When the little horn of Rome is represented in verses nine through twelve of Daniel chapter eight, it is a corrupted symbol for it is a symbol of transvestitism, a cross-dresser oscillating between male and female. It agrees with the Millerite understanding that Rome was represented by two phases, the first phase being the Roman statecraft and the second phase being the Roman churchcraft, but in the oscillation of genders in the verses, the little horn is out of the historical and prophetic sequence (corrupted). Yet each of the four verses represents history directly associated with either Roman statecraft or Roman churchcraft. Pagan Rome persecuted all who resisted its imperial authority, but the persecution of papal Rome (feminine) in verse ten, is specifically directed against heaven.
በዳንኤል ምዕራፍ ስምንት ቁጥር ዘጠኝ እስከ አሥራ ሁለት ውስጥ ያለው የሮም ትንሹ ቀንድ ሲወከል፣ የተበላሸ ምልክት ሆኖ ይቀርባል፤ ምክንያቱም የጾታ መለዋወጥ ምልክት፣ በወንድነትና በሴትነት መካከል የሚዋዥቅ የተሻጋሪ ልብስ ለባሽ ምልክት ነውና። ይህም ከሚለራውያን ግንዛቤ ጋር ይስማማል፤ ሮም በሁለት ደረጃዎች እንደተወከለች ያስተምራል፤ የመጀመሪያው ደረጃ የሮማውያን መንግሥታዊ ሥልት ሲሆን፣ ሁለተኛው ደረጃ የሮማውያን ቤተ-ክርስቲያናዊ ሥልት ነው፤ ነገር ግን በእነዚያ ቁጥሮች ውስጥ በጾታዎች መዋዥቅ ምክንያት፣ ትንሹ ቀንድ ከታሪካዊና ከትንቢታዊ ቅደም ተከተል ውጭ ነው (የተበላሸ)። ነገር ግን እያንዳንዱ ከአራቱ ቁጥሮች ከሮማውያን መንግሥታዊ ሥልት ወይም ከሮማውያን ቤተ-ክርስቲያናዊ ሥልት ጋር በቀጥታ የተያያዘ ታሪክ ይወክላል። አረማዊት ሮም ንጉሣዊ ሥልጣንዋን የሚቃወሙትን ሁሉ ታሳድድ ነበር፤ ነገር ግን በቁጥር አሥር ያለችው የጳጳሳዊት ሮም (ሴትነት) ስደት በተለይ በሰማይ ላይ የተመረጠ ነው።
In the Millerite understanding that Rome was the fourth and final kingdom, the oscillating from state to church to state to church again would not have been a concern. They had seen the mixture of iron and clay in the feet of Daniel chapter two, and simply understood it as two phases of Rome, with no concern to define a specific historical sequence of a fourth and fifth kingdom. They understood the same of chapter seven, where the horn that spake great things against the most High, had three horns plucked up from the original ten horns of the beast of Rome. Even if Miller did recognize the gender oscillation of verse nine through twelve, it would have been unimportant to his understanding of the fourth kingdom being Rome. In Millerite understanding the fourth kingdom ended in 1798, and the next prophetic event was the Second Coming of Christ.
在米勒派关于罗马乃第四且最后之国的理解中，那从国家到教会、再从国家到教会的来回摆动，本不会成为一个问题。他们已经看见《但以理书》第二章中脚上的铁与泥的混杂，并且只是将其理解为罗马的两个阶段，并不在意去界定第四国与第五国之特定历史次序。他们对于第七章也是同样理解；在那里，那说夸大话攻击至高者的角，是从罗马兽原有的十角中拔起了三角。即便米勒确曾注意到第九至第十二节中的性别转换，这对于他将第四国理解为罗马，也是不重要的。在米勒派的理解中，第四国于1798年结束，而接下来的预言事件乃是基督的第二次降临。
The feminine horn identifies the woman who commits spiritual fornication with the masculine horn, and is represented in verses ten and twelve.
Kè feminen an idantifye fanm ki fè fònikasyon espirityèl avèk kòn maskilen an, epi li reprezante nan vèsè dis ak douz yo.
And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them. Daniel 8:10.
Og það varð mikið, allt til hers himnanna; og það felldi nokkra af hernum og af stjörnunum til jarðar og traðkaði á þeim. Daníel 8:10.
The persecution of the papal power was directed against Christianity (the host of heaven), and in verse twelve papal Rome (feminine), receives the power to accomplish her murderous work through the transgression of fornicating with the kings of Europe.
La persécution exercée par la puissance papale fut dirigée contre le christianisme (l’armée des cieux), et au verset douze, la Rome papale (au féminin) reçoit le pouvoir d’accomplir son œuvre meurtrière par la transgression consistant à se prostituer avec les rois de l’Europe.
And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered. Daniel 8:12.
Na jeshi likatolewa kwake dhidi ya sadaka ya daima kwa sababu ya uasi; nalo likaitupa kweli chini ardhini; likatenda, na kufanikiwa. Danieli 8:12.
The “host” in the verse represents the military power that was given the papacy “against the daily.” The word “against” means “from”. From the pagan kings of Europe (pagan Rome), represented by “the daily,” military support (an host) was given to the papacy “by reason of transgression.” The combination of church and state, with the church in control of the relationship is the “transgression.” The wine of that transgression is Christian blood. Once the papacy had control of the armies of pagan Rome, papal Rome (“it”) “cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered.”
“સેના” શબ્દ આ વચનમાં તે સૈન્યશક્તિનું પ્રતિનિધિત્વ કરે છે, જે પાપાસત્તાને “દૈનિક”ના વિરોધે આપવામાં આવી હતી. “Against” શબ્દનો અર્થ “માથી” થાય છે. યુરોપના મૂર્તિપૂજક રાજાઓથી (મૂર્તિપૂજક રોમથી), જેનું પ્રતિનિધિત્વ “દૈનિક” કરે છે, સૈન્ય આધાર (“એક સેના”) પાપાસત્તાને “અપરાધના કારણે” આપવામાં આવ્યો હતો. ચર્ચ અને રાજ્યનું સંયોજન, જેમાં ચર્ચ આ સંબંધ પર નિયંત્રણ રાખે છે, તે જ “અપરાધ” છે. તે અપરાધનું દ્રાક્ષારસ ખ્રિસ્તી લોહી છે. એકવાર પાપાસત્તાએ મૂર્તિપૂજક રોમની સેનાઓ પર નિયંત્રણ મેળવી લીધું, ત્યારે પાપલ રોમ (“તે”) “સત્યને ધરતી પર પટક્યું; અને તેણે કાર્ય કર્યું અને સમૃદ્ધિ પામી.”
In Daniel chapter eleven, verse thirty-one, the giving of the armies to papal Rome is also represented:
Trong Đa-ni-ên chương mười một, câu ba mươi mốt, việc các đạo binh được trao cho La Mã Giáo hoàng cũng được biểu thị:
And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. Daniel 11:31.
Pâgsanáyon dagiti buyotna, ket dadaelenna ti santuario ti pannakabalin, ket ikkatenna ti inaldaw a daton, ket ipatakderda ti makarimon a mangted iti pannakapukaw. Daniel 11:31.
The verse is identifying the historical transition from pagan Rome to papal Rome. In the verse the “arms” are the European kings that began to stand up for the papacy beginning with Clovis, king of the Franks (France), in the year 496. The “arms” also polluted “the sanctuary of strength” (the city of Rome), through the continuous warfare from the fourth century onward to the year 538. The “arms” also removed the pagan resistance to the rise of the papacy, and by the year 508, the pagan resistance was finished.
Mstari huu unatambua mpito wa kihistoria kutoka Roma ya kipagani kwenda Roma ya upapa. Katika mstari huu, “mikono” ni wafalme wa Ulaya walioanza kusimama kwa ajili ya upapa kuanzia kwa Clovis, mfalme wa Wafranki (Ufaransa), katika mwaka 496. “Mikono” hiyo pia ilipatia unajisi “patakatifu pa nguvu” (mji wa Roma), kupitia vita vya daima tangu karne ya nne na kuendelea hadi mwaka 538. “Mikono” hiyo pia iliondoa upinzani wa kipagani dhidi ya kuinuka kwa upapa, na kufikia mwaka 508, upinzani wa kipagani ulikuwa umefikia mwisho.
The word translated as “take away,” is the Hebrew word “sur” and means “to remove”. The “arms” placed the “abomination that maketh desolate” (the papacy), on the throne of the earth in the year 538. When Daniel chapter eight, verse twelve identifies that “an host” was given to the feminine little horn, it is agreeing with the witness of verse thirty-one of chapter eleven. The book of Revelation also gives witness to the same truth in chapter thirteen.
Le mot traduit par « ôter » est le terme hébreu « sur » et signifie « enlever ». Les « bras » placèrent sur le trône de la terre « l’abomination qui cause la désolation » (la papauté) en l’an 538. Lorsque Daniel, chapitre huit, verset douze, déclare qu’« une armée » fut donnée à la petite corne féminine, il s’accorde avec le témoignage du verset trente et un du chapitre onze. Le livre de l’Apocalypse rend également témoignage à cette même vérité au chapitre treize.
And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. Revelation 13:2.
Et la bête que je vis était semblable à un léopard; ses pieds étaient comme ceux d’un ours, et sa gueule comme la gueule d’un lion. Et le dragon lui donna sa puissance, son trône et une grande autorité. Apocalypse 13:2.
Sister White directly identifies the beast of verse two as the papacy, and that the dragon in the verse is pagan Rome. Pagan Rome gave three things to the papacy; “his power, and his seat, and great authority.”
Nabbiin adde White lakk. 2 keessatti bineensicha kallattiidhaan abbaa irree Phaaphaasii taʼuu isaa ni ibsiti; akkasumas keessa lakkicha keessatti jawwiichi Roomaa waaqeffannaa mootummaa durii taʼuu isaa ni ibsiti. Roomaan waaqeffannaa mootummaa durii Phaaphaasiif waan sadii kenne; “humna isaa, fi teessoo isaa, fi aangoo guddaa.”
The military power was given by pagan Rome beginning with Clovis in the year 496. The “seat” to rule from, was given to the papacy in the year 330, when the emperor Constantine moved his capitol to Constantinople, leaving his former capitol city of Rome to the control of the papal church. In the year 533, the emperor Justinian decreed that the pope was the head of the church and the corrector of heretics, turning his “great authority” over to the pope of Rome. Verse twelve of Daniel chapter eight, identifies the time when a “host” was given, and that prophetic truth is testified to on many witnesses. From that point in time (beginning in the year 496), the papacy “prospered.”
A autoridade militar foi conferida pela Roma pagã, começando com Clóvis no ano 496. A “sede” de onde governar foi dada ao papado no ano 330, quando o imperador Constantino transferiu a sua capital para Constantinopla, deixando a sua antiga cidade capital, Roma, sob o controle da igreja papal. No ano 533, o imperador Justiniano decretou que o papa era o cabeça da igreja e o corretor dos hereges, entregando ao papa de Roma a sua “grande autoridade”. O versículo doze de Daniel capítulo oito identifica o tempo em que um “exército” foi dado, e essa verdade profética é atestada por muitas testemunhas. A partir desse momento no tempo (começando no ano 496), o papado “prosperou”.
It would continue to “practice” and “prosper” until the end of the indignation against the northern kingdom of Israel ended in 1798, and the papacy received its deadly wound.
Ezyokweeyongera “okukola” era “okulabirira” okutuusa ku nkomerero y’obusungu obwali ku bwakabaka bwa Isirayiri obw’omumambuka, bwe bwaggwa mu 1798, era obupapa ne bufuna ekiwundu kyabwo ekitta.
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. Daniel 11:36.
Ug ang hari magabuhat sumala sa iyang kabubut-on; ug iyang bayawon ang iyang kaugalingon, ug pagadakuon ang iyang kaugalingon labaw sa matag dios, ug magasulti ug katingalahang mga butang batok sa Dios sa mga dios, ug molampos hangtod nga matuman ang kapungot; kay pagabuhaton ang gitagal. Daniel 11:36.
Verse nine of chapter eight, describes masculine Rome (pagan Rome), and represents the three-step conquering process that pagan Rome accomplished, and which typified the three geographical areas that would be conquered in order for papal Rome to be established upon the throne of the earth, as represented by the three horns that were plucked up in chapter seven. Those two three-step conquering’s of pagan and papal Rome, represented the three geographical obstacles of modern Rome, in verses forty through forty-three of Daniel eleven. Then in chapter eight, verse eleven, the masculine little horn (pagan Rome) is again represented. In the verse, the sanctified logic is so sound, that the scornful men that rule Jerusalem were forced to introduce several theological lies in order to erect their counterfeit foundation.
لە ئایەتی نۆی هەشتیندا، ڕۆمای نێرینە (ڕۆمای بەتپەرست) وەسف دەکرێت، و ئەو پرۆسەی سێ-هەنگاوی داگیرکردنە نیشان دەدرێت کە ڕۆمای بەتپەرست ئەنجامی دا، و کە بووە نموونەی ئەو سێ ناوچەی جوگرافییەی کە دەبوو داگیر بکرێن بۆ ئەوەی ڕۆمای پاپایی لەسەر تەختی زەوی دامەزرابێت، وەک لە سێ شاخەکەی لە دەرچوو لە بەشی حەوتدا نیشان دراوە. ئەو دوو داگیرکردنە سێ-هەنگاوییەی ڕۆمای بەتپەرست و ڕۆمای پاپایی، بوونە نوێنەری ئەو سێ بەرگرییە جوگرافییانەی ڕۆمای نوێ، لە ئایەتەکانی چل تا چل و سێی دانیال یازدەدا. پاشان لە هەشتیندا، ئایەتی یازدەدا، شاخی بچوکی نێرینە (ڕۆمای بەتپەرست) دیسان نوێنەرایەتی دەکرێت. لەو ئایەتەدا، منطقە پیرۆزەکە هێندە دروست و پتەوە کە ئەو پیاوانەی گاڵتەجاڕ کە ئۆرشەلیم حوکم دەکەن ناچار بوون چەندین درۆی ئیلاهیاتی بهێننە ناوەوە بۆ ئەوەی بنەمای ساختەی خۆیان هەڵبچنن.
Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Daniel 8:11.
Ndiyo, alijitukuza hata mpaka kwa Mkuu wa jeshi, na kwa yeye sadaka ya kila siku ikaondolewa, na mahali pa patakatifu pake pakatupiliwa chini. Danieli 8:11.
As we begin to address the counterfeit coins and jewels that have been introduced to Adventism since 1863, it should be noted that there are two primary fields of supposed theological expertise which Adventism boasts of, as their basis for upholding the doctrines of apostate Protestantism and Catholicism. The claim that the modern theologians of Adventism make is that they are either experts in biblical history, or experts in biblical languages. Their application of the verse, reveals the prophetic word has become as a sealed book unto them, and also reveals that their claim of being experts of the biblical languages is simply the modern manifestation of Pharisaism.
پیش از آنکه به بررسی سکّهها و جواهراتِ تقلبیای بپردازیم که از سال 1863 به اینسو به ادونتیسم وارد شدهاند، باید توجه داشت که دو حوزهٔ اصلیِ ادعاییِ تخصصِ الهیاتی وجود دارد که ادونتیسم به آنها میبالد و بر پایهٔ آنها آموزههای پروتستانتیسمِ مرتد و کاتولیسیسم را تأیید و حفظ میکند. ادعایی که الهیدانانِ معاصرِ ادونتیسم مطرح میکنند این است که یا در تاریخِ کتابمقدسی صاحبنظرند، یا در زبانهای کتابمقدسی. کاربردِ آنان از این آیه آشکار میسازد که کلامِ نبوت برای ایشان همچون کتابی مُهرشده شده است، و نیز آشکار میسازد که ادعای ایشان مبنی بر متخصص بودن در زبانهای کتابمقدسی، صرفاً جلوهٔ امروزیِ فریسیمآبی است.
First is the disregard of the oscillation of the genders for the little horn in verse nine through twelve. If they were actually experts in the Hebrew language, they would not deny, or water down, the fact that Daniel purposely employed gender oscillation in the verses. The little horn is represented in both genders, and those genders go back and forth through the verses. The theologians try to cover this fact with rubbish and counterfeit coins, for it clearly identifies that verse eleven is identifying pagan, not papal Rome. They of course insist that the little horn of verse eleven is the pope, when it is actually pagan Rome.
Fyrst is þæt forhyrnys þære ymbhwearftnysse þara cynna be þam lytlan horne on fersum nigon oð twelf. Gif hi soðlice cræftigan on þære Hebreiscen spræce wæron, hi ne forsocen, ne adwæscan, þæt Daniel mid geþafunge þa cynna-ymbhwearftnysse on þam fersum brucode. Þæt lytle horn is on bam cynnum getacnod, and þa cyn gað fram anum to oðrum þurh þa fers. Þa godspellere secað þis gewit mid idelre brosnunge and leasum mynetum behelian, forðan hit openlice geswutelað þæt fers endleofan hæfð to tacnienne hæþenlice, na papan, Rome. Hi, witodlice, behatað þæt þæt lytle horn on fers endleofan sie se papa, þonne hit soðlice hæþenlic Rome is.
Once it is acknowledged that two of the four little horn verses are male and two are female, then it is simple to incorporate the biblical truth that a woman in Bible prophecy represents a church, and a man represents a state. Knowing this allows all who wish to see, that the little horn of verse eleven, is masculine Rome (pagan Rome), not feminine Rome (papal Rome).
Ka a tiisa lekoko hore lipolelo tse peli ho tse ’nè tse buang ka lenaka le lenyenyane li ngotsoe ka bong ba botona, ’me tse peli ka bong ba botšehali, joale ho ba bonolo ho kenyeletsa ’nete ea Bibele ea hore mosali boporofeteng ba Bibele o emela kereke, ’me monna o emela ’muso. Tsebo ena e nolofalletsa bohle ba ratang ho bona ho hlokomela hore lenaka le lenyenyane la temana ea leshome le motso o mong ke Roma ea bong ba botona (Roma ea bohetene), eseng Roma ea bong ba botšehali (Roma ea bopapa).
The verse then is understood as teaching that pagan Rome (he) magnified himself to the prince of the host, as did pagan Rome when it placed the prince of the host upon the cross of Calvary. Not only did pagan Rome magnify itself against Christ at the cross, the verse goes on to say that by him (pagan Rome) “the daily sacrifice was taken away.”
Le verset est donc compris comme enseignant que Rome païenne (il) s’éleva jusqu’au prince de l’armée, comme le fit Rome païenne lorsqu’elle plaça le prince de l’armée sur la croix du Calvaire. Non seulement Rome païenne s’éleva-t-elle contre le Christ à la croix, mais le verset poursuit en disant que par lui (Rome païenne) « le sacrifice perpétuel fut ôté ».
In the book of Daniel there are two Hebrew words that are both translated as “take away.” The words are “sur” and “rum”. Both words are used in the sanctuary service. Sur means to take away or remove, and when the ashes from the altar in the sanctuary were removed, the word used to describe the removal of the ashes is “sur”. The word “rum” means to lift up and exalt, and when the priest in the sanctuary was to lift up a wave offering, he was to “rum” (lift up) the offering. In verse eleven, pagan Rome (“the daily”) would “rum” (take away) paganism by lifting up and exalting the religion of paganism.
Ndërsa në librin e Danielit gjenden dy fjalë hebraike që të dyja përkthehen si “heq”. Fjalët janë “sur” dhe “rum”. Që të dyja fjalët përdoren në shërbesën e shenjtërores. “Sur” do të thotë të heqësh ose të largosh, dhe kur hiri nga altari në shenjtërore hiqej, fjala e përdorur për të përshkruar heqjen e hirit është “sur”. Fjala “rum” do të thotë të ngresh lart dhe të lartësosh, dhe kur prifti në shenjtërore duhej të ngrinte lart një blatim tundjeje, ai duhej ta “rum” (ta ngrinte lart) blatimin. Në vargun njëmbëdhjetë, Roma pagane (“e përditshmja”) do ta “rum” (“hiqte”) paganizmin duke ngritur lart dhe lartësuar fenë e paganizmit.
Pagan Rome would lift up and exalt the religion of paganism. The Adventist theologians that profess an expertise of biblical languages choose to treat every occurrence of “take away” in the book of Daniel as “remove”. They fail to acknowledge the distinct and precise writing of Daniel, and thus place themselves above the prophet Daniel.
រ៉ូមក្រោមសាសនាប្រកាន់ព្រះក្លែងក្លាយនឹងលើកតម្កើង និងបង្កើនកិត្តិយសដល់សាសនាប្រកាន់ព្រះក្លែងក្លាយ។ អ្នកទេវវិទូអាដវិនទីស ដែលអះអាងថាមានជំនាញខាងភាសាព្រះគម្ពីរ ជ្រើសរើសបកស្រាយគ្រប់ករណីនៃពាក្យ «ដកហូត» ក្នុងសៀវភៅដានីយ៉ែលថា «យកចេញ»។ ពួកគេមិនទទួលស្គាល់ការសរសេរដែលខុសប្លែក និងត្រឹមត្រូវយ៉ាងច្បាស់លាស់របស់ដានីយ៉ែលទេ ហើយដូច្នេះ ពួកគេបានដាក់ខ្លួនឯងឲ្យនៅលើសាស្ត្រាព្យាការីដានីយ៉ែល។
The theologians that profess to understand the biblical languages provide arguments to justify why Daniel intended to mean the same thing, when he employed two different words. They provide long and tedious word studies to uphold their false claims. The theologians that profess to understand biblical history, argue that the false application is based upon recognizing that in different periods of history the same word might mean something different, and therefore when Daniel employed two different words, only a historical expert can identify what Daniel actually meant. It is important to identify these two false methods for they are employed often by the theologians who seek to hide from the methodology of “line upon line.”
Os teólogos que professam compreender as línguas bíblicas apresentam argumentos para justificar por que Daniel tencionava significar a mesma coisa, quando empregou duas palavras diferentes. Fornecem estudos lexicais longos e enfadonhos para sustentar suas falsas alegações. Os teólogos que professam compreender a história bíblica argumentam que a falsa aplicação se baseia no reconhecimento de que, em diferentes períodos da história, a mesma palavra poderia significar algo diferente e, portanto, quando Daniel empregou duas palavras diferentes, somente um perito em história pode identificar o que Daniel realmente quis dizer. É importante identificar esses dois métodos falsos, pois são empregados frequentemente pelos teólogos que procuram ocultar-se da metodologia de “linha sobre linha”.
Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Daniel 8:11.
Oui, il s’éleva jusqu’au chef de l’armée, et par lui le sacrifice perpétuel fut ôté, et le lieu de son sanctuaire fut renversé. Daniel 8:11.
The word translated as “taken away” in the verse means to “lift up and exalt”. It does not mean to remove. This fact creates confusion and contradiction for the Adventist theologians, for their premises do not hold up under a simple evaluation of the verse, when the actual definition of the word Daniel used is applied to the verse. They argue the little horn of the verse is papal Rome, and therefore the verse would read that “by him” (papal Rome) “the daily was taken away.”
Стихтә «алынып ташланған» дәп тәрҗимә қилинған сөз «көтирип жуқури қилип улуқлаштуруш» дегән мәнини билдүриду. У «чәтләштүрүш» яки «йоқитиш» дегәнни билдүрмәйду. Бу һәқиқәт Адвентист илаһиятчилири үчүн қалаймиқанчилиқ вә зиддийәт пәйда қилиду, чүнки Даниял ишләткән сөзниң һәқиқий тәрифи бу стихкә қоллинилғанда, уларниң асас-йөләк пәрәзлири бу стихни аддийла баһалаш алдида өзини ақлиялмайду. Улар бу стихтики кичик мүңгүзни папилиқ Рим дәп мулаһизә қилиду, шуңа стих мундақ оқулуши керәк болидуки: «униң арқилиқ» (папилиқ Рим арқилиқ) «күндилик көтирилип улуқланди.»
They of course have no problem including the added word that Sister White states directly was added by human wisdom and does not apply to the text.
Özellikle de, Kız Kardeş White’ın açıkça insan hikmetiyle eklenmiş olduğunu ve metne uygulanmadığını belirttiği ilave sözcüğü dâhil etmekte elbette hiçbir sakınca görmezler.
“Then I saw in relation to the ‘daily’ (Daniel 8:12) that the word ‘sacrifice’ was supplied by man’s wisdom, and does not belong to the text, and that the Lord gave the correct view of it to those who gave the judgment hour cry.” Early Writings, 74.
« Puis je vis, au sujet du « perpétuel » (Daniel 8:12), que le mot « sacrifice » avait été ajouté par la sagesse humaine, qu’il n’appartient pas au texte, et que le Seigneur en donna la juste compréhension à ceux qui proclamèrent le cri de l’heure du jugement. » Early Writings, 74.
They identify “the daily” as Christ’s sanctuary ministry, so the “daily sacrifice” upholds the concept that “the daily” is Christ sacrificial work in the heavenly sanctuary. But inspiration identifies that the word “sacrifice” “does not belong to the text”.
वे “नित्य” को मसीह की पवित्रस्थान-सेवा के रूप में पहचानते हैं; अतः “नित्य बलिदान” यह धारणा बनाए रखता है कि “नित्य” स्वर्गीय पवित्रस्थान में मसीह के बलिदानी कार्य को सूचित करता है। परन्तु प्रेरणा यह स्पष्ट करती है कि “बलिदान” शब्द “मूल पाठ का भाग नहीं है।”
When the drunkards of Ephraim identify “the daily” as Christ’s sanctuary work, the verse would then read, “by him” (papal Rome) “the daily was taken away,” or it would read, “by the papal power, Christ’s sanctuary ministry was taken away.” They actually teach this falsehood. They insist that through the darkness of the papal rule the true understanding of Christ’s sanctuary ministry was removed from the minds of men.
Ephraim ၏ မူးယစ်သမားတို့က “အစဉ်မပြတ်” ကို ခရစ်တော်၏ သန့်ရှင်းရာဌာနအမှုတော်ဟု သတ်မှတ်လျှင်၊ ထိုအခါ ထိုအခန်းငယ်သည် “ထိုသူအားဖြင့်” (ပုပ်ရဟန်းမင်းဆိုင်ရာ ရောမ) “အစဉ်မပြတ်သောအရာကို ဖယ်ရှားယူသွား၏” ဟု ဖတ်ရမည်ဖြစ်မည်၊ သို့မဟုတ် “ပုပ်ရဟန်းမင်းဆိုင်ရာ အာဏာအားဖြင့် ခရစ်တော်၏ သန့်ရှင်းရာဌာနအမှုတော်ကို ဖယ်ရှားယူသွားခဲ့သည်” ဟု ဖတ်ရမည်ဖြစ်မည်။ အမှန်တကယ်ပင် သူတို့သည် ဤမှားယွင်းသော အယူဝါဒကို သင်ကြားကြသည်။ ပုပ်ရဟန်းမင်း၏ အုပ်စိုးမှုအမှောင်ထုအားဖြင့် ခရစ်တော်၏ သန့်ရှင်းရာဌာနအမှုတော်နှင့်ဆိုင်သော မှန်ကန်သော နားလည်ခြင်းကို လူတို့၏ စိတ်ထဲမှ ဖယ်ရှားပယ်ဖျက်လိုက်သည်ဟု သူတို့သည် အခိုင်အမာဆိုကြသည်။
Yet the word translated as “take away,” does not mean to remove, it means to lift up and exalt. If the professed experts of biblical languages would correctly apply the meaning of the Hebrew word “rum,” to the passage, their rendition would need to say, “by the papal power, Christ’s sanctuary ministry was lifted up and exalted.” When did the papacy ever lift up and exalt Christ?
Cependant, le mot traduit par « ôter » ne signifie pas enlever ; il signifie élever et exalter. Si les prétendus experts des langues bibliques appliquaient correctement au passage le sens du mot hébreu « rum », leur traduction devrait dire : « par le pouvoir papal, le ministère de Christ dans le sanctuaire fut élevé et exalté ». Quand la papauté a-t-elle jamais élevé et exalté Christ ?
They seek to impose the definition of the Hebrew word “sur” upon the Hebrew word “rum.” Daniel uses the word “sur,” which means to remove, in connection with “the daily” in two other verses, but in verse eleven, Daniel chose the word “rum” meaning to lift up and exalt. Not only is the dish of fables concerning this verse foolishness because of the wresting of the meaning of the word translated as “take away,” but there was never a time when Christ’s sanctuary ministry was in any way removed from men.
Тэд еврей “sur” гэдэг үгийн тодорхойлолтыг еврей “rum” гэдэг үгэнд тулган хэрэглүүлэхийг оролддог. Даниел “sur” буюу “зайлуулах, авч хаях” гэсэн утгатай үгийг “өдөр тутмын” зүйлтэй холбоотойгоор өөр хоёр ишлэлд хэрэглэсэн байдаг; харин арван нэгдүгээр эшлэлд Даниел “өргөх, өргөмжлөх” гэсэн утгатай “rum” гэдэг үгийг сонгосон. Энэ эшлэлийн талаархи үлгэр домгийн таваг мэт элдэв яриа нь “авах” гэж орчуулсан үгийн утгыг мушгин гуйвуулснаасаа болж мунхаглал төдий бус, Христийн ариун сүм дэх үйлчлэл хүмүүсээс ямар нэгэн байдлаар зайлуулагдсан үе хэзээ ч байгаагүй юм.
But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. Hebrews 7:24, 25.
Naye mtu huyu, kwa sababu adumu milele, anao ukuhani usioweza kubadilika. Kwa hiyo aweza kuwaokoa kabisa wale wamjiao Mungu kwa yeye, kwa kuwa yu hai sikuzote ili awaombee. Waebrania 7:24, 25.
To claim, as the Adventist theologians do, in an attempt to prop up their false application of the verse, that there was a period of time when the papacy exercised some type of power to remove Christ’s sanctuary intercession is absurd!
הטענה, כפי שטוענים התיאולוגים האדוונטיסטים בניסיון לתמוך ביישומם המוטעה של הפסוק, כי הייתה תקופת זמן שבה האפיפיורות הפעילה איזשהו סוג של כוח כדי להסיר את השתדלותו של המשיח במקדש, היא אבסורדית!
But the theologians do not teach that the verse identifies that the papacy lifted up and exalted Christ’s sanctuary ministry. They avoid the meaning of Daniel’s words, and the inspired counsel of Ellen White, to teach what they choose to teach in spite of the testimony of Daniel’s words.
Mais les théologiens n’enseignent pas que ce verset indique que la papauté a élevé et exalté le ministère de Christ dans le sanctuaire. Ils évitent le sens des paroles de Daniel et le conseil inspiré d’Ellen White, pour enseigner ce qu’ils choisissent d’enseigner en dépit du témoignage des paroles de Daniel.
Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Daniel 8:11.
Oui, il s’éleva jusqu’au chef de l’armée ; par lui, le sacrifice perpétuel fut ôté, et le lieu de son sanctuaire fut renversé. Daniel 8:11.
The theologians teach that the verse means “by the papal power, Christ’s sanctuary ministry was removed,” and the removal of Christ’s sanctuary ministry from the minds of men is supported by the fact that in association with the removal, the place of Christ’s “sanctuary was cast down.” There is not one verse in God’s Word that identifies the heavenly sanctuary, which is where Christ performs his intercession, has ever been cast down. Nor is there any biblical passage that identifies that heaven itself, which is the “place of his sanctuary”, is ever cast down. Once again, the theologians place themselves above the prophet Daniel, for they insist that “the place of his sanctuary” in the verse is referring to God’s sanctuary, in spite of the fact that Daniel teaches directly opposite of that idea.
Wafasiri wa teolojia hufundisha kwamba aya hiyo ina maana, “kwa mamlaka ya kipapa, huduma ya Kristo ya patakatifu iliondolewa,” na kuondolewa kwa huduma ya Kristo ya patakatifu kutoka katika akili za wanadamu kunathibitishwa na ukweli kwamba, sambamba na kuondolewa huko, mahali pa “patakatifu” pake Kristo “paliangushwa.” Hakuna hata aya moja katika Neno la Mungu inayoitambulisha patakatifu pa mbinguni, ambamo Kristo hutekeleza uombezi wake, kuwa limewahi kuangushwa. Wala hakuna kifungu chochote cha kibiblia kinachoithibitisha mbingu yenyewe, ambayo ni “mahali pa patakatifu pake,” kuwa imewahi kuangushwa. Kwa mara nyingine tena, wanateolojia wanajiweka juu ya nabii Danieli, kwa maana wanasisitiza kwamba “mahali pa patakatifu pake” katika aya hiyo panarejelea patakatifu pa Mungu, licha ya ukweli kwamba Danieli anafundisha moja kwa moja kinyume cha wazo hilo.
The professed experts of the Hebrew language insist that in the verse the Hebrew word “rum,” needs to be understood with the meaning of the Hebrew word “sur.” They also insist that the Hebrew word “miqdash” needs to be understood as the Hebrew word “qodesh.” “Miqdash” and “qodash” are both translated simply as “sanctuary” in the book of Daniel, yet they have different meanings. “Miqdash” represents any sanctuary, whether it is God’s sanctuary or a pagan sanctuary. It is the general word for sanctuary, but “qodesh” is only used in the Bible to represent God’s sanctuary.
De självutnämnda experterna på det hebreiska språket hävdar bestämt att det hebreiska ordet ”rum” i versen måste förstås med betydelsen av det hebreiska ordet ”sur”. De hävdar också bestämt att det hebreiska ordet ”miqdash” måste förstås som det hebreiska ordet ”qodesh”. ”Miqdash” och ”qodesh” översätts båda helt enkelt med ”helgedom” i Daniels bok, men de har olika betydelser. ”Miqdash” betecknar vilken helgedom som helst, vare sig det är Guds helgedom eller en hednisk helgedom. Det är det allmänna ordet för helgedom, men ”qodesh” används i Bibeln endast för att beteckna Guds helgedom.
Daniel knew the difference between a pagan sanctuary and God’s sanctuary. If Daniel was going to identify a pagan sanctuary, he would use the word “miqdash.” It is amazing to me that the supposed experts of the Hebrew language never address the fact that in four consecutive verses, Daniel uses both words three times. Daniel’s usage of the two Hebrew words, both translated as “sanctuary” defines the meaning Daniel intended to be understood.
ഡാനിയേൽ ഒരു അന്യജാതീയ വിശുദ്ധസ്ഥലവും ദൈവത്തിന്റെ വിശുദ്ധസ്ഥലവും തമ്മിലുള്ള വ്യത്യാസം അറിഞ്ഞിരുന്നു. ഡാനിയേൽ ഒരു അന്യജാതീയ വിശുദ്ധസ്ഥലത്തെ തിരിച്ചറിയാൻ പോകുകയായിരുന്നുവെങ്കിൽ, അവൻ “miqdash” എന്ന പദം ഉപയോഗിച്ചേനേ. തുടർച്ചയായ നാല് വാക്യങ്ങളിൽ ഡാനിയേൽ ഈ രണ്ടു പദങ്ങളും മൂന്നു പ്രാവശ്യം ഉപയോഗിക്കുന്നുവെന്ന സത്യത്തെ എബ്രായഭാഷയിലെ അന്നെന്നു കരുതപ്പെടുന്ന വിദഗ്ധർ ഒരിക്കലും പരിഗണിക്കാത്തത് എനിക്കു അതിശയകരമാണ്. “വിശുദ്ധസ്ഥലം” എന്നു വിവർത്തനം ചെയ്യപ്പെടുന്ന ഈ രണ്ടു എബ്രായ പദങ്ങളുടെ ഉപയോഗത്തിൽ ഡാനിയേൽ ഉദ്ദേശിച്ച അർത്ഥം എന്താണെന്നത്, അവൻ തന്നെയുള്ള പ്രയോഗം വ്യക്തമായി നിർവചിക്കുന്നു.
Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered. Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Daniel 8:11–14.
Verdadeiramente, ele se engrandeceu até ao Príncipe do exército; e por ele foi tirado o sacrifício contínuo, e o lugar do seu santuário foi deitado abaixo. E foi-lhe entregue um exército contra o sacrifício contínuo, por causa da transgressão; e lançou a verdade por terra; e assim fez, e prosperou. Então ouvi um santo que falava, e outro santo disse àquele certo santo que falava: Até quando durará a visão acerca do sacrifício contínuo e da transgressão assoladora, para que sejam entregues o santuário e o exército, a fim de serem pisados? E ele me disse: Até duas mil e trezentas tardes e manhãs; então o santuário será purificado. Daniel 8:11–14.
In the very passage that includes the foundation of Adventism, Daniel employs two different Hebrew words that are both translated as “sanctuary.” In verses thirteen and fourteen Daniel chose to use the Hebrew word for “sanctuary,” that is only used biblically to identify God’s sanctuary, but in verse eleven, Daniel used the general or generic Hebrew word that can be God’s sanctuary, or it can be a pagan sanctuary.
A cikin ainihin nassin da ya ƙunshi tushen Adventism, Daniyel ya yi amfani da kalmomin Ibrananci guda biyu mabambanta waɗanda duka ake fassara su da “wuri mai tsarki.” A ayoyi na goma sha uku da goma sha huɗu, Daniyel ya zaɓi ya yi amfani da kalmar Ibrananci domin “wuri mai tsarki,” wadda a cikin Littafi Mai Tsarki ana amfani da ita ne kawai domin nuna wuri mai tsarkin Allah; amma a aya ta goma sha ɗaya, Daniyel ya yi amfani da kalmar Ibrananci ta gama-gari ko ta jinsin suna, wadda za ta iya nufin wuri mai tsarkin Allah, ko kuma za ta iya nufin wuri mai tsarki na arna.
If Daniel had wanted to identify the “sanctuary” in verse eleven, as God’s sanctuary, he would have used the same Hebrew word that he used twice within the next three verses. It is absolutely clear that Daniel was making a distinction between a pagan sanctuary in verse eleven, and God’s sanctuary in verses thirteen and fourteen! But the drunkards of Ephraim argue that the “place of his sanctuary” that was “cast down,” in verse eleven, was the place of God’s sanctuary, though they avoid the word “place.”
यदि दानिय्येल पद ग्यारह में “पवित्रस्थान” को परमेश्वर के पवित्रस्थान के रूप में पहचानना चाहता, तो वह वही इब्रानी शब्द प्रयोग करता जिसे उसने अगले तीन पदों के भीतर दो बार प्रयोग किया। यह सर्वथा स्पष्ट है कि दानिय्येल पद ग्यारह में एक अन्यजातीय पवित्रस्थान और पद तेरह तथा चौदह में परमेश्वर के पवित्रस्थान के बीच भेद कर रहा था! परन्तु एप्रैम के मतवाले यह तर्क करते हैं कि “उसके पवित्रस्थान का स्थान,” जो पद ग्यारह में “गिरा दिया गया,” परमेश्वर के पवित्रस्थान का स्थान था, यद्यपि वे “स्थान” शब्द से बचते हैं।
They teach that the papacy took away Christ’s ministry of intercession and cast down the truth of the heavenly sanctuary. But Daniel was clear that the “sanctuary” in verse eleven, was not God’s sanctuary, but a pagan sanctuary. Daniel was just as clear that it was not the “sanctuary” that was cast down, but “the place” of his sanctuary.
Ils enseignent que la papauté a supprimé le ministère d’intercession du Christ et a jeté bas la vérité du sanctuaire céleste. Mais Daniel a clairement indiqué que le « sanctuaire » au verset onze n’était pas le sanctuaire de Dieu, mais un sanctuaire païen. Daniel a été tout aussi clair sur le fait que ce n’était pas le « sanctuaire » qui fut jeté bas, mais « le lieu » de son sanctuaire.
Refusing to acknowledge the purposeful gender oscillation of verses nine through twelve, the modern theologians adopted the definition of “the daily” that originated within apostate Protestantism, and began to construct a foundation upon the sand of human conjecture, tradition and custom. When they arrive at verse eleven, they even reject the inspired counsel of Sister White that identified that Miller’s understanding of “the daily” as paganism was correct, and begin to employ the art of misdirection and conjecture to defend their love of Catholic and Protestant theology.
નવથી બાર સુધીના વચનોમાં રહેલી હેતુપૂર્વકની લિંગ-આવર્તનને સ્વીકારવાનો ઇનકાર કરીને, આધુનિક ધર્મશાસ્ત્રીઓએ તે “દૈનિક”ની વ્યાખ્યા અપનાવી જે ભ્રષ્ટ પ્રોટેસ્ટન્ટવાદમાંથી ઉદ્ભવી હતી, અને માનવીય અનુમાન, પરંપરા અને પ્રથાની રેતી પર પાયો બાંધવાનું શરૂ કર્યું. જ્યારે તેઓ અગિયારમા વચન સુધી પહોંચે છે, ત્યારે તેઓ સિસ્ટર વ્હાઇટની તે પ્રેરિત સલાહને પણ નકારી કાઢે છે, જેણે દર્શાવ્યું હતું કે “દૈનિક” વિષે મિલરની આ સમજણ—કે તે મૂર્તિપૂજકતા હતી—સાચી હતી, અને કેથોલિક તથા પ્રોટેસ્ટન્ટ ધર્મશાસ્ત્ર પ્રત્યેના પોતાના પ્રેમને બચાવવા માટે ગેરમાર્ગે દોરવાની કળા અને અનુમાનનો સહારો લેવા માંડે છે.
They change pagan Rome into papal Rome in the verse, and they force the definition of “remove” upon the word that means “lift up and exalt”. They define the satanic symbol of “the daily”, as a godly symbol, and then insist that a pagan temple is God’s temple, while avoiding the direct reference to “the place” of the sanctuary. And the “unlearned” (as Isaiah identifies them), who will only understand if the “learned” tell them it is so, accept the dish of fables unto their own destruction.
Ils changent, dans le verset, la Rome païenne en Rome papale, et ils imposent au mot qui signifie « élever et exalter » la définition de « supprimer ». Ils définissent le symbole satanique du « continuel » comme un symbole divin, puis ils soutiennent qu’un temple païen est le temple de Dieu, tout en évitant la référence directe au « lieu » du sanctuaire. Et les « ignorants » (comme Ésaïe les désigne), qui ne comprendront qu’à la condition que les « savants » leur disent qu’il en est ainsi, acceptent ce plat de fables pour leur propre perdition.
We will continue our consideration of the increase of the knowledge represented as the jewels in Miller’s dream in the next article.
Nous poursuivrons, dans l’article suivant, notre examen de l’accroissement de la connaissance représentée par les joyaux dans le rêve de Miller.
“The apostle Paul warns us that ‘some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.’ This is what we may expect. Our greatest trials will come because of that class who have once advocated the truth, but who turn from it to the world, and trample it under their feet in hate and derision. God has a work for his faithful servants to do. The attacks of the enemy must be met with the truth of his word. Falsehood must be unmasked, its true character must be revealed, and the light of the law of Jehovah must shine forth into the moral darkness of the world. We are to present the claims of his word. We shall not be held guiltless if we neglect this solemn duty. But while we stand in defense of the truth, let us not stand in defense of self, and make a great ado because we are called to bear reproach and misrepresentation. Let us not pity ourselves, but be very jealous for the law of the Most High.
“प्रेरित पौलुस हमें चेतावनी देता है कि ‘कतिपय लोग विश्वास से बहक जाएंगे, और भरमाने वाली आत्माओं तथा दुष्टात्माओं की शिक्षाओं पर ध्यान देंगे।’ यही वह बात है जिसकी हमें अपेक्षा करनी चाहिए। हमारी सबसे बड़ी परीक्षाएँ उसी वर्ग के कारण आएँगी जिन्होंने कभी सत्य का समर्थन किया था, परन्तु उससे फिरकर संसार की ओर चले जाते हैं और घृणा तथा उपहास के साथ उसे अपने पैरों तले रौंदते हैं। परमेश्वर के अपने विश्वासयोग्य सेवकों के लिए एक कार्य है। शत्रु के आक्रमणों का सामना उसके वचन के सत्य से किया जाना चाहिए। मिथ्यात्व का मुखौटा उतारा जाना चाहिए, उसका वास्तविक स्वरूप प्रकट किया जाना चाहिए, और यहोवा की व्यवस्था का प्रकाश संसार के नैतिक अन्धकार में चमक उठना चाहिए। हमें उसके वचन के दावों को प्रस्तुत करना है। यदि हम इस गंभीर कर्तव्य की उपेक्षा करें, तो हम निर्दोष नहीं ठहराए जाएँगे। परन्तु जब हम सत्य की रक्षा में खड़े हों, तब हम अपनी स्वयं की रक्षा में न खड़े हों, और इस कारण कि हमें निन्दा और मिथ्या आरोप सहने पड़ते हैं, बड़ा कोलाहल न करें। हम अपने ऊपर तरस न खाएँ, बल्कि परमप्रधान की व्यवस्था के लिए अत्यन्त सजग और धर्मोन्मुख उत्साह रखने वाले हों।”
“Says the apostle, ‘The time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.’ On every side we see men easily led captive by the delusive imaginations of those who make void the word of God; but when the truth is brought before them, they are filled with impatience and anger. But the exhortation of the apostle to the servant of God is, ‘Watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.’ In his day some left the cause of the Lord. He writes, ‘Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world;’ and again, he says, ‘Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works: of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words.’
પવિત્ર પ્રેરિત કહે છે: “સમય આવશે, જ્યારે તેઓ ખરા ઉપદેશને સહન નહિ કરે; પરંતુ પોતાની જ વાસનાઓ મુજબ ખંજવાળ ખાતાં કાન ધરાવતા હોવાથી તેઓ પોતાને માટે શિક્ષકોનો ઢગલો કરશે; અને તેઓ સત્યથી પોતાના કાન ફેરવી લેશે, અને કપોળકલ્પિત વાતો તરફ વળી જશે.” ચારે બાજુ આપણે જોઈએ છીએ કે જે લોકો દેવના વચનને નિષ્ફળ ઠરાવે છે તેમની ભ્રમજનક કલ્પનાઓથી મનુષ્યો સહેલાઈથી બંધક બનાવી લેવાય છે; પરંતુ જ્યારે સત્ય તેમની સમક્ષ રજૂ કરવામાં આવે છે, ત્યારે તેઓ અધીરતા અને ક્રોધથી ભરાઈ જાય છે. પરંતુ દેવના સેવકને પ્રેરિતની આજ્ઞા એવી છે: “તું સર્વ બાબતોમાં જાગ્રત રહેજે, ક્લેશો સહેજે, સુસમાચારકનું કાર્ય કરજે, અને પોતાની સેવા પૂર્ણપણે સાબિત કરજે.” તેના સમયમાં કેટલાંક લોકોએ પ્રભુના કાર્યનો ત્યાગ કર્યો હતો. તે લખે છે: “દેમાએ આ વર્તમાન જગતને પ્રેમ કરીને મારો ત્યાગ કર્યો છે;” અને ફરી તે કહે છે, “અલેકસાન્દર તાંબાકામિયાએ મને ઘણું અનિષ્ટ કર્યું: પ્રભુ તેને તેના કાર્યો અનુસાર બદલો આપે: તેના વિષે તું પણ સાવચેત રહેજે; કેમ કે તેણે અમારા વચનોનો ખૂબ જ વિરોધ કર્યો છે.”
“Prophets and apostles experienced similar trials of opposition and reproach, and even the spotless Lamb of God was tempted in all points like as we are. He bore the contradiction of sinners against himself.
« Baporofeta le baapostola ba ile ba hlaheloa ke liteko tse tšoanang tsa khanyetso le nyeliso, ’me esita le Konyana e se nang sekoli ea Molimo e ile ea lekoa linthong tsohle ka ho tšoana le rona. O ile a mamella khanyetso ea baetsalibe khahlanong le eena. »
“Every warning for this time must be faithfully delivered; but ‘the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient; in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves.’ We must cherish carefully the words of our God lest we be contaminated by the deceptive workings of those who have left the faith. We are to resist their spirit and influence with the same weapon our Master used when assailed by the prince of darkness,—‘It is written.’ We should learn to use the word of God skillfully. The exhortation is, ‘Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.’ There must be diligent work and earnest prayer and faith to meet the winding error of false teachers and seducers; for ‘in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.’ These words portray the character of the men the servants of God will have to meet. ‘False accusers,’ ‘despisers of those that are good,’ will attack those who are faithful to their God in this degenerate age. But the embassador of Heaven must manifest the spirit that was displayed in the Master. In humility and love he must labor for the salvation of men.
“U kila ogaatisa oo bara kanaatiif taʼe amanamummaadhaan labsamuu qaba; garuu, ‘tajaajilaan Gooftaa wal loluu hin qabu; garuu nama hundumaatti laafaa, barsiisuu kan danda’u, obsa qabeessa; warra of morman garraamummaadhaan gorsaa’ taʼuu qaba. Jechoota Waaqa keenyaa of eeggannoodhaan kunuunsuu qabna, akka hojii gowwoomsaa warra amantii dhiisanii irraa faalamneef miti. Hafuuraa fi dhiibbaa isaanii meeshaa isa gooftaan keenya yeroo bulchaa dukkanaa isa rukutetti itti fayyadameen mormuu qabna,—‘Barreeffameera.’ Dubbii Waaqayyoo ogummaadhaan itti fayyadamuu barachuu qabna. Gorsi kennamu, ‘Ofii keetiif Waaqa duratti fudhatama qabeessa akka taatuuf jabaadhu; hojjetaa qaanofamuu hin qabne, dubbii dhugaa sirriitti qoodu’ jedhuudha. Dogoggora maramaa barsiisota sobaa fi gowwoomsitootaa dura dhaabachuuf hojii cimaa, kadhannaa garaa guutuu fi amantii barbaachisa; jechuunis, ‘guyyoota dhumaatti yeroo sodaachisaan ni dhufa. Namoonni of jaallattoota, sassattoota, of jajjabeessitoota, of tuultota, arrabsitoota, warra abbaa fi haadhaaf hin abboomamne, galata hin qabne, qulqulluu hin taane, jaalala uumamaa hin qabne, warra walii galtee cabsan, himattota sobaa, of hin qabne, hamoo, warra gaarii jibban, gantoota, ariifattoota, of ol qabeeyyii, Waaqa jaallachuu irra gammachuu jaallatan ta’u; bifa waaqeffannaa qabaatanii humna isaa garuu mormu: akkasii irraa garagali.’ Dubbiileen kun amala namoota tajaajiltoonni Waaqayyoo isaan qunnamuu qaban ni agarsiisu. ‘Himattota sobaa,’ ‘warra gaarii jibban,’ bara xuraaʼaa kana keessatti warra Waaqa isaanii amanamummaadhaan tajaajilan ni weeraru. Garuu ergamaan samii hafuura isa Gooftaan agarsiise mulʼisuu qaba. Gad of deebisuu fi jaalalaan fayyina namootaatiif hojjechuu qaba.”
“Paul continues concerning those who oppose the work of God, comparing them to the men who made war against the faithful in the time of ancient Israel. He says: ‘Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth; men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.’ We know that the time is coming when the folly of warring against God will be revealed. We can afford to wait in calm patience and trust, no matter how much maligned and despised; for ‘nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest,’ and those who honor God shall be honored by him in the presence of men and angels. We are to share in the sufferings of the reformers. It is written, ‘The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me.’ Christ understands our grief. Not one of us is called to bear the cross alone. The suffering Man of Calvary is touched with the feeling of our woes, and as he has suffered being tempted, he is able also to succor them that are in sorrow and trial for his sake. ‘Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned.’” Review and Herald, January 10, 1888.
«پولُس دربارۀ کسانی که با کار خدا مخالفت میکنند ادامه میدهد و ایشان را با مردانی مقایسه میکند که در روزگار اسرائیلِ باستان بر ضد وفاداران جنگیدند. او میگوید: “و چنانکه یَنّیس و یَمبریس با موسی مقاومت کردند، اینان نیز همچنین با راستی مقاومت میکنند؛ مردمانی فاسدالذهن و مردود از جهت ایمان. لیکن بیش از این پیش نخواهند رفت، زیرا حماقت ایشان بر همگان آشکار خواهد شد، چنانکه حماقت آنان نیز آشکار شد.” ما میدانیم که زمانی فرا میرسد که حماقتِ جنگیدن با خدا آشکار خواهد شد. هر قدر نیز بدنام و خوار شمرده شویم، میتوانیم در آرامشِ صبر و اعتماد انتظار بکشیم؛ زیرا “هیچ چیز پوشیده نیست که آشکار نگردد”، و آنان که خدا را حرمت مینهند، از سوی او در حضور آدمیان و فرشتگان حرمت خواهند یافت. ما باید در رنجهای مصلحان شریک شویم. نوشته شده است: “ملامتِ ملامتکنندگانِ تو بر من افتاد.” مسیح اندوه ما را درک میکند. هیچیک از ما فراخوانده نشده است که صلیب را به تنهایی بر دوش کشد. آن مردِ رنجکشیدۀ جلجتا از دردهای ما متأثر میشود، و چون خود در حین وسوسه شدن رنج کشیده است، قادر است آنان را نیز که بهخاطر او در غم و آزمایشاند، یاری رساند. “بلکه همۀ کسانی که بخواهند در مسیح عیسی به دینداری زیست کنند، جفا خواهند دید. اما مردمان شریر و فریبندگان، بدتر و بدتر خواهند شد، گمراهکننده و گمراهشونده. لیکن تو در آنچه آموختهای ثابت بمان.” Review and Herald, January 10, 1888.»