw, creeping into the church, errors that would prepare the way for the development of the papacy.

> Apostlen Paulus forudsagde i sit andet brev til thessalonikerne det store frafald, som ville resultere i oprettelsen af pavemagten. Han erklærede, at Kristi dag ikke skulle komme, “før frafaldet først kommer, og syndens menneske, fortabelsens søn, åbenbares, han som sætter sig op imod og ophøjer sig over alt, hvad der kaldes Gud eller dyrkes, så at han som Gud sætter sig i Guds tempel og udgiver sig selv for at være Gud.” Og videre advarer apostlen sine brødre om, at “lovløshedens hemmelighed er allerede virksom.” 2 Thessalonikerne 2:3, 4, 7. Allerede på den tid så han fejl snige sig ind i kirken, fejl som ville bane vejen for pavedømmets udvikling.

> “Little by little, at first in stealth and silence, and then more openly as it increased in strength and gained control of the minds of men, ‘the mystery of iniquity’ carried forward its deceptive and blasphemous work. Almost imperceptibly the customs of heathenism found their way into the Christian church. The spirit of compromise and conformity was restrained for a time by the fierce persecutions which the church endured under paganism. But as persecution ceased, and Christianity entered the courts and palaces of kings, she laid aside the humble simplicity of Christ and His apostles for the pomp and pride of pagan priests and rulers; and in place of the requirements of God, she substituted human theories and traditions. The nominal conversion of Constantine, in the early part of the fourth century, caused great rejoicing; and the world, cloaked with a form of righteousness, walked into the church. Now the work of corruption rapidly progressed. Paganism, while appearing to be vanquished, became the conqueror. Her spirit controlled the church. Her doctrines, ceremonies, and superstitions were incorporated into the faith and worship of the professed followers of Christ.

> „Lidt efter lidt, først i smug og stilhed og siden mere åbent, efterhånden som den voksede i styrke og vandt herredømme over menneskers sind, førte »lovløshedens hemmelighed« sit bedrageriske og gudsbespottelige værk videre. Næsten umærkeligt fandt hedenskabets skikke vej ind i den kristne kirke. Kompromisets og tilpasningens ånd blev en tid holdt tilbage af de voldsomme forfølgelser, som kirken udholdt under hedenskabet. Men da forfølgelsen ophørte, og kristendommen trådte ind i kongers hoffer og paladser, lagde hun Kristi og Hans apostlenes ydmyge enkelhed til side for hedenske præsters og herskeres pragt og hovmod; og i stedet for Guds krav satte hun menneskelige teorier og traditioner. Konstantins navnkundige omvendelse i den første del af det fjerde århundrede vakte stor glæde; og verden, tildækket med en form for retfærdighed, gik ind i kirken. Nu skred fordærvets værk hastigt frem. Hedenskabet, som syntes at være besejret, blev erobreren. Dets ånd beherskede kirken. Dets læresætninger, ceremonier og overtro blev indlemmet i de bekendende Kristi efterfølgeres tro og gudsdyrkelse.“

> “This compromise between paganism and Christianity resulted in the development of ‘the man of sin’ foretold in prophecy as opposing and exalting himself above God. That gigantic system of false religion is a masterpiece of Satan’s power—a monument of his efforts to seat himself upon the throne to rule the earth according to his will.” The Great Controversy, 49, 50.

> „Dette kompromis mellem hedenskab og kristendom resulterede i udviklingen af ‘syndens menneske’, som i profetien blev forudsagt som den, der sætter sig op imod og ophøjer sig over Gud. Dette gigantiske system af falsk religion er et mesterværk af Satans magt—et monument over hans bestræbelser på at sætte sig selv på tronen for at herske over jorden efter sin vilje.“ The Great Controversy, 49, 50.

Back to Articles