Beginning: the structure

 How do we know Acts 27 is a reform line? A parable = prophecy.

The big picture of Acts 27:

 Without even reading:

 If you open your maps in the Bible of Paul's journey, this is his 4th missionary journey. It's the
only journey to Rome
 This journey took place in 2 ships.
 Did Paul have the choice to participate in this journey?

Act 27:1 And when it was determined that we should sail into Italy, they delivered Paul and certain
other prisoners unto one named Julius, a centurion of Augustus' band.

 Paul had no choice of taking this journey, it's different than the 3 journeys in this sense.

Two ships

Adramyttium ship

Act 27:2 And entering into a ship of Adramyttium, we launched, meaning to sail by the coasts of
Asia; one Aristarchus, a Macedonian of Thessalonica, being with us.

Act 27:6 And there the centurion found a ship of Alexandria sailing into Italy; and he put us therein.

Thayer's Definition:

Adramyttium = “I shall abide in death”

1) Adramyttium, a seaport of Mysia

Stong's

From Ἀδραμύττειον Adramutteion (a place in Asia Minor); Adramyttene or belonging to

Adramyttium: - of Adramyttium.

 Abide in death? Look it up in EGW or in webster's dictionary.

Psa 119:90 Thy faithfulness is unto all generations: thou hast established the earth, and it abideth.

 Two parts in the verse (easy to see in Psalms).

 Abide = all generations.
o If you look at the word generation, Strong describes a generation as a circle. So if it's all
generations it's like many circles that never end.

 Ezekiel 37. To turn the bodies to an army you need to prophecy. But if you just prophecy
nothing happens, life has to come to the bones. You can't be more dead than them.
  And we they're the 4th generation. How?
 So at beginning of Paul's 4th missionary there's the story there's a ship that decided to abide
in death unto all generation. So no matter what generation is coming, it's deciding to abide in
death.

The ship from Alexandria.

 And then we have the story of a second ship. We began to look at it in verse 6.
 A ship that came from Alexandria was known for charging wheat.

Act 27:38 And when they had eaten enough, they lightened the ship, and cast out the wheat into
the sea.

 We can also know that from history. Egypt was known as the bread basket of the world. The
agricultural production on the Nile delta, supplied much grain that fed the Roman empire. So
this wheat was carried to Alexandria dn then to Romans. This story of the ship, happens at the
beginning of the winter. So they charge the lasts ship to feed the Roman empire.

They had no means of cooking; no fire could be lighted, the utensils had been washed overboard,
and most of the provisions were water-soaked and spoiled. In fact while their good ship was
wrestling with the tempest, and the waves talked with death, no one desired food. LP 265.2

 So it's a good ship wrestling with the tempest.

 Ship = good ship, wheat ship, designed to feed the empire of the day, trying to take Paul to his
destiny: to take the gospel to Rome.
 So it's two ships, all marked by the 4th generations. Covering the same period, but from 2
different perspective:
o Of those who decide to abide in death
o The other of God's true and pure people.

Passangers of the ships

Act 27:2 And entering into a ship of Adramyttium, we launched, meaning to sail by the coasts of
Asia; one Aristarchus, a Macedonian of Thessalonica, being with us.

 'us': Luke, paul and Aristarchus.

 What makes them different from the rest? They're Christian. Who do they represent?

Name meanings

 Artistarchus : 'the chief or best ruler'

o Ruler who is the best or the chief: the head or most prominent, supreme.
o Filemon 1:24 : Paul discusses about Aristarchus, Luke, and others etc. So they're
coperators of Paul.
o Col 4:10 : he is his fellow prisioner.

o LP 262.1
 The season of safe navigation was already far advanced, before the apostle's ship
left Caesarea, and the time was fast approaching when travel by sea would be
closed for the year. Every day's delay increased the peril of the voyage. But the
journey which would be difficult and dangerous to the ordinary traveler, would be
doubly trying to the apostle as a prisoner. Roman soldiers were held responsible
with their own lives for the security of their prisoners, and this had led to the
custom of chaining prisoners by the right wrist to the left wrist of soldiers, who
relieved each other in turn. Thus not only could the apostle have no movement
free, but he was placed in close and constant connection with men of the most
uncongenial and absolutely repulsive character; men who were not only
uneducated and unrefined, but who, from the demoralizing influence of their
surroundings, had become brutal and degraded. This custom, however, was less
rigidly observed on shipboard than when prisoners were ashore. One
circumstance greatly lightened the hardships of his lot. He was permitted to
enjoy the companionship of his brethren, Luke and Aristarchus. In his letter to
the Colossians, he speaks of the latter as his “fellow-prisoner.” But it was as an
act of choice, because of his affection for Paul, that Aristarchus shared his
bondage, and ministered to him in his afflictions. LP 262.1

 That indicates that he could have taken his jurney on his own. But to light his load
he was accompanied by 2 companions.
 He was a prisoner by choice because he could minister to Paul.

o He represents Christ
o Dn 10:13 - Christ is chieff prince (EGW)

 Luke : 'light giving'

o We don't see his name in Acts 27 or in Acts.
o No where he describes his experience. He never speaks of himself.
o He is dictating the words.
o Application of his career as a physician: to cure or make whole, free from sickness. If
we're sick as dead like in Ezekiel, the prophetic message, but what channel it comes
through or who adminsers that? The HS. EGW says the writers of the writers that they
o He represents the HS

Paul : 'small or little (cease, released, separated, in the sense of sin)'

o He is the only one that is not a prisioner by choice, he has to participate weather he
likes it or not.

 The journey begins in Ceasarea.

o Theyers: to be severed (machucado) or cut
 The stone is cutfrom the mountain in Daniel 2
 In the beginning of Paul we have Ceasarea.
 So this is were the process of being cut begins, at the ToE

Paul's experience in Ceasarea

Act 24:24 And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he
sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ.
Act 24:25 And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix
trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for
thee.

 What message does Paul give in Ceasarea? 3 messages. What messages? First angel's
messages?
 Feliz was afraid, and fear is the response of the 1st angel
 Why does this message left Feliz afraid. EGW (AA 425.3) says this message brought to memory
his past, his sinful condition, he saw himself as what he was and this filled him of terror. She
says it was the first time he received a message from God. His response was: he sent Paul
away and said that he would for him when he needed. EGW says he was never given another
opportunity to repent and change. Only chance in his life. He rejected it. And if you reject,
does Paul come again? This was a life and death message.

Act 24:27 But after two years Porcius Festus came into Felix' room: and Felix, willing to shew the
Jews a pleasure, left Paul bound.

 So 2 years after we're still in Ceasarea and we see a change from Feliz to Festus.
 What was offered by Paul to Felix? Life. But he chose death. He was already dead, and he
chose to abide in death.
 Change of leadership at the ToE?
o 1989: Reagan to Bush
o Darius and Cyrus
 When it comes to the state power there's change of leadership at the ToE.
 What type power are we dealing with Festus and Felix? State power.

**********************************************************************************
*****

Pyrrhus history
 AT Jones: GEP chapter 17
 Notes of Australian prophecy school

Why is Pyrrhus a parable

 Cherry picking concpet.

 Dn 8:8, Daniel cherry picked 4 years of 4 generals
 Alexander's fell

 Acts 27 picks another cherry: 273.

**********************************************************************************
*****
  Big picture:
o Two ships
 Adramyttium: 'I will abide in death' name.
 Psalms 119
 Alexandia:
 full of wheat, designed to feed the world (EGW says it's a good ship)
 struggling with the tempest

 ToE = Ceasarea
o Paul is giving the 3rd angel at the ToE.
o ToE because t
 here's a change of leadership.
 It's where he gets on the boat, where he begins.
o Ceasarea 'to be svered'. Dn 2.
o Why the 1st am? Acts 24:25. Because of Felix' reaction (fear)

**********************************************************************************
****

 Paul presents his case to 2 authorities: Felix and Festus and also to Agripa

Act 25:13 And after certain days king Agrippa and Bernice came unto Caesarea to salute
Festus.
Act 25:14 And when they had been there many days, Festus declared Paul's cause unto the
king, saying, There is a certain man left in bonds by Felix:

Though Agrippa was a Jew, he did not share the bigoted zeal and blind prejudice of the
Pharisees. “This man,” he said to Festus, “might have been set at liberty, if he had not
appealed unto Caesar.” But the case had been referred to that higher tribunal, and it was now
beyond the jurisdiction of either Festus or Agrippa. AA 438.5

 So Agripa is a Jewish king. He had oversight of the temple. Under the Romans they had this
rights. He and two man were to point and chose priests and the administration of the temple.

Act 25:22 Then Agrippa said unto Festus, I would also hear the man myself. To morrow, said
he, thou shalt hear him.
Act 25:23 And on the morrow, when Agrippa was come, and Bernice, with great pomp, and
was entered into the place of hearing, with the chief captains, and principal men of the city, at
Festus' commandment Paul was brought forth.

Act 26:1 Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Thou art permitted to speak for thyself. Then Paul
stretched forth the hand, and answered for himself:
Act 26:2 I think myself happy, king Agrippa, because I shall answer for myself this day before
thee touching all the things whereof I am accused of the Jews:
Act 26:3 Especially because I know thee to be expert in all customs and questions which are
among the Jews: wherefore I beseech thee to hear me patiently.
 What added info that give us about Agrippa? Expert in all customs and question. Not only a
Jew himself, but also knows what it means to be a jew.
 Was Paul able to say that to Felix? No.
 Skip most of chapter 26..

Act 26:22 Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to
small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say
should come:

Act 26:26 For the king knoweth of these things, before whom also I speak freely: for I am
persuaded that none of these things are hidden from him; for this thing was not done in a
corner.
Act 26:27 King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets? I know that thou believest.

 What did Agripa already know?

 EGW says in RH that Paul gave Agripa the leading events of the life of Christ. He testified that
the Messiah of prophecy had come. RH Nov 16, 1911 par. 11
 Paul delineates prophecy to Agripa and his response is:

Act 26:28 Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.
Act 26:29 And Paul said, I would to God, that not only thou, but also all that hear me this day,
were both almost, and altogether such as I am, except these bonds.

 EGW: LP 255.2 EGW is wondering what Agripa was thinking. Family history, Herod (great
grandfather). Herod (there's a few Herods), this was the responsible of the masacre of the
children in Bethlehem. Antips. Murdered JB. His father: killen apostle James. Think of the sins
of the fathers: kill the prophets. She gives us 4 generation.

Did the mind of Agrippa at these words revert to the past history of his family, and their
fruitless efforts against Him whom Paul was preaching? Did he think of his great-grandfather
Herod, and the massacre of the innocent children of Bethlehem? of his great-uncle Antipas,
and the murder of John the Baptist? of his own father, Agrippa I., and the martyrdom of the
apostle James? Did he see in the disasters which speedily befell these kings an evidence of the
displeasure of God in consequence of their crimes against his servants? Did the pomp and
display of that day remind Agrippa of the time when his own father, a monarch more
powerful than he, stood in that same city, attired in glittering robes, while the people shouted
that he was a god? Had he forgotten how, even before the admiring shouts had died away,
vengeance, swift and terrible, had befallen the vainglorious king? Something of all this flitted
across Agrippa's memory; but his vanity was flattered by the brilliant scene before him, and
pride and self-importance banished all nobler thoughts. LP 255.2

 This is the same is said to Belshazar.

Dan 5:22 And thou his son, O Belshazzar, hast not humbled thine heart, though thou knewest
all this;

 EGW says he was close… Agrippa was convinced of the right

 Almost persuaded meaning

Festus, Agrippa, and Bernice were the criminals who should in justice have worn the fetters
placed upon the apostle. All were guilty of grievous crimes. These offenders had that day
heard the offer of salvation through the name of Christ. One, at least, had been almost
persuaded to accept of grace and pardon. But to be almost persuaded, means to put aside the
proffered mercy, to be convinced of the right way, but to refuse to accept the cross of a
crucified Redeemer. LP 260.1

Application

 Felix and Festus = Roman state (USA)

 Agrippa = Jewish church (SDA)
 So we know this journey of the USA and the SDA church, both coming to a period of
judgment.

Parables
Dan 8:8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was
broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.

 She did a nice diagram of that history.

o 323 - 301 is a period of 4 wars. There's dozens of horns. Then 5 [3rd and 4th wars], then
4 [301-298], then 3 then 2 [KN and KS]
o So 8:8 goes 323 to 301.

 Why does he pick those cherries? If we go in depth, he could have well picked others
[impoprante speaking]
 Why doesn't he pick them all? Too many.

Act 27:37 And we were in all in the ship two hundred threescore and sixteen souls.

 276 is part of that parable.

**********************************************************************************
********
 She did a nice summary of Cesarea as the ToE. [take picture of the board]

Acts 27:1-5 : ship of Adramyttium

Act 27:1 And when it was determined that we should sail into Italy, they delivered Paul and certain
other prisoners unto one named Julius, a centurion of Augustus' band.
Act 27:2 And entering into a ship of Adramyttium, we launched, meaning to sail by the coasts of
Asia; one Aristarchus, a Macedonian of Thessalonica, being with us.

 Adramyttium = 'I will abide in death'

  The 1st angel makes us fear, then we choose if we will abide in death or not.
 From vs 1-5 we should see the fall of the state (USA) and the SDA church [Festus, Felix and
Agrippa]
 We already saw the ship and the 3 Christians.

Sidon
Act 27:3 And the next day we touched at Sidon. And Julius courteously entreated Paul, and gave
him liberty to go unto his friends to refresh himself.

Sidon or Zidon = “hunting”

From H6679 in the sense of catching fish; fishery; Tsidon, the name of a son of Canaan, and of a
place in Palestine: - Sidon, Zidon.

 Greek word from a Hebrew word. It's the Hebrew word that begins to give us the definition.

A primitive root; to lie alongside (that is, in wait); by implication to catch an animal (figuratively
men); (denominative from H6718) to victual (for a journey): -

 Why is he tarrying? He is fishing. You have to have patience. Otherwise you'll espantar peces.
 Why is that the name of a city?

Gen 10:1 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto
them were sons born after the flood.

Gen 10:6 And the sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan.

Gen 10:15 And Canaan begat Sidon his firstborn, and Heth,

 With the concept of generations, what does that make him? 4th generation. Second witness
for 4th generation.

1Ch 1:13 And Canaan begat Zidon his firstborn, and Heth,

 Sidon = Zidon

 Sidon, until Tire came to ascendency, Sidon was the most powerful economic power of the
Mediterranean

Isa 23:1 The burden of Tyre. Howl, ye ships of Tarshish; for it is laid waste, so that there is no house,
no entering in: from the land of Chittim it is revealed to them.
Isa 23:2 Be still, ye inhabitants of the isle; thou whom the merchants of Zidon, that pass over the
sea, have replenished.

 Sidon made Tyre grow. When you replenish something what do you do? Potatoes example.
Was that stock once full? First it's full, gets low, and then empty.
  If we consider Tyre as a symbol of the Papacy, the USA replenishes the papacy. Papacy in the
height of his power: 1260.
 Sidon provided material and men to build [rebuild?] the city

Jer 25:22 And all the kings of Tyrus, and all the kings of Zidon, and the kings of the isles which are
beyond the sea,

 Tyrus, Zidon and the kings (conglomerate)

 There's just one Tyrus and one Zidon. It's a sucession of kings (I think) and not many kings of
Zidon and Tyrus.

Joe 3:4 Yea, and what have ye to do with me, O Tyre, and Zidon, and all the coasts of Palestine? will
ye render me a recompence? and if ye recompense me, swiftly and speedily will I return your
recompence upon your own head;

 Tyre, Zidon and all the coasts of Palestine (conglomerate). Network of city states (not a coast
of nice beaches)

 This is the triple union.

o Plural = dragon
o Tyre = beast = Papacy
o Zidon = false prophet = USA

 Ez 28 and 29 and see the same pattern. Judgment on the dragon power, judment on Tyre
(Satan) and between them is the judgment on Zidon.

Act 27:3 And the next day we touched at Sidon. And Julius courteously entreated Paul, and gave
him liberty to go unto his friends to refresh himself.

 Paul's experience at Sidon was: good. What was this to Paul? Refreshing.
 Is 28:10-12
o 'this is the rest and refreshing yet they would not hear'
o Rain.
o EGW's description: the experience was an Oasis: source of water, and that it gave him
the strenght for the rest of the journey.

Class
 Big picture: Paul's journey to Rome. 4th and last missionary.

Vs 1-5
 He boards ni Ceasarea and in vs 5 they touch ground. And then they come to the other ship.

The line
 Caesarea, sidon, Cyprus, (sea of Cilicia and Pamphylia)

Sydon
  Tarrying (name). Hunting but not active, waiting for fish
 Refreshing for Paul
 Is 23:1-2

 Jer 25:22 and Joel 3:4

Another witness: judgment on the triple union

Judgment on Tyre
Eze 28:13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the
sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and
the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in
the day that thou wast created.

 So Tyre has another meaning.

Eze 28:15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found
in thee.
Eze 28:17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by
reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may
behold thee.

The dragon
Eze 29:1 In the tenth year, in the tenth month, in the twelfth day of the month, the word of the
LORD came unto me, saying,
Eze 29:2 Son of man, set thy face against Pharaoh king of Egypt, and prophesy against him, and
against all Egypt:
Eze 29:3 Speak, and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, Pharaoh king of Egypt,
the great dragon that lieth in the midst of his rivers, which hath said, My river is mine own, and I
have made it for myself.

In between: judgment of Tyre

Eze 28:21 Son of man, set thy face against Zidon, and prophesy against it,

*********************************************************************************

The voyage began prosperously, and the day after they started, they cast anchor in the harbor of
Sidon. Here Julius, the centurion who had listened to the apostle's address before Agrippa, and had
thus been favorably disposed toward him, “courteously entreated Paul,” and being informed that
there were Christians in the place, he “gave him liberty to go unto his friends to refresh himself.”
The favor was highly appreciated by the apostle, who was in feeble health, and but scantily provided
with comforts for the long journey. His brief stay in Sidon was like an oasis in his barren and dreary
path, and proved a comfort and encouragement to him during the anxious, storm-tossed weeks
upon the sea. LP 263.1
Jer 25:17 Then took I the cup at the LORD'S hand, and made all the nations to drink, unto whom the
LORD had sent me:
Jer 25:18 To wit, Jerusalem, and the cities of Judah, and the kings thereof, and the princes thereof,
to make them a desolation, an astonishment, an hissing, and a curse; as it is this day;

 What's in that cup? The wrath of God. When it's poured it's judgment.

Jer 25:22 And all the kings of Tyrus, and all the kings of Zidon, and the kings of the isles which are
beyond the sea,

 In that verse the judgment falls on the kings, but from Dn 2:38 we know a king = a kingdom.
And also in Rev 17 (heads = kings and kingdom)

So Sidon = 911

Cyprus
Act 27:4 And when we had launched from thence, we sailed under Cyprus, because the winds were
contrary.

 What's the difference with Caesarea and Sidon?

 Caesarea marks where they board, but here they don't port.

Thayer's

Cyprus = “love: a blossom [produce flowers]”

1) a very fertile and delightful island of the Mediterranean, lying between Cilicia and Syria

Hitchcock

fair; fairness

 Fair = beautiful

Son 4:7 Thou art all fair, my love; there is no spot in thee.

 Fair = spotless

Near the close of the second angel's message, [see Appendix.] I saw a great light from heaven
shining upon the people of God. The rays of this light seemed bright as the sun. And I heard the
voices of angels crying, “Behold, the Bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet Him!” EW 238.1

This was the midnight cry, which was to give power to the second angel's message. Angels were
sent from heaven to arouse the discouraged saints and prepare them for the great work before
them. The most talented men were not the first to receive this message. Angels were sent to the
humble, devoted ones, and constrained them to raise the cry, “Behold, the Bridegroom cometh; go
ye out to meet Him!” Those entrusted with the cry made haste, and in the power of the Holy Spirit
sounded the message, and aroused their discouraged brethren. This work did not stand in the
wisdom and learning of men, but in the power of God, and His saints who heard the cry could not
resist it. The most spiritual received this message first, and those who had formerly led in the work
were the last to receive and help swell the cry, “Behold, the Bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet
Him!” EW 238.2

In every part of the land, light was given upon the second angel's message, and the cry melted the
hearts of thousands. It went from city to city, [people waking up the people] and from village to
village, until the waiting people of God were fully aroused. In many churches the message was not
permitted to be given, and a large company who had the living testimony left these fallen churches.
[Babylonian churches] A mighty work was accomplished by the midnight cry. The message was
heart-searching, leading the believers to seek a living experience for themselves. They knew that
they could not lean upon one another. EW 238.3

 This August 1844. MC of Millerite history.

 Lifting up of a people who had the living the testimony.
 Living testimony = witness of the message.
 When something is lifted up it is pure, this living testimony.

Fair (Meriam Webster's Bible: fair water or sky (clear))

 From April to July their messge is clouded. In July there's a clarification. That's why there's
confusion and fanaticism.

Two false prophets

 Cyprus is a period (they pass under it) in contrast to a port. Period not point. Like the MC.

 In Acts they have to lead with two false disciples

o Barjesus (Elymas) - Acts 13:8
 He is a false prophet from Cyprus, he fights against the disciples and never claims
to be part of the movement.
o Simon Magus - Acts 8:23
 EGW compares him with Demas, false bretheren.
 His problem was more than money, false bretheren.

Act 8:23 For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.

 'gall of bitterness' EGW uses to Kellog (Alpha apostasy = omega aposty). Kellog's problem was
twofold: profess to believe a message he didn't believe, and he hated God's appointed
leadership (descibed as gall of bitterness).

 So in Cyprus there's problems with both internal and external messages eventhough the
message is spotless.

 Fair = not diluded, purer

Contrary winds

Under Cyprus

Act 27:5 And when we had sailed over the sea of Cilicia and Pamphylia, we came to Myra, a city of
Lycia.

Thayer Definition:

1) to sail under, that is, to sail close by

2) to the leeward [under the sheltered side] of

Cyprus comes from a root word Kittim

Gen 10:1 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, andel Japheth: and unto
them were sons born after the flood.
Gen 10:2 The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech,
and Tiras.
Gen 10:3 And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah.
Gen 10:4 And the sons of Javan; Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim.

 There's 4 generations since Noah.

 We can expect to see judgment, progressive destruction, last generation (we have a number 4
in Caesarea, Sidon, Cyprus, showing us the 4th generation all the way in the line).

Moving on in the trip: Cilicia and Pamphylia

Act 27:5 And when we had sailed over the sea of Cilicia and Pamphylia, we came to Myra, a city of
Lycia.
Act 27:6 And there the centurion found a ship of Alexandria sailing into Italy; and he put us therein.
  Cilicia : overturn
 Pamphilia : a nation made up of every tribe
o 'the overturn of a nation made of every tribe'

Eze 21:27 I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it
is; and I will give it him.

 What do we usually mark in this period is the decline of the USA [Cicilia] and the rise of the UN
[a nation made of every tribe]

 The same that happens to the USA has to happen to the SDA because Felix receives the same
message as Agrippa and they are going to get the same judgment.

 SDA declines [Cilicia] and a nation of every tribe ascends [144k or 12 x 12]. How many tribes
are there? When do we say the 10 tirbes join the 2? MC? So there's the completion of the 12
tribes [10 + 2] and thus we get the 144k.

Joining of the 2 sticks

 Ezekiel 37
 History of Joseph

Myra : 'bitterness'

 Sweet in the mouth and bitter in the stomach. Disappointment of Oct 22, 1844.
 Also ties to the church of Smyrna (bitter experience)

Lycia : 'wolfish'

Perhaps akin to the base of G3022 (from the whitish hair); a wolf: -

Theyers
1) a wolf
2) metaphorically of cruel, greedy, rapacious [to take by violence or force], destructive men

 We didn't explain why Feliz was replaced by Festus. But his behaviour towards the Jews was
so bad (slaughter) that the Romans replaced him.

Strongs
From λύκη lukē (“light”); white: -

Theyers
1) light, bright, brilliant

1a) brilliant from whiteness, (dazzling) white

1a1) of the garments of angels, and of those exalted to the splendour of the heavenly state

1a2) shining or white garments worn on festive or state occasions

1a3) of white garments as the sign of innocence and purity of the soul

1b) dead white

1b1) of the whitening colour of ripening grain

 So this is the harvest after the SL.

Why is Paul in the bad ship?

 Parables have limitation: God is stuck with human affairs of human warfare, sailing or
whatever.

Class
The sixth to the seventh head

 We have between Cyprus and Myra then the USA falling and the UN rising. 6th to 7th head.
 What's the difference between the 6th and 7th if both are Trump leading the USA leading the
world?
o Answer:
 WWII. If Hitler would have won, leaders wouln'dt have liked it. It would have been
a dictaroship. Russia was the restriction, if it would have been beaten, there's no
restrain.
 Now Trump says 'we'll build a wall on the southern border and Mexico is going to
pay for it'. Mexico says 'no we won't'.
 In the 7th head Mexico will pay for it.

 First the church then the world: external (compare and contrast)
o First a dictator in the USA
o Then a dictator in the world (UN).

 When Bush went to war against all UN established protocols.

Parminder comment:

 The reason why France has been attacked 20 times since 2014 and other european countries
were not touched, is that when the USA says jump, France obeys.

2520 and Dn 11:40-45

  In Lev 26 we miss the original application.
 What we applied internally should apply also externally.
 Encourage us to educate ourselves in the external events.

Syrian proxy war

 We take the concept 'proxy war' and are ok with that. But we need to know the context.
 Russia has such a political influence because they sell 1/4 of the European oil. Sells 80% of it's
oil to Europe.
 When they have problems with like Georgia or Ukraine, they turn of the gas. Europe lives in
fear and are nervous to restrain Russia.
 So there's this conflict between middle east, Eurpe and Russia about gas.
 If Eurpoe was to build a duct of gas, Russia would lose its advantage.
 So in the Persian gulf there's gas. Part controlled by Iran (allied to Russia) and part by Qatar
(allied to the USA, largest military base in the middle east)
 2009 saw a proposal:
o Proposed to build pipe lines up to Europe (gas directly from the persian gulf bypassing
Russia).
o Problem: Syria (allied with Russia) is in the middle. You have to pass through it.
o When they asked Syria to pass gas they said: no chance.

Guerra de procuração da Síria.

Governo da Síria apoiado pela Rússia, e os rebeldes na Síria, apoiados pelos EUA.
A rússia tem tanta influência porque eles fornecem gás para a Europa. Então quando existe uma
controvérsia grande, eles simplesmente fecham o registro e as pessoas ficam sem gás nas suas
casas. É uma das razões poque eles içam preocupados com Rússia. Então há esse conflitou entre
Europa, Rússia e ocidente.
Obama disse em 2014 que para restringir Rússia, eles precisam arranjar uma outra maneira de
arranjar gás além da Rússia.
No golfo da Pérsia tem uma grande quantidade de gás, parte é controlado pelo Irã e outra parte
sobre controle de Qatar.
2009, Qata lançou uma proposta: Eles construíram —— a partir da sua reserva de gás, subindo por
toda a região até a Europa. A Europa teria gás diretamente do golfo da Pérsia, passando a Rússia.
Mas tinha um problema com isso. A Síria fica no meio do caminho, e a Síria é aliado da Rússia,
portanto rejeitaram essa proposta. Logo depois que rejeitaram a proposta do Qatar, Ira decidiu
fazer outra proposta, e a dantesca maneira que o Qatar, teriam que passar pela Síria. Mas agora a
Síria disse que nao teria problema, A Rússia nao se imputa muito com isso que as reservas do Ira são
menores que as do Qatar. Em 2012 assinaram um contrato para levar gasodutos do golfo da Pérsia
até a Europa. Não é coindência que em 2011, de repente há esse animo de derrubar o governo da
Síria. Acredita-e que nos primeiros aos da guerra civil da Síria, o Qatar cheguou a apoiar os rebeldes
com 3bi de dólares.
Turquia entra na historia apoiando os rebeldes, Síria e também a Isis para derrubar ————, então
esse conflito é extremamente significante, a influencia da Rússia sobre Europa e o equilíbrio de
poderes no meio ambiente, acaba-se resumindo a quem ganhará essa guerra. Isso nao tem.a ver
com a questão de pro democracia, ou guerrear contra Isis, por isso que a Rússia tem sido
primariamente quem estava bombardeando a ISis, eles precisam apoiar o governo Sírio. Então por
causa da localização da Síria, eles se tornam um aliado extremamente importante.
Isso é uma campanha para uma influencia global.
(Ela enfatiza que é implante sabermos a historia do mundo, o que esta acontecendo no mundo).
No fim do ano passado, Trump, decidiu que tiraria todas as tropas da Síria. A maioria das pessoas
pensaram que isso seria uma vitória para Rússia.

The joining of the two sticks.

o Felix (USA) falls
o Compare and contrast: we do Agrippa (SDA)

Line of the 144k

 1989
 911

Class
Summary

We looked at the sea of Cilicia and Pamphilia

 ToE: both chose to abide in death

 We get to the end of their journey and ship that remains in death is sailing over the sea of
Cilicia and Pamphile
 Here there was the overturn and the coming up was this nation made up of every tribe.
 We marked this as the MC to the SL.
 USA: we can identify then that falls between the MC and SL
 UN: they fall in that same period.
 We began discussed (not as deep as we need to), how is that raising up of the UN.
 Also we understood that the SDA structure is overturned.
 From here we would go into the study of the study of the two sticks.
o We spoke about - 723

The reign of Uzziah was drawing to a close, and Jotham was already bearing many of the burdens of
state, when Isaiah, of the royal line, was called, while yet a young man, to the prophetic mission.
The times in which Isaiah was to labor were fraught with peculiar peril to the people of God. The
prophet was to witness the invasion of Judah by the combined armies of northern Israel and of
Syria; he was to behold the Assyrian hosts encamped before the chief cities of the kingdom. During
his lifetime, Samaria was to fall, and the ten tribes of Israel were to be scattered among the
nations. [723] Judah was again and again to be invaded by the Assyrian armies, and Jerusalem was
to suffer a siege that would have resulted in her downfall had not God miraculously interposed.
Already grave perils were threatening the peace of the southern kingdom. The divine protection was
being removed, and the Assyrian forces were about to overspread the land of Judah. PK 305.2
  We are inclined to take this story [MC to SL] and see 10 + 2. The 10 are scattered among the
world, and thus the call to come out of Babylon at the end of the world.
o It's not us grafting to them but them to us
o This is the two sticks of Ezekiel 37
 Then we went to the lines and found a problem: the Nethinims have their harvest between SL
and the CoP.
 If we cry to someone in the world between the MC and the SL they become a Levite, not a
Nethinim.

 How can a Nethinim enter only after the SL?

o If we entered before our harvest, why can't they the same?
o If we consider the priest, from 1989 we're not talking about people being plowed but
about a movement.
o The Levites' harvest is from P to SL
o Nething: SL to CoP
 What are they coming into? To the Church triumphant?
 If the church is the firm platform, then we had to build the platform and they just
have to join it. Same thing with Noah's ark and the two kinds of animals.

The period of their probation was drawing near its close. The unbelieving, scoffing
inhabitants of the world were to have a special sign of God's divine power. Noah had
faithfully followed the instructions God had given to him. The ark was finished exactly as
God had directed. He had laid in store immense quantities of food for man and beast.
And after this was accomplished, God commanded the faithful Noah, “Come thou, and
all thy house, into the ark, for thee have I seen righteous before me.” Angels were sent
to collect from the forest and field the beasts which God had created. Angels went
before these animals and they followed, two and two, male and female, and clean
beasts by sevens. These beasts, from the most ferocious, down to the most gentle and
harmless, peacefully and solemnly marched into the ark. The sky seemed clouded with
birds of every description. They came flying to the ark, two and two, male and female,
and the clean birds by sevens. The world looked on with wonder—some with fear, but
they had become so hardened by rebellion that this most signal manifestation of God's
power had but a momentary influence upon them. For seven days these animals were
coming into the ark, and Noah was arranging them in the places prepared for them. 1SP
71.3

 We also can see that people from the world have joined the

(Parenthesis)
 When we consider the MC in the Millerite period where does it begin? July in Boston, then
Concord, then Exteter.
o Boston = MN
o Concord
o Exeter = MC

 We may be tempted to make the two sticks P and L. But I'd sugest that methodology is what
led us astray before. Correct methodology: compare and contrast.
 Coming back to the first ship

Act 27:5 And when we had sailed over the sea of Cilicia and Pamphylia, we came to Myra, a city of
Lycia.

SL
 Myra [SL] is where our ship ends

Myra [G3460] = myrth, myrthle juice

 Comes from a Hebrew word

Est 2:12 Now when every maid's turn was come to go in to king Ahasuerus, after that she had been
twelve months, according to the manner of the women, (for so were the days of their purifications
accomplished, to wit, six months with oil of myrrh, and six months with sweet odours, and with
other things for the purifying of the women;)

 Sweet in the mouth and bitter in the stomach. Disappointment of Oct 22, 1844.
 Also ties to the church of Smyrna (bitter experience)

Strong definition
From H4843; myrrh (as distilling in drops, and also as bitter): - myrrh.

H4843 - A primitive root; properly to trickle (see H4752); but used only as a denominative from
H4751; to be (causatively make) bitter (literally or figuratively): -

 They use this expression: the clouds destil water to the earth. That's rain. And at the SL we
mark the rain.
 But it also has this connotation of bitternes

BDB Definition:
1) myrrh
1a) an Arabian gum from the bark of a tree, used in sacred oil and in perfume

Lycia : 'wolfish'

Perhaps akin to the base of G3022 (from the whitish hair); a wolf: -

Theyers
1) a wolf
2) metaphorically of cruel, greedy, rapacious [to take by violence or force], destructive men

 We didn't explain why Feliz was replaced by Festus. But his behaviour towards the Jews was
so bad (slaughter) that the Romans replaced him.

Strongs
From λύκη lukē (“light”); white: -
 Theyers
1) light, bright, brilliant
1a) brilliant from whiteness, (dazzling) white
1a1) of the garments of angels, and of those exalted to the splendour of the heavenly state
1a2) shining or white garments worn on festive or state occasions
1a3) of white garments as the sign of innocence and purity of the soul
1b) dead white

1b1) of the whitening colour of ripening grain

 So this is the harvest after the SL.

 Pyrrhus [Putin] dies at Argos which means 'white'. It's believed that's because there's a mountain,
and plains because the visually given by the Argolic plains during harvest times.

Final thoughts or questions

 The ship symbolizes both the USA and the SDA church.

Class
We spent time studying the sea of Pamphilia and Cilicia. We considered the P,L,N. When we
soncsidered the two sticks, we took that to the line of the N (world) to try and understand what that
period signified between MC and SL. To understand that period it forced us to draw our lines. We
are studying the two ships, but we want to slip a study in between.

We want to review the line of the 144k and the fractals.

144k

 1989 - TOE - plowing

 911 - ER
 SL - LR
 COP
 2nd Advent

 Note: it's a repeat of the M line: 1798, Aug 11 1840, April 19 1844, Boston, Exeter, Oct 22.

3 camp meetings before Oct 22nd

 Quote by Joseph Bates. The midpoint he says it's about July 20, it's actually 21st (midway) and he
also calls this the T.T (April 19). He says that in Boston Snow gave the MC, and that it was believed
by the people, he'd (Snow) been trying to tell people of this before (July 21st), but people wouldn't
believe it. The next place the cry reached was a campmeeting between Boston and Exeter: Concord.
 He says that the cry resounded throughout the camp.
 This is the middle point between the two camp meetings.
 He then says that a camp was held in Exeter, and on his way to it he was deeply impressed that he
was going to hear something.
 So for the Millerites this is marking their swelling to the LC: Boston, Concord and Exeter.
 Was there any other leader in Concord like in Exeter?
 Bates was not aware of Concord, he says they found out afterwards.

“At Midnight a cry was raised, the bridegroom is coming, go ye out to meet him. Then all the virgins
arose, and trimmed their lamps.” We have already shown that the tarrying time for the bridegroom
by the prophetic periods was six months, beginning the 19th April down to 22nd October, 1844.
The Midnight of this dark stupid time would be about July 20th. S. S. Snow gave the true Midnight
Cry in the Tabernacle in Boston at this time, and it was received by the virgins in a different light
from what it ever was before. He says he had been trying to make people believe it before, but
without effect, because it was generally believed as we had been taught from 1840, that the
Midnight Cry embraced the whole subject, even beginning back to the French Revolution, and some
were old enough to believe it had begun in the day of the Apostle. But now it began to move with
rapid progress. God was giving the light by his spirit. I well remember some that I conversed with,
who related the wonderful manner in which they were moved upon to examine this subject before
they had heard it. BP2 72.1
At Midnight, in the dead of the night of this tarrying of the Bridegroom, “the cry was raised,” which
caused great agitation and excitement, looking with unparalleled interest at definite time, 10th of
the seventh month. BP2 72.2
A camp meeting was held in Concord, N.H., somewhere about the first of August. Here, as we
afterwards learned; the cry resounded throughout the camp. On the 12th of August, another was
held in Exeter, N. H. On my way there, something like the following seemed to be continually forcing
upon my mind. You are going to have new light here, something that will give a new impetus to the
work. How many thousand living witnesses there still are scattered over the land that experienced
the manifestation of the spirit’s power in applying to their hearts the many scriptures, and especially
the clear exposition of the parable of the ten virgins, at that meeting. There was light given and
received there, sure enough; and when that meeting closed, the granite hills of New Hampshire
rang with the mighty cry, Behold the Bridegroom cometh, go ye out to meet him! As the stages and
railroad cars rolled away through the different States, cities, and villages of New England, the
rumbling of the cry was still distinctly heard. Behold the Bridegroom cometh! Christ is coming on the
tenth day of the seventh month! Time is short, get ready! get ready!! In a few weeks this Way Mark,
like a beacon to the tempest-tossed mariner, was clearly seen in our pathway throughout New
England, and onward into other parts as it moved by camp meetings, conference and papers. Here
S. S. Snow published the true midnight cry (Aug. 22, 1844). “Then all those virgins arose and
trimmed their lamps.” General excitement and looking with awful and unparalleled interest to a
definite point. What a striking and perfect fulfilment. Who does not still remember how this
message flew as it were upon the wings of the wind - men and women moving on all the cardinal
points of the compass, going with all the speed of locomotives, in steamboats and rail cars,
freighted with bundles of books and papers, wherever they went distributing them almost as
profusely as the flying leaves of autumn. They purported to contain the last warning to a guilty
world. (How true it was that this was the last warning that they would ever receive from Advent
believers.) And then the agonizing prayers and entreaties for our families, friends and brethren.
Surely time can never efface those deep impressions, besides the deep searchings of heart and
consecrations of time, friends, property, all, all, to God. Surely here is where we put on the wedding
garments - “was made white.” Say, was this the work of God? If you deny it, you veto the work and
power of God among men, in every age, and make religion a something which man can never
understand. Admit that there were frailties and improprieties in some, and every thing else that
man is subject to; but it does not follow by any means that all was wrong. By the assistance and
grace of God, I feel bound to say without fear of contradiction, that his mighty cry was the power
and work of God. I should peril my soul to deny it, and so will every honest hearted one that had any
thing to do with it. Why, if this was not the work of God, then I should forever despair of finding the
road to heaven. I say again, in the fear of Him before whom I soon expect to appear to receive my
final destiny, it is downright infidelity in any Advent believer to doubt this being the fulfillment of
the parable of the ten virgins. It was the only conclusion we all came to at the time we felt and knew
the most about it that we ever shall in this mortal state. And surely none could understand it better
than those that were burdened and pained to be delivered of this cry. For eight long months we
were discussing the subject of this cry, while the sound was rolling away in the distant heavens.
“And the foolish said to the wise; give us of your oil,“ - that is, give us your evidences, your light; we
want preparation. “Buy for yourselves,“ - that is, search your Bibles, pray God for grace to prepare
you. “While they went to buy, the Bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to
the marriage, and the door was shut.” Here is where the division took place which was so clearly
manifest at the very close of the cry, and has been a standing witness ever since. While they went to
buy - clearly showing that they left a part of the virgins in the right position with oil in their lamps
waiting. When he comes, this waiting party go in, and the door is shut. Where are the others? Gone
away for oil. Do any of my readers say this is not fulfilled? I ask what you mean then, by writing,
preaching, talking, and lamenting the division among the Advent people? Don’t you see that you are
to the very letter acknowledging the fact. But you say that would be acknowledging ourselves the
foolish virgins. Whether you do so or not, the parable and our experience make it clear; each party
had their choice. BP2 72.3
“Afterwards came also the other virgins, saying master, master, open unto us.” After when is this
knocking? Why it is after the door is shut! And there has been a clamoring at the door ever since the
cry was finished - a perfect fulfilment of the parable in all its features. This calling for an open door
after it is shut, must certainly be fulfilled here, and not in the air. Thus we have the likeness perfect
and complete. Suppose, for instance, your likeness should be painted, leaving out your hand, foot or
nose, or even the expression of your eyes, you would detect it in a moment, and point to the defect;
and when finished, you would pronounce it a likeness. Well, this parable is a likeness of the kingdom
of heaven, and finishes after the 12th verse, and no where else. And after it was finished, we were
at least eight months examining its features, and proving it to be what our Lord had told us it was;
and how many thousands there were that pronounced it a perfect picture. Many have since denied
it, but that has not altered the features of it in the least, nor produced the least proof of when, or
where, or how, this cry with all its appendages will or can be, in the future. I say there is not faith
enough in all those who have doubted this mighty work to put forth one hundredth part of the
energy, moral courage and zeal, to do this work as it was done when accomplished. And I ask who
else will attempt it? Not those surely that believe it is done. Neither the world nor such as have
pronounced it mesmerism. You know very well that God has called out a people to do his work and
will; and think you that it will not be done in scriptural order, and in the right time? It has been and
it is the height of folly to believe that God will require his people to do it twice. I know it is
triumphantly stated that the door is not shut; and there has not been any striving to open it,
because no one would ask for admittance until they knew it was shut. They must know the fact first,
say they, and they say they do not. Answer, why did not these same virgins understand that their
vessels were empty of oil before it was too late? So in the case of the clamor about the door - they
have then already been proved to be foolish virgins, and are as likely to make a fatal mistake in this
 part of the parable as the other. How many scores of writers could be called up here, if time and
space would admit of it, to prove how clearly this cry has been fulfilled, and that our work ended
here for the world. I know it is called infidelity now and even blasphemy to say so. Admit this to be
your testimony then about all the advent believers have committed blasphemy, and their confession
to backslidden advent blasphemers or a fallen church and guilty world, will never atone for one sin
or back track which they have taken. One letter out of the many was joyfully received, (though it
came at a late hour,) as so much interest was felt for the author. I will extract a few lines: “Oh the
glory I have seen to-day. My brother, I thank God for this light. My soul is so full that I cannot write.
My doubts and fears and darkness are all gone. I see that we are yet right. God’s word is true; and
my soul is full of joy. Methinks I hear you say, Br. Miller is now a fanatic. Very well, call me what you
please; I care not. Christ will come in the seventh month, and will bless us all. Oct. 6, 1844.” This
then was our united testimony respecting the tallest way mark in our pathway. See Isaiah 14:31 and
40, 2, 6; Jeremiah 8:19, 46:12; Lamentations 2:19. BP2 74.1

Priests
 1989
 911
 2014 - Boston
 2016 - Concord (midway between 2014 and 2018). This is the swelling of the LC
 2018 - Exeter
 2019 - Raphia
 Panium

 2016
 Trump became president [external]
 We discovered Dn 11:40 isn't completed [internal]
 We can add more to this story.

Concord :
'agreement between persons, union in opinions, views or interestes, peace or harmony, a
compact or treaty'

 When the pope wants to put something as an agreement between him and the state it's
called a concordat
 In WWII pope Pius XII went into an alliance with Adolf Hitler, they signed a concordate. The
pope introduced a concordat with Germany, agreemtn with Hitler abouot how the Catholic
church and the Nazi government would relate.

2Co 6:15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with
an infidel?

Concord - strong
 From G4856; accordance: -

From G4859; to be harmonious, that is, (figuratively) to accord (be suitable, concur) or
stipulate (by compact): -

 When we think of Pyrrhus and WWII we mark in 2016, a bit before Ipsus there's the alliance,
so Pyrrhus and Demetrius fight in concord in Ipsus (2016)
 Two fronts war: serious disadvantage for Germany. The two fronts end in 1845 at the same
time, but they begin at different points. Before the Eastern front begins [2019] and after the
western front begins [2016] Germany was only fighting the west because it was in concord
with the east.

Levites

 911
 2014
 2019
 2020 - Concord (we grab it from the American revolution)
 Panium
 SL

Revolutions

 2019 ended what revolutions?

 The Russian
 The German
 The French
 They all have in common: a revolution and a counter-revolution.
 So we have a revolution ending in 2019, and in the 3 revolutions we can mark Nov 9.
 Then you have a period of preparation until 2020

The American revolution (war for independence).

 Begins in 1775. This would be the beginning of the counter revolution: they try to overthrow the
British government.
 We saw that there's an end of revolution [2019], period of preparation [till 2020] and a counter
revolution.
 In 2019 we can mark Napoleon, Lennin, Hitler (in a different way),
 Hitler in a different way: is there a dictator before that waymark in Germany? In Russia? Yes.
All we want to mark is 2020 as the beginning of the American civil war, which was a battle in
Lexington and Concord.

Nethinims

 In the battle of Lexington and Concord there were 273 British casualties.
 This is the waymark we take from Acts 27 (273 b.C).
 So we have Concord also between Panium and SL.

144k
As the Sabbath has become the special point of controversy throughout Christendom, and religious
and secular authorities have combined to enforce the observance of the Sunday, the persistent
refusal of a small minority to yield to the popular demand will make them objects of universal
execration. It will be urged that the few who stand in opposition to an institution of the church and
a law of the state ought not to be tolerated; that it is better for them to suffer than for whole
nations to be thrown into confusion and lawlessness. The same argument many centuries ago was
brought against Christ by the “rulers of the people.” “It is expedient for us,” said the wily Caiaphas,
“that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.” John 11:50. This
argument will appear conclusive; and a decree will finally be issued against those who hallow the
Sabbath of the fourth commandment, denouncing them as deserving of the severest punishment
and giving the people liberty, after a certain time, to put them to death. Romanism in the Old World
and apostate Protestantism in the New will pursue a similar course toward those who honor all the
divine precepts. GC 615.2

 After the CoP and before the 2nd Advent there's a decree. And the Concord definition was
agreement, treaty or decree.

The voice of God is heard from heaven, declaring the day and hour of Jesus’ coming, and delivering
the everlasting covenant to His people. Like peals of loudest thunder His words roll through the
earth. The Israel of God stand listening, with their eyes fixed upward. Their countenances are lighted
up with His glory, and shine as did the face of Moses when he came down from Sinai. The wicked
cannot look upon them. And when the blessing is pronounced on those who have honored God by
keeping His Sabbath holy, there is a mighty shout of victory. GC 640.2

 Between CoP and 2nd Advent we can mark 2 waymarks

 Decree: all in agreement that God's people must be killed, or our enemies are in Concord.
 The day and the hour: we have time.

1989 to 911
 We have 2 waymarks.
o Increase of knowledge (period and a point) [1991]
o Formalization of the message [1996]

 The line of the priests mirrors the 144k line. So between Raphia and Panium [CoP and 2nd Advent]
we should expect 2 waymarks. It's going to impact all 3 groups.
 Ipsus and Heraclea impact everyone
 So we have two waymarks everywhere.
 Between 2019 and Panium, we have a Concord, and the date for Panium. Why don't we have the
date for Panium before Raphia? Because it's not our test.
 We see 2 waymarks between each of our CoPs or between our traditional waymarks.
 All the Concords have the same characteristics
 Decree, and alliance
 Time
 It's just the formalization of a message that began before. I.e: LC is formalization of a message
that began at the SL.

2016: Concordia conference

 Alexander Nix [there's a video clip], was involved in Trump's campaing, and his firm was involved in
the elections (if not responsible for it). He spoke at an incredible influential summit in 2016, some of
the most powerful influential people in the world attended, and it began in 2011, opened by George
Bush. It's connected to the UN. Nix spoke here, and showed how he helped Trump win the
campaign. Sept 2016, the first time he stands up and shows what he is doing. That conference is
called Concordia.

Reasearch homework

 Look into Alexandre Nix [CEO of Cambridge Analytica].

Class
We were looking at the concept of stitching. We looked at the 144k and placed our fractals
underneath. I was hoping to note that the waymarks have the same characteristics.
 If we look at the beginning of the 144k line we have 2 waymarks between ToE and 911:
increase of knowledge and formalization.
 At the end of the 144k there's also 2 waymarks: increase of something and time
[formalization].
 We have this repeating pattern in all the lines.

Millerites

 April 19
 July 21 (Boston)
 August 1 (Concord)
 Aug 15 (
 Oct 22

 We need to pass a thread through each waymark: note the history of that period.

Priests

 Aprli 19 - 911
 July 21 - 2014
 Aug 1 - 2016
 We need to connect all the waymarks.
 If you're a M what do you need to know? They're expecting something to happen, they see
nothing: disappointment. So July 21, what happens? They were meant to become aware of a
message. Same in Aug 1 and same in Aug 15, and Oct 22
 What I want us to notice is the difference between these two lines.
o Let's take 2016. Aug 1 there's a campmeeting at Concord. What were you supposed to
do? See and accept the correction of the message. When we go to 2016 same thing (Dn
11). It's only an internal thing.
o Apr 19 was only an internal thing. If all you had was Revelation and some verses could
you identify 911 and pass through that waymarks? So April 19 they have some Bible
verses
o July they have a message, and the same all the way through.
o We have the same thing: info and a message.
o How could we understand 911 if that's all we have? If we hadn't have seen the planes
and buildings we had not know that 911 was a waymark.
o Internally it's the same: we have scrpiture, they have scripture.
o But there's a difference with the two lines. In our line we need to identify also the
external events: the planes hit the buildings. And then you can look and see Islam
restrained.
o External events in Millerite history are 1798 and 1840, but they're not in the same
thread of history.

 911: there's concpiracy theories even in our movement (that it's the USA, not Islam) while
they hold to the 3rd woe message. So we can have an internal message but we can still be
shaken if we don't recognize out external event. 2014's external event was harder to see.
2016 we have all the inspiration needed to identify Trump, but because of concpiracy theories
about this as well. We can have this info acurately but if we don't deal with the external
information and the concpiracy theories that we hold on to, we fail that waymark.
 So if we don't thread both needles we don't pass that waymark.
 My focus isn't necessarily the internal. Some people say that the message I've been sharing
are complicated. But part of the message is going back to 2014 and identify what happened,
and 2016 and 2018. The problem is we sometimes havet o go back to 1989 because people
don't even understand that event, we didn't pass the needle. We shouldn't be here having to
explain 2014, that's why it's so much information all at once.
 What are the concecuences of not passing a waymark succesfully.
 To get to 2016 and not identify Trump, not sure of the concecuences. But it will get harder
down the way.

Dan 11:13 For the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than
the former, and shall certainly come after certain years with a great army and with much
riches.

 People struggle with the 'army' part, because I'm saying there's not hot war.

Dan 11:40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of
the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with
many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.
  There was a wall in Germany that came down, but you didn't see the USA in Germany. If we
go to the cold war and follow the events and find that there's no hot war
 People who listen to Walter Veith have a lot of trouble accepting our message. People in our
movement recuse to believe that Trump went into an alliace with Putin, particularily
conservatives.

Acts 27: the second ship

The ship of Alexandria

  The story has quite a few complications or layers. Parts that I don't understand. But to identify
the framework you don't need to see every particular.
 The way we should approach this is like we should approach history: look at the framework
first.

Act 27:6 And there the centurion found a ship of Alexandria sailing into Italy; and he put us therein.
Act 27:7 And when we had sailed slowly many days, and scarce were come over against Cnidus, the
wind not suffering us, we sailed under Crete, over against Salmone;
Act 27:8 And, hardly passing it, came unto a place which is called The fair havens; nigh whereunto
was the city of Lasea [Hitchcock: wise, thick in the sense of solid].
Act 27:9 Now when much time was spent, and when sailing was now dangerous, because the fast
was now already past, Paul admonished them,
Act 27:10 And said unto them, Sirs, I perceive that this voyage will be with hurt and much damage,
not only of the lading and ship, but also of our lives.
Act 27:11 Nevertheless the centurion believed the master and the owner of the ship, more than
those things which were spoken by Paul.
Act 27:12 And because the haven was not commodious to winter in, the more part advised to
depart thence also, if by any means they might attain to Phenice, and there to winter; which is an
haven of Crete, and lieth toward the south west and north west.

The Storm at Sea

Act 27:13 And when the south wind blew softly, supposing that they had obtained their purpose,
loosing thence, they sailed close by Crete.
Act 27:14 But not long after there arose against it a tempestuous wind, called Euroclydon. [East /
to be low, a surge of the sea]

 We already mentioned how the ship of Alexandria is a good ship [EGW says so].
 Lasea is marked as wise, where is that in our reform line? ToE, the wise enter the reform line.
 Paul gives a message: it's about time to sai. They decide to sail anyway. What do they encounter?
Euroclydon. So after Lasea an east wind strikes them, this is 911.
 Why is this a missionary journey? Because he wanted to go to preach in Rome. He didn't decide he
was going to go to Rome. So he has the message of the gospel, and eventhough this is a voyage as a
prisioner it's identified as a missionary journey because he is preaching the gospel in this journey.

 So how many groups do we have?

 Paul, Luke and Aristarchus. [1] They are the group who have the gospel message. Where do
they first share it? To the people of the ship.[2] EGW would tell us that a certain % accepted
and others didn't: they were divided.

Act 27:23 For there stood by me this night the angel of God, whose I am, and whom I serve,
Act 27:24 Saying, Fear not, Paul; thou must be brought before Caesar: and, lo, God hath given
thee all them that sail with thee.

 Then they take the gospel to Malta [3], the island

 Paul = priests
 Boat = Levites
 Island = Nethinims

 Vs 8 (Lasea). Problem: we skip 3 places in vs 7. Question, when does Paul get into the boat? Vs 6,
they are in Myra, a city of Lycia. Our first ship ended at the same point. So the 2nd ship begins at
that point. So we can take what we knew about the place for the first ship (not saying it's the same
waymark but we can identify the same characteristics).

 Myra/Lycia: bitterness.

Rev 10:10 And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth
sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.

“And the angel which I saw stand upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his hand to heaven, and
sware by Him that liveth forever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and
the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there
should be time no longer” [Revelation 10:5, 6]. This message announces the end of the prophetic
periods. The disappointment of those who expected to see our Lord in 1844 was indeed bitter to
those who had so ardently looked for His appearing. It was in the Lord's order that this
disappointment should come, and that hearts should be revealed. 17MR 9.3

 The boat doesn't begin at Myra but in Alexandria, Myra is just where Paul gets on the ship.
 So if Myra is Oct 22 1844, then Alexandria (where the ship is loaded with grain) is where? 1798:
loaded with wheat and comes from Alexandria. Wheat or wise = ToE.
 So what is this line about? Adventism.
 The bad ship of Adramyttium represents the USA, and Adventism (SDA). It's a ship that abides in
death.
 Alexandria ship is a good ship and represents Adventism and USA.
 If we go back to our methodology of compare and contrast, then this makes sense.

Homework: Consider how we can consider these two ships and also read chapter 27.

Class
 Our line, let's thread the event, what thread can we do?
 1989, '91, '96, 911, 2004, 2011, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2019

KN and KS [Russia and the USA]

 July 21, 2014 = Boston camp meeting

 Difference between M and us here: if you're a Milerite you have to identify a new message,
and we have to identify a new message and an external event (required)
 August 1, 2016 = Concord
 Millerite history is the same as Boston, required to identify a message, but we're required to
see an external event. Which one?

Trump
  Trump? We can mark him in 2000
http://content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19890116,00.html]
 We can mark him in 2000/2001 [candidate]
 Who is Trump? Interaction between KN and KS. So you can track the KN and KS through all our
waymarks.

 Dn 11:40, is this marking the beginning, middle, or end?

 If it's the end, we need waymarks before 1989
 We have 1979
 This is a proxy war in Afghanistan, its' interesting that it's restarted today, but with different
dynamics.
 So we have this external thread that we need to be able to track to each of our waymarks.
 We talk about the Syrian proxy war, why is that significant for us?

 The Cold war

 Why the Afghan war was a proxy war
 The fall of the USSR
 1996 (a lot of things happened in this year)
 …
 How Trump came to power
 How Putin came to power

Syrian conflict review

 We place it in 2011 [begins], 2014, 2016 and 2018.

 1999:
 Putin became president
 Beginning of ISIS

Proxy war:
 Satan is expelled from heaven and comes to earth. Christ and Satan don't fight directly but
through proxys, through ideologies. What do they do with their ideologies? Because just
having a different idea doesn't put you in conflict with another person. Satan tried to bring
some people to his side, and Christ did the same. God prepares Abel, and Satan Cain, and fight
through two separate camps or churches. This is the great controversy. So a lot of the stories
in the Bible, the problems adressed is Christ trying to make sure His people are ready to fight,
because we're apt to go to Laodicea and not want to fight, He has to wake us up, gives all our
weapon, sword, so that we can fight for Him, He fights through us.
 Compare and contrast: Satan has to do the same.
 Who controls the KN? And who the KS? Why are they figting? Because if the KS wasn't there,
we would have a SL way before. So God has to be the one controlling the KS.
 From 1979 to 1989 they're not fighting directly, one is supporing the govt of Afganisthan
[USSR] and the US the rebells. And then they fight. Only now, 40 years later, Afganisthan is
still being destroyed, except now the USA is supporting the govt, and as in 2016 the Russia has
begun to support the rebels.
 Who's behind in Syria? A lot of sources would list up to 8 proxy wars. So it's a complicated war. The
reason it's not over yet, is because these political players keep proping up their side. They keep
sending more arms and money, and if they didn't do that millions of people wouldn't die.
 It's also a proxy war between
 Iran and Saudi Arabia
 Turkey [NATO] and Kurdish rebels
 Assad [president of Syria] and the revolution.

RUSSIA USA
Iran Saudi Arabia
Turkey (NATO) Kurdish Rebels
Assad (Syria) Revolution

 It's not so complicated when we understand it's between the USA and the KS
 So when we see conflict between the USA and Iran and the USA goes easy with Saudi Arabia
eventhough they're almost just as bad. This is why: they have to keep their allies.
 Problem with Turkey is that it is part of NATO, it was a US ally. Now this civil war has made this
relationship complicated.
 Where is ISIS come into this? It's not allied with any power, want to defeat all of them. But because
sometimes ISIS attacks the Kurdish rebels, Assad supports them. And sometimes because ISIS fights
Syria and Assad, some individuals in Saudi Arabia support ISIS: provide cars, weapons, money,
bombing their enemy.
 So ISIS has been used as a 'guion' between those allies, and they can play a role to both sides.

 So how did the Syrian war began?

 We said it's in the middle of the way for the gas pipeline. Russia provided 25% of European gass
through Ukraine. Then Ukraine makes political decisions that they don't like. And Russia has the
hand on the 'canilla' [tap it], so they close it. They did it in Ukraine and in Georgia.
 So Obama in 2014 said what many had been thinking for many years: have to have a way to provide
gas to Europe that made it less dependant on Russia. It could come through Qatar. They propose to
build pope.
 That's the history of 2011

 Last year Trump decided to pull out the troops from Syria because they've defeated ISIS. So he is
saying that the only reason they've been there was because of ISIS. But it's not, it's about power: KN
vs KS. Islam is just the excuse. So when he says he's going tocome out, he is knowingly and willingly
giving up a sphere of influence to the KS. So it shouldn't surprise us, that worldy people with no idea
of prophecy are recognizing the same fulfillments of prophecy that we are, that there has been an
alliance between the KN and KS, that this is repeating the history of WWII. However they identify
those events, that's preparing them for? The Nethinims are in what stage? Plowing, it begins 2014
to 2019. We should consider this: two sides are forming over this issue. One side is actually
identifying a fulfillment of prophecy, and this prepares them for? They will identify truth in this
message.

Revision of the ships

 First ship

 We identified the ship of Adramittyum: "abide in death" which is the 4th generation because of
Ceasarea, Sidon and Cyprus. 4 is also judgment, destruction. The emphasis is that this is the story of
the 4th generation.
 We considered the ship as it related to Felix and Agrippa, the USA and the SDA.

Second ship

 This is the good ship [EGW].

Class

Internal and external events

 Millerite [April to October] : internal events.

 Other than exeptions, it's all internal events. Me: thus it would make sense that we separate
the line from April 19 and not include the previous history..
 To be on the right side you had to accept only an internal message
 Our: [911 to CoP] : internal and external.
 We don't have a message without the external.
 You have to accept both messages

 Internal message in 2016: battles of Raphia and Panium, KS not done away in 1989. Also the
last president of the USA: and we had 2 options, coming towards the end it's Trump or
Clinton. Was there a problem with the internal message? Yes, when we come to the other
side it's so clear that it had to be Trump. Example: who brings about the SL? Who calls for it in
the USA? Protestant churches, and the vast majority of them was backing the USA. We should
have known, but why didn't we? Because of the conspiracy theories? Because of what source
we get info? Do we still have that protestant kind of thinking? The same kind of thinking that's
going to call for a SL? The internal info was perfect, but depending on how we observe the
external events, and what ext
 ernal voices we choose to hear, all comes to influence how we understand that waymark
prophetically. Partially because of Russian conspiracy theories that we say 'may be it's Hillary,
because morally speaking she's not good anyway'. Then we failed inidentifying and predicting
the last president of the USA. That isn't a problem internally, with our internal information,
but it's bent out of shape because of what we hear externally.

Russian history

 One way we can connect our waymarks is with the information age. We can go all the way to the
computer system origin: 1888

 1917 : Russia turns KS

 WW2
 Cold War, which ended in the:
 Aphganistan proxy war
 1989 - 91 - fall of the USSR
 1991-1999 : trying to find it's feet
 1991 : Putin becomes president, re organize societies, rise of the Russian olygarchs, a total colapse
of their economy, a very frightening period for them. If you're Russian, how popular is Putin today in
Russia? Very popular. We have this idea that he is a hated dictator in his country, for some people
yes, but many love him. When you look back at their history, they had Zar Nicholas which was a
dictator, then Stalin, then all this embarassing years where they loose with the US, then Gorbachov
who allowed their country to break appart, then Yeltsin who was alcoholic and an embarassment, so
by the time they receive this strong man Putin, the older people who remember the history love
him.

Russian revolution

 1917, it's known as red october. The Zar abdicated and the government was overthrown. Around
October or November Lenin comes to power. Who sent Lenin to Russia? Remember we're in the
history of Germany vs Russia on the eastern front of WWI. Germany had Lenin hiding in his country,
so they put him on a train and sent them to Russia to conduct this revolution. It was hoacked by
Germany. It was sucesfull and he overthrew the government. So in 1917 Lenin comes to power. He
suffers a series of strokes, and Stalin comes up in his place: from around the early 20's, Stalin comes
to power.
 Then we have his alliance with Hitler and the WWII. 1939 to 1945. At the beginning of the war Stalin
alligned with Hitler, and 1945 they end up allied with the USA. We discussed Germany before, and
they're disadvantage was a two front war. USA invades Germany from the West and USSR through
the east, they met at the river Elbe. Through a series of conferences they split Germany. Instead of
allowing those countries to establish themselves Stalin set up communist puppet governments. And
when the west realized that that was what he was doing, they began to fight against that. So they
were forced to ally with Hitler but Stalin after WWII assumed control of the east. The USA to
counteract it started to push back all the way back to 1989. Why didn't they just go to war with
Stalin and fight him like Hitler? Because there was attomic bombs. The first in 1945. Stalin had his in
1949. Why was this a cold war. They had this MAD 'mutually assured destruction' thing. As Trump
says, he has a red button and within minutes they could be sure that they would both be destroyed.
Quite recently Putin had something to say. They asked him about this dynamic: what would this
world be without Russia? What he was saying is that he had no proble destroying the world because
he didn't see the point of the world existing without Russia. If he felt threatened that Trump would
attack him with some kind of super weapon he is sending him a message. It's ok if you take down
Russia because within minutes I'll just end the world anyway. Which beings us to the question, has
this MAD concept changed?
 That same restriction exists today. But if we trace the information age, we can tie it to 1989, Dn
11:40 and all the way back to 1888. So just by connecting our waymarks we can have more
assurance of how war looks like in our history.
 Trump pulling out of the INF treaty (made during the cold war), can we look at this as the rise of the
intensity of the conflict?
 Last year Putin at a conference presented his guns. Some were very impressive. They were noted by
the USA. Particularily when in the simulations he has them aimed to the USA. So there's been
agravations both sides, and that's a characteristic of the Cold war. But just because they come up
 with ideas of new weapons doesn't mean they'd use them. So yes, I think that's a step toward arm
race.

Acts 27

 This is a missionary journey, so we should expect the preaching of a message. We should

expect to see Paul preach the gospel, the gospel spread. Where do we see that in Acts 27? At
the beginning of the chapter, Paul has the gospel message, and he takes it to (from vs 8, in the
context of our second ship) to the passangers, and then to the Island. So straight away we
have 3 groups of people: Paul who has the gospel message, aided by Aristarchus and Luke
[Christ and HS].

 When does he take it to the passengers on the ship? Vs 33 works for now.
 When to the Island? 28:1 and 2. P,L,N..

Are the Levites gentiles? Paul says Jews = gentiles. So you can treat them as the same..

 From Ceasarea to the SL [story 1], it's a story of what? Dn 11:40? A ship. We're going to struggle if
we try to make it the story of the priests, or the P,L and N. It's about the ship, if we can compare and
contrast.
 When we're trying to identify waymarks or what this symbols are talking about, we have to see if it's
about the P,L,N or the ship. We have 4 symbols to consider.
 When we consider the second group, the Levites and we can see them from the beginning of the
journey, it's for a couple of reasons, but one thing we need to remember, is that the thread of this
story is not the P,L or N, if we want to understand it fully it's the story of the ship. If we consider the
passengers (Levites) there's a neat EGW passage, where she's discussing this voyage.

When the roll was called, not one was missing. Nearly three hundred souls, sailors, soldiers,
passengers, and prisoners, stood that stormy November morning upon the shore of the island of
Melita. And there were some that joined with Paul and his brethren in giving thanks to God who had
preserved their lives, and brought them safe to land through the perils of the great deep. {LP 270.1}
 .
 She says there were almost 300 and a stormy November morning. There was some that joined with
Paul and his brethren [Luke and Aristarchus] in giving thanks to God. We can automatically conclude
that some didn't. So as they're being ministered by Paul, all along that voyage it gets to the ponit
they're on the shore.
 Earlier study: line of the Levites. They're plowed from 911 to 2014, the ER from 2014 to 2019, LR
until Panium and then harvest. We concluded their harvest is progressive (1% to 100%), SL is both
they're 2nd advent and the cut off point where there can't be another Levite.
 So when we come to the symbol of shipwreck, where are we on the line of the Levites? Panium. So
we have the beginning of the division here. Any other thoughts?
 After the shipwreck nobody gets converted, so the shipwreck is the 100%, the SL.
 Paul preaches then the
 Class - 04 Feb 2019

Russian history
 She gave the referrence of Putin saying why the world would exist without Russia?

Review

 1917 was the Russian Revolution, around 1922 the USSR is formed, it then takes time for the
country to work itself through civil war, but around 1922 that is completed and the USSR is formed.
However, most countries in the world didn't recognize the USSR. In 1933 the USA recognizes it. By
then Stalin was in power. 1933, the same yea,r Hitler comes into power in Germany. Secular
commentators say the USA is currently in 1933 Germany. We can recognize prophetically that we
are in WWII, but the differences in our history, is that we can overlay both histories, Hitler or Trump
is both raising to power at the same time that we can observe war in the western front.
 1939 to 1945 was WWII. USSR was with Hitler at the beginning of the war and with the USA at the
end. The papacy was on the side of Germany at the beginning, and after WWII finished when
obviousely Germany would fail, the papacy switched to the side of the USA. So the papacy also
began by supporting Germany, they thought it would help them defeat the USSR. We tend ot think
that was Reagan and JPII, but they were working particularily close in the final years of WWII.
 3 superpowers came together to decide what Europe would look like, redraw the map of the world.
Britain, USSR, USA: Churchill, Rosevelt and Stalin. Stalin was able to convince Roosevelt and
Churchill that he needed a buffer zone.
 Hitler and Stalin had divided Europe in zones of influence. They considered areas of protection:
buffer zones. If Hitler was too close to the USSR, there's no area to absorb any possible impact, so
that when they do go to war they have some time of distance or warning.
 What they didn’t expect him to do is to set up puppet governments. Germany was divided, and they
said that something fell: the iron curtain. When we consider the USSR (Russia today), why is
Aphganistan important? Because it's right on the south of Russia, it's weak underbelly. So if USA
controls it, that's a problem, but specially when you consider that Putin has spent all of these years
trying to make sure that NATO odn't extend on the eas area, because just like Stalin wants to make
sure it's borders are secure. So everytime countries try to join NATO like Ukrain, you know there's
going to be conflict. That's one reason why Aphganistan becomes strategically important, on top of
being an avenue into Asia.

1917 1922 1933 1939 1945 1991

| | | | | |
Russian USSR USA USSR USSR
Rev recognizes + +
Germany USA

There were conferences, Yalta, Potsdam. Roosevelt particularly wasn't too concerned about Stalin,
and he wanted to piss off Churchill. In today's conferences like the G20 you see the same things.
When the iron curtain fell, instead of going into war, the USA woke up into what Stalin was doing
and began to have a cold war.
In 1945 the USA ends the war with Japan by dropping nuclear bombs on it, and the USSR gets the
bomb in 1949. The cold war ends in 1991. I find it reasonable to mark the beginning of the cold war
with the end of WWII. If so, it's a 46 years history.
This was a cold war because of nuclear weapons: MAD (Mutually assured destruction). The
dynamics today are the same.
Mid July 1945 is generally considered as the beginning of the cold war, when the relationship of the
USSR and USA collapsed: USSR had taken control of eastern Europe, and it called it the area of
safety around its borderd.

There's an interesting article from 2012. Paraphras: the world is less stable than it was during the
cold war, and all the major confrontations were around … Both America and Russia can nuclear
weapons. The concept of mutual destruction.. We just don't think about it anymore.

How were the fights during the cold war? Proxy wars, sanctions/economic, espionage (

Cold War espionage describes the intelligence gathering activities during the Cold War (circa 1947-1991)
between the Western allies (chief US, UK and NATO) and the Eastern Bloc (The Soviet Union and aligned
countries of Warsaw Pact).[1] Because each side was preparing to fight the other, intelligence on the
opposing side's intentions, military, and technology was of paramount importance. To gather
information, the two relied on a wide variety of military and civilian agencies.
While several organizations such as the CIA and KGB became synonymous with Cold War espionage,
many others played key roles in the collection and protection of the section concerning detection of
spying, and analysis of a wide host of intelligence disciplines.

From <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War_espionage>

Disinformation

In India, a story is released on the newspaper 'the patriot'. Small newspaper, they publish a story
that says that the HIV virus was created by the USA laboratories as a weapon to kill african
americans and homosexuals. It says it was created in Maryland. That story goes for a coouple of
years: 1985 is picked up and publishes in a Soviet newspaper but they were able to say the oring
was India. Then it spreads all over Africa. Two east german biologies write articles to back up the
information. By 1986 it has became the newspaper version of viral, about 200 reports in 80
countries. By 1987, it's now being reported by mainstream US TV. The story came from Russia, if you
were KGB agent, you were required to spend 25% of your time manufacturing misinformation, part
of your job description. Inventing ways to spread them also. So they'd plant information, example: a
fake treasure of documents of Nazis, of how CIA killed John kennedy, etc. About 85% of the founds
of the KGB were destined to spread false stories. KGB is where Putin worked, so he knows all aobut
spending time inventing stories. They were tested at the end of the year to see that they'd come out
with the required amount of information.

1985 interview quote (KGB agent who defected to the USA) : his job was to 'change the perception
of reality fo every American to such an extent that despite the aboundance of info, no one is able to
come to sensible conclusions, in the interest of defengin themselves, their communities and
 countries.' So what they were doing more than anything in the cold war was to change the
perception of reality, so it doesn' matter how much info you've got, you can't come to any sensible
conclusion. Putin knows how to do it, and is doing a great work today because the USA citizens are
not getting to sensible conclusions despite the abundance of info.
Gorbachov was confronted with the AIDS issue on an interview and appologized to Reagan. Publicly
acknowledged. It employed many people, etc. Internal subversion and to change the perception of
reality.

Disinformation vs propaganda, consider the differences, not the same thing. We'll see also that this
story of this AID issue took 4 years to develop, today it can be done in a matter of minutes. We'll
talk about the deep web.

Acts 27
Myra
Lycia
1989 911 MC SL
Adramyttium : 'Abide in death' | | | |
4 4 4 Bitter
Harvest

The shipwreck = SL

Act 27:34 Wherefore I pray you to take some meat: for this is for your health: for there shall not an
hair fall from the head of any of you.
Act 27:35 And when he had thus spoken, he took bread [harvest of the Levites begins: 1%], and
gave thanks to God in presence of them all: and when he had broken it, he began to eat.

 So here you're either standing with Paul or not, but here Paul is breaking bread with Paul (sharing
the word, harvesting the Levites). So the second journey of the second ship has more layers than the
first. But we've succesfully placed one waymark. Also the shipwreck is the beginning of the Island,
and also there's fire and rain (Acts 28:2)

Euroclydon

Act 27:14 But not long after there arose against it a tempestuous wind, called Euroclydon.

 Being this the east wind, marks 911.

Beginning of the journey: Alexandria

Act 27:6 And there the centurion found a ship of Alexandria sailing into Italy; and he put us therein.
Act 27:7 And when we had sailed slowly many days, and scarce were come over against Cnidus, the
wind not suffering us, we sailed under Crete, over against Salmone;
 The ship begins in Alexandria, but Paul gets on in Myra, Lycia. (Lycia was the SL in the other ship
history).
 The theme of the first ship is the USA and the SDA abiding in death. The second is from 1798 which
is where the SDA and USA come (GC 440.2 Esp). So it is compare and contrast.
 It is not a story primarily about the P,L,N but about the SDA and USA.
 What is being judged when this history deals with the ship? The SDA structure, not people. Because
we'd have to say that the people of the USA is being judged.
 So eventhough the P,L,N are being spoken of, they're not the theme. It's about the strucutre of the
SDA. Why would Adventism fall at the SL (shipwreck)? When the last Levite has been called out,
there's no more reason for that structure to exist.
 Why is it called a good ship then? We'll wrestle with that.. It's both a good ship and also a bad ship.

Class - 06 Feb 2019

Is what we teach in this movement propaganda?

Propaganda is a noun, it was a congregation of the roman Catholic church. It was, in a noun sense, a
specific congregation. That congregation had oversight over the church missionary work. So it's
original intention was to describe missionary work of the church. Because we have the tendency to
say 'biased' in a negative sense. Are we biased? Do we have an agenda? Or are we just sharing
straight information?

Definition of Propaganda

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/propaganda

1 capitalized : a congregation of the Roman curia having jurisdiction over missionary territories and
related institutions
2 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution,
a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing
cause
also : a public action having such an effect

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/propaganda

Information or ideas that are spread by an organized group or government to influence people’s
opinions, esp. by not giving all the facts or by secretly emphasizing only one way of looking at the
facts

 We are biased, we do propaganda.

 The argument can be made that all media is biased or propaganda, therefore they're all equal, but
we are biased and propaganda. So going by this definition alone is not a good argument.
 Disinformation

False information shared to influence public opinion, deliberately disroted. It's purpose is to deceive
and manipulate, commonly known as fake news. But that term is been so misused that it's hard to
use now.
Disinformation is different than propaganda. This is the type of campaign that we saw the USSR do,
with the story of Kenedy's assasination, or the HIV virus.

Propaganda runs through our news sources, and that used as an argument to discount it, and to say
that we can't trust anything that we see or read, but that is nothing new. If you want to go back
2000 years, one of the difficults to understand Pyrrhus is that you had to discern everything when
written by a roman point of view. But even so you could discern. The difficult we have today is we
no longer live in the years of volcanos and mushroom clouds. It has been said that it doesn't matter
were you get your news source because if there was a volcano that erupted, and even if they
approach it from a different perspective, news sources would always report the same thing: volcano
that you can see. But understand: when it comes to discerning external events, it doesn't look like
that anymore, we're not required to discern something that obvious: war is not with machine guns
but information. Remember the purpose of the USSR:

'to change the perception of reality of every American to such an extent that despite the abundance
of information no one is able to come to a sensible conclusion'

Back in the 1970s or 80s shared through newspapers, took 4 5 years to become popular and do
damage. Now it's instantly.

Dark Web

When you're online, your destinations are wbesties but the structure that connects them is the
internet. When they say 'surf the web' it's this journey, you have a ticket which tells you where you
departed from and where you're going. At any given time, where you're leaving from, and where
you're going both know the steps of your journey. So if I'm on facebook and want to go to twitter
then both websites know where I've been and where I'm going because it's in my ticked. So there's
very little online that is anonymus. The internet was partially created by the US government to be
use in their millitary. If you had an agent in Russia and wants to report in the USA and goes online to
write to them, then it's very easy to those inside Russia, depending on what wifi or newortk they're
using, it's still quite simple to know where they come from and where they're going. So he can't
register into a confidential site.
Around 2002 they solved this problem, a deep web was created by the US Nay. They created a new
browser. Instead of chrome, they created the Tor browser (the most common). If you download it
and open it up there is no google, no search engine. Everything is private, you have a ticket but it's
blanc. It's a way to create an anonymus internet, and completely free, with no suppervision. You
open it, and want to go to a page, how do you acces it, because there's no search engine? Before
the days of google, you'd have to manually type in the name of the website, but these websites are
secret, so it's a secret secuence of numbers and letters, a code. You type that into the browser, and
it would take you to that website. How you find the codes, depends on who you knos. People spend
years trying to figure out the codes, going into chatrooms, trying to meet the right people. But then
the US navy had a problem. If they had an agent on Russia and on that person's computer was Tor,
the government knows that he works for the US government in secret. So if we were both secret
agents and I wanted to meet another to pass info, in the street, if we're the only two people on the
street, it is obvious. So what the US govt was forced to do is to make the Tor browser public and
popular. The more people that access it, the more hidden their work is. And it's through the deep
web or particularily this browser, that much of the secret government is done. But now that is open
and public it's used to the same extent by the other world powers, it's mosst popular in Iran, Spain
and France, Japan, but equally popular in the US and Russia. Even if it's financed by the US Navy,
Iran and Russia are able to use it in the same way. ISIS communicates not on google, arms dealing,
drug websites, you may have heard of 'Silk Road': a secret website on the Tor browser. This was the
amzon of druges, where you could leave your costumer commentaries, and have the drugs
delivered to your home. The creator is serving two live sentences, he'll never get out of jail. It's on
these hidden sites that you begin to see Russia share this information. 40 years ago it was through a
newspaper in India, and then from somewhere in obscurity they were able to spread them to other
nesppapers over about 5 years. Now instead of a newspaper in India, they share stories on the deep
web and then they're able to promote those stories, till a source not directly tied to them brings
them into the open web. This could take 5 days, but it can happen in ours or minutes. You'd see this
over and over again in the 2016 elction. And people in the movement say 'don't you know Hillary is
so bad, because we saw her in a video, we think it's her, she had a mask hiding her face, doing
something really really bad.' Many many people in the USA, even in the movement, believe what's
coming out of the deep web.

This is a bit of working knowledge on how this war works. They odn't only use the deep web,
sometimes through Russia today, and then it goes through a couple of sources, and then it's
replayed by fox as fact, and then it's shared by people in our movement. When I ask for sources and
they say 'Russia today' people don't realize this is not where we get information. This is not about 2
propaganda machines, what's going on is something different.

Our source is the same biased sources that gave us 1989, 1991, 1996 and 911. And they're saying
that Trump is the last president of the USA. When they say last president it can be said in a joking
way, but they're at least recognizing the threat.

Acts 27

Alexandria Lycia Cnidus Lasea Euroclydon

| | | | | |

The ship begins at Alexandria. Then we pick it up in vs 6 in Myra, a city of Lycia. Why would Paul get
on the ship here? Because that's where the first ship ended. So we can take our symbols from here
to the second line. What did we understand this waymark to be? Harvest and bitterness.

Where do we generally mark bitterness? Rev 10:10. This is 1844, October.

Rev 10:10 And I took the little book out of the angel's hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth
sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.
17MR 9.3 - the prophetic periods ended, those who expected to see Jesus in 1844 were
disappointed, indeed bittter.

Alexandria = 1798, ToE, this is where the wheat is loaded into the ship. [Me: remember that EGW
says we came from Egypt and 1844 was our red sea].

Act 27:6 And there the centurion found a ship of Alexandria sailing into Italy; and he put us
therein.
Act 27:7 And when we had sailed slowly many days, and scarce were come over against Cnidus, the
wind not suffering us, we sailed under Crete, over against Salmone;
Act 27:8 And, hardly passing it, came unto a place which is called The fair havens; nigh whereunto
was the city of Lasea.

Cnidus - they were sailing close by it, had winds not favorable. So what did they do? They sailed pass
it. They're following the coast line, they're meant to cut across, and instead they go south: they go
off course, they change directions. When does the ship change directions? Hasting's dictionary says
that at Cnidus Paul changed his course in the way to Rome and they head south.

When did we change courses? 1863.

They head south, sail under Crete, over against Salmone and they come to the city of Lasea. We've
already discussed Lasea: wise and thick ("solid"). This was 1989, and after this they pass Euroclydon.

So between Cnidus and Lasea we have 2 waymarks. How did we deal with Cyprus? We were able to
mark Ceasarea, Sidon, but they sail under Cyprus, showing something more progressive in nature.
So this whole period is saling under Crete. The same thing.
 Crete:
Theyers : 'fleshy'

 This is carnal, sold under sin. Our sins in that period [1863 to 1989] is prophetic sins, till we begin to
deal with them from 1989.

Class - 08 Feb 2019

Adramytium: 'I shall abide in death'. Ceasarea [1989], Sidon [911], Cyprus [MC], Myrac of Lycia [SL].
This line is about the ship which equals the USA and SDA structures. We recognized this was verses
1-5.

Alexandria. We've done the majority of the work. It starts in Alexandria, not marked specifically in
the verses, but that's where it came from. Then Myra, a city of Lycia, which represent harvest and
bitter, which brought us to 1844, pointing to the disappointment and the harvest that follows the
shut door. Then we come to Cnidus, if we look at the map, what happens there is a deviation, they
head south, change directions. We mark that in 1863 where they go off. There's contrary winds in
1863, externally is the civil war [1861-1865], where they make decisions as a church to avoid
military service, it was a time of crisis. Then they get to Crete, which means 'fleshy', which we
marked as the sins of the fathers. In Crete, they sail over against Salmone.

Salmone

Strongs: 'the surge on the shore' (oleada en la orilla). Fear, shake, overflow.

 Those two names have the same origin word: Salmone on Crete and Salamis on Cyprus. So we're
talking about waves coming up over the shore and also covering or cloth. So it's about the water
coming and clothing. If we would have marked this concept as Daniel said, overflow, from 1963 to
1989, this adds to this history, what overflows is papal doctrine, it's the 126 years. And in this time
you can mark the carnal heart of 'fleshly'. Until the 126 end and we come to Lasea, where we can
mark the wise and the foolish (wise and thick).

Then Paul tells them that they should not set sail is because it is now dangerous. In vs 9 he says it's
because the fast has already passed. This means the day of atonement had already pass, therefore
it's not a good time to sail. It's common knowledge for them that they wouldn't sail after that day,
and strongs gives us that day as well.

From G3522; abstinence (from lack of food, or voluntary and religious); specifically the fast of the
Day of Atonement: - fast (-ing.)

 So Paul is saying that it's going to be dangerous because the day of atonement is passed.

Act 27:13 And when the south wind blew softly, supposing that they had obtained their purpose,
loosing thence, they sailed close by Crete.
Act 27:14 But not long after there arose against it a tempestuous wind, called Euroclydon.
EGW when she talks about the voyage, she says that leaving the port was foolish because they
should have known the east wind was coming. They should have known because the east wind is
normally preceeded by the south wind. So even though the east wind was favorable, you should
know that the east wind is coming.

N,S,E,W

When we consider kingdoms, East and West are multiple choice (you have many options). But north
and south is absolute points: USA and Russia. So before you see the activities of Islam you should
see the activities of Russia. The south wind impacts the ship: the USA. And this south wind is
favorable.

The centurion decided to follow the judgment of the majority. Accordingly, “when the south wind
blew softly,” they set sail from Fair Havens, with the flattering prospect that a few hours would
bring them to the desired harbor. All were now rejoicing that they had not followed the advice of
Paul: but their hopes were destined to be speedily disappointed. They had not proceeded far, when
a tempestuous wind, such as in that latitude often succeeds the blowing of the south wind, burst
upon them with merciless fury. From the first moment that the wind struck the vessel, its
condition was hopeless. So sudden was the blow, that the sailors had not a moment in which to
prepare, and they could only leave the ship to the mercy of the tempest. {LP 264.2}

So when we consider the structures of the USA and SDA, when 911 hits, shipwreck is inevitable.
They could have turned back with the east wind, but with the east wind is too late. No turning back.

Let's consider who this ship trip is about: the thread of history.

1798 - who is it? SDA and USA. What happened then was the rise of the USA [GC 440.2] and of the
beginning of Adventism.

1844 - (we have to bring in Adventism and the USA): the fall of the protestant horn of the lamb like
beast [GC 376, and there's other very good EGW quotes], [me: baptism of Adventism?].

1863 - with the church, we already marked that we go of course. We know it's in the middle of a
civil war. But we need to mark 1863 specifically for the USA. What happens there? 3 times the USA
attempts to introduce a SL, the first one is 1863. {1893 ATJ,CAR 3.1 and 2} He gives us Feburary of
1863, there was an organized movements of the protestant churches to make the government of
the USA recognize the christian religion as the religion of the country and enforce Sunday as the
Sabbath. So began in 1863, the second one was 1888 and the third one 1893. The three are
waymarks for our church.

We've been discussing 1893 in this movement, it's the Chicago world fair, and we've been tying it to
2019 by the 126. 1888 + 126 takes to 2014, 1863 takes us to 1989. This is amazing.

1989 - this is the beginning of the fall of the USSR, brought about an alliance between the USA and
the papacy, that's what really weakened the USSR. I want to mark 1979, two things happened then:
the beginning of a proxy war in Afghanistan; and the pope visited the White House. He had never
been allowed to be there, but he is welcomed there and it's said to him that he is 'our new friend'.
So in this history that brings us to 1989, we have the pope working with a US president (JPII and
 Reagan). So you can mark activity of the USA and also the ToE for Adventism. We've had this 46 (44
at this stage), and November 9 falls the Berlin wall, marking the beginning of the fall of the USSR.

911 - if we follow the thread, we not only mark the role of Islam [USA] but also the introduction of
spiritualism [SDA]. Also it's when the leadership falls down.

Spiritual formation, there's some good links on presentations done, a brother in the movement had
experience with this, and Tess has the interviews in her laptop.

Watch the last part (minutes)

Class - 10 Feb 2019

Summary

The theme of the line was the ship, and we're trying to mark in every waymark something related to
the SDA and something to the USA. We saw the N,S,E,W.

We have two ships, and we can take them from ToE to SL. How does the ships end? The
Adramyttium just stops, and they get off. The other shipwrecks. But in application they are the same
thing: SDA and USA. In vs 17 the ship is held together by strong chords, divided into two groups with
chords pulling tight to pull those boards to the center, they'd do that time after time. The only
reason the boat can sail after 911 is because of these chords, which is line upon line, the only that
gets this boat through SL. It's in a very bad condition.

MN - MC issue

"if we have a MN and MC we have to have a shut door and not to a SL": We need hooks (being able
to call them MN and MC) to be able to hook Raphia and Panium.

Act 28:3 And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a
viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand.
Act 28:4 And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among
themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet
vengeance suffereth not to live.
Act 28:5 And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm.

 When we get to the SL we have no priests (because their line is over). Paul is bitten by a snake, and
he can't die. So he is an 144k. So we can mark priests, Levites, and Nethinims and 144k. So we can
mark our 4th groups. Snake represents Satan, and he can't kill him, and Paul is doing a work of
bounding into bundles to be burn, and this work is not done by the crew nor the island people.

 This is not the line of the Priest, Levites, Nethinims nor 144k. Both lines are the line of structures. If
we consider Noah's ark. We have Noah and family, 7 clean animals, and 2 unclean. We also have the
bride and the virgins or guests, and EGW is clear that the bride is not people but a structure. She
compares it to New Jerusalem [GC 426.2] to which we enter in.
 When does the structure come to its end? SL. So what is SL for the ship? Close of probation.
 Act 27:21 But after long abstinence Paul stood forth in the midst of them, and said, Sirs, ye should
have hearkened unto me, and not have loosed from Crete, and to have gained this harm and loss.
Act 27:22 And now I exhort you to be of good cheer: for there shall be no loss of any man's life
among you, but of the ship.
Act 27:23 For there stood by me this night the angel of God, whose I am, and whom I serve,
Act 27:24 Saying, Fear not, Paul; thou must be brought before Caesar: and, lo, God hath given thee
all them that sail with thee.
Act 27:25 Wherefore, sirs, be of good cheer: for I believe God, that it shall be even as it was told
me.
Act 27:26 Howbeit we must be cast upon a certain island.
Act 27:27 But when the fourteenth night was come, as we were driven up and down in Adria, about
midnight the shipmen deemed that they drew near to some country;

 They'd been sailing for 14 nights, EGW says all but Paul had lost hopes of being saved. Because he
had a prophetic message to take to Rome. An angel comes and answer to his prayer.
 We can mark night number night, and MN. Paul tells the hopeless that they're going to shipwreck,
find an island. So they send watchmen to look for land through the night. When they see it, what
would have that sounded like? A cry, so I'll mark this waymark as a MC. Also noting the 14th night.
On the 14th night S. Snow arrived at Exeter. So that brings us to MC. This leads to shipwreck which
is the SL or for the ship the CoP.
 The angel descends to Paul previous to MC marks MN with a message in vs 22. Here they know
this will happen but they don't know when, at the MC in vs 27 they know time.
 It enables us to see that there's a message about the CoP of the ship, and all the events are about
the ship. [watch this part again]

 What hinders us from placing this MC between R and P for example? Why does it have to be R and
P. Because of the thread, the MC has to announce the CoP for the ship. 1863 is not about people,
and 911 the east wind didn't attack me or you.
 We need to compare and contrast, how does that help us? We have two ships with the same
waymarks. In the first line the MC is Panium, where we have a falling down (USA and SDA), and then
the ship ends. And we also see the new arising of a new leadership. This demonstrates that the MC
of the second line is the same as in the first line, which was Panium.

Class - 11 Feb 2019 (mornign)

 Summary

 We must understand these voyage by compare and contrast: both are a symbol of the USA and SDA.
And we can mirror them from 1798. We were able to pass a thread of history for both the USA and
SDA.

 1863: also Abraham Lincoln abolished civil freed.

 It's particularly 1979 to 1989 what we should understand. The pope goes to the WH, with James
Carter. Before that the Baptist president, he was candidate and saw a discourse of the pope on TV,
he got exited and decided he was going to make an alliance with him. The pope was against
 communist and Carter was capitalist, considering communism a bad deal. From 1977 to 1981, they
had some assassination of the pope was 13 May 1881. 13 May 1917 was the vision of Fatima, in
which those children are given 3 secrets. The second talks of the purpose. When JPII was shot he
almost dies and when saved at the hospital, he's first thought is the connection with 13 May and
how the Catholic was in rebellion since 1917. He asked that the prophecies be brought, he read that
if they didn't dedicate Russia they'd die. He does in 1884 and from there the USSR begins to
crumble. They are being directed, it's not like they woke up and say 'oh what a good idea to '

 911: the structure is particularly attacked. And like in the parable, EGW says from this time the ship
was hopeless.

 MC = LC, we get that from EGW, she says that from the SL its swell.

 There is no priests after Panium, there is no line, second advent.

 We considered the story of Noah. We had 3 groups, Noah and family, 7 clean, 2 unclean. But
separate and distinct there's the ark. It's story about an ark even though people are mentioned.

 We saw the 14th night and midnight. In M history the 14 is a symbol of Exeter, MC. Samuel Snow
arrives on the 14th night.
 It's told to Paul at night [MN], that the ship is going to shipwreck, and then at MN [MC] they have
the time for it.
 Another way to mark the CoP for the structures is with the kingdoms of prophecy. The 6th kingdom
is over at the SL.
 How do we know it's not another MC of the priests or Levites for example? By the thread of history.
The first line taught us that we have 911 MC and SL and between there's the sea of Cilicia and
Pamphylia, so the USA and SDA begin to fall there. We can identify that it is Panium. And comparing
and contrasting we thus have to have Panium in the ship of Alexandria.

Loose ends
Act 27:28 And sounded, and found it twenty fathoms: and when they had gone a little further, they
sounded again, and found it fifteen fathoms.

 In connection to them seeing land, they want to know how far away they are from shipwreck. 1 F =
72 inches. 20 F = 1440. 15 F = 1080. Combined it's 2520. So they can know time based upon the
2520, like Parminder said, it's the key for time.

 AA 444.2 : 275
LP 264.1 : 300
LP 268.3 : 276
LP 270.1 : almost 300

A while ago I mentioned to Elder Jeff that you can mark the number 300 from MC to SL. Some
people didn't like it because there's 300. But why would EGW say that? Acts 27 says 276. We know
this is the correct number.
 “When he had thus spoken, he took bread, and gave thanks to God in presence of them all: and
when he had broken it, he began to eat.” Then that worn and discouraged company of two hundred
and seventy-five souls, who but for Paul would have become desperate, joined with the apostle in
partaking of food. “And when they had eaten enough, they lightened the ship, and cast out the
wheat into the sea.” {AA 444.2}

 [Me] Observation: look at how she speak about Luke and Aristarchus (Christ and Luke)

 She is giving us more symbols to use. Jeff did a list of all the 300 you can mark from MC to SL.

 Details: vs 33 and 35. Paul breaks bread to the Levites, gospel. So we have MC and Paul taking the
gospel.

273
 Why does Luke wait till then to give us the number 276?

Num 3:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Num 3:12 And I, behold, I have taken the Levites from among the children of Israel instead of all the
firstborn that openeth the matrix among the children of Israel: therefore the Levites shall be mine;

This is the very first calling of the Levites.

Num 3:15 Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male
from a month old and upward shalt thou number them.
Num 3:16 And Moses numbered them according to the word of the LORD, as he was commanded.

It was the role of the firstborn to do this work, but because of their failure on the desert they were
substituted by the tibe of Levie that had been faithful. So they needed to number them, because it
had to be person to person replacement.

Num 3:39 All that were numbered of the Levites, which Moses and Aaron numbered at the
commandment of the LORD, throughout their families, all the males from a month old and upward,
were twenty and two thousand.
Redemption of the Firstborn
Num 3:40 And the LORD said unto Moses, Number all the firstborn of the males of the children of
Israel from a month old and upward, and take the number of their names.

(Num 3:43) And all the firstborn males by the number of names, from a month old and upward, of
those that were numbered of them, were twenty and two thousand two hundred and threescore
and thirteen.

Num 3:44 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,

Num 3:45 Take the Levites instead of all the firstborn among the children of Israel, and the cattle of
the Levites instead of their cattle; and the Levites shall be mine: I am the LORD.
Num 3:46 And for those that are to be redeemed of the two hundred and threescore and thirteen
of the firstborn of the children of Israel, which are more than the Levites;
 What problem did they face? They had to pay a loan, because they're owing 273. So when we come
to a history that's dealing with the very final calling of the Levites, we get the number completed.

 Sometimes there's more than one line being dealt with at a time, like rain at the time of the harvest.
This will help us when we deal with Ipsus and the questions I had.

Class (02-11-19)
Summary

For a good summary on the arch and the institutions watch the first 5 minutes.

Another good logic: it's the end of the road for the ship = the end of the road for the 6th head of
Bible prophecy.

They were raised up for a purpose, and whatever it is they went off track. Both went off in 1863 and
at least one of them is in a Laodicean condition. It would be worth it to study the history of the
USA… Christianity elected Donald Trump and perhaps forgot about their purpose. We need to
compare and contrast to come to these conclusions.

As we continue to investigate this 5th line of institution. The other 4 allows us to place a harvest
model, I don't see any evidences that we can do it in this line.

We considered the 2520 in the measures of acts 27. They're measuring the distance, if they measure
10F and then 15 minutes afterwards 10F, then they're calculating the time they have till shipwreck.

We also considered the number of people according to EGW. We considered why she would
consider inaccurate numbers.

The 273 is after Panium but before the shipwreck.

The king of the South

Deu 18:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my
words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

 What waymark could we apply this to in Millerite history? 1818, where he came to the conclusions.
 The original context may have been Samuel, someone relevant in those days of Moses.

Eze 20:9 But I wrought for my name's sake, that it should not be polluted before the heathen,
among whom they were, in whose sight I made myself known unto them, in bringing them forth out
of the land of Egypt.
Eze 20:10 Wherefore I caused them to go forth out of the land of Egypt, and brought them into the
wilderness.
 Eze 20:11 And I gave them my statutes, and shewed them my judgments, which if a man do, he
shall even live in them.

 273 has some very interesting characteristics. It is absolute zero, talking about temperature. What
makes something hot or cold? If you picture boiling water, the more it becomes hot, the more active
it becomes till it's forced to change form and it releases. So when something is cold it moves slowly,
referring to atoms. If water is cold, the atoms move slowly, and as it increases they move faster. So
there's a connection between movemnt and temperature. There's a point where you can't become
more cold, or more still. That temperature is -273 Celsius. This has never been recreated, but they
suspect that it would just cease to exist. In a laboratory they have cooled something to as cold as
they can, colder than outer space, and that's still not 273 Celsius. In Kelvin this is 0. He called -273 =
0.
 The cylce of the moon lasts 273 days (I think) because when you consider the patterns of the earth,
sun and moon they all revolve around the number 273. That's why they use it so much in
spiritualism, when they consider the gestation of humans and connect it to the moon cycles.

Book 'The navies of Rome'

ATJ - the Romans were becoming popular, famous because of the Pyrrhic war. This is the first time
Rome was recognized as an international power. No international recognition before this. This war
went from 280 to 275 b.C.

This is in the context of the death of Alexander in 323, and then afterwards you get Seleucus and
Ptolemy fighting in Daniel 11.
There was Pyrrhus king of Epirus. There were city states in Italy. The democrates recognized that
what the aristocrats wanted (which was to ally with Rome) wanted to remain with Greece. In this
internal struggle in Thurii the aristochrats won. Tarentum then declares war to Rome, they ask
Pyrrhus to come and be their general. So he sailed over to Tarentum and fought on the behalf of
this southern city state. So it becomes a war between Epirus and Rome.

280 279 275 - 273 - 272

| | | | |

In 273 Egypt sends ambassadors to Rome. Pyrrhus and Tarentum are destroyed completely in 272
[why is - 273 zero movement then?] In 272 Rome gives back the favor sending ambassador (Fabius
Maximum Gurges). In Acts 27:27 we have MN marked and the 14th night, that was the MC.
Acts 27 summary

 The theme of the chapter: the ship. We identified a MN and a MC before SL. This structure relates
to SDA and USA. This is the 5th line: a line for the structures or institutions. This is demonstrated
in Acts 27 by 2 ships: Adramyttium and Alexandria. One takes his journey from 1798 and the other
from 1989 but they both end at SL. We spent time discussing why is this illustrated by a bad ship
and a good ship.

A bad ship and a good ship

 This chapter doesn't allow us to talk about a them and an 'us' within the SDA church. We're all in
the same boat till SL. But we're so used to divide between Laodicea and Ephesus. We can't in this
case

USA

The lamblike horns and dragon voice of the symbol point to a striking contradiction between the
professions and the practice of the nation thus represented. The “speaking” of the nation is the action of
its legislative and judicial authorities. By such action it will give the lie to those liberal and peaceful
principles which it has put forth as the foundation of its policy. The prediction that it will speak “as a
dragon” and exercise “all the power of the first beast” plainly foretells a development of the spirit of
intolerance and persecution that was manifested by the nations represented by the dragon and the
leopardlike beast. And the statement that the beast with two horns “causeth the earth and them which
dwell therein to worship the first beast” indicates that the authority of this nation is to be exercised in
enforcing some observance which shall be an act of homage to the papacy. {GC 442.1}
Such action would be directly contrary to the principles of this government, to the genius of its free
institutions, to the direct and solemn avowals of the Declaration of Independence, and to the
Constitution. The founders of the nation wisely sought to guard against the employment of secular
power on the part of the church, with its inevitable result—intolerance and persecution. The
Constitution provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” and that “no religious test shall ever be required as a
qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.” Only in flagrant violation of these
safeguards to the nation’s liberty, can any religious observance be enforced by civil authority. But the
inconsistency of such action is no greater than is represented in the symbol. It is the beast with lamblike
horns—in profession pure, gentle, and harmless—that speaks as a dragon. {GC 442.2}
“Saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast.” Here is clearly
presented a form of government in which the legislative power rests with the people, a most striking
evidence that the United States is the nation denoted in the prophecy. {GC 442.3}

 In that sense the USA is a place of safety

 But the suggestion is that in 1798 the USA already started to violate its principles. They did it in
WWs and they're about to do it again. So in one sense it's a bad ship.

SDA

 What makes it bad? It went of course in 1863, it's not upholding the principles that it was raised to
demonstrate. God raised up the SDA church for a purpose, and they forgot what it was and
became worldly: Laodicean condition.
USA
 The USA was raised with a purpose, and they quickly begin to war against it. For those waring
against the idea of a Muslim woman in congress, this is an apostate protestant idea because this
violates the constitution.

Building structure
Dan 11:40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north
shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he
shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.

 This verse gives us 2 ToE. Let's compare and contrast them. Verse 40 ends at the SL.

1798

Rev 12:6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they
should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.

 1260 = wilderness.

Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed:
and all the world wondered after the beast.

Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book
of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

 So there's a point in the future from 1798 where that wound is healed, and its ascending out of
the bottomless pit. Why would you be in a pit? Because its dead.
 Another way to prove this is that this is countering the death and resurrection of Jesus. And Christ
actually died, not just wounded. Also they wander after the beast like they wandered after Christ,
because they resurrected.
 This is a war between the KN and KS..

 The diplomatic relations between France and the papacy ended in 1791
 Then in 1796 Napoleon leads the troops against the papacy (literal battle between KN and KS)

That afternoon [November 2] he [Elder Bourdeau] had us accompany him to the Cathedral [in
Valence, France] and look upon the bust of Pius VI who was noted in prophecy, who was led into
captivity and died in captivity. [Rev 13:10] Here was the one marked in history who received the
deadly wound. His heart is encased in the marble monument beneath where the bust is located.
We felt rather solemn as we looked upon the monument of this man noted in prophecy.—Letter
110, 1886, p. 2. (To W. C. White and wife, November 4, 1886.) {8MR 354.1}

 EGW is in France looking at the bust of Pope Pius VI. She is referencing Rev 13:10. She marks the
pope not the papacy as lead into captivity. So she is saying that Pius VI received the deadly wound.
 From Dn 2 we learnt king = its kingdom. The papacy or Pius received the deadly wound. Pius VI
never recovered from being taken captive, and the following year he died.

Compare and contrast 1798 with 1989.

 KN now defeats the KS. Did the USSR end in 1989? No, it received the deadly wound. When did it
die? 1991. So in 1989 its wounded, in 1991 it dies. To paraphrase a quote from the Washington
Post archives written in 1991, Dec 25.'
 There's the cold war before 1989 : there's war previous to 1798
 There's 126 before 1989 : there's 1260 before 1798

 We should thus expect the KS to resurrect.

 Suggestion: we can already see the world wondering around Putin and asking where his power
comes from..
 It's been the KS as the USSR. It has died and now it resurrects and the world wanders.
 1989 is the deadly wound, its defeated in battle, 1991 for death. Where would you mark Panium?
People feel tempted to mark Panium at 1991 and then the 30 years would place Panium in 2021.
But 1989 is Panium and 1991 is the SL. So the SL would fall in 2021.

-----------------1260---------------------------------|
-------------------war--------------------|
1791 1796 1798 1799 Healed
| | | | | | |
Deadly wound Death in captivity
(Pius VI) (Pius VI)

-----------------126-----------------------------------|
---------- Cold war----------------------|
1989 1991 Healed
R P
| | | | | | |
| |
Deadly wound
Gorbachev
Panium SL
|--------------30 years----------------------------------
------------|
|-------------------30 years--------------------------------------------------
--|
We understand there's a deadly wound in 1798 then a death and then a resurrection.
Then in 1989 the same thing. But let's consider the resurrection. If we compare it to our history, we can
divide it in 2 parts: alpha and omega. When we consider its alpha history, there's a war with the KS. Nazi
Germany + Pius XII to defeat the USSR. And in the omega history, the USA allied with apostate
Protestantism will defeat Russia.
So when we discuss what's going on in the USA today, we can compare Hitler with Trump.
Pyrrhus in Macedonia and Italy illustrates the two parts of the history of the KS: alpha and omega.

Class 13 Feb 2019

Dn 11:40 comes in two parts. We're marking two separate battles which create 2 ToE. What we did
yesterday was compare and contrast the two. The reason why we're approaching the subject this way is
I'd like us to spend most of the rest of our time studying the battle of the KN and KS.

1260 prior to 1798 : 126 prior to 1989. Both are a scattering. In Rev 13 is called the wilderness. And in
1863 in Acts 27 the ship changes it's course. We read 8MR 354.1 were EGW describes 1798, but instead
of describing the papacy she was describing Pius VI, the man himself. He was lead into captivity in 1798
and then he died in captivity in 1799.

Prior to 1798 and 1989 it’s the history of a war. It should teach us what these battles look like in our
times.
From an article someone wrote who was there at the wall November 9 1989.

'The German polititians were debating what to do with the mobs that were involved in the wall. They
had considered to order the guards to shoot the people but they decided not to intervene because of
what led up to 1989 the communist government of East Germany no longer believed its own
propaganda and no one was willing to kill their fellow citizens for something they didn't believe.' So you
see a regime breaking down from the inside, because the polititians themselves had failed to believe
their own propaganda. And she is saying in this article that these demonstrations in 1989 mattered
because they completely demoralized it. And the polititians understood that they were completely
opposed by society, and then they lost their will to impose their system by force. So you see this
demoralization and the failure of the propaganda machine. And the reason their machine failed was
because the USA had a stronger one, but for all apearances in 1989 it's falling appart from the inside,
not a visible outside attack. And we considered that 1798 marked the deadly wound, then 1989 must
mark a deadly wound. As we see it's demoralizing but its not dead.
It died in 1991, in December Gorbachov resigned, they also dissolved the USSR. Once again we see the
fall of a king and a kingdom. But what do we understand of this line (1798), we learnt from Rev 13 that
the KN was engaged in a war and received a deadly wound, it died and after it died it went where? To a
grave, buried. Counterfeiting Christ, so what's going to happen? He will resurrect, come out of the grave,
wound healed and all the world will wonder after the beast.
So what must happen to the KS? Needs to die as well [1991], and it's going to resurrect again.

So that was the logic we came to with Dn 11:40 part a and part b. Another thing we noted with this
history, is we're also trying to understand what the war looks like. We're taking 1989, doing 30 years to
2019. And what are we hoping to learn when we mark 30 years from the ToE? We get the 30 from the
priests, so we learn that the work of the priests starts. 2019 we can mark baptism, then He goes to the
wilderness or time of trouble, but we can mark this 30 as the beginning of His work, and prior to that He
was engaged in construction.

2019 is Raphia, so then it can be tempting to say 1989 is Raphia, and then 1991 would be Panium. What
problem do we have there? When we go to Pyrrhus, or just consider it from Acts 27, the first ship begins
to fall in Panium and its fallen by SL. That's the path of the USA, and the UN begins to rise, or the 7th
head. But we can mark it also with Pyrrhus that Panium is where Russia begins to fall, that Panium marks
a deadly wound, and the SL marks the death.

1989 1991
| |
Deadly wound Death

Panium SL
| |
Deadly wound Death

273? 272?
| |

When we consider the 30 years for us, it’s the line of Christ. So do we have to apply the whole thing to
the USSR? It's similar to the issue of the shipwreck and having a harvest and a LR at the same time: you
need to be able to separate the noise of the story. [watch this part again]

Modern Israel
When we considered the beginning and the end of Modern Israel, we go from 1798 after the 1260
scattering, Why were they scattered? The scattering and darkness are symptoms of apostasy. Then they
begin to come out of that apostasy, what brings them out is the 3 angel's messages. This is the history of
the Millerites, and then the ship went of course, and we have this second history. We could say alpha
and omega.

Modern Babylon
Babylon was scattered in 1798 (the papacy had gone into apostasy, and they're scattered). We'll not go
into a study of the specific dates. To come out of that condition they need? A message of revival:
because if they're scattered because of apostasy their problem is internal. So in 1773 they abolish the
Jesuit order and stop scattering God's people. Thus they're taken captive by the KS.
So they need a 3 step prophetic testing message.

1. Fear
2. The point of the visions: KS
3. Judgment

 The only solid instructions, or the whole point of the visions, is to dedicate Russia. Mary: 'the
world is aobut to receive war, this is punishment ofr the world, and the church and pope are
about to be persecuted. Russia must be consacrated to Mary, if you follow the instrucions Russia
will be converted and there'll be peace. But if not, Russia will spread error through out the world,
new wars and persecutions, some nations will cease to exist. But inspite of this, the pope will
consacrate Russia, it will be converted, the world is going to enjoy a period of peace. So in the 3
visions, the repeated instruction is to dedicate Russia. So when you consider what Satan is doing,
it's in this history that he starts targeting Russia. Why would he be doing it in June 1917?
So 2017 there's a tension between the KN and the KS, I want to understand why in 1917 Satan
wanted this work accomplished, when we see that the deadly wound occurs at the SL, but he is
doing a revival 100 years before. Why are they receiving their 3am in 1917? Russia becomes the
KS around April, it begins in March, 1917, the Zar of Russia abdicates and revolution sweeps away
the leadership. So Lenin leading the Bolsheviks was rising, and in the October revolution
(November in our calendar) Lenin took power. So this 3 messages are in the middle of this history
as Russia is changing from a monarchy to a completely different beast. We can see that there's a
transition from the abdication of the Tsar to Lenin, a communist country that opposes the papacy.
Right in the middle of this history, even before Lenin, Satan is already preparing for its destruction.

They have an alpha, like we do. So if Satan is doing a work against the KS in 1917, we must also
understand the work of the papacy in the history surrounding 1917.

The scattering for modern Babylon ends in 1899, because there's other things we can compare
apart from the KS, like the overturning of a leadership.

There's war with the KS in the alpha history, and there's war with the KS in the omega history:
Hitler vs USSR, and Trump vs Russia. [KN = Trump or something?]

Disappointment of the alpha history [1844] = 1945. When they lose to the USSR they're
disappointment, bitterness. And it's also a history of 46 years from 1899 to 1945.

So let's be comfortable not only that the KS is going to resurrect but that there's 2 histories about
the KS: it exists in the alpha and omega history of modern Babylon.

Who helped Hitler to come into power? Its 1933, he isn't yet a dictator, and a catholic party inside
the German government, completely democratic and opposed to Hitler. And then Pius says 'if I go
into an alliance with you I'll abolish that party, and you're last obstacle for dictatorship will be
prevented'. Mussolini in Italy became a dictator because of the Lateran treaty, Hitler became a
dictator because of his alliance with Pius XII: the papacy could have prevented that but didn’t
because they had an agenda: Hitler was a power about to take down the USSR. When Hitler had in
his mind to take down the USSR, then the pope came to the aid.

Pyrrhus
 Pyrrhus was the 10th from Admetus. After Pyrrhus came Neoptolemus II, whom Pyrrhus forced to
co-rule, then comes Pyrrhus again.

Pyrrhus represents Putin. So when it comes to 2008, Putin had run for 2 consecutive terms, and
under the constitution of Russia, you cannot run for 3 consecutive terms. So he steps aside, and
Medvedev asumes. This is 2008 to 2012. They co-ruled, Putin never left. In fact even the banner
for Medvedev's campaing has them standing alongside each other and it says 'together we win',
and they ruled together in those 4 years before Putin became sole ruler.

So if we compare and contrast, Putin becomes the 10th, who is the 1st? Stalin. He was ruling in
what period? WWII. Putin is fighting Trump, Lening was fighting Hitler (not Lenin).

Aecedis involved his people in a war that they became tired of. So he was opposed in a coup, and
Neoptolemus II became king. The same one from this history that co-rules with Pyrrhus. Being so
weakened by his position, he only lasts a short time and he is killed. In his place his brother
becomes king, etc…………..

Class - 14 Feb 2019

Two wars against the KS

How can we prove the KS's deadly wound is going to be healed? By comparing and contrasting vs
40 part a with part b.

 Sequence:

Moses | Christ | Millerites | 144k

 But we can break it so that the alphas teach you about the omegas:

Alpha |Moses|
Omega |Christ|
……………….
Alpha |Millerites|
Omega |144k|

 And we can also parallel the 4.

 The same thing happens with Modern Babylon. It receives a deadly wound in 1798 because of its
apostasy. To come out of it they need 3 angel's messages. In 1917 they receive them:

1. Fear
2. KS
3. Judgment

 Is Lucia speaking to her generation or the omega generation? EGW is speaking to their generation
or to their generation? Suggestion: Modern Babylon is a counterfeit of Modern Israel (Adventism).
  So we need to break the line of Modern Babylon and overlay its alpha and its omega. Since we
have a war with the KS in the alpha, we have a war with the KS in the omega and we can overlay
the war.

The story of the KS as typified by Pyrrhus

Here goes the picture of the 10 kings of Epirus and of Russia

Alphas and Omegas

 Tsar Nicholas: forced to abdicate. 10. Gorbachev: forced to abdicate.
 Lenin: places Stalin in power. 10. Boris Yeltsin, his health failed along with his approval rating and
places Putin in power.
 Stalin. 10. Putin.

How do we then know that Germany is the KN? Because WWII is Germany trying to take down Stalin,
and Germany is supported in that effort by the papacy.

People are saying that there's 3 attempts to take the KS.

True history of God's people

1798 1844
| Millerites |

| 144k |

Counterfeit

1899 1945
| |

[mirar esta parte de nuevo]

Stalin and Putin similarities

 It's Stalin and Putin who most closely resemble each other. Stalin was violent, an errand boy. He
called the attention of Lenin.
 Putin was also a ground soldier of the KGB. He never had problems with getting his hands dirty (he
tortured and had many people killed). There was a very convenient bombing for coming into
power. He wasn't happy that the USSR fell: he says it's the greatest something of the century.

Pyrrhus
The context of Pyrrhus

Dan 8:5 And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole
earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.
Dan 8:6 And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and
ran unto him in the fury of his power.
Dan 8:7 And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote
the ram, and brake his two horns: and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast
him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of
his hand.
Dan 8:8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken;
and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.

Alexander dies in 323 and there's a conference of the generals who divide the empire into tiny parts.
They argue and fight over who will be king, because non where kings, they are waiting for Alexander's
unborn child to be old enough. They're supposed to just keep the little part they have until they could
give it to the child. All this is 323 b.C. The battle of Ipsus produces the 4 generals in 301. And in between
there's 22 years and 4 wars. Daniel is ignoring the 4 wars and the history of 323 where its divided in
many parts. He is just seeing a cause and an effect, or the beginning and the end of that process. The
beginning of the division of Greece and the end where it can't be united. All those 4 wars were to
Daniel noise.

Alexander dies Ipsus

- 323 - 301
| 1 2 3 4 |
cause effect

Dan 11:4 And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four
winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom
shall be plucked up, even for others beside those.

 Ipsus is a subject of prophecy.

 Note that there's 4 generals only for 3/4 years, and Daniel doesn't even mark the most relevant
events.

Class 15/02/2019
Who is the KS and who is the KN?

Dn 11:40. How do we prove that the KS is not defeated in 1989? We compare and contrast part a with
part b. In part a there's a deadly wound (KN). If you receive a deadly wound you're not dead yet, so the
papacy is not dead yet in 1798, it takes a while. Pius VI receives the deadly wound (EGW says when she
is in France and she sees the bust of the pope). So the papacy receives the deadly wound but we know
we can tie a king and a kingdom. If he's been wounded and it takes him a period of time to die, then
there must be a point where he dies. That's in 1799, when he dies in captivity (Rev 13:10). We also
understood that this deadly wound was the result of a
war between the KN and the KS. So in 1799 we can mark the death, and he goes to a grave. And this is a
counterfeit of Christ, so we should expect a resurrection. So if we compare and contrast this with the KS,
we should see the same. That is, there was also a war between the KN and the KS, Gorbachov was
leading the USSR, and in 1989 the Berilin wall falls marking the beginning of the fall of the USSR, and in
1991 Gorbachev abdicates, and at that same time the USSR dissolves (dies). And in the future it will
resurrect as the KN. So we can understand that the USSR really died, it isn't doing this underground
scheme planning on how it will come back, in other words, it hasn't fake its death like the KN didn't fake
its death in 1798. So the KS is the USSR, if it was Russia, then what dies in 1989? Compare and contrast
solves the issue.

The papacy dies as the 5th head, and the 7th (or 8th) head resurrects. It's a different head, a different
manifestation. So the same with the USSR, it dies as the USSR and it resurrects as Russia.

How does Dan 11:10 stand then? His sons shall be stirred up. Sons plural, of the KN. In 1989 you have 2
presidents: Reagan and Bush. And one of the was killed, removed from power and his brother took over
the throne and finished the work that the other began. Reagan began the work against the USSR, Bush
came in and finished the work. So when we read the verse, it says that the KN its going to take all the
satellite states of the USSR, but that last phrases says its only able to take to the fortress of the KS. So
how we understand that is that the KN took all of the satellite states of the USSR but didn't take Russia.
And then the suggestion can be made that because Russia wasn't taken, that it didn't die.

In the next couple of verses (we'll go through them next weeks) but it's the history of Raphia and
Panium. And we want to note when we discuss Panium to SL, what conclusion did we come to about the
KS? The fall of the KS. So it receives a deadly wound in Panium, and it's dead at SL.

Panium

Dan 11:13 For the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former,
and shall certainly come after certain years with a great army and with much riches.
Dan 11:14 And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers
of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall.
Dan 11:15 So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities:
and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any
strength to withstand.

At Panium the KN defeats the KS. If we went back to the history, it's the history of the 5th Syrian war,
which are a fight for the area coele Syria. Egypt is down south, kingdom of Ptolemy (KS) and up there is
the area of Seleucus KS. And when they come down to Panium Seleucus defeats Ptolemy or the generals
that represented those kings. So at Panium what area does the KN win? Seleucus never takes Egypt, he
doesn't take it in 1989 and neither in Panium. So is Egypt is never taken. Thus we can't use the argument
that Russia isn't dead because he didn't take Egypt (the head). So the fact that he doesn't take the head,
we can't use it to say that Russia didn't die. I would suggest that if they take everything but your head,
you're still dead.

Isa 8:8 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.
Get to the neck = complete destruction.
Also 'up to the neck' is to behead someone.

I think the only way we can consider Russia during the whole story, is some kind of deep state
conspiracy theory. Yeltsin was really trying to re create Russia as a democracy, however corrupt that
might have been.

Back to the reform lines

Alpha Omega
Ancient Israel Modern Israel

We have Miller learnt by study and EGW by direct revelation: two types of prophets. So when we come
to Modern Babylon we must be able to say the same thing: the raising up of a prophet, also a prophet
receiving visions, a 3 step testing message, etc. And we can demonstrate that. What I want us to
understand, for us to focus on our history, is that EGW says the Millerite history is the history of the 1st
and 2nd angel's messages [1798 to 1844].

Alpha of Modern Babylon is from 1899 to 1945. EGW says the 2nd ends in 1844. What ends in 1945?
WWII. So 1899 to 1945 is the history of WWI and WWII. So Millerite history (alpha of modern Israel) is
the history of the 2 angel's messages. The counterfeit is the story of WWI and WWII. In one sense you
can see WWIII beginning in 1945 with the cold war, runs through history and is empowered in the
future. We can see the angels in different ways, particularly the 2nd war. Also it's 46 years in both
histories! WWI is 4 years and WWII is 6 years. It's 46, a counterfeit of the two tables, etc.

So in 1917 the papacy is arming himself against the KS who is rising. And this call of a prophetess to
overturn the papal leadership, Pius XII, and you also have Lucia receiving visions. And all this inside the
papcy is not for a war 100 years later, it's for a war with Stalin as the KS against Hitler. When we get to
1919 Hitler is in an alliance with the pope, already had a treaty and where working together. So we are
going to discuss the history of Pyrrhus in 2 parts.

Class 17 Feb 2019

A little review of 'to his fortress'

Why are you scattered prophetically? Is 1:5 describes it.

Isa 1:5 Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and
the whole heart faint.
Isa 1:6 From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and
bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with
ointment.
Isa 1:7 Your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your
presence, and it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers.
  We can apply apostasy in 1773 and scattering in 1798. You can also see this as a sickness. And
once you see the symptoms of that, you've already been sick for some time. So when we say
mortal wound, or the symptoms of this disease, and then we talk about death, it's not
disconnected to the previous history.
 If we compare and contrast, the USSR had to die after 1989 because the KN died in 1799.

Dan 11:10 But his sons shall be stirred up, and shall assemble a multitude of great forces: and one shall
certainly come, and overflow, and pass through: then shall he return, and be stirred up, even to his
fortress.

 'to his fortress'. This is the nation of Egypt, saying it came all the way to the borders. So all the
other territory has been taken but the key country itself has not. Can we see that as an actual
defeat? Because that's describing what happens in 1989. You have Russia and then all of the
satellite states including east germany and everything in between were taken. We use that logic to
say that we misunderstood these verses (Dn 11:40 wrong). And we say that the KS wasn't actually
defeated. The reason we say it wasn't is because the USSR was not the KS but Russia. So what do
we do now? We compare and contrast it in Dn 11:40 to the KN, and we prove it has to die. And
also, in Panium Egypt wasn't conquered either, but since we know Panium is a total defeat for
Russia, this can't mean that Egypt is not taken. So the KS can be fully defeated without his own
country being taken.

USA and Russia are not trying to take each other's countries down, but it's more about influences, which
makes the war much more subtle. And what's going on in Syria, weather Trump gets out of there, his
relationship with Nato and his allies, if we consider this as being a battle about global influence, this
becomes more important. [re watch this commentary]

1899 46 1945 46 1991

| | Cold war |

The Cold war was from 1945 to 1991,which is a 46 year history, as it is from 1899 to 1945. So when we
deal with this cold war, both powers have nuclear weapons, why is this not a hot war (open
declaration)? MAD (mutually assured destruction). Madness. Now after 1991, what happened to the
Russian economy? Collapsed, and it was reconstructed in what way? Capitalist structured economy.
Their biggest businesses are privatized, all of them are open to the international market to invest and
trade, and with globalization billions of Russian money get out of Russia. So now most of their money is
in the in the west. London, in particular, which is why that's where people fleeing Putin keep going, and
so many Russians die in England, in very suspicious circumstances. And when USA sneezes the whole
world gets a cold. So now we don't just have MAD, but Mutually assured economical destruction. If
we're expecting Putin to actually attack the west, in any truly destabilizing way, it would be national
suicide, economically. So what Putin must do in a very clever way is re gain his global influence, and
defeat the USA without destroying the country or destabilizing the economy. His network is estimated
between 200 to 500 billion dollars. So much of that money is tied up in the west, and also tied to US
sanctions. So even having the USA against him, he looses money. So it changes how he needs to fight.
And if we consider Dn 11, they're fighting because they want to be the dominant power, not to destroy
the other country. And that's what Putin has to do. That's what global influence means: he doesn't want
to lose Syria, or his oil control over Europe, or Iran. This is what they're fighting over: global influences
and the removal of sanctions. Anything antagonistic, that doesn't further that in, would be Madness, he
would lose his country, his economy and his own finances.

How about the other way around? US has hurt Russia economically through sanctions. But it does hurt
them, if they would go to far, oil prices in Europe would go high, hurting the US's allies. For example,
the US did put sanctions on Iran, and Europe is not happy (during the last 2 days).

Pyrrhus

323 ----------------22------------------- 301

| 1 2 3 4 | 4 |
Cause Effect
Last general that
could unite the empire dies
4 even generals

She did a nice summary of that line and the Diadochi wars. [watch] The fourth Diadochi war begins
when Demetrius invades Athens. In -317 Cassander places a dictator in Athens, and this was a very
strategic area, one that they had a rivalry over. Demetrius frees Athens in -307. So we can mark a period
of 10 years leading up to Demetrius taking the territory from Casander, liberaing it from the control of a
dictator. This begins the 4th war, because they break the peace treaty that they had. In our reform line
we mark a 10 year period with the Afghan war. So 307 marks the ToE: freeing of a strategic place of a
dictatorship, and we can also mark the number 4 as we did with Acts 27. So in 307 the war begins, and
in 307 Pyrrhus enters into the world scene and he goes in an alliance with Demetrius. He was born in
Epyrus, and Alexander's mom was a princess of Epirus, so he is himself a relative of Alexander, and he
really enters the world scene in 303 with only 17 years old, as a general of Demetrius. His sister marries
Demetrius, cementing that alliance, and he begins to act as a general. This alliance, was first tested at
the battle of Ipsus, which ended the 4th diadochi war. It's here that Pyrrhus and Demetrius go into
alliance, and the only battle you see them on the same side. This 4 generals dediced it was time to finally
defeat Antigonus, they combined their forces and met together at Ipsus facing off Antigonus and
Demetrius. Prior to meeting up, Ptolemy heard word that the battle had been lost, a false report, so he
turned back and never showed up at Ipsus. C,L,S fight Demetrius and young Pyrrhus who was in his first
battle as far as I'm aware. They looked evenly matched, but Seleucus had just returned form his
campaign east and he brought to this battle 400 war elephants. It was going well for Antigonus and
Demetrius, but they became separated, they made a mistake and ventured to far from each other, and
when they tried to unite their armies again, Seleucus stroke his animals between them and split the
army. Demetrius tried to reach his father but couldn't make it through the elephants. Antigonus being
isolated fought to the last but his whole army was destroyed, he fled and Demetrius and Pyrrhus fled.
With that battle the last general who was powerful enough to reunite the empire, was defeated. Now
you can mark 4 that are fairly even matched, and Alexander's empire will never be united again. So
seeing how much history has been, it doesn't mean 301 is not an insignificant event.

Application
Pyrrhus is Putin or the KS. Demetrius is the KN. This is the only record of them fighting on the same side.
From 301 forward they become desperately enemies. It's in 2013 that Putin begins to interfere in the
elections, or preparing to do that. The only time we see them on the same side is the 2016 elections.

World war 2
Pyrrhus = Putin = Stalin

USSR entering into world stage : Spanish civil war

I don't want to consider when the USSR begins because in those years it's involved in civil war. I want to
consider when it enters into the world stage, and that really began with the Spanish civil war. So in 1
there's 2 sides in Europe, many countries are threatened with civil war and the 2 sides that want to fight
are those that support a fascist type of government, and those who want a communist style
government. So this becomes a conflict between fascism and communism. Few significant countries
were inclined to fascism. And Spain is headed in that direction. It erupts into civil war in 1936. France
calls for all the countries of Europe not to intervene, and they sign a non intervention agreement signed
by 27 countries. So the Spanish civil war is their national government vs general Franco who was a
fascist. So Stalin begins to become worried. By 1936 he has seen fascist govts rise in Italy and Germany,
and he knows also that Franco and the fascist are being supported by Germany, Hitler sending aid as is
Mussolini. By 1936 there's this teams settled. So the USSR begins to supply military aid to the
government. They sent them so much military supplies that at the beginning of the war Spain had the
4th largest gold reserve of gold, and by the end of the war 2/3 were sent to the USSR to pay for the
military supplies. It's said that the Spanish civil war was the WWII in training, like a playoff game before
the championship match. So Franco won, and now you had a 3rd major fascist government in Spain. And
increasingly in this history, those fascist governments were supported by the pope, weather it was
Mussolini or Franco.

Stalin killed millions of his own people. Putin's excuse for Stalin is that he faced some difficult times and
that Stalin had no choice because in the 1930s the USSR had 2 big threats, and Putin says those 2 was
the rise of these fascist govts and the Spanish civil war, which was a proxy war between Fascism and
communism. It's interesting when you read these chapters on the Spanish civil war of the book Hitler's
pope. It was written by a dedicated catholic who started hearing rumors the Pius XII supported Hitler in
WWII, he wished to defend the papacy and went to the Vatican and asked permission to investigate.
They gave him access to the Vatican archives that no one else had access to, outside of their close inner
circle. So he spent many months in this Vatican basement pouring through the material of WWII. He
came to the conclusion that the accusation were worst than he could have imagined. He uncovered a lot
of material. If we want to understand this alpha history of the papacy, its an essential reading. IN page
223 talks of the Spanish civil war and how by this stage the papacy was supporting Franco. By the time
WWII ended, you would have 1000s of people coming at the balcony of the Vatican, and pope would
come to address them, and at the end of his speeches he called out any of the pilgrims from Spain, he
would shout out 'the pope is for Spain' and they would shout 'Spain is for the pope'. So you can see
Fascism and the papacy combining. Mussolini had sign the Lateran treaty and he was now known by the
church as the new Constantine, so Mussolini and Hitler are in alliance with the papacy. In 1929 we mark
the Lateran treaty, where the papacy gained it's territory back, and also when Hitler starts to rise, also
the great depression. So you can see how Europe is divided between Fascism and communism. And on
April 17, 1939, Pius XII states that once more the hand of divine providence has manifested itself over
Spain. So he is praising God for the victory of Franco. So you can imagine the world shocked when on the
23rd of August, there's a pact or alliance between Hitler and Stalin: Molotov Ribbentrop pact.

Molotov Ribbentrop pact

When we get to August Hitler has his hand set to conquer Poland. He knows that if he does, Britain and
France would go to war with him. And Hitler fought in WWI, he knows why they lost: the disadvantage
of two fronts. He knows he isn't strong enough for 2 fronts, Stalin is his natural enemy, and he is afraid
that he would take advantage of his weakness and invade. So if he is going to take Poland, he has to
make sure that he has peace with Stalin. So this pact is to enable him to go to war with the west. If he
doesn't have it he can't go to war with the west. So this is why this 2 natural enemies united. It was
said at that time, the whole course of world politics suddenly changed. When news of that alliance hit
the press, the world began preparing for war. They understood that it was now WWII.

Class - 19 Feb 2019

We connected Pyrrhus to Putin, and Putin to Stalin. We recognized the beginning of Pyrrhus in the world
stage. We recognized a 10 year period, a proxy war, and soon after, an alliance between Hitler and
Stalin. So this proxy war was WWII in training, because what it really was, is a world wide struggle
between Fascism and communism. Hitler only went to war with the west, because he knew unless they
let him, he couldn't conquer the west. His end goal was always to conquer the USSR.

Spanish civil war : 1798 to 1989

Spanish civil war: Fascism (Hitler and Mussolini supporting Franco) and the papacy took their side. On
the side of the republican government of Spain was Stalin. And we understand that Franco won the war,
victory for Fascism and Hitler. So we took this history, recognized that there was a proxy war.

Molotov Ribbentrop: 2014

The next interaction between the KN and KS is an alliance that took the world by surprise because the
other countries recognized that they were natural enemies. There was two parts: non agression pact
which enabled Hitler to go to war with western europe, and Spheres of influences where they divided
Eastern Europe between them. The first pact was open and the second secret, first admitted to in 1989
(a few months before the fall of th Berlin wall) where they admitted colussion with the Nazi
government.

Invasion of Poland : 2016

The purpose of the alliance is to enable Hitler to go to war with the west. You have 3 allies: France,
England and Poland. Hitler wanted Poland which meant war with the others. He needed peace with the
USSR. And the pact gave him that. So Hitler can take on 3 allies. And we began to make application: we
recognized 10 years to the ToE, a proxy war, and also remember 1789, that is also when the pope goes
to the White House, and you can mark some interesting things in 1979 that teach us about the
information age. So it's an interesting year.

Collusion : 2014
The next thing we are to see between the KN and KS is an alliance that took everyone by surprise. It's
recognized a colussion between Stalin and Nazis that enabled WWII. And in 2014 there was collusion
between Trump and Putin that enabled WWIII.

2016: the Battle of Ipsus

In this battle you have 6 parties or players:

 Antigonus : takes one part of the army

 His son Demetrius
 Pyrrhus supporting Demetrius

Phyrrhus is fighting for Demetrius, he is his general. He is not fighting for Antigonus. These two man are
fighting 3 allies

 Seleucus
 Cassander
 Lysimachus

*************************************************************************************
***

Layers or perspectives

Ptolemy was going to fight but he heard a false report that the battles had been lost to the allies so he
didn't appear. Before we enter the battle in parts, let's consider one concept: when we look at t battle
or story, it can be seen on different levels or layers or perspectives.

Mat 13:24 Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a
man which sowed good seed in his field:

 Who is that man?

Mat 13:37 He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;

Mar 4:26 And he said, So is the kingdom of God, as if a man should cast seed into the ground;
Mar 4:27 And should sleep, and rise night and day, and the seed should spring and grow up, he
knoweth not how.

 Does God know how seeds grow? Yes, so who does this man represents? EGW would tell us that
this is us. So when we talk about a story having different levels and angles, not one of the angles is
wrong, but it can gives us more information. Same thing when we consider the field, is it the world
or the church? We can also see history or battles in different levels.

*************************************************************************************
****
This is the 2016 elections. The name Antigonus means 'to be like' and 'ancestor'. So the name means 'to
be equal to an ancestor'. So who is this story saying that Antigonus is equal to? Who was the king of
Greece in Daniel 8? Alexandre. He is the empire builder. So Antigonus becomes equal to the ancestor,
he is Alexandre the Great. And what did Alexander do? He built the empire. So he is an empire builder.
You can call this alpha and omega. And that is the way history reads, Antigonus was the last or only
general that could unite the empire, who was uniting it in the same manner as Alexander the Great, and
when he dies all hopes is lost.

| |

Antigonus = Hillary Clinton

3 branches of government

So in this battle, you have Antigonus, the empire builder confronting 3 allies. They are fighting for what?
Demtrius and Antigonus want to defeat the allies: conquer them or subdue them, take them captive to
control them. We will spend time on explaining the US government. But in an election cycle, what the
parties are trying to control is 3 branches: executive (president), legislative and judicial.

So in 2016 our parties are fighting for all 3, because as you might notice at the moment, Trump has the
executive branch but it's not very strong, because in the mid terms he lost the house. And we have 2
separate parties, Antigonus and Demetrius. Antigonus represents the empire builder and is equal to the
ancestor that constructed the empire. Demetrius on the other hand, is entering that battle with an
important ally: the KS. Who is Antigonus? Hillary Clinton. So what is she representing? So she is like
whom? She represents the republican horn, we could call it George Washington, or Abraham Lincoln,
Theodore Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan. But if you want to take it to the empire builder, then she is equal to
what created the empire in the first place. So Clinton becomes an example of this empire. And Trump
has said that. He's whole campaign in 2016 rested on the argument that she represented the
establishment. And we've turned the idea of establishment into a dirty word: the swamp. And he was
right, if you don't make it dirty words and understood that she was standing for the republican horn,
and she is equal to the ancestor: Alexander the Great.

So you have two parties fighting for the control of the 3 branches. Antigonus and Demetrius fighting for
the control of 3 allies, and one of them is backed by Pyrrhus. And in this battle Antigonus is killed, and
Demetrius becomes king. So Hillary is killed, or the republican horn is killed [me] in 2016.

So what we have is the story of the 2016 elections: Trump vs Clinton. One party stands in favour of the
republican horn, omega of the person who created the empire. And the other is coming into the battle
supported by the KS. So in this battle, Antigonus is killed, Demetrius flees, he is made king because he's
father is now dead.

The results: Antigonus killed, Demetrius becomes king, and also in this battle Pyrrhus was undefeated.
And then make a point from that. So Demetrius becomes king from this battle, despite the loss of his
father, and Antigonus is killed. Also I'd like to mark that this is the first battle Antigonus has ever lost. He
is over 80 years of age. Undefeated, he continues his whole carrear representing his ancestor:
undefeated. But also with Antigonus, he has two names, one was given to him as a nick name. He is
known as Antigonus Monoftalmus. So like most people he is bor with 2 eyes and somewhere an arrow
hit him in one aye and blinded him. He begins with 2 eyes, sometimes before the battle he looses one.
Then in this battle he looses the last eye. So if Antigonus represents this empire as well as Clinton, she
represents 2 horns: one horn falls here, the other fell before. Born with 2, but in this battle, the other
horn is broken. The other eye is lost. So you can bring this idea of the republican horn. We talked about
it falling. The republican horn is already fallen. It fell in 2016 when Clinton lost.

Demetrius
Interesting character, interesting morals. Most of the significant battles he lost, or his number one
weakness was the fact that his own people were disgusted by them. But his name comes from a goddess
known ad 'Demeter', the Greek goddess of corn and harvest. So what does Demetrius bring? Harvest.
Without him there's no harvest. So if we went back to our simbology. A person from Arkansas (T)
teaches that both of them are equally bad, that is good that Clinton didn't win, because if she hadn't
won, the world would have ended a lot sooner. Because without Demetrius there's no harvest. We
wouldn't face Raphia, Panium without Trump. If Clinton won, we would have the same as the ancestors,
another 4 years of Lincoln, Roosevelt, Washington, not the end of the world. So we should consider this
battles, particularly Ipsus. Because they unpack for us how we should see the elections, and how these
people stood for. If that make us uncomfortable, we might need to reconsider our thought process. You
have two people, you could say 2 institutions or parties, one of them represents the ancestors:
Alexander the Great, how this country became great. And it's continuing that legacy. The other stands
for harvest and allies with the KS. And in this battle Trump becomes king, taking on these 3 allies, the
three branches of the US government. Demetrius is made king and Pyrrhus is Invictus. Antigonus had
already lost one eye, fighting with disadvantage. But when she looses that elections, the republican
horn is broken. It is now hopeless to reunite the empire, it's gone.

This is one perspective, and what we don't understand now the other will explain. But we don't go to
another verse to explain what we don't understand. So let's be comfortable with this perspective first.

Antigonus is killed by Seleucus, using elephants. And we would identify this as a new mode of warfare.
Without them he wouldn't have lost the elephants. From this perspective we see this comes from the 3
allies. An interesting thing of this battle, is that it's discussing a civil war, which is what 2016 was. These
aren't just people but the political parties. And where the political parties met? They live in the 3
branches. So we also need to understand that they are also the allies. And if we are talking about a new
mode of warfare, in a simple way what is it? Cyberinformation. Who invented that? Who invented the
internet? The deep web, invented by the US government, so they're taken down by they're own
weapon, and if you look at the 2016 election, Clinton was looking like he was going to win, until Comey
was investigating her 2 days before the elections. And where would you put James Comey? In one of the
3 branches, he is FBI.

Republicanism. When the US government was created there was not Republicans and Democrats. The
horn is not talking about the parties but their system. But when you consider the republican party or the
democrat party. The republican was formed I think around the 1850s, but just prior to the civil war. In
the American civil war, it was the republican party fighting to free the slaves, but by the time you get to
the civil rights movement, they're opposing the civil rights, and now it's the democrats. So there's a
period in history where they switch roles for what they represented when created. We'll explain that
history: what was happening around those parties when they were created. But when we come to our
reform line in 1989 it's the republican party that really speaks for Protestantism, it's Reagan that goes to
an alliance with John Paul, George Bush in 911, Trump now, at the SL. They're the ones tied to
Republicanism.

Laodicea represents the condition of God's people at the end. And from Acts 27 we can see that the US
is parallel to the SDA, and the problem with Adventism is we've forgotten why we were raised up. We
compare and contrast. Might be interesting to study why the US was created for. And I would suggest
why we're reading the constitution in a different way, when we get to 2016 it's the protestants that
think Trump is going to restore the constitution; and prophecy show he is going to destroy it. Clinton
represents the people that fight for the constitution.

We said whoever was going to win the 2016 election is because he is rich. It's much deeper than that. It
wasn't looking at his personal wealth that made us get it wrong. It's weather or not we are listening to
what information source. To recap Ipsus from this perspective, we see Antigonus and Demetrius, both
going for te 3 allies. Antigonus is cut from his army due to his elephants, Demetrius then becomes king.
He is going to this battle with Pyrrhus, his genera. We define Antigonus as being equal to his ancestor,
and thus we can build an alpha and an omega, beginning and end of empire. George Washington, the
alpha of the empire, and Clinton. Also he is born with 2 eyes, lost one. And in this battle he looses the
other eye. There's nothing wrong with that eye, he is fighting in that battle with more than 80 years with
that eye. It's intact, not something that's been damaged in this history, where it finally crumbles. He falls
when he is killed. Then we define Demetrius, his name comes from Demeter, the goddess of corn and
harvest. So it's Demetrius that brings harvest. Without Trump there would be no Raphia, no Panium, and
without those 2, we'd have no harvest. I'm not suggesting that the horn is not broken in other points.
But this is not giving us the idea of a gradual fall: the ancestor is consistent to the end. Make sure we put
into history what there's not there, and construct from there.

WWII
You don't have 6 players, just the fight. It doesn't give you this story of Antigonus and Demetrius,
because Hitler is already in power. It's just the story of 5 players instead of 6. So then we have Hitler,
being supported by Stalin against the 3 fold enemies. This is Poland, Britain and France, the allied forces.
So Hitler is trying to take Poland predominantly. So he goes into Poland and takes it, it's a fast process.
So one of the branches is taken quickly and sparkles a war with the west. So the invasion of Poland gives
us something different to consider. Because there are 2 fronts. The invasion of Poland is Hitler taking
those 3 allies. Trump takes quickly the executive branch. The legislative and the judicial take time. But
what this gives us that we don't see on the history of Pyrrhus is war on the west front. When did war
began in our history? 2016.

Some recognize where they're living, and we understand some time in this history there'll be war in the
eastern front, which is Stalin. So Trump will fight Putin when war begins in the eastern front. So it's
important to note, eastern and western front looked identical to western front. So if we want to know
what it looks like when Trump and Putin are fighting we should look at the western front.

Revision: Antigonus represents the ancestor, the empire builder, Alexander the Great. And also fighting
the 3 allies is Demetrius, who represents harvest, who brings it. And he is supported by the KS. In this
battle the undefeated general is killed. The second eye is lost, the horn killed. Alexander is the omega,
and you can trace how Trump called the establishment and made it dirty, from the beginning of the
empire to 2016. Clinton is trying to conquer but is killed by elephants. The KS is undefeated, the empire
ends. We applied it to 2016, defined who the 2 parties represent, and also considered WWII, the
invasion of Poland and the beginning of war on the western front.

Parminder's comments (20 Feb 2019)

Someone asked if the lamb like beast lost a horn, how come it is fully functioning today? If you go to
Acts 27, you have Panium - LC - SL. There's a progressive fall. Another way: 1798 to 1840 we see a
progressive increase of knowledge. If something falls or breaks suddenly, is it contradiction with a
progressive fall?
If we were to consider republicanism in general, I'm assuming you think it all begins good and it ends all
bad, what historic events you would mark to point that it's getting worst?

1863, you get Christian politicians who want to make America great by introducing Sunday worship.

1837 Wolf was allowed to preach in congress. Would that be a deterioration?

The pope going to congress in 1989? Why is it so bad entering into a political alliance with the pope? As
'your enemy is my enemy'. What's wrong with that? If some country asks for help in the middle east to
the US? It's the same thing.

The Ipsus story and the last eye teaches that everything was functioning properly, is that different for us
to say that the beast of Rev 17…

Seals and churches. From 538 to 1798 is the 4th church. So 1798 is the opening of the 5th seal.

Rev 6:12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and
the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;

Open the 6th seal and there's an earthquake, sun dark, moon as blood. This is Mt 24:29. All we've got is
an additional piece of information: the arthqueak (1755). So I want to argue that the 6th seal is
clustering of events around 1798. And the 5th seal is just a conversation between 2 people.

Rev 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain
for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: [there were people who were killed and are
living under the altar, it tells you why they were killed slain]

Rev 6:10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge
and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? [this is why I say they're dead and alive, because
they're crying, so we know it's a parable. They want vengeance for their murderers who live on earth]

Rev 6:11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they
should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed
as they were, should be fulfilled.
Summary: in 1798 dead people who were murderer are asking for revenge to the murderers and God
responds back to them that they need to wait because in the future people will be killed in the same
way. If it's the same way you know why: because of the word of God and the testimony they give.

So they were killed between 538 and 1798 and He says there's going to be more killing in the future. So
because we are allowing structures to guide us, we're going to say the killing is the same, proof texting if
you like, but bringing a whole structure with us into the future. So this proves the 1260 structure in the
future. The dark ages, 1260, wilderness (don't want to put that one but it's correct), Thyatira, papal
supremacy.

What causes the darkness of the dark ages? The absence of the Bible. What's causing the death?

Son 2:1 I am the rose of Sharon, and the lily of the valleys.
Son 2:2 As the lily among thorns, so is my love among the daughters.
Son 2:3 As the apple tree among the trees of the wood, so is my beloved among the sons. I sat down
under his shadow with great delight, and his fruit was sweet to my taste.
Son 2:4 He brought me to the banqueting house, and his banner over me was love.

How does the killing happen? The state is killing, not the church. You can't find any evidence that any
bishop or none did anything wrong, it was all the government and its agents. That's teaching us a church
state relation between the church and the state, which causes the killing. How can a couple of bishops
take our Bibles from us? But if they call the police, and tell them we're a bad movement, then we'd get
worried.

Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the
souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not
worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their
hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

This is the mark of the beast, the SL issue. So we know here we have a church state relationship, the
same as in Rev 5.

Rev 17 is not easy, complex. You have 3 models: a beast, 7 heads, 8 heads. Rephrase: 1 beast, 7 heads
and then the 8th head. If we want to do this in a parable and draw a picture, we get to the problem of
the other day, how many heads does the beast have. It says that it has 7 heads (we have evidence in
chapter 12 and 13), it never actually says that it has 8 heads, but we infer that. Part of the complexity

Class 20/02/2019
Revision

We looked at the battle of Ipsus and how it typifies in its details the 2016 elections: a complicated and
controversial American election cycle explained by a battle fought more than 2000 years ago. So there's
2 sides: Antigonus and Demetrius, they're fighting 3 allies to control or dominate them. When we
considered Antigonus, his name means 'like the ancestor' (two words: Anti: comparison, gonus : gonus).
Considering Greece Alexander the great is the ancestor. So you have the fall of Greece, falling apart, but
you have Antigonus and Alexander showing us the beginning and the end of the empire. And Antigonus
represents Alexander, he is in a sense the same person, doing the same thing. That's why Daniel goes
from 1 to 4, because Alexander's work is continued by Antigonus, and it is when he dies that the work
ends, of continuing and uniting an empire. So note that Antigonus was doing what to Alexander's
empire? Reorganize and reconstruct. Alexander's work was to try and unite the huge empire, Antigonus
is doing the same thing. Even historians recognize that they were doing the same thing. Once Antigonus
is killed they mark the end of that empire in one sense. And Antigonus represents Hillary Clinton. So who
was making America great again? Clinton. So now we have this story of an empire, and you can mark it
as an alpha and an omega. Whatever made America great in the first place, whatever was happening on
that early history ,is the work that Obama and Hillary were doing in uniting that empire. So we have an
alpha and an omega, Alexander and Antigonus. If you want to stick to people you'd say one is
Washington and the other is Clinton. That goes for a couple of hundred years. Antigonus for over 80
years undefeated, faced his last battle fighting 3 allies: Seleucus, Lysimachus and Cassander (Ptolemy
didn't show up). Both this men with 2 separate armies are fighting these 3 allies. But Demetrius had
Pyrrhus supporting him, the KS. So when we come to the 2016 elections, these 2 people are trying to
control the 3 branches of government. Hillary doesn't want Trump, she wants the 3. From that angle
they're actually in unison. Seleucus is the executive (the one that brings the elephants: Comey issue, and
I think there's something else). Trump's attack with Hillary is that she is the establishment, that she is
like Obama, establishment or the swamp. And he turns that into dirty words. If we can erase that brain
washing from our minds, she is the establishment. So there's an element of truth to that, but he brain
washed people into thinking that's something negative. Because she is Antigonus, and she stands for
what Washington stood for, and what the people that wrote the constitution stood for, so we can do an
alpha and omega, beginning and end of this empire. When she is defeated, we can understand that
there's no opportunity, no chance to ever unite it again.

Antigonus had one eye, so we considered also that symbology, and saying that the 2 horns are
represented by two eyes. Prior to this battle, he had lost an eye: he is blinded. That tells us that it starts
out with 2, looses one. The horn breaks, Protestantism. So he goes into this battle with one eye, and if
the protestant horn is broken, his other eye represents republicanism, the other horn. So when Clinton
is defeated, you can identify that the republican horn is broken. And you know when it's broken you
cannot take it back and fix it: another evidence that we're in the history of the last president. Demetrius,
on the other hand, his name comes from the 'goddess Demeter', and they'd teach that when it came the
time for winter, Demeter would visit the god Hades in hell, and the 6 months she was with him was
winter, and she's come back in time for harvest. So she's known as the goddess of corn (for bread) and
harvest.

So note a couple of things: first, in 2016 the republican horn is broken. Antigonus is killed, representing
the story of those who built the empire, and Demetrius becomes king, even though he is a weak king
because the 3 are not his friends. First, whatever America was purposed to be, if we consider an alpha
and an omega, and we'd mark Clinton or Obama or Antigonus, he was restoring, healing, building the
empire, the same work as Washington and Roosevelt and Abraham Lyncoln. So it is not a story in which
it becmoes weak, in which somehow Obama brings more taxes and because we're being taxed to
support the needy he is a comunist and a socialist breaking the republican horn.

The other conclusion, without going to the proofs, we're saying strongly that when you come to Raphia
and Panium there's not going to be a huge change, which turns it more important that we have the right
view today, and the same for the SL.
So for now, we want to bring in her morality, and want to feel better for having made this mistake by
questioning her morality or behaviour or strange believes, and that's dangerous, because you could give
us any US president, with all the arguments that we make against Clinton, we should question George
Bush, for going into a war that killed 1000s of people. That's morally questionable. So we treat her in a
different way. Perhaps is where she came from (Arkansas), but we attack her differently than to other
persons. The problem is, you can't go into prophecy to justify that. The mistake goes greater than not
recognizing who was going to win the 2016 elections based on the idea that he was richer than Clinton.
This is because it wasn't a choice between two bad options. This makes us question how much we
understand republicanism, and what apostate Protestantism is trying to do. Now you have people in this
movement, saying that they agree with these studies but it's good that Trump won because Hillary was
worst and she would have brought the SL faster. The problem is that it's rebellion against prophecy,
because the person in an alliance with the KS is the only one on this board that represents harvest in the
end of an empire. Then people want to spend the last 8 months of probation we have left going through
Hillary Clinton's emails and trying to prove that she was a bad person, to justify our mistakes. 5 years
after our SL, if we were hard up to Dn 12:1 and realized that we've gone through the history of the SL
with these mistakes, I think we should went back and ask ourselves why we made them and not try to
justify them. We are saying that the evidence for this conclusion only gets stronger and stronger. Not
everything has been presented yet, not every evidence, but it only adds weight and makes our mistake
more serious.

We took a different perspective, this is the story of Pyrrhus, Ipsus. Then we went into WWII and saw the
invasion of Poland. That gave us a bit of additional information, a repeat and enlarge of the same story.
In WWII you don't see Antigonus or Demetrius. Germany/Hitler is fighting the 3 allies. Where is
Antigonus and Demetrius in that story? There's no Antigonus. This is because Hitler has already come
into power, and we need other layers to understand that history. But the repeat and enlarge is the
conquering of the 3 allies. And what we can learn from this is that the conquering of the executive
branch is quick, but the other 2 takes longer, it's a long drawn out war with them. Hitler supported by
the KS goes against the 3 allies and takes Poland. If this is the 2016 election, Trump goes after the 3
branches. So when you look at America and see it is in trouble, that war on the western front is Trump
trying to control the whole of the government. You can see more detail in the history of WWII.
We also considered that this is the western front, which begins in 2016, when does the eastern front
begin? Panium, and it looks the same as the western front, because it was so in WWII. So how Trump is
fighting now, we can understand is how he'll fight then. There was a change in scenery, but the method
of warfare was the same. Between Poland and Raphia, there was battle after battle after battle,
different than it was before, where you would have very separated battles, like Raphia and Panium:
battles of one or two days, then they withdraw. It changes our idea of how we see the conflict and also
how much we expect to see at Raphia.

WWII is a history of failure, there's a disappointment in 1945. We haven't gone far enough to prove that,
but when we come to the battle of the KS you switch who attacks and who wins.

Why is there no Antigonus? WWII was trying to teach us something different. We talked about 1933 and
the rise of Hitler. But in 303 Pyrrhus is not king, neither is Demetrius. In the story of WWII they're both
kings. And when you come to 2014, one is a king and one isn't. 303 there's an alliance, every one knows
it. In WWII it's half secret, half open. And in our history is all secret. So you can mark differences. One of
them is that Hitler is already in power in 1939, you wouldn't see a change of government in Germany. So
this shows Hitler being the KN at that waymark, showing us that Trump was the KN there as well. It
becomes important when we look a 2014 SL, and it comes from the KN. So we shouldn't have looked a
SL in 2014 by Obama, we can see it from Trump.

How could we look for a SL with Obama when he is left wing? People would say because he raised taxes.
Apostate Protestantism is not speaking through Obama, they're doing all they can to remove him. You're
not going to find a church state relationship. They're trying to kill him, symbolically. They want a
president who does.

How do we see a SL in 2014? By comparing and contrasting, it's easy to see where the SL has to come
from.
The right wing is very active in 2014, working hard but in secret. Not the president. Internal and
external, compare and contrast.

Ptolemy vs Seleucus (Raphia)

Dan 11:13 For the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former,
and shall certainly come after certain years with a great army and with much riches.
Dan 11:14 And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers
of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall.
Dan 11:15 So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities:
and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any
strength to withstand.

KN comes against the KS and the KS is defeated. This is the battle of Panium. This is Seleucus vs Ptolemy
(not literally because its his descendants). It's 200 b.C.

Vs 11 says the KN is bringing a biggest army than he had before against the KS. So you know that before
they have fought, because this is a bigger army than what he's fought with him. This battle you find in vs
11 and 12.

Panium, I want to make a couple of points, not details to memorize. In 200 b.C the KN is Antiochus III.
The KS is Ptolemy V Epiphanes. He is about 10 years old, so he is not fighting, Scopas of Aetolia is
fighting, his general. So it's a king vs a general, because the KS is young and weak. The Ptolemaic
kingdom never fully recovered from Panium. We will look at Raphia and these battles between Seleucus
and Ptolemy, and make more applications for our history.

Class - 21 Feb 2019

Panium : 200 b.C

Dan 11:13 For the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former,
and shall certainly come after certain years with a great army and with much riches.
Dan 11:14 And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers
of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall.
Dan 11:15 So the king of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, and take the most fenced cities:
and the arms of the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be any
strength to withstand.

These verses describe Panium. The KN is coming again against the KS. So if it says he is going to put a
multitude greater than the former one, means they fought before. In this battle, it was Antiocus III, who
was king of the Seleucid empire. And for the Ptolemaic empire, it was genral Scopas of Aetolia. He was
fighting because the king was 5 years old. Too young to be leading an army.

Antiocus III achieved a complete victory. He anihilated the Ptolemaic army. He won the victory over
what? Seleucus didn't take Egypt, but he didn't want it. That wasn't the goal. They're not just fighting for
the sake of fighting. Something had happened that made them fight. Something they both want: there's
this area in between named Coele Syria, it's quite strategic. So when they fight Panium, it's over this
land. And that's what Antiocus wins at Panium. They've been fighting over that area for a long time.
There were 6 Syrian wars in total. So all the history we talk of today relates to these 6 Syrian wars.

Panium is the end of the 5th Syrian war. So if you were a historian you wouldn't mark the end in Panium,
but Daniel does, he says that the 6th war is noise, and the KN is strong again. So in this 6th Syrian war,
it's not really two empires fighting because it's at Panium that Ptolemy is weakened and he is never able
to be strong again as an empire. And in the history as well we can see that it's noise, Egypt isn't very
strong, it hasn't recovered from Panium.

But one of the reasons we want ot go through these histories is so that we can identify noise.
Sometimes the facts are laid out as applications, saying: these is 1798 and this is what the history tells
us. We have overlooked very much in the real history, we completely ignored that there was another
war, that the KS doesn't fight in Panium with his army because he is only 5 years old.

We've already bought this story, and ignored many noise. So this is a training for Pyrrhus.

At the battle of Panium Seleucus wins Coele Syria. And after Panium Antigonus begins to prepare for
war with Rome. So we also identify Rome being introduced. Another reason why we would identify the
6th war as noise.

Battle of Raphia : 217 b.C

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

So he tries to desecrate the temple between Raphia and Panium.

If we go to the history, they meet at Raphia and they fight one of the largest battles ever fought in the
ancient world. They're not fighting for each other's territory again, it was for Coele Syria.

222 b.C
Dan 11:10 But his sons shall be stirred up, and shall assemble a multitude of great forces: and one shall
certainly come, and overflow, and pass through: then shall he return, and be stirred up, even to his
fortress.

Something had happend that had turn this 2 into enemies, and they're fighting in Panium because
they've fought in Raphia. And they fought in Raphia because somethign had happened. So this is
another battle in verse 10.

'But his sons'. The first hting twe notice, that is unusual, is that there's 2 sons. So in this waymark the KN
is being represented by 2 people: Seleucus Seraunus and Antiochus II (Magnus). Another more point on
noise: Raphia was Antiochus III (Magnus) and Ptolemy IV Philopator.

So at Raphia it's Trump and Putin and in Panium we say it's the same, but if you go into this history it's
not the same. So are we ok with that? When we do Pyrrhus we're not doing anything different. That
they change is noise because it's KN and KS all over. In Pyrrhus and Demetrius it's the same all the way
through. So you have to make a decision based on more than one line, because one of them has to be
noise because they're contradicting each other.

Another thing: no one's line gives us every detail.

Application of verse 10: the sons go to the borders but not Egypt. It's 1989. The two sons are Ronald
Reagan and Bush Sr. So it's between the two of them that they form this multitude and are engaged in
war, but it says one shall come. So it's just one of them that uses this army and takes down the KS,
because in 1989 we're in an election cycle, and in Acts 27 we marked Feliz and Festus at the ToE. Also
Reagan and Bush co ruled like Seleucus and Antigonus because one was the vice president of the other
until the other ends the term (and one of the sons die).

The Laodicean wars

Dan 11:6 And in the end of years they shall join themselves together; for the king's daughter of the
south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement: but she shall not retain the power of
the arm; neither shall he stand, nor his arm: but she shall be given up, and they that brought her, and he
that begat her, and he that strengthened her in these times.
Dan 11:7 But out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate, which shall come with an
army, and shall enter into the fortress of the king of the north, and shall deal against them, and shall
prevail:
Dan 11:8 And shall also carry captives into Egypt their gods, with their princes, and with their precious
vessels of silver and of gold; and he shall continue more years than the king of the north.

So if we can paraphrase this verse simply, the KN and the KS are in an alliance. And the KS's daughter
marries the KN. But that agreement is broke, the alliance ends. So the KS comes against the KS and beats
them. And this is where we marked that he goes into the fortress. This history is known as the Laodicean
wars. It's Bernice, a princess of the KS that marries the KN. Laodice is the wife that was put away by the
KN. And he marries Ptolemy's daughter Berenice. He begins to miss her former wife and brings her back.
Fearing she'd be put away again, she posons him, Berenice and the child. So they have this alliance and
its broken. it's his brother that comes against the KN as vengeance. That's described in vs 7, that in
retaliation he attacks the KN, goes into his fortress and defeats him.
This in application is 1798. In 1796, France had invaded the papal states and defeated the army. They
entered into a treaty, the KN violated it, which the KS France used as the reason ot march into Rome,
proclaim a republic and enter into Rome.

Dan 11:5 And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his princes; and he shall be strong above
him, and have dominion; his dominion shall be a great dominion.

Verse 4 we've done quite a few times.

Ptolemy is the KS, but he has a prince, in reality a general. And this general is going to be stronger than
he is, bigger empire and more power: it's Seleucus. So literally in that history, Seleucus was a general of
Ptolemy who was given Babylon and began to make this great empire.

So in application when we say the dominion will be greater, we say this is the 1260, where the KN is
more powerful than the KS, and it's going to war against this power.

The point I wanted us to come to this, is we understand Raphia and Panium, the prior history, but why
are they fighting? Because they started as allies, and somewhere in that history they began to fight
against Coele Syria, and they're fighting for that territory. Where all that began is verse 4, you won't
read it in the verse, you have to go to Wikipedia, which will tell you that this tension between the KN
and the KS began at the battle of Ipsus, which we've discussed in the last clases. We talk a lot about
Raphia, but even from the perspective of Ptolemy and Seleucus, there's no Raphia and Panium withouth
Ipsus, where you have an alliance with 4 generals: S,P,L,C. And just before it, Ptolemy heard they had
lost, and never came to fight. So what that battle looked like, was Antigonus against Selucus and
Cassander and Lysimachus. Antigonus was killed, and the empire was divided up. Seleucus was given
Coele Syria. Before he could take control of that region, Ptolemy went and took control of it first (he
wasn't supposed to). And because these men were friends, Seleucus never fought against him, let him
keep it. But when those 2 kings die, they're children fought for it many years. So the 6 Syrian wars are
the descendant fighting over it. But it began at the battle of Ipsus. We spoke at the beginning of our
class of Ipsus that we should look at battles in more than one perspective. So you have Antigonus going
against Seleucus (he is still 'like the ancester'). Ptolemy isn't in the battle, bu he is supporting Seleucus.

Now we have two perspectives of 2016. We have Pyrrhus supporting the 3 allies. But from another
perspective, who is taking down Antigonus (Clinton)?

Now Ipsus is the history of Seleucus and Antigonus, and they're children fighting for Coele Syria because
Ptolemy and Seleucus dind't.

But now who is using the elephants, the new mode of warfare? Seleucus. Seleucus is Trump, Ptolemy is
Putin. Antigonus is Clinton.

I should watch the last part.

I think we can blame to much on Putin, but if we're willing to understand elphants as the new mode of
warfare, who is using or introducing this weapon in 2016? Trump (Seleucus) because the elephants were
Seleucus.
We'll do it more slowly tomorrow.

Class - 22 Feb 2019

1st perspective

1. Antigonus = Clinton
2. Demtrius = Trump
3. Seleucus, Cassander, Lysimachus.

In this battle they're father and son, in application they're not fighting each other, they're fighting the 3
branches of the US government, that's what they want. Clinton doesn't want Trump tower, they're both
fighting over something separate from each other. Antigonus means 'like (or in comparison to) the
ancestor', when we consider the empire, they say he was like Alexander the Great, so we do an alpha
and an omega. They both built the empire, and Daniel is able to skip all the 4 Diadochi wars in Dn 8:8
because this empire is still being pulled together or united until the death of Antigonus: because
Alexander was building the Greek empire, and Antigonus was doing the same. So you can do
Washington, who wrote the constitution, and Clinton that upheld the constitution, or Obama. But
Antigonus enters into this battle with one eye. So in a battle pre this history he had lost one eye in a
battle. He was born with two eyes. He dies in this battle loosing one eye, and we made application with
the two horns of the lamb like beast. One fell 1844 and the other 2016: the protestant horn and the
republican horn.

Quote from 'tuning points from the ancient world'.

"Antigonus was close to.. Reuniting Alexander's empire… he was the last man who seriously attempted
it, to achieve such a dream. With his death a new time began. Alexander's empire was forever broken up
between the remainder generals. It was never reunited again."

At the high of his power he was nearly as extended as Alexander, and his goal was to maintain it. The
goal of the other men was to create they're own empire, after Egypt or Babylon, but it isn't considered
as being the empire of Alexander of Macedonia.

So we understand Clinton represented the stablishment as had existed since 1798, and the republican
horn of the USA, but in this battle, about 400 to 500 war elephants divided Antigonus from his troops
and left him unprotected.

2nd Perspective

The 3 allies were able to divide the empire of Antigonus, it says 'almost straight away, because they
were dividing the empire of Antigonus, it sowed the seed for a new war. In Syria immediately the seed
of a new war began between Seleucus and Ptolemy, each one claiming control over Syria..'

http://turningpointsoftheancientworld.com/index.php/2018/09/22/decision-day-ipsus/

A new war began, or 6 wars you could say. As with Ipsus, the end of the 4th lead us to the battle of
Raphia, and the 5th one was Panium.
So we have the reform line of Pyrrhus, of Ipsus (Dn 11:4), of Dn 11 (Seleucus and Ptolemy), and WWII.
So instead of going through all the line of Pyrrhus, we want to dig in the 2016 waymark. Then we'll finish
with Pyrrhus.

Yesterday we went on a diversion into Daniel 11 and Raphia and Panium, we looked into this 6 Syrian
wars. So about the 6 Syrian wars, Daniel 11 skip the first 4. And they began with the battle of Ipsus,
because as we read they were dividing Antigonus' empire. We had Ptolemy and Seleucus not fighting for
their own territory but over Cole Syria. At the end of the battle of Ipsus, Seleucus was awarded that
territory, but before he could take it Ptolemy took it. But every one knew it had been given to Seleucus
originally. Seleucus never fights for it, but when both men die their children begin to fight over it. That
fight over Cole Syria is Dn 11:5-15, though it doesn't include the history of the 6th war. There is no battle
of Raphia without Ipsus, if we would connect our waymarks, pass a thread, understand cause and effect,
then there must first have been a cause at Ipsus, which was the disagreement over Cole Syria. So the
battle of Raphia is 2019, we can see the beginning of this conflict in 2016. There's no Raphia in 2019
without 2016.

So Demetrius' name is harvest. So when we think about Dn 12:1, harvest = CoP, this is the man that
takes us into harvest, there is no harvest without him. That is one nice evidence to see that he is the last
president of the USA. But from this other perspective, who is the KS and KN in Daniel 11? Ptolemy and
Seleucus. So here they are allies. Ptolemy support Seleucus. Ptolemy doesn't show up because he
receives word that the battle was lost, which was not true, he receives a false report. But even though, if
this is the 2016 elections, he doesn't have a vote, but he is still evolved. Because there's this area that
pertained to Antigonus, and Ptolemy is laying siege in this city (Cole Syria). So he is fighting Antigonus,
even not being at Ipsus. It's not a coincidence that this is the city of Sidon, and we've seen Sidon before
in Acts 27, which represented 911, the USA. So you can place the USA at 911 but in many waymarks.
And it's no coincidence it was this city that Ptolemy was attacking. Once again we have the KN and the
KS in an alliance, while the KN goes against a common enemy, like the 2016 elections it was Putin and
Trump in an alliance against Clinton and Obama. We can see the destruction of Clinton, and really the
USA as a democracy. That was our second perspective.

Dan 8:8 Therefore the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken;
and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.

We can see it has gone from Alexander to the 4. We spent time considering what was going on here.
This is 1 king, Alexander in 323 b.C. And then it skips 22 years of history taking us to 301 b.C where we
have 4 generals. This is the story of 4 diadochy wars, and the battle of Ipsus gives end to it. So what
Daniel has done is really to condense history, from where it begins to fall or stumble, to the death of
Antigonus, because if we're saying they are one person, this isn't a history of destruction, the republican
horn is not crumbling, you can pinch those 2 men together and skip this 4 wars. Because if you're going
to mark the destruction you could mark it in 323 or in 301. It's cause and effect.

And in our application of Daniel 11 we are skipping a history of 4 Syirian wars, doinng the same structure
(which Daniel calls noise). We are saying Ipsus is the cause, the effect is Raphia in 217. And to get from
Ipsu sto Raphia, all these middle verses of Daniel 11 are 4 Syrian wars, Ipsus is the nd of the 4th Diadochi
war; Raphia the end of the 4th Syrian war. Daniel goes from cause to effect, because he wants to make a
point. Wesuggest we can do the same: there is no Raphia without Ipsus. Because even our history of
Raphia and Panium begin with an alliance of the KN and KS, but that alliance turns.
[Me: we are cherry picking using a structure, thus God is telling us what to skip.]

Alexander's Ipsus
Death Diadochi
| 1 2 3 4------------->|
Cause Effect

Ipsus Syrian Raphia

| 1 2 3 4------------->|
Cause Effect
2016 2019
vs 4 vs 11-12

People would want to re apply the verses of Dn 11 between Ipsus and Raphia, but based on structure,
we don't do that. Like Daniel chose 1, 4 an 2 kings, and we pick up 3 and 5.

To people who say we can't do this because chronologically you'd have 2016 and then 1798 and then
1989 and Raphia and Panium; we respond that we do the same with Dn 11:3-4 and the next verses.

WWII

This tory doesn't give you the rise of the KN, he is already in power. This is Hitler and Stalin, and again
they're taking 3 allies. Why can we go the history of WWII to do this? When we did alpha and omega
histories, we understood that Pyrrhus comes in two parts. So considering the KS there's an alpha and an
omega history. How can we connect the alpha history to WWII?

The papacy is trying to ride the beast, it's an alliance between the pope and Hitler because both have a
common enemy: the communist USSR. So when we consider WWII, the invasion of Poland was WWII, in
application, and now we have Hitler taking on 3 allies. Hitler is allied with Stalin, and without Stalin Hitler
would never had been able to go to war. So again we made an application: Putin is enabling Trump to
take the 3 branches of government. He takes the one branch quickly, Poland, and then there's a
prolonged war. It gives us war on the western front. We can see that what Trump is fighting now, is as
much part of this war as Raphia and Panium, because WWII has two fronts. So when we see Trump
facing impeachment we know there's war on the western front. There's many battles, fought on the
courts, on the streets, over tweeter and social media. And it's a war largely of information, and we
know this is 2016 and 2019. And what is happenign on the west, soon will turn on the east. And these
2 men that started off as allies were fighting in the same way as Trump is fighting now.

Questions (thoughts)

So western war is inside the USA. When we look at Trump vs Nato, UK or EU, is that included in any
applications?

The only reason the omega histories exist is because the alpha fails. Like in Millerite history and ours, or
WWII and WWIII. That's relating to Ipsus being reverted, or a history of failure, just like WWII.
We could spend much time in how Hitler came to power and how the pope helped.

Hitler could not take on the 3 allies without alliance with Stalin, because much of the material he
needed had to come from Stalin to support his war efforts. So the battle of Ipsus is won by 500
elephants that come from Seleucus not Ptolemy. So when considering the mode of warfare, a great deal
of time is spent to blame Putin and Russia, but this is something that Trump developed and used
himself, so we make that point that it comes from Trump, that Putin doesn't run his tweeter, and it
wasn't him who made the rally declarations, and Putin wasn't using CA. But when we consider the
history of WWII, this is not just vocal support, they're giving material that Trump could not go to war
without having. So what Putin did in 2016 with disinformation and hacking also comes into that story.
We'll go into the history of Putin. Basic history, not in great detail, we want to understand where he
came from, why he has a problem with Hillary and an alliance with Trump. That's a bit of the history that
builds into 2016.

Class - 24 Feb 2019

There's an alpha and omega history of the KS. In Pyrrhus' line there's some differences between the KS
(where he is based), and it's a total new KN.

We had a 3 year span period from 317 to 307. And this is 1929 to 1939 we have also the two ideologies
strggling for power (fascism and communism), like the city states struggling after Cassander placed a
dictator in athes.

Then they enter into an alliance, Molotov Ribbentrop pact. Just like 303. Then we consider the battle of
Ipsus, first battle they fight but on the same. Here we have the 2 allies, fighting Antigonus + Demetrius
backed by Pyrrhus. We bring that to the invasion of Poland, UK and France. They're facing off Hitler
supported by Stalin, only 8 days after the pact.

{1989 ATJ GEP 199.2 - 199.4}

AT Jones says 'this final battle was.. They'd been prepagin for it for a long.' He is aying Demetrius was
not defeated, he still had Ephesus, some other land areas, but particularily his navy. He ruled the sea.
Application: while he was wekean, he came into a weaker kingdom as his father. Trump is still ruling, but
when he began ruling it was a weaker kingdom than his predecesors. It's weaker than Obama's kingdom.
Because people turn against Trump. But what is a sea? People. Trump is ruling people. AT Jones, then
says 'then in 301, 22 years after Alexander died, the empire conquered…

When Cassander dies, Philip the older got the kingdom, but he soon died. Antipater and Alexander were
never worried about the kingdom because it was Philip, but when he died, it changed everything.
Cassander had Macedonia, the west: Macedonia involves Epirus, it's Pyrrhus' neighbors. Alexander flees.
His mistake is asking help to two kings. Pyrrhus gets land for helping him (north of of Pyrrhus).

When Demetrius comes and kills Alexander, Pyrrhus who had an ally and he wasn't happy having
Demetrius there. So it becomes a struggle for zones of influences. So they're relationship is crumbling.
When AT Jones discusses this, he says Seleucus had taken Lysimachus and Cassander. But that quote is
incorrect, Seleucus never conquered Cassander, it was Demetrius who took over Macedonia. So we
need to re consider our application of 2016.

So they're relationship crumbles until 291. 297 was the death of Cassander, but I'm not marking that as
a waymark because the history from 301 to 291 was the conflict.

301 to 291

How to apply the invasion of Thessaly

Look again the history of Stalin.

Class - 27 Feb 2019

The 4 generation of Germany

 Germany as a nation was first unified in 1971 to 1890 by Bismarck. He united Germany and
formed an empire.
 The second stage is 1890 to 1918. 1918 is the end of WWI. So in 1890 there's anew Kaiser. He is
not willing to share controll of the country with Bismark, doesn't want a competitive government.
So he forces him to resign and Kaiser governs alone. This is the Wilhelmine Ere.
 In 1918 Kaiser had to surrender the throne and leave Germany for the sake of peace. Then they
have a new government, a republic, from 1918 to 1933. This new government is known as the
Weimer republic.
 So if you mark the stages of Germany, the 4th leader is Hitler. From 1933 to 1945, Hitler and the
Nazi party. When we come to WWII we can see the KN as being in the 4th generation, leading it
up to WWII.

In 1989 there was a deadly wound on the KS, and it dies in 1991. We get this story because it's Dn
11:40b and we compared and contrasted it with Dn 11:40a, which is the history of the deadly wound of
the papacy. We know the pacy will resurrect on the future, compare and contrast we know the KS died
in 1991 but it's going to resurrect.

We understand that it has to be WWII and not WWI because we saw that Putin is the 10th and Stalin is
the 1st. We saw that Pyrrhus = Stalin and Pyrrhus = Putin. [we located Pyrrhus to the SL, and we saw
alpha and omega history]. Then we saw that the histories are very similar. So with Pyrrhus we could see
the whole life of the KS.

In 285 Pyrrhus dies and he resurrects in a total different country: Italy. He dies completely. The USSR
dies completely. And resurrects with a new body.

Class 3 Feb 2019

 Making application of Pyrrhus and WWII

Our message is designed to teach us about the KS. As with ancient and modern Israel, the KS has to have
alpha and omega lines. We understand them to be the history of Stalin and Hitler during WWII, and the
history of Putin and Trump. We did all of this using the line of Pyrrhus as well. And we want to make
application.

Our history.

There's a 10 year history from 1979. You can observe several events there, but I want us to consider a
proxy war between the KS and KN (USSR and USA). At the ToE the KS is defeated (Dn 11:40b). The KN
comes against the KS, overflows and passes over, he defeats him. In 1989 he begins to fall, and 1991
where he is fully death. So it's a two year period as the KS falls or crumbles. We've already made some
application, already discussed the proxy war and the fall of the KS. We understand that in the life of
Pyrrhus we can mark the 10 years disagreement over a sphere of influence: Athens and the Greek city
states around it. At the end of that 10 years, Demetrius frees Athens. He is a symbol of the KN. Pyrrhus
of the KS.

In the history of Italy Rome is on the North, and Pyrrhus and Tarentum on the south. What happens is
that the city states allied to the south split from it and ally with the north. They come under the sphere
of influence of Tarentum and Pyrrhus. And in 285 b.C, one of the main city states changes its allegions
from the south to the north. We're making application to the history of 1989 to 1991. One thing we've
been discussing is what this war looks like, and when the KS is defeated in 1989 all these satelite
countries change their allegions from the KS to the KN. That's how the KN is defeated. It isn't in battle.
So in 1989 to 91, just like what is happeing in Italy in 285, these satelite states of the KS begin to change
their allegions from the KS to the KN. So we can mark these 10 year history, a proxy war and the change
of alegions of these satelite staes.

In the history of WWII there is a conflict. Europe is diveded between Fascism and communism. That is
first demonstrated in a proxy war between communist USSR and fascist Germany and Hitler. And that is
the Spanish civil war. So we've placed a proxy war, a 10 year history of warning, and then we have these
satelite states.

I just want to name one satelite state but you can consider all of them. The one I want to particulary
consider is the Ukraine. In 1989 like all the satelite staets, it begins the process of separation of the USSR
which finalizes in 1991. So in that history we have the satelite stae separate as the war comes to an end
between the KN and the KS. IN the history of WWII we can see communism and fascism, USSR and
Germany, set up as mortal enemies, complete enemies. The whole world recognized this. So what
surpirsed everyone is when shortly after they had such long confliect they became allies. And the USSR
and Germany allied themselves together in a pact: Molotov-Ribbentrop, on the 12 of August 1939. Hitler
had already said that his purpose was to take down the USSR. He'd already stated that they were his
enemies, not France or Britain. So everyone was taken by surprise when he goes into a pact or alliance
with them. This is where we see the story of Pyrrhus, an alliance between him and Demetrius. And in
WWII an alliance between Hitler and Stalin.

If we consider Pyrrhus in Italy, in 285 Thuri changes its allegions from the KS to the KN.In 282 the KS
responds by attacking Thuri. So if Thuri changed its allegions, it asked the help from Rome for
protection, Rome accepted and they came down and placed a garrison in Thuri and sailed ships into the
bay of Tarentum. Tarentum responded by attacking Thuri, expelling the garrison attempting to take
control of the city. The reason they did this is because they had an old pact with Rome: that Rome was
to never extend its infulences in that region of the south. It would honor Tarentum's control over this
area and never sail ships into this bay. But they salied ships anyway and esentially took over Thuri. So
the question is, when it comes to 1989 to 1991, and these satellite states changing their allegions from
the USSR to the USA or the west, was there an old agreement that allocated that territory to the USSR?
The answer is yes. And understanding was reached at the end of WWII that eastern Europe would come
under the authority, most of the countries, of the USSR. It was also agreed in 1990 in the middle of this
break down that if Gorbachov honored his agreement with the west then the USA would not expand
NATO into Eastern Europe. So NATO was to not expand anywhere east past Germany. If Gorbachov
would allow Germany to unify, then the USA would honor at that stage the USSR had authority over
eastern europe. This was a verbal agreement between the USA and the USSR. As you might be aware,
the USA did not honor this agreement. And it's something that Putin likes to bring up in conversation to
show how he has tried to do the right thing and to make it appear that it's the USA that has broken the
agreements. In this history of Italy, Thuri applied for Rome's protection twice, in 285 they allied with
Rome and then in 282 they ask for Rome's protection again. And it's this second attempt to ally with
Rome that causes Tarentum to respond. In this history of ours [1989-1991], Ukrain as an example allies
with the west. In a simple way, we say that in 2014 it allied agains with the west. The reason Thuri allied
again with Rome is because there were 2 political parties in the city, one wanted alliance with Rome and
the other with Tarentum. The side that wants Rome defeats and takes over the ones that want to ally
with Tarentum (they're old relatives). This is why they begin to want to change they're allegions. In 2014
there are 2 political parties in Ukrain. Yanuchovich is in power and he wants to ally with Russia, he is a
close friend of the KS. IN November 2013 the Euro maiden begins. IN early 2014 Yanuchovich is
overthrown and a political party takes power, led by the will of the people that wants to ally with the
USA to join NATO and go into economic agreements with Europe. So there was an internal conflict that
parallels the issue in Thuri. This former satelite state breaks free from its traditional master and allies
with the west in 2014.

Tarentum attacks Thuri = 2014 in Ukraine

So what happens to Thuri when in this second time it splits from Tarentum and creates an alliance with
Rome? It's attacked. Tarentum tries to take it back by force. So in 2014 Putin invades the Ukraine, Russia
attacks and takes the Crimea to stop the alliance with the KN.

But we have 2 other waymarks to bring into this: that in the midst of this conflict between the KN and
the KS is that suddenly and unexpectedly it appears that there is an alliance between them. Remember
the quote of the Los Angeles times from 1989. They're speaking about the Molotov Ribbentrop pact
between Hitler and Stalin, that at that point in time shocked the world. In 1998 the USSR admitted to
this pact for the first time. Paraphrase: "collusion". And whoever originally started noticing this
relationship, the word they use for Trump and Stalin is collusion. You can place collusion in and around
the year 2014 according to our models. And why would Trump and Putin go in an alliance. Stalin and
Hitler needed this alliance. Hitler in particular because in the western front there was an alliance
between P,E,F. And Hitler wanted to take Poland, but he would thus be fighting all 3. Hitler was a soldier
of WWI and he understood that in WWI Germany had a disadvantage: two fronts war. So when you
consider the geography of Germany it has some serious disadvantage due to its location. Whearas
other countries like Russia or France more likely to just have enemies on one side. Hitler knew that if
he was to invade Poland he'd have war on the western front. He needed to make sure he had peace in
the eastern front, that was the only reason (also trade reasons), but just concernig the pact, the reason
was to have peace because there was about to be a battle. In Pyrrhus, we have again an alliance
between Pyrrhus and Demetrius that all leads up to the battle of Ipsus where the KN and the KS united
in alliance, take on 3 enemies: Cassander, Lysimachus and Seleucus. This is the history of 3 allies. We've
already studied 2016 in class, but when we consider why Trump and Putin are on an alliance is because
Trump is about to go into war in the western front with a 3 fold enemy. He is trying to everhtrow the 3
branches of government. Hitler takes Poland and then goes into war with the other 2. In 2016 Trump
goes to war with the 3 branches of government. He takes the presidency, executive branch, and then
faces a prolongues war with the legislative and judiciary. That was war on the western front. So when
we consider what war looks like, this is one front that we're facing, but there's also war on the eastern
war. War inside of the USA as Trump take sthe powers of a dictator and begins to take over the
legislative and judicial branches.

We're going to study 2016 in more detail.

Pyrrhus is doing a work in his own territory. So you see the KS takes over his own territory in a way that
he had not done before. IN 2016 Putin does some interesting things inside Russia. We'll mention a
couple. We want to note and suggest he is doing is the same Pyrrhus was doing in Tarentum. But if we
consider what war looks like today, it defines in a precise way by how Putin prepares for it. And the 2
things he does in 2016 give us some idea of this.

First of all, he establishes a national guard. When we consider 1989 to 1991 no foreign army worked. His
own people overthrow them. Which is exactely how the USA or KN designed it to be. The KN defeats the
KS by causing the KS to be overthrown. And the USSR is destroyed by their own people, no foregin army
that comes inside and shuts down the KS. And in 1989 Putin is a KGB agent in East Germany watching
the protesters try to storm his building. And he is afraid and threatening them. He is trying to get
moscow to protect them and they wont do it. In 1990 he is back inside of Russia and outside his KGB
building protesters had robes and they're throwing down the statues of they're soviet leaders. So Putin
knows where Russia is weak. If it gets overthrown again it will be from the inside. In 2011 he's had a 4
year break from being president, Medvedev was, and Putin anounces he is coming back. We discussed
that this caused the greates protest inside Russia since the USSR was overthrown in 1989. SO Putin
watches the protesters bring down the govt in 1989 and the next time he sees his people rise up to the
same level, they're now determined to destroy him. So in 2011 he begins to make plans to establish a
national guard. This guard's purposes is to have highly armed trained troops that are loyal to only one
person, given the rights to arrest and kill without warning, disband any organizaition, pretty much any
organization or individual that he owould consider a threat to his presidency. It's composd form the
strongest and dangerous troops over the authority of his guards. It's 300 to 4000 soldiers. So he created,
and established in 2016, is a personal army that separate to the army of Russia, with comparable
independence, this guard army is under the authority, designed to protect one man: Putin. So what he is
protecting himself from is not an attack by the USA but from his own people. That was the first thing we
wanted to note of 2016.

The second item is what he is doing with internet censorship. It's not unrelated to his natinoal guard. It's
the same methof of controlling his people. What he does from 2011 to 2016 is bringin in internet
censorhip. From back in 2011 it's free internet, like in any open democratic country. And throughout this
history, culimianting in 2016 he begins to take over the internet inside Russia. He is now controlling the
influencial streams. In 2016 he begins to get into alliance with China and introduces the same restricted
internet they use in China.
So we've looked into 2016 through the eyes of 3 histories. We want to note something of Pyrrhus, whrre
we need to consider the differeneces between when we would obsevre and alpha history or omega
history. How many battles can you observe in Pyrrhus? We have 2 histories: Macedonia and Pyrrhus,
and how many battles? 4, Ipsus, Heraclea, Asculum and Beneventum. Since 2016 in this movement
we've been considering Raphia and Panium. When we come to Pyrrhus we don't observe 2 but 4. Ipsus
is KN and KS in an alliance with a comon enemy. In Heraclea we have the break down of the alliance, is
where they begin to turn on each other. As we've already discussed, Beneventum represents the battle
of Panium and Asculum Raphia. That is how we came to the history of Pyrrhus: Asculum 275 and
Raphia 279, with the 273 in the middle. We've already stated that Ipsus is 2016, but before Asculum
which is 2019 there's one other battle. We only have one other waymark in our reform line in there.
2016 is a waymark, and 2019 is a waymark. 2018 is a waymark. So now we have 4 battles to consider
and not 2.

Pyrrhus is defeated at the SL, looses all but Epirus. But he comes back in the history of Italy and has a
second attempt. So we have a first attempt and a second attempt. So in 285 b.C it's defeated,
conquered. So in 285 b.C is the KS able to come back? Is it finally defeated? No. So we suggest that in
285 he has an opportunity to come back. But in 272 he has no chance, he is dead. So we know he is
going to come back from 285, but he can't from 272.

In 1991 the KS is killed, is he going to come back? Yes. He's been in his alpha history, he fought
Germany. In his Omega he's going to come against another country and have a second attempt. But
We'd suggest that after the SL he can't resurrect.

Let's consider 287 there's a battle between Pyrrhus and Demetrius, in which the KS wins. In 275
(Beneventum) the KN wins. 1945: USSR vs Germany, USSR (KS) wins. When it gets to Panium who wins?
KN.

If we move back one, disscusing Raphia. In Macedonia, KN wins (Demetrius invades Pyrrhus who is
forced to come into an agreement with him). At Asculum the KS wins. 1941, operation Barbarosa
(harder to identify because we're not placing battles but invasions), we would suggest when Hitler
invades the USSR he does it with a hight degree of success, and we discuss how weak Stalin was: it's a
victory for the KN. And Raphia is for the KS.

One waymark back. At this point their relationship is strained. It's for a short period: Pyrrhus invaded
Thessaly, (he didn't go much into the territory, it's like a dog that knows what you want and comes to
the porch and knows it shouldn't be there, all you have to do is start to come off your seat and it would
run away). That's what happens in Thessaly. All Demtrius needed to do is start to form his army and
Pyrrhus runs away: victory for the KN (again we're talking about invasions). Heraclea (battle) KS wins.
August of 1940, one month where they broke down their alliance, suggest victory for Hitler in Germany
if you go into the history of what came out at the end of that month. We have 2018, and the KS won.

What we can observe is patterns in our histories of Alpha and Omega.

What this teaches us is eventhough we can takes our lines and overlay them there's still some
differneces between how we would treat an alpha history and an omega history. So there's an alpha and
an omega for the KS. There's 4 battles in each. (Pyrrhus and modern KS lines, 4 lines):
In the alpha it's: KN KN KS death (and resurrection afterwards).
In the omega it's: KS KS KNS death.

2016 they're in an alliance to take down a common enemy. In 2018 this alliance is strained temporarily,
but it's not broken. At Raphia it's broken and there's war on the eatern front. And in that history there's
3 battles between the KN and the KS.

So this gives us history that leads up to Raphia and Panium, we can begin to understand why they're
fighting in the first place. We want to understand Raphia and Panium. We need to look at 2016 and
2018, because of the thread through each waymark theory.

If we'd do this we'd know what Putin wants for Raphia. What is he fighting for?
 Putin
How does this war look like? There's been a proxy war since 2011. Sanctions mainly since 2014. Is
nothing going to change, war will continue that way? So when we say we're not yet at the eastern front,
what do we mean? Also there's the concept of information battle. When we consider WWII we see the 3
allies, the 3 branches, where the KN or Hitler takes the 3 allies. But he has 2 fronts.

To have power today is to have global influence, and a network of subordinate coutries that are allied to
you.

When we consider where Putin came from, we mentioned it briefly, that you can line up Putin and
Stalin, with both they're line stories, and how they came to power, and how they ruled. From the start
they were both raised in extreme poverty. Putin was raised in the favelas of Leningrad. His first
occupation was to hunt rats on the tunnels. There were various families living in a flat, and they were
separated with carton. It was a hard youth. He was fascinated with the KGB, the Russian version of the
CIA. So he was involved with the Bolsheviks. He organized bank robberies, kidnappings, he murdered
government officials, organized paramilitary groups and when villages weren't being loyal to the
Bolsheviks, he'd go into the country and burn villages. He was so violent that Lenin turn against him. He
was critizied in the Duma. Stalin was an opperative at the beginning and Putin at the end. And Stalin had
this particular way of fighting, through violence and paramilitar groups. Putin had his way as well, but his
way was not in this combat way. He joined the KGB and worked in counter intelligences. This type of
work, all relates to how to deceive your enemies, and to prevent sabotage, to gather political and
military information. Also to interfere with your enemies information sources. So Stalin is robing banks
and killing people, and then he continues to fight when he is in power in the same way he was trained
to. Putin also continues fighting in the way he was trained to: disinformation. We read, when we
discussed this disinformation, that only 15% of the resources of the KGB that went to the inteligence
operations, only a small percentage went to espionage: the majotity of their work went through a slow
process that we call Active measures. And a defector of the KGB sais that the purpuese was 'to change
the perception of reality of every American, to such an extent that despite an abundance of information,
no one can come to sensible conclusions to defend themselves, their families, their communities and
their country. And this work of distorting reality in the west was Putin's field: to use disinformation. So
Stalin fough the same way he'd been trained to, and we suggest so is Putin.
One defector, said that fighting a war on the battle field is the most primitive and stupid way of fighting
a war, the highest art of warfare is not to fight at all, but to subvert everything of value in your enemies
coutry to turn them against each other.

In 1989 Putin is stationed in Dresden, east Germany. And he is working in counter intelligencies for the
KGB. This is right when the protests begin to happen. He is working alongside the secret police of East
Germany. In 1989 Reagan was in Germany, and called on Gorbachov to tear down the Berlin wall.
Protesters gathered all across East Germany, and in Dresden they dreaded the headquarters, and sacked
them. More and more angry they gathered around the KGB building, where Putin was working. He is
trying to call back to Russia, for instructions and help, but he can't get hthrough. Finally he reaches
someone in Moscow, he tells them he is under threat, that protesters are threatening to enter the
building. They tell him Moscow is silent. Putin is on his own. So he decides to bluff his way out. He walks
to the gates of the building and tells the protesters that there are men with gun inside the building that
will shoot them, and this stops the mob. He then goes to the basement and with the other agents he
burns all the documents just in case the building is sacked. In 1990 he returns to Russia, and in a KGB
headquarters in Leningrad, he is watching the statues of Lennin and their leaders torn down. In 1991, he
calls this 'the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century' : the collapse of the USSR. They asked him
last year if he could change any event what would that be, and he responded the collapse of the USSR. A
lot of bad things happened in Russia, but what he'd change is the collapse of the USSR.

So he worked for the KGB before that, in 1990 he returns to Leningrad. With the collapse of the USSR he
begins to be involved in politics. From 1991 to 1995 he is working in politics in Leningrad. So these are
local politics, but in 1996 he decided to become involved in state politics. He travels to Moscow and
starts winnig over Yeltsin. One thing that Putin is good at is politics, how to interact with people. In this
time period he convinced Yeltsin that he also wanted to see Russia as a democracy, and like Lenin
realized that Stalin had tricked him, by the time Yeltsin was dying he realized that Putin had tricked him.
Disinformation and lying was Putin's training. So within 3 years, by 1999, he has become Russian prime
minister. He is working directly under Yeltsin, in August 1999. He is the 5th prime minister in 18 months:
the government is in chaos. So in August he becomes prime minister. And one month, in September
1999 is the Russian apartment bombings. These were the bombings that got Putin elected as president.
There were some appartments in Russia where bombs were placed in the basement, when exploded
almost 300 people died. Putin blamed terrorist from Chechenia and began the second Chechen war.
There's some discrepancies with this account. His approval rating went up after these bombings. He
responded like a strong man. And he took full advantage of that publicity, many historians, people
whose account I trust, believed that those appartments were organized by the FSB, which was set up
after the KGB, it's the same thing. And it's believed that those appartment bombing were set up with the
purpose of promoting Putin to the presidency. There's some solid evidence for this. One of the speakers
of the appartments accidentaly anounced that the buildings had been bombed three days before the
bombs exploded. And there's other evidences also. Eyewitnesses recognized FSB officers, where able to
name them, and later on they found undetonated bombs at the bottom of other appartments. And the
FSB clamied this was a trainign exercice, using live bombs without evacuating anyone. So this has been a
scandal inside Russia. One women began investigating. I won't give her last name, just Ana. She was a
Russian journalist. She was an activist and she was reporting on the second Chechen war. They arrested
her and put her through a mop (pretended) execution. In 2004 she was poisoned but she survived. 2
times they tried to silence her. On 7th October 2006 she was found dead in her lift. She'd been shot. It
was just a few blocks from the Kremlin, on Putin's aniversary. A lawyer tried to investigate, and he was
assasinated in 2009. A jounalist saw how she was being attacked, tried to save here and was also killed.
Another person was also killed. So there's been a trail of assasinations of people who tried to look into
this.

In 2000, one men fled Russia after being threatened by Putin: Litvinenko. He also began to speak about
the Chechen war. When he saw Ana had died, he began to speak more about the Chechen war. He
wrote two books where he talked about the apartment bombings, explaining this was the work of the
FSB. 2006 he met with 2 former KGB agents who clamied to have information on Ana's death. A few
hours after the meetings he became sick: polonian poisoning and he died. Some of his final words: 'you
may suceed in silencing one man, but there will be protesters from around the world that Mr Putin will
hear from the rest of his life'. He knew he had him killed. I've mentioned about 4 or 5 people, there is
not time, but that is the tip of the iceberg. He has killed dozens of people. But I'm just speaking about
the people directly related to the apartment bombing.

December 1999, Yeltsin steps down, and Putin becomes president. He is relatively new in government to
go from just being involved in local politics, to president of Russia in 4 years. It's a very quick rise. From
the fall of the USSR in 1991 to 1999, TV and news had become independent. They were free to ridicule
they're politicians. And they would mock Putin. One of the largest companies was MTV. Putin had it
invaded, not them directly but they're parent company. It was the largest independent media company
in Russia. He impriessoned their president and said that he could be free if they handed their MTV
oligarch, and olygarch friendly to Putin. So almost as soon as he comes into power, he began taking over
the media. When he became president in 1999, one of the first to visit was Clinton, and it didn't go well.
Putin was angry at what the USA had done to Russia. Clinton immediately left his meeting with Putin,
and went to meet with Yeltsin. He said to him I'm concerned about the man you've turned the
president. He went over anc touch Yeltsin over his heart, and he said 'Vladimir Putin doesn't have
democracy at his heart'. The visit had not gone well. But in 2001 there's a new president. Now there's
George Bush, and Putin expects to have a good relationship with USA. In Putin's mind they can be allied
if there's the right present, they can work side by side. So they began to develop a good relationship.
Bush said famously 'I looked to the men in the eye, and found him to be very straight forward, I was able
to get a sense of his soul, he is a man deeply commited to his country and to the best interest of his
country'. So it starts off well, and then 911 happens. Putin was the very first foregin leader to call Bush
and gave symphaty and support. He was tring to work as a friend, to give adive and offer help, but Bush
wanted to go into a certain wayL a war with Iraqu, wich was exactely what Putin didn't want. He watch
America do a regime change in the USSR and he was very against a war in Iraqu, and tried to convince
Bush not to go, but found that Bush wasn't giving ear. And in 2003 the war in Iraq began. Putin said
about the Iraqu war that 'it was shaking the foundation of world stability, that Bush went against
internationla law.' But in 2003 he is still saying that 'we have a good relationship to the USA so they
might listen to us'. But Bush's language is different, and he is speaking abuot spreading democracy. Bush
said 'in every way that freedom stirs, let tyrants fear'. I don't think we understand well what this Iraq
war was. I think it was the point where Putin turned against the west. He was willing to negotiate until
then. In 2004 Russia suffered another attack, it was Chechen terrorist who hijacked a school. Putin order
the army to attack the school. Nearly 1/3 of the hostages died, and Putin blamed the Chechenian attack
on the USA. His tone begins to change. After this terrorits attack in 2004 he canceled the elections, and
forced out opposition leaders. In 2004 he set up a dictatorship. If we're going to go back to 1999, he
becomes president but he is weak because Russia is run by Oligarchs. When it goes from a communist
country to a capitalist, all they're state own holdings are privatized and they're sold off almost for
nothing. So a small group of powerful man buy them. And they become Russia's oligarchs, and there was
a bloody battle over those holdings. So Putin has become president and there's one man in Russia
named Bill Browder.

Research:
Bill Browder
Litvinenko

Browder came from the USA and began to invest in Russia, and he started an investment company, the
most succesfully investment company ever known because they're able to invest in these companies
that had just been privatized. But he began to realize in 1999 that the companies they were investing
were corrupt, and he started investigating the corruption and then releasing how they were doing these
corruptions to journalist in the media. Other people before him were trying to handle the corruption
and tended to die. So he had a group of bodyguards. So in 1999 Browder is fighting the olygarchs. Who
else is fighting the Oligarchs? Putin. So they have a common enemy. Browder is investigating these men
and uncovering their corruptions. This helps Putin because he is thus able to detain them, not because
they're corrupt but because they're threatening his power. To the end of 2003, this changed, and Putin
takes the riches oligarch in Russia, the owner of one of the oil company, he arrests him on his private jet,
brings him back to Russia and puts him on a public trial. His name is Michel. He puts him inside a cage in
a court room. And has the news cameras come and film them. This is the richest man in Russia, and
Putin is sending a message to all the oligarchs and one by one they submit to Putin. They ask what they
need to do to be saved. On top of doing what Putin tells them to do, they must also give him a part of
their profit. Now Bill Browder is in trouble, because now when he is attacking the olygarchs , he is also
attacking Putin because Putin is taking a part of their corruption. Around this time in 2003, Putin also
makes a deal with the Russian mafia. Over this time he brings in the oligarchs and the mafia, everything
is state controled. You don't have a mafia in Russia that's separate to the government.

In 2005 he is detained on a Russian airport and declared a threat to national security. He evacuated his
stuff and sold everything he had in Russia. In 2007 police officers raded his offices in Moscow and they
were able to re register his companies in their own names. So through fraud they took his companies.
They didn't know he'd already draded his companies. They got no money. So what they did instead is
asked for a tax refund from his buisness. But the taxtes he'd payed to the Russians were 213 billions of
dollars. They asked this on the 23rd of December and was payed to them the following day with no
questions asked. The biggest tax refund in Russian history. To be able to do this, they'd been able to
trace bribes through every stage. And this had to have Putin's approval to go ahead. Browder began to
speak publicly against what he'd seen happeing and he hired a young lawyer inside Russia: Sergei
Magnitsky. He then testified in Russia to the Russian version of the FBI. In 2008 the same officers they
testified to, arrested Magnistky. He was beaten and tortured. They tried to have him take back his
testimony. For over 6 months he was moved to different cells, tortured, his health broke down. Nov 16
2009 they tied him to his bead and beat him to death. Browder was very angry and his life purpose since
then is to get justice for Maginstky. He now goes from country to country and asks them to pass a
Magnitsky act. What it does is put snactions on anyone that benefited from Magnistky's death. Some of
Russia's most powerful people includin Putin can no longer access their money in they're western bank
accounts. Trump and Putin met in Helsinsky in 2018. When they came and stood at the front, they gave
a small acount of what they'd spoke. Trump said Putin was so generous. The only thing he asked of me
was an interview with Bill Browder. So you have a meeting between the KN and the KS, the very first
meeting and what does Putin want more than anything? Bill Browder. He is considered to be Putin's #1
enemy, he likes to calls himself like that.

So Putin takes control of Russia, silences the media, then brings in the oligarchs, the Russian mafia, and
then 2004 all the opposition is silenced through a terrorist attack (Beslan). By now the Iraq war is
happening and now he is speaking against the USA.

[The dictatorship is progressive, but every dictator starts with the media. It's a pattern we can see
Trump following. ]

2007 Putin is speaking in Germany, and he says 'I'm allowed to speak my mind, aren't I?' and he begins
speaking against the US, particularly because of the Iraq war: 'the USA pass their frontier… it pushes
other nations, who would like this? This is dangerous, results on the fact that… no one feels safe'.

So I find Putin's mindset a little interesting. From the time he was in Dresden in Germany, he knows the
threat that the USA can be, when it's conducting a regime change and when it's flexing its muscles. By
the time he gets into power in 1999, he has no sympathy for Clinton, he won't work with him. But he
thinks he can work with Busch, and they're relationship goes well. But when he sees Iraq, he knows the
same USA who took the USSR and is refusing to hear him now, all abide by international law won't
hesitate to also destroy him. Rephrase: when the USA invaded Iraq they broke international law, against
the UN, that's illegal. So when a general stands up and says to Putin 'you invaded the Ukraine' what is he
going to say? You invaded Iraq!. And when they say 'Georgia' he can still say 'Iraq' against international
law. And he knows the USA hasn't changed, so when he says in 2007 that no one feels safe, I think it
shows one of his personal paranoia.

So the relationship with Bush has disintegrated. In 2009 Putin has finished his second term as president,
Bush had finished his second term as well. So you have a new president in Russia dn in the US. This is
Medvedev and Obama. This is what is known as the Russian 'restart'. When Obama believed that he
could repair the relationships with Russia. He gives the job of rebuilding the relationship to his secretary
of state: Hillary Clinton.

People who don't know the history question 'why would Putin have an alliance with Trump' 'why would
Putin have a problem with Hillary as president'. We have more to understand prophetically about this
earlier history: how Putin turned against the west. But particualrily when it comes to what his points are,
what he wants from Trump, what he asked for was Brodwer, what he is fighting for is sanctions. There
was the meeting in Trump tower in 2016. There was a meeting in Trump tower between a Russian
lawyer Vaselnitskaya. But part of the investigation into Trump is why this Russian lawyer met in secret
with his campaign manager and son in law. This lawyer, Natasha, was taksed with one job with the
Kremiln. She is a lawyer traveling around the world, and his one task is to take down Maginstky acts and
destroy Bill Browder. Trump says that meeting was about sanctions. That part of his lie was true. She
was against Bill Browder. She wanted that the campaign team if elected removed sanctions against
Russians. And that's one of the reasons why Trump is being investigated. This begins to tie together, and
explains why Trump is being investigated.

Questions:

How did he establish a dictatorship in 2004? He used the terrorist attack in 2004. He specificlaly blamed
the USA aobut the attacks. When your nation is afraid, what he's been able to do in Russia, is to make
them see that evrything is the USA. He introduced the idea that he is the only person able to keep them
safe, and that anything that opposes him, any opposition or protest is sponsored by the USA. So it made
it much easier in 2004, to remove the opposition and cancel the elections that were going to happen. So
the elections were postponed.

Class 25 Feb 2019

People become confused why Putin would ally Trump. We talked aobut the kings, the zar, was a
dictator. The B revolution was for reason. So they had Lennin and went

[very interesting class. A must watch and type down]

[I must watch this again]

 Monitoring Trump since 1979.

 If you went to Russia as a student they recorded you.
 Class 25 Feb 2019 tarde
Pyrrhus becomes involved in world afairs in 303 b.C where he goes into an alliance with Demtrius.
Before this there is the 3rd Diadochi war between Antigonus and Demtrius and the 3 allies, relaly the 4
generals but whenever it comes to a battle one is always missing. So in 317 b.C Cassander places a
dictatorship in Athens, and it's almost like that area of Greece with all the city states, where those
generals would fight for influence. They allowed their independence due to resources and power the
generals always were interested in the sphere of influence ni there. It has a lot of paralells to the middle
east today. 10 years later Demetrius frees athens and turns that into an alliance with his father,
beginning the 4th diadochi war. In the middle of this war he goes into an alliance with Pyrrhus, which is
utilized at the battle of Ipsus. We spent some time discussing Ipsus. We see that the relationship is
strained. Why is it? Because of the issue with the two brothers and the death of Cassander.

Being Raphia the issue of Demetrius ravaging Epirus, we can also see there the issue with the general
and Pyrrhus: a small win for Trump at Raphia.

Demtrius went back to besiege Thebes. The problem is that while doing so, he is charhing his people
with taxes, doesn't treat them very well and he doesn't have their loyalty. It doesn't matter how big your
army is if they won't fight for you. So this military buildup threatens the allies and the alliance that they
have formed back to go against his father comes back again with the purpose of hindering him of
forming the empire again.

Not all the generals come to fight: just Lysimachus and Pyrrhus. Pyrrhus comes from the west and
Lysimachus from the west. And Demetrius army abandons him, who flees. And his country is divided in
half. Part to Pyrrhus part to L. L isn't happy with his part, so he engages in a cold war, and this becomes a
battle between east and west. L and P, engage in a cold war where L defeats him by cutting off his
supplies and undermining him and his own territory. And P leaves all and is left with nothing but Epirus
itself. That is in 285 b.C. When we consider the conflict between these 4 generals, what is peculiar about
Pyrrhus and Demetrius? They never have a direct fight. All those generals fought each other, even our 4
allies, right down to Ptolemy and Seleucus and they're fight; and the 4 diadochi wars, they're all battles.
But not with Pyrrhus and Demetrius. We suggest that is designed to teach us something, here we have
the KN and the KS in conflict over 2000 years ago, and somehow they're able to go through all of that
history, and we can see that destruction in this history of the KN cause by the KS without so much as a
battle. We'd say without a shot being fired if they had guns. Something to consider.

So this is an alpha history, and we line up Pyrrhus with Putin. Putin is tipified by Stalin. Now you have to
go back to the history of Stalin. It's 1917 to 1929 before the KS can make any moves, because its conflict
is internal. And then between 1929 and 1939 there's this growing struggle in Europe between Fascism
and communism. We see that in the Spanish civil war. This is where general Franco wins, and who
supported Franco? Mussolini and Hitler and the pope. Stalin supported the republican government of
Spain. But then we see that just a few months later they go into an alliance. Why would Stalin go into an
alliance with Hitler?
What di Hitler gain from the alliance? To be able to war with the west. He had a plan, he wanted
something, he wanted Poland, and who stood on his way? Britain and France.

Stalin wanted to encourage war in the west for his enemies to destroy each other.
Former KGB agent quote: 'Russia is small, especially if you compare to the west, not just the states.. But
if Vladimir Putin could turn the west against himself he can break up the alliances, and that way Russia
becomes much more powerful, and instead of dealing with all the allies like NATO, he can take the
countries one by one, he can re shape world order. So when we talk about war on the west, it was
encouraged by Stalin. Hitler first had to conquer the west. And Stalin wanted it to last the longest. He
was hoping to enter when they were all weak and destroy them. I wanted to see that this was
intentional by Stalin. What he wanted to gain was not written in the pact, but it was the weakening of
his enemies. When we make application, when we see war in the west it's intentional to divide and
weaken, and also to break up the alliances, when you consider the European nations and NATO. It
serves Putin's purpose to have a president in the White House who threatens to come out of NATO and
says he doesn't need them anymore because Russia is not a threaten anymore. That suits the purpose of
the KS. So after this alliance, Hitler is free to invade Poland, 1 Sept 1939. A Germany ship, visits the city
of Damsdeg and opens fire on the Polish garrison. This gave the signal and the German invasion began.

So the war in the west, we're not going to go into that history. Just discuss the war on the east.

There was one other reason why Hitler needed an alliance with Stalin: supplies. Particularly oil or gas,
rubber, and a long list of things he didn't have. He couldn't just get them from his normal sources, as you
might imagine other countries refused to trade with him. There were less and less places he could get
resources from. When he wanted to, he would find that his supply chain was blocked. So by the time
you get into the middle of 1940, over half of Germany's import came from the USSR. But in August of
1840 Stalin became worried.

Heraclea, or August 1940

There were three reasons: Hitler was doing really well in his war on the west, and Stalin was worried it
was going to end sooner than he expected. Another reason: Hitler was falling behind with his payments,
because he always knew he was going to invade soon, the less he had to pay the better. In August of
1940, USSR stop sending delivering's to Germany. They were also in conflict with spheres of influences.
They had divided Europe, but then they wouldn't agree, they were arguing about where they would
draw they're borders in Europe. So Stalin cut off the supplies for about one month. By the end of
August, they've redrawn the borders of Eastern Europe and Stalin saw that Britain was doing well, and
UK also started to work with the US and Stalin was confident the war would continue; so he continued
to send delivering's. We discussed this morning. What Stalin had done was purge his military, and in
doing that he killed off his most talented generals (because of paranoia, he thought they would come
against him. He was not someone stable, quite disturbed. He once said when his first wife died that he
lost all feeling for human life, he was a psychopath. One of his sons attempted suicide, and when he was
told that he heard that his son hadn't died, his only respond was that his osn couldn't do a good enough
job. His other son was captured by Hitler, and Hitler tried to do a prisioner exchange, and Stalin wouldn't
have his son back, because his son had failed. The son died in a concentration camp. So who could
understand his thought processes? But we do know he caused damage to the USSR. Probably they could
have repelled Hitler easily if the USSR was at full strength. When his generals in the east called him to
tell him that Hitler had invaded, he refused to believe them. So his army was being fight upon, and Stalin
wouldn't let them respond because he accused them of being drunk. Hitler was able to get a long way to
the USSR before Stalin ever responded to him He refused to listen to his own generals. It was such a
surpise that the Germans were looking at the trains going to Germany supplying his war efforts. Stalin
was still sending them deliveries. So it was a complete surprise. This is the eastern front.). So one of the
reasons he is happy to continue this war in the west is because he isn't ready to fight yet. He wants to
refrain the war with Hitler for a period of time. He thought I think that he had 2 years at least. He didn't
expect that Hitler was invading. Hitler had decided that instead of paying, he could just enter and take
the resources of the USSR.

Prior to the invasion of Barbarosa, Hitler had accepted that they would set up work camps or
concentration camps. But once he had a war in two fronts, he no longer had the resources to run these
camps. So in 1941 they began to use the gas camaras. And now it was just the issue of extermination.

So in 1945, there's a new player on the field: the USA. Russia was imporoving and Germany's weakness
was the same as Demtrius' : a two front war. So the USA came from the west and Russia, USSR came
from the east and they divided Germany in 2. This war ended in 1945 with the division of Germany into
E and W by Russia and his new player, the USA.

But in 1945 Russia joined the allies, the same allies who it was working aainst in 1939. Pyrrhus joined the
allies, and then worked with them. Both, once they joined the allies, they took part in an invasion.

Back when the war started the vatican had tried to turn the USA against Stalin. Roosevelt responded:
'however bad Stalin is, our enemy is Germany'. So you can see in this early history, the pacy is trying to
work with the USA but they're not able to agree on their enemy. For the papacy it's the KS, the USSR.
For the USA, they recognized the problems with Stalin, but their enemy was Germany. Unable to agree,
odn't work together in this history. Instead, the papacy works with Germany. Particularily prior to the
invasion of the USSR, the papacy created a great deal of literature aobut Fatima, and they sent priest
pretending to be Nazi soldiers who once they got into the USSR, left the army and went to the villages,
and all this literature about Fatima and Mary, what pope Pius XII was counting on, that after Hitler's
advance there could be amass conversion to Catholicism. Byt the time you get to this history, Hitler is no
longer tolerating the Vatican. So they refuse to let the pope do this, but they still attempted this in
secret.
It's the same thing pope John Paul was hoping for: as Eastern Europe was freed in 1998 to 1991, John
Paul was expecting the same thing that Pius XII was. And the people were freed from a dictatorship, and
what JP expected was that they'd be so greatful that they'd been freed from the dictatorhisp of the
USSR, they would choose the dictatorship of the Catholic church, but they wanted freedom. So there is
were JP failed. His great goal was not to deliver them from the USSR but to bring them into control of
the papacy.

Not both sides were happy. After 1945 bewteen E and W was the Cold War. The east wasn't happy with
what it had.

Class 26/02/19
She speaks more about WWII.

We also have Japan. Roosevelt and Churchill wanted Stalin's help in Japan. They agreed these in a
number of conferences, Yalta particularly.

The same part of the government that's financing Radio liberty and the voice of America, is the same
that are financing the Deep web today. It's the same thing happening. It was a slow inside work of the
USA. So the fall of the USSR was from the inside job. She mentioned the means to do this by the USA. So
we don't necessarily see any other country doing the job.

The campaign in Italy

 Pyrrhus never again attacks Lysimachus again. So he is completely defeated. Never attacks him
again.
 Alexander of Epirus had fought with the southern cities that were invaded. Before Pyrrhus was
born [interesting, watch, short]
 First day

Rev 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach
unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
Rev 14:7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come:
and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.

 Vs 7,8,9 - it's 3 angels counting back from vs 9.

Hierarchy
No truth is more clearly taught in the Bible than that God by His Holy Spirit especially directs His
servants on earth in the great movements for the carrying forward of the work of salvation. Men are
instruments in the hand of God, employed by Him to accomplish His purposes of grace and mercy. Each
has his part to act; to each is granted a measure of light, adapted to the necessities of his time, and
sufficient to enable him to perform the work which God has given him to do. But no man, however
honored of Heaven, has ever attained to a full understanding of the great plan of redemption, or even to
a perfect appreciation of the divine purpose in the work for his own time. Men do not fully understand
what God would accomplish by the work which He gives them to do; they do not comprehend, in all its
bearings, the message which they utter in His name. GC 343.2

 God
 HS
 Servants

 This quote is a middle step before we go and identify that John 16:7 is the same 3 steps as Rev
14:6,7.
 Otherwise you'd think: the angel is the HS.

Joh 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the
Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

 If the HS is the comforter, Jesus is also the comforter. It doesn't say in the verse, but it's in other
passages.
 See 2 Cor 1:3-5

Joh 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
Joh 16:9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
Joh 16:10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
Joh 16:11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.

 9-11 explains each of the steps

o Lack of believe reflects concept 'fear God'
 Rev 14:6 = John 16:8 but vs 9 and 8 in Rev uses other language. The third is judgment.

 How do the proves the verses give work?

 Are them the first steps of the first angel or the three steps in general? Does it make a difference?
Act 24:25 And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled,
and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee.

 Same 3 messages or steps. Order reversed in the english. It is: temperance, righteousness and
judgment.
 Rev 14: 'fallen fallen'. Some are righteous and one are fallen. This is were we begin to see that the
gospel does develop two classes of worshipers.
 Sanctuary model: courtyard, HP, MHP.

Sin Rigtheousness Judgment Jn 16:8

Fear Glory Judgment Rev 14:6-7
Courtyard HP MHP Sanctuary

Is there glory on the first angel?

The angel who unites in the proclamation of the third angel's message is to lighten the whole earth with
his glory. A work of world-wide extent and unwonted power is here foretold. The advent movement of
1840-44 was a glorious manifestation of the power of God; the first angel's message was carried to
every missionary station in the world, and in some countries there was the greatest religious interest
which has been witnessed in any land since the Reformation of the sixteenth century; but these are to
be exceeded by the mighty movement under the last warning of the third angel. GC 611.1

 Is there glory in the 1st angel? No

 1 am = 1798 - 1844. Has 3 parts, 1840-1844 = -4 glory (second step of first)
 Sin problem dealt with at 1840. No more fear.
 Glory = reflection of God's character.

 Prove : glory = Character.

Proof text: glory = character

In all ages Satan has persecuted the people of God. He has tortured them and put them to death,
but in dying they became conquerors. They bore witness to the power of One mightier than Satan.
Wicked men may torture and kill the body, but they cannot touch the life that is hid with Christ in
God. They can incarcerate men and women in prison walls, but they cannot bind the spirit. AA
576.3
Through trial and persecution the glory—the character—of God is revealed in His chosen ones.
The believers in Christ, hated and persecuted by the world, are educated and disciplined in the
school of Christ. On earth they walk in narrow paths; they are purified in the furnace of affliction.
They follow Christ through sore conflicts; they endure self-denial and experience bitter
disappointments; but thus they learn the guilt and woe of sin, and they look upon it with
abhorrence. Being partakers of Christ's sufferings, they can look beyond the gloom to the glory,
saying, “I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the
glory which shall be revealed in us.” Romans 8:18. AA 576.4
 Not a shadow interposed between them and their Creator. They knew God as their beneficent
Father, and in all things their will was conformed to the will of God. And God's character was
reflected in the character of Adam. His glory was revealed in every object of nature.6The Youth's
Instructor, June 2, 1898. AH 26.4

Mat 5:16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your
Father which is in heaven.

Summary
 Rev 14:6,7 - 1am. Fear, Glory, hour judgment.
 GC 343.2 and saw there's a hierarchy in the work of salvation. That's the clearly revealed truth.
 Why make this point about the HS? We normally go straight to Jn 16. We want to make sure we
can link them. We'd end up saying the angel is the HS because they're doing the same work.
 Number 3 is what's connecting them.
 You have to follow rules. In this particular point is the rule of parables.
 Assumption: angel = servants (easy to prove EGW)
 Man = instruments in His hands employed. Men = servants. They could be anything. Who else
could they be apart from men?

Dan 10:21 But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that
holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.

 Verse has 2 parts.

o 1st part - something has been written in the Bible, before Daniel was written and He is going
to show thee. (could be Moses, or Jeremiah, etc)
o 2nd part - who is 'me'? Gabriel

While Satan was striving to influence the highest powers in the kingdom of Medo-Persia to show
disfavor to God's people, angels worked in behalf of the exiles. The controversy was one in which
all heaven was interested. Through the prophet Daniel we are given a glimpse of this mighty
struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil. For three weeks Gabriel wrestled with
the powers of darkness, seeking to counteract the influences at work on the mind of Cyrus; and
before the contest closed, Christ Himself came to Gabriel's aid. “The prince of the kingdom of
Persia withstood me one and twenty days,” Gabriel declares; “but, lo, Michael, one of the chief
princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.” Daniel 10:13. All that
heaven could do in behalf of the people of God was done. The victory was finally gained; the
forces of the enemy were held in check all the days of Cyrus, and all the days of his son Cambyses,
who reigned about seven and a half years. PK 571.2

 This is a proof text for servants = real angels.

 How to prove men = servants? Parable teaching. 1st sentence has HS. 2nd part : doesn't have HS
to show the connection between heaven and earth.

Joh 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not
away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
  There's two options. We know which one is correct (Christ is also the comforter). This proves
compare and contrast.

Glory = character

Mat 5:16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your
Father which is in heaven.

 Picture: light = good works. When they see your good works they are led to glorify the Father.
Why do they glorify the Father and not you? If you made a meal why they say 'praise the Lord' and
not 'praise you'?

(1Pe 2:12 Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you
as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.)
[not go there until figure out the other]

 They attribute this light or this work to God. They are saying 'it's God's light'
 Works is not normal works like secular work. You couldn't know who to praise if you swept the
floor.
 But it's a reasonable good proof text. Because they recognize your doing God's work. It's His light.

Exo 33:18 And he said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory.

Exo 33:19 And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the
LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will
shew mercy.

 Glory = goodness, grace, mercy

It is our privilege to reach higher and still higher for clearer revealings of the character of God. When
Moses prayed, “I beseech Thee, show me Thy glory,” the Lord did not rebuke him, but He granted his
prayer. God declared to His servant, “I will make all My goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim
the name of the Lord before thee.” Exodus 33:18, 19. MH 464.5
It is sin that darkens our minds and dims our perceptions. As sin is purged from our hearts, the light of
the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, illuminating His word and reflected from
the face of nature, more and more fully will declare Him “merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and
abundant in goodness and truth.” Exodus 34:6. MH 464.6
In His light shall we see light, until mind and heart and soul are transformed into the image of His
holiness. MH 465.1

Such transformation of character as is seen in the life of John is ever the result of communion with
Christ. There may be marked defects in the character of an individual, yet when he becomes a true
disciple of Christ, the power of divine grace transforms and sanctifies him. Beholding as in a glass the
glory of the Lord, he is changed from glory to glory, until he is like Him whom he adores. AA 559.1

 From this we go to 2 Cor 3:18 (because she is quoting)

 2 Corinthians 3:18
2Co 3:18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the
same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

YLT 2Co 3:18 and we all, with unvailed face, the glory of the Lord beholding in a mirror, to the same
image are being transformed, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

'open' [face] : From G303 (in the sense of reversal) and G2572; to unveil: -

'we' :

2Co 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.

2Co 3:16 Nevertheless when it [?] shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
(YLT 2Co 3:16 and whenever they may turn unto the Lord, the vail is taken away.)

 'Whenever': at any time

 'Turn' : From G1909 and G4762; to revert (literally, figuratively or morally): -

o G4762 : Strengthened from the base of G5157; to twist, that is, turn quite around or reverse
(literally or figuratively): -
o G1909 : A primary preposition properly meaning superimposition (of time, place, order,
etc.), as a relation of distribution [with the genitive case], that is, over, upon, etc.; of rest
(with the dative case) at, on, etc.; of direction (with the accusative case) towards, upon,
etc.: -

2Co 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
(YLT 2Co 3:17 And the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is , there is liberty;)

 So from one day [which one?] till now, the Jews were reading Moses and they couldn't see
anything. But when any Jew turns to the Lord then the vail is taken away.

 Check the verses before and after and 1 Cor 13:12 and verify the model.
 Chazon, Mareh, Marah (the mirror). If we don't understand the mirror model, when it comes to
Marah you won't know what it meand and feels. (Dan 10).
 Is Cor 13:12? G2 OR G1. IF G1 then Mareh? We're living the Marah. Not just in the future.

 Review and check the model.

 Class 4
Pure and undefiled religion is not a sentiment, but the doing of works of mercy and love. This religion is
necessary to health and happiness. It enters the polluted soul temple, and with a scourge drives out the
sinful intruders. Taking the throne, it consecrates all by its presence, illuminating the heart with the
bright beams of the Sun of Righteousness. It opens the windows of the soul heavenward, letting in the
sunshine of God's love. With it comes serenity and composure. Physical, mental, and moral strength
increase, because the atmosphere of heaven as a living, active agency fills the soul. Christ is formed
within, the hope of glory.—The Review and Herald, October 15, 1901. WM 38.1

List of how to study

 Go to the original
 Go to the tittle
 Read the whole document to get an overview
o If it's too long read the introductory parragraph and the conclusion.
 Then you can see the paragraph surroundings.

 For context: read 6 volumes of BIO for SDA history during EGW's life. Google for historical external
events.

 Check if she is quoting scripture

Quoting the scripture

Joh 2:15 And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the
sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables;

Mal 4:1 For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do
wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it
shall leave them neither root nor branch.
Mal 4:2 But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings;
and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.

Col 1:27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the
Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:

Rom 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of
the glory of God.

 Decide which is the important passages.

 It's Col 1:27 (but they're actually saying the same thing)

 What is 'the hope of glory'? Glory 2 or 1?

Teaching methodology
  Always give the answe first and the simple answer first and then explain why
 From the simple to the complex

Class 5

Col 1:26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made
manifest to his saints:
Col 1:27 To [by] whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among
the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:

 Mystery = Christ (not in you)

 Christ in you = the richnes of the mistery
 'manifest' : From G5318; to render apparent (literally or figuratively): -
o G5318 From G5316; shining, that is, apparent (literally or figuratively); neuter (as adverb)
publicly, externally: -

 Fromἔλπω elpō which is a primary word (to anticipate, usually with pleasure); expectation
(abstract or concrete) or confidence: -

1 Cor 15:43

1Co 15:43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:

 Seed = a corrupted person that it is sown (when it is buried) and it is raised in incorruption.
 This is a parable. Juxtaposition.

Co 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. [there's 1 body] [turning point] There is a
natural body, and there is a spiritual body. [there's 2 bodies]

1Co 15:45 And so it is written [because there's 2 bodies it is written that:], The first man Adam was
made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

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

 How can a bad seed produce a good flower?

Sixth day
 Why do we not admit we apply verses when people point it out?

This principle we in our day are firmly to maintain. The banner of truth and religious liberty held aloft by
the founders of the gospel church and by God's witnesses during the centuries that have passed since
then, has, in this last conflict, been committed to our hands. The responsibility for this great gift rests
with those whom God has blessed with a knowledge of His word. We are to receive this word as
supreme authority. We are to recognize human government as an ordinance of divine appointment,
and teach obedience to it as a sacred duty, within its legitimate sphere. But when its claims conflict with
the claims of God, we must obey God rather than men. God's word must be recognized as above all
human legislation. A “Thus saith the Lord” is not to be set aside for a “Thus saith the church” or a “Thus
saith the state.” The crown of Christ is to be lifted above the diadems of earthly potentates. AA 68.2

En nuestros días debemos sostener firmemente este principio. El estandarte de la verdad y de la libertad
religiosa sostenido en alto por los fundadores de la iglesia evangélica y por los testigos de Dios durante
los siglos que desde entonces han pasado, ha sido, para este último conflicto, confiado a nuestras
manos. La responsabilidad de este gran don descansa sobre aquellos a quienes Dios ha bendecido con
un conocimiento de su Palabra. Hemos de recibir esta Palabra como autoridad suprema. Hemos de
reconocer los gobiernos humanos como instituciones ordenadas por Dios mismo, y enseñar la
obediencia a ellos como un deber sagrado, dentro de su legítima esfera. Pero cuando sus demandas
estén en pugna con las de Dios, hemos de obedecer a Dios antes que a los hombres. La palabra de Dios
debe ser reconocida sobre toda otra legislación humana. Un “Así dice Jehová” no ha de ser puesto a un
lado por un “Así dice la iglesia” o un “Así dice el estado.” La corona de Cristo ha de ser elevada por sobre
las diademas de los potentados terrenales. HAp 56.1

 What does it mean 'Thus saith the Lord'?

Rev 22:18 Porque yo testifico a cualquiera que oye las palabras de la profecía de este libro: Si alguno
añadiere a estas cosas, Dios añadirá sobre él las plagas que están escritas en este libro.

 Meaning?

'Thus saith the Lord' used over 400 times in the O.T. Usualy in the context of the Lord speaking
something to His people

 What happens to Paul when he takes a passage of Moses and changes it? Is he not changing the
word of God?

 Interpretation is what Strong does: say what a word means. When you interpret you try to
understand what the author is saying with precission.
o Example of 'man killed on the seventh day'.

1Co 10:11 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.

 Are you going to go there to say that we can do anything with the verses?
 Is it talking about us?

Our argument should be "we've been raised by God and you should listen to us" but it is "you should
listen to the word of God and the word of God says this." and 'this' is our interpretation (secondary).

Example: 2520. We take what the Millerites do as a 'thus saith the Lord'.

Paul was attacked on this point 'on what authority do you do these things'? Inside and outside the
movement. Listen to this part better.
 7th class
1Co 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that
which is spiritual.

 The way to make sure you're correct is by developing a story line.

1Co 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins
according to the scriptures; 1Co 15:4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day
according to the scriptures:

 'according to the scriptures'

o we should always search the source
o It has to be O.T because the N.T wasn't scripture

 Then he proves that Jesus resurrected (he lists first hand witnesses).
 His final evidence is vs 8: seen by himself. He uses his personal experience to prove it.
 Vs 5,6,7 this are first hand witnesses. Vs is his own testimony (Damascus)
 But vs 4: proof of old testament. He does this to proove the scriptures were being fulfilled.

Acts 2:25-28 Peter is quoting from Psalms (his proof)

Psa 16:8 A Jehová he puesto siempre delante de mí; porque está a mi diestra no seré conmovido.
Psa 16:9 Por tanto, mi corazón se alegra, y se goza mi gloria; también mi carne reposará segura.
Psa 16:10 Porque no dejarás mi alma en el infierno; ni permitirás que tu Santo vea corrupción.
Psa 16:11 Me mostrarás la senda de la vida: Plenitud de gozo hay en tu presencia; delicias en tu diestra
para siempre.

Psa 23:4; Is 53:10

Hos 6:2 Nos dará vida después de dos días; al tercer día nos resucitará y viviremos delante de Él.

Psa 23:4 Aunque ande en valle de sombra de muerte, no temeré mal alguno; porque tú estarás
conmigo; tu vara y tu cayado me infundirán aliento.

 Is it a good reference for 1 Cor 15:4? Not so good.

Two points to be clear about 'according to the scriptures'

 It's only quotes from the O.T
 Sometimes it's a direct quote
 Sometimes they're not easy to find. That's why in the cross references have many passages. It's
not clear to find.

 When he is in the valley is he dead or alive in it? Alive.

Isa 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken,
smitten of God, and afflicted.
Isa 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement
of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Isa 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD
hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Isa 53:7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb
to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.

Isa 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was
cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

Isa 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no
violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. [tumulo de Joseph Arimatea]

Isa 53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul
an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall
prosper in his hand.

 'Prolong his days' are hard literal translations. In more revised or paraphrased translations it says
'he shall live to see his seed, and enjoy a long life'.

Isa 53:11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my
righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.

Isa 53:12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the
strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors;
and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

 How 11-12 prove the resurrection?

 Psalm 23 idk if it's a good referrence but Is 53 I think it is.

Hos 6:1 Come, and let us return unto the LORD: for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten,
and he will bind us up.
Hos 6:2 After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up, and we shall live in his sight.
Hos 6:3 Then shall we know, if we follow on to know the LORD: his going forth is prepared as the
morning; and he shall come unto us as the rain, as the latter and former rain unto the earth.

1Co 15:4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

 What's the point he is trying to make? Resurrection or 3rd day resurrection? It's important to get
in the mind of the author instead of going to all of the cross reference.

 If he is making the point of the 3rd day then he is stuck

 Christ did it with the story of Jonas, when he wanted to proove the 3rd day.
  Hoshea is not speaking about literal days in the original context (has to be some kind of phases or
steps), but Paul is. Nothing to do with Jesus, and this people has done sin! And Paul affirms this as
a fact, but in real life it's his version of the scriptures.

 Is Hoshea making a distinction between the 2nd and 3rd day? Is he doing something like inclusive
and exclusive reckogning?

 Why is it Hoshea and not Jona? May be it is, so it has to be an application quote.

One of the best sources is TSK (cross references)

Class 8
1Co 15:12 Y si se predica que Cristo resucitó de los muertos, ¿cómo dicen algunos entre vosotros que
no hay resurrección de muertos?
1Co 15:13 Porque si no hay resurrección de muertos, tampoco Cristo resucitó.

1Co 15:14 Y si Cristo no resucitó, vana es entonces nuestra predicación, vana es también vuestra fe.
1Co 15:15 Y además somos hallados falsos testigos de Dios; porque hemos testificado de Dios, que Él
resucitó a Cristo; al cual no resucitó, si en verdad los muertos no resucitan.

 From vs 12 - 34 he repeats the logic that their faith is based upon Christ resurrecting

Important concept mentioned

1Co 15:20 Mas ahora Cristo ha resucitado de los muertos; primicias de los que durmieron es hecho.

Compare two people

1Co 15:21 Y por cuanto la muerte entró por un hombre, también por un hombre la resurrección de los
muertos.
1Co 15:22 Porque así como en Adán todos mueren, así también en Cristo todos serán vivificados.

 What's his argument? Compare and contrats principle: parables. The whole chapter uses this
principle.
 He states not obvious things as obvious facts. Question of why Jesus had to die?
 If we believed in compare and contrast, Paul is defining here what the nature of man is.

 Is this verse not a Chiasm?

Example: Dan 11:40

Dan 11:40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north
shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he
shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.

South - him : North - him

  Repeat and enlarge doesn't work so well. It's a Chiasm

Solution: S N : N S (Chiasm)

 It's almost a repeat and enlarge in the sense of 2 battles but there's subtil differences (the
agresor).
 In english you can trace the pronoun 'him'. It's the KN.
 But you can't work out 'him' of 40b. That's why the Chiasm is useful.
 Chiasms give you the power to predict something you can't see based on something you can see.

The Chiasm is in these verses:

1Co 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
1Co 15:23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his
coming.

 Vs 35-49 is the section we are.

1Co 15:35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?

 People are asking how are people rised up and what do their bodies look like? Do we ask the same
question today? What's Paul's answer/argument?

1Co 15:36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:

 He bases his argument in the agricultural cycle.

1Co 15:36 Necio, lo que tú siembras no revive, si antes no muere.

1Co 15:37 Y lo que siembras, no siembras el cuerpo que ha de ser, sino el grano desnudo, ya sea de
trigo o de otro grano;
1Co 15:38 pero Dios le da el cuerpo como Él quiere, y a cada semilla su propio cuerpo.

 What's the problem with his argument?

1Co 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

 Interesting thing? What's his proof that this will happen? If Christ does it, you to. Nothing about
being good or Christ being good.
 Let's see his logic. Not ours. It's not about being good (his argument). It's about a pattern.

1Co 15:36 Necio, lo que tú siembras no revive, si antes no muere.

1Co 15:37 Y lo que siembras, no siembras el cuerpo que ha de ser, sino el grano desnudo, ya sea de
trigo o de otro grano;
1Co 15:38 pero Dios le da el cuerpo como Él quiere, y a cada semilla su propio cuerpo.
  See how simple and childish are Paul's arguments. Seed ≠ wheat plant and (secondary) death ≠
life.
 But we want complex arguments to understand the lines.

Class 9
 We spent time on 1 Cor 15
 Vs 20-23 is repeat and enlarge
 But we want to see the technique Paul is using: repeat and enlarge. We saw a unique form of it is
Chiasm.

 Purpose: example (vs 21 and 22):

o Who's the man of vs 21? (doesn't say directly)

1Co 15:16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:

1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

 Because of vs 16 you could assume the man is Christ. (that would be proof texting). But
sometimes it's not so easy.
But if you couldn't work that out and saw the pattern of vs 21 and line it up with vs 22 you can
prove that asociation. That's not grammar, not logic, not context, not assumptions, not Hebrew.
Once you get to the level of seeing this sturctures, you don't even have to use those thing and
neither understand: you just state it as a fact. Because the Bible is defining itself.
 Bible define itself : various ways it does that. One is R&E. This is rule 5. We often think of proof
text, but that's just another way that the Bible defines itself. In the wrong hands it is a disastrous
tool. He spoke about the danger of proof texting wrongly.

Dan 11:40
 Proof text rule: you can't proof text the subject word, but you have to search an asociated word
(example of Sabbath and 7th day in Exodus and Genesis to prove that the Sabbath is the 7th day).

 We saw a proof text example yesterday: Dn 11:40. We proof texted 'him'. What do you assume to
proof text that?
o You have: S- him : N - him. Most obvious and natural reading is that is the same 'him'. That's
what proof text does for you. And it's wrong. Who that comes from? Uriah Smith? It actually
comes from the Millerites. Just like the argument of having 3 persons on vs 40. This is not
Uriah Smith's work. He comes 40 years later, and he is more abstract.
o The rules they said they used they were not using. If they were using the 14 rules, they
would have been self checking. Why did this happen? At simple level: preconcieved ideas.

 Why did they do this? If we undertand why we can understand why we have done it and prevent
future mistakes.
 They're focus is the 2nd coming. They use Dn 8:14 and (EGW connets hardly that with) Rev 14:6,7.
  1st am says 'the sanctuary is about to be cleansed'. Dn 8:14 is connected to time. And in Rev
14:6,7 we see the time in 'the hour of his judgment is come'. And when does the work of the 1st
angel begin? 1798.

 1799: they're looking at history and prophecy, they seem to line up, so they come to a conclusion.
But the words of the Bible don't match with what they see. They know it can't be conicnidence.
And what do they have to do? Just tiny modification: destroy a chiasm and change 'the king' to 'a
king'. Can you see how dangerous it is? And

Uriah Smith

Dan 11:45 And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy
mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.

 We changed that word. We want to change that to 'and'. We don't even use a Hebrew scholar like
Smith.

We are inclined to deal with 3 things at a time

 History
 Prophecy
 The words of the Bible

 We need to be careful on how to integrate those things.

 The safety = the rules. They're not so straightforward

 Example: bad seed does not produce good fruit. It does in Paul's mind. And it contradicts Jesus'
teachings.

 In dealing with the fight of the KS and KN

Class 10: Dn 11:40

 This is 1841, 40 years before Smith

Verses 36-39. “And [there should be a referrence ] the king shall do according to his will; and he shall
exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of
gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished; for that that is determined shall be done.
Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god; for he shall
magnify himself above all. But in his estate shall he honor the God of forces: a God whom his fathers
knew not shall he honor, with gold and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things. Thus shall
he do in the most strong holds, with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory;
and he shall cause them to rule over many, and shall divide the land for gain.” APEC 95.2

Such a character as is above described, was revolutionary France. [king and a kingdom] That dreadful
revolution commenced 1789, and was styled the first year of liberty. But not satisfied with the
achievements of that year, and the liberty they had asserted and exercised, the revolutionists rested
not, until they had established the reign of demoniac equality and frantic atheism. At an early period of
the revolution, the illuminated free-masons took the name of jacobins, from the name of a convent
where ‘they held their meetings. They then counted 300,000 adepts, and were supported by 2,000,000
of men, scattered through France, armed with pikes and torches, and all the implements of the
revolution. On the 12th of August, 1792, the wilful king, or atheistical power, exalted himself above all
law; the king of France was seized and carried a prisoner to the temple, and his right to the crown
declared forfeited; and it was decreed that to the date of rational liberty, the date of equality should in
future be added, in all public acts. The names and titles of the nobility of France were swept away at a
stroke, and all distinctions in civil society annihilated. APEC 96.1

 He then explains the word point by point

Not satisfied with this, on the 26th of August, 1792, this power exalted himself above all religion, and a
decree was passed, establishing atheism by law; and the clergy were ordered to leave the kingdom
within a fortnight of its date. APEC 96.2

 Once again he marks it as France revolutionary and not just Napoleon.

Thus this king, [not specifcally Napoleon but France] 1. Did according to his will, asserted and claimed
licentious liberty as the right of all. 2. He exalted himself above every god or power, imprisoning the
sovereign of France, and setting himself up as the supreme power. 3. He spoke marvellous things against
the God of gods; by decreeing that there was no God, and by banishing the ministers of God from his
dominion. In November a discourse was pronounced by Dupont, upon atheism, which was applauded by
the convention. And in Nov. 1793, it was stated by one of the atheists, that all religious worship had
disappeared in his section, even to the very idea of religion. He added, that he and his fellows detested
God. On the 17th of October, 1795, all external signs of religion were abolished, and it was decreed that
an inscription should be set up in the public burying-ground, that death is only an eternal sleep. APEC
96.3

 Then he quotes vs 40

“The time of the end” is a period to which frequent allusion has been made, and now we are brought
down to the period where it is introduced. It has before been stated, that “the time of the end” is from
the fall of Popery, 1798, to the end itself. [EGW does this often] The king of the South, we have also
seen in the preceding remarks, is Egypt; and the king of the North, is Syria. “Him,” in the 40th verse, is
the atheistical government of France… APEC 98.1

 What verse EGW uses to show the Papacy comes down at the ToE? Rev 13:3 and GC 356.1-2

Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed:
and all the world wondered after the beast.

 GC 356.1-2 : Dan 12:4 and 2 Thes 2:3

 GC 268 : Rev 11:2-11 and Mat 24:22
 GC 439.2 :
 GC 578.3 : Rev 13

 But how did the Millerites do it?

The inquiry, perhaps, may arise, Why commence the 2300 days with the 70 weeks? I reply,-1. Because
the 70 weeks was given as a key to the 2300 days, to show when they began. 2. There is no other time
to commence but that. For, if we understand them literal days, we are equally at a loss where to begin.
If they commenced when the vision was given, the third year of Belshazzar, it is not true that the
sanctuary was in any sense cleansed in 2300 days. If they represent 2300 years, and commenced then,
they would have ended A. D. 1747, when no event transpired which could be called the cleansing of the
sanctuary. But, leaving that point, we have no other period at which to commence but the one
designated in the 70 weeks’ prophecy. Indeed, it is now admitted by the strongest opponents of these
views, that the two periods were to begin together; but then they contend that the cleansing of the
sanctuary means the restoration of the Jews to Jerusalem, and the commencement of a temporal
millennium. But it has already been shown, from Luke 21:24, that “Jerusalem shall be trodden down of
the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled;” and that “then shall they see the Son of Man
coming in a cloud, with power and great glory.” So that the Jews will never be restored to Jerusalem,
until the Son of Man comes to possess his everlasting kingdom. Again; Gabriel declared expressly, “At
the time of the end shall be the vision.” And the time of the end will be shown to be, from the fall of
Popery, 1798, to the end itself. APEC 86.1

“Such as do wickedly shall he corrupt.” Those who are only nominal Christians, not Christians in heart,
shall he corrupt by flatteries to submit to all the pretensions of Papal Rome. “But the people (true
Christians) who do know their God, shall be strong and do exploits.” They shall protest against the
corruptions of Christianity which they witness around them. “And they that understand among the
people shall instruct many.” The true servants of God shall keep religion alive through the long dark
night of Papal rule. Yet they shall be persecuted and put to death by a variety of means, many days.
“When they shall fall they shall be holpen with a little help.” They shall have now and then a respite
from their persecutions; but whenever they do, they shall find many to cleave to them with flatteries,
and that they are in danger of being corrupted from their simplicity. But, to keep them humble and
dependent, “some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge them, and make them
white, even to the time of the end, because it is for a time appointed,” Until the time of the end,
therefore, the Papal power was to continue and be exerted in persecuting and putting to death all
who were in his power, who dared to dissent from the successor of St. Peter. But at the period where
the 35th verse leaves us, the time of the end is yet future. APEC 94.1

Dan 11:35 And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them
white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.

 He picks some points of vs 32 to 35.

“The time of the end” is a period to which frequent allusion has been made, and now we are brought
down to the period where it is introduced. It has before been stated, that “the time of the end” is from
the fall of Popery, 1798, to the end itself. The king of the South, we have also seen in the preceding
remarks [preceding verses of Dn 11], is Egypt; and the king of the North, is Syria. “Him,” in the 40th
verse, is the atheistical government of France. This government was to prosper, verse 36, “until the
indignation be accomplished;” or until Papal Europe should be scourged for the persecutions inflicted on
the people of God. For this purpose, atheistical France was permitted to triumph. The French revolution,
and the wars which followed it, and desolated Europe for so many years, were God’s sore judgment on
the Papal powers. Buonaparte was an instrument of vengeance in the hand of the Almighty. [this is the
45th president. His purpose is to bring vengance] “And at the time of the end”-he is presented as
growing up out of the revolution, rising above, and giving direction to, that dreadful storm. [911 to 119.
So it's different than theirs because their was the ToE] The Papal dominion was taken away in Feb. 1798;
and in May following, at the instigation of Napoleon, the French fitted out an expedition for Egypt, the
command of which was given to Buonaparte. He landed in Egypt on the 1st of July, and landed his army
at Marubaut, about a mile and a half from Alexandria. The Turks, although unprepared for this invasion,
mustered what force they could, and, shutting the gates of the city, held out until the French forced
their way through the old, crumbling walls. Thus, in 1798, the king of the South pushed at him. After
reconciling matters, however, with the Mohammedans, as well as he could, he commenced his march
through Egypt to the Pyramids, in sight of which they arrived on the 21st of July. Here a decisive battle
ensued with the Mamelukes, in which Buonaparte gained an important victory. The effect was, Cairo
surrendered to him, and Lower Egypt was entirely conquered. In the mean time, the French fleet, which
was moored in the bay of Aboukir, was destroyed by Lord Nelson. After settling the affairs of Egypt, he
commenced, in the beginning of 1799, a march into Syria, with an army of 10,000 picked men. Feb. 15,
he took possession of El-Arish; and, pursuing his march, he took Gaza without opposition; but at Jaffa
(Joppa) the Turks made a resolute defence; but the walls were carried by storm, and 3000 Turks died
with arms in their hands. And from 1200 to 3000 more, who had surrendered, were led out of the town,
and murdered in cold blood. APEC 98.1

Thus “the king of the North,” Syria, came” against him like a whirlwind,” with “horsemen,” with
“chariots,” or wheeled artillery, and with many ships; two British ships, and a Turkish fleet. And he was
defeated and driven back with great losses. APEC 100.1

 Discussion on predestination

Millerite history

1888 - around this time EGW says Christ could have returned before (basicly from 1844 to 1888. But
couldn't have been 1844. Let's refine it:

 1798
 1844 - Sabbath began to be introduced into the movement
 1845 - Bates
 1846 - EGW Sabbath
 1848 - Sabbath has become mature, well understood. They want to begin to preach this message
(3rd angel, they know) - 'Springs revolution' - (2011 Arab Springs). Also begins a series of study
with EGW's mind blocked
 1850 - Pentecost, public evangelism in serious way. And that's the purpose of the chart
 1863 - 2nd advent
 1888

2011 : Arab Spring begins the fight between KN and KS.

 The point: He couldn't have come before 1850.

Class 11: Predestination

Two options for Millerite history

 We were considering how predestination works.

 Either Christ would have come and vs 40 would have to be completed (and the M were correct in
the ir appoach) or Christ would never have come and the only correct approach to vs 40 is ours.
(assuming that Russia would never have risen).

We had some misconceptions

 Being in between verses. Would imply that 2018 isn't even recored in the Scirptures.
 Christians have this concept of standing on the word of God. We would now be in a ditch or valley
which is a symbol of the world (being lost).
 We were blind because of neglect.

Some quotes on the two options

 Are P,L,N original verses? Or they are not necessary in Millerite history?
 And also, where does their story end? We're seeing that from 1844 afterwards is not a separate
history.
 We have not considered the B.O in our history (after Dn 12:1) and in Millerite history either.
 We've got a bad habit of working backwards.

 Why could the model of having 2 ToE work for Millerites?

o Because it's one reform line. If it would end then you can't have 2 ToEs.
 If you can apply it 2 times, why not 3?
 Weather they're right with Syria or not, they couldn't use a Chiasm like we are.

Different rules:

 They would be usning proof text in vs 40 and we use repeat and enlarge. Not breaking the rules?

 EGW says 'it's imminent'. Did she not know that there was going to be another generation (ours)?
 EGW never seems to say 'because you've failed 1888 you will not enter into Canaan' like in the
Exodus story where Moses did say that. She seems to keep the hope that if people repent then
they could finish the work

The angels of God in their messages to men represent time as very short. Thus it has always been
presented to me. It is true that time has continued longer than we expected in the early days of this
message. Our Saviour did not appear as soon as we hoped. But has the word of the Lord failed? Never! It
should be remembered that the promises and threatenings of God are alike conditional. 1SM 67.8

Had Adventists, after the great disappointment in 1844, held fast their faith, and followed on unitedly in
the opening providence of God, receiving the message of the third angel and in the power of the Holy
Spirit proclaiming it to the world, they would have seen the salvation of God, the Lord would have
wrought mightily with their efforts, the work would have been completed, and Christ would have come
ere this to receive His people to their reward. 1SM 68.1
Another quote
When the third angel's message is preached as it should be, power attends its proclamation, and it
becomes an abiding influence. It must be attended with divine power, or it will accomplish nothing. I am
often referred to the parable of the ten virgins, five of whom were wise, and five foolish. This parable
has been and will be fulfilled to the very letter, for it has a special application to this time, and, like the
third angel's message, has been fulfilled and will continue to be present truth till the close of time. In the
parable, the ten virgins had lamps, but only five of them had the saving oil with which to keep their
lamps burning. This represents the condition of the Church. The wise and the foolish have their Bibles,
and are provided with all the means of grace; but many do not appreciate the fact that they must have
the heavenly unction. They do not heed the invitation, “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy
laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in
heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” RH August 19,
1890, par. 3

 We misread that quote

 ToE as being a period is not our interpretation of vs 40. It's theirs, so should we still use it?

Class 11: predestination

Thoughts of the afternoon class

 It's the captivity that produces the two groups. That's why we see Pharisees and Saducees in the
line of Christ. We know they're about to enter into a reform line, about to be saved, and the
enemy wants to prevent that. He prevnts them by not understanding their time of their visitation
(Dn 9: the 69th and 70th week). That's the dynamics of the pharisees and Saducees. We covered
that this morning.

Predestination

 Does God know that Millerites are going to fail?

 Does God knowing the future, write the Bible in a way that excludes the Millerites and their
understanging is all wrong? Or was it writen in a way that for both of us is correct but with
different approach.

The angels of God in their messages to men represent time as very short. Thus it has always been
presented to me. It is true that time has continued longer than we expected in the early days of this
message. Our Saviour did not appear as soon as we hoped. But has the word of the Lord failed? Never! It
should be remembered that the promises and threatenings of God are alike conditional. 1SM 67.8 [1MS
76.8 ESP]

A statement published in 1851 in Experience and Views, and found on page 49 [page 58, present
edition] of Early Writings is quoted as proving my testimonies false: “I saw that the time for Jesus to be
in the most holy place was nearly finished, and that time can last but a very little longer.” 1SM 66.6
  There's 3 books: ExV, Supl and 1SG (=GC). They were bound into EW. These statement was written
in 1851. Hence 'early' writings. People don't understand what she writes in the ExV and she
explains it in the supplement.

 She's been accused as a lier and she says this:

As the subject was presented before me, the period of Christ's ministration seemed almost
accomplished. Am I accused of falsehood because time has continued longer than my testimony seemed
to indicate? How is it with the testimonies of Christ and His disciples? Were they deceived? 1SM 67.1

 Then she quotes that that's how God always speaks

Our Saviour did not appear as soon as we hoped. But has the word of the Lord failed? Never! It should
be remembered that the promises and threatenings of God are alike conditional. 1SM 67.8

 Then she explains what SDAs had to do before Christ's coming and then:

Had Adventists, after the great disappointment in 1844, held fast their faith, and followed on unitedly in
the opening providence of God, receiving the message of the third angel and in the power of the Holy
Spirit proclaiming it to the world, they would have seen the salvation of God, the Lord would have
wrought mightily with their efforts, the work would have been completed, and Christ would have come
ere this to receive His people to their reward. 1SM 68.1

 This is from MS4 1883

 So this is between 1850 and 1883

Moses saw the chosen people established in Canaan, each of the tribes in its own possession. He had a
view of their history after the settlement of the Promised Land; the long, sad story of their apostasy and
its punishment was spread out before him. He saw them, because of their sins, dispersed among the
heathen, the glory departed from Israel, her beautiful city in ruins, and her people captives in strange
lands. He saw them restored to the land of their fathers, and at last brought under the dominion of
Rome. PP 475.1

He was permitted to look down the stream of time and behold the first advent of our Saviour. He saw
Jesus as a babe in Bethlehem. He heard the voices of the angelic host break forth in the glad song of
praise to God and peace on earth. He beheld in the heavens the star guiding the Wise Men of the East to
Jesus, and a great light flooded his mind as he called those prophetic words, “There shall come a Star
out of Jacob, and a Scepter shall rise out of Israel.” Numbers 24:17. He beheld Christ's humble life in
Nazareth, His ministry of love and sympathy and healing, His rejection by a proud, unbelieving nation.
Amazed he listened to their boastful exaltation of the law of God, while they despised and rejected Him
by whom the law was given. He saw Jesus upon Olivet as with weeping He bade farewell to the city of
His love. As Moses beheld the final rejection of that people so highly blessed of Heaven—that people
for whom he had toiled and prayed and sacrificed, for whom he had been willing that his own name
should be blotted from the book of life; as he listened to those fearful words, “Behold your house is left
unto you desolate” (Matthew 23:38), his heart was wrung with anguish, and bitter tears fell from his
eyes, in sympathy with the sorrow of the Son of God. PP 475.2
  Wouldn't have God had to prepare everything for the promise to be fulfilled? Like vs 40..?
 If God doesn't give them a Bible verse, He is complicit of the failure. We could blame Him like we
blame Him about 1843 hidden mistake.

Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the
transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in
everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

 Does it mean that there's going to be no more sin after that? Or that He's not going to forgive your
sins anymore? Or that there's no more animal sacrifice. Could be positive or negative It doesn't
seem negative. It seems to be written in a conditional way. But for Moses it was ugly. This is an
example that eventhough God knows the fate, He writes it in a conditional way.

I was shown the company present at the Conference. Said the angel: “Some food for worms, [Sister
Clarissa M. Bonfoey, who fell asleep in Jesus only three days after this vision was given, was present in
usual health, and was deeply impressed that she was one who would go into the grave, and stated her
convictions to others.] some subjects of the seven last plagues, some will be alive and remain upon the
earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus.” 1T 131.3

 This is writen before 1888?

The hour will come; it is not far distant, and some of us who now believe will be alive upon the earth,
and shall see the prediction verified, and hear the voice of the archangel, and the trump of God echo
from mountain and plain and sea, to the uttermost parts of the earth. All creation will hear that voice,
and those who have lived and died in Jesus, will respond to the call of the Prince of life. It will be heard
in the dungeons of men, in the caverns of the deep, in the rocks and caves of the earth, only to be
obeyed. It is the same voice that said, “Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy-laden, and I will
give you rest,”—the same voice which said, “Thy sins be forgiven thee.” All those who have obeyed that
voice when it said, “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and
follow me,” will hear the “Well done, thou good and faithful servant, enter thou into the joy of thy
Lord.” To them, that voice will mean,—rest, peace, and everlasting life. They will recognize it as the
voice of one who has been touched with the feeling of their infirmities. RH July 31, 1888, par. 9

Class 13: Daniel 2

 Make a summary about what the issue is, what the options are.
 We couldn't use it their way, they can. We're using the rules in different ways.

 Literal translation of vs 36: 'And the king'

Dan 2:44 'And in the days of these kings raise up doth the God of the heavens a kingdom that is not
destroyed—to the age, and its kingdom to another people is not left: it beateth small and endeth all
these kingdoms, and it standeth to the age.

 How do we read that?

  Literal version: 'In the days of them, the kings'
 What's Parminder's source for literal? Because it's different than Young's.

 See what the Millerites thought about this.. It makes sense, the kingdom would be the one single
generation that would see Christ's coming and that would have 1 ToE.

 Who are those kings? Wyclfer: KN and KS. How?

 It's the 10 kings. Where in chapter 2 mentions the 10 kings so that we can go back to make 'the
kings' the 10 kings?
 Remember in Dn 11:40 both M and us track in the chapter who 'him' is.

Dan 2:40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and
subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.

 We have 4 kings so far, how do you get 10?

 We change 'these kings' into 'some new kings' that are not even mentioned in the chapter, you
have to go somewhere else. That's what the M are doing in vs 36.

 The 4 kings are secuential. But then it says 'in the days of these kings'.
 Parminder: the literal structure says 'the kings' are the 4 kings. He introduced the multiple levels
thory.

Wesley's theory: the kingdom divided is 10 kings now

Dan 2:41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the
kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest
the iron mixed with miry clay.

 What's the division? It's divided in 2 not 10. And the trying to unite is not the 10 kings.

 The whole statue is a symbol of the KN. So it's not the KS, it's all the KN.

Rev 17:5 And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF
HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

 Babylon = alpha
 4b = omega.
 The name is the same. At one level it's secuential kingdom but at another is one kingdom. You can
do it through the symbology of the KN or through Rev 17

Dan 7:12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were
prolonged for a season and time.

 Suggestion: in Dn 2 when you see the progression is progression of dominion. Prolong the life, if
we take 'life' and take it 'crown', the crown is preserved. Babylon's nature, ideas is still alive.
  The way the parable is structured the head is still there at the end [I don't agree]
 You want to use Rev 17 to change 'the kings' to 'some other new kings' but you don't want to let
the M do that in Dn 11:36.

Class 14: Daniel 2

Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be
destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume
all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

 The kingdoms will be destroyed. How does he know it? Because he saw it.

Dan 2:45 Forasmuch [conjunction: word that connects two passages. We could substitute with 'because'
or 'in that same way'] as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and
that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made
known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation
thereof sure.

 Paralell verses:

Dan 2:34 Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet
that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces. Hello human

Rev 11:7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the
bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.
Rev 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom
and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. Yeah

Dan 2:35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and
became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place
was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole
earth.

 The head was still alive. It is broken at the end of the world when the feet are broken.

Dan 7:12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were
prolonged for a season and time. [the golden head has no power but is still alive and in Dn 2 the head
has not been destroyed till the end of the world]

 The stone breaks the head, it's not like it falls and breaks, the stone smashes everyhing.
 So 'the kings' are the 4 kingdoms, not the '10 kingdoms'

 We are critical with the Millerites for changing 'the king' to 'a king' but we do the same in Dn 2.
 'these kings' : check it, it could be 'the boys' or 'those boy'

 Rev 17: the 10 heads are secuential but also one king. And one woman as riding many beasts. The
papacy didn't ride Babylon.
  Read book 'two Babylons' to explain what it means that the head is still alive (the papacy is the
modern version of Babylon).

 Me: look at the kingdoms and see if all of them could have been alive at the same time?

 How do we make it the 10 kings? Because in Revelation 17 the 10 kings are one of the heads of
the single beast.

France rises to power [I didn't get this point, but it seemed strong..]

Rev 11:7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the
bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them.
Rev 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom
and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

 France delivers the deadly wound. Can you see the rise of France in Daniel? That's what the
Millerites are looking for. If you can see 'the kings' of Daniel 2, you can see 'a king' in Dn 11:36.

Class 14: the eternal purpose of God

The plan for our redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated after the fall of Adam. It was a
revelation of “the mystery which hath been kept in silence through times eternal.” Romans 16:25, R. V.
It was an unfolding of the principles that from eternal ages have been the foundation of God's throne.
From the beginning, God and Christ knew of the apostasy of Satan, and of the fall of man through the
deceptive power of the apostate. God did not ordain that sin should exist, but He foresaw its
existence, and made provision to meet the terrible emergency. So great was His love for the world,
that He covenanted to give His only-begotten Son, “that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish,
but have everlasting life.” John 3:16. DA 22.2

The purpose and plan of grace existed from all eternity. [1] Before the foundation of the world it was
according to the determinate counsel of God that man should be created, endowed with power to do
[choose] the divine will. But the defection of man, with all its consequences, was not hidden from the
Omnipotent, and yet it did not deter him from carrying out his eternal purpose; [2] for the Lord would
establish his throne in righteousness. [according to correct principles] God knows the end from the
beginning; “known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.” Therefore redemption
was not an afterthought—a plan formulated after the fall of Adam—but an eternal purpose [1] to be
wrought out for the blessing not only of this atom of a world but for the good of all the worlds which
God has created. ST April 25, 1892, par. 1

Purpose of grace existed from eternity. It was always the purpose to create man. Man's fall didn't
prevent God's purpuse because God would establish his [God's] throne in in righteousness anyway.

 What is his eternal purpose?

The creation of the worlds [nature], the mystery of the gospel, are for one purpose, to make manifest
to all created intelligences, through nature and through Christ, the glories of the divine character. By
the marvelous display of his love in giving “his only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him
should not perish, but have everlasting life,” the glory of God is revealed to lost humanity and to the
intelligences of other worlds. The Lord of heaven and earth revealed his glory to Moses, when he
offered his prayer to Jehovah in behalf of idolatrous Israel, and pleaded, “Show me thy glory.” And the
Lord said: “I will make all my goodness to pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord
before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show
mercy.... And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock.”
“And the Lord descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the Lord.
And the Lord passed by before him, and proclaimed, The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious,
long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and
transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty.” Moses was hidden in the cleft of the
rock when the glory of the Lord was revealed to him, and it is when we are hidden in Christ that we
obtain some view of the majesty and love of God. ST April 25, 1892, par. 2

 Eternal purpose : to establish His throne in righteousness, to make manifest the glories of the
divine character. It is not to rescue people, rescue people is what He would do if man failed.
Example of mountain with a medical kit.
 If you say it's 'redemption': did He create human beings so that they could fall and He could save
us?

 So 'eternal purpose' appears 3 times and I think it's different.

 Through parables (nature: where it says 'the creation of the worlds') He reveal His character to us.

Summary

 God wants to create a kingdom. As any person who wants to establish an empire, you have to
have subjects and things. His eternal purpose = to create a kingdom, establish a home, community
(depending on the context). If so, He's going to do it in a certain way: with being that are able to
follow the rules. He creates the worlds with rules for the subjects to follow them. She doesn't give
details on the rules but..
 If you give food to fish and they come but they're not obeying me but serving themselves.
 He can't or doesn't want to create the world in this false way.
 But there's a risk: no guarantee that they will do it. He is not only aware but He knows it's gonna
happen. But she says He creates them anyway.
 He knows all (10000000) of them are gonna rebel, and He creates a plan to offer them a solution.
And only 10 agree to the plan. What happens tho the rest? Nothing good, but that's He has to pay
so that His kingdom can be established in good principles (as she says 'in righteousness').

Let's link this with the Millerites

 50000 people sign up, but 50 make it. It has to be that way so that He can establish His kingdom in
righteousness. It gets so bad that He wants to establish it in righteousness, that everyone fails. By
the time you get to 1850, 1863, 1911 no one is going to make it through. Not saying every single
person is bad, but the church or movement fails.
 Can we say it fail if a special group or individual didn't? Yes. His purpose was to establish the
kingdom of glory, and if it didn't get established, it must have failed.
Watch the last part because I didn't get it
 Is 46 says the proof of the true God: telling you the end from the beginning.
 History of Moses that fails [Millerites] and the 4th generation

Class 15
 Compare and contrast. This concept comes from juxtaposition: bring to things together to see the
si…
 All the Bible is parables, but our definition of parable is narrow.
 Think about seasons: similar because they all lead with wether but opposite: hot and cold. Tall,
short, light, dark.. All these are forms of parables.
 1 Cor 15: we looked at how Paul uses method of compare and contrast. We used Miller's rules.
 Example

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

 We use it not in it's original setting which is the resurrection of the human body (second coming).
We looked at it because in the 3 steps of the gospel, and the step of glorification has 2 steps.

1Co 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:

 He is comparing and contrasting them

1Co 15:41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars:
for one star differeth from another star in glory.

 When you compare those heavenly objects you notice differences. How you know? Only by
comparing. How do you know someone is tall? You put a short person or a tape meassure. But
they have to be stars.

1Co 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:

1Co 15:43 se siembra en deshonra, se levantará en gloria; se siembra en flaqueza, se levantará en

poder;

1Co 15:44 se siembra cuerpo natural, resucitará cuerpo espiritual. Hay cuerpo natural, y hay cuerpo
espiritual.

 Here we see compare and contrast as we walk in the verse but when we go down verses we see
repeat and enlarge. These techniques are similar but not the same.

corruption incorruption
deshonra gloria
flaqueza poder
natural Espiritual
  What is his prove that there's going to be a resurrection

1Co 15:16 Porque si los muertos no resucitan, tampoco Cristo resucitó.

 It is that Christ resurrected. As we go through this chapter he develops this.

 Are you weak? This verse defines weakness.

 Can use this model which is speaking about the body and apply it to the heart?

 Paul spoke about glory 2 and we can speak about glory 1.. Why? Because they are comparable,
they are the same in how they function.

 Glory I = Glory II
 Man = man
 Lot's of implications

 It is a nice example because when he speaks to the Jews who wanted to hear (are worried) abuot
behaviour and to the Greeks about the body. And he keeps the answer simple, which is the
characteristic of smart people: the resurrection of Christ is the model, he doesn't invent another
model. It benefits jews and gentiles.

 Are you weak in heart? If you say 'in His strenght not in mine' , you are dishonoring God. Because
it is your heart, not His. It is an excuse to keep sining.

Dan 11:40 And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north
shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he
shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over.

 This repeat and enlarge is a bit different because it's a Chiasm.

The rule of the balance

 Knowing one side you know the other. One side can have more than one plate !!!!!!!!!! Very good.
Important principle: when we approach inspiration it should be approached in this, first you look
at it structuraly through a framework like the scale. I know it's the answer but I don't know why it
is.
 This is why if one is a freed, the other the other is imprissoned.
 This method stops you using your pre-conceived ideas.

 Once we know the 'him' is the KS we can discuss what it means. Perhaps the verse does not teach
that.

How can we know if we can apply a Chiasm?

 Combination of practice/art and rules.

 Class 16
 Before:
o History
o Words
o Symbology
 Now:
o Poetry (there's a pattern or style to it). One is repeat & enlarge. Say the same thing over
again.
o At the ToE thing 1 and at the ToE thing 2.
o Special type of R&E: kiasm or mirror.

 What makes it powerful: you don't need to go outside of the verse. (i.e.: 1 Cor 15:21-22)

 He explained the issue of Smith and Litch. It's a M understanding.

 I've discounted that because it is a literal interpretation. But we discussed about predestination.
There's 2 ideas in conflict: there's strong texts that God has fixed times and events. I.e: Moses sees
in vision that Romans will subjugate Israel.
 We could argue there's conditionals and non conditional prophecies.
 Moses: father don't enter the promised land but the sons. We believe that's a prophecy.
Therefore the Millerites couln't enter into the promised land. If you say that then it was
determined that the M would fail.

The history of ancient Israel is a striking illustration of the past experience of the Adventist body.
God led his people in the Advent movement, even as he led the children of Israel from Egypt. In
the great disappointment their faith was tested as was that of the Hebrews at the Red Sea. Had
they still trusted to the guiding hand that had been with them in their past experience, they would
have seen of the salvation of God. If all who had labored unitedly in the work in 1844 had received
the third angel's message, and proclaimed it in the power of the Holy Spirit, the Lord would have
wrought mightily with their efforts. A flood of light would have been shed upon the world. Years
ago the inhabitants of the earth would have been warned, the closing work completed, and Christ
would have come for the redemption of his people. 4SP 291.1
It was not the will of God that Israel should wander forty years in the wilderness; He desired to
lead them directly to the land of Canaan and establish them there, a holy, happy people. But “they
could not enter in because of unbelief.” Hebrews 3:19. Because of their backsliding and apostasy
they perished in the desert, and others were raised up to enter the Promised Land. In like manner,
it was not the will of God that the coming of Christ should be so long delayed and His people
should remain so many years in this world of sin and sorrow. But unbelief separated them from
God. As they refused to do the work which He had appointed them, others were raised up to
proclaim the message. In mercy to the world, Jesus delays His coming, that sinners may have an
opportunity to hear the warning and find in Him a shelter before the wrath of God shall be poured
out. GC 458.1

Kiasm: KS (France) KN (papacy) : KN (USA) KS (Russia)

  What does 'God determined' that he would come in the M if they behave nice? It means 'He
willed' and 'made it possible'.

We will look at vs 40-45 and learn from the Millerites.

i.e.:
 2520 to 1843 and to 1844. This is 911 and 2014 (or Raphia) to which we have 2 2520s as well. So a
mess or error produces a truth in our line.

 God wrote it in a way that it could be fulfilled in the M history and that if they failed the children
could have the verse fulfilled as well. That's why the Bible is not writen in a more clear fashion.

 mwsirATE UPON THIS 2 PASSAGES: KNOWLEDGE AND WILL INTERACT.

Class 18: 'to hasten His coming'

2Pe 3:12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire
shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

 A superficial reading seems to indicate we can speed up the coming of Christ.

 'unto': the word is not italicized but it's not in the Hebrew.
 Read the margin of the KJV, EGW I think uses this.

 Can we hasten the coming of Christ? Can Christ come before 1844?
 If not, how do we read vs 12? Vs 11, who is he talking to in vs 11?

2Pe 3:11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in
all holy conversation and godliness,

 To the people living then.

 So, Luther is going to make somethning that's going to make Christ come?

Strongs
Probably strengthened from G4228; to “speed” (“study”), that is, urge on (diligently or earnestly); by
implication to await eagerly: - (make, with) haste unto.

Theyer
1) to haste, make haste
2) to desire earnestly

 It could be 'to desire earnestly'. It could be understood either way. The way EGW uses to look at it

“Our only safety is in receiving divine inspiration from Heaven. This alone can qualify finite men to be co-
laborers with Christ. ‘Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought
ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, looking for and hastening unto the coming of the day of
God, [she rewrites it] wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt
with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens, and a new earth,
wherein dwelleth righteousness. Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent,
that ye may be found of Him in peace, without spot, and blameless.’ O that as a people bearing a solemn
message to the world, we might heed every word of instruction given us of God for this time. KC 35.2

 Written in 1906 adressing A.T Johns because of his bad behaviour.

Oh, I beseech those who are holding forth the word of life to present to all the necessity of individually
searching the Scriptures for themselves that they may know the expressed will of God. There is need of
a firmer, closer connection with God, and to all who have this connection there will be imparted
wisdom, caution, farseeing discernment, and executive ability which will make them far more efficient
than are mere worldly businessmen. Let there be no blundering work; every soul must look deeper than
the surface. God does not generally lay out in His revelations the minute transactions of life. His Word,
the Guidebook, deals with great and elevated themes, opening up the principles which should
underlie all our actions, and presenting them in language of such simplicity that all may comprehend
them. 14MR 198.2
Satan has come down with great power; he is working with desperate energy, playing the game of life
for the souls of men. We need now men of discernment and understanding, who will look deep and
reason soundly, men in living touch with Christ, the risen Saviour. Falsehoods are everywhere, but God's
Word is the solid rock. We are in the day of waiting; we are to be looking for and hastening the coming
of the day of God. We are to be climbing, ever climbing, heavenward. 14MR 199.1

 Jones is involved but this is about a prophetess call … EGW warning of following that woman.
 A surface reading: EGW saying that we can accelerate the coming. But if we see 'waiting and
climbing' we can define 'hastening' as climbing.

 This verse impacts Act 3:19. The structure is very similar, depending on how you read hastening. If
you read 'hastening' as 'personal preparation' and not 'accelerating His coming' you might need to
read Acts 3:19 different than we have done.

Dan 11
 We've said 1844 as beign the CoP. Now, if we're pushed we say 'it's a shut door' if you're not sure
about what the CoP means. In their time, they didn't know what it meant. We can further down a
bit, and say that the door to the MHP was was open and the HP was shut. And we can do that
without any implications for the people then. And then we'd go to Rev 3:7

Rev 3:7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is
true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man
openeth;
Rev 3:8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou
hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.

 They're people who call themselves Jews/Christ but are of the sinagogue of Satan. Also because
Christ came in the clouds (Dn 7).
  EW : synagoge of Satan is in the HP. He set himself up there.
 We've tended because of this to finish the M line in 1844
 We've got other evidences.. Which ones?
o The end of the 2300?
o Arrival of the 3rd angel?
o The end of the 2520? Lev 26.
o Seven thunders.
 10 virgins
 46 years.

*************************************************************************************
**********
Rev 10
 Without proving: this is the 1st angel and this is 1840
 Without any complexity: in 1798 the angel was flying around the athmosphere and in 1840 he
lands on earth
 We could do more detail
o What is means when a lion roars

Rev 10:3 And cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roareth: and when he had cried, seven thunders
uttered their voices.

 EGW: the 7 thunders = 1 + 2 ams. (doesn't quite say it that way: she says events). And we know
that the history 1798 to 1844 = 1844 history of 1 + 2 angels.
 When he does that LC here, 1840 according to these is the LC. We often put it somewhere else. So
the LC 1840 according to Rev 10. And the other LC further in the line is in another verse. LC = MC.
Mat 25.

 Interesting: LC of 1840 and then a shut door (protsetants), and then the LC of the 2nd angel and
another shut door afterwards.

*************************************************************************************
*

 The 46 years. Jn 2:20.

 So we have a lot of evidences over the years to mark 1844 as the end of the line.
 But whe we look at our hisotry we reconsider:
o The 3rd angel ariiving in 1844 doesn't line up with how we use it in our line.
o 1850 chart
o 2520
 Dificulty: we are beginning from the anti-type to the type. It shouldn't be that way.

Play with words

 Type - Antitype = natural - spiritual = first - second.
 Anti : can different connotations.
o In opposition or against. Christ - antichrist = true - false
 o Anti can also mean substitute. Also before.
o As type can teach you aobut the anti-type. We began to go to the 144k line and tended to
use it to understand M line. Back and forth. Perhaps it's breaking some protocols.
o Anti normally means the first but when we use it in antitype it is the second, it's kind of
confusing. Used in different way.]
o Anti in the Bible is used as 'first' in importance, not secuence.

 Which one scares the most?

 Christ does 30 and 3 1/2. Antichrist does the same thing. So they can become interchanagable and
we can learn about the true by the false.

 Is this a new thing?

 N.T church had the same problem, the Christ is used to explain the O.T. None is looking to the sky
for stars. But a star comes to explain the history of Balaam.
 Christ had the same problem. His experience of the family suffering. Mary should have been
looking at the story of Joseph but she didn't.

Class 19
 2520 (Lev 26 - Hab 2:3)
 2300 (Dn 8:14 - Hab 2:3)
 Sanctuary
o Two apartments: open door and shut door
o Rev 3:7-8
o Lev 16 - day of atonement
 10 virgins (Mt 25)
 7 thunders (Rev 10:3)
 46 years (John 2:20)

Hab 2:3 For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie: though it
tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not tarry.

 Cloud (Dn 7:13)

o 1st angel's message (Rev 14:7)
o The judgment referred to in the 2 verses is the same.

 3rd angel's message (Ezra 7:9, Rev 14:9-11)

Which ones are applications and which not?

 Ezra 7:9 - A
 Rev 14: 7 - ?
 Dn 14:9-11 - ?
 Dn 7:13 - O

Dan 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of
heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
  EGW: tells us cloud = chariot
 Ancient of days

Dan 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was
white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his
wheels as burning fire.

 He has a throne with wheels on it.

 Ancient of days = God the Father.
 They wheel His throne from the HP to the MHP

 John 2:20 = restorarion - A

o 2520 - 2300 = 220 (scatterin and the end of 2300 point to the restoration of the temple).
o 220 after an event the earth is restored
o Temple restored

 7 thunders - 7BC 971, ms 59, 1900

 Orignial - Dn 11:40 to Dn 12:1

 Ms means manuscreipt that was never released
o Some portions are published in portions of books
o But they were not published in the set of released manuscripts
 MR - manuscript released
 Young adventists indignated for hidden information and they forced the church to release all the
documents held in these bovedas. They are called the unpublished writings: letters and
manuscripts. Available in the internet and EGW app. The old 2008 software it's available as a
separate download, you can't plug it into the existing data base.

The special light given to John which was expressed in the seven thunders was a delineation of events
which would transpire under the first and second angels’ messages. It was not best for the people to
know these things, for their faith must necessarily be tested. In the order of God most wonderful and
advanced truths would be proclaimed. The first and second angels’ messages were to be proclaimed,
but no further light was to be revealed before these messages had done their specific work. This is
represented by the angel standing with one foot on the sea, proclaiming with a most solemn oath that
time should be no longer. 7BC 971.6

Rev 10:7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of
God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

 7th angel. Our understanding (correct), if you go back to chapter 9 vs 13

Rev 9:13 And the sixth angel sounded, and I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which
is before God,

 Seems to be a connection between the two angels. Series of 7 angels (tracking). Which is the 7th
trumpet or the 7th trumpet angel, which take you back to Rev 8. That's whom that angel is.
 This is evidence that the orignal intent of Rev 10 is not Millerite.
 William Foy he says the 7th angel doesn't begin until 1844.

 Heber: relation between Dn 8 and Rev 10. One is beginning something and the other ending
something.

 Dn 12:4-9 try to connect it with Rev 10

Class 20
 2300 - original: he meant 2300 years when He said says, and He excludes the Babylonian history
(starts from MP)

 Hab 2:3 For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie:
though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not tarry.

o Application.

 2520
o It's an Application

o Original intent:
 1260 when it says 'time, times and a half', 'time' is there and it means a year or period of
time. 3.5 x 360 is a valid calculation. But not in Lev 26. Seven is a symbol and thus it
becomes a symbol?
 Argument: lev 25 is time so Lev 26:18 is time. It's like bad proof texting.
 Answer [key] : vs 18's 'time' is connected to vs 15-17 not to Lev 25.
 Why do we not the same with the punishment from 15-17?
 Why do we not expect them to be blessed for a certain period of time in 4-13
 It's a '7' kind of punishment.
 How long it takes to create? 6 days, but what's the 7th? It's some kind of
completion, even when the work itself ended in 6 days. In the 7th day you
complete creation: you enjoy it. Sanctifiy. Contemplation is part of that creative
work.
 Perfection = maturity
 Oath or promise (in the definition)

 This immature (15-17) punishment is brought to maturity in vs 18.

 Vs 18 'I'm going to bring this punishment to completion'

 If we did a study, completion takes always 4 steps. Which is why you see it in 4 verses.
It's a progressive punishment, which is 4 steps, is actually the completion or
perfection of 15-17. So the 4 sevens is a singular punishment, (because they're all
being controlled by the number 7) which is the completion or the perfection of the
punishment of 15-17.
 The fullness of the punishment doesn't happen all at once, but in 4 steps. So it's 4, but
at another level, since it's the perfection , so it's a unit.
  15-17 = -2 judges (from Joshua to Samuel)
 So it happens multiple times in the judges. But it is described as one thing
 18 - 28 = the kings
 But there's a long gap between vs 17 and 18.
 We're in vs 28, final punishment, which is what's really going to finish everything
off.
 Each vs has it's progressive nature
 Vs 27, there's conditionality 'if'. There's some options.
 Vs 28, that if gets taken out. So from 28, and look to the verses that follow
 19-20 tells you how the punishment of 18 is. Same with the rest
 After 28 those verses would then tell us how the punishement of 28 is.
 29 - eat the meat of children
 30 - worship places destroyed
 31 - city destroyed
 32 - land destroyed as a surprise
 33 - scattered to the gentiles

Lev 26:34 Then shall the land enjoy her sabbaths, as long as it lieth desolate, and ye be in
your enemies' land; even then shall the land rest, and enjoy her sabbaths.
Lev 26:35 As long as it lieth desolate it shall rest; because it did not rest in your sabbaths,
when ye dwelt upon it.

 So this issue of the Sabbath is being brought back

 Chapter 25 says let the land have Sabbath.

 Between vs 17 and 18 is a period to learn your lesson or test. If you don't learn your
lesson, I'm going to punish you again. And the end result is 34-35: taken to the land of
the enemies until the land has enjoyed her Sabbaths. It turns out being 70 years.
 The sturcute of the passage doesn't allow you to bring '70' to the 4 sevens.
 That probationary time is 490 years.
 They must have been tested before the judges also (because they were punished)

Class 21
 We're trying to see how the M line should have been layed out from the beginning.

October 1844

 2300 - Dn 8:14 - original intent

 2520 - 2520 - application
o Habakkuk 2 (involves both 2520 and 2300) - application

Lev 26

 Blessings
o Lev 26:3 If ye walk in my statutes, and keep my commandments, and do them;
o 4-13 - Judges
  Cursings
o Lev 26:14 But if ye will not hearken unto me, and will not do all these commandments;
o 15-17 - Judges
 Punished and repent (if you see the histories)
 Samuel is the last, then you have the period of the kings.
 But after the judges, before the kings, God is going to test them. We call that
probationary time. This is 490 years (in a very simple way) because the 490 don't end
in vs 18.
 If you read the verses there's no this gap, but if you go to the history and see how the
punishment is delivered. It's 490 years, and God is seeing if they were corrected or
not.
 490: form anointing of Saul at Samuel's history, 1097, to 607 (Jerusalem)

o What's the punishment of the judges? Small example

'…ye shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it.'

 This happened in Gideon: the Medianites let them sow their [Jews] seed, and in
harvest time they would invade and take all the crop.

Jdg 6:11 And there came an angel of the LORD, and sat under an oak which was in Ophrah,
that pertained unto Joash the Abiezrite: and his son Gideon threshed wheat by the
winepress, to hide it from the Midianites.

 He is not doing it in the threshing floor, so that the Medianites don't see him.
 But Gideon is raised, destroys the Medianites and then it's all good.

 If that's not enough then…

o Lev 26:18 And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven
times more for your sins.

o Vs 18 : if you are not corrected by the period of the judges, then I'm going to punish you
more (kings)

Question: if 18, 21, 24 (the conditional clause is in 27), 28 (there's no condition) are one punishment,
why are the 3 steps conditional? Is it conditional or not?

 This is what we've been discusing about predestination.

o EGW says He could have come a little after 1844
o We have evidences to say He couldn't come
 The way Dn 11:40 is written
 Millerites = Moses who couldn't enter in the promised land.
K 382.2

Faithfully the prophets continued their warnings and their exhortations; fearlessly they spoke to
Manasseh and to his people; but the messages were scorned; backsliding Judah would not heed. As an
earnest [type] of what would befall the people should they continue impenitent, the Lord permitted
their king to be captured by a band of Assyrian soldiers, who “bound him with fetters, and carried him to
Babylon,” their temporary capital. This affliction brought the king to his senses; “he besought the Lord
his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers, and prayed unto Him: and He was
entreated of him, and heard his supplication, and brought him again to Jerusalem into his kingdom.
Then Manasseh knew that the Lord He was God.” 2 Chronicles 33:11-13. But this repentance,
remarkable though it was, came too late to save the kingdom from the corrupting influence of years of
idolatrous practices. Many had stumbled and fallen, never again to rise. PK 382.3

 Downpayment = type. Because you give $100 as a deposit (guarantee) that you'll but the item of
$10,000. If you say you'll buy it you will buy. [let your yay be yay]
 100 $ = 1000 & is the same because it's money
 Like when you shake hands It's a guarantee in Germany.
 Anti-type [anti = first, it's about importance].

Jas 5:12 Mas por sobre todas las cosas, mis hermanos; no juréis, ni por el cielo, ni por la tierra, ni por
ningún otro juramento; sino que vuestro sí sea sí, y vuestro no, sea no; para que no caigáis en
condenación.

 Christian concept: 'my word is my guarantee'

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in
whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Eph 1:14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession,
unto the praise of his glory.

Through Huldah the Lord sent Josiah word that Jerusalem's ruin could not be averted. Even should the
people now humble themselves before God, they could not escape their punishment. So long had
their senses been deadened by wrongdoing that, if judgment should not come upon them, they would
soon return to the same sinful course. “Tell the man that sent you to me,” the prophetess declared,
“Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, and upon the inhabitants thereof, even all
the words of the book which the king of Judah hath read: because they have forsaken Me, and have
burned incense unto other gods, that they might provoke Me to anger with all the works of their hands;
therefore My wrath shall be kindled against this place, and shall not be quenched.” Verses 15-17. PK
399.1

 This is in Josiah [in between vs 18 and 21]

 Vs 18 says 'if' and Hulda says 'no, it's too late'.

 We've seen this concep repeatedly. God frames His interactions with us as if it is possible, yet we
see it's impossible.
 That's why I say this punishment of 18,21,24,28 is a single punishment that's going to be
progressively delivered.

 Another example:
o Pharaoh hardens his heart. But Moses keeps on saying that he stops his rebellion. Is it
possible? The way the story is written it seems it is.
o One version of the story says it's too late (inevitable), but the way it's written it's like it's
possible.
Coming back to 490

 Dn 9 - 70 weeks, we focus on the last week.

Mat 18:21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I
forgive him? till seven times? [not a coincidence]
Mat 18:22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times
seven. [490]

 Morally : 490 = always because no one can count.

 Prophetically : at the 491 I'll not forgive you anymore.

Lev 26:28 Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for
your sins.

 There's no conditional clause from here onward

 Vs 35 takes us back to chapter 25 and the issue of time. [now this time actually connects us to 25]

Summary

 490 years, the model of Lev 25 of the 49 years. If you did 10 cycles you have 70 years. If you did 70
cycles you have 490 years. You have stolen 70 years.
 This are Sabbath years.

2Ch 36:21 To fulfil the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her
sabbaths: for as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years.

Class
In every part of the land, light was given upon the second angel's message, and the cry melted the
hearts of thousands. It went from city to city, and from village to village, until the waiting people of God
were fully aroused. In many churches the message was not permitted to be given, and a large company
who had the living testimony left these fallen churches. A mighty work was accomplished by the
midnight cry. The message was heart-searching, leading the believers to seek a living experience for
themselves. They knew that they could not lean upon one another. EW 238.3

En todas partes del país fué proyectada luz sobre el mensaje del segundo ángel y el
anunció enterneció el corazón de millares de personas. Propagóse de villa en villa y de
ciudad en ciudad, hasta despertar por completo al expectante pueblo de Dios. En
muchas iglesias no fué permitido dar el mensaje, y gran número de fieles que tenían el
viviente testimonio abandonaron aquellas caídas iglesias. El pregón de media noche
efectuaba una potente obra. El mensaje escudriñaba los corazones, e inducía a los
creyentes a buscar por sí mismos una vívida experiencia. Comprendían que no podían
apoyarse unos en otros. PE 238.2
  EGW says in JTT every earthly support will be cut off. But she says here that that experience is also
before.
 'contrary winds' [Tess] and you can't lean upon one another. Here seems to indicate there's just
one wind but another story that there's contrary winds.
 It was because of the contrary winds that they had to pass through the period of the MC.

Class Friday
 Summary on the 2520.
o There's a test
o P1 (judges, vs 15-17)
o Between P1 and P2 there's a gap. It would be unfair if there wasn't, because this is a time of
test, probationary time. It's 490 years. We went to verses to show that 490 is actually
probationary time
 Mt 18:21-22
 Dn 9:24
o P2 = kings, vs 18-35
 7
 Complete
 Perfection
 Judgment
 Oath/Promisse.
 18, 21,24,28
 4th = 4 progression
 4 = 4 complete as well, destruction, judgment
 Unique punishment in 4th stages
o Easy to make mistake: vs 25 is all about time
o Then we come to vs 34 and 2 Chron 36:21 and the 70 connect with the 490 of the test:

o So we have
 Ch 25
 P1
 Test
 P2
 Ch 25

 Lev 26 is about captivity: it's a prediction about the Babylonian captivity. (like in the saced Bible
class).

 Miller took the 7, understood that time = year, and said 7 years x 360 = 360 2520. That's how he
gets that number.

Lev 26:34 Then shall the land enjoy her sabbaths, as long as it lieth desolate, and ye be in your enemies'
land; even then shall the land rest, and enjoy her sabbaths.

 Then = after this thing

  This vs is about time, but 'Then' places after the 4 sevens. So the time of 2 Chronicles 36 is not
connected to the 4 sevens but to a post story.

 Vs 28 - 'no more bread' (won't do it for time)

Our Arguments:

 Rule of 1st mention: 7 is connected to time because it's 7th day. No, 7 is not time, it's completion
"God ended his work'.
 The cows of Joseph. The 7 is not time, the cows are time. And Joseph made it up that cow = year.

Class
 What's the difference with this methodology and the 'duration' metodology?
 What we should have seen: the 4 progressive steps, we knew about the number 4. We could have
know way earlier.

 'duration': we used a proper method: repeat and enlarge. 7T = 7T = 7T = 7T

o 4 times = 4 cardinal point, which is worldwide, which takes you to the end of the world. Easy
to go down the road of duration.

*************************************************************************************
*************
Soundness of M interpretation of vs 40

1798 : Rev 14
 Europe (France, UK)
 Egypt
 Turkey
 Syria

1840 : Rev 10
 Europe
 Egypt
 Turkey
 Syria

 It's worth studying, may be we can see the relationship between 1798 and 1840
 It's 42 years : wilderness (1260)
 The more you see the more you think that they're interpretation perharaps is not a creazy idea.
 Egypt is a province of Turkey. Same dynamics in 1798.
 August 11, 1840. But there was an engagment in 1840 at 911 in the same city engaged in 1798.
 Augost 11 : unimport event, Eurpoe forces Egypt not to attack Turkey. (Egypt wanted to go to war
with Turkey)
 911, 1840 : little 'battle' in Damascus. Damascus is in 1798.
*************************************************************************************
**********

 M: they do repeat and enlarge (7T = 7T = 7T = 7T)

 We use progression.

 Is this the same methodology they used in vs 40?

 They're not consistent. They pick and choose. Also in Dn 2 they use the same rule we use in Dn
11:44

When the third angel's message is preached as it should be, power attends its proclamation, and it
becomes an abiding influence. It must be attended with divine power, or it will accomplish nothing.
[introductory thought is about the 3am] I am often referred to the parable of the ten virgins, five of
whom were wise, and five foolish. This parable has been [1798 to 1844] and will be fulfilled to the very
letter [present and future], for it has a special application to this time [present], and, like the third
angel's message, has been fulfilled and will continue to be present truth till the close of time. In the
parable, the ten virgins had lamps, but only five of them had the saving oil with which to keep their
lamps burning. This represents the condition of the Church. The wise and the foolish have their Bibles,
and are provided with all the means of grace; but many do not appreciate the fact that they must have
the heavenly unction. They do not heed the invitation, “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy
laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in
heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” RH August 19,
1890, par. 3

How to approach?
 You should look at the historical contex, where is she, when, whom is he adressing?
 We first look at the date, 1890 and we'de have to know that it is linked to 1888. That's the
importance of reading widely (to just know the history)
 We have to know what's the theme also
 This has nothing to do with the 10 virgins, but with righteouness
o Huge problem in the church about what? ('rejection of the message of righteousness': I
want to approach this in more systematic way)
o EGW: introduction, body, conclusion
 The problem is : 'justification by works'
 That's why she says '3am = justification by faith'. But the 3am is not that. If you say
that you disconect it from history, or progression.
o EGW has a vision right after 1844, she taken to the sanctuary, sees the 4th commandmant
with a halo of light, and also Jesus with a halo, and the issue of encarnation. They are the
same subject, not separate as many would say. Sabbath and the incarnation are different
parts of the 3am.
o 3am = Sabbath + encarnation.
o If we jump forward 44 and now we're dealing with justification by faith. That's why I don't
want to call it so, but incarnation. It's a continues thought in this history.
o What had they done wrong? Rejected the 3am.
o In 1844, their understanding grows. EGW says she's been preaching the same thing W&J
[read]. But they do it more techincal and confrontational.
o W&J wanted to lead with the Sabbath and the incarnation. Jones is the champion of the
Sabbath. Expert in incarnation is the same man: W&J.
 o That's why EGW says the 3am = justification by faith.
o We should recognize that as we approach the SL the subject of the nature of man should
resurface.

o If they would have been reading the SOP properly from 1844, they wouldn't have been in
that mess.
o If we would have followed the SOP from 911 the 7T wouln't be such a challenge.
 It's about the SOP not leaders, Miller was both a bad man and good man. At the MC you
shouldn't be following him.
o History repeats!

o Why did the message of incarnation died? If we go to EW without reading and SP1 and
you see how she lays the great controversy, and see the structure of the chapters.
 In the message we target the church for spiritualism. EGW says spiritualism is the world.
It was a supernatural attack upon the world. Why he does that? Because he knows
what's about to happen: these SDAs are about to war, or gospel.
 Covetousness is for the church (compare and contrast).
 When we target spritualism to the church we need to know what we're doing.
 Covetousness: eyes from heaven to earth. Laodciean condition. It's a satanic attack
upon the church. This is what causes no divinity, or all human.

 Back to the 10V quote:

Class
 The events of 1840 are connected to the events in 1798 (same players)
 Details
o Ottoman empire weakened and weakened
o The Sultan weakened. Within his own kingdom there was the province of Egypt with the
leader the Pacha Mehmed Ali, who rebelled over the time. To the point that he took over
Egypt and even Syria. When he had conquered Syiria the sultan sends an army in 1839 to
reconquer Syria. They sought the help of the Prusian, Ali sends his son to the war, and Egypt
wins the battle. In response the Ottoman empire sends its fleet against Egypt and they
render without battle. The Sultan dies and his son assumes (16 years old). Now he is in
charge of the Ottoman empire is lead by a child. Prussia, England, Austria and Russia
become worried about the situation, they see the danger of Egypt getting too strong, they
meet in England where on the 15 July they sign a treaty (1840). The treaty which has a list of
demands against the Egyptian Pacha. Among others that he returns Syria. Now we have
Litch who made this prediction, and this scenario of newspapers which is not like today
(quick), so it first seems that the events point to the fact that the prophecy actually doesn't
fulfill on thr 11th but on the 15th because they had this significant meeting with the
embassador who supposedly delivered this demands to the Pacha. So first Litch tries to
 correct the calculation, and his argument is that the prophecy only tells us the hour. And he
says if we go from the 11th to the 15th there's only 16 minutes. Then he reconsiders and
sees it's actually the 11th. He comes up with another newspaper that there was a
siginificant event on the 11th. The embassador arrived on Alexandria on the 11th. And
semes a restraint……….. and that there was an immediate encounter between the
embassador and the pacha, he reads the demands, and the Pacha doesn't agree so he
postpones the meeting. At the next meeting they have all the other embassadors present.
At the end the Pacha doesn't accept the terms. Its believed he was hoping for the help of
France. Never happened, and he preferrs to fight and looses. Losse it in honor instead of
giving up.

 Danger: we oversimplify history. Example, the way we teach 1840 is what truth we glean from it?
911. We take from it the restraint of radical Islam. But what we don't do is try to search in the
history of 1840 and see the players. Not all the countries per say, but we know there's tension
between two radical Islam power. We just take the concept of one radical group and see how it
interacted with the USA. Because of that basic paralell. We thus can't see the development of
radical islam in the world. I'm not sure how many are aware of the Syrian war, and the alliences
with the west and some not. Most of us have a very shallow understanding of the Aphganistan
war which has striking parallels to the Syrian war. And this is tied to our very poor understanding
of the history of 1840.

Lev 26

 Moses is seeing a progressvie process in 4 steps

 The M don't see it like that, but as a repeat and enlarge.

 This relationship between the two perspectives becomes important for us. If we understood this,
we would be well served in our studies of the Bible
 We saw and example: the 10 virgins. It's not disoncet to this because Mt 24:29 is related to 1798

Mat 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon
shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be
shaken:

 Those 3 events are clustering around 1798: 2 before and 1 after.

o 1780, 1833
 The verse is dealing with the history of 1798 that begins the M history or Dn 11:40.
 Direct connection between 25 and 24

Mat 25:1 Entonces el reino de los cielos será semejante a diez vírgenes que tomando sus lámparas,
salieron a recibir al esposo.

 Refrase: 'at that time'. That's what 'then' means in that context [connotation]

Stong's
From (the neuter of) G3588 and G3753; the when, that is, at the time that (of the past or future, also in
consecution): - that time, then.
Thayer Definition:
1) then
2) at that time

 What time in 24 is this? Without proving, it's referring to the history that begins in vs 29.
 Vs 29 is 1798

 We should have a good understanding of the structure of this chapter as a movement.

 It's divided in 3 parts
o Disciples
o End of the world.
o Big gap between them that's called 'those days' in vs 29

 Mk 13 and Luk 21, are the same story, you'd have to overlay them to do this execise.

What to look for in the RH quote?

 Date
 Read widely to connect 1890 to 1888
 Tittle
 Who is involved? This is a response to brother.
 Propperly: we'd go to par 2

Dear Brother,
It was with pleasure that I read your letter of inquiry to me, for the thought that the work of the Spirit of
God wrought upon your heart at the Kansas meeting has so far not been effaced, is of great satisfaction.
You have had a glimpse of the righteousness of Christ which you have not lost, as I am sure some others
did when they came in contact with those who did not appreciate this blessed truth. I am glad that Jesus
does indeed make his presence manifest when it is eagerly sought for and gratefully acknowledged. RH
August 19, 1890, par. 2

 We'd go and understand those Kansas meeting to have a better context.

 Some people had a positive response to the Kansas meeting and some not.
 Then she goes to par 3

When the third angel's message is preached as it should be, power attends its proclamation, and it
becomes an abiding influence. It must be attended with divine power, or it will accomplish nothing. I am
often referred to the parable of the ten virgins, five of whom were wise, and five foolish. This parable
has been and will be fulfilled to the very letter, for it has a special application to this time, and, like
the third angel's message, has been fulfilled and will continue to be present truth till the close of time.
In the parable, the ten virgins had lamps, but only five of them had the saving oil with which to keep
their lamps burning. This represents the condition of the Church. The wise and the foolish have their
Bibles, and are provided with all the means of grace; but many do not appreciate the fact that they must
have the heavenly unction. They do not heed the invitation, “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are
heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly
in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” RH August
19, 1890, par. 3
  Our approach was not true to the words. And it was exactely what Miller did: repeat and enlarge.

Theyers
 Fulfilled = 'to make perfect', to complete, to bring to its end, to accomplish. Connotation of
something has been finished, or completed.

Class
Mat 24

 Mat 24:29 - change in the events that Christ is portraying because it begins 'after those days', so
it's a new dispensation
 Vs 30 -
 Vs 31 - angels gathering the elect

 Vs 32 - now we switch from a story about prophetic events to a parable. The prophecy has ended
in vs 31. Why would Christ say: here's a parable? What's this parable supposed to be teaching us?
 In this movent we have this study 'the budding trees of spring' (EGW phraseology) and we develop
a logict to say we're the last generation.
 Luiza: Prophecy finishes in vs 31, the parable is about vs 29 to 31. There's a passage in the bible
that says that the summer is about the harvest.
 In this passage, vs 31, when you gather the elect, that's the prophecy and we're gonna have a
parble.

 29,30,31 = 32

Mat 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves,
ye know that summer is nigh:
Mat 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.

Mat 24:37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

 Compare Noah's day with the days of Christ. This is another parable. So you can't go to verses 38
and 39 and start going forward, because it's parable after parable. If you continue you'll just see
parables.

Mat 24:40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

 Parables that there is:

o Trees
o Noah
o Field
o Robber

 Parables are explaining the prophecy. We havent's delineated a structure for the chapter.
 There's 2 dispensations: of the disciples and the end of the world. And in between them there's
'those days'.
 So when it says in vs 32 that you need to learn a parables, we understand that parables are a
natural phenomenom that explains a spiritual phenomenom.
 So which one dispensation are the parables referring to? I II or III?

 If we compare the 3 chapter, we'd see the disciples actually ask 4 questions at the beginning, they
are all about the end.
 The purpuse is not to do a detailed study but to show us how to approach an unknown subject.
 The way the chapter is structured is very simple, very logical.
 All the parables explain the same spiritual phenomenom. If not, it would be a nightmare to see
what parable referrs to what history (I II or III).
 We should always look to the simple answer
 Then you test it. Example:
o When you see a thief, he comes at a certain time, and that immediately takes you to vs 30-
31 (Christ coming)
o Noah same thing.
o Man in the field, same thing.
 We come to the right answer if we look at the simple structures and pattern. If you were Christ
you wouldn't do it hard to understand the answer you expect. Wouldn't you explain in a
systematic way or fashion. The purose of the parables is to make things easier, all the purpose of
the field is because it's something intuitive.
 Then you check and see all the parables are speaking of the same thing.

 Tess: it's going back to vs 15.

 So when you see 66 AD then you know the summer is here (vs 32)? She ended up making 'the Son
of man' Titus. She blended everything. Because the story of Noah is not referring to 70 AD.

 The easiest to see is vs 37 and 30 connected. You then know it's talking about the second coming.
And what you're supposed to be seeing something (stars, sun, moon) you know that the summer
is here.
 And all of the parables are dealing with 2 groups.
 And when you go to Mt 25 it's a parable about two groups. So then you'd place that parable from
the sun, stars and moon. So when Luiza said she couldn't locate the parable from the Bible, you
can because it is just another parable in the secuence, but more detailed.

 The changes in vs 32 are the sings of vs 29.

Mat 25

 We were trying to see the relationship between the 10V and the 3am.
 If you do 'has been' and 'will be' as 2 separate distinct stories, what did you assume that the
author knows? That she knows and has built into this model that there's going to be 2 ToE. If you
do this, you will have to have good evidence that she knows that there will be another ToE. Or
you'd say that she believes this eventhough she never says it.
  She always says that Christ will come in her lifetime, not that there's going to be another ToE. So
she doesn't have visibility of that. So when we approach this our second witnesses are that EGW
doesn't believe there's going to be another ToE. If you believe that it is two separate histories,
you'd have to show two witnesses… (which there's not).

 The word 'fulfill' means complete. How do we understand what that means?
 Is she using the model of 3A, 3E and doing like Apr 19 to 1844 or 1844 to a date.
 'Fulfill' webster's dictionary
o 6th - In general to acomplish, to carry into effect.
o 1st - To acomplish, to perform, to answer.. To fulfill a prophecy or a predicton. To fulfill a
promise.
 I want to suggest: that when she says the 3rd was fulfilled she means this: 1844, it was fulfilled,
 The promise is the 1st am: the hour judgment is come. The word judgment is the event 1844,
when it was fulfilled in event or execution, it was in that way that the 3am was fulfilled. So all she
was simply saying is that it was the fulfillment of the 1st am, because it was predicitng .

 Watch again the last minutes, very important.

Class
 People wanted to do repeat and enlarge in Mt 24 and connect vs 15 with vs 30 or 31.
 Vs 15 is 66 AD says 'when you this thing something is about to happen' just like in vs 32 says the
same thing. They are using R&E.
 The new parable of mt 25 begins with 'then' and it's about two groups
 Vs 14 is another parable and again two groups
 Vs 31 is about two groups: sheep and goats.

Mat 25:31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he
sit upon the throne of his glory:

 When are these two groups being illustrated? Second coming.

Mat 25:32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another,
as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:

 What's He going to do then? Separate the two groups. They've been feeding together, where? In a
field. So you've got a field, with two types of animals feeding together untill the 2nd coming. And
then Jesus will separate them.
 He is like a shepherd, they use a tool, a shepherd stick, and when talking about harvest we use a
hoax. So the W&T have similar characteristics to this parable.
 Mt 24:36 or 37 begins to teach parables of two groups. Mt 25 just continuesthat thought.
 Remember: people were not making this prophecy a singular prophecy but two separate stories.

Mat 24:15 Por tanto, cuando viereis la abominación desoladora, que fue dicha por el profeta Daniel,
que estará en el lugar santo (el que lee, entienda).
Mat 24:32 De la higuera aprended la parábola: Cuando ya su rama enternece, y las hojas brotan, sabéis
que el verano está cerca.

 People want to say the leaves were 66 AD. Does that make sense?
 If you do that you're doing the same thing that the movement in the 10 virgings quote: R&E.
 But the verses don't read that way: see vs 21, 22, 29 (the tribulation), it's a list of secutiential
events.
 You can't break the line like that because contextually the leaves are not in AD 66, it's too far from
the 2nd coming.
 The chapter is written in this concept of progression, but we use this R&E.
 If you use that R&E technique, what happens is that you get a very limmited understanding of
what's going on. Unless you're very careful you'll come out with very strange answers.
 If we do that,

Mat 24:6 Y oiréis de guerras, y rumores de guerras; mirad que no os turbéis, porque es menester que
todo esto acontezca, pero aún no es el fin.

 We take vs 6, and say there's been a lot of wars in the last 2000 years, so many that we say this is
proof that we're in the end of the war.
 What was in the mind of the author? Any war ever? SDA would say yes, and I say no.
 When is vs 6? Is it before vs 15?
o I said when you aproach you're studies assume common sense things: Jesus is listing events
in chronological order, so 6 would be before 15. And then test it.
o 15, 21, 29: they are in chronological order. If they are in order, and in 30 says something is
going to happen afterwards.. We've got enough verses to prove that the chapter is in
chronological order.

Mat 24:13 Pero el que persevere hasta el fin [fin de la dispensacion de los discipules], ése será salvo.

Mat 24:14 Y este evangelio del reino se predicará en todo el mundo como testimonio a todas las
naciones, y entonces vendrá el fin.

Col 1:23 si en verdad permanecéis en la fe bien cimentados y constantes, sin moveros de la esperanza
del evangelio que habéis oído, que fue proclamado a toda la creación debajo del cielo, y del cual yo,
Pablo, fui hecho ministro.

 If you pass all the tribulation till vs 12, and get to 66 AD, you'll be ok, saved.
 So when we use the R&E technique, when you get to vs 6, what wars are them?
 Go to google and find there was civil wars in the Roman empire, provinces rising against the
empire. [watch this minute]
 But now, what kind of wars are you looking for? Specific wars. Example: today we're focusing on
WWII, but no one has done WWI.

Min 1:02: fix [sound of truck]

When the third angel's message is preached as it should be, power attends its proclamation, and it
becomes an abiding influence. It must be attended with divine power, or it will accomplish nothing. I am
often referred to the parable of the ten virgins, five of whom were wise, and five foolish. This parable
has been and will be fulfilled to the very letter, for it has a special application to this time, and, like
the third angel's message, has been fulfilled and will continue to be present truth till the close of time.
In the parable, the ten virgins had lamps, but only five of them had the saving oil with which to keep
their lamps burning. This represents the condition of the Church. The wise and the foolish have their
Bibles, and are provided with all the means of grace; but many do not appreciate the fact that they must
have the heavenly unction. They do not heed the invitation, “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are
heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly
in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” RH August
19, 1890, par. 3

Christ had bidden His people watch for the signs of His advent and rejoice as they should behold the
tokens of their coming King. “When these things begin to come to pass,” He said, “then look up, and lift
up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” He pointed His followers to the budding trees of
spring, and said: “When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now
nigh at hand. So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is
nigh at hand.” Luke 21:28, 30, 31. GC 308.2

 We can't see the year, so we go to the tittle.

 Herald: someone who proclaims a message, but the connotation is someone who works for the
king, monarchy concept. It's not a factory worker giving a message. It's a royal person, who's
message is that the morning is coming. These heralds deliver the message usually with a trumpet.
 In the chapter, she esentially explains vs 29: sun, moon and stars. Paragraph before:

May 19, 1780, stands in history as “The Dark Day.” Since the time of Moses no period of darkness of
equal density, extent, and duration, has ever been recorded. The description of this event, as given by
eyewitnesses, is but an echo of the words of the Lord, recorded by the prophet Joel, twenty-five
hundred years previous to their fulfillment: “The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into
blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord come.” Joel 2:31. GC 308.1

 Then she says 'budding trees of spring' and we said the rain produces this.
 We know that summer is harvest. We'd say that spring comes before the summer, so it's the rain.
 That's good but it's basic at best, when we consider what she means with 'spring' here.
 1855, 1780, 1833 seems to be the heralds of the morning. We jump steps and get gaps in our
information.
 Methodology = pen.
 Lines = Christ
 Worship lines.
 We've been using a bad pen. Thus we get info gaps.

Coming back to 10V

 10V fulfilled on Oct 22, 1844, and we identified the shut door.
 3am also was fulfilled
 Webster's dictionary definition of 'fulfill'.
o Rev 14:7
Rev 14:7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come:
and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.

 When she says 'fulfilled' I'm suggesting it's not in the wat we think in the message.
 Millerites 1798, have their eye in 1844, and the 1am is a prophecy or a prediccion or promise of
something that's about to happen. The 3am is about to

[watch the last minutes]

Class
 We tried to show the relationship between 1798 and 1840. Doing that we looked at an example
on how to read a SOP quote.

 We were seing:
o R&E : 7T = 7T = 7T = 7T
o Progression

 A plain reading of Lev 26 does not read like the Millertie, but we can show 4 is progression.
 We developed a simple structure to show P1 - probantioary time (490) - P2.
 This is in agreement with history: Judges - period in between - Kings
o Period in between (during the period of the kings) because the punishment doesn't come
right away
o They show perfect failure and God punishes them perfectly

 RH 1890 (10V)
 We showed some methodology
o 1890 (date)
 Related it to 1888
o We saw it was a letter to a brother who had been to a camp meeting in Kansas (we should
have gone there to see if we can glean light)
o We didn't look at the date the letter was written.
o We then want to look at the tittle: gives an idea of the subject she's dealing with
o We should then consider: intro, body, conclusion.
 We saw the 3am (in the paragraph intro) and considered what the 3am was a
progression [so we see the importance of the concept], not righteousness by faith.
 We said the 3am was
 Incarnation
 Sabbath
 The only way to demonstrate that is by seeing a history or a progression.

o I want to show the relationship between 1844 and 1798.

 You have 1 2 3 from 1798 to 1844
 Sabbath & Incarnation are the major subjects of the 3am (picked from EGW vision).
 We then can understand what's going on in 1888, because I'm saying it's not
justification by faith.
  justification by faith = incarnation = nature of man (H + D)
 We coul study to show the Sabbath is a sign of your righteousness. Sabbath is the proof
of you're righteouss: so you can't separate nature of man and the Sabbath.
 When J&W, and all they talk is justification by faith, (which is not true), their focus on it
becomes clear because in the church we were doing too well with the Sabbath
keeping. But the problem is it was legalism. EGW: 'our message became dry', dry in
opposition to wet = withouth the HS. Thus the 1888 message was the masge was to
bring back the HS.
 I want to highlight the importance of progression, or connecting things together.

 Is 28:17 : line of judgment and waymarks of righteounsneess.

o Imagine this waymarks were needles or pins, and what you need to do is pass a hilo through
the needles. Danger if you don't do that, you could create a waymark, like a PBM. PBM
doesn't have an eye, therefore I can't connect it. But I can go to many histories and proof it
exists, but if I can't connect it I am probably wrong.
o What we had done is: take the waymarks from histories and put it in ours. We ended up
putting it in the wrong place (after 2019).

 We are proof texting 'justification by faith', which shows us proof text is not limited to words,
because we know it's equal to 'nature of man'.

 Fulfill: fulfill a promise. 1798 is about the third angels' message. We don't teach it that way. The
first coming and is predicting the 3am. His word in Rev 14:7 is judgment (3am). So his story is
about the 3am. 1844 is about the arrival or fulfillment of that promise. 1888 is about the 3am
beign broken and us fixing it. So it's all about the 3am. That's what I mean by connecting the
waymarks.
 I could put other waymarks, like 1848, that's the Spring Revolution, but what we see internally is
that the message of the 3am, has now achieved maturity, and they now decide how they're going
to deliver the 3am. 1850, is about the chart, but we can take from there the 3am. We can thus add
wayarks, if you can't get them to fit, then you know you're probably wrong.

 The Sabbath goes from strenght to strenght, but the incarnation of man goes down (dies) to be
resurrected afterwards.
 What does the incarnation going down look like? We need to develop a story.
 We went to EW, didn't even read any chapter. Why was the GC 1911 put in place? It says that it
was to keep in the mind of the people the earlier works.
 EW was 1882

 5 chapters to M history
 Spiritualism
 Covetousness

 Let's proof text covetousness. The Bible is thus defining itself (not Bible dictionary). Covetousness
= Laodicea. You can mark this condition in 1850. We marked the 3am in 1850. So now we know it's
about the 3am. Then we use dictionary definition. The image of God is being destroyed. It's a
Satanic attack.
 Can we plug 1863 in this thread of history? It's the creation of a substitute chart. This fits with the
decline of the 3am.
 Class
The thread of history, good comments

 We had a number of dates and we talked about a theme that threads through each waymarks:
3am.
 When you can thread a story through the waymarks is serves as a strong witness that the story is
correct.

1863 (example):
 when we do 1863 we often connect that only to a chart, and sometimes also to a war. It's correct
but if we think about 1888 and the SL, we should know that there's a direct connection with 1888.
This Christian politians were trying to lead the USA against the constitution, and that movement
began in 1863: the national reform movement. And it was connected to the civil war, but what I
want us to see the direct connection between 1863 and the Sabbath. It's the Sabbath issue that
connects those two [1863 - 1888].

Laodicea
 We also began considering the theme of Laodicea, and through it we were able to connect the
3am in the other waymarks: like 1989.
 We also saw Leodicean state = Satanic attack. And if so, it's not just SDAs being lazy or careless. It's
much more evil than that.

1856:
 the movement is pretty well established now. There's a figure here, who's been in the movement
for some time, and his name appears in 1844, 1848, and now 1856]: Hiram Edson
o 10/23/1844 : after the disappointment he has a vision to understand the sanctuary
message: Christ moving from the HP to the MHP.
o The sanctuary messge isn't just understood after the disappointment, if you look at Snow's
message (he was working with a man named Star], he's got a correct understanding of what
the sancturary was. The message had some limitations, but Snow had already Bible studied
the subject and came to the right answer, but no one noticed, I'm not sure he even
unerstood the import of the studies. So we can learn that: it's not easy to miss things.
o Fanatism: group of people who had different views.

Meetings in 1846
 There's a series of conferences to define the church doctrines, and EGW was used to determine
which opinion was the correct.
 EGW's mind was locked.
 Hiram Edson is involved in this history too.

1856

 He never completes his studies, but propeses that the movement was wrong about the 2520, that
it really should be 723 to 1844.
  Argument:
o The Bible directly talks about 3 1/2 T (42m, 1260d)
o He understands that the 2520 = 2520 7T
o He develops the structure of 2 1260s with 538 in the middle.
o This stands in contradiction with what Miller developed.

*************************************************************************************
************

Another layer to Lev 26 structure (the 12 tribes)

Judges - 490 - kings
12 tribes - S,D,S - N (10) and S (2)

 Then we have the destrution of 723 and the destruction of Jerusalem

 Is Joel standing in 721 and just saying 'look what just happened, the 2520 just began in 723!'? Or
has he just seen the destruction of Samaria in 721, and saying 'look what just happened'

 'That vicious nation that looks like a lion, look what it has done'

 1780 is about Joel, Joel is about 2520, so 1780 is connected to the 2520
 Mt 24:29

2Ki 17:4 Mas el rey de Asiria halló que Oseas conspiraba; porque había enviado embajadores a So, rey
de Egipto, y no había pagado tributo al rey de Asiria, como lo hacía cada año; por lo que el rey de Asiria
le detuvo, y le aprisionó en la casa de la cárcel.
2Ki 17:5 Y el rey de Asiria invadió todo el país, y subió contra Samaria y la sitió durante tres años. [7th,
8th and 9th of Hoshea]
2Ki 17:6 En el año nueve de Oseas tomó el rey de Asiria a Samaria, y llevó a Israel cautivo a Asiria, y los
puso en Halah y en Habor, junto al río de Gozán, y en las ciudades de los medos.

2Ki 18:9 Y aconteció que en el cuarto año del rey Ezequías, que era el año séptimo de Oseas hijo de Ela
rey de Israel, subió Salmanasar rey de Asiria contra Samaria, y la sitió.
2Ki 18:10 Y la tomaron al cabo de tres años; esto es, en el año sexto de Ezequías, el cual era el año
noveno de Oseas rey de Israel, fue Samaria tomada.

*************************************************************************************
***********

Miller's 2520

 Wycfer said the 45 years after 1798 was not Paganism nor papalims but God's people. But his
error: forgot to pass the thread through the waymaks. It has to have the same theme: pain, or
punishment.
 Problem Wycfer had: this movement says it's about a scattering and a gathering. It's not incorrect
term, but it's not the theme.
 45 years is Paganism II
 Me: So the passing of thread rule proves Miller's understanding [I think]
Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be
destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all
these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

 Everybody said 'these kings' are the 10 kings of Rev 17. That's the same thing Miller, he went to
Dn 2 and asked 'what will I do with these 45 years?' and answered himself 'let's go to rev 17,
because we're near the end and you cannot ignore a chapter [17]'. So what he does makes sense.
 At the end of the 1260, the kings end their work.
 The only difference between these 2 men is how they structure it. Miller cuts one 1260 and Edson
says that's illegal. So there's no difference between the 2, it's just about approach.

 This opens up the possibility that M history wasn't going to end in 1844 but that it stretches
over.

Class
 Millerites have a different approach of Dn 11:40. There's a relationship between vs 40 and 1840. If
you want the rule of the thread of history through the waymarks, we actually see that in 1798 we
have Europe, Egypt, Syria and Turkey, you end up seeing that all these players end up being the
same players in 1840. Not only that, but you can develop a historical connection between 1798
and 1840. Their problem with this approach is that they go into vs 40, pick up the 'him' and trace it
back to Dn 11:36. Why we say that approach is wrong? They change the 'the king' and 'a king'. We
say what a silly methodology, but all they're doing is a contextual approach. And we use
grammatical arguments to say they're wrong, and we use also a chiasm to show they're wrong.

 But in Dn 2, 'these kings' and we use Rev 17 and the 4 horns of Dn 7 to change what 'these kings'
are. We're doing the same thing the M did. If so, we should be able to trace back who 'these kings'
are. Vs 37 says king = kingdom. 'The kingdoms' = the 4 kingdoms. Vs 40 say 4th kingdom, there's
only 4. In fact you get into trouble if you bring Rev 17 because there it is just one kingdom: the 10
kings will give the kingdom [singular kingdom].

Rev 17:12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet;
but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.

 We know this is correct because we can take models from the O.T. Israel divides in 2 and 10
[Israel]. It's not the kingodom of Israels, but of Israel. It's one kingdom which is comprised of 10
tibes or rulers. Same dynamics. So Dn 11:40 cannot make it 10 kingdoms.
 If you're not sure, go to vs 45: 'forasmuch' it 'equal', immediately you know there's parable, it's a
repeat. If it was woe = woe that's a repeat but no enlarge. But if we do woe = pain, then there's
R&E.

 You have body parts and materials: it's approaching the problem in two ways. It's rare that
someone looks at the body parts, we focus on the material. But if we are ok that kingdom =
material. So 44 and 45 say that kings = kingdom. Example: gold. So one of the kings of vs 45 has to
be gold. So how do you make it the 10 toes? The passage is teaching something else.
 How can we be so critical of the M when we do the same? It's very logical what we do but it's not
gramatically correct what we do with the 10 toes (Rev and Dn are the same book, the stone hits
the toes, etc).

 So we put 14 rules in a bag, and you pick one and I pick another. Or we pick the same rule and you
use it how you want and I use it how I want.
 Are the Millerite's approach of vs 40 completely wrong? Only If the 10 toes approach is completely
wrong.

Another model. Lev 26 = 26 Dn 2.

 When you look at the great controversy timeline, you pick up babel and begin to see the war
between the knigdoms of the world and the kingdom of heaven. Lev 26 is a little portion of this
history of the great controversy. Lev 26 is about God's people having sin, punished and restored
and life moves on. If that's all that history is, what purpose it serves for us? How would we call
that story? 'In the same way', parable. This natural story is a parable that's going to explain a
spiritual phenomena which is has the same structure but a very different scale.
 So Lev 26 is a parable, but we want to choose who is right (Miller or Moses). Because we're not
used to parables.. If Miller would have says that it is a parable, we would have been indoctrinated
into how parables work from our birth. EGW says 70 years captivity = 1260 years. Why can't Miller
make the 7 symbol = 2520.

The darkness of error and superstition threatened to blot out a knowledge of true religion. God’s church
on earth was as verily in captivity during this long period of relentless persecution as were the children
of Israel held captive in Babylon during the period of the exile. {PK 714.1}
But, thank God, His church is no longer in bondage.

 I don't believe that, if we did this movement wouldn't exist.

 Application is not '=' . = is parable.

 Daniel disagreeing with the argument of vs 44 and 45.

 I don't want to use logic, I want to use a thus saith the Lord. But, if you want go to Dn 7:12 and
Babylon is till the end. And even the dominion of Babylon is taken 538, Babylon is still all the way
till the end. Also Rev 17:5.

 Parminder then did Hiram Edson's 2520 line, putting the kingdoms of Dn 2 in the 1st 1260 and the
clay and iron in the 1260 papal and Daniel was forced to agree there was 4 kings. Hiram Edson is
doing the original reading of Dn. 2.
 Hiram Edson's line is the natural of Dn 2.

Class
 Rev 13:10, EGW quote on the lamb like beast.
  Tess is creating 2 lines: first ship from 1989 to SL and the other from also the ToE, but from 1798
to the SL. She marked that this is the story of the USA and the SDA (in both cases). So my point is
this is Rev 13.

Rev 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having
seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of
blasphemy.

 We have a beast in 3 chapter 12, 13, 17. It's the same animal, it's got 7 heads and 10 heads. If you
proof text it using Miller's rule, you make it the same. Then you'd compare and contrast, because
they'd be teaching something different.
 Where does Tess story lead you? To Rome, because he wants to destroy Rome. Joshua isn't going
to have a lunch there in Jericho. It's
 Everything else, the towns he goes to it's accidental, not like in the other missionary trips
 Rev 13, out of 18 verse 12 or 13 of them have nothing to do with a SL.
 Watch

Rev 13:11 And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb,
and he spake as a dragon.
 Rev 13 just like Acts 27, you need to see the story that leads you to the goal (SL or Rome).
 So it's a journeya bout the lamb's horns being broken from 1798 to the SL.

 Why can't you have protestantism after the SL?

 They will pretend to be separate to poperism but yet they're in alliance.
 Because the horn of protestantism has to have been dealt with.
 Republicanism: separation of the 3 bracnhes: king, princes and judges.
 Democracy: majority rules.
 2016: Hillary won.
 He explained the electoral college system.
 Republicanism needs to be taken before the SL.
 This lamb described as a false prophet in chapter 16:13
 13:11 = 16:13
 False prophet is going to deceive you.

Rev 13:13 And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in
the sight of men,

 O.T story allusion: fight between Elijah and prophets of Baal. In this story the beast, false prophet
brings the fire. They're flipped around.

Class

1798 1844
| |
Vs 40 1840
Europe ---
 Egypt ---
Syria ---
Turkey ---
1989 911

 The players are the same, so they're using the same methodology we are: thread of history.
 We switched from Islam to Russia because we had a misunderstanding on the role of the KS.
 We did studies on Islam with Luke 1 and Acts 9 [?], we didn't know fractals and groups, we will
need to go back and review them.
 We know Islam enters into history in 1989, proxy war afaghanistan which rises up Islam. There's
was an attempted attack to NY buildings before 911. We haven't spoken of it's development.
 We don't tend to connect a thread of history about Islam, we dind't about the KS either until now.
 We didn't observe, interpret and apply (historical grammatical method). We applied straight
away.
 It's like 2015 and 2016 for the KS.
 How did we refine our understanding of the KS, how did we do it?
o We needed some extra information which in that case came from Dn 11, and then we've
further refined it by going to Dn 8 (Pyrrhus). Combing the chapters, we see that 1 horn to 4
horns to 2 horns. In Dn 8:9 and we transition from Greece to Rome, it's not so simple from 1
to 4 to 2, so we found extra information to refine it further. Cherry picking.

 It's going to happen (at least partially, if not fully) using Millerite history, every player is the same
as today. We can go back to that history and see the restraining of radical Islam.
 We don't trace the history of Islam and the cause and effect of 1798 and 1840.
 Smith is pledging, copying and paste (don't focus on him).
 There are not 2 compeeting methodologies, we say 'vs 36 'the king' Millerites can't just change it
to 'a king', and the whole history, from the papacy to France.'. But can they? Can they be applied
to France, who is that 'God of forces'? May be it's Jehovah or maybe someone else..

Class
Recap

Parables are really about how to understand structures. The way we normally think is symbols and how
to define them. If I say lion = (and then we know that it's a parable),

lion = Christ or Babylon/Assyria or Satan or us/Judah

That is not incorrect, not error. But is a very basic understanding on how parables work. In addition to
that, I want us to think about them as structures. Let's say:

lion devours = Satan brings spiritual death

Repeat and enlarge: you start with Satan and then you repeat Satan: S = S. The problem is that you
don't get any additional information, it doesn't help you. Then you do the enlargement: S = L. Amplify =
to give additional information.
Now explain some characteristics of Satan using this parable. We're not saying that Satan's got a big
beard. What characteristic we're going to pick up? Pray, his methodology of hunting (stalking
technique). He observes, he circles around us, how comes the prey doesn't notice? He makes sure you
can't detect him as he approaches you, uses camouflage. We can use all the characteristics we know
about lions. Once he got to you, you can't escape. If you study this animals, sometimes they just kill for
the sake of killing and they just keep eating and eating. They target the weak animal, not paying
attention, not the strongest male. He is a good strategist.

Your understanding of Satan is as good as your understanding of lion is. If you think a lion is a good pet,
then it doesn't serve its purpose.

This case is simple but it could get more complex, and that's when practice and team work enters into
the scene.

Dan 11:40

We see it as part a and b, so it's not a progression, it's a repeat and enlargement (even though it's a
progressive history). But this is a special R&E: Chiasm (mirror). Why are these so useful compared to a
normal R&E? It gives us the missing information.

Balance method. We know 3 fruits with their weights, and if the balance is in balance, we know what
fruit is on the box. Unlike the word association (Satan = lion): there's no information on the name itself,
then you give it a symbol, and then you understand the missing information (Satan is a strategists that
plans to kill you for eternity). But in Chiasm approaches the problem differently. The distance to the
mirror gives you the info you need. In our example we have KS, him, KN, him. If we did a word study on
the word 'him' we wouldn't get so far. We don't do it trying to understand what a symbol is. It's the
structure that gives us that. Note: it's the same methodology but subtilty different. It's still repeat and
enlarge. We balance Satan against a lion, but we're just taking the natural characteristics of a lion and
apply them to Satan. But when we deal with a chiasm, we can't do the same thing, at least not that
easily. There's not enough information on the 'him' for us. So we use this structure to prove what the
him is: one is the KN and the other the KS. So we don't do a study on what the south is, that would be
the second step. This is not guess work, but it's a proper literary methodology.

There's a person named Warning, he is German. We use the chiasms to prove things. Then it says 'at the
ToE'. And thus we put them line upon line, they both have to begin at the ToE. There's a deadly wound
in part 1, there's has to be a deadly wound in part 2. There can be some differences: when the KS
attacks he does it by himself, and the KN does it with chariots and ships. And since we understand who
they are, we can know why the differences.

Then we went to see how the Millerites and saw how their approached the verse. The philosophical
problem is that we attribute this understanding to U. Smith. And because EGW praises that book, people
say everything in it is correct. We didn't go there because I think it's not a profitable discussion. But
Smith cut and past from Josiah Litch. In the year 42 he explains verse 40. And his answer which we have
said it's completely wrong, crazy people that make the countries literal. Hopefully we're more
comfortable that they're using sound information. What's my launching pad to say they're correct? That
they connect 1798 with 1844 with a thread of history. We've been using that for a long time, but we
didn't understand what we're saying. Is 28:17 says that the line is a symbol of judgment, and every
single one of this waymarks is a symbol of justice. We've been mentioning this for 2 or 3 years, if I say
justice, justice, justice, they're same word, so I can put an equal between them. Every single time you
see a waymark you are obliged to find justice. If I went to 1989 you should be able to develop a story
that talks about justice.

(Christ coming in their time is the foundation of this study)

1798 to 1840 = 1840 42 years (1260)

Class
We went to verse 40 and once more we see the relationship between R&E and progression: it's ToE1
and ToE2. But it's also a repetition, a special one: a Chiasm, which has the purpose of creating
information that's not there.
We then went to Is. 28:17, it's not my intention to show how we make application of that to make it a
reform line but if you go to verse 16, it's about construction, and you are constructing something in Zion,
like the temple or the house of David. That's a superficial reading of verse 16. But the backdrop of it all is
the breaking of a covenant, so the symbol of the re establishment of the covenant. God is using the
imagery of a building which is being likened to His people. He is going to check it, measure it to see if it's
square or fits properly, and anything that's not in harmony with the plan will be destroyed. To go from
there to make it a reform line is an application. The destruction is from the KN, either the Assyrians or
Babylonish (depending on the point you want to make).

The vertical waymarks we should always see righteousness exposed. If not, either you created an
incorrect waymark or you're not understanding the waymark properly.

Litch gives us a story about 1798, (written in 1841), he is going to show us 4 people.

Him Europe (France)

KS Egypt
KN Turkey
Syria

All the battles are strategic, Napoleon does them for strategic reasons. Litch describes the events of
1840, which is Rev 9, describes the European power with Egypt and Turkey and he mentions Syria. So all
the powers are mentioned 42 years later. And the tension between Egypt and Turkey is related to the
tension between the same in 1798. So there's a connection between the waymarks.

The problem is this version gives us 3 people in vs 40, and our version gives us 2.

Most of the O.T stories have more than one fulfillment, as an application. But in this case of vs 40,
doesn't seem so straight forward.

[Me] What we do: KS = France, KN = Papacy - KN = USA?, KS = Russia

Even though the KS's application in our approach changes application wise, it's still 1 person (the KS).
Dan 11:13 For the king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multitude greater than the former,
and shall certainly come after certain years with a great army and with much riches.
Dan 11:14 And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers
of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall.

 Take away the 'many' there's 3 people. In the natural way of reading verse 40 gives us 3 people
like the Millerites, not 2 like us.

Parminder vs Heber and the problem of 'same structure'

 Parminder gave the example of Israel and Judah (10 and 2), and the application 200 years
aftwerwards of being Gentiles and Jews.

Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Rom 9:25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her
beloved, which was not beloved.

 Tess' comment on how EGW writes prior to 1863 is an interesting point.

Class
What's the relationship between 1798 and 1840?

 1798 = 1A and 1840 = 1E.

 1842 the chart is made.
 April 1844 = 2A
 July to August = MC = 2E

What characteristics the MC has? How do we know we are in the MC?

 Is it always something connected to time? (formalization of the time message)

 The announcement/pointing to a shut door.
 Visual sign, you can see in the present.
 Fanaticism ceases? What is fanaticism? When you reject the message? So can I put 'disagreement
ceases'?

Time
o 'The kingdom of heaven is at hand' and 'the hour of judgment is come'. It's the same
message in Christ's history and the Millerites.

Fanaticism
o The message is in total agreement? What does that mean? With what is it in agreement?
o In the summer of 1844 these group was creating musical items to create an emotional
response, and there's was a fight between them and the ones that followed S. Snow. These
people suddenly left the camp.
 o There's the leaders not accepting the message, the Watertown people that want to bring
unity using music (in our history with ideas of sanctification in the future), and other people
accepting the message of Snow and uniting.
o History of Christ: Christ is not the leader, he is Snow. The disciples are the leaders, not all on
board.

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. {10MR 311.1}

It was not the proclamation of the second advent that caused fanaticism and division. These
appeared in the summer of 1844, when Adventists were in a state of doubt and perplexity
concerning their real position. The preaching of the first angel’s message and of the “midnight
cry” tended directly to repress fanaticism and dissension. Those who participated in these
solemn movements were in harmony; their hearts were filled with love for one another and for
Jesus, whom they expected soon to see. The one faith, the one blessed hope, lifted them above
the control of any human influence, and proved a shield against the assaults of Satan. {GC 398.2}

 Dictionary definition of fanaticism: excessive enthusiasm, wild and extravagant ideas and notions
of religion.
 So the fanatics would be the Watertown people, and the dissention would be the leaders.
 Fanaticism: believe the message but be too exited, like say 'let's stop everything and sing a bit, or
let's have an all night prayer meeting'.

 What does she mean by 'first angel' and 'midnight cry'. What period she means when she says 'the
preaching of the first angel'.

 'fanaticism and division appeared in the summer of 1844'. So she can't be speaking of any period
previous to that.
 'these solemn movements' = these messages [1am, MC]
 So there's two independent movement

 The message of the first angel ends in in April 20, until it is picked up again because of the MC
message, which gives it back the time of the proclamation of time.
 She is comparing and contrasting two movements. She is doing a flashback in history, comparing
to a previous history that had similar characteristics.

A quote for this: 1888 939.3

Class - 14 Feb 2019

1798 and 1840, you can make a strong argument that it's the same powers. For a long time al we've
understood about Islam is its restriction at 911, we understand this as being Al Quaeda, ISIS, like an
independent movement. But through this history we can identify actually 2 Islamic powers: Egypt,
Turkey, and Syria is involved also because it’s a region of Turkey's influence. So it seems to me the
dynamics are more complex than just the restraining.

We usually focus on Turkey in 1840, why? Because of Rev 9.

Alpha Omega
1E King 4E King
4 I King 2nd woe 1 I King
| 391y 15d |
1449 h,d,m,y 1840

Alpha and Omega: if you have a structure, the beginning and the end have similar characteristics, and
the key or the skill is identifying them, because there could be differences as well. The structure or
prophecy is a story that's some kind of link between the beginning and the end.

We are comfortable with explaining by examples, but we should switch to a 'concept model'.

The problem is the noise. You need to pick the right pieces of information. Who decides what is noise
and what's not? You have to make sure that whatever the story you're developing is correct.
So there's an 'it' like a couple fighting, or a singular thing, or a group of people. But there's a story or a
prophecy, and what we want to make a framework. Is 28:10, 13, 17. 17 actually gives us this structure (a
line and waymarks). This is a story of 'the thing'. And it has a beginning and an end. As an example now,
my subject is Turkey. I want to start my story in 1449, and because I'm using a funny calendar, I get to
1842. So when I apply things, I have a power in 1449, and in 1842 I don't have a relevant event. So I have
to go back and check everything. Turkey is right, we know that. In 1449 we had 'power', may be that's
wrong. Or 1842 could be wrong.

Example of 1989 to 911. The priests is the thing, and there's a number 30. Then we go to priest and we
find a number 30. The priest are born, then we can develop a story in 2019 that they come to an age.

If we want to speak about a wall coming coming down and a wall coming up in 1989 and 2019. 'It' = wall.
This is a story about a wall. So you got a country that's divided into 2 by wall. So in 1989 there's a divided
country (germany) being united. And in 2019 we have a country being divided into 2. But

My subject is Jerusalem

Class 17-02-2019
The restriction of radical Islam

There's a relationship between 1798 and 1840. It's 1A and 1E. As soon as we do that, we pass thread of
history. The way we approach 1840, is we say it's the restrain of radical Islam. We make an application
to 911, and their ability to travel and they closed their bank accounts (their liberty restrained). But in
1840 there was 4 powers that intervened in a conflict between 2 Islamic powers. We picked up the
restraining of Turkey to 4 powers. We ignore the details. That's the place we actually depart from what
really happened in history, because today (2001) the group who was restrained were the radicals. If you
go to 1840, the group that was being restrained and were becoming radicalized was Egypt, not Turkey.
So we conflate two stories together. If we want to mark the restraining of radical Islam we should mark
Egypt not Turkey because in 2001 there's was no benign Islamic country restrained. So you can see
straight away that 1798 and 1840 don't have the same thread, at least as how we approach it. So are we
missing some piece of information or is this all noise that shouldn't worry us?

The thread of this history

Why would we focus on Turkey in 1840? What's that fixation? Because of Rev 9. We understand that
1840 became a fulfillment of prophecy, given in 4 steps: hour, month, day and year (391 + 15). We see
this structure and see and alpha and omega, our symbol for the structure being the second woe. But
what is it a story of? Who do we say gets restrained in 1840? We need as story about something or
someone: the Ottoman Empire. We drop the word Turkey, because in some way that's noise, because
it's not really about Turkey itself but the Ottoman empire. When we tell the story we don't use the word
restrain, but use 'the rise and the fall of the Ottoman empire'.

When we talk about the rise and fall of nations, say like Russia. When is its fall? Panium. But what does
Panium look like? Are Americans going to win the battle, get rid of Russians and move over?

In 1839 there was a sultan ruling in Turkey, and after what we mark the end of the 2nd woe, August 11,
the same sultan was ruling in Turkey afterwards! It was not like a Prussian prince? No! But the empire as
it was functioning begins to collapse. But the empire still continues on.

We've got another theme: Egypt is being restrained in 1840. And another theme is that Turkey is being
restrained. Turkey is doing it voluntarily, and Egypt is by force. So it's not so straight forward as saying
'the restriction of Islam'? On of them is a prophecy which takes us to the rise and fall of Turkey. But the
restriction of a radical part isn't a prophecy, it's about Egypt.

Then shouldn't our focus on 911 be different than it currently is? We can see radical Islam being
restrained, but is that the prophecy part?

In 1798 France comes into Egypt, it's a strategic move to deal with north Africa and control the
Mediterranean part of Europe. We know there was war between France and England. Egypt had the
mamluks, who were like slaves, or soldier. They are used by Egypt to push back against the French.
According to Millerite understanding of that history, Dn 11:40, Egypt would win, largely because of this
mamluk ('property').

| |

Alpha and Omega

There's a structure that more often than not is a prophecy, there's a story, and history. We can now use
Is 28:10,13,17 to see we have a start and end, and we need to understand what those 2 are teaching us.
The way we do that is understanding the history.

So we should look for an Islamic power that submitted voluntarily to the west (if we see Islam as the
east). In 1840 with Turkey, what we did is look at the cause of the fall, but the cause is not in prophecy.

In 1840 if we follow the thread of the prophecy how would we even get to 911? Because it's the
voluntary submission of an Islamic power. We should see two Islamic powers, like Iraq and Iran.

Back to the history

1798, we have the Mamluk. Egypt wants to rebel against Turkey. It's not a normal rebellion, their
mission is take over Turkey, why does everybody love Turkey? Why Constantine move there? It was a
nice place. It's a strategic point to connect two countries. And if you wanted to invade a country, it's
extremely hard to do it by boat. So Egypt wants to take the world (Europe), it's not America. Europe is
the world, and the only you're going to do it is by a land attack. They have a two fold strategy. If they
take over Turkey (kill people on the top), you multiplied your army (get the Turkish army) and have a
formidable army. That's why the Europeans are scared, not because there's war in the middle east, but
because someone wants to come to conquer them.

The geography model

We are not used to use it to understand end time prophecy. It's a valid model. The geography directs
our understanding.

Would you be happy if I said this is a story of president Trump?

1. Cyrus
2. Cambyses
3. Smerdis
4. Darius
5. Xerxes = Ahasuerus

So it's the story of Eshter. He used the geographical model to make the story

The radicalized people of Egypt in 1840 were from the same tribe (Wasabi). They are hired mercenary,
may be 'property', the mamluk. The mamluk in 1798 and the Wasabi in 1840.

The more you look the stronger the evidence between 1798 and 1840, which is what we'd expect.

Class 18 Feb 2019

I didn't take notes

 Class 19 Feb 2019
We continued to look at the relationship between 1A and 1E, we saw that Josiah Litch was the person
doing this connecting. We have a singular period connected by 42 years, same people involved (Europe
and Islam), war at the beginning and at the end, and they're connected: there's a group of mercenaries
being used as catalyzers. What relevance does that have for us? It's not to show 1989 and 911, why are
we trying to show the relationship between Europe and Islam?

We ended up speaking about Mt 24 and if Christ was going to come or not for the disciples

Mat 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon
shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be
shaken:
Mat 24:30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of
the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and
great glory.
Mat 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together
his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
Mat 24:32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves,
ye know that summer is nigh:

Dan 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of
heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
Dan 7:14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and
languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his
kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

vs 32 has to be an explanation of the previous verses because of vs 33:

Mat 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.

Sun, moon, stars

see
Leaf Summer
| | |

The sign has to be the leaf, not he summer. It's a sign of a man. "All these things" has to be the sign.

The mouring (vs 30) has to be the sign of the Son of man. 'These things' includes the sign of the Son of
man, because it says that he is 'at the doors', he is not coming. And then it says:

Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

What are 'these things' of vs 34? All of what we read in vs 29-31, which includes the sign and the event
itself.
 Class 19 Feb 2019 Afternoon
Jesus' answer

Christ’s words had been spoken in the hearing of a large number of people; but when He was alone,
Peter, John, James, and Andrew came to Him as He sat upon the Mount of Olives. “Tell us,” they said,
“when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of Thy coming, and of the end of the world?”
Jesus did not answer His disciples by taking up separately the destruction of Jerusalem [1] and the
great day of His coming. [2] He mingled the description of these two events. Had He opened to His
disciples future events as He beheld them, they would have been unable to endure the sight. In mercy
to them He blended the description of the two great crises, leaving the disciples to study out the
meaning for themselves. When He referred to the destruction of Jerusalem [1], His prophetic words
reached beyond that event to the final conflagration in that day when the Lord shall rise out of His place
to punish the world for their iniquity, when the earth shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover
her slain. [2] This entire discourse was given, not for the disciples only, but for those who should live in
the last scenes of this earth’s history. {DA 628.1}

 Does that mean the destruction of Jerusalem was a picture of the destruction of Jerusalem? Can I
do: Jerusalem = the world? Yes. We know they're two separate events, but at one level they're the
same.

Joe 2:28 And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons
and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:

Joe 2:29 And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.

Joe 2:31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the
terrible day of the LORD come.

When you read Acts 2:16, 20, we can learn of applications. Is Mt 24 two different applications, or it had
two original intents?

They ask:
1. When Jerusalem going to be destroyed
2. What's the sign
3. When is the end of the world?

She says He doesn't answer them separately, but mingle them. What does that mean?

Let's stay with what we got, they ask 3 question. She [EGW] breaks the 3 question into 2 events:
destruction of Jerusalem, destruction of the world. 'two great crisis', 'the final conflagration of the
world'.
So they want to know the 3 things. He doesn't answer them separately, even if EGW says so.

Btw: she says 2nd coming = plagues (the same event).

How is He mingling them? She is not telling us how, I don't think. The way He mingles is, He had
question 1 (Jerusalem) and question 2 and 3 (ToE) and a blank space in between. So He mixes it by
uniting the story, with 'some days'.

From the destruction of Jerusalem, Christ passed on rapidly to the greater event, the last link in the
chain of this earth’s history,—the coming of the Son of God in majesty and glory. Between these two
events, there lay open to Christ’s view long centuries of darkness, centuries for His church marked with
blood and tears and agony. Upon these scenes His disciples could not then endure to look, and Jesus
passed them by with a brief mention. “Then shall be great tribulation,” He said, “such as was not since
the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be
shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened.” For
more than a thousand years such persecution as the world had never before known was to come upon
Christ’s followers. Millions upon millions of His faithful witnesses were to be slain. Had not God’s hand
been stretched out to preserve His people, all would have perished. “But for the elect’s sake,” He said,
“those days shall be shortened.” {DA 630.5}

What's He doing to these days? He is shortening them. It could be a couple of weaks! So in doing so, he
is kind of making the 2nd coming the same as AD 70. So AD 70 is the beginning of the end, and the way
He put it like it would be a couple of days. In doing so, He eded up with 2 dispensations. That's merging
or mixing. It's not that simple as cuting the line and putting it underneeth.

How many days? They start in AD 70, and go to the ToE.

But it's not AD 70, Mar 13:18 is 66AD. So they begin in 66 ad.

Jesus migles: He makes 'those days' ambiguous.

EGW's version: 34, 66, 77, 538, 1798, 2nd.

The disciples ask the wrong question, and Jesus doesn't help them. If you ask the wrong question, you
get the wrong answer.

Class 21/02/2018
In vs 40 we chose to look at the KN and KS. But our attention has been so fixed to the KN. We pretty
much got that correct, even from the very beginning, not about Trump but we would come to the last
president, events before the SL, and resurrection of this king. What we did do is miss the KS. The way we
approach the verse cause us misunderstandings. What caused us the problems? We said the KS ends in
1898. We didn't read the words properly. May be we're like the disciples in Mt 24. What was their
assumption? They mingled the destruction of Jerusalem and of the world by saying it's the same. What
they didn't anticipate is that there was something in between them: the days. Jesus' answer doesn't
destroy their understanding because they didn't know how long the days were!

So, when we read the words of Dn 11:40 it ends in 1989. It ends with the death of the KS. When does he
die? 1989 (1991 but we ignored it, we said we want to focus on 1989). We combined the two dates
(1989 and 1991; 1798 and 1799). We said 1798 is the death. We said 1989 because we saw the death of
the KS with our own eyes. Then we said: in the early days, because time is short, the next event is the SL.
Perhaps we have longer time than we think till the SL.
So we had vs 40 to 1989, and and vs 41 at the SL. And with that modeling we get Pyrrhus' history as an
extra-Biblical history. So then we took it all the way to the SL. But we have many events before the SL,
and where do we get all of them? [me: there's no Bible nor SOP quote]. Is 2014 in the Bible? Or is extra
Biblical? It's not, if you can construct 2014 with structures, it's just as valid a waymark as 1989. So to
create a waymark you can have words or structure. It's very easy to make errors with words, but not so
much with structures. So Pyrrhus is not extra Biblical, but you have to go to wikipedia.

EGW says that Dn 11 has almost reached its complete fulfillment. She is already in Dn 11 a. And her
proof is what? I this passage she says that if your look at the rise of the papacy over 1000 years, its
already beginning. Because the history is almost fulfilled. She takes us from 30 to 36. She says these
verses which are the rise of the KN will show us the rise of the KN. Vs 36 says 'the king' and it has to be
the same as in vs 30 -35. Josiah Litch says no, that 'the king' is another new king. And France is the king.
We say it's wrong because EGW says it is. (and other reasons).

Dan 11:35 And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them
white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed.

Dan 11:36 And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself
above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the
indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.

So vs 36 is where? After the ToE? Because if you go from 36 to 39, vs 40 says ToE. So you have a
problem. The way most people understand that is repeat and enlarge.

If you go to France, who is France? Clos to 1798 France is the KS. Was France always the KS? No. What
was it before? KN.

Today we say that the US is the KN. And if you think that is an anomaly, like America being a puppet of
the papacy.

Class 26 Feb 2019

There's a war between the years 29-41 which is called the second Syrian war, and the first Syrian war is
from 31 to 33. Also lasted 2 years. It's called the Syrian war because there was a struggle over this
territory between Egypt and Turkey.

Why is this of interest? Because they are the KN and the KS fighting over Syria. If we recall what Tess
was teaching us. If we can all 1798 'the cause', 1840 is 'the effect'. Note that we're dealing with Litch's
interpretation. So there's a cause an effect relationship between this 2 events. And this understanding
which people normally call Smith's understanding, we are saying it has merit of investigation. Even if
Heber is correct and it's all wrong, I'd still argue that the incorrectness still has merith and I think it
would allow us to understand Islam at the end of the world in a more comprehensive fashion because
this is an alpha and an omega (1798 and 1840). One of the characteristics is that they should be the
same, and then you can see it as a parable, comparing and contrasting those 2 histories. And 1798 you
have Europe and Islam, and the same in 1840. It's not just any type of Islam, it's the same. Turkey, Egypt
and Syria. And in this history we have Europe (we'd put France and England), and in 1840 we'd put (4
European countries, but also France is involved, so I'll put France and England). So we've got the same
people. In this history the reason why there's even an issue going on, that England and France are here,
is because France wants to take over, essentially the north coast of Africa to block England's trade
routes. England's got trade routes to other parts of the world and they want to go by the Mediterranean
through north Africa, an area which we are probably familiar with, the Suez cannal. It wasn't built then,
but it's a convenient route to get to India and Assia. The only other way to get there is all the way
around Africa. Not only is longer, but Cape Town is a dangerous way. So it's much nicer to basically cut
across the little bit of Egypt. So France wants to cut that road. So if this is a war between France and
England, this is a proxy war.

There was a naval battle over Syria, so we already knew that England was involved. Now we've just
added that there was a war between Egypt and Turkey, Egypt is a slave state of Turkey, and they're
struggling over Syria. We know that Turkey is the KN and Egypt is the KS. Now we have to remember
what Tess taught us: it's significant because the KN and the KS today are fighting over Syria.

We've had problems with this idea of a body or a neck, because we saw that Seleucus never entered
into Egypt. So we struggle if the KS died or not. Tess was saying that the battle was over a place called
Cole Syria.

It's interesting that s 4-15 is the alpha and vs 40 the omega (of Dn 11). So that and that the name is the
same, to me is evidence. You have 2000 years in between.

And also 40a is the same as 40b, and 40a is Syiria (Turkey and Egypt over Syria) and in our history it was
USA and USSR (over Europe: spheres of influence). In part a is the middle east (Islam, 1798) and in part b
it's Europe (1989). The USSR was beheaded and lost the body. We are learingin that if you loose your
body means to be dead, weather you put your foot on the neck (and you go to the O.T passages that use
that language, or you say that the flood or the blood comes up to the neck, it's all talking about dead).
Then we began to talk about resurrection, and our understanding gets confirmed more and more.

Cole Syria is today Lebanon (and Syria).

So the war that happened in 1798-1840 is very similar to the war that happened in Dn 11 with Seleucus
and Ptolemy. And also to the war that's going on in 1989 history. It's a conceptual change, which we
need to begin to consider. Changing the language, which means to change the concept of what's going
on. Because in the old days, you'd go and destroy someone's castle, take possession and live there. It's
what the MP and the Babylonians did. When Manasseh was taken captive, it was the Assyrians, EGW
names the king and says he got taken to their temporary capital. So the Babylonians or Chaldeans take
the capital, own it. Then the MP do. We're so used to this concept of taking geography. Pagan Rome
moves from the city of Rome to Byzantine: from Italy to Turkey, and then the papacy will take that
geography (Rome). It's just this idea of taking people's homes. When we get to 1989 we expect the
Americans to take over the house of the KS. What's the home of the KS in 1989? Russia. Because
America didn't do so, we said we made a mistake, because we were so conditioned to taking someone's
property. And now we're learning there's another way of approaching thing equally valid but more
subtle. The term that Tess has chosen to use is 'spheres of influence'. We need to become familiar with
what that actually means. If you chop someone's body off, we normally say the other way around
(chopp someone's head). So there are dead, and you might say 'I don't like your home, I prefer mine.
We're not thinking about aking someone's house, because we don't even like it. We just want to destroy
it and in the words of verse 40 overflow and passover. We want to move on, not stay there.

So that's why this concept of 'spheres of influences' becomes critically to understand.

It was crazy for France to attack each other. Once they tried to and it almost destroyed Spain. So it
becomes and imposiblity really, to directly attack your enemy because you're so balanced in power. So
here in 1798 they decide to get to a proxy war instead. They were fighting over the spheres of influences
because they were a source of revenue.

Question: is 1831 to 1841 a 10 year proxy war? Can we do 1831 = 2011 and 1841 = 2021? Anabbeth is
saying it's a 2 year war on each side with a gap of 6 years in between. Can you extend this as a 10 year
war?

Faithfully the prophets continued their warnings and their exhortations; fearlessly they spoke to
Manasseh and to his people; but the messages were scorned; backsliding Judah would not heed. As an
earnest of what would befall the people should they continue impenitent, the Lord permitted their king
to be captured by a band of Assyrian soldiers, who “bound him with fetters, and carried him to
Babylon,” their temporary capital. This affliction brought the king to his senses; “he besought the Lord
his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers, and prayed unto Him: and He was
entreated of him, and heard his supplication, and brought him again to Jerusalem into his kingdom.
Then Manasseh knew that the Lord He was God.” 2 Chronicles 33:11-13. But this repentance,
remarkable though it was, came too late to save the kingdom from the corrupting influence of years of
idolatrous practices. Many had stumbled and fallen, never again to rise. {PK 382.3}

Class -27 Feb 2019

Rev 9:13 And the sixth angel sounded, and I heard a voice from the four horns of the golden altar which
is before God,
Rev 9:14 Saying to the sixth angel which had the trumpet, Loose the four angels which are bound in the
great river Euphrates.

4 sultans and on top Mahmut II.

War on Islam after 911

Guerrilla warfare is a form of irregular warfare in which a small group of combatants, such as
paramilitary personnel, armed civilians, or irregulars, use military tactics including ambushes, sabotage,
raids, petty warfare, hit-and-run tactics, and mobility to fight a larger and less-mobile traditional
military. Guerrilla groups are a type of violent non-state actor.

A paramilitary is a semi-militarized force whose organizational structure, tactics, training, subculture,

and (often) function are similar to those of a professional military, but which is formally not part of a
government's armed forces.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian%E2%80%93Ottoman_War_(1839%E2%80%931841)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian%E2%80%93Ottoman_War_(1831%E2%80%931833)

Maybe:

Iraq = Turkey
Afghanistan = Egypt (all of it is radicalized)

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

 When it says Syria it doesn't say north (which it is) but uses East
 We have Syria (Seleucus empire) and Egypt (Ptolemaic empire). Just like in the history of Raphia.
 Why glorious land introduced here?

Dn 11
 Egypt = world
 Glorius land = USA
 KS = USSR [we know it's from the East, like Syria]

For us the key area is the USA, the glorious land.

In the fall of Greece, the most difficult or intriguing is Egypt. If you ask anyone, which one story they
know, there's even movies of Actium.

So why is the glorious land introduced in the history? It's in between them, so instead of saying 'Cole
Syria' it just says glorious land. Wasn't Lebanon supposed to be part of the glorious land? Also Panium
was at the border of the Jordan. So the glorious land is introduced, if we are comfortable to the idea of
the glorious land being connected to Syria, then it is because it was the land that Greece had. And this is
about parallel kingdoms, about Greece falling and Rome ascending, that transition. So not only Rome
takes the north and the south, but also this strategic land.

Sept 11, 1840 there's the war in which Beirut is taken by European countries (they thus take Syria)
{Litch's quote}

Class 28 Feb 2019

Why do we want to make the connection that it is Josiah Litch [me: reminds me of king Josiah] that
writes this?
Which year is the ToE if you're Litch? 1798. Now, he is not famous for commenting on that year, but on
1840. Not only he directs us to Dn 11 but he takes us to Rev 9:15.

We do know there's a conflict between Egypt and Turkey, but there's also another country: Syria. The
two Islamic powers are fighting over Syria.
The 4 European nations involved because they're fearful of the consecuences. So in 1840 we've got
Turkey, Egypt and Syria. But there are more than 4 players. We've identified this as France and England.

Litch explains that there's a struggle between Europe and Islam (it's France and England, and Turkey,
Egypt and Syria). So you've got the same players in 1798 and 1840.

What's the relationship between the 4 European nations and France and England? At these level we're
developing a logic between these two waymarks. After that we try to go to the details to see what's
going on.

If we have the same people, it's much more strongly likely that the two powers are connected.

We put another layer adding two wars: the Egyptian Ottoman war or the Syrian war. Each last 2 years
and the dates: 31-33 and 39-41. We've drawn other concepts from this history: there's a conflict
between Egypt and Turkey over Syiria. We've seen that's a parallel to the battle of Panium fight over
Cole Syria (Seleucus and Ptolemy). So we have 3 conflicts dealing with the same location. We could put
Seleucus, Cole Syria and Ptolemy but not at Raphia but Panium, but Ipsus.

Repeat:
1840: Turkey (KN), Egypt (KS) fighting over Syria.

Raphia and Panium: Seleucus (KN), Ptolemy (KS) fighting over the same area (Cole Syria).

Ipsus: Seleucus , Ptolemy fighting over (it's not a fight between the KN and the KS but the KS has just
stolen property that belongs to the KN, the KN turned around pretending it was all ok because Seleucus
owned Babylon of the Greek empire, he was a general. He owned it, someone takes it from him and
runs away to Egypt, and Ptolemy helps him. He becomes his general. We move forward, Seleucus takes
back his country, becomes the KN and when the KS stills part of his territory, he remembers his debt
with the KS. Eventough the KS doesn't say it, so when he steals his land he turns ablind eye. So
remember a debt being payed)

Sometimes they are fighting and sometimes not, but these conflict over Syria keeps on coming up: 1840,
Raphia and Panium, Ipsus.

Dn 8:9 : the Seleucid empire and the Ptolemic empire. What we'd normally do is take the glorious land
and think that was Israel. Not talking about the geography but God's kingdom. But Daniel 8:9 is about
what story? It's the rising of the little horn and the fall of other kingdoms.

The little horn is the king of fearce countenance of vs 23. So vs 9 is the rise of Rome and the end of
kingdoms? What kingdoms? Vs 9 speaks aobut what kingdoms? Singular: Greece. It’s the battle of
Actium. What does Greece look like?