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.
“Antremêlées de prophéties qu’ils avaient considérées comme s’appliquant au temps du second avènement, se trouvaient des instructions spécialement adaptées à leur état d’incertitude et d’attente anxieuse, les encourageant à patienter avec foi, dans l’assurance que ce qui était alors obscur à leur intelligence serait, en son temps, rendu clair.
“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 genyen pwofesi Abakik 2:1–4 la: “M ap kanpe sou pòs gad mwen, m ap pran plas mwen sou gwo fò won an, epi m ap veye pou m wè sa L ap di m, ak sa m ap reponn lè yo reprann mwen. Lè sa a, Seyè a reponn mwen, li di: Ekri vizyon an, fè l klè sou tab yo, pou moun k ap li l la ka kouri. Paske vizyon an 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 san mank li ap vini, li p ap retade. Gade, nanm moun ki gonfle ak ògèy 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 byen bonè an 1842, direksyon yo te bay nan pwofesi sa a pou ‘ekri vizyon an, epi fè l klè sou tab yo, pou moun k ap li l la ka kouri,’ te deja pouse Charles Fitch prepare yon tablo pwofetik pou ilistre vizyon Danyèl ak Revelasyon an. Piblikasyon tablo sa a te konsidere kòm yon akonplisman kòmandman Abakik te resevwa a. Men, lè sa a, pèsonn pa t remake ke menm pwofesi a prezante yon reta ki sanble nan akonplisman vizyon an—yon tan kote li ta pran tan. Apre desepsyon an, pasaj sa a te parèt gen anpil siyifikasyon: ‘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 tan, tann li; paske san mank li pral vini, li p ap pran tan ankò…. 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 Habakkuk yo, sou plan pwofetik, se de temwen. Dapre Bib la, yo dwe mete de temwen ansanm pou tabli 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 18:16.
Men, si li pa vle koute ou, pran avèk ou youn oswa de lòt ankò, pou nan bouch de oswa twa temwen tout pawòl ka konfime. Matye 18:16.
When Habakkuk’s two tables (the 1843 and 1850 pioneer charts) are overlaid with one another 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 bèl pyè koute chè nan rèv Miller la. Erè 1843 la, jan li te reprezante sou premye tablo a, lè yo sipèpoze l ak dezyèm tablo a, etabli tan reta vizyon an. Miller (gadyen senbolik istwa sa a) te mande kisa li te dwe di pandan deba 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.
Mwen pral kanpe sou pòs vijilans mwen, m ap mete tèt mwen sou gwo fò won an, epi m ap veye pou m wè sa l ap di m, ak sa m pral reponn lè yo korije m. Abakik 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 l 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.
Senyè a reponn mwen, li di m konsa: Ekri vizyon an, epi fè l klè sou tab yo, pou moun k ap li l la ka kouri. Abakouk 2:2.
The tables then identify the tarrying time and the first disappointment.
Lè sa a, 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 dènye bout la, li pral pale, epi li p ap bay manti: menm si li pran reta, tann li; paske li pral vini sètènman, li p ap pran reta. Abakik 2:3.
The three-step testing process produced by the increase of knowledge (Miller’s jewels) are then represented.
Pwosesis tès an twa etap ki pwodui pa ogmantasyon konesans lan (bijou Miller yo) prezante apre sa.
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 ki 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 adoratè yo t ap vin parèt klè atravè pwosesis eprèv ki nan chapit douz liv Danyèl la.
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 fè wout ou, Danyèl; paske pawòl yo fèmen e sele jouk tan lafen an. Anpil moun va pirifye, yo va blanchi, epi yo va pase anba eprèv; men mechan yo va fè mechanste; e okenn nan mechan yo p ap konprann; men moun 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.
Saj Danyèl yo se vyèj saj yo nan Matye vennsenk yo, ki te jistifye pa lafwa; e mechan yo se te vyèj sòt yo, ki te leve nan ògèy. 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 jwenn dezonè lè nou pa resevwa mesaj li voye ban nou yo. Konsa, nou rejte lwil an lò li ta vide nan nanm nou pou l ka transmèt bay moun ki nan fènwa yo. Lè apèl la va rive: ‘Men Veterinè maryaj la ap vini; soti al rankontre l,’ moun ki pa t resevwa lwil sen an, ki pa t cheri gras Kris la nan kè yo, ap wè, menm jan ak vyèj sòt yo, yo pa pare pou rankontre Seyè yo. Yo pa gen, nan tèt pa yo, pouvwa pou jwenn lwil la, epi lavi yo fini kraze.” Review and Herald, 20 jiyè 1897.
The light of Miller’s jewels in the last days will shine ten times brighter, and both the number ten and light are symbols of a test. 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 represented as the 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.
Limyè bijou Miller yo nan dènye jou yo ap briye dis fwa pi klere, epi ni chif dis la ni limyè a se senbòl yon tès. Nan dènye jou yo, jan sa reprezante nan fen rèv Miller la, limyè verite a ki parèt sou tab Habakouk yo pwodui yon mesaj eprèv, ki, nan parabòl dis vyèj yo, reprezante kòm mesaj Kri Minwi a. Pwosesis eprèv sa a se yon repetisyon pwosesis eprèv istwa Millerit la, paske parabòl dis vyèj yo repete jis nan dènye detay li 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.
«Yo souvan fè referans ak parabòl dis vyèj yo, senk ladan yo ki te saj, e senk ki te sòt. Parabòl sa a te akonpli epi l ap akonpli jouk nan pi piti detay, 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.
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 represented 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 it is the prophetic characteristics of the papacy which is employed to identify the character of those who chose not to live by faith.
Dis se senbòl yon eprèv, e nan fen dis jou yo, Danyèl ak twa diyitè yo te parèt pi bèl vizibman e pi gra pase sa yo ki t ap manje rejim Babilòn nan. Ògeye yo, ki reprezante nan Abakik kòm moun ki te viv pa sipozisyon, pa pa lafwa, te devlope karaktè Babilòn nan. Nan istwa Milerit la, yo te vin tounen pitit fi Babilòn yo, epi nan Abakik, se karakteristik pwofetik papote a ki sèvi pou idantifye karaktè moun sa yo ki te chwazi pa viv pa lafwa.
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 ògèy la pa dwat nan li; men moun jis la va viv pa lafwa li. Wi tou, paske li peche pa diven, li se yon nonm ògeye, li pa rete lakay li; li elaji dezi li tankou lanfè, li tankou lanmò, epi li pa ka janm satisfè; men li rasanble tout nasyon yo bò kote li, li anpile tout pèp yo pou tèt li. Èske tout sila yo p ap pran yon parabòl kont li, ak yon pwovèb derespektan kont li, epi di: Malè pou sila a ki ogmante sa ki pa pou li! Jiska kilè? Epi pou sila a ki chaje tèt li ak gwo mas labou! Èske yo menm ki pral mòde ou yo p ap leve kanpe toudenkou, epi sila yo ki pral boulvèse ou yo p ap reveye? Epi 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. Habakkuk 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.” It is the papal power that gets suddenly bitten, just as Jezebel was eaten by dogs.
Pwosesis egzamen an ki vini sou vyèj Matye vennsenk yo pwodui yon kategori adoratè ki devlope karaktè wa nò a (papote a), ki se tou pouvwa ki “piye anpil nasyon.” Se pouvwa papal la yo mòde toudenkou, menm jan chen te manje Jezabèl.
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, epi yon gwo nasyon pral leve soti nan bout latè yo. Yo pral pran banza ak frenn; yo mechan, yo pa gen okenn pitye; vwa yo gwonde tankou lanmè; yo monte sou chwal, ranje tankou moun ki pare pou lagè kont ou, o pitit fi Siyon an. Nou tande repitasyon li: 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 laperèz toupatou. O pitit fi pèp mwen an, mare ren ou ak twal sak, epi woule tèt ou nan sann; fè dèy tankou pou yon sèl pitit gason, ak plenn ki pi anmè a; paske destriktè 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 klas Habakuk 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 yo, swa yo devlope karaktè Kris la, epi konsa yo resevwa sele Bondye a, swa yo devlope karaktè papasi 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 lèzòm pou yo pa resevwa mak bèt la oswa mak imaj li a sou fwon yo oswa nan men yo. Resevwa mak sa a vle di rive nan 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 diven kòlè Bondye a tou, ki vide san melanj nan koup endiyasyon li a; epi yo va tòtire li ak dife ak souf nan prezans zanj sen yo, ak nan prezans Ti Mouton an.’” Review and Herald, 13 jiyè 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 nan pral, alafen, bwè diven kòlè Bondye a. Nan Ezayi, tafyatè Efrayim yo montre avègman tafyatè yo lè yo vire tout bagay tèt anba, epi aksyon sa a dwe konsidere kòm “labou potye a.”
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 Second Thessalonians, chapter two.
Idantifikasyon “sa ki kontinyèl la” kòm yon senbòl Kris la vire verite “sa ki kontinyèl la” tèt anba, paske “sa ki kontinyèl la” se yon senbòl satanik. Idantifikasyon Miller te fè de “sa ki kontinyèl la” kòm payanis la reprezante dirèkteman sou tablo Abakik yo. Dekouvèt Miller te fè nan pasaj ki nan Tesalonisyen yo, ki te pèmèt li konprann se payanis la yo te “retire,” pou “nonm peche a,” ki chita nan tanp Bondye a, te kapab parèt, se verite prensipal ki chita nan Dezyèm 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 [kontinyèl la] te parèt, eksepte nan Danyèl. Lè sa a, [avèk èd yon konkòdans] mwen te pran mo sa yo ki te kanpe an rapò avèk li: ‘retire;’ li pral retire kontinyèl la; ‘depi lè kontinyèl la va retire,’ 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 inikite a deja ap travay; sèlman sila a ki kounye a anpeche a ap anpeche, jiskaske yo wete li nan chemen an, epi lè sa a mechan an va parèt,’ elatriye. E lè mwen te rive nan tèks sa a, o, jan verite a te parèt klè e gloriye! Men li! Se sa ki kontinyèl la! Bon, kounye a, kisa Pòl vle di pa ‘sila a ki kounye a anpeche,’ oswa ki fè baryè? Pa ‘nonm peche a,’ ak ‘mechan an,’ yo vle di Pape a. Bon, kisa li ye ki anpeche Pape a pou l pa parèt? Poukisa, se Pàganis; ebyen, ‘kontinyèl la’ dwe vle di Pàganis.” —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.
Sans mo “kontinyèl la” nan Tesalonisyen yo, ke Miller te dekouvri, se verite prensipal pasaj la. Lè Pòl idantifye moun ki pa renmen verite a, e ki poutèt sa pral resevwa yon gwo twonpri, li sètènman ap idantifye rayisman verite nan sans jeneral la; men verite ki mansyone dirèkteman nan pasaj la se verite ki fè konnen “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 se sa, je ou senp, tout kò ou va plen ak limyè. Men, si je ou move, tout kò ou va plen ak fènwa. Si limyè ki nan ou a se fènwa, ala gwo fènwa sa a ye! Pesonn pa ka sèvi de mèt: paske swa li va rayi youn nan, epi li va renmen lòt la; osinon li va kenbe fèm ak youn nan, epi li va 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 yon lanmou pou verite a, oswa yon rayisman pou verite a. Pa gen okenn tè mitan. Gwo ilizyon ki vini sou vyèj sòt yo nan Matye vennsenk la chita sou rejè yo fè limyè bijou Miller yo, ki reprezante dènye tès la. Dènye tès ansyen Izrayèl la se te dizyèm tès yo, e bijou Miller yo klere dis fwa pi fò nan dènye jou yo. Senbòl rejè bijou Miller yo se “the daily,” ke tafyatè Efrayim yo te vire tèt anba nan twazyèm jenerasyon Advantis la. “The daily” se yon senbòl satanik paganism. Tafyatè yo te entwodui yon fo bijou, ke yo te pote soti nan Pwotestantis aposta a, ki idantifye “the daily” 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 listwa kote li te leve a. Li te konvenki Dezyèm Vini an te pwochen evènman pwofetik la; poutèt sa, blesi mòtèl papote a an 1798 pa t kapab reprezante anyen lòt pase katriyèm e dènye wayòm tèren Danyèl de a. Konpreyansyon li sou “kontinyèl la” te limite tou, paske temwayaj li se ke, pa mwayen revelasyon, li te kondi pou rive nan yon metòd etid patikilye, kote li te deklare li te sèvi ak Bib li, Konkòdans Cruden, epi li te li kèk jounal. Desizyon li te pran pou etidye nan fason sa a te senpleman vin antre 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 deyis, mwen te li tout istwa mwen te kapab jwenn; men kounye a mwen te renmen Bib la: li te anseye konsènan Jezi! Men, te toujou 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 rann vizit, e ki te konnen m e ki te tande m pale lè mwen te yon deyis, li te mande m, nan yon fason ki te gen anpil siyifikasyon: ‘Kisa ou panse de tèks sa a, ak tèks sa a?’ li t ap fè referans ak ansyen tèks mwen te konn leve objeksyon kont yo lè mwen te yon deyis. Mwen te konprann sa li t ap chèche fè a, e mwen te reponn—Si ou ban m tan, m ap di ou sa yo vle di. ‘Konbyen tan ou bezwen?’ Mwen pa konnen, men m ap di ou, mwen te reponn, paske mwen pa t kapab 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 ke mwen te kapab dekouvri sa Sentespri a te vle di. Men, depi 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, metòd sa a pou etidye Bib la te vini nan lespri mwen:—M ap pran mo ki nan pasaj sa yo, m ap suiv yo atravè Bib la, epi konsa m ap dekouvri siyifikasyon yo. Mwen te gen Konkòdans Cruden lan, ke mwen panse ki pi bon nan lemonn; konsa mwen te pran li ansanm ak Bib mwen, mwen te chita bò biwo mwen, epi mwen pa t li anyen ankò, eksepte yon ti jan jounal, paske mwen te detèmine pou m konnen kisa 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, 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 a pou aji sou kè yon kiltivatè ki pa t kwè nan Bib la, pou mennen l fouye nan pwofesi yo. Zanj Bondye yo te vizite sila a yo te chwazi a anpil fwa, pou dirije lespri li epi louvri pou konpreyansyon li pwofesi ki te toujou fènwa pou pèp Bondye a. Yo te ba li kòmansman chèn verite a, epi yo te mennen l kontinye chèche lyen apre lyen, jiskaske li te gade avèk etònman ak admirasyon sou Pawòl Bondye a. Li te wè ladan l yon chèn verite ki pafè. Pawòl sa a, ke li te konsidere kòm yon pawòl ki pa enspire, kounye a te louvri devan je li nan bèlte 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 kè kontan, avèk 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 a” bay Miller, sa idantifye ke se Gabriyèl ki te zanj Bondye te voye bay Miller, paske “zanj Li a” se yon ekspresyon 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, ‘Mwen se Gabriyèl, mwen menm ki kanpe devan prezans Bondye,’ montre li okipe yon pozisyon gwo onè nan lakou selès yo. Lè li te vini ak yon mesaj pou Danyèl, li te di, ‘Pa gen pèsonn ki kenbe 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: ‘Li te voye l, e li te fè konnen l pa mwayen zanj li bay sèvitè li Jan.’ Revelation 1:1.” The Desire of Ages, 99.
Gabriel and the other angels were sent to guide Miller’s mind and “open 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 had come into his mind. When God brings truth to our mind, it is divine revelation as opposed to arriving at truth through the process of rightly dividing the Bible. Miller did both, but divine revelation had to be part of how Miller came to understand the subject of “the daily.”
Gabriyèl ak lòt zanj yo te voye pou dirije lespri Miller epi pou “louvri pou konpreyansyon li pwofesi ki te toujou rete fènwa pou pèp Bondye a.” Mesaj li a pa t devlope sèlman atravè metòd etid li, men tou pa mwayen revelasyon diven. Menm metòd li te itilize pou etidye Bib la te vin nan lespri li. Lè Bondye pote verite nan lespri nou, sa se revelasyon diven, an opozisyon ak rive nan verite atravè pwosesis pou byen separe Pawòl la. Miller te fè toude, men revelasyon diven te dwe fè pati fason Miller te rive konprann sijè “kontinyèl la.”
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 not have 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 gen okenn enfòmasyon konsènan lang biblik yo. Li pa t ap wè diferans ki genyen ant “sur” ak “rum”, ki toude tradui “retire.” Li pa t ap wè diferans ki genyen ant “miqdash” ak “qodesh”, ki toude tradui “tanp.”
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, 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 kapab wè a (ki se menm verite li te wè tou), se ke nan san kat fwa mo ebre “tamid” lan sèvi nan Bib la, se sèlman nan liv Danyèl la mo ebre “tamid” lan sèvi 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 itilize kòm yon non, epi lòt katreven-diznèf fwa yo li itilize kòm yon advèb. Se poutèt sa, lè tradiktè Bib Wa Jak la te vin fas ak lefèt ke Danyèl te itilize mo a senk fwa kòm yon non, tandiske tout lòt ekriven Bib la te itilize mo a katreven-diznèf fwa kòm yon advèb, yo te fòse pa pwa prèv yo korije fason Danyèl te itilize mo a kòm yon non. Pou yo te korije Danyèl, yo te ajoute mo “sakrifis” la nan Pawòl la, epi konsa yo te fè yon non tounen yon advèb. Epi apre sa, pou yo te korije tradiktè yo, Ellen White te resevwa enspirasyon pou ekri ke li, “te wè anrapò ak ‘Joupa a,’ ke mo ‘sakrifis’ la te ajoute pa sajès lèzòm, epi li pa fè pati tèks la; e ke Senyè a te bay bon konpreyansyon sou li bay moun 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.
Dapre temwayaj pa li menm, Miller t ap chèche konprann “sa ki kontinyèl la,” sa li te finalman rive konprann nan 2 Thessaloniciens. Men tou, dapre pwòp temwayaj pa li, lè l t ap chèche konprann yon mo, li t ap konsidere tout kote mo a te itilize, epi mo sa a itilize katrevendiznèf lòt fwa nan Bib la. Men, temwayaj li konsènan “sa ki kontinyèl la” se ke li pa t jwenn li okenn lòt kote eksepte nan liv Danyèl la, lè li te deklare: “Mwen te kontinye li, epi mwen pa t ka jwenn okenn lòt ka kote li [sa ki kontinyèl la] te parèt, eksepte nan Danyèl.” Miller te mennen nan bijou yo non sèlman pa metòd etid li, 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 li te limite. Li pa t kapab rekonèt ke, pami senk fwa yo fè referans ak “sakrifis kontinyèl la” nan liv Danyèl la, youn nan twa fwa kote yo “retire” “sakrifis kontinyèl la” te reprezante yon sans diferan de de lòt fwa yo. Yon fwa yo itilize “sakrifis kontinyèl la” ak mo ebre “rum”, epi de lòt fwa yo itilize li ak mo ebre “sur”. Toude mo yo tradui kòm retire, men “rum” nan Danyèl chapit uit, vèsè onz, vle di “leve anlè epi egzalte”, tandiske nan chapit onz, vèsè tranteyen, 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 k ap manje ak bwè rejim Babilòn nan soutni ke, kit ou retire yon bagay, kit ou leve yon bagay anlè, toude reprezante yon kalite retranchman; konsa, yo dwe konprann toude mo yo kòm yo gen menm sans. Yo soutni ke, nan twa fwa yo pale de “chak jou a” kòm yon bagay yo “wete,” sa toujou vle di retire; e, lè yo fè sa, yo fè idantifye ke Danyèl te neglijan nan chwa mo li yo. Yo pa di sa aklè, men pa dediksyon yo anseye ke Danyèl te dwe sèvi ak mo “sur” nan tout twa okazyon yo, paske, dapre teyolojyen yo, li te sipoze vle di menm bagay la chak fwa yo te “wete” “chak jou a.”
They do the same thing with the words “miqdash” and “qodesh” which are both translated as “sanctuary,” in verses eleven through fourteen of 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 the opposite understanding of the modern theologians.
Yo fè menm bagay la ak mo “miqdash” ak “qodesh,” ki toude tradui kòm “tanp lan,” nan vèsè onz rive katòz nan chapit uit la. Nan chak referans kote “tanp lan” parèt nan kat vèsè sa yo, yo ensiste yo tout reprezante tanp Bondye a. Yon lòt fwa ankò, pa konsekans, Danyèl ta dwe senpleman itilize “qodesh” nan tout twa referans yo, epi li pa ta dwe itilize “miqdash” nan vèsè onz la. Miller pa t ap rekonèt diferans ki genyen ant mo sa yo, men teyolojyen modèn yo rekonèt li, e lè yo fè sa, yo ensiste pou yo pa rekonèt okenn diferans. Men, Miller, ki pa t rekonèt diferans ki genyen ant mo sa yo, te rive nan yon konpreyansyon ki opoze ak sa teyolojyen modèn yo genyen.
The reality is that Daniel was an extremely careful writer, who knew the Hebrew language and was judged as ten times smarter than all the other wise men of Babylon who were very smart men in their society in their own right. 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 gen anpil prekosyon, ki te konnen lang ebre a, e yo te jije li dis fwa pi saj pase tout lòt saj Babilòn yo, ki te moun trè entèlijan nan sosyete pa yo tou. Si te gen yon moun ki te konnen itilizasyon kòrèk lang ebre a, ak fason li te dwe reprezante kòrèkteman nan istwa patikilye sa a, se te Danyèl. Si Danyèl te sèvi ak mo diferan, se paske yo te fèt pou transmèt sans diferan, sa li te chèche reprezante avèk entansyon. Lè yo rekonèt fason diferan Danyèl sèvi ak mo yo tradui kòm “tanp” oswa kòm “retire,” yo soutni konpreyansyon Miller te genyen sou “sakrifis kontinyèl la,” ke Miller te rekonèt nan menm pasaj kote Pòl idantifye ke sila yo ki rayi verite a 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 laity 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 those whose soul is lifted up in Habakkuk two, and they are the foolish virgins of Matthew twenty-five. 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 e ki kwè manti a ki pwodui gwo awogans espirityèl la, yo reprezante tou kòm tafyatè Efrayim yo, ki parèt an de kategori. Youn nan kategori yo se dirijan savan yo, e lòt kategori a se laisite ki pa gen fòmasyon, ki va sèlman tande sa savan yo anseye yo. Se yo menm ki kache anba manti, e ki fè yon alyans ak lanmò. Se yo menm ki gen nanm yo gonfle nan Habakik de, e se yo menm ki vyèj sòt yo nan Matye vennsenk. Se yo menm ki rejte verite fondamantal rèv Miller la, ki klere dis fwa pi briyan nan fen an (sa ki reprezante dizyèm e dènye eprèv pou Izrayèl modèn), jan sa te prefigire pa dizyèm e dènye eprèv pou Izrayèl ansyen an.
We will continue this study in the next article.
N ap kontinye etid sa a nan atik k ap vini an.
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. 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 Senyè a di Moyiz: Jiska kilè pèp sa a ap meprize m? E jiska kilè yo p ap kwè nan mwen, malgre tout siy mwen te fè nan mitan yo? M ap frape yo ak move maladi a, m ap depouye yo de eritaj la, 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 ak 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, ou menm, Senyè, yo wè ou fas a fas, nwaj ou a kanpe sou yo, epi ou mache devan yo lajounen nan yon poto nwaj, e 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, y ap di: Paske Senyè a pa t kapab mennen pèp sa a antre nan peyi li te sèmante pou l ba yo a, se poutèt sa li touye yo nan dezè a. E kounye a, m ap sipliye ou, se pou pouvwa Seyè mwen an vin gran, dapre sa ou te di a, lè ou te di: Senyè 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. Tanpri, padonnen inikite pèp sa a dapre grandè mizèrikòd ou, menm jan ou te padonnen pèp sa a depi Lejip jouk kounye a. E Senyè a di: Mwen padonnen, dapre pawòl ou; men osi vre ke mwen vivan, tout tè a va ranpli ak laglwa Senyè a. Paske tout mesye sa yo ki te wè laglwa mwen ak mirak mwen yo, sa mwen te fè nan Lejip ak nan dezè a, epi ki tante m kounye a dis fwa, e ki pa koute vwa mwen, sètènman yo p ap wè peyi mwen te sèmante zansèt yo a; ni okenn nan moun ki te pwovoke m yo p ap wè li. Men Kalèb, sèvitè m nan, paske li te gen yon lòt lespri avè l, e li te swiv mwen nèt ale, se li menm m ap fè antre nan peyi kote li te ale a; e desandans li va posede li. Resansman 14:11–24.