It is essential in understanding the message that is being unsealed in the book of Revelation, to recognize the roots, development and significance of the Protestant Reformation. Three primary lines within the history of that Reformation address the Bible, and the correct methodology to be used in studying the Bible and also that the chosen messengers through that history are waymarks of that history. As always is the case Satan attempted to hide the King James Bible with several counterfeits, and he sought to hide the correct methodology for understanding the Bible with several counterfeits and he also sought to hide the correct messengers (waymarks) that were raised up along the way in that history.

Li esansyèl, pou konprann mesaj k ap devwale nan liv Revelasyon an, pou rekonèt rasin, devlopman ak enpòtans Refòm Pwotestan an. Twa liy prensipal nan istwa Refòm sa a pale konsènan Bib la, ansanm ak bon metodoloji ki dwe itilize nan etid Bib la; yo montre tou ke mesaje chwazi yo atravè istwa sa a se siy repè nan istwa sa a. Menm jan sa toujou fèt, Satan te chèche kache Bib Wa Jak la dèyè plizyè fo kopi; li te chèche tou kache bon metodoloji pou konprann Bib la dèyè plizyè fo metòd; e li te chèche tou kache bon mesaje yo (siy repè yo) ki te leve youn apre lòt sou chemen istwa sa a.

“But Satan was not idle. He now attempted what he has attempted in every other reformatory movement—to deceive and destroy the people by palming off upon them a counterfeit in place of the true work. As there were false Christ’s in the first century of the Christian church, so there arose false prophets in the sixteenth century.” The Great Controversy, 186.

“Men, Satan pa t rete san fè anyen. Kounye a li te eseye sa li te eseye nan tout lòt mouvman refòm yo—twonpe epi detwi pèp la lè li t ap fè yo pran yon fo bagay pou vrè travay la. Menm jan te gen fo Kris nan premye syèk legliz kretyen an, konsa tou fo pwofèt leve nan sèzyèm syèk la.” The Great Controversy, 186.

In the Millerite history from 1840 through 1844 the mantle of Protestantism, (which is one of two horns on the earth-beast that is the United States), Millerite Adventism became the Protestant horn. At the same time, the churches who had previously professed to be Protestant became apostate Protestantism, or as the Millerites identified them, “the daughters of Rome.” When the Protestants rejected the first angel’s message in 1843, they fell and the Millerites carried on with the mantle of Protestantism. The Millerite history was the climax of God’s work in bringing His “church in the wilderness” up to the full understanding of the Word of God.

Nan istwa Milerit la soti 1840 rive 1844, manto Pwotestantis la, (ki se youn nan de kòn bèt ki soti sou tè a ki se Etazini), Advantis Milerit la te vin kòn pwotestan an. An menm tan an, legliz yo ki te deja fè pwofesyon yo se Pwotestan te vin tounen Pwotestantis aposta, oswa jan Milerit yo te idantifye yo, “pitit fi Wòm yo.” Lè Pwotestan yo te rejte mesaj premye zanj lan an 1843, yo te tonbe, e Milerit yo te kontinye pote manto Pwotestantis la. Istwa Milerit la te akonplisman somè travay Bondye nan mennen “legliz li nan dezè a” rive nan konpreyansyon plen Pawòl Bondye a.

The opening of the investigative judgment brought the test of the law of God and especially the Sabbath. To proclaim the third angel’s message required a church that upheld the law of God, which had been buried under papal traditions and customs during the Dark Ages. Christ brought the Protestants to the history of 1840 to 1844 and presented the test of Elijah, of whom William Miller was typified, and when the Protestants rejected Miller’s message they returned to Rome. The test of the first angel’s message as delivered by Miller was typified by Elijah at Mount Carmel.

Ouvèti jijman ankèt la te pote tès lalwa Bondye a, e espesyalman Saba a. Pou pwoklame mesaj twazyèm zanj lan, sa te mande yon legliz ki te soutni lalwa Bondye a, lalwa ki te antere anba tradisyon ak koutim papal pandan Mwayennaj fènwa yo. Kris te mennen Pwotestan yo nan istwa 1840 rive 1844 la, e li te prezante tès Eli a, ki te yon tip William Miller; epi lè Pwotestan yo te rejte mesaj Miller la, yo te retounen lavil Wòm. Tès mesaj premye zanj lan jan Miller te bay li a, te yon tip sa k te fèt ak Eli sou mòn Kamèl la.

And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the Lord be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word. 1 Kings 18:21.

Epi Eli te vini bò kote tout pèp la, epi li di yo: Jiska kilè n ap mache ant de opinyon? Si Seyè a se Bondye, swiv li; men si se Baal, swiv li. E pèp la pa t reponn li yon sèl mo. 1 Wa 18:21.

In 1840, when confronted with the message of Elijah, represented by Miller and the first angel, the Protestants chose Baal!

An 1840, lè yo te vin fas ak mesaj Eli a, ki te reprezante pa Miller ak premye zanj lan, Pwotestan yo te chwazi Baal!

The Protestant Reformation was an unsealing of the truths of the Bible that began with the “morning star,” which was promised to be given during the history represented by the church of Thyatira. The direct attack against the Bible began centuries earlier and is clearly presented in The Great Controversy, especially with the history of the Waldensians. In 1930, Benjamin Wilkerson published the book, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated. The book documents the warfare against the sacred original texts that were ultimately used to translate the King James Bible and the various satanic counterfeit texts that were and still are promoted by Catholics, apostate Protestantism and Laodicean Adventists. The warfare began well before the history of the Waldensians, but they are the waymark and symbol of those who gave their lives to testify to the importance of the correct manuscripts that were ultimately translated into the 1611 King James Bible.

Refòm Pwotestan an te yon dezèlman verite Labib yo ki te kòmanse avèk “zetwal maten an,” yo te pwomèt pou bay pandan istwa legliz Tiyatir la reprezante a. Atak dirèk kont Labib la te kòmanse plizyè syèk pi bonè, epi sa prezante aklè nan The Great Controversy, espesyalman nan istwa Valdwa yo. An 1930, Benjamin Wilkerson te pibliye liv la, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated. Liv la dokimante lagè ki te fèt kont tèks orijinal sakre yo, ki finalman te sèvi pou tradui King James Bible la, ansanm ak divès tèks fo satanik yo ke Katolik yo, Pwotestantis aposta a, ak Advantis Laodise yo te ankouraje e yo kontinye ankouraje toujou. Lagè sa a te kòmanse byen anvan istwa Valdwa yo, men yo se repè a ak senbòl sila yo ki te bay lavi yo pou rann temwayaj sou enpòtans maniskri kòrèk yo ki finalman te tradui nan King James Bible 1611 la.

The production of the King James Bible in 1611 went through a very specific translation process. The process of translating and publishing the Bible was accomplished through seven steps of production. It also took seven years to accomplish, and seven biblical years is twenty-five hundred and twenty days. That is of course the same number of prophetic days in which Jesus confirmed the covenant with many in fulfillment of Daniel nine. In the center of that sacred week Christ was crucified, and of course Christ crucified is the center of the Bible. Those seven steps to produce the pure Word of God were as follows.

ការផលិតព្រះគម្ពីរ King James នៅឆ្នាំ 1611 បានឆ្លងកាត់ដំណើរការបកប្រែដ៏ជាក់លាក់យ៉ាងខ្លាំងមួយ។ ដំណើរការនៃការបកប្រែ និងការបោះពុម្ពផ្សាយព្រះគម្ពីរ ត្រូវបានសម្រេចឡើងតាមរយៈជំហានផលិតកម្មប្រាំពីរ។ វាក៏បានចំណាយពេលប្រាំពីរឆ្នាំដើម្បីសម្រេចផងដែរ ហើយប្រាំពីរឆ្នាំតាមព្រះគម្ពីរ គឺស្មើនឹងពីរពាន់ប្រាំរយម្ភៃថ្ងៃ។ ជាការពិត នេះគឺជាចំនួនដូចគ្នានៃថ្ងៃទំនាយ ដែលព្រះយេស៊ូវបានបញ្ជាក់សេចក្តីសញ្ញាជាមួយមនុស្សជាច្រើន ក្នុងការសម្រេចបំពេញដានីយ៉ែលជំពូក ៩។ នៅកណ្ដាលនៃសប្ដាហ៍បរិសុទ្ធនោះ ព្រះគ្រីស្ទត្រូវបានឆ្កាង ហើយជាការពិត ព្រះគ្រីស្ទដែលត្រូវបានឆ្កាង គឺជាចំណុចកណ្ដាលនៃព្រះគម្ពីរ។ ជំហានទាំងប្រាំពីរនោះ ដើម្បីផលិតព្រះបន្ទូលដ៏បរិសុទ្ធរបស់ព្រះ មានដូចតទៅ។

  • First: Initial Translation by Individuals: Around 50 translators were divided into six committees, each responsible for different sections of the Bible. These individuals worked on translating from the original languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek) into English.

    Premyèman: Tradiksyon inisyal pa moun endividyèl: Anviwon 50 tradiktè te divize an sis komite, chak te responsab pou diferan seksyon nan Bib la. Moun sa yo te travay sou tradiksyon soti nan lang orijinal yo (ebre, arameyen, ak grèk) pou mete yo an anglè.

  • Second: Committee Review: After each committee completed their translation of a section, the work was reviewed by the committee members themselves. This allowed for collective input and correction of errors.

    Dezyèmman: Revizyon Komite a: Apre chak komite te fin tradui yon seksyon, travay la te revize pa manm komite yo menm. Sa te pèmèt yon kontribisyon kolektif ak koreksyon erè yo.

  • Third: General Committee Review: The individual committee translations were then submitted to a larger group of scholars, referred to as the General Committee. This committee consisted of representatives from each of the six translation committees. They reviewed the entire work, comparing and harmonizing the different committee translations.

    Twazyèmman: Revizyon Komite Jeneral la: Apre sa, tradiksyon chak komite endividyèl yo te soumèt bay yon gwoup savan ki pi laj, yo rele Komite Jeneral la. Komite sa a te gen ladan l reprezantan ki soti nan chak nan sis komite tradiksyon yo. Yo te revize tout travay la, pandan yo t ap konpare epi amonize diferan tradiksyon komite yo.

  • Forth: Additional Review and Revision: The General Committee’s revised version was sent back to the individual committees for further review and refinement. This iterative process helped ensure that the translation was consistent and accurate.

    Katriyèmman: Revizyon ak koreksyon siplemantè: Vèsyon Komite Jeneral la te revize a te voye tounen bay komite endividyèl yo pou plis revizyon ak rafinman. Pwosesis iteratif sa a te ede asire ke tradiksyon an te konsistan e egzak.

  • Fifth: Final Review and Approval: Once the individual committees completed their revisions, the final draft was submitted to the General Committee for a final review and approval.

    Senkyèmman: Revizyon final ak apwobasyon: Lè komite endividyèl yo te fin konplete revizyon pa yo, yo te soumèt dènye bouyon an bay Komite Jeneral la pou yon revizyon final ak apwobasyon.

  • Sixth: Royal Approval and Publication: The approved translation was then presented to King James I for his approval.

    Sizyèmman: Apwobasyon wayal ak piblikasyon: Tradiksyon ki te apwouve a te prezante bay Wa Jak I pou apwobasyon li.

  • Seventh: Once he granted his royal approval, the translation was published in 1611 as the King James Version (Authorized Version) of the Bible.

    Setyèmman: Yon fwa li te bay apwobasyon wayal li, tradiksyon an te pibliye an 1611 kòm Version wa Jak la (Version Otorize) nan Bib la.

The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever. Psalms 12:6, 7.

Pawòl Senyè a se pawòl ki pwòp: tankou ajan yo pase nan founo sou tè a, yo rafine l sèt fwa. Ou menm, O Senyè, w ap kenbe yo; w ap prezève yo kont jenerasyon sa a pou tout tan. Sòm 12:6, 7.

In the warfare of Satan against God’s word, and against the waymarks represented by the various messengers of that unfolding history and of the correct methodology to be used in rightly dividing His Word the King James Bible of 1611, is a waymark that is specifically identified in Psalm twelve. None of the various counterfeit Bibles that have been produced through corrupted Catholic manuscripts meets the criteria of Psalm twelve. The purification process that took seven steps and the period of twenty-five hundred and twenty days identify that the King James Bible is God’s “pure words.” God promises to keep the King James Bible as His pure Word forever, and He therefore promises to uphold the methodology of “historicism” that was employed by the Protestant reformers, including William Miller.

Nan lagè Satan ap mennen kont Pawòl Bondye a, epi kont repè yo ki reprezante pa divès mesaje yo nan istwa k ap dewoule sa a ansanm ak metodoloji ki kòrèk pou itilize nan byen separe Pawòl Li a, Bib Wa Jak 1611 lan se yon repè ki idantifye espesyalman nan Sòm douz. Okenn nan divès Bib fo yo ki te pwodui atravè maniskri katolik koripsyon pa satisfè kritè Sòm douz la. Pwosesis pirifikasyon an ki te pran sèt etap ak peryòd de mil senk san venn jou yo idantifye ke Bib Wa Jak la se “pawòl pi” Bondye yo. Bondye pwomèt pou konsève Bib Wa Jak la kòm Pawòl pi pa Li pou tout tan, e se poutèt sa Li pwomèt tou pou soutni metodoloji “istorisis” la ke refòmatè pwotestan yo te itilize, enkli William Miller.

In the fourteenth century John Wycliffe, who is identified as “the morning star of the Reformation” in the book The Great Controversy was used by God to translate the Bible into a language that even a common man would understand. He is the messenger that marks the waymark of the beginning of the Protestant Reformation.

Nan katòzyèm syèk la, Jan Wycliffe, ki idantifye kòm “zetwal maten Refòm nan” nan liv The Great Controversy, te sèvi kòm yon enstriman Bondye pou tradui Bib la nan yon lang menm yon moun òdinè te kapab konprann. Li se mesaje ki make repè kòmansman Refòm Pwotestan an.

“The great movement that Wycliffe inaugurated, which was to liberate the conscience and the intellect, and set free the nations so long bound to the triumphal car of Rome, had its spring in the Bible. Here was the source of that stream of blessing, which, like the water of life, has flowed down the ages since the fourteenth century. Wycliffe accepted the Holy Scriptures with implicit faith as the inspired revelation of God’s will, a sufficient rule of faith and practice. He had been educated to regard the Church of Rome as the divine, infallible authority, and to accept with unquestioning reverence the established teachings and customs of a thousand years; but he turned away from all these to listen to God’s holy word. This was the authority which he urged the people to acknowledge. Instead of the church speaking through the pope, he declared the only true authority to be the voice of God speaking through His word. And he taught not only that the Bible is a perfect revelation of God’s will, but that the Holy Spirit is its only interpreter, and that every man is, by the study of its teachings, to learn his duty for himself. Thus he turned the minds of men from the pope and the Church of Rome to the word of God.

“Gran mouvman Wycliffe te inogire a, ki te pou delivre konsyans ak entèlijans, epi mete nasyon yo an libète, yo menm ki te tèlman lontan mare ak cha triyonfal Wòm nan, te pran nesans li nan Bib la. La a te sous kouran benediksyon sa a, ki, menm jan ak dlo lavi a, ap koule atravè syèk yo depi katòzyèm syèk la. Wycliffe te aksepte Ekriti Sen yo avèk yon lafwa san rezèv kòm revelasyon enspire volonte Bondye a, yon règ sifizan pou lafwa ak pratik. Yo te edike l pou l konsidere Legliz Wòm nan kòm otorite diven ki pa ka twonpe, epi pou l aksepte avèk yon reverans san kestyon ansèyman ak koutim etabli pandan mil ane; men li te vire do bay tout bagay sa yo pou l koute pawòl sen Bondye a. Se te sa ki otorite li te egzòte pèp la rekonèt. Olye legliz la t ap pale atravè pap la, li te deklare sèl vrè otorite a se vwa Bondye k ap pale atravè Pawòl Li. Epi li te anseye non sèlman Bib la se yon revelasyon pafè volonte Bondye a, men tou, Lespri Sen an se sèl entèprèt li, e ke chak moun dwe, grasa etid ansèyman li yo, aprann devwa pa l pou tèt li. Konsa li te detounen lespri lèzòm yo soti nan pap la ak Legliz Wòm nan pou mennen yo nan pawòl Bondye a.

“Wycliffe was one of the greatest of the Reformers. In breadth of intellect, in clearness of thought, in firmness to maintain the truth, and in boldness to defend it, he was equaled by few who came after him. Purity of life, unwearying diligence in study and in labor, incorruptible integrity, and Christlike love and faithfulness in his ministry, characterized the first of the Reformers. And this notwithstanding the intellectual darkness and moral corruption of the age from which he emerged.

“Wycliffe te youn nan pi gran Refòmatè yo. Nan lajè entèlijans li, nan klète panse li, nan fèmte li pou kenbe laverite a, ak nan odas li pou defann li, te gen trè kèk nan sa yo ki te vini apre li ki te egal li. Pite lavi li, dilijans san pran souf li nan etid ak nan travay, entegrite enkowòptib li, ansanm ak lanmou ak fidelite ki te sanble ak Kris nan ministè li, te make premye nan Refòmatè yo. E sa, malgre fènwa entelektyèl ak koripsyon moral epòk kote li te sòti a.”

“The character of Wycliffe is a testimony to the educating, transforming power of the Holy Scriptures. It was the Bible that made him what he was. The effort to grasp the great truths of revelation imparts freshness and vigor to all the faculties. It expands the mind, sharpens the perceptions, and ripens the judgment. The study of the Bible will ennoble every thought, feeling, and aspiration as no other study can. It gives stability of purpose, patience, courage, and fortitude; it refines the character and sanctifies the soul. An earnest, reverent study of the Scriptures, bringing the mind of the student in direct contact with the infinite mind, would give to the world men of stronger and more active intellect, as well as of nobler principle, than has ever resulted from the ablest training that human philosophy affords. ‘The entrance of Thy words,’ says the psalmist, ‘giveth light; it giveth understanding.’ Psalm 119:130.” The Great Controversy, 93, 94.

“Karaktè Wycliffe la se yon temwayaj sou pouvwa edikatif ak transfòmatè Sentespri Ekriti yo. Se Bib la ki te fè li tounen sa li te ye a. Efò pou konprann gwo verite revelasyon yo bay frechè ak fòs a tout kapasite yo. Li elaji lespri a, li rann pèsepsyon yo pi file, epi li mennen jijman an rive nan matirite. Etid Bib la ap nòb tout panse, tout santiman, ak tout aspirasyon, jan okenn lòt etid pa ka fè sa. Li bay fèmte nan objektif, pasyans, kouraj, ak andirans; li rafine karaktè a epi li sanktifye nanm nan. Yon etid serye ak reveran sou Ekriti yo, ki mete lespri etidyan an an kontak dirèk ak lespri enfini an, ta bay mond lan moun ki gen yon entèlijans pi fò e pi aktif, ansanm ak prensip ki pi nòb, pase sa fòmasyon ki pi ekselan filozofi imen an ka bay. Men sa salmis la di: ‘Lè pawòl ou yo antre, yo bay limyè; yo bay konprann.’ Sòm 119:130.” The Great Controversy, 93, 94.

Following the testimony concerning John Wycliffe in The Great Controversy, Sister White provides a list of faithful reformers (waymarks), that ultimately reaches the reformer John Knox. She identifies a significant question posed to John Knox from Mary the Queen of Scotland.

Apre temwayaj konsènan John Wycliffe nan The Great Controversy, Sè White prezante yon lis refòmatè fidèl (waymarks), ki finalman rive jouk sou refòmatè John Knox. Li idantifye yon kesyon enpòtan Mari, Rèn Ekòs, te poze John Knox.

“John Knox had turned away from the traditions and mysticisms of the church, to feed upon the truths of God’s Word, and the teaching of Wishart had confirmed his determination to forsake the communion of Rome, and join himself to the persecuted reformers. . . .

“Jan Knox te vire do bay tradisyon ak mistisism legliz la, pou l te nouri tèt li ak verite ki nan Pawòl Bondye a, epi ansèyman Wishart te konfime detèminasyon li pou l te abandone kominyon Wòm nan, epi mete tèt li ansanm ak refòmatè yo t ap pèsekite yo....”

“When brought face to face with the queen of Scotland, in whose presence the zeal of many a leader of the Protestants had abated, John Knox bore unswerving witness for the truth. He was not to be won by caresses; he quailed not before threats. The queen charged him with heresy. He had taught the people to receive a religion prohibited by the State, she declared, and had thus transgressed God’s command enjoining subjects to obey their princes. Knox answered firmly:—‘As right religion received neither its origin nor its authority from princes, but from the eternal God alone, so are not subjects bound to frame their religion according to the tastes of their princes. For oft it is that princes, of all others, are the most ignorant of God’s true religion. If all the seed of Abraham had been of the religion of Pharaoh, whose subjects they long were, I pray you, madam, what religion would there have been in the world? And if all in the days of the apostles had been of the religion of the Roman emperors, I pray you, madam, what religion would there have been now upon the earth? … And so, madam, you may perceive that subjects are not bound to the religion of their princes, although they are commanded to give them reverence.’

«Lè yo te mete l fas a fas ak larenn Ekòs la, devan prezans pa li kote zèl anpil chèf pwotestan yo te vin febli, Jan Nòks te rann yon temwayaj san brannen pou laverite a. Yo pa t kapab genyen li pa karès; li pa t tranble devan menas. Larenn nan te akize li de erezi. Li te anseye pèp la pou yo resevwa yon relijyon Leta te entèdi, li te deklare, e konsa li te vyole kòmandman Bondye ki mande sijè yo obeyi chèf yo. Nòks te reponn avèk fèmte:—“Menm jan vrè relijyon an pa t resevwa ni orijin li ni otorite li nan men chèf, men nan men Bondye etènèl la sèlman, konsa tou sijè yo pa oblije fòme relijyon pa yo dapre gou chèf yo. Paske souvan, se chèf yo menm, pami tout lòt moun, ki pi inyoran konsènan vrè relijyon Bondye a. Si tout desandans Abraram nan te suiv relijyon Farawon an, ki moun yo te sijè pandan lontan, m ap mande nou, madam, ki relijyon ki ta gen nan lemonn? E si tout moun nan tan apot yo te suiv relijyon anperè women yo, m ap mande nou, madam, ki relijyon ki ta sou tè a kounye a? … Konsa, madam, nou ka wè klèman sijè yo pa oblije pran relijyon chèf yo, byenke yo resevwa kòmandman pou yo ba yo respè.”»

“Said Mary, ‘You interpret the Scripture in one way, and they [the Romish teachers] interpret it in another; whom shall I believe, and who shall be judge?’

Mari di: “Ou menm, ou entèprete Ekriti a yon fason, epi yo menm [anseyen womis yo], yo entèprete l yon lòt fason; kilès pou m kwè, e kilès ki va jij?”

“‘You shall believe God, who plainly speaketh in his Word,’ answered the reformer; ‘and farther than the Word teaches you, ye shall believe neither the one nor the other. The Word of God is plain in itself, and if in any one place there be obscurity, the Holy Ghost, who never is contrary to himself, explains the same more clearly in other places, so that there can remain no doubt but unto such as are obstinately ignorant.’ Such were the truths that the fearless reformer, at the peril of his life, spoke in the ear of royalty. With the same undaunted courage he kept to his purpose, praying and fighting the battles of the Lord, until Scotland was free from popery.” The Great Controversy, 250, 251.

“‘Nou dwe kwè Bondye, ki pale aklè nan Pawòl li a,’ refòmatè a reponn; ‘epi pi lwen pase sa Pawòl la anseye nou, nou pa dwe kwè ni youn ni lòt la. Pawòl Bondye a klè nan li menm, epi si nan nenpòt kote gen tenèb, Sentespri a, ki pa janm kontrè ak tèt li, esplike menm bagay la pi klè nan lòt kote, pou pa ka rete okenn dout, eksepte pou moun ki fè tèt di rete nan inyorans.’ Se te verite sa yo refòmatè san laperèz la, ak lavi li menm an danje, te pale nan zòrèy wayote a. Avèk menm kouraj san tranble sa a, li te kenbe fèm nan objektif li, pandan li t ap priye epi goumen batay Senyè a, jiskaske Scotland te vin lib anba pouvwa papis la.” The Great Controversy, 250, 251.

The interaction between the reformer and the queen highlights the third thread in the reformation history that identifies Satan’s effort to counterfeit the Bible, the reformers and the methodology of biblical study. John’s answer to the Queen was that the correct methodology is “historicism” which is premised upon a line of prophetic history being explained by the Holy Spirit with another line of prophetic history.

Entèraksyon ant refòmatè a ak larenn nan mete an relèf twazyèm fil la nan istwa Refòm nan, ki idantifye efò Satan an pou kontrefè Bib la, refòmatè yo, ak metodoloji etid biblik la. Repons Jan te bay larenn nan se te ke metodoloji ki kòrèk la se “istorisisme”, ki baze sou prensip selon ki yon liy istwa pwofetik esplike pa Sentespri a atravè yon lòt liy istwa pwofetik.

The light had been opened in the darkness. Wycliffe and the early reformers all the way through the Millerite history employed a method of biblical study labelled “historicism.” The history of the biblical method of Bible study is often overlooked, but is essential to recognize if one truly will see the significance of the rules of prophetic interpretation adopted by Miller and thereafter by Future for America.

Limyè a te louvri nan fènwa a. Wycliffe ak premye refòmatè yo, depi nan kòmansman yo jouk atravè tout istwa Millerit la, te sèvi ak yon metòd etid biblik yo te rele “istorisis.” Istwa metòd biblik etid Bib la souvan neglije, men li esansyèl pou rekonèt li si yon moun vrèman vle wè enpòtans règ entèpretasyon pwofetik Miller te adopte yo epi, apre sa, Future for America tou.

There are only two churches Sister White identifies as God’s denominated people. That being ancient Israel and the Seventh-day Adventist church.

Gen sèlman de legliz Sè White idantifye kòm pèp Bondye a ki pote non li. Sa yo se ansyen Izrayèl ak Legliz Advantis Setyèm Jou a.

“The reasons why we are denominated people of God are to be repeated and repeated. Deuteronomy 4:1–13” Manuscript Releases, volume 8, 426.

“Rezon ki fè yo rele nou pèp Bondye a dwe repete ankò e ankò. Detewonòm 4:1–13” Manuscript Releases, volim 8, 426.

The church of the apostles,’ the church in the wilderness during the papal darkness were never called God’s denominated people, for the term (meaning to be named) represents a church that is given the responsibility of being the depositaries of God’s law, and with Adventism they were also to be the depositaries of God’s prophetic truths.

Legliz apot yo, legliz ki te nan dezè a pandan fènwa papal la, pa t janm rele pèp Bondye ki te resevwa denominasyon sa a; paske tèm nan (ki vle di yo bay yon non) reprezante yon legliz yo bay responsablite pou l vin depozitè lalwa Bondye a, e avèk Adventis la yo te dwe vin tou depozitè verite pwofetik Bondye yo.

“God has called His church in this day, as He called ancient Israel, to stand as a light in the earth. By the mighty cleaver of truth, the messages of the first, second, and third angels, He has separated them from the churches and from the world to bring them into a sacred nearness to Himself. He has made them the depositaries of His law and has committed to them the great truths of prophecy for this time. Like the holy oracles committed to ancient Israel, these are a sacred trust to be communicated to the world. The three angels of Revelation 14 represent the people who accept the light of God’s messages and go forth as His agents to sound the warning throughout the length and breadth of the earth.” Testimonies, volume 5, 455.

“Bondye rele legliz Li a nan tan sa a, menm jan Li te rele Izrayèl tan lontan an, pou l kanpe kòm yon limyè sou tè a. Pa gwo kouto file verite a, pa mesaj premye, dezyèm, ak twazyèm zanj yo, Li separe yo ak legliz yo ansanm ak lemonn nan pou mennen yo nan yon pwoksimite sakre avèk Li menm. Li fè yo vin depozitè lalwa Li a, epi Li konfye yo gwo verite pwofesi yo pou tan sa a. Menm jan ak pawòl sakre yo ki te konfye a Izrayèl tan lontan an, sa yo se yon konfyans sakre ki dwe kominike bay lemonn. Twa zanj yo nan Revelasyon 14 la reprezante pèp ki aksepte limyè mesaj Bondye yo epi ki soti kòm ajan Li pou fè avètisman an sonnen toupatou sou tout latè.” Testimonies, volim 5, 455.

William Miller represented the chosen messenger to open God’s prophetic truths, and when those truths led a people to the open door of the Most Holy Place in 1844, God then opened up the law of God. Wycliffe is a waymark in opening up the Bible and producing the beginnings of the Protestant Reformation, but he is also a waymark of God’s work to establish “the great truths of prophecy.” John Wycliffe was the morning star identified in the history of the twelve-hundred and sixty year rule of the papacy. His work began in the fourteenth century, then in the seventeenth century another waymark of that prophetic line was the production of the King James Bible in 1611. On that line we ultimately reach the waymark of Miller’s rules of prophetic interpretation. Miller is a waymark in that line of truth, and so are his rules. His rules give witness to a waymark at the end of Adventism represented by the publication of Prophetic Keys.

William Miller te reprezante mesaje chwazi a pou louvri verite pwofetik Bondye yo, e lè verite sa yo te mennen yon pèp nan pòt ouvè Trè Sen an an 1844, Bondye te louvri lalwa Bondye a. Wycliffe se yon repè nan ouvèti Bib la ak nan pwodui kòmansman Refòm Pwotestan an, men li se tou yon repè nan travay Bondye pou etabli “gwo verite pwofesi yo.” Jan Wycliffe te zetwal maten an idantifye nan istwa dominasyon papote a pandan mil desan swasant ane yo. Travay li te kòmanse nan katòzyèm syèk la; apre sa, nan disetyèm syèk la, yon lòt repè nan liy pwofetik sa a se te pwodiksyon Bib Wa Jak la an 1611. Sou liy sa a nou rive finalman nan repè règ Miller yo pou entèpretasyon pwofetik. Miller se yon repè nan liy verite sa a, e règ li yo tou se repè. Règ li yo rann temwayaj sou yon repè nan fen Advantis la, repè ki reprezante pa piblikasyon Prophetic Keys.

If we do not understand that Miller’s rules were a waymark in a line of prophetic history representing the work to preserve the original and correct texts of the Bible and also the work of the opening up the true understanding of the Bible, which required that the reformers were led to understand and employ the sacred methodology of study called “historicism,” we lack the information necessary to recognize prophetic truths associated with the work of presenting and preserving the light of the third angel at the end of Adventism. For this reason, it is important to take a small survey of that line of history.

Si nous ne comprenons pas que les règles de Miller constituaient un jalon dans une ligne d’histoire prophétique, représentant l’œuvre destinée à préserver les textes originaux et corrects de la Bible, ainsi que l’œuvre d’ouverture de la véritable compréhension de la Bible, laquelle exigeait que les réformateurs fussent conduits à comprendre et à employer la méthodologie sacrée d’étude appelée « historicisme », nous manquons des informations nécessaires pour reconnaître les vérités prophétiques associées à l’œuvre de présentation et de préservation de la lumière du troisième ange à la fin de l’adventisme. Pour cette raison, il importe de faire un bref survol de cette ligne d’histoire.

The only genuine definition of the word “Protestant” is to protest Rome. If a church ceases to protest Rome, it is no longer Protestant and it then becomes a daughter of Rome, as did the Protestants who rejected the first angel’s message. The premier understanding that became the “motto” of the Protestants that came out of the Catholic church was “the Bible and the Bible alone.” Yet history attests to the fact that the Bible needed to be rightly divided.

Sèl definisyon otantik mo “Pwotestan” an se pwoteste kont Wòm. Si yon legliz sispann pwoteste kont Wòm, li pa Pwotestan ankò, e li vin tounen yon pitit fi Wòm, menm jan ak Pwotestan sa yo ki te rejte mesaj premye zanj lan. Pi gwo konpreyansyon ki te vin tounen “deviz” Pwotestan yo ki te soti nan legliz Katolik la se te “Bib la, e Bib la sèlman.” Men, listwa rann temwayaj sou lefèt ke Bib la te bezwen byen divize.

Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. 2 Timothy 2:15, 16.

Efforce-toi de te présenter devant Dieu comme un homme éprouvé, un ouvrier qui n’a point à rougir, dispensant droitement la parole de la vérité. Mais évite les discours profanes et vains; car ceux qui les tiennent avanceront toujours plus dans l’impiété. 2 Timothée 2:15, 16.

The method of biblical study that the Protestants were led to use in their efforts to rightly divide the word of truth is “historicism.” That method was a specific and serious target for Satan to attack, and attack he did.

Metòd etid biblik yo te mennen Pwotestan yo sèvi avè l nan efò yo pou byen separe pawòl verite a se “istorisis.” Metòd sa a te yon sib espesifik e serye pou Satan atake, e li te atake l vre.

“We should know for ourselves what constitutes Christianity, what is truth, what is the faith that we have received, what are the Bible rules—the rules given us from the highest authority.” The 1888 Materials, 403.

“Nou ta dwe konnen pou tèt pa nou sa ki konstitye Krisyanis la, sa ki verite a, sa ki lafwa nou te resevwa a, ki sa règ Bib la ye—règ yo ki te ban nou soti nan otorite ki pi wo a.” The 1888 Materials, 403.

The undermining of the biblical methodology used by the Reformers all the way to and including William Miller is specifically identified as beginning in the fifteenth century with a Jesuit scholar named Francisco Ribera (1537–1591), who is credited with popularizing the futurist interpretation. He wrote a commentary on the book of Revelation that proposed a futuristic interpretation of the prophecies, distancing them from the historical context. Ribera invented this methodology for the purpose of resisting the truth which the methodology of historicism always produced. That truth was that the pope of Rome is the antichrist of Bible prophecy.

Feblèsman metodoloji biblik Refòmatè yo te itilize depi nan kòmansman yo jouk rive lakay William Miller e ki enkli li menm, idantifye avèk presizyon kòm yon pwosesis ki te kòmanse nan kenzyèm syèk la avèk yon savan Jezuit yo te rele Francisco Ribera (1537–1591), yo rekonèt li kòm moun ki te fè entèpretasyon futuris la vin popilè. Li te ekri yon kòmantè sou liv Revelasyon an ki te pwopoze yon entèpretasyon futuris sou pwofesi yo, pandan li t ap separe yo ak kontèks istorik la. Ribera te envante metodoloji sa a nan bi pou l te reziste verite metodoloji istorisis la te toujou pwodui a. Verite sa a se te ke pap Wòm nan se antikris pwofesi biblik la.

In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries it can be documented that Protestantism knew that Ribera’s false methodology was satanic and unsound. The Protestants in that history wrote books and tracts opposing the “profane and vain babblings” of the Jesuit scholar. But in 1909, the Trojan horse, the Scofield Reference Bible was published, and the references inserted into the footnotes of the Bible were based upon the teachings of Ribera and another Jesuit named Manuel Lacunza (1731–1801). Lacunza wrote under the pen name Juan Josafat Ben-Ezra, and published a book titled The Coming of the Messiah in Glory and Majesty. As Ribera before him, the book was a direct attack upon the fulfillment of the prophecies in the book of Revelation.

Nan disetyèm ak dizwityèm syèk yo, li kapab dokimante ke Pwotestantis te konnen metòd fo Ribera a te satanik e li pa t solid. Pwotestan yo nan istwa sa a te ekri liv ak bwochi pou opoze ak “pawòl pwofan ak diskisyon san valè” savan Jezuit la. Men, an 1909, chwal Twawa a, Scofield Reference Bible la, te pibliye, epi referans yo te mete nan nòt anba paj Bib la te baze sou ansèyman Ribera ak yon lòt Jezuit ki te rele Manuel Lacunza (1731–1801). Lacunza te ekri anba non plim Juan Josafat Ben-Ezra, epi li te pibliye yon liv ki te gen tit The Coming of the Messiah in Glory and Majesty. Menm jan ak Ribera anvan li, liv la te yon atak dirèk kont akonplisman pwofesi ki nan liv Revelasyon an.

Satan knew the message he needed to cloud with confusion was the final warning message that comes from the book of Revelation. Incorporating the profane and vain babblings of the two Jesuit priests into the references within the Scofield Reference Bible allowed Satan to lead apostate Protestants into accepting the Jesuit methodologies, thus blinding them to the truth. Satan accomplished by introducing several Catholic prophetic models which removed the possibility to clearly identify who the antichrist of Bible prophecy is. It was not a difficult deception for Satan, for the Protestants had already returned to the Roman church with their rejection of Miller’s message in 1843.

Satan te konnen mesaj li te bezwen anvlope nan konfizyon an se te dènye mesaj avètisman ki soti nan liv Revelasyon an. Lè yo te enkòpore pawòl pwofan ak diskou vid de prèt jezuit yo nan referans ki andedan Scofield Reference Bible la, sa te pèmèt Satan mennen Pwotestan aposta yo rive aksepte metodoloji jezuit yo, konsa li te avèg yo devan verite a. Satan te reyalize sa lè li te entwodui plizyè modèl pwofetik katolik ki te retire posiblite pou idantifye klèman kiyès antikris pwofesi Bib la ye. Sa pa t yon desepsyon ki te difisil pou Satan, paske Pwotestan yo te deja retounen nan legliz Wòm nan lè yo te rejte mesaj Miller an 1843.

There have been several books and articles published through the years that document Satan’s attack upon the Bible, that began in the first few centuries after Christ was crucified. That attack reached a point where counterfeit manuscripts were introduced to produce counterfeit Bibles. Satan also attacked the reformers that were raised up to uphold God’s word while they lived and even after those Reformers died.

Pandan ane yo, plizyè liv ak atik te pibliye ki dokimante atak Satan kont Bib la, yon atak ki te kòmanse nan premye syèk yo apre Kris la te kloure sou kwa a. Atak sa a te rive nan yon pwen kote yo te entwodui maniskri kontrefè pou pwodwi Bib kontrefè. Satan te atake refòmatè yo tou, moun Bondye te leve pou soutni pawòl Bondye a pandan yo t ap viv, e menm apre Refòmatè sa yo te mouri.

Just consider how modern Seventh-day Adventist historians and theologians treat the subject of William Miller. It is as if they dug up his bones and cast them into the Mississippi River.

Konsidere sèlman kijan istoryen ak teyolojyen Advantis Setyèm Jou modèn yo trete sijè William Miller. Se kòm si yo te fouye zo li yo epi yo te voye yo nan Rivyè Mississippi.

“William Miller was disturbing Satan’s kingdom, and the arch-enemy sought not only to counteract the effect of the message, but to destroy the messenger himself. As Father Miller made a practical application of Scripture truth to the hearts of his hearers, the rage of professed Christians was kindled against him, even as the anger of the Jews was excited against Christ and his apostles. Church-members stirred up the baser classes, and upon several occasions enemies plotted to take his life as he should leave the place of meeting. But holy angels were in the throng, and one of these, in the form of a man, took the arm of this servant of the Lord, and led him in safety from the angry mob. His work was not yet done, and Satan and his emissaries were disappointed in their purpose.” Spirit of Prophecy, volume 4, 219.

« William Miller t ap boulvèse wayòm Satan an, e gran advèsè a t ap chèche non sèlman pou anpeche efè mesaj la, men tou pou detwi mesaje a menm. Pandan Papa Miller t ap fè yon aplikasyon pratik verite Ekriti yo sou kè moun ki t ap koute l yo, kòlè moun ki te fè pwofesyon yo se kretyen yo te limen kont li, menm jan ak jan kòlè Jwif yo te leve kont Kris la ak apot li yo. Manm legliz yo te brase klas ki pi ba yo, e nan plizyè okazyon ènmi yo te fè konplo pou pran lavi li lè li t ap kite kote reyinyon an. Men zanj sen yo te nan foul la, e youn nan yo, sou fòm yon nonm, te pran bra sèvitè Senyè a sa a, epi li te mennen l an sekirite pou l soti nan mitan foul fache a. Travay li pa t ankò fini, e Satan ansanm ak emisar li yo te desi nan objektif yo a. » Spirit of Prophecy, volim 4, 219.

Look at how those same two categories of Adventism (theologians and historians) have downplayed and covered up the validity of the rules of Miller, which Sister White informs us will be used by all who actually proclaim the three angel’s messages.

Gade kijan menm de kategori Advantis sa yo (teyolojyen ak istoryen) te minimize epi kouvri valabilite règ Miller yo, règ Sè White fè nou konnen ke tout moun ki vrèman pwoklame mesaj twa zanj yo pral sèvi avè yo.

“Those who are engaged in proclaiming the third angel’s message are searching the Scriptures upon the same plan that Father Miller adopted. In the little book entitled Views of the Prophecies and Prophetic Chronology, Father Miller gives the following simple but intelligent and important rules for Bible study and interpretation:—

“Moun ki angaje nan pwoklamasyon mesaj twazyèm zanj lan ap fouye Ekriti yo dapre menm metòd Papa Miller te adopte a. Nan ti liv ki pote tit Views of the Prophecies and Prophetic Chronology, Papa Miller bay règ senp sa yo, men ki saj e ki enpòtan, pou etid ak entèpretasyon Labib la:—”

“[Rules one through five quoted.]

«[Règle youn jiska senk site.]»

“The above is a portion of these rules; and in our study of the Bible we shall all do well to heed the principles set forth.” Review and Herald, November 25, 1884.

“Sa ki anlè a se yon pati nan règ sa yo; e nan etid nou fè sou Bib la, nou tout ap fè byen pou nou pran prekosyon pou nou suiv prensip ki tabli yo.” Review and Herald, 25 novanm 1884.

Without reviewing the three threads of the line of prophetic history associated with the development and establishment of God’s Word it is impossible to see the significance of a major testimony to uphold William Miller as the messenger that was typified by Elijah in his presentation of the message, and as Moses in the promise of Miller being raised up in the resurrection of the righteous, and as Elisha in his willingness to leave his farm and serve the Elijah message. Sister White identifies all three of the biblical heroes as typifying William Miller, who is now treated by modern Adventist theologians and historians as if he was simply some “poor farm boy” from the eighteenth century.

San yo pa revize twa fil liy listwa pwofetik ki asosye ak devlopman ak etablisman Pawòl Bondye a, li enposib pou wè enpòtans yon gwo temwayaj ki soutni William Miller kòm mesaje ki te tipifye pa Eli nan prezantasyon mesaj li a, epi kòm Moyiz nan pwomès konsènan Miller pou leve nan rezirèksyon moun ki jis yo, epi kòm Elize nan volonte li pou l kite fèm li epi sèvi mesaj Eli a. Sè White idantifye tout twa ewo biblik sa yo kòm tipifye William Miller, ke teyolojyen ak istoryen Advantis modèn yo kounye a trete kòm si li te senpleman yon “pòv tigason fèm” soti nan dizwityèm syèk la.

William Tyndale was one of the many reformers raised up in this line of prophetic history. If I might say it this way, his ‘mission statement’ against the pope’s ambassadors he interacted with was, “I will cause the boy that drives the plow to know more of the Scriptures than you do.” William Miller was the farm boy, who drove the plow and fulfilled Tyndale’s prophecy.

William Tyndale te youn nan anpil refòmatè Bondye te leve nan liy istwa pwofetik sa a. Si m te ka di sa konsa, “deklarasyon misyon” li kont anvwaye pap la, avèk moun li te an kontak yo, te konsa: “M ap fè ti gason k ap kondi chari a vin konnen plis nan Ekriti yo pase nou menm.” William Miller te ti gason nan fèm nan, ki te kondi chari a epi ki te akonpli pwofesi Tyndale la.

This introduction has been greatly simplified in terms of all the history that could be brought to bear in support of what we have presented up until now. We will now consider some signatures of Alpha and Omega in order to lead back to the consideration of Miller as a waymark and a messenger.

Entwodiksyon sa a te senplifye anpil anrapò ak tout istwa ki ta kapab sèvi kòm sipò pou sa nou te prezante jiska kounye a. Kounye a, nou pral konsidere kèk siyati Alfa ak Omega pou nou ka retounen sou konsiderasyon Miller kòm yon repè ak yon mesaje.

The book of Daniel is the beginning of a book that consists of two books. The end of that book is the book of Revelation. Though they are two distinct books, together they represent one book.

Liv Dànyèl la se kòmansman yon liv ki konpoze de de liv. Fen liv sa a se liv Revelasyon an. Menm si se de liv ki diferan, ansanm yo reprezante yon sèl liv.

Years ago, I had a public interaction with a well-known Seventh-day Adventist theologian who worked at the Biblical Research Institute of the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The theologian was attempting to correct my understanding of the last six verses of Daniel eleven, and also my understanding of the “daily” in the book of Daniel. In our interaction which took place over a period of time, for it consisted of his producing an article which I responded to, which he then answered back, and then of course I returned my thoughts, and so on and so forth. In the interaction he informed me that in the committee he worked in at the General Conference, he was considered the expert on the book of Daniel, and that a coworker of his was considered the resident expert on the book of Revelation. In our interactions he did not want to address points in the book of Revelation, but rather refer them to his colleague. He wanted to keep the discussion in the book of Daniel alone.

Sa gen kèk ane, mwen te gen yon entèraksyon piblik ak yon teyolojyen Advantis Setyèm Jou byen koni ki t ap travay nan Biblical Research Institute nan Konferans Jeneral Legliz Advantis Setyèm Jou a. Teyolojyen an t ap eseye korije konpreyansyon mwen sou sis dènye vèsè Danyèl onz la, epi tou sou “kontinyèl la” nan liv Danyèl la. Nan entèraksyon nou an, ki te dewoule pandan yon sèten tan, paske li te konpoze de lefèt ke li te pwodui yon atik mwen te reponn, epi li menm li te reponn ankò, epi apre sa, natirèlman, mwen te retounen ak refleksyon pa m, e konsa sa te kontinye. Nan entèraksyon an, li te fè m konnen ke nan komite kote li t ap travay la nan Konferans Jeneral la, yo te konsidere l kòm ekspè sou liv Danyèl la, e yo te konsidere youn nan kòlèg li yo kòm ekspè rezidan sou liv Revelasyon an. Nan entèraksyon nou yo, li pa t vle trete pwen ki nan liv Revelasyon an, men pito voye yo bay kòlèg li a. Li te vle kenbe diskisyon an sèlman nan liv Danyèl la.

Sister White is clear that Daniel and Revelation are one book. At that level they represent the Bible, which is one book made up of two books, the old and the new. Sister White also comments on the Jewish church, that only considers the old book to be the one book, and she also comments on those who disregard the old book for they only understand or are only willing to understand the new book. Her inspired testimony is that if you only accept the new, then you reject the old, and vice versa. For the theologian to claim he was the expert of Daniel, but not of Revelation is repeating the Jewish concept of only accepting the Old Testament, and we know where that narrow view led the Jews. Taking either side of the issue; accepting the old and not the new, or accepting new, but not the old is to reject the entire testimony.

Sè White fè konnen avèk klè ke Danyèl ak Revelasyon se yon sèl liv. Sou nivo sa a, yo reprezante Bib la, ki se yon sèl liv ki fòme ak de liv, ansyen an ak nouvo a. Sè White fè kòmantè tou sou legliz jwif la, ki konsidere sèlman ansyen liv la kòm sèl liv la; epi li fè kòmantè tou sou moun ki meprize ansyen liv la, paske yo konprann sèlman, oswa yo sèlman dispoze konprann, nouvo liv la. Temwayaj enspire li a se ke si ou aksepte sèlman nouvo a, alò ou rejte ansyen an, e vis vèrsa. Pou teyolojyen an pretann li te ekspè nan Danyèl, men pa nan Revelasyon, se repete konsèp jwif la ki aksepte sèlman Ansyen Testaman an; e nou konnen kote vizyon etwat sa a te mennen jwif yo. Pran nenpòt bò nan kestyon an—aksepte ansyen an epi pa nouvo a, oswa aksepte nouvo a men pa ansyen an—se rejte temwayaj la antye.

“The Saviour inquired of his disciples if they understood these things. They answered, ‘Yea, Lord. Then said he unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of Heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old.’ In this parable, Jesus presented before his disciples the responsibility of those whose work it is to give to the world the light which they have received from him. The Old Testament was all the Scripture then in existence; but it was not written merely for the ancients; it was for all ages and for all people. Jesus would have the teachers of his doctrine diligently search the Old Testament for that light which establishes his identity as the Messiah foretold in prophecy, and reveals the nature of his mission to the world. The Old and the New Testament are inseparable, for both are the teachings of Christ. The doctrine of the Jews, who accept only the Old Testament, is not unto salvation, since they reject the Saviour whose life and ministry was a fulfillment of the law and the prophecies. And the doctrine of those who discard the Old Testament is not unto salvation, because it rejects that which is direct testimony of Christ. Skeptics begin with discounting upon the Old Testament, and it takes but another step to deny the validity of the New, and thus both are rejected.

“Sovè a te mande disip li yo si yo te konprann bagay sa yo. Yo reponn: ‘Wi, Seyè.’ Lè sa a li di yo: ‘Se poutèt sa, chak eskrib ki resevwa enstriksyon pou wayòm syèl la sanble ak yon mèt kay, ki tire nan trezò li bagay nouvo ak bagay ansyen.’ Nan parabòl sa a, Jezi te mete devan disip li yo responsablite moun sa yo ki gen travay pou bay mond lan limyè yo te resevwa nan men li. Ansyen Testaman an te tout Ekriti ki te egziste lè sa a; men li pa t ekri sèlman pou ansyen yo; li te pou tout epòk ak pou tout pèp. Jezi te vle pou anseyan doktrin li yo fouye avèk dilijans nan Ansyen Testaman an pou limyè sa a ki tabli idantite li kòm Mesi yo te anonse davans nan pwofesi a, epi ki revele nati misyon li pou mond lan. Ansyen ak Nouvo Testaman yo pa ka separe, paske toude se ansèyman Kris la. Doktrin Jwif yo, ki aksepte sèlman Ansyen Testaman an, pa mennen nan delivrans, paske yo rejte Sovè a, lavi ak ministè li te yon akonplisman lalwa a ak pwofesi yo. Epi doktrin moun ki mete Ansyen Testaman an sou kote a pa mennen nan delivrans nonplis, paske li rejte sa ki se temwayaj dirèk konsènan Kris la. Moun ki ensèten yo kòmanse pa diminye valè Ansyen Testaman an, epi li pa pran plis pase yon lòt pa pou yo nye validite Nouvo a; konsa yo rejte toude.”

“The Jews have little influence over the Christian world in showing them the importance of the commandments, including the binding law of the Sabbath, because in bringing forth the old treasures of truth, they throw aside the new ones in the personal teachings of Jesus. On the other hand, the strongest reason why Christians fail to influence the Jews to accept the teachings of Christ as the language of divine wisdom, is because, in bringing forth the treasures of his word, they treat with contempt the riches of the Old Testament, which are the earlier teachings of the Son of God, through Moses. They reject the law proclaimed from Sinai, and the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, instituted in the garden of Eden. But the minister of the gospel, who follows the teachings of Christ, will gain a thorough knowledge of both the Old and the New Testament, that he may present them in their true light to the people an inseparable whole—the one depending upon and illuminating the other. Thus, as Jesus instructed his disciples, they will bring forth from their treasure ‘things new and old.’” Spirit of Prophecy, volume 2, 255.

« Jwif yo gen ti enfliyans sou mond kretyen an pou montre yo enpòtans kòmandman yo, ansanm ak lwa obligatwa Saba a, paske, lè y ap fè parèt ansyen trezò verite yo, yo mete sou kote sa ki nouvo yo nan ansèyman pèsonèl Jezi yo. Okontrè, rezon ki pi fò ki fè kretyen yo pa rive enfliyanse Jwif yo pou aksepte ansèyman Kris la kòm langaj sajès diven an, se paske, lè y ap fè parèt trezò pawòl li yo, yo trete ak mepri richès Ansyen Testaman an, ki se ansèyman pi bonè Pitit Bondye a te bay atravè Moyiz. Yo rejte lwa ki te pwoklame depi Sinayi a, ansanm ak Saba katriyèm kòmandman an, ki te tabli nan jaden Edenn nan. Men, minis levanjil la, ki suiv ansèyman Kris la, ap rive gen yon konesans apwofondi ni sou Ansyen Testaman an ni sou Nouvo Testaman an, pou l ka prezante yo bay pèp la nan vrè limyè yo kòm yon antye endisolisib—youn nan depann de lòt la epi li klere lòt la. Konsa, jan Jezi te enstwi disip li yo, y ap tire nan trezò yo “bagay nouvo ak bagay ansyen.” » Spirit of Prophecy, volim 2, 255.

The previous counsel has another application for Laodicean Adventists. To profess to believe the Bible in its entirety, both the Old and the New Testaments, yet reject the Spirit of Prophecy is the identical ditch of accepting only one testimony. Two witnesses are required to establish truth, so it is impossible to establish truth with one witness, and if any attempt to do so they are rejecting both witnesses, they are basing their faith upon what is referred to as ‘half-truths.’

Konsèy anvan an gen yon lòt aplikasyon pou Advantis Lawodise yo. Pwofese kwè nan Bib la antye, ni Ansyen Testaman an ni Nouvo Testaman an, epi poutan rejte Lespri Pwofesi a, se egzakteman menm twou a ak aksepte yon sèl temwayaj sèlman. De temwen nesesè pou etabli verite a; kidonk, li enposib pou etabli verite ak yon sèl temwen; e si kèk moun eseye fè sa, y ap rejte toude temwen yo, y ap baze lafwa yo sou sa yo rele “mwatye verite.”

I will now repeat a question that was in one of the initial articles that have been coming out since July, 2023. The question is, “What new light has come out of Adventism since 1863?” The answer is simply, “None.”

Mwen pral kounye a repete yon kesyon ki te nan youn nan premye atik yo ki ap parèt depi Jiyè 2023. Kesyon an se: “Ki nouvo limyè ki sòti nan Adventis depi 1863?” Repons lan senpleman se: “Okenn.”

The books of Daniel and the Revelation are one. One is a prophecy, the other a revelation; one a book sealed, the other a book opened. John heard the mysteries which the thunders uttered, but he was commanded not to write them.” Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, volume 7, 971.

“Liv Danyèl ak Revelasyon an se youn. Youn se yon pwofesi, lòt la se yon revelasyon; youn se yon liv sele, lòt la se yon liv ki louvri. Jan te tande mistè loraj yo te pwononse yo, men yo te ba li lòd pou l pa ekri yo.” Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, volim 7, 971.

The Alpha and Omega therefore identifies that Daniel is the first and Revelation the last. Daniel represents the beginning and Revelation represents the end of Adventism.

Se poutèt sa, Alfa ak Omega a montre ke Danyèl se premye a, epi Revelasyon se dènye a. Danyèl reprezante kòmansman Advantis la, epi Revelasyon reprezante fen Advantis la.

“Revelation is a sealed book, but it is also an opened book. It records marvelous events that are to take place in the last days of this earth’s history. The teachings of this book are definite, not mystical and unintelligible. In it the same line of prophecy is taken up as in Daniel. Some prophecies God has repeated, thus showing that importance must be given to them. The Lord does not repeat things that are of no great consequence.” Manuscript Releases, volume 9, 8.

« L’Apocalypse est un livre scellé, mais c’est aussi un livre ouvert. Il rapporte des événements merveilleux qui doivent se produire dans les derniers jours de l’histoire de cette terre. Les enseignements de ce livre sont précis, non mystiques ni inintelligibles. On y reprend la même ligne prophétique que dans Daniel. Certaines prophéties, Dieu les a répétées, montrant ainsi qu’il faut leur accorder de l’importance. Le Seigneur ne répète pas des choses qui sont sans grande conséquence. » Manuscript Releases, volume 9, 8.

In the beginning of Adventism, in the very verses that are the central pillar of Adventism, the verses that were unsealed in 1798; Jesus introduced Himself as “Palmoni,” the Wonderful Numberer. At the end of Adventism, Jesus introduces Himself as “Alpha and Omega,” the wonderful linguist—the Word of God. For this reason, the beginning of Adventism and the first angel’s message was “hung upon time.” At the end of Adventism, the third angel’s message will be hung upon His Word.

Nan kòmansman Advantis la, nan menm vèsè sa yo ki se poto mitan Advantis la, vèsè ki te desele an 1798 la, Jezi te prezante Tèt Li kòm «Palmoni», Bèl Moun ki konte a. Nan fen Advantis la, Jezi prezante Tèt Li kòm «Alpha ak Omega», bèl lengwis la—Pawòl Bondye a. Se poutèt sa, kòmansman Advantis la ak mesaj premye zanj lan te “pandye sou tan”. Nan fen Advantis la, mesaj twazyèm zanj lan ap pandye sou Pawòl Li.

The beginning and ending of Adventism take place during the history of the sixth kingdom of Bible prophecy, therefore they occur during the beginning and ending of the United States. The prophetic history of the United States is the history of the two horns of Republicanism and Protestantism. At the conclusion of that history those two horns will have changed from a lamb to a dragon. Republicanism will change to a democracy and Protestantism will change to apostate Protestantism. When the cup of probationary time for the United States begins to come to its close, as is happening right now, the two horns of apostate Republicanism and apostate Protestantism will form an image to the beast, thus merging church and state into one horn that speaks as a dragon. But God will not be left without a witness, for in the process of bringing a conclusion to the United States, He will raise up the genuine horn of Protestantism to protest both the image of the beast in the United States, and thereafter the image of the beast that confronts the entire world. The raising up of the Protestant horn at the end of the United States will be accomplished within the same historical structure as was the Protestant horn raised up in the beginning of the United States. A former covenant people will be passed by, and a new people will become the new covenant people. There is nothing new under the sun.

Kòmansman ak fen Advantis la pran plas pandan istwa sizyèm wayòm pwofesi biblik la; se poutèt sa yo rive pandan kòmansman ak fen Etazini. Istwa pwofetik Etazini se istwa de kòn Repiblikanis ak Pwotestantis la. Nan konklizyon istwa sa a, de kòn sa yo pral chanje soti nan yon ti mouton pou vin yon dragon. Repiblikanis pral chanje pou l tounen demokrasi, epi Pwotestantis pral chanje pou l tounen Pwotestantis aposta. Lè gode tan pwobasyon Etazini an kòmanse rive nan fen li, jan sa ap fèt kounye a menm, de kòn repiblikanis aposta ak pwotestantis aposta yo pral fòme yon imaj ak bèt la, konsa yo pral ini legliz ak leta nan yon sèl kòn ki pale tankou yon dragon. Men Bondye pap rete san yon temwen, paske nan pwosesis pou mennen Etazini nan konklizyon li, Li pral leve vrè kòn Pwotestantis la pou pwoteste ni kont imaj bèt la nan Etazini, epi apre sa kont imaj bèt la ki ap fè fas ak lemonn antye. Leve kòn Pwotestantis la nan fen Etazini an pral reyalize anndan menm estrikti istorik kote kòn Pwotestantis la te leve nan kòmansman Etazini. Yon ansyen pèp alyans pral mete sou kote, epi yon nouvo pèp pral vin nouvo pèp alyans lan. Pa gen anyen nouvo anba solèy la.

When we use the time prophecies understood and presented in the Millerite history to evaluate the Alpha and Omega, we find they are one in the same. Every time prophecy begins with a history when the prophecy is proclaimed, and that history always typifies the history when the prophecy is fulfilled.

Lè nou sèvi ak pwofesi tan yo jan yo te konprann e prezante nan istwa Millerit la pou evalye Alfa ak Omega a, nou jwenn yo se youn e menm bagay la. Chak pwofesi tan kòmanse ak yon istwa kote pwofesi a pwoklame, e istwa sa a toujou tipifye istwa kote pwofesi a akonpli.

The history of the twenty-three hundred year prophecy began on the third decree in 457 BC and ended at the third angel’s message on October 22, 1844. Leading up to, but before the arrival of the third decree the work of erecting the temple and Jerusalem was accomplished. In like manner the history, leading up to the arrival of the third angel, the foundational truths of the Millerite temple was established.

Istwa pwofesi de mil twasan ane a te kòmanse ak twazyèm dekrè a an 457 av. J.-K. e li te fini nan mesaj twazyèm zanj lan, nan dat 22 oktòb 1844. Anvan rive twazyèm dekrè a, men pandan peryòd ki t ap mennen rive sou li, travay pou bati tanp lan ak Jerizalèm te akonpli. Menm jan an tou, nan istwa ki t ap mennen rive sou aparisyon twazyèm zanj lan, verite fondamantal tanp Millerit la te tabli.

In 1798, the twenty-five hundred and twenty year prophecy that began in 723 BC with the scattering of the northern ten tribes was fulfilled. That prophecy identified two periods of twelve hundred and sixty years, marking the trampling down of the literal temple and literal Jerusalem by literal pagan Rome, that was followed by twelve hundred and sixty years of papal Rome trampling down the spiritual city and temple. The prophecy began with the destruction of the northern kingdom and the scattering of the kingdom’s citizens. Half way through the prophecy in 538, marks the end of the trampling down of God’s people by pagan Rome, the fourth kingdom of Bible prophecy and produces the scattering of God’s church into the wilderness of the Dark Ages. The end of that time prophecy in 1798 marks the end of the fifth kingdom of Bible prophecy. The scattering of the northern ten tribes, and of the Christian church that fled into the wilderness represents the gathering of those destined to become the horn of Protestantism. Waymarks are often represented by opposites and a scattering can represent a gathering, just as Elijah represents John the Baptist. In the same prophetic confrontation Elijah does not die, and John the Baptist does.

An 1798, pwofesi de mil senksan venn lane ki te kòmanse an 723 anvan Jezikri avèk dispèsyon dis tribi nò yo te akonpli. Pwofesi sa a te idantifye de peryòd mil desan swasant lane, ki make pilonnen tanp literal la ak Jerizalèm literal la pa lavil Wòm payen literal la; apre sa te vini mil desan swasant lane kote lavil Wòm papal la t ap pilonnen vil espirityèl la ak tanp espirityèl la. Pwofesi a te kòmanse avèk destriksyon wayòm nò a ak dispèsyon sitwayen wayòm nan. Nan mitan pwofesi a, an 538, sa make fen pilonnen pèp Bondye a pa lavil Wòm payen an, katriyèm wayòm pwofesi Bib la, epi sa pwodui dispèsyon legliz Bondye a nan dezè Mwayennaj Fènwa yo. Fen pwofesi tan sa a an 1798 make fen senkyèm wayòm pwofesi Bib la. Dispèsyon dis tribi nò yo, ansanm ak legliz kretyen an ki te kouri al nan dezè a, reprezante rasanbleman sila yo ki te destine pou yo vin kòn Pwotestantis la. Souvan, repè pwofetik yo reprezante pa opoze, e yon dispèsyon ka reprezante yon rasanbleman, menm jan Eli reprezante Jan Batis. Nan menm konfwontasyon pwofetik la, Eli pa mouri, men Jan Batis mouri.

In 677 BC the southern tribe of Judah, (also identified as the glorious land in the Scriptures) was scattered for twenty-five hundred and twenty years, ending on October 22, 1844. That prophecy was identifying the trampling down of God’s people, who Daniel identifies as the “host” in Daniel 8:13, 14.

Nan ane 677 anvan Jezikri, branch sid Jida a, (yo idantifye li tou kòm bèl peyi a nan Ekriti yo) te gaye pandan de mil senk san ven ane, e sa te fini 22 oktòb 1844. Pwofesi sa a t ap idantifye pilonnen pèp Bondye a, ke Danyèl idantifye kòm “lame a” nan Danyèl 8:13, 14.

Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Daniel 8:13, 14.

Apre sa mwen tande yon sen k ap pale; epi yon lòt sen di ak sen sa a ki t ap pale a: Jiska kilè vizyon an ap dire konsènan sakrifis kontinyèl la ak transgresyon devastasyon an, pou yo lage ni sanktyè a ni lame a pou yo pilonnen yo anba pye? Epi li di m: Jiska de mil twa san jou; apre sa, yo va pirifye sanktyè a. Danyèl 8:13, 14.

The twenty-three hundred year prophecy which ended at the same time as the twenty-five hundred and twenty year prophecy that began in 677 BC was identifying the trampling down of the sanctuary as identified in Daniel 8:13, 14. The prophecy of the scattering of Judah in 677 BC was preceded by three attacks from Nebuchadnezzar and that prophecy ended on the arrival of the third message on October 22, 1844.

Pwofesi de mil twasan (2,300) an yo, ki te fini an menm tan ak pwofesi de mil senksan ven (2,520) an ki te kòmanse an 677 av. J.-K., t ap idantifye pilonnen Tanp lan jan sa make nan Danyèl 8:13, 14. Pwofesi sou gaye Jida an 677 av. J.-K. te vin apre twa atak Nebikadneza te fè, epi pwofesi sa a te rive nan bout li lè twazyèm mesaj la te rive 22 oktòb 1844.

The two twenty-five hundred and twenty year prophecies ending respectively in 1798 and 1844 identify the forty-six years of building the Millerite temple foundation. Moses was forty-six days in receiving instructions on building the temple, Herod’s temple remodeling in the time of Christ took forty-six years, which ended the year of Christ’s baptism. From the baptism He went to the wilderness for forty days, and when He returned, he cleansed the temple the first time and the quibbling Jew’s wanted to know by what authority He did such a thing.

De pwofesi de mil senk san venn ane yo, ki fini youn an 1798 e lòt la an 1844, idantifye karannsis ane konstriksyon fondasyon tanp Millerit la. Moyiz te pase karannsis jou ap resevwa enstriksyon pou bati tanp lan; renovasyon tanp Ewòd la nan tan Kris la te dire karannsis ane, e sa te fini nan ane batèm Kris la. Depi batèm lan, Li ale nan dezè a pandan karant jou; epi lè Li tounen, Li pirifye tanp lan pou premye fwa, e Jwif k ap diskite yo te vle konnen ak ki otorite Li te fè yon bagay konsa.

And the Jews’ passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem, And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise. And his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up. Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things? Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body. When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said. John 2:13–22.

E fèt Delivrans Jwif yo te toupre, epi Jezi monte Jerizalèm. Li jwenn nan tanp lan moun ki t ap vann bèf, mouton ak pijon, ansanm ak moun ki t ap chita ap chanje lajan. Apre sa, li fè yon fwèt ak ti kòd, li mete yo tout deyò nan tanp lan, ansanm ak mouton yo ak bèf yo; li vide lajan moun k ap chanje lajan yo, epi li chavire tab yo. Epi li di moun ki t ap vann pijon yo: Wete bagay sa yo isit la; pa fè kay Papa m nan tounen yon kay komès. Disip li yo vin sonje sa ki te ekri a: Zèl pou kay ou a fin devore m. Lè sa a, Jwif yo pran lapawòl, yo di li: Ki siy ou montre nou, dèske w ap fè bagay sa yo? Jezi reponn, li di yo: Detwi tanp sa a, e nan twa jou m ap leve l ankò. Lè sa a, Jwif yo di: Yo pase karannsis ane ap bati tanp sa a, epi ou menm, ou ta leve l nan twa jou? Men, li t ap pale konsènan tanp kò li. Konsa, lè li te leve soti vivan nan lanmò, disip li yo sonje li te di yo sa; epi yo kwè nan Ekriti a ak nan pawòl Jezi te di a. Jan 2:13–22.

The Millerite temple was erected in forty-six years from 1798 at the conclusion of the first twenty-five hundred and twenty year prophecy and ended forty-six years later at the fulfillment of the second twenty-five hundred and twenty year prophecy in 1844. Those forty-six years began with the arrival of the first angel and ended with the arrival of the third angel, for Christ said His temple would be raised up in three days. If you are unwilling to see these facts it is because of two primary problems beyond the problems that may exist in an unwilling and unconverted heart. The first problem is you are unwilling to approach the prophetic Word from the perspective that history repeats. You are not a historicist. The other problem is an inability to apply symbolic words that have been recorded within the Word of God by the Word of God. The beginnings of all these prophecies identify the end, and they always identify much more than simply histories which repeat.

Tanp Millerit la te bati pandan karannsis ane, kòmanse an 1798 nan konklizyon premye pwofesi de mil senk san ven ane a, epi li te fini karannsis ane apre, nan akonplisman dezyèm pwofesi de mil senk san ven ane a an 1844. Karannsis ane sa yo te kòmanse avèk arive premye zanj lan epi yo te fini avèk arive twazyèm zanj lan, paske Kris la te di tanp Li a t ap leve ankò nan twa jou. Si ou pa vle wè reyalite sa yo, se poutèt de pwoblèm prensipal, anplis pwoblèm ki ka egziste nan yon kè ki pa dispoze epi ki pa konvèti. Premye pwoblèm nan se ke ou pa vle pwoche bò kote Pawòl pwofetik la apati pèspektiv ke listwa repete tèt li. Ou pa yon istorisist. Lòt pwoblèm nan se yon enkapasite pou aplike mo senbolik ki anrejistre nan Pawòl Bondye a selon Pawòl Bondye a. Kòmansman tout pwofesi sa yo idantifye lafen an, epi yo toujou idantifye anpil plis pase senpleman listwa ki repete.

The Bible says we are a temple for the Holy Spirit and the body temple is made up of forty-six chromosomes. The scientists who study those forty-six chromosomes inform us that the twenty-three male chromosomes and the twenty-three female chromosomes are wrapped around a protein that is shaped as a cross.

Bib la di nou se yon tanp pou Sentespri a, epi tanp kò a fòme ak karant-sis kwomozòm. Syantis ki etidye karant-sis kwomozòm sa yo fè nou konnen venntwa kwomozòm gason yo ak venntwa kwomozòm fi yo vlope toutotou yon pwoteyin ki gen fòm yon kwa.

In Daniel twelve there are three connected time prophecies, the first is referencing the scattering of the power of the holy people, which represents the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six. The scattering of the power of the holy people that was fulfilled by them was twenty-five hundred and twenty years, yet in Daniel twelve it only references the last half of that period. It portrays Daniel as not understanding what was meant by the pronouncement.

Nan Danyèl douz, gen twa pwofesi tan ki konekte youn ak lòt; premye a ap fè referans ak dispèsyon pouvwa pèp sen an, ki reprezante “sèt tan” Levitik vennsis la. Dispèsyon pouvwa pèp sen an, ki te akonpli pa yo, te dire de mil senksan ven ane; men nan Danyèl douz, li sèlman fè referans ak dènye mwatye peryòd sa a. Li prezante Danyèl kòm yon moun ki pa t konprann sa pwoklamasyon an te vle di.

And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished. And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? Daniel 12:7, 8.

Epi mwen tande nonm ki te abiye an twal len an, ki te anwo dlo larivyè a, lè li leve men dwat li ak men gòch li anlè nan syèl la, epi li fè sèman pa sila a ki viv pou tout tan, ke sa va dire pou yon tan, tan, ak mwatye yon tan; epi lè li va fin akonpli pou gaye pouvwa pèp sen an, tout bagay sa yo va fini. Epi mwen tande, men mwen pa t konprann; lè sa a mwen di: O Seyè mwen, ki sa ki va dènye bout bagay sa yo? Daniel 12:7, 8.

Daniel twelve is illustrating the message that is unsealed at the time of the end, which was 1798. In the passage Daniel represents William Miller, the primary symbol of the wise in that history. Miller was first led to the twenty-five hundred and twenty year prophecy of Leviticus twenty-six, and in verses seven and eight he represents the wise who must reconcile the truth that the twenty-five hundred and twenty year scattering is most definitely identified as God’s scattering of His people.

Danyèl douz la ap ilistre mesaj ki sele a ki vin louvri nan tan lafen an, ki te 1798. Nan pasaj la, Danyèl reprezante William Miller, senbòl prensipal saj yo nan istwa sa a. Se nan premye tan an yo te mennen Miller nan pwofesi de mil senksan venn ane a nan Levitik vennsis, epi nan vèsè sèt ak uit li reprezante saj yo ki dwe rekonsilye verite sa a, ke dispèsyon de mil senksan venn ane a se sètènman menm dispèsyon pèp Li a Bondye fè.

And if ye will not yet for all this hearken unto me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins. And I will break the pride of your power; and I will make your heaven as iron, and your earth as brass. Leviticus 26:18, 19.

Epi si nou pa vle koute m toujou apre tout sa, lè sa a m ap pini nou sèt fwa plis pou peche nou yo. M ap kraze lògèy fòs nou; m ap fè syèl nou tankou fè, e tè nou tankou bwonz. Levitik 26:18, 19.

The “pride” of ancient Israel was when they were allowed to reject God as their king and choose a human king. Their pride, which precludes a fall (Proverbs 16:18) was their desire to be like all the idolatrous kingdoms around them. Removing first the northern kingdom and then the southern kingdom was the scattering of the power (king) in 723 BC and 677 BC respectively.

“Lògèy” ansyen Izrayèl la se te lè yo te jwenn pèmisyon pou yo rejte Bondye kòm wa yo epi chwazi yon wa imen. Lògèy sa a, ki vin anvan yon tonbe (Pwovèb 16:18), se te dezi yo pou yo vin tankou tout wayòm idolèt ki te antoure yo. Retire an premye wayòm nò a epi ansuit wayòm sid la, se te gaye pouvwa a (wa a), respektivman an 723 av. J.-K. ak 677 av. J.-K.

Miller represented the wise who understood the increase of knowledge that was unsealed in the previous verses of Daniel twelve, and in verses seven and eight he is represented as not understanding the connection of twelve hundred and sixty years with the twenty-five hundred and twenty years of the scattering of God’s people. Daniel is representing God’s people at the end of Adventism, as well as Miller at the beginning of Adventism. At the end of Adventism, the same dilemma exists, for as Adventism set aside Miller’s understanding of the “seven times” they were forced to only identify the twelve hundred and sixty years as the Dark Ages. The wise at the end had a similar problem to resolve as Daniel and Miller illustrate. Why is the terminology of Leviticus twenty-six employed to illustrate three and a half times instead of seven times?

Miller te reprezante saj yo ki te konprann ogmantasyon konesans ki te sele louvri nan vèsè anvan yo nan Danyèl douz, epi nan vèsè sèt ak uit yo, li reprezante kòm yon moun ki pa t konprann koneksyon ki genyen ant mil desan swasant ane yo ak de mil senksan ven ane dispèsyon pèp Bondye a. Danyèl ap reprezante pèp Bondye a nan fen Advantis la, menm jan ak Miller nan kòmansman Advantis la. Nan fen Advantis la, menm dilèm nan egziste, paske lè Advantis la te mete sou kote konpreyansyon Miller te genyen sou “sèt tan” yo, yo te oblije idantifye sèlman mil desan swasant ane yo kòm Mwayennaj Fènwa yo. Saj yo nan fen an te gen yon pwoblèm menm jan pou yo rezoud, jan Danyèl ak Miller montre sa. Poukisa yo sèvi ak tèminoloji Levitik vennsis la pou ilistre twa tan edmi olye de sèt tan?

Miller never fully reconciled this dilemma, but in 1856 the last “new prophetic light” was presented in a series of six articles that were never concluded identifying the seven times as representing three and a half years of pagan Rome trampling down God’s literal Israel, followed by three and a half years of papal Rome trampling down spiritual Israel. Seven years later Adventism outright rejected all of the light of the seven times, preparing the dilemma for the wise at the time of the end in 1989, when, as described in Daniel eleven, verse forty, the countries representing the former Soviet Union were swept away by the papacy and the United States.

Miller pa t janm reyisi rezoud dilèm sa a nèt; men, an 1856, dènye “nouvo limyè pwofetik” la te prezante nan yon seri sis atik ki pa t janm fini, kote yo te idantifye sèt tan yo kòm ki reprezante twa zan edmi Wòm payen k ap foule Izrayèl literal Bondye a anba pye, epi ansuit twa zan edmi Wòm papal k ap foule Izrayèl espirityèl la anba pye. Sèt ane apre sa, Advantis la te rejte kareman tout limyè sou sèt tan yo, konsa li te prepare dilèm nan pou saj yo nan tan lafen an an 1989, lè, jan sa dekri nan Danyèl onz, vèsè karant, peyi ki t ap reprezante ansyen Inyon Sovyetik la te disparèt anba aksyon papote a ak Etazini.

The first light given to Miller was rejected in 1863, and the last light on the subject was given by Hiram Edson in those six articles. Those articles were discontinued and seven years (times) later the power of modern Israel was set aside in order to imitate the idolatrous churches that had a few years before been correctly identified as the daughters of Babylon. The seven times of Leviticus twenty-six as a prophetic doctrine became the stone of stumbling, and the pride of ancient Israel as represented by their desire to have Saul rule over them as king was repeated. Jesus represents the end with the beginning.

Premye limyè yo te bay Miller la te rejte an 1863, epi dènye limyè sou sijè a te bay pa Hiram Edson nan sis atik sa yo. Yo te sispann atik sa yo, epi sèt ane (tan) pita yo te mete sou kote pouvwa Izrayèl modèn nan pou yo te ka imite legliz idolàt yo, ki kèk ane anvan sa te byen idantifye kòm pitit fi Babilòn yo. Sèt tan Levitik vennsis la, antanke yon doktrin pwofetik, te vin tounen wòch ofans lan, epi ògèy ansyen Izrayèl la, jan sa te parèt nan dezi yo pou Sòl te gouvène sou yo kòm wa, te repete ankò. Jezi reprezante fen an avèk kòmansman an.

The book of Daniel also identifies a twelve hundred and ninety year prophecy along with a thirteen hundred and thirty-five year prophecy that both begin at the taking away of “the daily” in 508. The taking away of “the daily” represents the removal of pagan Rome’s resistance to the rise of the papal power in 538. There was a thirty-year transition period before the papal power was placed upon the throne of the earth in 538, then the remaining twelve hundred and sixty years ends in 1798. The thirty years of transition from one kingdom to the next identifies the final years of papal rule that lead to the sixth kingdom of Bible prophecy being placed on the throne of the earth in 1798. The beginning of the twelve hundred and ninety year prophecy identifies a transition from one kingdom of Bible prophecy unto the next kingdom of Bible prophecy, as does the ending of that prophecy.

Liv Danyèl la idantifye tou yon pwofesi mil desan katreven-dis ane ansanm ak yon pwofesi mil twasan trantsenk ane, ki toude kòmanse ak retranchman “sakrifis kontinyèl la” an 508. Retranchman “sakrifis kontinyèl la” reprezante retire rezistans Wòm payen an kont leve pouvwa papal la an 538. Te gen yon peryòd tranzisyon trant ane anvan pouvwa papal la te plase sou twòn tè a an 538; apre sa, rès mil desan swasant ane yo fini an 1798. Trant ane tranzisyon ki soti nan yon wayòm pou antre nan pwochen an idantifye dènye ane dominasyon papal la ki mennen nan sizyèm wayòm pwofesi Bib la, lè yo te mete l sou twòn tè a an 1798. Kòmansman pwofesi mil desan katreven-dis ane a idantifye yon tranzisyon soti nan yon wayòm pwofesi Bib la pou rive nan pwochen wayòm pwofesi Bib la, menm jan ak fen pwofesi sa a.

The thirteen hundred and thirty-five year prophecy that began at the removal of “the daily” in 508 ends in 1843.

Pwofesi mil twasan trantsenk ane ki te kòmanse lè yo te retire “sakrifis kontinyèl la” an 508, fini an 1843.

And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. Daniel 12:11, 12.

Depi lè yo va retire sakrifis tout tan an, epi yo va mete kanpe abominasyon ki fè dezolasyon an, pral gen mil desanndiznèf jou. Benediksyon pou sila a ki tann, epi ki rive jouk nan mil twasan trantsenk jou yo. Danyèl 12:11, 12.

The prophecy of thirteen hundred and thirty-five years ended in 1843, and Daniel says those that “waited” when that prophecy would be fulfilled would be blessed. Sister White says it this way.

Pwofesi mil twa san trantsenk ane a te fini an 1843, e Danyèl di ke sila yo ki “te tann” lè pwofesi sa a t ap akonpli t ap beni. Sè White di sa konsa.

“Blessed are the eyes which saw the things that were seen in 1843 and 1844.

“Byennere je ki te wè bagay ki te parèt an 1843 ak 1844.”

“The message was given. And there should be no delay in repeating the message, for the signs of the times are fulfilling; the closing work must be done. A great work will be done in a short time. A message will soon be given by God’s appointment that will swell into a loud cry. Then Daniel will stand in his lot, to give his testimony.” Manuscript Releases, volume 21, 437.

“Mesaj la te bay. Epi pa dwe gen okenn reta nan repete mesaj la, paske siy tan yo ap akonpli; dènye travay la dwe fèt. Yon gwo travay pral fèt nan yon ti tan. Talè konsa, yon mesaj pral bay pa dispozisyon Bondye ki pral vin anfle pou l tounen yon gwo rèl. Lè sa a, Danyèl pral kanpe nan pòsyon pa l la, pou l bay temwayaj li.” Manuscript Releases, volim 21, 437.

Therefore, the beginning of the thirteen hundred and thirty-five year prophecy identifies a transition from the religion of paganism unto the religion of papalism, thus identifying a transition from Protestantism unto Millerite Protestantism.

Se poutèt sa, kòmansman pwofesi mil twasan trantsenk ane a make yon tranzisyon soti nan relijyon payanis pou rive nan relijyon papalis, konsa li idantifye yon tranzisyon soti nan Pwotestantis pou rive nan Pwotestantis Millerit.

Those Adventists that reject the foundational truths of Adventism, reject all the time prophecies the Millerites presented, even the twenty-three hundred years of Daniel 8:14. They may very well deny this fact, but it can be logically shown that this fact is true, but my point now is different, so I will leave that off for now as we attempt to bring this article to a conclusion.

Adventis sa yo ki rejte verite fondamantal Advantis yo, rejte tout pwofesi tan Milerit yo te prezante yo, menm de mil twasan jou yo nan Danyèl 8:14 la. Yo ka byen nye reyalite sa a, men li ka demontre lojikman ke reyalite sa a se verite; men pwen mwen kounye a diferan, konsa m ap kite sa sou kote pou kounye a pandan n ap eseye mennen atik sa a nan konklizyon li.

The scattering of the “glorious land” of Judah in 677 BC represents the trampling down of the “host” in Daniel 8:13, 14, and points to the establishment of the modern glorious land, the United States. The twenty-three hundred years of the same verses began in 457 BC, and represents the trampling down of the “sanctuary.”

Dispèsyon “peyi gloriye” Jida a nan ane 677 anvan Jezikri reprezante pilonnen “lame a” nan Danyèl 8:13, 14, epi li lonje dwèt sou etablisman peyi gloriye modèn nan, Etazini. De mil twasan ane yo nan menm vèsè sa yo te kòmanse an 457 anvan Jezikri, epi yo reprezante pilonnen “tanp lan.”

Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Daniel 8:13, 14.

Lè sa a, mwen tande yon sen k ap pale; epi yon lòt sen di ak sen sa a ki t ap pale a: Jiska kilè vizyon an ap dire konsènan sakrifis chak jou a ak transgresyon dezolasyon an, pou yo lage ni Tanp lan ni lame a pou yo pilonnen anba pye? Epi li di m: Jiska de mil twasan jou; apre sa, Tanp lan va pirifye. Danyèl 8:13, 14.

677 BC and 457 BC are dates connected by the relationship of God’s people and God’s sanctuary. God brought both the host and the sanctuary back together at the same time on October 22, 1844. The two hundred and twenty years between 677 BC and 457 BC symbolize a period when God establishes a waymark representing an increase of light. On October 22, 1844 the light of the third angel arrived, the light of the sanctuary began to shine and a host was there to proclaim the light.

677 av. J.-C. et 457 av. J.-C. sont des dates liées par la relation entre le peuple de Dieu et le sanctuaire de Dieu. Dieu ramena à nouveau ensemble, au même moment, à la fois l’armée et le sanctuaire, le 22 octobre 1844. Les deux cent vingt années comprises entre 677 av. J.-C. et 457 av. J.-C. symbolisent une période durant laquelle Dieu établit un repère représentant un accroissement de lumière. Le 22 octobre 1844, la lumière du troisième ange arriva, la lumière du sanctuaire commença à briller, et une armée était là pour proclamer la lumière.

In the prophetic line which identifies the three-fold warfare that Satan and Christ engaged in, the King James Bible of 1611 was produced. Exactly two hundred and twenty years later in 1831, William Miller published his message for the first time:

Nan liy pwofetik ki idantifye lagè an twa aspè Satan ak Kris te angaje ladan l lan, yo te pwodui Bib Wa Jak 1611 la. Egzakteman desanven (220) ane pi ta, an 1831, William Miller te pibliye mesaj li a pou premye fwa:

“For nine years William Miller was convinced that he ought to give his message to the churches; but he waited, hoping that some recognized authority would proclaim the glad news of a soon-coming Saviour. In thus waiting, he but proved the truth of the message; there was a name that they lived, but they were fast dying. In 1831 Miller gave his first discourse on the prophecies.” Steven Haskell, The Seer of Patmos, 77.

“Pandan nèf ane, William Miller te gen konviksyon ke li te dwe pote mesaj li a bay legliz yo; men li te tann, avèk espwa ke yon otorite rekonèt t ap pwoklame bon nouvèl yon Sovè ki t ap vini byento. Lè li te tann konsa, li pa t fè anyen lòt pase pwouve verite mesaj la; yo te gen non kòm si yo t ap viv, men yo t ap mouri byen vit. An 1831, Miller te bay premye diskou li sou pwofesi yo.” Steven Haskell, The Seer of Patmos, 77.

God protected the sacred and correct original texts used to produce the Bible. He then produced His Bible in 1611. He then raised up a messenger that would employ the rules located, derived and established within the Bible to produce the message of the first angel. In 1831, Miller’s message was formalized as was the message in Christ’s history formalized by John the Baptist, as the message has been formalized in every reformatory movement. The message of Miller, the first angel’s message announcing the opening of the judgment is directly upheld by the application of the prophetic time period of two hundred and twenty years. It was the message of warning at the beginning of the sixth kingdom of Bible prophecy—the United States.

Bondye te pwoteje tèks orijinal sakre e kòrèk yo ki te sèvi pou pwodui Bib la. Apre sa, Li te pwodui Bib pa Li a an 1611. Apre sa, Li te leve yon mesaje ki t ap sèvi ak règ yo ki chita, ki sòti, epi ki tabli andedan Bib la pou pwodui mesaj premye zanj lan. An 1831, mesaj Miller la te vin fòmalize, menm jan mesaj la nan istwa Kris la te fòmalize pa Jan Batis, menm jan mesaj la te fòmalize nan chak mouvman refòm. Mesaj Miller la, mesaj premye zanj lan ki anonse ouvèti jijman an, soutni dirèkteman pa aplikasyon peryòd tan pwofetik de san venn an. Se te mesaj avètisman an nan kòmansman sizyèm wayòm pwofesi Bib la—Etazini.

In 1996, the ministry of Future for America began, and the message of the third angel that had been unsealed in 1989, the message identifying the healing of the deadly wound of the papacy and the soon coming Sunday law was published in a magazine titled, The Time of the End. The message at the end of Adventism had been formalized just as the message at the beginning had been formalized. In the beginning the message was hung upon time and represented a further development of the truths contained within God’s Word. In 1996, two hundred and twenty years after the birth of the United States in 1776, the message at the end of Adventism was formalized and represented a further development of the three angels’ messages.

An 1996, ministè Future for America a te koumanse, epi mesaj twazyèm zanj lan ki te dezsele an 1989 la—mesaj ki te idantifye gerizon blesi mòtèl papote a ansanm ak lwa dimanch ki t ap vini byento a—te pibliye nan yon magazin ki te pote tit, The Time of the End. Mesaj la nan fen Advantis la te fòmalize menm jan mesaj la nan kòmansman an te fòmalize. Nan kòmansman an, mesaj la te mare ak tan epi li te reprezante yon devlopman pi lwen nan verite ki ladan yo nan Pawòl Bondye a. An 1996, de san venn ane apre nesans Etazini an nan 1776, mesaj la nan fen Advantis la te fòmalize epi li te reprezante yon devlopman pi lwen nan mesaj twa zanj yo.

As we address the parallel history of the Republican horn and the Protestant horn in the history of the sixth kingdom of Bible prophecy it must be understood who the Protestant horn is and who it is not.

Pandan n ap abòde listwa paralèl kòn Repibliken an ak kòn Pwotestan an nan listwa sizyèm wayòm pwofesi biblik la, li nesesè pou nou konprann kiyès kòn Pwotestan an ye, e kiyès li pa ye.

Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. 2 Timothy 2:15, 16.

Chèche prezante tèt ou bay Bondye kòm yon moun li apwouve, yon ouvriye ki pa bezwen wont, k ap byen separe pawòl verite a. Men, evite pawòl pwofàn ak diskisyon vid; paske yo pral mennen nan plis mechanste toujou. 2 Timote 2:15, 16.