Article

# Rome Establishes the Vision - Number Five

Rom Eguzobe Ọhụ — Nọmba Ise

Unveiling the Repeated Prophetic Controversies in Adventism: Understanding the Robbers of Thy People

Ikpughe Ihe Arụmụka Amụma Ndị A Na-emegharị n’ime Adventizim: Ịghọta Ndị Ohi nke Ndị Gị

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

August 9, 2024

Formats

PDF
Word
Song MP3

In the last article we identified six prophetic lines of controversy which have occurred in the history of Adventism from the Millerite time period until the present day. I contend the first and the last controversy over the “robbers of thy people” in verse fourteen of Daniel chapter eleven are prophetically identical. The Millerites understood the “robbers” to be Rome, and the Protestants taught the “robbers” were a Syrian king named Antiochus Epiphanes.

N’isiokwu ikpeazụ, anyị chọpụtara ahịrị isii amụma nke esemokwu ndị mere n’akụkọ ihe mere eme nke Adventism site n’oge ndị Millerite ruo taa. Ana m ekwusi ike na esemokwu mbụ na nke ikpeazụ banyere “ndị ohi nke ndị gị” dị na amaokwu nke iri na anọ nke Daniel isi nke iri na otu bụ otu ihe n’amụma. Ndị Millerite ghọtara na “ndị ohi” ahụ bụ Rom, ndị Protestant kụzikwaara na “ndị ohi” ahụ bụ eze Siria a kpọrọ Antiochus Epiphanes.

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

> N’oge ndị ahụ, ọtụtụ ga-ebili imegide eze nke ndịda: ndị ohi nke ndị gị kwa ga-ebuli onwe ha elu iji mee ka ọhụụ ahụ guzosie ike; ma ha ga-ada. Daniel 11:14.

Beginning in verse ten, and continuing through verse fifteen a warfare between the kingdoms of Egypt and Syria is represented. Egypt is the king of the south in the passage, and the Syrian king is represented as the king of the north. Verse ten identifies what the historians call the beginning of the Fourth Syrian war in 219 BC, verses eleven and twelve represent the battle of Raphia in 217 BC, and its aftermath. Then verses thirteen through fifteen identify the battle of Panium in 200 BC. In verses ten through fifteen the Syrian king is Antiochus Magnus, ruler of the Seleucid Empire.

Malite n’amaokwu nke iri, ma na-aga n’ihu ruo n’amaokwu nke iri na ise, a na-egosi agha dị n’etiti alaeze Ijipt na Siria. Ijipt bụ eze nke ndịda n’akụkụ Akwụkwọ Nsọ a, a na-anọchikwa eze Siria anya dịka eze nke ugwu. Amaokwu nke iri na-akọwa ihe ndị ọkọ akụkọ ihe mere eme kpọrọ mmalite nke Agha Siria nke Anọ n’afọ 219 T.K., amaokwu nke iri na otu na nke iri na abụọ na-anọchi anya agha Raphia n’afọ 217 T.K., na ihe ndị sochiri ya. Mgbe ahụ amaokwu nke iri na atọ ruo nke iri na ise na-akọwa agha Panium n’afọ 200 T.K. N’amaokwu nke iri ruo nke iri na ise, eze Siria ahụ bụ Antiochus Magnus, onye na-achị Alaeze Seleucid.

Verse ten represents the history when Antiochus Magnus begins a war to regain territory that was taken from the Seleucid kingdom years before. In the verse he regains the lost territory in 219 BC, but he temporarily ceases his aggressions, and seeks to regroup his military strength. He had regained control of the lost territory, and made it all the way to the border of Egypt, the southern kingdom ruled by the Ptolemy dynasty. Between 219 BC and 217 BC, both the king of the south and the king of the north made plans for the approaching battle of Raphia.

Amaokwu nke iri na-anọchi anya akụkọ ihe mere eme mgbe Antiochus Magnus malitere agha iji weghachite ókèala e wepụrụ n’alaeze Seleucid ọtụtụ afọ tupu ahụ. N’amaokwu ahụ, ọ weghachitere ókèala ahụ furu efu n’afọ 219 BC, ma ọ kwụsịrị mwakpo ya nwa oge, wee chọọ ịchịkọta ọzọ ike agha ya. O weghachitela ọchịchị n’elu ókèala ahụ furu efu, ma rutekwara ruo n’ókè ala Ijipt, alaeze ndịda nke usoro eze Ptolemy na-achị. N’agbata afọ 219 BC na 217 BC, ma eze ndịda ma eze ugwu haziri atụmatụ maka agha Raphia nke na-abịanụ.

The battle of Raphia took place in 217 BC, and the southern kingdom of Egypt, ruled by Ptolemy prevailed over the Syrian king Antiochus Magnus, king of the north in the prophetic passage. Then in verses thirteen through fifteen, seventeen years later in 200 BC, Antiochus Magnus, who had then formed an alliance with Philip of Macedon engaged Egypt in the battle of Panium. The southern kingdom of Egypt then had a child king of five or six years old, and Antiochus Magnis and Philip could not resist taking advantage of the child king of Egypt, and Antiochus Magnus prevailed in the battle of Panium. The three verses that represent the battle of Panium contain verse fourteen, where a new power is introduced into the prophetic narrative.

Agha nke Raphia mere n’afọ 217 T.K., alaeze ndịda nke Ijipt, nke Ptolemy na-achị, meriri eze Siria bụ Antiochus Magnus, eze ugwu n’akụkụ amụma ahụ. Mgbe ahụ, n’amaokwu nke iri na atọ ruo nke iri na ise, afọ iri na asaa ka e mesịrị n’afọ 200 T.K., Antiochus Magnus, onye n’oge ahụ esorola Philip nke Masedonia banye n’ọgbụgba ndụ, lụrụ Ijipt ọgụ n’agha nke Panium. Ala-eze ndịda nke Ijipt n’oge ahụ nwere eze nwata dị ihe dị ka afọ ise ma ọ bụ isii, Antiochus Magnus na Philip enweghịkwa ike izere iji ohere eze nwata Ijipt ahụ mee ihe, Antiochus Magnus wee merie n’agha nke Panium. Amaokwu atọ ahụ nke na-anọchi anya agha Panium gụnyere amaokwu nke iri na anọ, ebe a na-ewebata ike ọhụrụ n’akụkọ amụma ahụ.

The robbers of thy people are a different power than the Egyptian king of the south, or the Seleucid king of the north, or Philip the Macedonian ruler. The Millerites recognized that Rome is the robbers of thy people. One of the Hebrew root words that is translated as “robbers,” means breaker. Pagan Rome is represented in prophecy as the power who would break in pieces.

Ndị ohi nke ndị gị bụ ike ọzọ dị iche na eze ndịda nke Ijipt, ma ọ bụ eze ugwu nke ndị Selusid, ma ọ bụ Filip, onye ọchịchị Masedonia. Ndị Millerite ghọtara na Rom bụ ndị ohi nke ndị gị. Otu n’ime mgbọrọgwụ okwu Hibru a sụgharịrị dịka “ndị ohi,” pụtara onye na-agbaji. A na-anọchi anya Rom ndị ọgọ mmụọ n’amụma dịka ike ahụ nke ga-agbaji agbaji.

> After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. Daniel 7:7.

> Mgbe nke a gasịrị, ahụrụ m n’ọhụụ abalị, ma lee, anụ ọhịa nke anọ, nke dị egwu ma jọgburu onwe ya, nke dịkwa ike nke ukwuu; o nwekwara nnukwu ezé ígwè: ọ loro ihe, kụrisịa ha n’ibe, ma jiri ụkwụ ya zọda ihe fọdụrụ: ọ dịkwa iche na anụ ọhịa niile ndị bu ya ụzọ; o nwekwara mpi iri. Daniel 7:7.

When Uriah Smith comments on the robbers, he quotes a historian who points out that robbers represent breakers.

Mgbe Uriah Smith na-ekwu okwu banyere ndị ohi, ọ na-ehota onye ọkà mmụta ihe mere eme nke na-akọwa na ndị ohi na-anọchi anya ndị na-agbaji ihe.

> “A new power is now introduced,—‘the robbers of thy people;’ literally, says Bishop Newton, ‘the breakers of thy people.’ Far away on the banks of the Tiber, a kingdom had been nourishing itself with ambitious projects and dark designs. Small and weak at first, it grew with marvelous rapidity in strength and vigor, reaching out cautiously here and there to try its prowess, and test the vigor of its warlike arm, till, conscious of its power, it boldly reared its head among the nations of the earth, and seized with invincible hand the helm of their affairs. Henceforth the name of Rome stands upon the historic page, destined for long ages to control the affairs of the world, and exert a mighty influence among the nations even to the end of time.

> “A na-ewebata ugbu a ike ọhụrụ,—‘ndị ohi nke ndị gị;’ n’ezie, ka Bishọp Newton kwuru, ‘ndị na-agbaji ndị gị.’ N’ebe dị anya n’akụkụ osimiri Taịba, otu alaeze nọ na-azụlite onwe ya site n’ọchịchọ ọchịchị na atụmatụ ọchịchịrị. N’mbụ ọ dị nta ma bụrụ onye na-adịghị ike, ma o toro n’ike na ume n’ụzọ dị ịtụnanya, na-amịpụ nlezianya ebe a na ebe ahụ iji nwalee ike ya, ma nwalee ume nke ogwe aka ya agha, ruo mgbe, n’ịma onwe ya ike ya, o weliri isi ya n’atụghị ụjọ n’etiti mba nile nke ụwa, ma jiri aka a na-apụghị imeri emeri jide nduzi nke ihe omume ha. Site n’oge a gaa n’ihu, aha Rom na-eguzo n’akwụkwọ akụkọ ihe mere eme, edebere ya ka ọ na-achịkwa ihe omume nke ụwa ruo ọtụtụ afọ ogologo, ma na-emetụta mba nile ike nke ukwuu ọbụna ruo ọgwụgwụ nke oge.”

> “Rome spoke; and Syria and Macedonia soon found a change coming over the aspect of their dream. The Romans interfered in behalf of the young king of Egypt, determined that he should be protected from the ruin devised by Antiochus and Philip. This was BC 200, and was one of the first important interferences of the Romans in the affairs of Syria and Egypt.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and Revelation, 257.

> “Rom kwụrụ okwu; Siria na Masedonia wee malite ngwa ngwa ịhụ mgbanwe na-abịa n’elu ọdịdị nke nrọ ha. Ndị Rom tinyere aka n’ihi eze na-eto eto nke Ijipt, kpebisie ike na a ga-echebe ya pụọ ná mbibi nke Antiokus na Filip kpara. Nke a bụ BC 200, ma bụrụ otu n’ime mbubata-aka mbụ dị mkpa nke ndị Rom n’ihe gbasara Siria na Ijipt.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and Revelation, 257.

The prediction set forth in the verses was fulfilled in roughly twenty years from 219 BC unto 200 BC, but the prophets speak more about the last days than the days in which they lived.

Mmezu nke e depụtara n’amaokwu ndị ahụ mezuru n’ime ihe dị ka afọ iri abụọ, site n’afọ 219 T.K. ruo n’afọ 200 T.K., ma ndị amụma na-ekwu okwu karịa banyere ụbọchị ikpeazụ karịa ụbọchị ndị ha biri n’ime ha.

> “Each of the ancient prophets spoke less for their own time than for ours, so that their prophesying is in force for us. ‘Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.’ 1 Corinthians 10:11. ‘Not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.’ 1 Peter 1:12. . . .

> “Onye ọ bụla n’ime ndị amụma oge ochie kwusara okwu pere mpe maka oge nke ha karịa maka oge anyị, nke mere na amụma ha ka dị irè nye anyị. ‘Ugbu a, ihe ndị a niile mere ha ka ha bụrụ ihe atụ: e dekwara ha maka ịdọ aka ná ntị anyị, ndị ngwụcha nke ụwa bịakwasịrị.’ 1 Corinthians 10:11. ‘Ọ bụghị nye onwe ha, kama nye anyị ka ha na-eje ozi n’ihe ndị ahụ, nke ndị kwusara unu ozi ọma site n’aka Mmụọ Nsọ e si n’eluigwe zitere akọwaworị unu ugbu a; ihe ndị a bụ ndị mmụọ ozi na-achọsi ike ilebanye anya n’ime ha.’ 1 Peter 1:12....”

> “The Bible has accumulated and bound up together its treasures for this last generation. All the great events and solemn transactions of Old Testament history have been, and are, repeating themselves in the church in these last days.” Selected Messages, book 3, 338, 339.

> “Akwụkwọ Nsọ achịkọtawo ma kekọọkọ ọnụ akụnụba ya niile maka ọgbọ ikpeazụ a. Ihe omume ukwu niile na mmemme ndị dị nsọ nke akụkọ ihe mere eme nke Agba Ochie abụwo, ma na-adịkwa, na-emegharị onwe ha n’ime ụka n’ụbọchị ikpeazụ ndị a.” Selected Messages, book 3, 338, 339.

Although Daniel did not live in the twenty-year time period we are considering, inspiration through the writings of Sister White informs is that much of the history recorded in Daniel eleven is to be repeated in the final fulfillment of Daniel eleven.

Ọ bụ ezie na Daniel ebighị n’oge afọ iri abụọ ahụ anyị na-atụle, mkpali sitere n’akwụkwọ Sister White na-agwa anyị na a ga-emegharị ọtụtụ n’ime akụkọ ihe mere eme e dere na Daniel iri na otu n’ime mmezu ikpeazụ nke Daniel iri na otu.

> “We have no time to lose. Troublous times are before us. The world is stirred with the spirit of war. Soon the scenes of trouble spoken of in the prophecies will take place. The prophecy in the eleventh of Daniel has nearly reached its complete fulfillment. Much of the history that has taken place in fulfillment of this prophecy will be repeated.” Manuscript Releases, number 13, 394.

> “Anyi enweghị oge anyị ga-atụfu. Oge nsogbu dị n’ihu anyị. Mmụọ agha akpaliela ụwa. N’oge na-adịghị anya, ihe nkiri nke nsogbu ndị e kwuru banyere ha n’amụma ga-emezu. Amụma dị n’isi nke iri na otu nke Daniel eruwo nso n’imezu ya kpamkpam. Ọtụtụ n’akụkọ ihe mere eme nke mezuwo n’imezu amụma a ga-emegharịa.” Manuscript Releases, number 13, 394.

Verses ten through fifteen of Daniel eleven represent the history of the last days which leads up to the soon-coming Sunday law, for verse sixteen identifies when Rome, for the first time, conquered the “glorious land.”

Amaokwu nke iri ruo nke iri na ise nke Daniel iri na otu na-anọchi anya akụkọ ihe mere eme nke ụbọchị ikpeazụ nke na-eduga ruo n’iwu Sọnde nke na-abịa n’oge na-adịghị anya, n’ihi na amaokwu nke iri na isii na-egosi mgbe Rom, na nke mbụ ya, meriri “ala ahụ dị ebube.”

> But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed. Daniel 11:16.

> Ma onye ahụ nke na-abịa imegide ya ga-eme dị ka uche nke ya si dị, ọ dịghịkwa onye ga-eguzo n’ihu ya: ọ ga-eguzokwa n’ala ahụ dị ebube, nke a ga-ebibi site n’aka ya. Daniel 11:16.

Daniel employs the expression “glorious land” twice in his writings. The first is verse sixteen, when literal pagan Rome conquered the literal glorious land of Judah.

Daniel ji ugboro abụọ jiri okwu ahụ bụ “ala ebube” n’ihe odide ya. Nke mbụ bụ n’amaokwu nke iri na isii, mgbe Rom na-ekpere arụsị n’ezie meriri ala ebube n’ezie nke Juda.

> “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.

> “Ọ bụ ezie na Ijipt enweghị ike iguzogide Antiochus, eze nke ugwu, Antiochus onwe ya enweghị ike iguzogide ndị Rom, ndị bịara ugbu a imegide ya. Ọ dịkwaghị alaeze ọ bụla nwere ike iguzogide ike a na-ebili elu. E meriri Siria, ma tinye ya n’ime alaeze ukwu Rom, mgbe Pompey, BC 65, napụrụ Antiochus Asiaticus ihe onwunwe ya, ma wedata Siria ka ọ bụrụ ógbè nke Rom.

> “The same power was also to stand in the Holy Land, and consume it. Rome became connected with the people of God, the Jews, by alliance, BC 162, from which date it holds a prominent place in the prophetic calendar. It did not, however, acquire jurisdiction over Judea by actual conquest till BC 63; and then in the following manner.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and Revelation, 259.

> “Otu ike ahụ kwa ga-eguzo n’Ala Nsọ, ma laa ya n’iyi. Rome sonyere ndị Chineke, ndị Juu, site n’ọgbụgba-ndị-otu, na BC 162, site n’oge ahụ ka ọ ji nwee ọnọdụ pụtara ìhè n’usoro oge amụma. Ma, ọ nwetaghị ikike ọchịchị n’elu Judia site n’emeri ya n’ezie ruo BC 63; ma mgbe ahụ, n’ụzọ dị otu a na-eso.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and Revelation, 259.

The other verse where Daniel employs the “glorious land” is in verse forty-one.

Amaokwu nke ọzọ ebe Daniel ji “ala dị ebube” mee ihe dị n’amaokwu iri anọ na otu.

> He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon. Daniel 11:41.

> Ọ ga-abanyekwa n’ala ahụ dị ebube, a ga-emekwa ka ọtụtụ mba daa: ma ndị a ga-agbanahụ n’aka ya, ya bụ, Edom, na Moab, na ndị isi nke ụmụ Amọn. Daniel 11:41.

Verse forty-one of course follows verse forty, and verse forty begins with the words “and at the time of the end.” In The Great Controversy, Sister White identifies 1798 as the “time of the end,” so verse forty-one is identifying history that follows after the time of the end in 1798.

Amaokwu iri anọ na otu, n’ezie, na-esochi amaokwu iri anọ, ma amaokwu iri anọ na-amalite n’okwu ndị a: “ma n’oge ọgwụgwụ.” N’akwụkwọ The Great Controversy, Nwanneanyị White kọwara afọ 1798 dịka “oge ọgwụgwụ,” ya mere amaokwu iri anọ na otu na-akọwa akụkọ ihe mere eme nke na-esote oge ọgwụgwụ ahụ n’afọ 1798.

> “But at the time of the end, says the prophet, “Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.’ Daniel 12:4. . . . Since 1798 the book of Daniel has been unsealed, knowledge of the prophecies has increased, and many have proclaimed the solemn message of the judgment near.” The Great Controversy, 356.

> “Ma n’oge ọgwụgwụ, ka onye-amụma ahụ na-ekwu, ‘Ọtụtụ ga-agba ọsọ ije ebe a na ebe ọzọ, a ga-amụbakwa ihe ọmụma.’ Daniel 12:4.... Kemgbe afọ 1798, a kpọghewo akwụkwọ Daniel, ihe ọmụma banyere amụma abawanyela, ọtụtụkwa ekwusaala ozi ahụ dị nsọ nke ikpe dị nso.” The Great Controversy, 356.

The glorious land of verse forty-one is not literal ancient Judah of old, but spiritual modern Judah. The United States is spiritual modern Judah, and verse forty-one is identifying the soon-coming Sunday law in the United States.

Ala ahụ nke ebube e kwuru na amaokwu nke iri anọ na otu abụghị Judia ochie nkịtị nke oge gara aga, kama ọ bụ Judia nke mmụọ nke oge a. United States bụ Judia nke mmụọ nke oge a, ma amaokwu nke iri anọ na otu na-akọwapụta iwu Sọnde na-abịa n’oge na-adịghị anya na United States.

> Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 1 Corinthians 15:46.

> Otú ọ dị, nke ahụ bụ nke mmụọ abụghị nke mbụ, kama ọ bụ nke eke; emesia, nke ahụ bụ nke mmụọ. 1 Kọrint 15:46.

That Sunday law is typified by verse sixteen, for “much of the history that has taken place” in the fulfillment of Daniel eleven is to be repeated. Verses ten through fifteen in the last days, represents the history preceding and leading up to the Sunday law.

Iwu Sọnde ahụ ka e ji ama atụ n’amaokwu nke iri na isii, n’ihi na “ọtụtụ n’ime akụkọ ihe mere eme nke mere” n’ime mmezu nke Daniel iri na otu ga-eme ọzọ. Amaokwu nke iri ruo nke iri na ise n’ụbọchị ikpeazụ na-anọchi anya akụkọ ihe mere eme nke bu ụzọ mee ma na-eduga ruo n’Iwu Sọnde ahụ.

The king of the north in those five verses, as well as the king of the south who were fulfilled by the Seleucid king Antiochus Magnus and the Egyptian kings of the Ptolemaic kingdom, typify powers that are the focus of the history that leads to the soon-coming Sunday law. These verses identify the history of the movement of the one hundred and forty-four thousand, for verse ten identifies the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, and verse sixteen the soon-coming Sunday law.

Eze nke ugwu n’ime amaokwu ise ahụ, yana eze nke ndịda, bụ ndị e mezuru n’aka eze Seleucid bụ́ Antiochus Magnus na ndị eze Ijipt nke alaeze Ptolemaic, na-anọchite anya ike ndị bụ isi ihe a na-elekwasị anya na ya n’akụkọ ihe mere eme nke na-eduga n’iwu Ụka banyere Sọnde nke na-abịa n’oge na-adịghị anya. Amaokwu ndị a na-akọwapụta akụkọ ihe mere eme nke ngagharị nke otu narị puku na iri anọ na anọ, n’ihi na amaokwu nke iri na-akọwapụta ọdịda nke Soviet Union na 1989, ebe amaokwu nke iri na isii na-akọwapụta iwu Ụka banyere Sọnde nke na-abịa n’oge na-adịghị anya.

Christ emphasizes these verses by aligning verse ten with verse forty and verse sixteen with verse forty-one. The direct reference to the literal glorious land which typifies the spiritual glorious land of verse forty-one is the end of the six verses, and verse ten is the beginning.

Kraịst na-eme ka amaokwu ndị a pụta ìhè site n’ịkọrọ amaokwu nke iri na amaokwu nke iri anọ, na amaokwu nke iri na isii na amaokwu nke iri anọ na otu. Ntụaka kpọmkwem banyere ala ebube nkịtị nke na-anọchi anya ala ebube nke mmụọ nke amaokwu nke iri anọ na otu bụ njedebe nke amaokwu isii ahụ, ebe amaokwu nke iri bụ mmalite.

Just as Christ made sure verse sixteen has a direct connection with verse forty-one, and so too, verse ten has a direct connection with verse forty. The expression in verse ten “overflow, and pass through,” is the identical Hebrew phrase that is translated as “overflow and pass over,” in verse forty. The phrase is only found one other place in the Scriptures, but it is translated a little differently than verse ten and verse forty. Still, it is the same Hebrew phrase.

Dịka Kraịst siri hụ na amaokwu nke iri na isii nwere njikọ kpọmkwem na amaokwu nke iri anọ na otu, otu a kwa ka amaokwu nke iri nwere njikọ kpọmkwem na amaokwu nke iri anọ. Okwu ahụ dị n’amaokwu nke iri, “ijupụta ókè, gafee kwa,” bụ otu mkpụrụokwu Hibru ahụ kpọmkwem nke a sụgharịrị dịka “ijupụta ókè ma gafee,” n’amaokwu nke iri anọ. A hụrụ mkpụrụokwu ahụ naanị n’otu ebe ọzọ n’Akwụkwọ Nsọ, ma a sụgharịrị ya ntakịrị n’ụzọ dị iche na amaokwu nke iri na amaokwu nke iri anọ. N’agbanyeghị nke ahụ, ọ ka bụ otu mkpụrụokwu Hibru ahụ.

> And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel. Isaiah 8:8.

> Ọ ga-agabiga na Juda; ọ ga-eju iju ma gafee, ọ ga-erukwa ọbụna n’olu; mgbasapụ nku ya ga-ejupụta obosara ala gị, O Immanuel. Aịzaya 8:8.

Isaiah’s “overflow and go over,” is the same as verse ten’s “overflow, and pass through,” and verse forty’s “overflow and pass over.” More than this, each of the three verses are describing an attack from the king of the north upon the king of the south. In Isaiah, the northern king of Assyria, Sennacherib, was attacking Judah, the southern kingdom of Israel. In verse ten Antiochus Magnus, the northern king of the Seleucid Empire was attacking the southern kingdom of Egypt. In verse forty, the king of the north, the papal power, who had received a deadly wound at the beginning of verse forty, was attacking the southern atheistic power of the Soviet Union. Each verse represents the same prophetic structure of a conflict between the kings of the north and south, and in each verse the northern king “overflows and passes over.”

“Ijubiga ma gafee,” nke Aịzaya kwuru, bụ otu ihe ahụ dị ka “ijubiga, ma gafee,” nke amaokwu nke iri, na “ijubiga ma gafere,” nke amaokwu nke iri anọ. Karịa nke a, amaokwu atọ ahụ nke ọ bụla na-akọwa mwakpo eze ugwu megide eze ndịda. N’akwụkwọ Aịzaya, eze ugwu nke Asiria, Sennacherib, nọ na-awakpo Juda, alaeze ndịda nke Izrel. N’amaokwu nke iri, Antiochus Magnus, eze ugwu nke Alaeze Seleucid, nọ na-awakpo alaeze ndịda nke Ijipt. N’amaokwu nke iri anọ, eze ugwu ahụ, ike papal, onye natara ọnya na-egbu egbu na mmalite nke amaokwu nke iri anọ, nọ na-awakpo ike ndịda nke ekweghị na Chineke nke Soviet Union. Amaokwu nke ọ bụla na-anọchi anya otu usoro amụma ahụ nke ọgụ dị n’etiti ndị eze ugwu na ndịda, ma n’amaokwu ọ bụla eze ugwu ahụ “na-eji jubiga ókè ma gafee.”

Isaiah’s testimony and verse ten both identify that when the northern king attacks he ceases before entering into the capital of the southern kingdom. Sennacherib brought his warfare to the walls of Jerusalem, and no further. In 219 BC, Antiochus Magnus came to the border of Egypt and stopped. Then he lost the battle of Raphia that occurred two years later in 217 BC. Sennacherib came to the walls of Jerusalem and lost the battle as God intervened.

Àmà nke Aịzaịa na amaokwu nke iri ha abụọ na-akọwapụtakwa na mgbe eze ugwu wakporo, ọ kwụsịrị tupu ọ banye n’ime isi obodo nke alaeze ndịda. Senakerib wetara agha ya ruo n’akụkụ mgbidi Jerusalem, ma ọ gaghị n’ihu karịa nke ahụ. N’afọ 219 T.K., Antiochus Magnus bịara ruo n’ókè Ijipt ma kwụsị. E mesịa, o merụrụ n’agha Raphia nke mere afọ abụọ ka e mesịrị n’afọ 217 T.K. Senakerib bịara ruo n’akụkụ mgbidi Jerusalem ma tufuo agha ahụ dịka Chineke tinyere aka.

> Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning the king of Assyria, He shall not come into this city, nor shoot an arrow there, nor come before it with shield, nor cast a bank against it. By the way that he came, by the same shall he return, and shall not come into this city, saith the Lord. For I will defend this city, to save it, for mine own sake, and for my servant David’s sake. And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the Lord went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses. So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh. And it came to pass, as he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god, that Adrammelech and Sharezer his sons smote him with the sword: and they escaped into the land of Armenia. And Esarhaddon his son reigned in his stead. 2 Kings 19:32–37.

> Ya mere, otú a ka Onyenwe anyị kwuru banyere eze Asiria: Ọ gaghị abata n’obodo a, ọ gaghị agba akụ n’ebe ahụ, ọ gaghị eji ọta bịakwute ya, ọ gaghịkwa kwakọba ájá ọgụ imegide ya. Ụzọ ọ bịara ka ọ ga-esi lọghachi; ọ gaghịkwa abata n’obodo a, ka Onyenwe anyị kwuru. N’ihi na M ga-echebe obodo a, zọpụta ya, n’ihi onwe M, nakwa n’ihi Devid, odibo M. O wee ruo n’abalị ahụ, mmụọ ozi nke Onyenwe anyị pụrụ gaa tie n’ụlọ-ikwuu ndị Asiria otu narị puku na iri asatọ na puku ise; ma mgbe ha tetara n’isi ụtụtụ, lee, ha niile bụ ozu ndị nwụrụ anwụ. Ya mere Senakerib, eze Asiria, pụtara, jee, laghachi, ma biri na Nineve. O wee ruo, ka ọ nọ na-efe ofufe n’ụlọ Nisrọk, chi ya, na Adramelek na Shareeza, ụmụ ya ndị ikom, ji mma agha gbuo ya; ha wee gbaga n’ala Armenia. Esarahadon, nwa ya nwoke, wee chịa n’ọnọdụ ya. 2 Ndị Eze 19:32–37.

In 1989, the king of the north swept away the Soviet Union, but he did not overcome the capital of the Soviet Union. Russia was left standing. The next battle, typified in verses eleven and twelve, was the battle of Raphia, which was also typified by the overthrow of Sennacherib’s army and his subsequent death which identifies a victory for the southern king, which was Judah in the testimony of Sennacherib, and Raphia in the testimony of Antiochus Magnus.

N’afọ 1989, eze ugwu kpochapụrụ Soviet Union, ma o merighị isi obodo Soviet Union. A hapụrụ Russia ka ọ guzo. Agha sochirinụ, nke e ji ama atụ ya n’amaokwu nke iri na otu na nke iri na abụọ, bụ agha Raphia, nke e jikwaa ama atụ ya site n’ịkwatu ndị agha Sennacherib na ọnwụ ya sochirinụ, nke na-egosi mmeri nye eze ndịda, nke bụ Juda n’àmà Sennacherib, na Raphia n’àmà Antiochus Magnus.

Verse ten provides a direct connection to verse forty and verse sixteen provides a direct connection with verse forty-one. Verses ten through sixteen represent the history of 1989 unto the Sunday law. The verse represents a hidden history in verse forty that begins with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 and continues unto the Sunday law. Verse ten also directly connects the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six to the hidden history, but that line of truth is outside what we are here setting forth.

Amaokwu nke iri na-enye njikọ kpọmkwem n’amaokwu nke iri anọ, ma amaokwu nke iri na isii na-enye njikọ kpọmkwem n’amaokwu nke iri anọ na otu. Amaokwu nke iri ruo nke iri na isii na-anọchi anya akụkọ ihe mere eme site n’afọ 1989 ruo n’iwu ụbọchị Sọnde. Amaokwu ahụ na-anọchi anya akụkọ ihe mere eme zoro ezo n’amaokwu nke iri anọ, nke malitere site n’ọdịda nke Soviet Union n’afọ 1989 ma na-aga n’ihu ruo n’iwu ụbọchị Sọnde. Amaokwu nke iri na-ejikọkwa kpọmkwem “oge asaa” nke Levitikọs iri abụọ na isii na akụkọ ihe mere eme ahụ zoro ezo, ma ahịrị eziokwu ahụ dị n’èzí ihe anyị na-edobe ebe a.

In Millerite history the first of six primary controversies within Adventism concerning the correct identification of Rome occurred, and it was over who the robbers of verse fourteen represented. The Protestants held they represented Antiochus Epiphanes, and the Millerites identified them as Rome. In the last controversy of Adventism concerning the correct identification of Rome it is also over the robbers of verse fourteen. One class, represented by the Millerites, is upholding the foundational understanding of the Millerites, which was endorsed by the Spirit of Prophecy.

N’akụkọ ihe mere eme nke ndị Millerite, nke mbụ n’ime esemokwu isi isii dị n’ime Adventism gbasara njirimara ziri ezi nke Rom mere; ọ bụkwa banyere onye ndị ohi ahụ nke amaokwu nke iri na anọ nọchiri anya ya. Ndị Protestant kwusiri ike na ha nọchiri anya Antiochus Epiphanes, ndị Millerite wee kpọọ ha Rom. N’esemokwu ikpeazụ nke Adventism banyere njirimara ziri ezi nke Rom, okwu ahụ ka bụkwa banyere ndị ohi ahụ nke amaokwu nke iri na anọ. Otu òtù, nke ndị Millerite nọchiri anya ya, na-akwado nghọta ntọala nke ndị Millerite, nke Mmụọ nke Amụma kwadoro.

> “I have seen that the 1843 chart was directed by the hand of the Lord, and that it should not be altered; that the figures were as He wanted them; that His hand was over and hid a mistake in some of the figures, so that none could see it, until His hand was removed.” Early Writings, 74.

> “Ahụwo m na aka Onyenwe anyị duziri chaatị 1843 ahụ, nakwa na e kwesịghị ime mgbanwe ọ bụla n’ime ya; na ọnụọgụgụ ndị ahụ dị dịka O chọrọ ka ha dị; na aka Ya dịkwa n’elu ya ma zoo njehie dị n’ime ụfọdụ n’ime ọnụọgụgụ ndị ahụ, ka onye ọbụla ghara ịhụ ya, ruo mgbe e wepụrụ aka Ya.” Early Writings, 74.

That sacred chart identifies the controversy with the notation of 164 BC.

Mpịakọta nsọ ahụ na-akọwapụta esemokwu ahụ site n’ịrịba ama nke 164 BC.

> “164 Death of Antiochus Epiphanes, who of course, stood not up against the Prince of Princes, as he had been 164 yrs. dead before the Prince of Princes was born.”

> “164 Ọnwụ nke Antiochus Epiphanes, onye n’ezie, eguzoghị imegide Onyeisi nke ndịisi, ebe ọ nwụrụla afọ 164 tupu a mụọ Onyeisi nke ndịisi.”

The reference of that controversy upon the sacred chart represents the only truth represented upon the sacred chart that is not based upon a prophetic passage from God’s Word. In doing so it identifies a waymark, not of biblical history, but of Advent history, and “it should not be altered,” for the controversy identifies how the prophetic vision is established. To reject that foundational truth is to simultaneously reject the authority of the Spirit of Prophecy’s endorsement of the sacred chart.

Ntụaka nke esemokwu ahụ dị n’elu chaatị nsọ ahụ na-anọchi anya naanị eziokwu e gosipụtara n’elu chaatị nsọ ahụ nke na-esiteghị n’otu amaokwu amụma sitere n’Okwu Chineke. N’ime ime nke a, ọ na-akọwapụta otu akara ụzọ, ọ bụghị nke akụkọ ihe mere eme nke Akwụkwọ Nsọ, kama nke akụkọ ihe mere eme nke Advent, ma “a gaghị agbanwe ya,” n’ihi na esemokwu ahụ na-akọwa otú e si eme ka ọhụụ amụma ahụ guzosie ike. Ịjụ eziokwu ntọala ahụ pụtara n’otu oge ahụ ịjụ ikike nke nkwado Mmụọ nke Amụma nyere chaatị nsọ ahụ.

> “The very last deception of Satan will be to make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God. ‘Where there is no vision, the people perish’ (Proverbs 29:18). Satan will work ingeniously, in different ways and through different agencies, to unsettle the confidence of God’s remnant people in the true testimony. He will bring in spurious visions to mislead, and will mingle the false with the true, and so disgust people that they will regard everything that bears the name of visions as a species of fanaticism; but honest souls, by contrasting false and true, will be enabled to distinguish between them.” Selected Messages, book 2, 78.

> “Ndúhie ikpeazụ nke Sétan ga-abụ ime ka àmà nke Mmụo nke Chineke ghara ịrụ ọrụ. ‘N’ebe ọhụụ na-adịghị, ndị mmadụ na-ala n’iyi’ (Ilu 29:18). Sétan ga-eji amamihe aghụghọ rụọ ọrụ, n’ụzọ dị iche iche na site n’aka ọrụ dị iche iche, iji mebie ntụkwasị obi nke ndị fọdụrụnụ nke Chineke nwere n’ámà ahụ nke eziokwu. Ọ ga-ebute ọhụụ ụgha iji duhie, ọ ga-agwakọkwa ụgha na eziokwu, ma si otú a mee ka ndị mmadụ kpọọ ihe niile a na-akpọ ọhụụ asị dịka ụdị ịkpa isi n’okpukpe; ma mkpụrụ obi ndị ezi obi, site n’iji nke ụgha na nke eziokwu tụnyere ibe ha, ga-enwe ike ịmata ọdịiche dị n’etiti ha.” Selected Messages, akwụkwọ nke 2, 78.

The last controversy of “the robbers of thy people”, is the same as the first, and without an understanding of the symbol which establishes the vision, “the people perish.” They “perish” because they “make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God.”

Esemokwu ikpeazụ nke “ndị ohi nke ndị gị,” bụ otu ihe ahụ dị ka nke mbụ, ma e wezụga nghọta nke akara nke na-eme ka ọhụụ ahụ guzosie ike, “ndị mmadụ na-ala n’iyi.” Ha “na-ala n’iyi” n’ihi na ha “na-eme ka àmà nke Mmụọ nke Chineke ghara ịdị irè.”

The other class claims that the United States is represented as the robbers of verse fourteen. That class is unable or unwilling to see that Antiochus Magnus in verses ten through fifteen represents the United States. Just as the Protestants of Millerite history claimed the robbers were Antiochus, the class who is unwilling to see identifies the robbers as the power (the United States) that is typified by Antiochus.

Òtù ọzọ na-ekwu na e gosipụtara United States dịka ndị ohi ahụ dị n’amaokwu nke iri na anọ. Òtù ahụ enweghị ike ma ọ bụ na-achọghị ịhụ na Antiochus Magnus, n’amaokwu nke iri ruo nke iri na ise, na-anọchi anya United States. Dị nnọọ ka ndị Protestant n’akụkọ ihe mere eme nke Millerite siri kwuo na ndị ohi ahụ bụ Antiochus, otu ahụ nke na-achọghị ịhụ na-akọwa ndị ohi ahụ dịka ike ahụ (United States) nke Antiochus bụ ihe nnọchianya ya.

Sennacherib’s attack upon Judah that reached to the capital, Jerusalem, and that failed, was led by Sennacherib’s general, the Rabshakeh.

Mwakpo agha Senakerib megide Juda nke ruru ruo n’isi obodo ya, Jerusalem, ma nke dara ada, ka onye ọchịagha Senakerib, Rabshakeh, duru.

> Now therefore, I pray thee, give pledges to my lord the king of Assyria, and I will deliver thee two thousand horses, if thou be able on thy part to set riders upon them. How then wilt thou turn away the face of one captain of the least of my master’s servants, and put thy trust on Egypt for chariots and for horsemen? Am I now come up without the Lord against this place to destroy it? The Lord said to me, Go up against this land, and destroy it. Then said Eliakim the son of Hilkiah, and Shebna, and Joah, unto Rabshakeh, Speak, I pray thee, to thy servants in the Syrian language; for we understand it: and talk not with us in the Jews’ language in the ears of the people that are on the wall. But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you? Then Rabshakeh stood and cried with a loud voice in the Jews’ language, and spake, saying, Hear the word of the great king, the king of Assyria. 2 Kings 18:23–28.

> Ugbu a, ya mere, biko, nye nna-ukwu m, bụ́ eze Asiria, nkwa; m ga-enyekwa gị ịnyịnya puku abụọ, ma ọ bụrụ na ị pụrụ, n’akụkụ gị, itinye ndị na-agba ha n’elu ha. Òleezị kwa otú ị ga-esi chụpụ ihu ọbụna otu onye-isi nke kacha nta n’ime ndị ohu nna-ukwu m, ebe ị tụkwasịrị Ijipt obi maka ụgbọ-ala agha na maka ndị na-agba ịnyịnya? Ọ bụ na ugbu a ka m rigotere imegide ebe a ibibi ya n’enweghị Onyenwe anyị? Onyenwe anyị gwara m, Rigoo imegide ala a, bibiekwa ya. Mgbe ahụ, Eliakim nwa Hilkaịa, na Shebna, na Joah, gwara Rabshaka, sị, Biko, gwa ndị ohu gị okwu n’asụsụ Siria; n’ihi na anyị na-aghọta ya: ekwukwala kwa na anyị n’asụsụ ndị Juu n’ntị ndị mmadụ nọ n’elu mgbidi. Ma Rabshaka gwara ha, sị, Ọ̀ bụ nna-ukwu m zitere m n’aka nna-ukwu gị na n’aka gị ikwu okwu ndị a? Ọ̀ bụghị n’aka ndị ikom ahụ nọ ọdụ n’elu mgbidi ka o zitere m, ka ha na unu wee rie nsị nke ha, ma ṅụọkwa mmamịrị nke ha? Mgbe ahụ Rabshaka guzoro, tie mkpu n’oké olu n’asụsụ ndị Juu, kwuo, sị, Nụ okwu nke nnukwu eze, bụ́ eze Asiria. 2 Ndị Eze 18:23–28.

The Rabshakeh was presenting not his words, but the words of Sennacherib, king of Assyria. In Daniel eleven verse forty the king of the north is the papal power who at the time of the end in 1798 received a deadly wound at the hands of atheistic France, the southern king. In the verse the king of the north ultimately retaliates and overflows the southern kingdom (the USSR) in 1989. When the king of the north accomplished that work, he brought with him “chariots, and with horsemen, and many ships.” “Chariots and horsemen” represent military might and “ships” represent economic power. Those symbols identify the United States as papal Rome’s proxy army in the victory of 1989, as typified by Rabshakeh. Antiochus Magnus in verse ten through fifteen represents the United States, and as William Miller correctly identified that the word “also” in verse fourteen establishes a new power entering the prophetic narrative, the “robbers” must represent a power distinct from either the Ptolemaic kings of the south, or Antiochus the king of the north or Philip of Macedon.

Rabshakeh nọ na-ekwupụta ọ bụghị okwu nke ya, kama okwu Sennacherib, eze Asiria. N’ime Daniel isi nke iri na otu, amaokwu nke iri anọ, eze ugwu bụ ike papal nke, n’oge ọgwụgwụ, n’afọ 1798, natara ọnya na-egbu egbu n’aka France ekweghị na Chineke, bụ eze ndịda. N’ime amaokwu ahụ, eze ugwu n’ikpeazụ na-emeghachi omume ma jubiga ókè n’alaeze ndịda ahụ (USSR) n’afọ 1989. Mgbe eze ugwu mezuru ọrụ ahụ, ọ bịara na “ụgbọ ịnyịnya agha, na ndị na-agba ịnyịnya, na ọtụtụ ụgbọ mmiri.” “Ụgbọ ịnyịnya agha na ndị na-agba ịnyịnya” na-anọchite anya ike agha, “ụgbọ mmiri” na-anọchitekwa anya ike akụ na ụba. Akara ndị ahụ na-achọpụta United States dịka ndị agha nnọchi anya Rome papal n’ime mmeri nke afọ 1989, dịka e siri mee ụdị ya n’akụkọ Rabshakeh. Antiochus Magnus n’amaokwu nke iri ruo nke iri na ise na-anọchite anya United States, ma dịka William Miller si ziri ezi chọpụta na okwu “nakwa” n’amaokwu nke iri na anọ na-eguzobe ike ọhụrụ na-abanye n’akụkọ amụma ahụ, “ndị ohi” aghaghị ịnọchite anya ike dị iche na ma ndị eze Ptolemaic nke ndịda, ma ọ bụ Antiochus eze ugwu, ma ọ bụ Philip nke Masedonia.

> “The king of the south, in this verse, without any doubt, means king of Egypt; but what the robbers of thy people means remains yet a doubt perhaps to some. That it cannot mean Antiochus, or any king of Syria, it is plain; for the angel had been talking about that nation for a number of verses previous, and now says, ‘also the robbers of thy people,’ etc., evidently implying some other nation. I will admit that Antiochus did perhaps rob the Jews; but how could this ‘establish the vision,’ as Antiochus is not spoken of anywhere in the vision as performing any act of that kind; for he belonged to what is called the Grecian kingdom in the vision. Again, ‘to establish the vision,’ must mean to make sure, complete, or fulfill the same.” William Miller, Miller’s Works, Lecture 6, 89.

> “N’amaokwu a, eze nke ndịda, n’enweghị mgbagha ọ bụla, pụtara eze Ijipt; ma ihe “ndị ohi nke ndị gị” pụtara ka bụ ihe na-adịgide n’ime mgbagha, ikekwe nye ụfọdụ. Na ọ pụghị ịpụta Antiochus, ma ọ bụ eze ọ bụla nke Siria, o doro anya; n’ihi na mmụọ ozi ahụ ekwuwo banyere mba ahụ n’ime ọtụtụ amaokwu ndị bu ụzọ, ma ugbu a ọ sịrị, ‘ndị ohi nke ndị gị kwa,’ wdg., nke na-egosi n’ezie mba ọzọ. Aga m ekweta na Antiochus nwere ike ịbụ na o zuru ndị Juu; ma olee otú nke a ga-esi ‘mee ka ọhụụ ahụ guzosie ike,’ ebe a naghị ekwu Antiochus ebe ọ bụla n’ime ọhụụ ahụ dịka onye na-arụ omume ọ bụla nke ụdị ahụ; n’ihi na ọ so n’ihe a na-akpọ alaeze Gris n’ime ọhụụ ahụ. Ọzọkwa, ‘ime ka ọhụụ ahụ guzosie ike,’ aghaghị ịpụta ime ka ọ bụrụ ihe doro anya, nke zuru ezu, ma ọ bụ imezu ya.” William Miller, Miller’s Works, Lecture 6, 89.

“Antiochus” was a name selected by many of the kings of the Syrian Seleucid Empire. The founder of that empire was Seleucid Nicator, and somewhere between twenty-six to thirty kings made up the entire list of Seleucid kings. Many of those kings chose the name “Antiochus”, just as the many popes choose throne-names when they are selected as popes. The popes are all “antichrist,” which means “against Christ”. The word “anti” meaning “against”. As antichrists they have taken the name of their spiritual forefather, who is Satan. Satan and the popes are both identified as the antichrist in inspiration.

“Antiochus” bụ aha ọtụtụ n’ime ndị eze nke Alaeze Seleucid nke Siria họọrọ. Onye guzobere alaeze ahụ bụ Seleucid Nicator, ma n’otu ebe n’etiti ndị eze iri abụọ na isii ruo iri atọ ka e depụtara n’ụzọ zuru ezu n’ime ndepụta ndị eze Seleucid. Ọtụtụ n’ime ndị eze ahụ họọrọ aha “Antiochus”, dị nnọọ ka ọtụtụ ndị pope na-ahọrọ aha ọchịchị mgbe a họpụtara ha ịbụ pope. Ndị pope niile bụ “antichrist,” nke pụtara “megide Kraịst”. Okwu ahụ bụ “anti” pụtara “megide”. Dị ka antichrists, ha ewerela aha nke nna nna ha nke mmụọ, onye bụ Setan. A na-akọwa Setan na ndị pope ha abụọ n’ime mkpughe nsọ dịka antichrist.

> “The determination of antichrist to carry out the rebellion he began in heaven will continue to work in the children of disobedience.” Testimonies, volume 9, 230.

> “Mkpebi siri ike nke onye na-emegide Kraịst imezu nnupụisi ahụ o bidoro n’eluigwe ga-anọgide na-arụ ọrụ n’ime ụmụ nke nnupụisi.” Testimonies, volume 9, 230.

A pope is a representative of Satan, and thus they are both against Christ, and therefore are the “antichrist.” They choose a name when they take the position as pope, and become Satan’s earthly representative.

Pope bụ onye nnọchi anya Setan, ya mere ha abụọ na-emegide Kraịst, ya mere kwa ha bụ “onye na-emegide Kraịst.” Ha na-ahọrọ aha mgbe ha nabatara ọnọdụ ahụ dịka pope, ma bụrụkwa onye nnọchi anya Setan n’ụwa.

> “To secure worldly gains and honors, the church was led to seek the favor and support of the great men of earth; and having thus rejected Christ, she was induced to yield allegiance to the representative of Satan—the bishop of Rome.” The Great Controversy, 50.

> “Iji nweta uru na nsọpụrụ nke ụwa a, e duru ụka ka ọ chọọ amara na nkwado nke ndị ukwu nke ụwa; ma, ebe o si otu a jụ Kraịst, e mere ka o nye nkwado na nrubeisi nye onye nnọchi anya Setan—bishọp nke Rom.” The Great Controversy, 50.

By their works you shall know them, and the popes carry on the same work as Satan.

Site n’ọrụ ha ka unu ga-esi mara ha, ndị popu na-aga n’ihu n’ọrụ ahụ Satani na-arụkwa.

> “Through the pope of Rome the same work has been carried on here on earth as was carried on in the courts of heaven before the expulsion of the prince of darkness. Satan sought to correct the law of God in heaven, and to supply an amendment of his own. He exalted his own judgment above that of his Creator, and placed his will above the will of Jehovah, and in this way virtually declared God to be fallible. The pope also takes the same course and, claiming infallibility for himself, seeks to adjust the law of God to meet his own ideas, thinking himself able to correct the mistakes he thinks he sees in the statutes and commands of the Lord of heaven and earth. He virtually says to the world, I will give you better laws than those of Jehovah. What an insult is this to the God of heaven!” Signs of the Times, November 19, 1894.

> “Site n’aka pope nke Rom ka a gara n’ihu n’ọrụ ahụ otu a n’elu ụwa dịka e siri gaa n’ihu n’ụlọikpe nke eluigwe tupu a chụpụ eze nke ọchịchịrị. Setan chọrọ idozi iwu Chineke n’eluigwe, ma tinye mmezi nke aka ya. O buliri ikpe nke aka ya elu karịa nke Onye Okike ya, ma debe uche nke aka ya n’elu uche Jehova, ma n’ụzọ a o kwupụtara n’ezie na Chineke nwere ike imehie. Pope ahụ kwa na-agbasokwa otu ụzọ ahụ, ma, n’ịzọrọ na ya enweghị njehie, ọ na-achọ imezi iwu Chineke ka o daba n’echiche nke aka ya, na-eche na ya nwere ike idozi njehie ndị ọ chere na ọ na-ahụ n’iwu na n’ihe-nye-iwu nke Onyenwe eluigwe na ụwa. N’ezie, ọ na-agwa ụwa, Aga m enye unu iwu ka mma karịa nke Jehova. Lee mkparị dị otu a o buuru Chineke nke eluigwe!” Signs of the Times, November 19, 1894.

Though Seleucus Nicator established the Seleucid Empire, many of the following kings chose the name “Antiochus,” in honor, not of Seleucus, but of his father. Seleucus’ father, Antiochus, was a nobleman and a general in the service of King Philip II of Macedon, who was the father of Alexander the Great. This noble status and military background helped establish the foundation for Seleucus’s own prominent role and subsequent rise to power after the death of Alexander the Great.

N’agbanyeghị na Seleucus Nicator guzobere Alaeze Ukwu Seleucid, ọtụtụ n’ime ndị eze sochirinụ họọrọ aha “Antiochus,” iji gosi nsọpụrụ, ọ bụghị nye Seleucus, kama nye nna ya. Nna Seleucus, bụ́ Antiochus, bụ onye a ma ama n’ọkwá ndị isi na onye ọchịagha n’ozi Eze Philip II nke Masedonia, onye bụ nna Alexander Onye Ukwu ahụ. Ọnọdụ nsọpụrụ a na ndabere agha a nyere aka iwulite ntọala maka ọrụ a ma ama nke Seleucus n’onwe ya na ịrị elu ya n’ọchịchị sochirinụ mgbe Alexander Onye Ukwu nwụsịrị.

Seleucus’ kingdom was established when he took control of three of the four areas of Alexander’s kingdom. Rome also conquers three geographical powers in order to take control and become the king of the north. When Seleucus had secured the east, the west and the north he became the king of the north in the historical narrative, and his capital was the city of Babylon. Many of the following kings chose the name “Antiochus” when they took the northern throne in order to honor their political forefather. The parallel is easy to see, if you choose to see. If you don’t, you don’t.

E guzobere alaeze Seleucus mgbe o were n’okpuru ọchịchị ya mpaghara atọ n’ime mpaghara anọ nke alaeze Alexander. Rome kwa meriri ike ọchịchị ala atọ iji were nweta ọchịchị ma bụrụ eze nke ugwu. Mgbe Seleucus jichachara n’aka ya ọwụwa anyanwụ, ọdịda anyanwụ, na ugwu, ọ ghọrọ eze nke ugwu n’akụkọ ihe mere eme, isi obodo ya bụkwa obodo Babylon. Ọtụtụ n’ime ndị eze sochirinụ họọrọ aha “Antiochus” mgbe ha nọrọ n’ocheeze ugwu iji sọpụrụ nna nna ha ndọrọ ndọrọ ọchịchị. Mmekọrịta yiri ibe ya a dị mfe ịhụ, ma ọ bụrụ na ị họrọ ịhụ ya. Ọ bụrụ na i meghị, ị gaghị ahụ ya.

The name “Antiochus” (Ἀντίοχος in Greek) comes from the Greek elements’ “anti” (meaning “against” or “opposite”) and “ocheo” (meaning “to hold fast” or “to maintain”). The northern kings chose the name to maintain their political heritage with the father, just as the antichrist (popes) choose names when they begin to rule. Just as the popes are representatives of their father, the devil, so too the Antiochus’ of the Syrian Empire typify representatives of their father. In this application Antiochus represents a proxy of their father. The proxy of the papal power in 1989 was the United States, and the secular testimony upholds the relationship between the antichrist, Pope John Paul II, and Ronald Reagan in their work to bring down the former Soviet Union.

Aha “Antiochus” (Ἀντίοχος n’asụsụ Grik) sitere n’ọtụtụ mkpụrụokwu Grik “anti” (nke pụtara “imegide” ma ọ bụ “nke na-abụghị”) na “ocheo” (nke pụtara “ijidesi ike” ma ọ bụ “idobe”). Ndị eze ugwu họọrọ aha ahụ iji nọgide na-edobe ihe nketa ndọrọ ndọrọ ọchịchị ha na nna ahụ, dịka onye na-emegide Kraịst (ndị poopu) na-ahọrọ aha mgbe ha malitere ịchị. Dịka ndị poopu bụ ndị nnọchi anya nna ha, bụ́ ekwensu, otu a kwa ndị Antiochus nke Alaeze Siria na-anọchi anya ndị nnọchi anya nna ha n’ụdị atụ. N’itinye nke a n’ọrụ, Antiochus na-anọchi anya onye nnọchi anya nna ha. Onye nnọchi anya ike ọchịchị ndị poopu n’afọ 1989 bụ United States, àmà nke ụwa kwa na-akwado mmekọrịta dị n’etiti onye na-emegide Kraịst, Pope John Paul II, na Ronald Reagan n’ọrụ ha ime ka Soviet Union mbụ daa.

In verses ten through sixteen, the first and last verse possess direct references to verses forty and forty-one. Verse ten directly represents verse forty. Verse sixteen directly represents verse forty-one. The verses represent the portion of the prophecy of Daniel that relates to the last days.

N’amaokwu nke iri ruo nke iri na isii, amaokwu mbụ na nke ikpeazụ nwere ntụaka kpọmkwem n’amaokwu nke iri anọ na nke iri anọ na otu. Amaokwu nke iri na-anọchi anya amaokwu nke iri anọ kpọmkwem. Amaokwu nke iri na isii na-anọchi anya amaokwu nke iri anọ na otu kpọmkwem. Amaokwu ndị a na-anọchi anya akụkụ nke amụma Daniel nke metụtara ụbọchị ikpeazụ.

> “The book that was sealed was not the book of Revelation, but that portion of the prophecy of Daniel which related to the last days. The Scripture says, ‘But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased’ (Daniel 12:4). When the book was opened, the proclamation was made, ‘Time shall be no longer.’ (See Revelation 10:6.) The book of Daniel is now unsealed, and the revelation made by Christ to John is to come to all the inhabitants of the earth. By the increase of knowledge a people is to be prepared to stand in the latter days. . . .

> “Akwụkwọ ahụ e mechiri emechi abụghị akwụkwọ Mkpughe, kama ọ bụ akụkụ ahụ nke amụma Daniel nke metụtara ụbọchị ikpeazụ. Akwụkwọ Nsọ na-asị, ‘Ma gị onwe gị, Daniel, mechie okwu ndị a, kpọchiekwa akwụkwọ ahụ, ruo oge ọgwụgwụ: ọtụtụ ga-agagharị n’ebe dị iche iche, a ga-amụbakwa ihe ọmụma’ (Daniel 12:4). Mgbe e meghere akwụkwọ ahụ, e kwusara, ‘Oge agakwaghị adịkwa ọzọ.’ (Lee Mkpughe 10:6.) Akwụkwọ Daniel emegheela ugbu a, mkpughe ahụ Kraịst nyere Jọn ga-erukwa ndị niile bi n’ụwa. Site n’ịmụba ihe ọmụma ka a ga-eji kwadebe otu ndị ga-eguzo n’ụbọchị ikpeazụ....”

> “In the first angel’s message men are called upon to worship God, our Creator, who made the world and all things that are therein. They have paid homage to an institution of the Papacy, making of no effect the law of Jehovah, but there is to be an increase of knowledge on this subject.” Selected Messages, book 2, 105, 106.

> “N’ozi nke mmụọ-ozi mbụ, a na-akpọ ụmụ mmadụ ka ha kpọọ isiala nye Chineke, Onye Okike anyị, onye kere ụwa na ihe niile dị n’ime ya. Ha akwụgola nsọpụrụ nye otu nzukọ nke Papacy, na-eme ka iwu Jehova ghara ịdị irè, ma a ga-enwe mmụba nke ọmụma n’ihe gbasara isiokwu a.” Selected Messages, book 2, 105, 106.

At the time of the end in 1989 the last six verses of Daniel chapter eleven represent the “portion of the prophecy of Daniel which related to the last days.” It was recognized when it was then unsealed, and that unsealing produced an increase of knowledge on the “institution of the Papacy, making of no effect the law of Jehovah.” The Alpha and Omega always illustrates the end with the beginning, and the testing process that began in 1989, was designed to produce two classes of worshippers.

N’oge ọgwụgwụ ahụ na 1989, amaokwu isii ikpeazụ nke Daniel isi nke iri na otu nọchiri anya “akụkụ amụma Daniel nke metụtara ụbọchị ikpeazụ.” A ghọtara ya mgbe ahụ, mgbe e mepere ya akara, mmeghe akara ahụ wee mụbaa ihe ọmụma banyere “imewe ọchịchị Papacy, ime ka iwu Jehova ghara ịrụ ọrụ.” Alfa na Omega na-egosi mgbe niile ọgwụgwụ site na mmalite, ma usoro ọnwụnwa ahụ nke malitere na 1989 ka e mere iji mepụta ụdị abụọ nke ndị na-efe ofufe.

> And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. Daniel 12:9, 10.

> Ọ sịrị, Gaa ụzọ gị, Daniel: n’ihi na e mechiri okwu ndị a ma kaa ha akara ruo oge ọgwụgwụ. A ga-eme ka ọtụtụ dị ọcha, meekwa ka ha bụrụ ndị na-acha ọcha, a ga-anwakwara ha; ma ndị ajọ omume ga-eme ajọ omume: ọ dịghịkwa onye ọ bụla n’ime ndị ajọ omume ga-aghọta; ma ndị amamihe ga-aghọta. Daniel 12:9, 10.

We are now in the final period of that testing process, for the controversy of the robbers at the beginning of Adventism is now being repeated. To identify the robbers as the United States is to identify Antiochus as the robbers. It is the identical controversy of the Millerites and Protestants.

Anyi nọ ugbu a n’oge ikpeazụ nke usoro ule ahụ, n’ihi na esemokwu banyere ndị ohi ahụ n’mbido Adventism ka a na-emeghachi ugbu a. Iji mata ndị ohi ahụ dịka United States bụ ịmata Antiochus dịka ndị ohi ahụ. Ọ bụ otu esemokwu ahụ kpọmkwem nke ndị Millerite na ndị Protestant.

At the end of the testing process, just as in the beginning of the testing process, which began in 1989, the Lion of the tribe of Judah unseals “that portion of the prophecy of Daniel which related to the last days.” In 1989 it was the last six verses of Daniel eleven, and at the ending it is the hidden history of verse forty, that is typified by verses ten through sixteen.

Ná ngwụcha usoro ule ahụ, dịka kwa na mmalite usoro ule ahụ, nke malitere n’afọ 1989, Ọdụm nke ebo Juda na-emeghe akara nke “akụkụ amụma Daniel nke metụtara ụbọchị ikpeazụ.” N’afọ 1989, ọ bụ amaokwu isii ikpeazụ nke Daniel iri na otu, ma n’ọgwụgwụ ya, ọ bụ akụkọ nzuzo nke amaokwu nke iri anọ, nke amaokwu nke iri ruo nke iri na isii na-anọchi anya ya.

We will continue our consideration of the six lines of controversies within the history of Adventism in the following articles. The first of those six controversies illustrates the last of those six controversies. We will use the first and last controversies to overlay the other four controversies as we unfold the elements involved with the efforts of the enemy of righteousness to prevent God’s people from rightly dividing “the vision”, which is established with the symbol of Rome.

Anyị ga-aga n’ihu n’ịtụle ahịrị isii nke esemokwu dị n’ime akụkọ ihe mere eme nke Adventism n’akwụkwọ ndị na-eso. Nke mbụ n’ime esemokwu isii ndị ahụ na-egosi nke ikpeazụ n’ime esemokwu isii ndị ahụ. Anyị ga-eji esemokwu mbụ na nke ikpeazụ kpuchie esemokwu anọ ndị ọzọ ka anyị na-akọwapụta ihe ndị metụtara mgbalị nke onye iro nke ezi omume na-eme iji gbochie ndị nke Chineke ikewa “ọhụụ” ahụ n’ụzọ ziri ezi, nke e ji akara Rome guzosie ike.

> “Unless we understand the importance of the moments that are swiftly passing into eternity, and make ready to stand in the great day of God, we shall be unfaithful stewards. The watchman is to know the time of night. Everything is now clothed with a solemnity that all who believe the truth for this time should realize. They should act in reference to the day of God. The judgments of God are about to fall upon the world, and we need to be preparing for that great day.

> “Ọ gwụla ma anyị aghọta ịdị mkpa nke oge ndị ahụ na-agafe ọsọ ọsọ banye n’ebighị ebi, ma kwadebe ịnọgide guzosie ike n’ụbọchị ukwu nke Chineke, anyị ga-abụ ndị nlekọta na-ekwesịghị ntụkwasị obi. Onye nche ga-amata oge abalị. Ihe niile ugbu a yikwara nsọpụrụ dị egwu nke ndị niile kwere eziokwu nke oge a kwesịrị ịghọta. Ha kwesịrị ime omume n’ile anya n’ụbọchị Chineke. Ikpe Chineke dị nso ịdakwasa ụwa, ma anyị kwesịrị ịdị na-akwadebe maka ụbọchị ukwu ahụ.

> “Our time is precious. We have but few, very few days of probation in which to make ready for the future, immortal life. We have no time to spend in haphazard movements. We should fear to skim the surface of the word of God.” Testimonies, volume 6, 407.

> “Oge anyị dị oké ọnụ ahịa. Anyị nwere naanị ụbọchị ole na ole, dị nnọọ ole na ole, nke oge amara e nyere anyị iji kwadebe onwe anyị maka ndụ ọdịnihu ahụ na-adịghị anwụ anwụ. Anyị enweghị oge anyị ga-eji na mmegharị na-enweghị ntụziaka doro anya. Anyị kwesịrị ịtụ egwu ịdị na-agafe naanị n’elu okwu Chineke.” Testimonies, volume 6, 407.

Back to Articles