“In view of the recent events that have captured global attention, related to the death of Pope Francis and the appointment of his successor, Leo XIV, and the reaction within our church to this new appointment, we are forced to consider these events, which have led to hearing from our pulpits a plethora of assumptions that once again alert our brotherhood to the imminent implementation of a universal Sunday law, promoted by the new pope with the support of the United States, against the Sabbath-keeping Adventists. The main purpose of this article is to analyze how well-founded our interpretation is, that the little horn of Daniel 7 was represented by the papacy, and consequently, is represented by Pope Leo XIV, from whom Adventists expect a persecution of the saints by promulgating a law that will make Sunday observance mandatory. Our theologians point out that in Daniel 7:21, 25 it is prophesied that the little horn would make war against the saints and prevail over them for 1,260 days, which we interpret as corresponding to 1,260 years. They also point out that in verse 8, the emergence of the aforementioned little horn is prophesied, before which three of the first horns were uprooted, which were represented by the Herules, the Vandals, and the Ostrogoths, who were progressively defeated, culminating with the power of the Ostrogoths, ‘the last’ barbarian tribe, which according to our prophetic interpretation received the mortal blow in the year 538 AD, facilitating the rise of the papacy to initiate papal supremacy and the persecution of the saints prophesied in chapter 7 of Daniel. The problem with the previous interpretation is that history does not validate either the dates or the events supposedly occurring on the mentioned dates. Next, we will review what history records in this regard, highlighting our inconsistencies and interpretive inaccuracies. 1 – The Ostrogoths were not definitively eliminated or received the mortal blow as we indicated in 538; a year in which it is claimed, papal supremacy began; because in the years 540, 546, and 550, they returned and sacked Rome, to the extent that the Ostrogoth king Totila during the sack of Rome in 546, tore down the city walls, dissolved the Senate, and minted coins depicting himself in imperial clothing. On the other hand, it is worth noting that in the year 538, the only event recorded in history is the lifting of the siege that the Ostrogoths had imposed on the city, due to the news of the arrival of new troops sent by Justinian, an event that is not significant compared to the forced abandonment of Rome by the Ostrogoths in 536, due to the arrival of Justinian’s army with the purpose of liberating the city from the rule of that barbarian tribe. At this point, it is important to highlight the acknowledgment made by our esteemed historian Mervin Maxwell in an article titled ‘Beginning and End of the 1,260 Days: Are 538 and 1798 Appropriate Dates?’ In this article, Maxwell states that the year 538 arises from a posteriori calculation starting from the year 1798, from which the mentioned 1,260 years in the prophecy are subtracted. Maxwell also asserts that we should not be ashamed of this process, as knowledge moves from the ‘known’ – which is nothing more than an assumption – to the unknown, which in turn is another conjecture that is not supported by history. 2 – Before the year 538, the papacy was subject to the will of the Ostrogoths, who ruled Rome from 493 until 536 when they were expelled from the city. After that date, the papacy, free from the dominance of that barbarian tribe, had the path cleared to exercise political-religious dominion in the Western Roman Empire, with the support of Justinian, the Eastern Roman Emperor. Unfortunately, things did not unfold as expected, because Pope Vigilius, who held the pontificate in 538, was taken prisoner seven years later and sent to Constantinople, where he was held captive for approximately ten years by order of the Emperor Justinian. At this point, we must ask ourselves: How could papal supremacy, or rather the persecution of the saints for 1,260 years, have begun in 538 if the one who was persecuted, arrested, and held captive for the rest of his pontificate was Pope Vigilius? It is surprising that in almost two hundred years of our existence as a religious denomination, we have not noticed this significant inconsistency, and that our theologians of the 21st century continue to repeat such a misguided interpretation. 3 – The Ostrogoths were not the last barbarian tribe to which the papacy was subject, because after the definitive defeat of these, the Lombards emerged, who ravaged Rome for approximately 200 years, to the point that in 767 they deposed Pope Constantine II and appointed Stephen IV in his place. In the centuries following the year 538, the papacy was subject to the Eastern emperors, the Lombards, the Moors, the Normans, and the German emperors. The papacy was so fragile that at one point, the papal seat remained vacant for more than a year, awaiting the approval of the ruling power. In the 14th century, the papacy entered a new crisis due to the Babylonian Captivity and the Papal Schism, where there were simultaneously two popes, what forced European monarchs to order the capture of one of them. Additionally, the detention and exile of Pope Pius VI in 1798 has been magnified, with that event being portrayed as the greatest humiliation and outrage inflicted upon the papacy, overlooking the fact that in the 10th century, Pope John XIV was deposed, arrested, thrown into a dungeon, and sentenced to die from starvation. Similar fates befell Popes Leo V and Stephen VI, who were dethroned from their pontifical positions and thrown into a prison where they were strangled. It should also be noted that the detention and exile of Pius VI in 1798 was an extreme measure taken by the French Directory, which had decided to strip him of his political power while respecting his religious status. Considering that the pope did not accept the loss of political power he had exercised in Rome, he plotted a conspiracy to assassinate the new civil authorities appointed by the French, a plot that was uncovered, leading to his removal from Rome and isolation, being sent to a monastery in Florence along with his staff. Pope Pius VI’s proclamations were famous for calling for the massacre of the French and their sympathizer criollos. The pope promised full indulgences to the faithful who beheaded more Frenchmen and granted complete amnesty to thieves and murderers who redeemed their crimes by fighting for the religion. 4 – In light of all the aforementioned historical facts, which are verifiable, some of our theologians inexplicably claim that while it is true that the prophecy indicates 1,260 years of papal supremacy and persecution of the saints, the beginning and end of the prophecy were a gradual process that did not necessarily have to start in 538 or end in 1798. This assertion presents the following inconveniences: 1 – Inability to pinpoint the moment when the process reached its peak, leading to a subsequent progressive decline. Unfortunately, we do not find in history the record of at least a continuous century in which the papacy exercised absolute supremacy over kings and princes. The only case in which we could identify some subjection by certain monarchies was during the pontificate of Innocent III, who held that office for less than two decades; however, the king of France, Philip II, and the claimants to the German crown, Frederick II and Otto IV, paid no attention to or attached importance to the excommunication threats made against them by Innocent, without suffering any harm. 2 – . We cannot expect a process in the fulfillment of the 1,260-year prophecy – because it suits us – and at the same time, emphasize a millimetric precision in the fulfillment of the 2,300-year prophecy, in which we specify the exact year, month, and day in which said prophecy ended. This reflects an extreme blindness that should have no place in a true Christian but rather in someone who wishes to ignore the truth and continue to believe in senseless dogmas. There is more related to the prophecy of the 1,260 years that we will find in previous articles published on this blog. At this time, we believe that the considerations in this article clearly demonstrate that our interpretation, that the papacy represented and represents the little horn of Daniel 7, lacks biblical and historical support, and that we must correct ourselves and seek a better interpretation. It is time to awaken and come out of the prophetic obscurantism that depicts us as just another sect. If the papacy does not represent the little horn, we must discard the alarming and nonsensical Sunday law, which was another conjecture of our sincere pioneers. Hans La Rondelle, one of our most prominent theologians, in his book ‘Prophecies of the End,’ pages 309-310, enlightens us by stating that we should not expect a universal Sunday law from the papacy, supported by the beast that rises from the earth, having two horns like a lamb, speaking like a dragon, as he writes the following: ‘the designation that the two-horned beast ‘ascended from the earth’ (Revelation 13:11) has become a subject for various speculative interpretations. A few take ‘the earth’ as a symbol of satanic inspiration from below, from the hell… Others take the earth in a restricted geographical sense, for example: (1) Palestine; (2) Asia Minor; (3) the United States of America (Sabbatarian Adventists since 1851). But such geographical restrictions are conjectures… Therefore, it is understandable that the North American Adventists since 1851 saw this part of America, which seemed peaceful, as the fulfillment of the beast with two horns like a lamb… this innovative application of applying the symbol of the two-horned beast to the United States had far-reaching consequences for Adventist understanding of the ‘mark of the beast’ and its forecast of universal Sunday law.’ We conclude by inviting you to read the aforementioned book, distributed by our publishing houses, which in its over 500 pages, does not contain a single mention or allusion to the future implementation of the Sunday law against Sabbath keepers. Blessings.
Comments