Article

# Rome Establishes the Vision - Number Five

Róòmù Fi Ìran náà Múlẹ̀ - Nọ́mbà Márùn-ún

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

Ìṣípayá Àwọn Àríyànjiyàn Àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ Tí Ń Tún Ṣe Ara Wọ́n Nínú Adventism: Òye Nípa Àwọn Ajinigbé Àwọn Ènìyàn Rẹ̀

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.

Nínú àpilẹ̀kọ tó kọjá a ṣàfihàn ìlà mẹ́fà ti àríyànjiyàn àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ tí ó ti ṣẹlẹ̀ nínú ìtàn Adventism láti àkókò àwọn Millerite títí dé òní. Mo dìídì pé àríyànjiyàn àkọ́kọ́ àti èyí ìkẹyìn nípa “àwọn ọlọ́ṣà ènìyàn rẹ” nínú ẹsẹ̀ kẹrìnlá Danieli orí kọkànlá jẹ́ ohun kan náà ní ti àsọtẹ́lẹ̀. Àwọn Millerite lóye pé “àwọn ọlọ́ṣà” náà ni Róòmù, àwọn Pírótẹ́sítáǹtì sì kọ́ni pé “àwọn ọlọ́ṣà” náà jẹ́ ọba ará Síríà kan tí a ń pè ní 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.

> Ní àwọn àkókò wọ̀nyẹn, ọ̀pọ̀lọpọ̀ yóò dìde sí ọba gúúsù; pẹ̀lú àwọn ọlọ́ṣà nínú àwọn ènìyàn rẹ ni yóò gbé ara wọn ga láti mú ìran náà ṣẹ; ṣùgbọ́n wọn yóò ṣubú. Danieli 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.

Láti ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá bẹ̀rẹ̀, tí ó sì ń bá a lọ títí dé ẹsẹ̀ kẹẹ́dógún, a ṣàfihàn ogun kan láàárín àwọn ìjọba Ejibiti àti Siria. Ejibiti ni ọba gúúsù nínú àyọkà náà, a sì ṣàfihàn ọba Siria gẹ́gẹ́ bí ọba àríwá. Ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá tọ́ka sí ohun tí àwọn akọ̀wé-ìtàn ń pè ní ìbẹ̀rẹ̀ Ogun Siria Kẹrin ní ọdún 219 S.K., ẹsẹ̀ kọkànlá àti kejìlá ṣàfihàn ogun Raphia ní ọdún 217 S.K., àti ohun tí ó tẹ̀ lé e. Nígbà náà ni ẹsẹ̀ kẹtàlá títí dé kẹẹ́dógún tọ́ka sí ogun Panium ní ọdún 200 S.K. Nínú ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá títí dé kẹẹ́dógún, ọba Siria náà ni Antiochus Magnus, alákòóso Ilẹ̀-ọba 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.

Ẹsẹ kẹwàá ṣàpẹẹrẹ ìtàn náà nígbà tí Antiochus Magnus bẹ̀rẹ̀ ogun kan láti gba ilẹ̀ tí a ti gba kúrò lọ́wọ́ ìjọba Seleucid ní ọ̀pọ̀ ọdún ṣáájú padà. Nínú ẹsẹ náà, ó gba ilẹ̀ tí ó pàdánù padà ní ọdún 219 Ṣ.K., ṣùgbọ́n ó dá ìwà ìbínú ogun rẹ̀ dúró fún ìgbà díẹ̀, ó sì wá ọ̀nà láti tún agbára ọmọ-ogun rẹ̀ kó jọ. Ó ti tún gba àkóso ilẹ̀ tí ó pàdánù padà, ó sì ti dé títí dé ààlà Ejibiti, ìjọba gúúsù tí ìdílé ọba Ptolemy ń ṣàkóso. Láàárín ọdún 219 Ṣ.K. àti 217 Ṣ.K., ọba gúúsù àti ọba àríwá méjèèjì ṣe ètò fún ogun Raphia tí ń bọ̀.

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.

Ogun Rafia ṣẹlẹ̀ ní ọdún 217 ṣáájú ìbí Kristi, ìjọba gúúsù ti Ejibiti, tí Ptolemi ń ṣàkóso, sì borí ọba Siria, Antiochus Magnus, ọba àríwá nínú àyọkà àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà. Lẹ́yìn náà, nínú ẹsẹ̀ kẹtàlá sí kẹẹ̀ẹ́dógún, ọdún mẹ́tàdínlógún lẹ́yìn náà ní ọdún 200 ṣáájú ìbí Kristi, Antiochus Magnus, ẹni tí ó ti dá àjọṣe pọ̀ nígbà náà pẹ̀lú Philip ti Makedonia, bá Ejibiti jagun nínú ogun Panium. Nígbà náà, ìjọba gúúsù ti Ejibiti ní ọba ọmọ ọdún márùn-ún tàbí mẹ́fà, Antiochus Magnus àti Philip kò sì lè fara da àǹfààní tí wọ́n lè rí nínú ọba ọmọ Ejibiti náà, Antiochus Magnus sì borí nínú ogun Panium. Ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́ta tí ń ṣàpẹẹrẹ ogun Panium ní ẹsẹ̀ kẹrinlá, níbi tí a ti ṣàfihàn agbára tuntun kan sínú ìtàn àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà.

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.

Àwọn ọlọ́ṣà lára àwọn ènìyàn rẹ jẹ́ agbára mìíràn yàtọ̀ sí ọba gúúsù ti Íjíbítì, tàbí ọba àríwá ti Ṣẹ́lúsídì, tàbí Fílípù olórí Màsídóníà. Àwọn Mílàráítì mọ̀ pé Róòmù ni àwọn ọlọ́ṣà lára àwọn ènìyàn rẹ. Ọ̀kan lára àwọn gbòǹgbò ọ̀rọ̀ Hébérù tí a túmọ̀ sí “àwọn ọlọ́ṣà,” túmọ̀ sí “olùfọ́.” Nínú àsọtẹ́lẹ̀, a ṣojú fún Róòmù Kèfèrí gẹ́gẹ́ bí agbára tí yóò fọ́ ní wẹ́wẹ́.

> 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.

> Lẹ́yìn èyí ni mo sì rí nínú ìran òru, sì kíyèsi i, ẹranko kẹrin kan, tí ó bani lẹ́rù tí ó sì burú gidigidi, tí ó sì lágbára jù lọ; ó sì ní eyín irin ńlá: ó jẹ run, ó fọ́ túútúú, ó sì fi ẹsẹ̀ rẹ̀ tẹ èyí tí ó kù mọ́lẹ̀: ó sì yàtọ̀ sí gbogbo àwọn ẹranko tí ó ṣáájú rẹ̀; ó sì ní ìwo mẹ́wàá. Daniel 7:7.

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

Nígbà tí Uriah Smith bá ń ṣàlàyé nípa àwọn ọlọ́ṣà, ó tọ́ka sí ọ̀rọ̀ akọ̀wé-ìtàn kan tí ó fi hàn pé àwọn ọlọ́ṣà dúró fún àwọn apanirun.

> “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.

> “Agbára tuntun kan ni a mú wá báyìí,—‘àwọn ọlọ́ṣà ènìyàn rẹ;’ ní tòótọ́, ni Bíṣọ́ọ̀bù Newton wí, ‘àwọn apanirun ènìyàn rẹ.’ Ní ìhà jíjìn lórí etí odò Tiber, ìjọba kan ti ń fi ara rẹ bọ́ lára nínú àwọn ète ìfẹ́ ipò gíga àti àwọn àkànṣe òkùnkùn. Kékeré àti aláìlera ni ó jẹ́ ní ìbẹ̀rẹ̀, ṣùgbọ́n ó dàgbà pẹ̀lú ìyára àgbàyanu nínú agbára àti okun, ó ń na ọwọ́ rẹ lọ́wọ́lọ́wọ́ síhìn-ín-síhìn-ín pẹ̀lú ìṣọ́ra láti dán agbára rẹ wò, kí ó sì dán okun apá ogun rẹ wò, títí, nígbà tí ó ti mọ agbára ara rẹ, ó fi ìgboyà gbé orí rẹ sókè láàárín àwọn orílẹ̀-èdè ayé, ó sì fi ọwọ́ àìsegun gba ìdarí ọ̀ràn wọn. Láti ìgbà yẹn lọ, orúkọ Róòmù dúró lórí ojú ewé ìtàn, a sì ti yàn án fún ọ̀pọ̀lọpọ̀ ọ̀rúndún láti máa ṣàkóso ọ̀ràn ayé, kí ó sì ní ipa ńlá láàárín àwọn orílẹ̀-èdè àní títí di òpin àkókò.

> “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.

> “Róòmù sọ̀rọ̀; Síríà àti Màsídóníà sì kánkán rí i pé ìyípadà kan ń bọ̀ wá lórí ìrísí àlá wọn. Àwọn ará Róòmù dá sí ọ̀ràn náà nítorí ọba ọdọ ilẹ̀ Íjíbítì, wọ́n sì pinnu pé a gbọdọ̀ dáàbò bo òun kúrò nínú ìparun tí Áńtíókù àti Fílípì ti pète fún un. Èyí ṣẹlẹ̀ ní ọdún 200 ṣáájú Kristi, ó sì jẹ́ ọ̀kan lára àwọn ìdásí ọ̀ràn pàtàkì àkọ́kọ́ ti àwọn ará Róòmù nínú àwọn ọ̀ràn ilẹ̀ Síríà àti Íjíbítì.” 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.

Àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ tí a gbé kalẹ̀ nínú àwọn ẹsẹ̀ náà ṣẹ ní ìwọ̀n ọdún ogún, láti ọdún 219 BC títí dé 200 BC, ṣùgbọ́n àwọn wòlíì sọ̀rọ̀ nípa àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn ju àwọn ọjọ́ tí wọ́n gbé ayé wọn lọ.

> “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. . . .

> “Olúkúlùkù àwọn wòlíì ìgbàanì sọ̀rọ̀ kéré síi fún àkókò tiwọn ju tiwa lọ, nítorí náà àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ wọn wà ní agbára fún wa. ‘Ǹjẹ́ gbogbo nǹkan wọ̀nyí ṣẹlẹ̀ sí wọn gẹ́gẹ́ bí àpẹẹrẹ: a sì kọ wọ́n sílẹ̀ fún ìkìlọ̀ wa, lórí ẹni tí òpin ayé ti dé.’ 1 Kọrinti 10:11. ‘Kì í ṣe fún ara wọn, ṣùgbọ́n fún wa ni wọ́n ń ṣe iṣẹ́ ìránṣẹ́ nínú àwọn nǹkan náà, tí a ti sọ fún yín nísinsin yìí láti ọ̀dọ̀ àwọn tí wọ́n ti wàásù ìhìn rere fún yín nípasẹ̀ Ẹ̀mí Mímọ́ tí a rán kalẹ̀ láti ọ̀run; àwọn nǹkan wọ̀nyí ni àwọn áńgẹ́lì ń fẹ́ láti wo inú wọn.’ 1 Peteru 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.

> “Bíbélì ti kó jọ, ó sì ti so àwọn ìṣúra rẹ̀ pọ̀ mọ́ra fún ìran ìkẹyìn yìí. Gbogbo àwọn ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀ ńlá àti àwọn ìṣe pàtàkì tí ó kún fún ìbẹ̀rù mímọ́ nínú ìtàn Májẹ̀mú Láéláé ti ń tún ara wọn ṣe, wọ́n sì ń tún ara wọn ṣe nínú ìjọ ní àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn wọ̀nyí.” Selected Messages, ìwé 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.

Bí ó tilẹ̀ jẹ́ pé Dáníẹ́lì kò wà láàyè ní àkókò ọdún méjìlélógún tí à ń gbé yẹ̀ wò yìí, ìmísí nípasẹ̀ àwọn ìkọ̀wé Sister White sọ fún wa pé púpọ̀ nínú ìtàn tí a gbasilẹ sínú Dáníẹ́lì 11 yóò tún ṣẹlẹ̀ ní ìmúṣẹ́ ìkẹyìn Dáníẹ́lì 11.

> “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.

> “A kò ní àkókò láti sọ̀fò. Àwọn àkókò ìdààmú wà níwájú wa. A ti ru ayé sókè pẹ̀lú ẹ̀mí ogun. Láìpẹ́, àwọn ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀ ìdààmú tí a sọ nípa wọn nínú àwọn àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ yóò ṣẹlẹ̀. Àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ tí ó wà nínú Daniẹli orí kọkànlá ti fẹ́rẹ̀ dé ìmúṣẹ̀ rẹ̀ pípé. Ọ̀pọ̀ nínú ìtàn tí ó ti ṣẹlẹ̀ gẹ́gẹ́ bí ìmúṣẹ̀ àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ yìí ni a ó tún ṣe.” 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.”

Ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá títí dé kẹ́ẹ̀ẹ́dógún nínú Dáníẹ́lì mọ́kànlá ń ṣàpẹẹrẹ ìtàn àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn tí ń ṣamọ̀nà sí òfin Ọjọ́ Àìkú tí ń bọ̀ láìpẹ́, nítorí ẹsẹ̀ kẹrìndínlógún ń tọ́ka sí ìgbà tí Róòmù, fún ìgbà àkọ́kọ́, ṣẹ́gun “ilẹ̀ ológo.”

> 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.

> Ṣùgbọ́n ẹni tí ó bá wá sí i lòdì sí i yóò ṣe gẹ́gẹ́ bí ìfẹ́ tirẹ̀, kò sì ní sí ẹni tí yóò lè dúró níwájú rẹ̀: yóò sì dúró ní ilẹ̀ ológo náà, ilẹ̀ tí a ó fi ọwọ́ rẹ̀ run. Danieli 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.

Dáníẹ́lì lo ọ̀rọ̀ náà “ilẹ̀ ògo” lẹ́ẹ̀mejì nínú àwọn ìkọ̀wé rẹ̀. Èkínní ni ẹsẹ̀ kẹrìnlá, nígbà tí Róòmù aláìsìn gidi ṣẹ́gun ilẹ̀ ògo gidi ti Júdà.

> “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.

> “Bí ó tilẹ̀ jẹ́ pé Íjíbítì kò lè dúró níwájú Ántíókùsì, ọba àríwá, Ántíókùsì fúnra rẹ̀ kò lè dúró níwájú àwọn ará Róòmù, tí wọ́n wá dojú kọ ọ́ ní àkókò náà. Kò sí ìjọba kankan mọ́ tí ó lè tako agbára yìí tí ń dìde. A ṣẹ́gun Síríà, a sì fi kún ìjọba Róòmù, nígbà tí Pómpẹ́ì, BC 65, gba Ántíókùsì Asiatíkùsì ní gbogbo ohun-ìní rẹ̀, tí ó sì sọ Síríà di ìpínlẹ̀ Róòmù.

> “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.

> “Agbara kan náà pẹ̀lú ni yóò dúró ní Ilẹ̀ Mímọ́, a ó sì run un. Róòmù di alábáṣiṣẹ́pọ̀ pẹ̀lú àwọn ènìyàn Ọlọ́run, àwọn Júù, nípasẹ̀ àdéhùn ìbáṣepọ̀, ní ọdún 162 ṣáájú ìbí Kristi, láti ọjọ́ náà ni ó ti gba ipò pàtàkì nínú kálẹ́ńdà àsọtẹ́lẹ̀. Síbẹ̀, kò gba àṣẹ lórí Judea nípasẹ̀ ìṣẹ́gun gidi títí di ọdún 63 ṣáájú ìbí Kristi; nígbà náà sì ni ní ọ̀nà wọ̀nyí tí ó tẹ̀lé.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and Revelation, 259.

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

Ẹsẹ̀ kejì tí Dáníẹ́lì ti lo ọ̀rọ̀ náà, “ilẹ̀ ológo,” wà nínú ẹsẹ̀ kọkànlélógójì.

> 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.

> Yóò sì wọ ilẹ̀ ológo náà pẹ̀lú, a ó sì bì ọ̀pọ̀lọpọ̀ orílẹ̀-èdè ṣubú: ṣùgbọ́n àwọn wọ̀nyí yóò bọ́ kúrò lọ́wọ́ rẹ̀, àní Edomu, àti Moabu, àti olórí àwọn ọmọ Ammónì. Danieli 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.

Dájúdájú ẹsẹ̀ kọkàndínlógójì tẹ̀ lé ẹsẹ̀ ogójì, àti pé ẹsẹ̀ ogójì bẹ̀rẹ̀ pẹ̀lú àwọn ọ̀rọ̀ wọ̀nyí, “àti ní àkókò òpin.” Nínú The Great Controversy, Sister White tọ́ka sí ọdún 1798 gẹ́gẹ́ bí “àkókò òpin,” nítorí náà ẹsẹ̀ kọkàndínlógójì ń tọ́ka sí ìtàn tí ó tẹ̀ lé lẹ́yìn àkókò òpin náà ní ọdún 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.

> “Ṣùgbọ́n ní àsìkò ìkẹyìn, ni wòlíì náà wí pé, ‘Ọ̀pọ̀ ènìyàn yóò máa rìn káàkiri, ìmọ̀ yóò sì pọ̀ sí i.’ Dáníẹ́lì 12:4.... Láti ọdún 1798 ni a ti ṣí ìwé Dáníẹ́lì sílẹ̀, ìmọ̀ nípa àwọn àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ sì ti pọ̀ sí i, ọ̀pọ̀ ènìyàn sì ti kéde ìránṣẹ́ ọlọ́lá ti ìdájọ́ tí ó sún mọ́lé.” 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.

Ilẹ̀ tí ó lóríire ní ẹsẹ̀ kẹ́rìnlélógójì kì í ṣe Júdà àtijọ́ gidi ní ìgbà àtijọ́, bí kò ṣe Júdà ẹ̀mí ti òde òní. Orílẹ̀-èdè Amẹ́ríkà ni Júdà ẹ̀mí ti òde òní, àti pé ẹsẹ̀ kẹ́rìnlélógójì ń tọ́ka sí òfin Ọjọ́-Àìkú tí yóò ṣẹ̀ṣẹ̀ dé ní Orílẹ̀-èdè Amẹ́ríkà.

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

> Ṣùgbọ́n kì í ṣe èyí tí í ṣe ti ẹ̀mí ni ó kọ́kọ́ wà, bí kò ṣe èyí tí í ṣe ti ẹ̀dá; lẹ́yìn náà ni èyí tí í ṣe ti ẹ̀mí. 1 Kọrinti 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.

Òfin Ọjọ́-ìsinmi náà ni ẹsẹ̀ kẹrìndínlógún ṣàpẹẹrẹ, nítorí pé “púpọ̀ nínú ìtàn tí ó ti ṣẹlẹ̀” nínú ìmúṣẹ Dáníẹ́lì mọ́kànlá ni a ó tún ṣe. Àwọn ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́wàá sí mẹ́ẹ̀ẹ́dógún ní àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn ń ṣàfihàn ìtàn tí ó ṣáájú tí ó sì ń darí sí Òfin Ọjọ́-ìsinmi náà.

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.

ọba àríwá nínú àwọn ẹsẹ̀ márùn-ún wọ̀nyẹn, pẹ̀lú ọba gúúsù tí a mú ṣẹ nípasẹ̀ Antiochus Magnus, ọba Seleucid, àti àwọn ọba Íjíbítì ti ìjọba Ptolemaic, jẹ́ àpẹẹrẹ àwọn agbára tí wọ́n jẹ́ ìfojúsùn ìtàn tí ń darí sí òfin Ọjọ́ Àìkú tí ń bọ̀ láìpẹ́. Àwọn ẹsẹ̀ wọ̀nyí ń tọ́ka sí ìtàn ìṣísẹ̀ ẹgbẹ̀rún lọ́nà ọgọ́rùn-ún méjìlélógójì, nítorí ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá ń tọ́ka sí ìṣubú Soviet Union ní ọdún 1989, àti ẹsẹ̀ kẹrìndínlógún sí òfin Ọjọ́ Àìkú tí ń bọ̀ láìpẹ́.

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.

Kristi tẹnumọ àwọn ẹsẹ wọ̀nyí nípa fífi ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́wàá bá ẹsẹ̀ ogójì mu, àti ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́rìndínlógún bá ẹsẹ̀ mọ́kànlélógójì. Ìtọ́kasí tààrà sí ilẹ̀ ògo gidi náà, èyí tí ó jẹ́ àpẹẹrẹ ilẹ̀ ògo ti ẹ̀mí nínú ẹsẹ̀ mọ́kànlélógójì, ni òpin àwọn ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́fà náà, ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́wàá sì ni ìbẹ̀rẹ̀.

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.

Gẹ́gẹ́ bí Kristi ti dájú pé ẹsẹ̀ kẹrìndínlógún ní ìsopọ̀ tààrà pẹ̀lú ẹsẹ̀ kọkànlélógójì, bẹ́ẹ̀ náà ni ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá ní ìsopọ̀ tààrà pẹ̀lú ẹsẹ̀ ogójì. Ọ̀rọ̀ tí ó wà nínú ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá, “ṣàn jáde, kí ó sì kọjá lọ,” ni gẹ́gẹ́ bí ọ̀rọ̀ Hébérù kan náà tí a túmọ̀ sí “ṣàn jáde, kí ó sì kọjá lórí,” nínú ẹsẹ̀ ogójì. Gbólóhùn náà kò sí ní ibòmíràn ju ẹẹ̀kan ṣoṣo nínú Ìwé Mímọ́, ṣùgbọ́n a túmọ̀ ọ́ díẹ̀ ní ọ̀nà tí ó yàtọ̀ sí ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá àti ẹsẹ̀ ogójì. Síbẹ̀, ọ̀rọ̀ Hébérù kan náà ni.

> 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.

> Yóò sì kọjá lọ ní Juda; yóò ṣàn kọjá, yóò sì bọ́ lórí; yóò dé àní títí dé ọrùn; ìtànkálẹ̀ ìyẹ́ rẹ̀ yóò sì kún ìwọ̀n ilẹ̀ rẹ, ìwọ Immanuẹli. Isaiah 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.”

“àkúnya, kí ó sì kọjá,” ti Isaiah sọ, jẹ́ ohun kan náà pẹ̀lú “àkúnya, kí ó sì kọjá lọ” ti ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá, àti “àkúnya, kí ó sì kọjá lórí” ti ẹsẹ̀ ogójì. Ju bẹ́ẹ̀ lọ, ọkọọkan àwọn ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́tẹ̀ẹ̀ta náà ń ṣàpèjúwe ìkọlù láti ọ̀dọ̀ ọba àríwá sí ọ̀dọ̀ ọba gúúsù. Nínú Isaiah, ọba Ásíríà ti àríwá, Senakeribu, ń kọlu Juda, ìjọba gúúsù ti Israẹli. Nínú ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá, Antiochus Magnus, ọba àríwá ti Ìjọba Seleucid, ń kọlu ìjọba gúúsù ti Ejibiti. Nínú ẹsẹ̀ ogójì, ọba àríwá, agbára póòpù, ẹni tí ó ti gba ọgbẹ́ ikú ní ìbẹ̀rẹ̀ ẹsẹ̀ ogójì, ń kọlu agbára aláìgbàgbọ́ nínú Ọlọ́run ti gúúsù, ìyẹn Soviet Union. Ẹsẹ̀ kọ̀ọ̀kan ń ṣojú àkóso àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ kan náà ti ìjà láàárín àwọn ọba àríwá àti gúúsù, àti nínú ẹsẹ̀ kọ̀ọ̀kan ọba àríwá náà “àkúnya, ó sì kọjá.”

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.

Ẹ̀rí Isaiah àti ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá méjèèjì fihàn pé nígbà tí ọba àríwá bá kọlu, ó dúró kí ó tó wọ inú olú-ìlú ìjọba gúúsù. Sennakeribu mú ogun rẹ̀ dé ògiri Jerusalẹmu, kò sì lọ síwájú ju bẹ́ẹ̀ lọ. Ní ọdún 219 BC, Antiochus Magnus dé ààlà Ejibiti ó sì dúró. Lẹ́yìn náà, ó pàdánù ogun Raphia tí ó ṣẹlẹ̀ ní ọdún méjì lẹ́yìn náà, ní 217 BC. Sennakeribu dé ògiri Jerusalẹmu, ó sì pàdánù ogun náà bí Ọlọ́run ti dá sí i.

> 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.

> Nítorí náà, báyìí ni Olúwa wí nípa ọba Ásíríà pé, Kì yóò wọ ìlú yìí wá, bẹ́ẹ̀ ni kì yóò tafà síbẹ̀, kì yóò sì fi asà dojú kọ ọ́, kì yóò sì gbé ilé-odi erùpẹ̀ kalẹ̀ sí i. Ọ̀nà tí ó gbà wá ni yóò tún gbà padà; kì yóò sì wọ ìlú yìí wá, ni Olúwa wí. Nítorí èmi yóò dáàbò bo ìlú yìí láti gbà á là, nítorí tìrẹ̀ fúnra mi, àti nítorí Dáfídì, ìránṣẹ́ mi. Ó sì ṣe ní alẹ́ ọjọ́ náà pé, angẹli Olúwa jáde lọ, ó sì pa ọ̀kẹ́ márùn-ún ó lé ẹgbẹ̀rún mẹ́ẹ̀ẹ́dọ́gbọ̀n nínú ibùdó àwọn Ásíríà; nígbà tí wọ́n sì jí ní kùtùkùtù òwúrọ̀, kíyèsí i, gbogbo wọn di òkú. Nígbà náà ni Sennakeribu ọba Ásíríà kúrò, ó sì lọ, ó padà, ó sì gbé ní Ninefe. Ó sì ṣe, bí ó ti ń foríbalẹ̀ nínú ilé Nísírọ́kì ọlọ́run rẹ̀, pé Adrameleki àti Ṣaarezeri, àwọn ọmọ rẹ̀, fi idà pa á; wọ́n sì sá lọ sí ilẹ̀ Armenia. Esari-hadoni ọmọ rẹ̀ sì jọba ní ipò rẹ̀. 2 Àwọn Ọba 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.

Ní ọdún 1989, ọba àríwá gbá Ilẹ̀ Soviet Union kúrò, ṣùgbọ́n kò ṣẹ́gun olú-ìlú Soviet Union. A fi Rọ́ṣíà sílẹ̀ ní dúró. Ogun tí ó tẹ̀ lé e, tí a ṣàpẹẹrẹ rẹ̀ nínú ẹsẹ̀ kọkànlá àti kejìlá, ni ogun Raphia, èyí tí a tún ṣàpẹẹrẹ rẹ̀ nípa ìparun ọmọ-ogun Sennacherib àti ikú rẹ̀ tí ó tẹ̀ lé e, èyí tí ó ń tọ́ka sí ìṣẹ́gun fún ọba gúúsù, ẹni tí ó jẹ́ Juda nínú ẹ̀rí Sennacherib, àti Raphia nínú ẹ̀rí 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.

Ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá pèsè ìsopọ̀ tààrà sí ẹsẹ̀ ogójì, àti ẹsẹ̀ kẹrìndínlógún pèsè ìsopọ̀ tààrà pẹ̀lú ẹsẹ̀ kọ́kànlélógójì. Àwọn ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá títí dé kẹrìndínlógún ṣojú ìtàn láti ọdún 1989 títí dé òfin Ọjọ́ Àìkú. Ẹsẹ̀ náà ṣojú ìtàn ìkọ̀kọ̀ kan nínú ẹsẹ̀ ogójì, èyí tí ó bẹ̀rẹ̀ pẹ̀lú ìwólulẹ̀ Soviet Union ní ọdún 1989, tí ó sì ń bá a lọ títí dé òfin Ọjọ́ Àìkú. Ẹsẹ̀ kẹwàá pẹ̀lú ń so “àkókò méje” ti Levitikusi ogún-ún àti mẹ́fà pọ̀ mọ́ ìtàn ìkọ̀kọ̀ náà ní ọ̀nà tààrà, ṣùgbọ́n ìlà òtítọ́ yẹn wà níta ohun tí a ń gbé kalẹ̀ níbí.

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.

Nínú ìtàn àwọn ọmọlẹ́yìn Miller, àkọ́kọ́ nínú àwọn àríyànjiyàn pàtàkì mẹ́fà láàárín Adventism nípa ìdánimọ̀ Róòmù lọ́nà tó tọ́ ṣẹlẹ̀, ó sì jẹ́ nípa ẹni tí àwọn ọlọ́ṣà ti ẹsẹ̀ kẹrìnlá ń ṣàpẹẹrẹ. Àwọn Pírótẹ́sítánì gbà pé Antiochus Epiphanes ni wọ́n ń ṣàpẹẹrẹ, ṣùgbọ́n àwọn ọmọlẹ́yìn Miller dá wọn mọ̀ sí Róòmù. Nínú àríyànjiyàn ìkẹyìn Adventism nípa ìdánimọ̀ Róòmù lọ́nà tó tọ́, ó tún jẹ́ nípa àwọn ọlọ́ṣà ti ẹsẹ̀ kẹrìnlá. Ẹgbẹ́ kan, tí àwọn ọmọlẹ́yìn Miller ń ṣojú fún, ń di ìmọ̀ ìpìlẹ̀ àwọn ọmọlẹ́yìn Miller mú ṣinṣin, èyí tí Ẹ̀mí Àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ ti fọwọ́sí.

> “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.

> “Mo ti rí i pé ọwọ́ Olúwa ni ó darí àtẹ̀jáde 1843 náà, àti pé kò yẹ kí a yí i padà; pé àwọn nọ́ńbà náà rí gẹ́gẹ́ bí Ó ti fẹ́ kí wọ́n rí; pé ọwọ́ Rẹ̀ sì wà lórí i, ó sì bo àṣìṣe kan nínú díẹ̀ lára àwọn nọ́ńbà náà, kí ẹnikẹ́ni má bàa lè rí i, títí ọwọ́ Rẹ̀ fi yọ kúrò lórí i.” Early Writings, 74.

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

Àwòrán mímọ́ yẹn fi àmì ọdún 164 ṣáájú Kristi hàn gẹ́gẹ́ bí àríyànjiyàn náà.

> “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 Ikú Antiochus Epiphanes, ẹni tí, dájúdájú, kò dìde sí Ọmọ-Aládé àwọn aládé, níwọ̀n bí ó ti ti kú ọdún 164 kí Ọmọ-Aládé àwọn aládé tó bí i.”

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.

Ìtọ́kasí ìjàmbá yẹn lórí àtẹ̀ àtọwọ́dá mímọ́ dúró fún òtítọ́ kan ṣoṣo tí a ṣojú lórí àtẹ̀ àtọwọ́dá mímọ́ tí kò dá lórí ẹsẹ̀ àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ kan láti inú Ọ̀rọ̀ Ọlọ́run. Nípa ṣíṣe bẹ́ẹ̀, ó ń fi àmì ọ̀nà kan hàn, kì í ṣe ti ìtàn Bíbélì, bí kò ṣe ti ìtàn Advent, àti pé “kò yẹ kí a yí i padà,” nítorí ìjàmbá náà ń fi bí a ṣe fi ìran àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà múlẹ̀ hàn. Láti kọ̀ òtítọ́ ìpìlẹ̀ náà sílẹ̀ ni láti kọ àṣẹ ìfọwọ́sí Ẹ̀mí Àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ sí àtẹ̀ àtọwọ́dá mímọ́ náà sílẹ̀ ní àkókò kan náà.

> “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.

> “Ìtanjẹ tó gbẹ̀yìn-gbẹ́yìn jùlọ ti Sátánì yóò jẹ́ láti sọ ẹ̀rí Ẹ̀mí Ọlọ́run di aláìní agbára. ‘Níbi tí ìran kò sí, àwọn ènìyàn a ṣègbé’ (Òwe 29:18). Sátánì yóò fi ọgbọ́n àrékérekè ṣiṣẹ́, ní ọ̀nà onírúurú àti nípasẹ̀ àwọn ohun èlò onírúurú, láti mì ìgbẹ́kẹ̀lé àwọn ènìyàn ìyókù Ọlọ́run nínú ẹ̀rí òtítọ́. Yóò mú àwọn ìran èké wá láti ṣìtànṣán, yóò sì da irọ́ pọ̀ mọ́ òtítọ́, báyìí ni yóò sì mú kí àwọn ènìyàn kórìíra débi pé wọn yóò ka ohun gbogbo tí ó bá ru orúkọ ìran sí irú aṣekágba kan; ṣùgbọ́n àwọn ọkàn olóòótọ́, nípa fífi èké àti òtítọ́ wé ara wọn, ni a ó jẹ́ kí wọ́n lè yà wọ́n sọ́tọ̀.” Selected Messages, ìwé 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.”

Ìjà ìkẹyìn ti “àwọn ọlọ́ṣà ènìyàn rẹ,” náà jẹ́ kan náà pẹ̀lú èyí àkọ́kọ́, àti láìsí òye àmi tí ó fi ìran náà múlẹ̀, “àwọn ènìyàn a ṣègbé.” Wọ́n “ṣègbé” nítorí wọ́n “sọ ẹ̀rí Ẹ̀mí Ọlọ́run di asán.”

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.

Ẹgbẹ́ kejì sọ pé Orílẹ̀-Èdè Amẹ́ríkà ni a ṣojú rẹ̀ gẹ́gẹ́ bí àwọn ọlọ́ṣà inú ẹsẹ̀ kẹ́rìnlá. Ẹgbẹ́ yẹn kò lè rí i, tàbí kò fẹ́ rí i, pé Áńtíókùsì Mágúnùsì nínú àwọn ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́wàá sí mẹ́ẹ̀ẹ́dógún ń ṣojú Orílẹ̀-Èdè Amẹ́ríkà. Gẹ́gẹ́ bí àwọn Pírótẹ́sítáǹtì nínú ìtàn Míléráítì ṣe sọ pé àwọn ọlọ́ṣà náà ni Áńtíókùsì, bẹ́ẹ̀ ni ẹgbẹ́ tí kò fẹ́ rí i náà ń dá àwọn ọlọ́ṣà mọ̀ gẹ́gẹ́ bí agbára náà (Orílẹ̀-Èdè Amẹ́ríkà) tí Áńtíókùsì jẹ́ àpẹẹrẹ rẹ̀.

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

Ìkọlù Sennakeribu sí Júdà tí ó dé títí dé olú-ìlú náà, Jerusalẹmu, tí ó sì kùnà, ni Rábṣékè, gẹ́gẹ́ bí ọ̀gágun Sennakeribu, darí.

> 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.

> Nítorí náà ní báyìí, mo bẹ̀ ọ́, fi ìdánilẹ́kọ̀ọ́ hàn fún olúwa mi ọba Ásíríà, èmi yóò sì fi ẹgbẹ̀rún méjì ẹṣin fún ọ, bí ìwọ bá lè fi àwọn ẹlẹ́ṣin jókòó lórí wọn ní apá tirẹ. Báwo ni ìwọ yóò ṣe lè yí ojú kúrò lọ́dọ̀ ọ̀kan nínú àwọn olórí kékeré jùlọ nínú àwọn ìránṣẹ́ olúwa mi, tí ìwọ sì ń gbẹ́kẹ̀ lé Ejibiti fún àwọn kẹ̀kẹ́ ogun àti fún àwọn ẹlẹ́ṣin? Ǹjẹ́ èmi ti wá gòkè sí ibi yìí láìsí Olúwa láti pa á run bí? Olúwa sọ fún mi pé, Gòkè lọ sí ilẹ̀ yìí, kí o sì pa á run. Nígbà náà ni Eliakimu ọmọ Hilkiah, àti Ṣebna, àti Joa, sọ fún Rabṣaké pé, A bẹ̀ ọ́, máa sọ̀rọ̀ sí àwọn ìránṣẹ́ rẹ ní èdè Aram; nítorí àwa yé e: má sì ṣe bá wa sọ̀rọ̀ ní èdè àwọn Júù ní etí àwọn ènìyàn tí ó wà lórí ògiri. Ṣùgbọ́n Rabṣaké sọ fún wọn pé, Ǹjẹ́ olúwa mi rán mi sí olúwa rẹ àti sí ọ láti sọ ọ̀rọ̀ wọ̀nyí bí? Ǹjẹ́ kò rán mi sí àwọn ọkùnrin tí wọ́n jókòó lórí ògiri, kí wọ́n lè jẹ ìdọ̀tí ara wọn, kí wọ́n sì mu ìtọ̀ ara wọn pẹ̀lú yín bí? Nígbà náà ni Rabṣaké dúró, ó sì ké pè ní ohùn ńlá ní èdè àwọn Júù, ó sì sọ pé, Ẹ gbọ́ ọ̀rọ̀ ọba ńlá, ọba Ásíríà. 2 Àwọn Ọba 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.

Rábṣáké ń sọ̀rọ̀ kì í ṣe tirẹ̀, bí kò ṣe ọ̀rọ̀ Sẹ́nákéríbù, ọba Ásíríà. Nínú Dáníẹ́lì mọ́kànlá ẹsẹ̀ ogójì, ọba àríwá ni agbára póòpù, ẹni tí ní àsìkò òpin ní ọdún 1798 gba ọgbẹ́ ikú lọ́wọ́ Faranse aláìgbàgbọ́ nínú Ọlọ́run, ọba gúúsù. Nínú ẹsẹ̀ náà, ọba àríwá náà ní ìkẹyìn ń gbẹ̀san, ó sì ṣàn bo ìjọba gúúsù (USSR) ní ọdún 1989. Nígbà tí ọba àríwá ṣe iṣẹ́ náà, ó mú “kẹ̀kẹ́-ogun, àti àwọn ẹlẹ́ṣin, àti ọ̀pọ̀lọpọ̀ ọkọ̀ ojú omi” wá pẹ̀lú rẹ̀. “Kẹ̀kẹ́-ogun àti àwọn ẹlẹ́ṣin” dúró fún agbára ológun, “ọkọ̀ ojú omi” sì dúró fún agbára ọrọ̀-ajé. Àwọn ààmì wọ̀nyí fi Orílẹ̀-Èdè Amẹ́ríkà hàn gẹ́gẹ́ bí ọmọ-ogun aṣojú Róòmù póòpù nínú ìṣẹ́gun ọdún 1989, gẹ́gẹ́ bí a ṣe rí àpẹẹrẹ rẹ̀ nínú Rábṣáké. Áńtíókùsì Mágúnùsì nínú ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́wàá sí mẹ́ẹ̀ẹ́dógún dúró fún Orílẹ̀-Èdè Amẹ́ríkà, àti gẹ́gẹ́ bí William Miller ṣe tọ́ka sí ní òtítọ́ pé ọ̀rọ̀ náà “pẹ̀lú” nínú ẹsẹ̀ kẹ́rìnlá fi agbára tuntun kan tí ń wọ inú ìtàn àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ múlẹ̀, “àwọn ọlọ́ṣà” gbọ́dọ̀ dúró fún agbára kan tí ó yàtọ̀ sí àwọn ọba Ptolemaic ti gúúsù, tàbí Áńtíókùsì ọba àríwá tàbí Fílípù ti Makedóníà.

> “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.

> “Ọba gúúsù, nínú ẹsẹ̀ yìí, láìsí àní-àní kankan, túmọ̀ sí ọba Ejibiti; ṣùgbọ́n ohun tí “àwọn ọlọ́ṣà àwọn ènìyàn rẹ” túmọ̀ sí ṣì jẹ́ ohun ìyèmẹ̀jì bóyá fún àwọn kan. Wí pé kò lè túmọ̀ sí Antiochus, tàbí ọba kankan ti Siria, ó hàn gbangba; nítorí angẹli náà ti ń sọ̀rọ̀ nípa orílẹ̀-èdè náà fún ọ̀pọ̀ ẹsẹ̀ ṣáájú, ó sì wá ní báyìí wí pé, “àti àwọn ọlọ́ṣà àwọn ènìyàn rẹ,” àti bẹ́ẹ̀ bẹ́ẹ̀ lọ, ní fífi hàn ní kedere pé ó ń tọ́ka sí orílẹ̀-èdè mìíràn. Èmi yóò gbà pé bóyá Antiochus jí àwọn Júù; ṣùgbọ́n báwo ni èyí ṣe lè “mú ìran náà dúró ṣinṣin,” níwọ̀n bí a kò ti sọ ní ibikíbi nínú ìran náà pé Antiochus ṣe ìṣe irú bẹ́ẹ̀; nítorí ó jẹ́ ara ohun tí a ń pè ní ìjọba Giriki nínú ìran náà. Lẹ́ẹ̀kansi, “láti mú ìran náà dúró ṣinṣin,” gbọ́dọ̀ túmọ̀ sí láti mú un dájú, láti parí i, tàbí láti mú un ṣẹ.” 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.

“Áńtíókùsì” jẹ́ orúkọ tí ọ̀pọ̀ àwọn ọba Ilẹ̀-ọba Sẹ́lúsídì ti Síríà yàn. Olùdásílẹ̀ ilẹ̀-ọba náà ni Sẹ́lúsídì Níkátọ̀, àti ní ibìkan láàárín mẹ́rìndínlọ́gbọ̀n sí ọgbọ̀n ọba ni ó para pọ̀ jẹ́ gbogbo àtòkọ àwọn ọba Sẹ́lúsídì. Ọ̀pọ̀ nínú àwọn ọba wọ̀nyẹn yàn orúkọ “Áńtíókùsì,” gẹ́gẹ́ bí ọ̀pọ̀ àwọn póòpù ti ń yan orúkọ ìtẹ́ nígbà tí a bá yan wọn gẹ́gẹ́ bí póòpù. Gbogbo àwọn póòpù jẹ́ “antikristi,” èyí tí ó túmọ̀ sí “òdì sí Kristi.” Ọ̀rọ̀ náà “anti” túmọ̀ sí “òdì sí.” Gẹ́gẹ́ bí àwọn antikristi, wọ́n ti gba orúkọ baba wọn nípa ẹ̀mí, ẹni tí í ṣe Sátánì. Sátánì àti àwọn póòpù ni a fi ìmísí mọ̀ dájú gẹ́gẹ́ bí antikristi.

> “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.

> “Ìpinnu aṣòdì sí Kristi láti mú ìṣọ̀tẹ̀ tí ó bẹ̀rẹ̀ ní ọ̀run ṣẹ yóò máa bá a lọ láti ṣiṣẹ́ nínú àwọn ọmọ àìgbọ́ràn.” Testimonies, ìdìpọ̀ 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.

Póòpù jẹ́ aṣojú Sátánì, nítorí náà wọ́n méjèèjì lòdì sí Kristi, àti nípa bẹ́ẹ̀ wọ́n ni “òdì sí Kristi.” Wọ́n máa ń yan orúkọ kan nígbà tí wọ́n bá gba ipò Póòpù, wọ́n sì di aṣojú Sátánì lórí ayé.

> “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.

> “Láti lè rí èrè àti ọlá ayé gbà, a mú ìjọ náà wá sí wíwá ojúrere àti àtìlẹ́yìn àwọn ènìyàn ńlá ayé; àti nípa bẹ́ẹ̀, lẹ́yìn tí ó ti kọ Kristi sílẹ̀, a fà á sí i láti fi ìgbọràn rẹ̀ fún aṣojú Sátánì—bìṣọ́ọ̀bù ti Róòmù.” The Great Controversy, 50.

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

Nípa iṣẹ́ wọn ni ẹ̀yin yóò fi mọ̀ wọ́n, àwọn póòpù sì ń bá iṣẹ́ kan náà lọ gẹ́gẹ́ bí Sátánì.

> “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.

> “Nípasẹ̀ póòpù ti Róòmù ni a ti ń bá iṣẹ́ kan náà lọ níbí lórí ayé gẹ́gẹ́ bí a ti ń ṣe é ní àgbàlá ọ̀run kí wọ́n tó lé ọmọ-aládé òkùnkùn jáde. Sátánì wá láti tún òfin Ọlọ́run ṣe ní ọ̀run, àti láti pèsè àtúnṣe tirẹ̀ fún un. Ó gbé ìdájọ́ tirẹ̀ ga ju ti Ẹlẹ́dàá rẹ̀ lọ, ó sì fi ìfẹ́ tirẹ̀ ga ju ìfẹ́ Jèhófà lọ, àti ní ọ̀nà yìí ó fẹrẹ̀ẹ́ kede pé Ọlọ́run lè ṣàṣìṣe. Póòpù náà pẹ̀lú ń tọ ipa ọ̀nà kan náà, àti nígbà tí ó ń jẹ́wọ́ àìṣeéṣe-fàṣẹ̀sùn fún ara rẹ̀, ó ń wá ọ̀nà láti tún òfin Ọlọ́run ṣe kí ó lè bá èrò tirẹ̀ mu, ní ìrònú pé òun ní agbára láti ṣàtúnṣe àwọn àṣìṣe tí ó rò pé ó rí nínú àwọn ìlànà àti àwọn àṣẹ Olúwa ọ̀run àti ayé. Ní tòótọ́, ó ń sọ fún ayé pé, Èmi yóò fún yín ní àwọn òfin tí ó dára ju ti Jèhófà lọ. Ẹ̀gàn wo ni èyí jẹ́ sí Ọlọ́run ọ̀run!” 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.

Bí ó tilẹ̀ jẹ́ pé Seleucus Nicator ló dá Ìjọba Seleucid sílẹ̀, ọ̀pọ̀lọpọ̀ àwọn ọba tó tẹ̀ lé e yan orúkọ “Antiochus,” gẹ́gẹ́ bí àmì ọlá, kì í ṣe fún Seleucus, ṣùgbọ́n fún baba rẹ̀. Antiochus, bàbá Seleucus, jẹ́ ọlọ́lá kan àti gẹ́néràlì kan nínú iṣẹ́ Ọba Philip II ti Macedon, ẹni tí í ṣe baba Alexander the Great. Ipò ọlọ́lá yìí àti ìtàn iṣẹ́ ológun yìí ràn án lọ́wọ́ láti fi ìpìlẹ̀ múlẹ̀ fún ipa pàtàkì ti Seleucus fúnra rẹ̀ àti ìgbéga rẹ̀ sí agbára lẹ́yìn ikú Alexander the Great.

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.

A fi ìjọba Seliukusi múlẹ̀ nígbà tí ó gba àkóso lórí mẹ́ta nínú àwọn agbègbè mẹ́rin ìjọba Alẹkisáńdà. Róòmù pẹ̀lú ṣẹ́gun agbára ilẹ̀-ayé mẹ́ta kí ó lè gba àkóso, kí ó sì di ọba àríwá. Nígbà tí Seliukusi ti fi ìlà-oòrùn, ìwọ̀-oòrùn, àti àríwá múlẹ̀ lábẹ́ ara rẹ̀, ó di ọba àríwá nínú ìtàn ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀, olú-ìlú rẹ̀ sì ni ìlú Bábílónì. Ọ̀pọ̀ nínú àwọn ọba tí ó tẹ̀ lé e yan orúkọ “Antiochus” nígbà tí wọ́n gba ìtẹ́ àríwá, kí wọ́n lè bu ọlá fún baba-nlá wọn nípa òṣèlú. Ọ̀rọ̀ tó jọra náà rọrùn láti rí, bí o bá yàn láti rí i. Bí o kò bá rí i, o kò rí i.

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.

Orúkọ náà “Antiochus” (Ἀντίοχος ní èdè Giriki) ti inú àwọn èròjà Giriki “anti” (tí ó túmọ̀ sí “sí ìlòdì sí” tàbí “ìdákẹ́jì”) àti “ocheo” (tí ó túmọ̀ sí “dì mú ṣinṣin” tàbí “tọ́jú kí ó dúró”). Àwọn ọba àríwá yan orúkọ náà láti pa ogún ìṣèlú wọn mọ́ pẹ̀lú baba, gẹ́gẹ́ bí aṣòdì sí Kristi (àwọn póòpù) náà ṣe ń yan orúkọ nígbà tí wọ́n bá bẹ̀rẹ̀ sí í jọba. Gẹ́gẹ́ bí àwọn póòpù ṣe jẹ́ aṣojú baba wọn, Èṣù, bẹ́ẹ̀ náà ni àwọn Antiochus ti Ìjọba Siria jẹ́ àpẹẹrẹ aṣojú baba wọn. Nínú ìlò yìí, Antiochus dúró fún aṣojú-ìpò baba wọn. Aṣojú-ìpò agbára póòpù ní 1989 ni Orílẹ̀-Èdè Amẹ́ríkà, àti ẹ̀rí ayé ń fìdí ìbáṣepọ̀ múlẹ̀ láàárín aṣòdì sí Kristi, Pope John Paul II, àti Ronald Reagan nínú iṣẹ́ wọn láti wó Soviet Union àtijọ́ lulẹ̀.

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.

Nínú ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́wàá títí dé mẹ́rìndínlógún, ẹsẹ̀ àkọ́kọ́ àti ẹsẹ̀ ìkẹyìn ní ìtọ́kasí tààrà sí ẹsẹ̀ ogójì àti mọ́kànlélógójì. Ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́wàá ń ṣàfihàn ẹsẹ̀ ogójì ní tààrà. Ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́rìndínlógún ń ṣàfihàn ẹsẹ̀ mọ́kànlélógójì ní tààrà. Àwọn ẹsẹ̀ wọ̀nyí ń ṣojú apá kan nínú àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ Dáníẹ́lì tí ó ní ìbáṣepọ̀ pẹ̀lú àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn.

> “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. . . .

> “Kì í ṣe ìwé Ìfihàn ni a fi èdìdì dì, bí kò ṣe apá yẹn nínú àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ Dáníẹ́lì tí ó ní í ṣe pẹ̀lú àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn. Ìwé Mímọ́ wí pé, ‘Ṣùgbọ́n ìwọ, Dáníẹ́lì, pa ọ̀rọ̀ náà mọ́, kí o sì di ìwé náà ní èdìdì, títí dé àkókò ìkẹyìn: ọ̀pọ̀ yóò máa lọ kiri, ìmọ̀ yóò sì máa pọ̀ si i’ (Dáníẹ́lì 12:4). Nígbà tí a ṣí ìwé náà, a ṣe ìkéde pé, ‘Àkókò kì yóò sí mọ́.’ (Wo Ìfihàn 10:6.) Ìwé Dáníẹ́lì ti ṣí ní báyìí, ìfihàn tí Kristi sì fi fún Jòhánù yóò dé ọ̀dọ̀ gbogbo àwọn olùgbé ayé. Nípa ìpọ̀síwájú ìmọ̀ ni a ó fi pèsè àwọn ènìyàn kan láti dúró ní àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn....”

> “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.

> “Nínú ìròyìn áńgẹ́lì àkọ́kọ́, a ń pe ènìyàn láti jọ́sìn Ọlọ́run, Ẹlẹ́dàá wa, ẹni tí ó dá ayé àti gbogbo ohun tí ó wà nínú rẹ̀. Wọ́n ti fi ọlá fún ilé-iṣẹ́ kan ti Pápásì, ní ṣíṣe òfin Jèhófà di aláìní agbára, ṣùgbọ́n ìmúlòye yóò pọ̀ sí i lórí kókó yìí.” Selected Messages, ìwé 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.

Ní àkókò òpin ní ọdún 1989, àwọn ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́fà ìkẹyìn ti orí kọkànlá ìwé Dáníẹ́lì dúró fún “ìpín àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ Dáníẹ́lì tí ó ní í ṣe pẹ̀lú àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn.” A mọ̀ ọ́ nígbà tí a tú un sílẹ̀ nígbà náà, ìtú-sílẹ̀ yẹn sì mú ìmúgbòòrò ìmọ̀ wá nípa “ìdásílẹ̀ ipò Pápá, ṣíṣe òfin Jèhófà di aláìní agbára.” Alfa àti Omega máa ń fi òpin hàn nípasẹ̀ ìbẹ̀rẹ̀ nígbà gbogbo, ìlànà ìdánwò tí ó sì bẹ̀rẹ̀ ní 1989 jẹ́ ètò láti mú kí a bí ẹ̀ka olùjọsìn méjì jáde.

> 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.

> Ó sì wí pé, Máa lọ ní ọ̀nà rẹ, Dáníẹ́lì: nítorí a ti pa àwọn ọ̀rọ̀ náà mọ́, a sì ti fi èdìdì dì wọ́n títí di àkókò ìkẹyìn. Ọ̀pọ̀lọpọ̀ ni a ó sọ di mímọ́, a ó sì sọ wọ́n di funfun, a ó sì dán wọn wò; ṣùgbọ́n àwọn ènìyàn búburú yóò máa hu ìwà búburú: kò sì sí ẹni kankan nínú àwọn ènìyàn búburú tí yóò lóye; ṣùgbọ́n àwọn ọlọ́gbọ́n yóò lóye. Dáníẹ́lì 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.

A wà ní àkókò ìkẹyìn ìlànà ìdánwò yẹn nísinsìnyí, nítorí pé ìjàngbọ̀n nípa àwọn ọlọ́ṣà ní ìbẹ̀rẹ̀ Adventism ni a tún ń ṣe nísinsìnyí. Láti dá àwọn ọlọ́ṣà mọ̀ gẹ́gẹ́ bí Orílẹ̀-Èdè Amẹ́ríkà ni láti dá Antiochus mọ̀ gẹ́gẹ́ bí àwọn ọlọ́ṣà. Òun gan-an ni ìjàngbọ̀n kan náà ti àwọn Millerites àti àwọn 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.

Ní òpin ìlànà ìdánwò náà, gẹ́gẹ́ bí ó ti rí ní ìbẹ̀rẹ̀ ìlànà ìdánwò náà, èyí tí ó bẹ̀rẹ̀ ní ọdún 1989, Kìnnìún ẹ̀yà Júdà tú èdìdì kúrò lórí “apá yẹn nínú àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ Dáníẹ́lì tí ó ní í ṣe pẹ̀lú àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn.” Ní ọdún 1989, ó jẹ́ àwọn ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́fà ìkẹyìn ti Dáníẹ́lì mọ́kànlá, ṣùgbọ́n ní òpin náà, ó jẹ́ ìtàn ìkọ̀kọ̀ ti ẹsẹ̀ ogójì, èyí tí a fi àpẹẹrẹ hàn nínú àwọn ẹsẹ̀ mẹ́wàá sí mẹ́rìndínlógún.

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.

A ó máa bá ìtẹ̀síwájú ìṣàgbéyẹ̀wò wa nípa ìlà mẹ́fà ti àwọn àríyànjiyàn nínú ìtàn Àdífẹnítìsíìmù lọ nínú àwọn àpilẹ̀kọ tó ń bọ̀. Èkínní nínú àwọn àríyànjiyàn mẹ́fà wọ̀nyí ń ṣàfihàn èyí ìkẹyìn nínú wọn. A ó lo àríyànjiyàn àkọ́kọ́ àti ti ìkẹyìn láti fi bo àwọn àríyànjiyàn mẹ́rin yòókù bí a ṣe ń ṣí àwọn èròjà tí ó wà nínú ìsapá ọ̀tá òdodo láti dènà àwọn ènìyàn Ọlọ́run kúrò ní pípín “ìran náà” ní ọ̀nà tí ó tọ́, èyí tí a ti fi ààmì Róòmù múlẹ̀.

> “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.

> “Àyàfi bí a bá lóye pàtàkì àwọn àkókò tí ń yára kọjá sínú ayérayé, tí a sì múra sílẹ̀ láti dúró ní ọjọ́ ńlá Ọlọ́run, a ó di ìríjú aláìṣòótọ́. Olùṣọ́ ni ó yẹ kí ó mọ àkókò òru. Ohun gbogbo ti wọ ìwúwo ọ̀rọ̀ mímọ́ báyìí, ìwúwo tí gbogbo àwọn tí ó gbà òtítọ́ fún àkókò yìí gbọ́dọ̀ mọ̀. Wọ́n yẹ kí wọ́n hùwà ní ìbámu pẹ̀lú ọjọ́ Ọlọ́run. Àwọn ìdájọ́ Ọlọ́run ti fẹ́rẹ̀ẹ́ ṣubú lórí ayé, a sì nílò láti máa múra sílẹ̀ fún ọjọ́ ńlá náà.

> “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.

> “Àkókò wa níye lórí. A kò ní ju ọjọ́ díẹ̀ lọ, bẹ́ẹ̀ni díẹ̀ gan-an, gẹ́gẹ́ bí àkókò àyè ìdánwò láti múra sílẹ̀ fún ìyè ọjọ́ iwájú tí kò lè kú. A kò ní àkókò láti fi ṣòfò nínú ìṣísẹ̀ àìlètò. Ó yẹ kí a máa bẹ̀rù láti kan fẹ́rẹ̀ẹ́ kàn lórí ojú ọ̀rọ̀ Ọlọ́run.” Testimonies, volume 6, 407.

Back to Articles