The increase of knowledge that is represented by the vision of the Ulai River is what ultimately was written upon Habakkuk’s two tables.

Ogmantasyon konesans lan, ki reprezante pa vizyon Rivyè Ulai a, se sa ki finalman te ekri sou de tab Habakik yo.

“Interwoven with prophecies which they had regarded as applying to the time of the second advent was instruction specially adapted to their state of uncertainty and suspense, and encouraging them to wait patiently in the faith that what was now dark to their understanding would in due time be made plain.

“Pami pwofesi yo ki te mare youn ak lòt, pwofesi yo te konsidere kòm sa ki te aplike pou tan dezyèm avènman an, te gen ansèyman ki te espesyalman adapte ak eta ensèten ak tansyon yo, e ki t ap ankouraje yo pou yo tann avèk pasyans nan lafwa, paske sa ki te kounye a fènwa pou konpreyansyon yo t ap vin klè nan tan ki apwopriye a.

“Among these prophecies was that of Habakkuk 2:1–4: ‘I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what He will say unto me, and what I shall answer when I am reproved. And the Lord answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it. 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. Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.’

“Pami pwofesi sa yo te gen sa ki nan Abakik 2:1–4 la: ‘M ap kanpe sou pòs vijilans mwen, m ap rete sou fò won an, epi m ap veye pou m wè sa Li pral di m, ak sa m pral reponn lè yo korije m. Epi Seyè a reponn mwen, li di: Ekri vizyon an, epi fè l klè sou tablèt yo, pou moun k ap li l la ka kouri. Paske vizyon an se toujou pou yon tan fikse; men nan fen an li pral pale, epi li p ap bay manti: menm si li pran reta, tann li; paske li ap vini sètènman, li p ap retade. Gade, nanm moun ki gonfle ak lògèy la pa dwat nan li; men moun jis la va viv pa lafwa li.’”

“As early as 1842 the direction given in this prophecy to ‘write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it,’ had suggested to Charles Fitch the preparation of a prophetic chart to illustrate the visions of Daniel and the Revelation. The publication of this chart was regarded as a fulfillment of the command given by Habakkuk. No one, however, then noticed that an apparent delay in the accomplishment of the vision—a tarrying time—is presented in the same prophecy. After the disappointment, this scripture appeared very significant: ‘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…. The just shall live by his faith.” The Great Controversy, 391, 392.

Depi nan ane 1842, direksyon yo bay nan pwofesi sa a pou “ekri vizyon an, epi fè l klè sou tab yo, pou moun k ap li li a ka kouri,” te deja pouse Charles Fitch prepare yon tablo pwofetik pou ilistre vizyon Danyèl ak Revelasyon an. Yo te konsidere piblikasyon tablo sa a kòm yon akonplisman kòmandman Abakouk te resevwa a. Sepandan, pèsonn pa t remake lè sa a ke menm pwofesi a prezante yon reta ki sanble nan akonplisman vizyon an—yon tan reta. Apre desepsyon an, pasaj sa a nan Ekriti yo te parèt gen anpil enpòtans: “Vizyon an se toujou pou yon tan fikse; men nan fen an li va pale, epi li p ap bay manti: menm si li ta pran reta, tann li; paske li va sètènman vini, li p ap pran reta…. Moun jis la va viv pa lafwa li.” The Great Controversy, 391, 392.

The two tables of Habakkuk are prophetically two witnesses. Biblically, two witnesses are to be brought together to establish truth.

De tab Habakouk yo, nan sans pwofetik, se de temwen. Dapre Bib la, se pou yo mete de temwen ansanm pou etabli verite a.

But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. Matthew 8:16.

Men, si li pa vle koute ou, pran avèk ou youn oswa de lòt ankò, pou pa bouch de oswa twa temwen, tout pawòl ka tabli. Matye 8:16.

When Habakkuk’s two tables (the 1843 and 1850 pioneer charts) are overlaid with each other they confirm the truths that were the “jewels” of Miller’s dream. The mistake of 1843, represented upon the first table, when overlaid with the second table, establishes the “tarrying time” of the vision. Miller (the symbolic watchman of that history) asked what he was to say during the debate of his history.

Lè yo sipèpoze de tablo Abakik yo (tablo pyonye 1843 ak 1850 yo) youn sou lòt, yo konfime verite ki te “bijou” nan rèv Miller la. Erè 1843 la, ki reprezante sou premye tablo a, lè yo sipèpoze li ak dezyèm tablo a, tabli “tan reta” vizyon an. Miller (gadyen senbolik istwa sa a) te mande sa li te dwe di pandan deba ki te nan istwa pa li a.

I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what he will say unto me, and what I shall answer when I am reproved. Habakkuk 2:1.

M’a kanpe sou pòs veye mwen, m’a mete tèt mwen sou gwo fò won an; m’a veye pou m wè sa l va di m, epi sa m’a reponn lè yo korije m. Abakouk 2:1.

The Lord instructed Miller to write the vision, and in his dream he placed the casket which contained the vision on a table in the center of his room.

Seyè a te enstwi Miller pou ekri vizyon an, epi nan rèv li a li te mete ti bwat ki te gen vizyon an ladan l sou yon tab nan mitan chanm li a.

And the Lord answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it. Habakkuk 2:2.

Seyè a reponn mwen, li di: Ekri vizyon an, epi fè l klè sou tab yo, pou moun k ap li l la ka kouri. Abakik 2:2.

The tables then identify the tarrying time and the first disappointment.

Apre sa, tablo yo idantifye tan reta a ak premye desepsyon an.

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. Habakkuk 2:3.

Paske vizyon an se toujou pou yon tan fikse; men nan fen an, li pral pale, li p ap bay manti. Menm si li pran tan, tann li; paske li pral vini san manke, li p ap pran reta. Abakik 2:3.

Then the two classes that are manifested based upon the increase of knowledge are represented.

Lè sa a, de kategori ki parèt sou baz ogmantasyon konesans lan reprezante.

Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith. Habakkuk 2:4.

Gade, nanm li ki gonfle ak ògèy la pa dwat nan li; men moun jis la va viv pa lafwa li. Abakik 2:4.

The two classes of worshippers would be manifested by the testing process of Daniel chapter twelve.

De klas adoratris la ta manifesta pa medio di e proseso di prueba di Daniel kapítulo diesdos.

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

Epi li di: Ale wout ou, Danyèl; paske pawòl yo fèmen epi sele jouk nan tan lafen an. Anpil va pirifye, yo va vin blan, epi yo va pase anba eprèv; men mechan yo va aji avèk mechanste; e pa youn nan mechan yo va konprann; men saj yo va konprann. Danyèl 12:9, 10.

The “wise” of Daniel are the wise virgins of Matthew twenty-five who were justified by faith, and the wicked were the foolish virgins who were lifted up in pride. At the end of Miller’s dream, the jewels represent the oil in the parable of the ten virgins, which was the message.

“Moun saj” nan Danyèl yo se vyèj saj yo nan Matye 25 ki te jistifye pa lafwa, e mechan yo se te vyèj sòt yo ki te gonfle ak lògèy. Nan fen rèv Miller la, bijou yo reprezante lwil la nan parabòl dis vyèj yo, ki te mesaj la.

“God is dishonored when we do not receive the communications which he sends us. Thus we refuse the golden oil which he would pour into our souls to be communicated to those in darkness. When the call shall come, ‘Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him,’ those who have not received the holy oil, who have not cherished the grace of Christ in their hearts, will find, like the foolish virgins, that they are not ready to meet their Lord. They have not, in themselves, the power to obtain the oil, and their lives are wrecked.” Review and Herald, July 20, 1897.

“Bondye pa resevwa onè lè nou pa resevwa kominikasyon li voye ban nou. Konsa nou refize lwil an lò li ta vide nan nanm nou pou l ka transmèt bay sila yo ki nan fènwa. Lè apèl la va rive, ‘Men, Veterarye a ap vini; soti al rankontre li,’ sila yo ki pa t resevwa lwil ki sen an, ki pa t pran swen lagras Kris la nan kè yo, ap jwenn, menm jan ak vyèj sòt yo, yo pa pare pou rankontre Seyè yo. Yo pa gen, nan yo menm, pouvwa pou jwenn lwil la, e lavi yo fini kraze.” Review and Herald, July 20, 1897.

Miller’s jewels in the last days would shine ten times brighter, and both the number ten is a symbol of a test, as is light. In the last days, represented in the end of Miller’s dream, the light of truth represented upon Habakkuk’s tables produces a testing message, which in the parable of the ten virgins is the testing message of the Midnight Cry. That testing process is a repetition of the testing process of Millerite history, for the parable of the ten virgins is repeated to the very letter in the last days.

Nan dènye jou yo, bijou Miller yo t ap briye dis fwa plis, epi ni chif dis la se yon senbòl tès, menm jan ak limyè a. Nan dènye jou yo, jan sa reprezante nan fen rèv Miller la, limyè verite a ki reprezante sou tabak Abakouk yo pwodui yon mesaj tès, ki, nan parabòl dis vyèj yo, se mesaj tès Kri Minwi a. Pwosesis tès sa a se yon repete pwosesis tès istwa Millerit la, paske parabòl dis vyèj yo repete rive jis nan dènye lèt la nan dènye jou yo.

“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.” Review and Herald, August 19, 1890.

“Mwen souvan jwenn yo fè referans avè m a parabòl dis vyèj yo, senk ladan yo te saj, epi senk yo te sòt. Parabòl sa a te akonpli e li pral akonpli jis nan tout detay li, paske li gen yon aplikasyon espesyal pou tan sa a; epi, menm jan ak mesaj twazyèm zanj lan, li te akonpli e li pral kontinye rete verite prezan jouk nan fen tan an.” Review and Herald, 19 out 1890.

The experience of the tarrying time would be repeated to the very letter at the end of Miller’s dream, and his jewels would then shine ten times brighter than the sun, thus identifying that the jewels represent the final test in the parable of the ten virgins. Ten is the symbol of a test, and at the end of ten days Daniel and the three worthies were visually fairer and fatter than those who were eating the diet of Babylon. The proud in Habakkuk who lived by presumption, not faith, developed the character of Babylon. In Millerite history they became the daughters of Babylon, and in Habakkuk the papacy is used to identify their character.

Eksperyans tan reta a t ap repete jis nan dènye detay la nan fen rèv Miller la, epi bijou li yo t ap briye dis fwa plis pase solèy la; konsa sa idantifye bijou yo kòm yo reprezante dènye tès la nan parabòl dis vyèj yo. Dis se senbòl yon tès, epi nan fen dis jou, Danyèl ak twa mesye vanyan yo te parèt pi bèl e pi gra pase moun ki t ap manje manje Babilòn nan. Ògeye yo nan Abakik la, ki t ap viv pa soupozisyon, pa pa lafwa, te devlope karaktè Babilòn. Nan istwa Millerit la, yo te vin pitit fi Babilòn yo, epi nan Abakik la, papote a sèvi pou idantifye karaktè yo.

Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith. Yea also, because he transgresseth by wine, he is a proud man, neither keepeth at home, who enlargeth his desire as hell, and is as death, and cannot be satisfied, but gathereth unto him all nations, and heapeth unto him all people: Shall not all these take up a parable against him, and a taunting proverb against him, and say, Woe to him that increaseth that which is not his! how long? and to him that ladeth himself with thick clay! Shall they not rise up suddenly that shall bite thee, and awake that shall vex thee, and thou shalt be for booties unto them? Because thou hast spoiled many nations, all the remnant of the people shall spoil thee; because of men’s blood, and for the violence of the land, of the city, and of all that dwell therein. Habakkuk 2:4–8.

Gade, nanm li ki gonfle ak lògèy pa dwat nan li; men, moun jis la va viv pa lafwa li. Wi, tou, paske li peche pa mwayen diven, li se yon nonm ògeye; li pa rete lakay li; li elaji dezi li tankou lanfè, li tankou lanmò, e li pa kapab satisfè; men li rasanble bò kote li tout nasyon yo, epi li anpile sou li tout pèp yo. Èske tout sa yo p ap leve yon parabòl kont li, ak yon pwovèb mokè kont li, pou yo di: Malè pou moun ki ogmante sa ki pa pou li! jis ki lè? ak pou moun ki chaje tèt li ak labou lou! Èske sa yo ki pral mòde w yo p ap leve toudenkou, epi sa yo ki pral boulvèse w yo p ap reveye, e ou va tounen piyaj pou yo? Paske ou te piye anpil nasyon, tout rès pèp yo va piye ou; poutèt san lèzòm, ak poutèt vyolans ki fèt sou peyi a, sou lavil la, ak sou tout moun ki rete ladan l. Abakik 2:4–8.

The testing process brought upon the virgins of Matthew twenty-five produces a class of worshippers, who have developed the character of the king of the north (the papacy), who is also the power that “spoiled many nations.”

Pwosesis egzamen an ki vini sou vyèj yo nan Matye vennsenk la pwodui yon klas adoratè ki devlope karaktè wa nò a (papote a), ki se tou pouvwa ki te “piyaje anpil nasyon.”

Thus saith the Lord, Behold, a people cometh from the north country, and a great nation shall be raised from the sides of the earth. They shall lay hold on bow and spear; they are cruel, and have no mercy; their voice roareth like the sea; and they ride upon horses, set in array as men for war against thee, O daughter of Zion. We have heard the fame thereof: our hands wax feeble: anguish hath taken hold of us, and pain, as of a woman in travail. Go not forth into the field, nor walk by the way; for the sword of the enemy and fear is on every side. O daughter of my people, gird thee with sackcloth, and wallow thyself in ashes: make thee mourning, as for an only son, most bitter lamentation: for the spoiler shall suddenly come upon us. Jeremiah 6:22–26.

Men sa Seyè a: Gade, yon pèp ap vini soti nan peyi nò a, e yon gwo nasyon pral leve soti nan dènye bout tè a. Y ap pran banza ak frenn; yo mechan, yo pa gen pitye; bri vwa yo gwonde tankou lanmè; e yo monte sou chwal, ranje an batay tankou gason lagè kont ou, O pitit fi Siyon. Nou tande nouvèl sa a: men nou vin fèb; kè sere pran nou, ak doulè, tankou yon fanm k ap akouche. Pa soti nan jaden an, ni pa mache sou chemen an; paske nepe lènmi an ak lakrentif se toupatou. O pitit fi pèp mwen an, mare ren ou ak sak, woule kò ou nan sann; pran dèy tankou pou yon sèl pitit gason, ak yon plenn ki pi anmè; paske moun k ap detwi a pral tonbe sou nou toudenkou. Jeremi 6:22–26.

Habakkuk’s two classes are those who are justified by faith, and those who ate and drank the doctrines of Babylon. Those in the last days of Miller’s dream that are represented as virgins, either develop the character of Christ, and thus receive the seal of God, or they develop the character of the papacy and receive the mark of the beast.

De kategori Habakik yo se sila yo ki jistifye pa lafwa, ak sila yo ki te manje epi bwè doktrin Babilòn yo. Sila yo ki nan dènye jou rèv Miller la, ki reprezante kòm vyèj, swa yo devlope karaktè Kris la, epi konsa yo resevwa so Bondye a, swa yo devlope karaktè papote a epi yo resevwa mak bèt la.

“The time has come for the true light to shine amid moral darkness. The third angel’s message has been sent forth to the world, warning men against receiving the mark of the beast or of his image in their foreheads or in their hands. To receive this mark means to come to the same decision as the beast has done, and to advocate the same ideas, in direct opposition to the word of God. Of all who receive this mark, God says, ‘The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb.’” Review and Herald, July 13, 1897.

“Lè a rive pou vrè limyè a briye nan mitan fènwa moral la. Mesaj twazyèm zanj lan te voye bay lemonn, pou avèti moun kont resevwa mak bèt la oswa mak imaj li a sou fwon yo oswa nan men yo. Resevwa mak sa a vle di rive pran menm desizyon ak bèt la te pran an, epi soutni menm lide yo, an opozisyon dirèk ak Pawòl Bondye a. Konsènan tout moun ki resevwa mak sa a, Bondye di: ‘Moun sa a va bwè menm nan diven kòlè Bondye a, ki vide san melanj nan gode endiyasyon li a; epi yo va tòtire li ak dife ak souf an prezans zanj sen yo, epi an prezans Ti Mouton an.’” Review and Herald, July 13, 1897.

The virgins that drink the wine of Babylon will ultimately drink the wine of God’s wrath. In Isaiah, the drunkards of Ephraim manifest their blind drunkenness by turning things upside down, and that action is to be esteemed as “potter’s clay.”

Vyèj ki bwè diven Babilòn lan pral, alafen, bwè diven kòlè Bondye a. Nan Ezayi, tafyatè Efrayim yo montre avègman yo nan sou yo lè yo vire tout bagay tèt anba, epi aksyon sa a dwe konsidere kòm “labou bòs kizin an.”

The identification of “the daily” as a symbol of Christ, turns the truth of “the daily” upside down, for “the daily,” is a satanic symbol. Miller’s identification of “the daily” as paganism is directly represented upon Habakkuk’s tables. Miller’s discovery of the passage in Thessalonians, which allowed him to understand that it was paganism that was “taken away,” in order for the “man of sin” who sits in the temple of God to be revealed, is the primary truth located in 2 Thessalonians, chapter two.

Idantifikasyon “sakrifis tout tan an” kòm yon senbòl Kris la, ranvèse laverite sou “sakrifis tout tan an” tèt anba, paske “sakrifis tout tan an” se yon senbòl satanik. Idantifikasyon Miller te fè de “sakrifis tout tan an” kòm paganism lan reprezante dirèkteman sou tab Habakik yo. Dekouvèt Miller te fè sou pasaj ki nan Tesalonisyen yo, ki te pèmèt li konprann se paganism lan ki te “retire,” pou “moun peche a,” ki chita nan tanp Bondye a, te kapab parèt aklè, se verite prensipal ki chita nan 2 Tesalonisyen, chapit de.

“I read on, and could find no other case in which it [the daily] was found, but in Daniel. I then [by the aid of a concordance] took those words which stood in connection with it, ‘take away;’ he shall take away the daily; ‘from the time the daily shall be taken away,’ etc. I read on, and thought I should find no light on the text; finally I came to 2 Thessalonians 2:7, 8. ‘For the mystery of iniquity doth already work; only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way, and then shall that wicked be revealed,’ etc. And when I had come to that text, O, how clear and glorious the truth appeared! There it is! That is the daily! Well, now, what does Paul mean by ‘he who now letteth,’ or hindereth? By ‘the man of sin,’ and the ‘wicked,’ Popery is meant. Well, what is it which hinders Popery from being revealed? Why, it is Paganism; well, then, ‘the daily’ must mean Paganism.’—William Miller, Second Advent Manual, page 66.” Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, January 6, 1853.

“Mwen te kontinye li, e mwen pa t kapab jwenn okenn lòt ka kote li [sakrifis tout tan an] te parèt, eksepte nan Dànyèl. Lè sa a [avèk èd yon konkòdans] mwen pran pawòl sa yo ki te parèt an koneksyon avè l, ‘wete;’ li pral wete sakrifis tout tan an; ‘depi lè yo va wete sakrifis tout tan an,’ elatriye. Mwen te kontinye li, e mwen te panse mwen pa t ap jwenn okenn limyè sou tèks la; finalman mwen rive nan 2 Tesalonisyen 2:7, 8. ‘Paske mistè mechanste a deja ap aji; se sèlman sila a ki kounye a kenbe a ki va kontinye kenbe, jiskaske yo wete li nan chemen an, epi lè sa a mechan sa a va revele,’ elatriye. E lè mwen te rive nan tèks sa a, O, jan verite a te parèt klè ak gloriye! Men li la! Se sa ki sakrifis tout tan an! Bon, kounye a, kisa Pòl vle di pa ‘sila a ki kounye a kenbe a,’ oswa ki anpeche? Pa ‘nonm peche a,’ ak ‘mechan an,’ yo vle di Papis la. Bon, kisa li ye ki anpeche Papis la pou l pa revele? Poukisa, se Paganis la; byen, alò, ‘sakrifis tout tan an’ dwe vle di Paganis la.” —William Miller, Second Advent Manual, paj 66.” Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, 6 janvye 1853.

The meaning of “the daily” in Thessalonians, which Miller discovered, is the primary truth of the passage. When Paul identifies those who do not love the truth, and who will therefore receive strong delusion, he is most certainly identifying the hatred of truth in the general sense, but the truth which is directly referenced in the passage is the truth that “the daily,” represents pagan Rome.

Siyifikasyon “kontinyèl la” nan Tesalonisyen yo, ke Miller te dekouvri, se verite prensipal pasaj la. Lè Pòl idantifye sila yo ki pa renmen verite a, e ki poutèt sa pral resevwa yon gwo ilizyon twonpe, li sètènman ap idantifye rayisman verite nan sans jeneral la; men verite ki dirèkteman fè referans nan pasaj la se verite ke “kontinyèl la” reprezante Wòm payen an.

The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness! No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. Matthew 6:22–24.

Limyè kò a se je a: si donc je ou senp, tout kò ou va plen ak limyè. Men, si je ou move, tout kò ou va plen ak fènwa. Si donc limyè ki nan ou a se fènwa, ala gwo fènwa sa a ye! Pesonn pa ka sèvi de mèt: paske swa l ap rayi youn, epi renmen lòt la; oswa li pral atache ak youn, epi meprize lòt la. Nou pa ka sèvi Bondye ak mamon. Matye 6:22–24.

There is only a love for truth, or a hatred of the truth. There is no middle ground. The strong delusion that comes upon the foolish virgins of Matthew twenty-five is based upon their rejection of the light of Miller’s jewels that represent the final test. Ancient Israel’s final test, was their tenth test, and Miller’s jewels shine ten times brighter in the last days. The symbol of the rejection of Miller’s jewels is “the daily,” which the drunkards of Ephraim turned upside down in the third generation of Adventism. “The daily” is a satanic symbol of paganism. The drunkards introduced a counterfeit jewel, which they brought from apostate Protestantism that identifies “the daily,” as a symbol of Christ.

Gen sèlman swa yon lanmou pou verite a, swa yon rayisman pou verite a. Pa gen okenn mwayen tèren. Gwo ilizyon an ki vini sou vyèj sòt yo nan Matye vennsenk la baze sou rejè yo fè limyè bijou Miller yo ki reprezante dènye eprèv la. Dènye eprèv ansyen Izrayèl la se te dizyèm eprèv yo, e bijou Miller yo klere dis fwa pi fò nan dènye jou yo. Senbòl rejè bijou Miller yo se “sakrifis kontinyèl la,” ke tafyatè Efrayim yo te ranvèse tèt anba nan twazyèm jenerasyon Advantis la. “Sakrifis kontinyèl la” se yon senbòl satanik payenis. Tafyatè yo te prezante yon fo bijou, ke yo te pote soti nan Pwotestantis aposta a, ki idantifye “sakrifis kontinyèl la” kòm yon senbòl Kris la.

Miller’s understanding of his jewels was limited by the history in which he was raised up. Convinced the Second Coming was the next prophetic event, the deadly wound of the papacy in 1798, could only represent the fourth and final earthly kingdom of Daniel two. Miller was also limited in his understanding of “the daily,” for his testimony is that through revelation he was led to a specific method of study, in which he stated that he used his Bible, Cruden’s Concordance and read some newspapers. His decision to study in that manner had simply come into his mind.

Konpreyansyon Miller te genyen sou bijou li yo te limite pa istwa kote li te leve a. Kòm li te konvenki Dezyèm Vini an se te pwochen evènman pwofetik la, blesi mòtèl papote a an 1798 pa t kapab reprezante lòt bagay pase katriyèm ak dènye wayòm tèren an nan Danyèl de. Miller te limite tou nan konpreyansyon li sou “sakrifis chak jou a,” paske temwayaj li se ke, atravè revelasyon, li te dirije nan direksyon yon metòd etid espesifik, kote li te deklare li te sèvi ak Bib li, Concordance Cruden lan, epi li te li kèk jounal. Desizyon li pou etidye nan fason sa a te senpleman vin nan lespri li.

“During, the twelve years I was a deist, I read all histories I could find; but now I loved the Bible It taught of Jesus! But still there was a good deal of the Bible that was dark to me. In 1818 or 19, while conversing with a friend! To whom I made a visit, and who had known and [heard] me talk while I was a deist, he inquired, in rather a significant manner, ‘What do you think of this text, and that?’ referring to the old texts I objected to while a deist. I understood what he was about, and replied—If you will give me time, I will tell you what they mean. ‘How long time do you want?’ I don’t know, but I will tell you, I replied, for I could not believe that God had given a revelation that could not be understood. I then resolved to study my Bible, believing I could find out what the Holy Spirit meant. But as soon as I had formed this resolution the thought came to me—‘Suppose you find a passage that you cannot understand, what will you do?’ This mode of studying the Bible then came to my mind:—I will take the words of such passages, and trace them through the Bible, and find out their meaning in this way. I had Cruden’s Concordance, which I think is the best in the world; so I took that and my Bible, and set down to my desk, and read nothing else, except the newspapers a little, for I was determined to know what my Bible meant. Apollos Hale, The Second Advent Manual, 65.

“Pandan douz ane mwen te yon deis, mwen te li tout istwa mwen te kapab jwenn; men kounye a mwen te renmen Bib la. Li te anseye konsènan Jezi! Men, toujou te gen yon bon pati nan Bib la ki te fè nwa pou mwen. An 1818 oswa 1819, pandan m t ap pale ak yon zanmi mwen te al vizite, e ki te konnen m epi ki te [tande] mwen pale pandan mwen te yon deis, li te mande, avèk yon fason byen siyifikatif: ‘Ki sa ou panse de tèks sa a, ak tèks sa a?’ li t ap fè referans ak ansyen tèks mwen te konn opoze pandan mwen te yon deis. Mwen te konprann sa li te vle di, epi mwen te reponn:—Si ou ban m tan, m ap di ou sa yo vle di. ‘Konbyen tan ou vle?’ Mwen pa konnen, men m ap di ou, mwen te reponn, paske mwen pa t ka kwè Bondye te bay yon revelasyon ki pa t kapab konprann. Lè sa a, mwen te pran desizyon pou m etidye Bib mwen, avèk konviksyon mwen te kapab dekouvri sa Sentespri a te vle di. Men, tousuit apre mwen te fin pran rezolisyon sa a, panse sa a te vin nan lespri mwen:—‘Sipoze ou jwenn yon pasaj ou pa kapab konprann, kisa w ap fè?’ Lè sa a, mòd sa a pou etidye Bib la te vini nan lespri mwen:—M ap pran mo ki nan pasaj sa yo, m ap swiv yo atravè Bib la, epi konsa m ap dekouvri siyifikasyon yo. Mwen te gen Concordance Cruden lan, ki, dapre mwen, se pi bon an nan lemonn; konsa, mwen te pran li ansanm ak Bib mwen, epi mwen te chita bò biwo mwen, epi mwen pa t li anyen ankò, eksepte yon ti kras jounal, paske mwen te detèmine pou m konnen sa Bib mwen an te vle di. Apollos Hale, The Second Advent Manual, 65.”

Miller’s jewels were not simply recognized by his method of study, but also by direct revelation from God.

Bijou Miller yo pa t sèlman rekonèt grasa metòd etid li a, men tou pa revelasyon dirèk ki soti nan Bondye.

“God sent His angel to move upon the heart of a farmer who had not believed the Bible, to lead him to search the prophecies. Angels of God repeatedly visited that chosen one, to guide his mind and open to his understanding prophecies which had ever been dark to God’s people. The commencement of the chain of truth was given to him, and he was led on to search for link after link, until he looked with wonder and admiration upon the Word of God. He saw there a perfect chain of truth. That Word which he had regarded as uninspired now opened before his vision in its beauty and glory. He saw that one portion of Scripture explains another, and when one passage was closed to his understanding, he found in another part of the Word that which explained it. He regarded the sacred Word of God with joy and with the deepest respect and awe.” Early Writings, 230.

“Bondye te voye zanj Li pou touche kè yon kiltivatè ki pa t kwè nan Bib la, pou mennen l fouye nan pwofesi yo. Zanj Bondye yo te vizite moun Bondye te chwazi sa a plizyè fwa, pou gide lespri li epi louvri devan konpreyansyon li pwofesi ki te toujou rete fènwa pou pèp Bondye a. Yo te ba li kòmansman chèn verite a, epi yo te mennen l pou l chèche lyen apre lyen, jouk li te gade Pawòl Bondye a avèk mèvèy ak admirasyon. Li te wè ladan l yon chèn verite ki pafè. Pawòl sa a, li menm li te konsidere kòm yon pawòl ki pa t enspire, te vin louvri devan je li nan bote ak glwa li. Li te wè ke yon pati nan Ekriti a esplike yon lòt, epi lè yon pasaj te fèmen pou konpreyansyon li, li te jwenn nan yon lòt pati nan Pawòl la sa ki te esplike l. Li te konsidere Pawòl sakre Bondye a avèk lajwa, ak pi gwo respè ak lakrentif.” Early Writings, 230.

When Sister White states that “God sent His angel” to Miller, it is identifying that Gabriel was the angel sent to Miller, for “His angel,” is a term assigned to Gabriel.

Lè Sè White deklare ke “Bondye te voye zanj Li” bay Miller, sa idantifye ke Gabriyèl te zanj ki te voye bay Miller, paske “zanj Li” se yon tèm yo atribye a Gabriyèl.

“The words of the angel, ‘I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God,’ show that he holds a position of high honor in the heavenly courts. When he came with a message to Daniel, he said, ‘There is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael [Christ] your Prince.’ Daniel 10:21. Of Gabriel the Saviour speaks in the Revelation, saying that ‘He sent and signified it by His angel unto His servant John.’ Revelation 1:1.” The Desire of Ages, 99.

“Pawòl zanj lan, ‘Se mwen menm Gabriyèl, ki kanpe devan prezans Bondye a,’ montre ke li okipe yon pozisyon gwo onè nan lakou syèl la. Lè li te vini avèk yon mesaj pou Dànyèl, li te di, ‘Pa gen okenn ki kenbe ansanm avè m nan bagay sa yo, eksepte Mikaèl [Kris] Chèf nou an.’ Daniel 10:21. Konsènan Gabriyèl, Sovè a pale nan Revelasyon an, li di ke ‘Li voye l e li fè konnen l pa mwayen zanj li bay sèvitè li Jan.’ Revelation 1:1.” The Desire of Ages, 99.

Gabriel and the other angels guided Miller’s “mind and” opened “to his understanding prophecies which had ever been dark to God’s people.” His message was not simply developed through his method of study, but also by Divine revelation. The very method he employed to study the Bible just came into his mind. When God brings truth to our mind, it is a Divine revelation as opposed to arriving at truth through the process of rightly dividing the Bible. Miller did both, but Divine revelation was a part of how Miller came to understand the subject of “the daily.”

Gabryèl ak lòt zanj yo te gide “lespri ak” Miller, yo te louvri “nan konpreyansyon li pwofesi ki te toujou fè nwa pou pèp Bondye a.” Mesaj li a pa t sèlman devlope atravè metòd etid li, men tou pa revelasyon Diven. Menm metòd li te itilize pou etidye Bib la te tou senpleman vin nan lespri li. Lè Bondye pote verite nan lespri nou, sa se yon revelasyon Diven, an opozisyon ak rive nan verite atravè pwosesis pou byen separe Bib la. Miller te fè toude, men revelasyon Diven te yon pati nan fason Miller te rive konprann sijè “sakrifis tout tan an.”

Miller would not have recognized the gender oscillation of Daniel chapter eight, verses nine through twelve, for all he had was the Bible and a concordance that is void of any information concerning the biblical languages. He would not have seen the distinction between ‘sur’ and ‘rum’ which are both translated as “take away.” He would have not seen the distinction between ‘miqdash’ and ‘qodesh’ which are both translated as “sanctuary.”

Miller pa t ap rekonèt osilasyon jan an nan Danyèl chapit uit, vèsè nèf rive douz, paske tout sa li te genyen se te Bib la ak yon konkòdans ki pa t genyen okenn enfòmasyon konsènan lang biblik yo. Li pa t ap wè diferans ki genyen ant “sur” ak “rum,” ki toude tradui kòm “retire.” Li pa t ap wè diferans ki genyen ant “miqdash” ak “qodesh,” ki toude tradui kòm “tanp lan.”

He would not have seen the truth of the word ‘tamid’ that is found one hundred and four times in the Bible. The truth he could not have seen (which is also the truth that he did see), was that of the one hundred and four times that the Hebrew word ‘tamid’ is used in the Bible, but only in the book of Daniel is the Hebrew word ‘tamid,’ used as a noun. ‘Tamid’ is the Hebrew word that means “continual”, and is translated as “the daily” in the book of Daniel.

Li pa t ap wè verite mo “tamid” la, ki parèt san kat fwa nan Bib la. Verite li pa t ka wè a (ki se tou verite li te wè a), se ke pami san kat fwa mo ebre “tamid” la itilize nan Bib la, se sèlman nan liv Danyèl la mo ebre “tamid” la itilize kòm yon non. “Tamid” se mo ebre ki vle di “kontinyèl”, epi nan liv Danyèl la yo tradui li kòm “sakrifis chak jou”.

Only in the book of Daniel is the word used as a noun, and the other ninety-nine times it is used as an adverb. For this reason, when the translators of the King James Bible were confronted with Daniel using the word five times as a noun, when all the other writers of the Bible used the word ninety-nine times as an adverb, they were forced by the weight of evidence to “correct” Daniel’s use of the word as a noun. In order to “correct” Daniel, they added the word “sacrifice” to the word, and thus turned a noun into an adverb. And then in order to correct the translators, Ellen White was inspired to record that she, “saw in relation to the ‘Daily,’ 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.”

Se sèlman nan liv Danyèl la mo a sèvi kòm yon non, epi nan lòt katreven-diznèf fwa yo li sèvi kòm yon advèb. Se poutèt sa, lè tradiktè Bib Wa Jak la te jwenn Danyèl sèvi ak mo a senk fwa kòm yon non, pandan tout lòt ekriven Bib la te sèvi ak mo a katreven-diznèf fwa kòm yon advèb, yo te oblije, anba pwa prèv yo, “korije” fason Danyèl te sèvi ak mo a kòm yon non. Pou yo te “korije” Danyèl, yo te ajoute mo “sakrifis” la ak mo a, e konsa yo te fè yon non tounen yon advèb. Epi apre sa, pou korije tradiktè yo, Ellen White te enspire pou ekri ke li menm, “te wè konsènan ‘Daily’ a, ke mo ‘sacrifice’ la se sajès lèzòm ki te ajoute li, e li pa fè pati tèks la; e ke Senyè a te bay bon konpreyansyon sou li bay sila yo ki te bay kri lè jijman an.”

Miller, by his own testimony, was seeking to understand “the daily,” which he ultimately did in 2 Thessalonians. But also, by his own testimony, when seeking to understand a word, he would consider every place the word was used, and the word is used ninety-nine other times in the Bible. Yet his testimony of “the daily,” is that he found it nowhere but in the book of Daniel, when he stated, “I read on, and could find no other case in which it [the daily] was found, but in Daniel.” Miller was led to the jewels not alone by his method of study, but also by divine revelation that was given to him through the ministry of angels.

Miller, daprè pwòp temwayaj pa li, t ap chèche konprann “sakrifis tout tan an,” sa li te rive konprann finalman nan 2 Tesalonisyen. Men tou, daprè pwòp temwayaj pa li, lè l t ap chèche konprann yon mo, li t ap konsidere tout kote mo sa a te itilize, epi mo sa a itilize katreven-diznèf lòt fwa ankò nan Bib la. Men temwayaj li konsènan “sakrifis tout tan an” se ke li pa t jwenn li okenn lòt kote sof nan liv Danyèl la, lè li te deklare: “Mwen te kontinye li, e mwen pa t kapab jwenn okenn lòt ka kote li [sakrifis tout tan an] te parèt, eksepte nan Danyèl.” Miller te mennen nan bijou yo pa metòd etid li sèlman, men tou pa revelasyon diven ki te ba li atravè ministè zanj yo.

This is why his understanding of “the daily,” was correct, but limited. He could not recognize that of the five times “the daily” is referenced in the book of Daniel, that one of the three times “the daily” is “taken away,” represented a different meaning than the other two times. One time “the daily” is used with the Hebrew word ‘rum’ and the other two times it is used with the Hebrew word ‘sur.’ Both words are translated as take away, but ‘rum’ in Daniel chapter eight, verse eleven means to lift up and exalt, and in chapter eleven, verse thirty-one, and chapter twelve, verse eleven, the word ‘sur’ means to remove.

Se poutèt sa konpreyansyon li sou “sakrifis kontinyèl la” te kòrèk, men limite. Li pa t kapab rekonèt ke, nan senk fwa yo fè referans a “sakrifis kontinyèl la” nan liv Danyèl la, youn nan twa fwa yo di yo “retire” li a te reprezante yon sans diferan de de lòt fwa yo. Yon fwa yo itilize “sakrifis kontinyèl la” ansanm ak mo ebre ‘rum’, epi de lòt fwa yo itilize li ansanm ak mo ebre ‘sur’. Toude mo yo tradui pa retire, men ‘rum’ nan Danyèl chapit uit, vèsè onz, vle di leve anlè epi egzalte, tandiske nan chapit onz, vèsè trant-yon, ak chapit douz, vèsè onz, mo ‘sur’ la vle di retire.

The theologians that eat and drink the Babylonian diet, argue that whether you remove a thing or whenever you lift up a thing, they both represent a type of removal, so both words are to be understood as possessing the same meaning. They argue that the three times “the daily,” is “taken away” always means to remove, and in doing so, they identify that Daniel was careless in his choice of words. They do not openly say that, but by inference they teach that Daniel should have used the word ‘sur’ in all three occurrences, for according to the theologians he supposedly meant the same thing each time “the daily” was “taken away.”

Teyolojyen ki manje ak bwè rejim Babilòn nan soutni ke, kit ou retire yon bagay, kit ou leve yon bagay anlè, toude reprezante yon kalite retrè; konsa, fòk yo konprann toude mo yo kòm yo genyen menm sans lan. Yo fè agiman ke twa fwa yo pale de “sakrifis kontinyèl la” kòm li “wete,” sa toujou vle di retire; e lè yo fè sa, yo idantifye ke Danyèl te neglijan nan chwa mo li yo. Yo pa di sa ouvètman, men pa dediksyon yo anseye ke Danyèl te dwe sèvi ak mo “sur” la nan tout twa okazyon yo; paske, dapre teyolojyen sa yo, swadizan li te vle di menm bagay la chak fwa yo te “wete” “sakrifis kontinyèl la.”

They do the same thing with the words ‘miqdash’ and ‘qodesh’ which are both translated as “sanctuary,” in verses eleven through fourteen in chapter eight. In each reference of “sanctuary” in those four verses, they insist they all represent God’s sanctuary. By inference again, Daniel should have simply used ‘qodesh’ in all three references, and not used ‘miqdash’ in verse eleven. Miller would not have recognized the distinction between those words, but the modern theologians do, and when they do, they insist that no distinction should be acknowledged. Yet Miller, who did not recognize the distinctions between the words, came to an opposite understanding of the modern theologians.

Yo fè menm bagay la avèk mo ‘miqdash’ ak ‘qodesh’, ki toude tradui kòm “tanp”, nan vèsè onz rive katòz nan chapit uit la. Nan chak referans a “tanp” nan kat vèsè sa yo, yo ensiste ke yo tout reprezante tanp Bondye a. Pa enfèrans ankò, Danyèl ta dwe senpleman te itilize ‘qodesh’ nan tout twa referans yo, epi li pa t dwe itilize ‘miqdash’ nan vèsè onz la. Miller pa t ap rekonèt distenksyon ki genyen ant mo sa yo, men teyolojyen modèn yo rekonèt li, epi lè yo fè sa, yo ensiste ke okenn distenksyon pa ta dwe admèt. Men, Miller, ki pa t rekonèt distenksyon ki genyen ant mo yo, te rive nan yon konpreyansyon ki opoze ak pa teyolojyen modèn yo.

The reality is that Daniel was a careful writer, who knew the Hebrew language and was judged as ten times smarter than all the other wise men of Babylon. If anyone knew the proper usage of the Hebrew language, and how it was to be correctly represented in that particular history, it was Daniel. If Daniel employed different words, it was because they were meant to convey different meanings, which he purposely sought to represent. When Daniel’s distinct use of the words that are translated as “sanctuary” or as “take away” are acknowledged, they uphold Miller’s understanding of “the daily,” which was recognized by Miller in the very passage where Paul identifies that those who hate truth are destined to receive strong delusion.

Reyalite a se ke Danyèl te yon ekriven ki te pran anpil prekosyon, ki te konnen lang ebre a, e yo te jije l dis fwa pi entèlijan pase tout lòt saj Babilòn yo. Si te gen yon moun ki te konnen bon jan itilizasyon lang ebre a, ansanm ak fason li te dwe byen reprezante nan istwa patikilye sa a, se te Danyèl. Si Danyèl te sèvi ak mo diferan, se paske yo te fèt pou transmèt sans diferan, ke li te chèche reprezante avèk entansyon. Lè yo rekonèt itilizasyon distenk Danyèl fè de mo yo tradui swa kòm “tanp” oswa kòm “retire,” yo soutni konpreyansyon Miller te genyen sou “chak jou a,” ke Miller te rekonèt nan menm pasaj la kote Pòl idantifye ke moun ki rayi laverite yo destine pou resevwa yon gwo desepsyon.

Those who hate the truth and believe the lie which produces strong delusion, are also represented as the drunkards of Ephraim, who are represented in two classes. One class is the learned leadership and the other class is the unlearned who will only hear what the learned teach them. They are those who hide beneath lies, and who make a covenant with death. They are the foolish virgins of Matthew twenty-five, and those whose soul is lifted up in Habakkuk two. They are those who reject the foundational truths of Miller’s dream, which shine ten times brighter at the end (representing the tenth and final test for modern Israel), as typified by the tenth and final test for ancient Israel.

Moun ki rayi verite a epi ki kwè manti ki pwodui yon gwo awogans lespri, yo reprezante tou kòm tafyatè Efrayim yo, ki prezante an de kategori. Youn nan kategori yo se dirijan enstwi yo, epi lòt kategori a se moun ki pa enstwi yo, ki pa vle tande anyen lòt pase sa moun enstwi yo anseye yo. Se yo menm ki kache anba manti, epi ki fè yon alyans ak lanmò. Se yo menm ki vyèj san sajès yo nan Matye vennsenk, ak moun sa yo ki gen nanm yo gonfle ak ògèy nan Abakouk de. Se yo menm ki rejte verite fondamantal rèv Miller la, ki klere dis fwa pi plis nan fen an (sa ki reprezante dizyèm e dènye tès la pou Izrayèl modèn nan), jan sa te tipifye pa dizyèm e dènye tès la pou Izrayèl ansyen an.

We will continue this study in the next article.

Nou pral kontinye etid sa a nan pwochen atik la.

And the Lord said unto Moses, How long will this people provoke me? and how long will it be ere they believe me, for all the signs which I have shewed among them? I will smite them with the pestilence, and disinherit them, and will make of thee a greater nation and mightier than they. And Moses said unto the Lord, Then the Egyptians shall hear it, (for thou broughtest up this people in thy might from among them) And they will tell it to the inhabitants of this land: for they have heard that thou Lord art among this people, that thou Lord art seen face to face, and that thy cloud standeth over them, and that thou goest before them, by day time in a pillar of a cloud, and in a pillar of fire by night. Now if thou shalt kill all this people as one man, then the nations which have heard the fame of thee will speak, saying, Because the Lord was not able to bring this people into the land which he sware unto them, therefore he hath slain them in the wilderness.

Epi Senyè a di Moyiz: Konbyen tan pèp sa a ap meprize m? E konbyen tan ankò anvan yo kwè nan mwen, malgre tout siy mwen te fè nan mitan yo? M ap frape yo ak move maladi, m ap wete eritaj yo nan men yo, epi m ap fè soti nan ou yon nasyon ki pi gran e ki pi pisan pase yo. E Moyiz di Senyè a: Lè sa a, Ejipsyen yo va tande sa, paske se avèk fòs ou ou te fè pèp sa a monte soti nan mitan yo. E yo va rakonte sa bay moun ki rete nan peyi sa a; paske yo tande ou menm, Senyè, ou nan mitan pèp sa a; ke ou menm, Senyè, yo wè ou fas a fas; ke nwaj ou kanpe sou yo; e ke ou mache devan yo lajounen nan yon poto nwaj, epi lannwit nan yon poto dife. Koulye a, si ou ta touye tout pèp sa a tankou yon sèl moun, lè sa a nasyon ki tande repitasyon ou a va pale, yo va di: Paske Senyè a pa t kapab fè pèp sa a antre nan peyi li te sèmante ba yo a, se poutèt sa li te touye yo nan dezè a.

And now, I beseech thee, let the power of my Lord be great, according as thou hast spoken, saying, The Lord is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation. Pardon, I beseech thee, the iniquity of this people according unto the greatness of thy mercy, and as thou hast forgiven this people, from Egypt even until now. And the Lord said, I have pardoned according to thy word: But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the Lord. Because all those men which have seen my glory, and my miracles, which I did in Egypt and in the wilderness, and have tempted me now these ten times, and have not hearkened to my voice; Surely they shall not see the land which I sware unto their fathers, neither shall any of them that provoked me see it: But my servant Caleb, because he had another spirit with him, and hath followed me fully, him will I bring into the land whereinto he went; and his seed shall possess it. Numbers 14:11–24.

Epi kounyeya a, m ap sipliye ou, kite pisans Seyè mwen an parèt nan tout grandè li, jan ou te pale a, lè ou di: Seyè a pran tan pou l fè kòlè, li gen yon gwo mizèrikòd, li padonnen inikite ak transgresyon; men li pa janm kite koupab la san pinisyon, li pini inikite papa yo sou pitit yo jouk nan twazyèm ak katriyèm jenerasyon an. Padonnen, m ap sipliye ou, inikite pèp sa a dapre grandè mizèrikòd ou, menm jan ou te padonnen pèp sa a depi Lejip jouk jiska kounye a. Epi Seyè a di: Mwen padonnen dapre pawòl ou. Men, osi vre ke m vivan, tout tè a va plen ak glwa Seyè a. Paske tout mesye sa yo ki te wè glwa mwen ak mirak mwen yo, sa mwen te fè nan Lejip ak nan dezè a, epi ki gentan tante m dis fwa konsa, e ki pa t koute vwa mwen, an verite yo p ap wè peyi mwen te sèmante bay papa yo; ni okenn nan moun ki te pwovoke m yo p ap wè li. Men, Kalèb, sèvitè mwen an, paske te gen yon lòt lespri nan li, e li te swiv mwen nètale, mwen va mennen l antre nan peyi kote li te ale a; e desandans li va posede l. Resansman 14:11–24.