And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. Daniel 11:14.
Epi nan tan sa yo, anpil moun pral leve kont wa sid la; tou, moun vyolan pami pèp ou a pral leve tèt yo pou yo tabli vizyon an; men yo pral tonbe. Danyèl 11:14.
The word “doctrine” in the context of Christianity represents the established truths of the Bible. Various professedly Christian organizations possess different sets of what they define as biblical doctrines, but there is only one Truth. The distinction between “absolute truth” and “pluralism” is a subject outside our consideration at this juncture.
Mo “doktrin” nan kontèks Krisyanis la reprezante verite etabli Bib la. Plizyè òganizasyon ki deklare tèt yo kretyen genyen diferan ansanm sa yo defini kòm doktrin biblik, men gen yon sèl Verite. Diferans ki genyen ant “verite absoli” ak “pliralis” se yon sijè ki pa antre nan konsiderasyon nou nan moman sa a.
Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all. John 18:37, 38.
Pilat di li konsa: Donk, ou se yon wa? Jezi reponn: Se ou ki di mwen se yon wa. Se pou sa mwen te fèt, e se pou koz sa a mwen vini nan mond lan, pou m rann temwayaj pou laverite. Tout moun ki soti nan laverite tande vwa mwen. Pilat di li: Ki sa laverite ye? E lè li fin di sa, li soti ankò al jwenn Jwif yo, epi li di yo: Mwen pa jwenn okenn fot ditou nan li. Jan 18:37, 38.
Truth is God’s Word; it is His voice and it is Christ Himself.
Verite a se Pawòl Bondye; se vwa Li, e se Kris li menm.
“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. There are many who believe without a reason on which to base their faith, without sufficient evidence as to the truth of the matter. If an idea is presented that harmonizes with their own preconceived opinions, they are all ready to accept it. They do not reason from cause to effect, their faith has no genuine foundation, and in the time of trial they will find that they have built upon the sand.
“Nou ta dwe konnen pou tèt pa nou kisa ki konstitye Krisyanis, kisa ki verite a, kisa lafwa nou resevwa a ye, kisa règ Bib la ye—règ yo ban nou soti nan otorite ki pi wo a. Gen anpil moun ki kwè san yo pa gen yon rezon sou ki pou yo baze lafwa yo, san prèv ase konsènan verite bagay la. Si yo prezante yon lide ki ann amoni ak pwòp opinyon yo te deja fòme, yo tou pare pou yo aksepte li. Yo pa rezone soti nan kòz rive nan efè; lafwa yo pa gen okenn fondasyon reyèl, epi nan tan eprèv la yo va wè yo te bati sou sab la.
“He who rests satisfied with his own present imperfect knowledge of the Scriptures, thinking this sufficient for his salvation, is resting in a fatal deception. There are many who are not thoroughly furnished with Scriptural arguments, that they may be able to discern error, and condemn all the tradition and superstition that has been palmed off as truth. Satan has introduced his own ideas into the worship of God, that he might corrupt the simplicity of the gospel of Christ. A large number who claim to believe the present truth, know not what constitutes the faith that was once delivered to the saints—Christ in you the hope of glory. They think they are defending the old landmarks, but they are lukewarm and indifferent. They know not what it is to weave into their experience and to possess the real virtue of love and faith. They are not close Bible students, but are lazy and inattentive. When differences of opinion arise upon the passages of Scripture, these who have not studied to a purpose and are not decided as to what they believe, fall away from the truth. We ought to impress upon all the necessity of inquiring diligently into divine truth, that they may know that they do know what is truth. Some claim much knowledge, and feel satisfied with their condition, when they have no more zeal for the work, no more ardent love for God, and for souls for whom Christ died, than if they had never known God. They do not read the Bible [in order] to appropriate the marrow and fatness to their own souls. They do not feel that it is the voice of God speaking to them. But, if we would understand the way of salvation, if we would see the beams of the Sun of righteousness, we must study the Scriptures for a purpose, for the promises and prophecies of the Bible shed clear beams of glory upon the divine plan of redemption, which grand truths are not clearly comprehended.” The 1888 Materials, 403.
“Moun ki repoze yo satisfè ak pwòp konesans yo genyen kounye a sou Ekriti yo, ki enpafè, pandan yo panse sa sifi pou sali yo, yo ap repoze yo nan yon twonpri ki fatal. Gen anpil moun ki pa fin ekipe nèt ak agiman ki soti nan Ekriti yo, pou yo kapab disène erè, epi kondane tout tradisyon ak sipèstisyon yo te fè pase kòm verite. Satan mete pwòp lide pa li nan adorasyon Bondye, pou li ta ka gate senplisite levanjil Kris la. Yon gwo kantite moun ki fè deklarasyon yo kwè verite pou tan prezan an, pa konnen ki sa ki konstitiye lafwa ki te yon fwa delivre bay sen yo—Kris nan nou, espwa laglwa. Yo panse yo ap defann ansyen bòn yo, men yo tyèd e endiferan. Yo pa konnen ki sa sa ye pou tise nan eksperyans yo epi pou posede vrè vèti lanmou ak lafwa. Yo pa etidyan Labib ki pwòch, men yo parese e neglijan. Lè diferans opinyon leve sou pasaj Ekriti yo, moun sa yo ki pa t etidye avèk yon objektif epi ki pa deside sou sa yo kwè, tonbe kite verite a. Nou dwe enprime sou tout moun nesesite pou fouye avèk dilijans nan verite diven an, pou yo ka konnen yo vrèman konnen sa ki verite. Gen moun ki pretann yo gen anpil konesans, epi yo santi yo satisfè ak kondisyon yo, pandan yo pa gen plis zèl pou travay la, ni plis lanmou cho pou Bondye ak pou nanm Kris te mouri pou yo, pase si yo pa t janm konnen Bondye. Yo pa li Labib la [pou yo ka] fè mwèl ak grès li tounen pwòp nouriti nanm pa yo. Yo pa santi se vwa Bondye k ap pale ak yo. Men, si nou ta vle konprann chemen sali a, si nou ta vle wè reyon Solèy jistis la, nou dwe etidye Ekriti yo avèk yon objektif, paske pwomès ak pwofesi Labib la voye reyon klè laglwa sou plan diven redanmsyon an, gran verite sa yo ki pa konprann aklè.” The 1888 Materials, 403.
We are required to know what those doctrines are, and how to present, establish and defend those truths.
Nou oblije konnen ki sa doktrin sa yo ye, epi kijan pou nou prezante, tabli, epi defann verite sa yo.
“It does not seem possible to us now that any should have to stand alone; but if God has ever spoken by me, the time will come when we shall be brought before councils and before thousands for his name’s sake, and each one will have to give the reason of his faith. Then will come the severest criticism upon every position that has been taken for the truth. We need, then, to study the word of God, that we may know why we believe the doctrines we advocate. We must critically search the living oracles of Jehovah.” Review and Herald, December 18, 1888.
“Sa a pa sanble posib pou nou kounye a ke kèk moun ta dwe oblije kanpe pou kont yo; men si Bondye janm pale pa mwayen mwen, tan an ap vini lè y ap mennen nou devan konsèy ak devan dè milye moun poutèt non li, e chak moun ap oblije bay rezon ki fè lafwa li. Lè sa a, kritik ki pi sevè a pral fèt sou chak pozisyon ki te pran pou laverite a. Se poutèt sa, nou bezwen etidye Pawòl Bondye a, pou nou ka konnen poukisa nou kwè doktrin nou defann yo. Nou dwe fouye avèk lespri kritik nan orak vivan Jewova yo.” Review and Herald, 18 desanm 1888.
In order to be brought before “thousands” it is evident that some of the defenders of truth in the last days will be forced to defend the truth in a medium such as television or web broadcasts. How else could thousands watch the testimony given by the one hundred and forty-four thousand? The doctrines we advocate identify the basis of our faith.
Pou yo mennen nou devan “dè milye,” li klè gen kèk nan defansè laverite yo nan dènye jou yo k ap oblije defann laverite a nan yon mwayen tankou televizyon oswa emisyon sou entènèt. Ki lòt jan dè milye ta ka gade temwayaj san karant-kat mil yo? Doktrin nou soutni yo idantifye fondman lafwa nou.
“The members of the church will individually be tested and proved. They will be placed in circumstances where they will be forced to bear witness for the truth. Many will be called to speak before councils and in courts of justice, perhaps separately and alone. The experience which would have helped them in this emergency they have neglected to obtain, and their souls are burdened with remorse for wasted opportunities and neglected privileges.” Testimonies, volume 5, 463.
“Manm legliz la, chak grenn pa grenn, pral pase anba eprèv epi yo pral pwouve. Y ap mete yo nan sikonstans kote y ap oblije rann temwayaj pou verite a. Anpil pral resevwa apèl pou pale devan konsèy ak devan tribinal, petèt separeman ak poukont yo. Eksperyans ki ta ede yo nan ijans sa a, yo neglije chèche jwenn li, epi nanm yo chaje ak remò poutèt opòtinite yo te gaspiye ak privilèj yo te neglije.” Testimonies, volume 5, 463.
God’s Word never fails, and therefore if we are to be numbered with the one hundred and forty-four thousand, we must know what we believe based upon what is written in God’s Word. Before the testing time arrives when God’s people are forced to explain the doctrines they believe, God allows errors to be introduced in order to force God’s people to critically study His Word.
Pawòl Bondye pa janm febli; se poutèt sa, si nou dwe konte pami san karantkat mil yo, nou dwe konnen sa nou kwè sou baz sa ki ekri nan Pawòl Bondye a. Anvan tan eprèv la rive, lè pèp Bondye a pral oblije esplike doktrin yo kwè yo, Bondye pèmèt erè antre pou fòse pèp Li a etidye Pawòl Li a ak anpil lespri kritik.
“The fact that there is no controversy or agitation among God’s people should not be regarded as conclusive evidence that they are holding fast to sound doctrine. There is reason to fear that they may not be clearly discriminating between truth and error. When no new questions are started by investigation of the Scriptures, when no difference of opinion arises which will set men to searching the Bible for themselves to make sure that they have the truth, there will be many now, as in ancient times, who will hold to tradition and worship they know not what.
Lefètke pa gen okenn konfli ni ajitasyon pami pèp Bondye a pa ta dwe konsidere kòm yon prèv desizif ke yo kenbe fèm nan doktrin ki sen e ki dwat la. Gen rezon pou nou pè ke yo ka pa fè yon distenksyon klè ant verite ak erè. Lè ankèt sou Ekriti yo pa soulve okenn kesyon nouvo, lè pa gen okenn diferans opinyon ki leve pou pouse moun fouye Bib la pou tèt pa yo afin pou yo asire yo ke yo gen verite a, ap gen anpil moun kounye a, menm jan ak nan tan lontan, k ap kenbe tradisyon e k ap adore sa yo pa konnen.
“I have been shown that many who profess to have a knowledge of present truth know not what they believe. They do not understand the evidences of their faith. They have no just appreciation of the work for the present time. When the time of trial shall come, there are men now preaching to others who will find, upon examining the positions they hold, that there are many things for which they can give no satisfactory reason. Until thus tested they knew not their great ignorance. And there are many in the church who take it for granted that they understand what they believe; but, until controversy arises, they do not know their own weakness. When separated from those of like faith and compelled to stand singly and alone to explain their belief, they will be surprised to see how confused are their ideas of what they had accepted as truth. Certain it is that there has been among us a departure from the living God and a turning to men, putting human in place of divine wisdom.
“Yo te montre m ke anpil nan moun ki deklare yo gen konesans verite prezan an pa konnen sa yo kwè. Yo pa konprann prèv ki soutni lafwa yo. Yo pa gen yon bon apresyasyon sou travay ki pou tan prezan an. Lè tan eprèv la va rive, gen moun k ap preche bay lòt yo kounye a ki pral dekouvri, lè y ap egzamine pozisyon yo kenbe yo, ke gen anpil bagay pou yo pa ka bay okenn rezon ki satisfezan. Jiskaske yo fin pase anba eprèv sa a, yo pa t konnen jan inyorans yo te gran. E gen anpil nan legliz la ki pran sa pou yo akòde ke yo konprann sa yo kwè; men, jiskaske konfli leve, yo pa konnen pwòp feblès pa yo. Lè yo separe ak moun ki gen menm lafwa avèk yo epi yo oblije kanpe poukont yo, pou yo menm sèl, pou eksplike kwayans yo, y ap sezi wè jan lide yo konfonn sou sa yo te aksepte kòm verite. Sa ki sèten, se ke te gen nan mitan nou yon depa kite Bondye vivan an ak yon vire bò kote lèzòm, mete sa ki imen nan plas sajès diven an.
“God will arouse His people; if other means fail, heresies will come in among them, which will sift them, separating the chaff from the wheat. The Lord calls upon all who believe His word to awake out of sleep. Precious light has come, appropriate for this time. It is Bible truth, showing the perils that are right upon us. This light should lead us to a diligent study of the Scriptures and a most critical examination of the positions which we hold. God would have all the bearings and positions of truth thoroughly and perseveringly searched, with prayer and fasting. Believers are not to rest in suppositions and ill-defined ideas of what constitutes truth. Their faith must be firmly founded upon the word of God so that when the testing time shall come and they are brought before councils to answer for their faith they may be able to give a reason for the hope that is in them, with meekness and fear.
“Bondye pral leve pèp Li a; si lòt mwayen echwe, erezi yo pral antre nan mitan yo, e sa pral pase yo nan Van, separe pay la ak ble a. Seyè a rele tout moun ki kwè pawòl Li a pou yo reveye sòti nan dòmi. Gen yon limyè presye ki vini, ki apwopriye pou tan sa a. Se verite Biblik, ki montre danje ki deja sou tèt nou. Limyè sa a ta dwe mennen nou nan yon etid serye sou Ekriti yo ak yon egzamen ki pi sevè sou pozisyon nou kenbe yo. Bondye ta vle pou tout aspè ak tout pozisyon verite a egzamine nèt ale epi avèk pèseverans, avèk lapriyè ak jèn. Kwayan yo pa dwe repoze sou sipozisyon ak lide ki pa byen defini konsènan sa ki fòme verite a. Lafwa yo dwe byen fèm tabli sou pawòl Bondye a, pou lè tan eprèv la va rive epi yo mennen yo devan konsèy pou reponn sou lafwa yo, yo kapab bay rezon espwa ki nan yo a, avèk dousè ak krentif.”
“Agitate, agitate, agitate. The subjects which we present to the world must be to us a living reality. It is important that in defending the doctrines which we consider fundamental articles of faith we should never allow ourselves to employ arguments that are not wholly sound. These may avail to silence an opposer, but they do not honor the truth. We should present sound arguments, that will not only silence our opponents, but will bear the closest and most searching scrutiny. With those who have educated themselves as debaters there is great danger that they will not handle the word of God with fairness. In meeting an opponent it should be our earnest effort to present subjects in such a manner as to awaken conviction in his mind, instead of seeking merely to give confidence to the believer.
“Souleve, souleve, souleve. Sijè nou prezante bay mond lan dwe tounen yon reyalite vivan pou nou. Li enpòtan pou, lè n ap defann doktrin nou konsidere kòm atik fondamantal lafwa, nou pa janm pèmèt tèt nou sèvi ak agiman ki pa nèt ale solid. Yo ka rive fè yon opozan rete san repons, men yo pa bay verite a onè. Nou dwe prezante agiman solid, ki pa sèlman ap fè advèsè nou yo rete san repons, men ki ap sipòte pi pwòch ak pi sevè egzamen an. Pami moun ki fòme tèt yo kòm debatè, gen yon gwo danje pou yo pa manyen pawòl Bondye a avèk jistis. Lè n ap rankontre yon opozan, efò sensè nou dwe fèt pou prezante sijè yo nan yon fason ki ap leve konviksyon nan lespri li, olye nou chèche sèlman bay moun ki deja kwè plis asirans.”
“Whatever may be man’s intellectual advancement, let him not for a moment think that there is no need of thorough and continuous searching of the Scriptures for greater light. As a people we are called individually to be students of prophecy. We must watch with earnestness that we may discern any ray of light which God shall present to us. We are to catch the first gleamings of truth; and through prayerful study clearer light may be obtained, which can be brought before others.” Testimonies, volume 5, 708.
“Kèlkeswa pwogrè entelektyèl lèzòm ta ka fè, pa kite li panse menm pou yon ti moman ke pa gen nesesite pou yon rechèch pwofon e san rete nan Ekriti yo pou resevwa yon pi gwo limyè. Antanke yon pèp, nou rele chak moun pèsonèlman pou nou etidyan pwofesi. Nou dwe veye avèk anpil serye pou nou ka disène nenpòt reyon limyè Bondye va prezante nou. Nou dwe sezi premye klète verite yo; epi, atravè etid ki akonpaye ak lapriyè, yon limyè ki pi klè ka jwenn, limyè sa a nou ka prezante devan lòt moun.” Testimonies, volim 5, 708.
The “students of prophecy” that ultimately makeup the one hundred and forty-four thousand will be “individually tested and proved,” in advance of their confrontation with the earthly powers who bring about the soon-coming Sunday law crisis and persecution. The faithful will first be “aroused” by God. The sleeping virgins will be “aroused” from the slumber they have fallen into during the tarrying time. If they will not awaken by the message that God has presented through the articles that have been sent forth since July of 2023, then God will allow “heresies” to “come in among them” which will finish the separation of the wheat and tares through a sifting process. We are now in that sifting process.
“Étidyan pwofesi” yo ki finalman fòme san karannkat mil la pral “teste e pwouve endividyèlman” davans anvan konfwontasyon yo ak pouvwa tèren yo ki pral mennen kriz lwa dimanch ki pral vini byento a ak pèsekisyon an. Moun fidèl yo pral an premye “reveye” pa Bondye. Vyèj k ap dòmi yo pral “reveye” soti nan letaji yo te tonbe ladan l pandan tan reta a. Si yo pa leve pa mwayen mesaj Bondye te prezante atravè atik yo ki te voye soti depi Jiyè 2023, lè sa a Bondye pral pèmèt “erezi” yo “antre nan mitan yo,” epi sa pral fini separasyon ble ak move zèb yo atravè yon pwosesis tami. Nou nan pwosesis tami sa a kounye a.
There are three options available to those who have been following in the controversy of the correct identification of Modern Rome. One option is that the United States is Modern Rome, the other is that the papal power is Modern Rome and the third option is that both of the previous positions are incorrect and some other power is represented by the robbers of Daniel’s people who exalt themselves, fall, and establish the vision in verse fourteen of Daniel chapter eleven.
Gen twa opsyon ki disponib pou moun ki te suiv deba sou idantifikasyon kòrèk Wòm Modèn nan. Youn nan opsyon yo se ke Etazini se Wòm Modèn; lòt la se ke pouvwa papal la se Wòm Modèn; epi twazyèm opsyon an se ke toude pozisyon ki vin anvan yo pa kòrèk, e se yon lòt pouvwa ki reprezante pa piyajè pèp Danyèl la, ki leve tèt yo, ki tonbe, epi ki etabli vizyon an nan vèsè katòz chapit onz liv Danyèl la.
I contend that the disagreement of whether Modern Rome is the papal power or the United States, has been allowed to be introduced into this movement for the purpose of forcing His people to study His prophetic Word. God has brought about this controversy in a manifestation of His mercy. I contend the disagreement is more about preparing His people for the coming crisis than simply identifying who is right and who is wrong about Modern Rome. The disagreement was allowed and designed by God to demonstrate, for any who wish to see, that their own personal understanding of His prophetic Word is incomplete or incorrect. The controversy is therefore evidence of God’s mercy.
Mwen soutni ke dezakò sou kesyon si Wòm modèn se pouvwa papal la oswa Etazini, yo te pèmèt li antre nan mouvman sa a nan bi pou fòse pèp Li a etidye Pawòl pwofetik Li a. Bondye fè polemik sa a leve kòm yon manifestasyon mizèrikòd Li. Mwen soutni ke dezakò a konsène plis preparasyon pèp Li a pou kriz k ap vini an pase senpleman idantifye kiyès ki gen rezon ak kiyès ki nan erè sou Wòm modèn. Dezakò a te pèmèt epi Bondye te fè l fèt pou demontre, pou nenpòt ki vle wè, ke pwòp konpreyansyon pèsonèl yo sou Pawòl pwofetik Li a enkonplè oswa pa kòrèk. Se poutèt sa polemik la se yon prèv mizèrikòd Bondye.
The controversy not only involves the identification of who is the power represented by the robbers of thy people, but also whether the methodology of line upon line that both sides of the controversy profess to uphold is being properly applied. The prophetic rules associated with the methodology of line upon line includes special prophetic principles which will be part of the sifting process of the wheat and tares. Three elements of the methodology of line upon line which I contend are being misunderstood in this current controversy are Christ as the Truth, and Christ as Alpha and Omega, and a triple application of prophecy.
Kontrouvès la pa sèlman konsène idantifikasyon kiyès ki pouvwa ki reprezante pa vòlè pèp ou a, men tou si metodoloji liy sou liy la, ke toude bò nan kontrouvès la deklare yo soutni, ap aplike kòmsadwa. Règ pwofetik ki asosye ak metodoloji liy sou liy la gen ladan prensip pwofetik espesyal ki pral fè pati pwosesis separasyon ble ak move zèb yo. Twa eleman nan metodoloji liy sou liy la ke mwen soutni yo ap mal konprann nan kontrouvès aktyèl sa a se Kris la kòm Verite a, ak Kris la kòm Alfa ak Omega, epi yon aplikasyon trip pwofesi a.
Ultimately those who hold to an incorrect understanding of verse fourteen of Daniel eleven will be found to be basing their doctrinal position upon a private interpretation.
Anfen, moun ki kenbe yon konpreyansyon ki pa kòrèk sou vèsè katòz nan Danyèl onz la, yo pral jwenn yo ap baze pozisyon doktrinal yo sou yon entèpretasyon prive.
We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:19–21.
Nou genyen tou yon pawòl pwofetik ki pi sèten; nou fè byen lè nou pote atansyon sou li, tankou sou yon limyè k ap klere nan yon kote ki fè nwa, jouk lè jou a va kòmanse parèt, epi zetwal maten an leve nan kè nou: Konnen sa an premye, ke okenn pwofesi nan Ekriti a pa soti nan okenn entèpretasyon pèsonèl. Paske pwofesi a pa t vini nan tan lontan pa volonte lèzòm; men se moun sen Bondye yo ki te pale, jan Sentespri a t ap pouse yo. 2 Pyè 1:19–21.
In the controversy over verse fourteen, an example of what I understand to be a “private interpretation” is found in The Great Controversy.
Nan konfli ki konsène vèsè katòz la, yon egzanp sa m konprann kòm yon “entèpretasyon prive” jwenn nan The Great Controversy.
“As the Sabbath has become the special point of controversy throughout Christendom, and religious and secular authorities have combined to enforce the observance of the Sunday, the persistent refusal of a small minority to yield to the popular demand will make them objects of universal execration. It will be urged that the few who stand in opposition to an institution of the church and a law of the state ought not to be tolerated; that it is better for them to suffer than for whole nations to be thrown into confusion and lawlessness. The same argument many centuries ago was brought against Christ by the ‘rulers of the people.’ ‘It is expedient for us,’ said the wily Caiaphas, ‘that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.’ John 11:50. This argument will appear conclusive; and a decree will finally be issued against those who hallow the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, denouncing them as deserving of the severest punishment and giving the people liberty, after a certain time, to put them to death. Romanism in the Old World and apostate Protestantism in the New will pursue a similar course toward those who honor all the divine precepts.” The Great Controversy, 615.
“Pandan jou repo saba a vin tounen sijè espesyal ki lakòz konfli nan tout lakretyente a, e otorite relijye ak otorite sivil yo mete tèt yo ansanm pou fòse obsèvans dimanch la, refi pèsistan yon ti minorite pou yo soumèt devan egzijans popilè a pral fè yo tounen objè rayisman inivèsèl. Y ap plede di ke kèk moun sa yo ki kanpe ann opozisyon ak yon enstitisyon legliz la ak yon lwa leta pa ta dwe jwenn tolerans; ke li pi bon pou yo soufri pase pou nasyon antye yo lage nan konfizyon ak nan san-lwa. Menm agiman sa a, anpil syèk de sa, te leve kont Kris la pa ‘chèf pèp la.’ ‘Li bon pou nou,’ te di Kayif rize a, ‘pou yon sèl moun mouri pou pèp la, epi pou tout nasyon an pa peri.’ Jan 11:50. Agiman sa a pral parèt kòm yon prèv ki desizif; epi alafen, y ap pibliye yon dekrè kont sila yo ki mete saba katriyèm kòmandman an apa kòm sen, pandan y ap denonse yo kòm moun ki merite pinisyon ki pi sevè a, epi bay pèp la libète, apre yon sèten tan, pou mete yo a lanmò. Romanis nan Ansyen Monn nan ak pwotestantis aposta nan Nouvo Monn nan pral swiv yon demach ki sanble anvè sila yo ki onore tout prensip diven yo.” The Great Controversy, 615.
“Christendom” represents the worldwide community of Christians or the collective body of Christian-majority countries and cultures. The term is often used to denote the parts of the world where Christianity is the dominant religion and has significantly influenced the culture, laws, and social norms. Christendom encompasses the global expanse of Christianity in terms of its followers, cultural impact, and historical significance. Without removing the repetition that exists in the Ellen White CD-ROM, the word Christendom occurs one hundred and seventy-six times. Geographically Sister White identifies that Christendom in general represents Europe and the Americas. In the context of Sister White, Europe is identified as the Old World and the Americas are the New World.
“Lakretyente” reprezante kominote mondyal kretyen yo, oswa kò kolektif peyi ak kilti kote kretyen yo majoritè. Tèm nan souvan itilize pou deziyen pati nan mond lan kote Krisyanis se relijyon dominan an e li enfliyanse kilti a, lwa yo, ak nòmal sosyal yo yon fason enpòtan. Lakretyente anglobe etandi mondyal Krisyanis la an tèm de disip li yo, enpak kiltirèl li, ak enpòtans istorik li. San yo pa retire repetisyon ki egziste nan CD-ROM Ellen White la, mo Lakretyente a parèt san swasant-sèz fwa. Sou plan jewografik, Sè White idantifye Lakretyente an jeneral kòm Ewòp ak Amerik yo. Nan kontèks Sè White, Ewòp idantifye kòm Ansyen Mond lan epi Amerik yo kòm Nouvo Mond lan.
“But the beast with lamblike horns was seen ‘coming up out of the earth.’ Instead of overthrowing other powers to establish itself, the nation thus represented must arise in territory previously unoccupied and grow up gradually and peacefully. It could not, then, arise among the crowded and struggling nationalities of the Old World—that turbulent sea of ‘peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.’ It must be sought in the Western Continent.
“Men bèt ki te gen kòn tankou ti mouton an te wè l ‘ap monte soti nan tè a.’ Olye li ta ranvèse lòt pouvwa pou l tabli tèt li, nasyon ki reprezante konsa a dwe leve sou yon teritwa ki te deja pa okipe epi grandi piti piti ak anpè. Donk, li pa t kapab leve nan mitan nasyonalite ki chaje e k ap goumen youn ak lòt nan Ansyen Monn lan—lanmè ajite sa a ki fèt ak ‘pèp, ak foul moun, ak nasyon, ak lang.’ Se nan Kontinan Lwès la yo dwe chèche li.”
“What nation of the New World was in 1798 rising into power, giving promise of strength and greatness, and attracting the attention of the world? The application of the symbol admits of no question. One nation, and only one, meets the specifications of this prophecy; it points unmistakably to the United States of America.’ The Great Controversy, 441.
“Ki nasyon nan Nouvo Monn nan ki, an 1798, t ap leve vin pran pouvwa, ki t ap bay pwomès fòs ak grandè, epi ki t ap atire atansyon lemonn? Aplikasyon senbòl la pa kite okenn kestyon. Yon nasyon, e youn sèl, reponn ak karakteristik pwofesi sa a; li montre san okenn dout sou Etazini d Amerik.” The Great Controversy, 441.
The last sentence in the paragraph we are considering has been employed to suggest that “Romanism in the Old World and apostate Protestantism in the New” is identifying “Romanism of the Old World” as the papacy during the Dark Ages, and the United States (apostate Protestantism) as Modern Rome, represented by the phrase “apostate Protestantism in the New.” The “Old” is defined as past history, and the “New” is defined as modern or current history. That application wrest Sister White’s established understanding of both Christendom and the Old and New world.
Dènye fraz nan paragraf n ap egzamine a te sèvi pou sijere ke “Romanis nan Ansyen Mond lan ak Pwotestantis aposta nan Nouvo” ap idantifye “Romanis Ansyen Mond lan” kòm papote a pandan Mwayennaj Fènwa yo, epi Etazini (Pwotestantis aposta) kòm Wòm Modèn, sa ki reprezante pa ekspresyon “Pwotestantis aposta nan Nouvo a.” “Ansyen” an defini kòm istwa pase, epi “Nouvo” a defini kòm istwa modèn oswa aktyèl. Aplikasyon sa a tòde konpreyansyon etabli Sè White sou ni Lakretyente ni Ansyen ak Nouvo mond lan.
Those who apply the sentence in terms of past and future history, identify “a private interpretation” in direct contradiction to Sister White’s intended meaning. The claim is that the “Old World” represents past history and the “New” represents modern or current history (New).
Moun ki aplike fraz la an tèm listwa pase ak listwa k ap vini, idantifye “yon entèpretasyon prive” an kontradiksyon dirèk ak sans Sister White te vle bay la. Reklamasyon an se ke “Ansyen Mond lan” reprezante listwa pase a, epi “Nouvo” a reprezante listwa modèn oswa aktyèl la (Nouvo).
The passage says, “will pursue.” Romanism and apostate Protestantism “will pursue a similar course toward those who honor all the divine precepts.” The Old World in the passage is Europe and the New world is the Americas. Sister White is teaching that the entire world is to be confronted by the Sunday law test, and that Romanism will lead out in the persecutions in Europe and apostate Protestantism will lead out in persecutions in the Americas. The Americas and Europe are what is defined as “Christendom.” Both Romanism and apostate Protestantism “will pursue a similar course toward those who honor all the divine precepts.”
Pasaj la di, “pral pouswiv.” Romanis ak Pwotestantis apostazi “pral pouswiv yon menm konduit anvè sila yo ki onore tout prensip diven yo.” Ansyen Mond lan nan pasaj la se Ewòp, epi Nouvo Mond lan se Amerik yo. Sè White ap anseye ke tout lemonn dwe konfwonte ak tès lwa dimanch lan, e ke Romanis pral pran latèt nan pèsekisyon yo ann Ewòp, tandiske Pwotestantis apostazi pral pran latèt nan pèsekisyon yo nan Amerik yo. Amerik yo ak Ewòp se sa yo defini kòm “Lakretyente.” Ni Romanis ni Pwotestantis apostazi “pral pouswiv yon menm konduit anvè sila yo ki onore tout prensip diven yo.”
“Will pursue” is identifying a future action by both powers, and it is grammatically impossible to suggest that Romanism of the Old World is the papal power of the Dark Ages. The persecution carried out by both powers is future tense. The definition of the phrase is “will pursue” and it means to follow or chase after something with the intention of achieving or attaining it. It implies a future action where an individual or group is committed to actively seeking a goal or objective.
“Va poursuivre” montre une action future de la part des deux puissances, et il est grammaticalement impossible de prétendre que le romanisme de l’Ancien Monde soit la puissance papale du Moyen Âge obscur. La persécution exercée par les deux puissances est au futur. La définition de l’expression est « va poursuivre », et elle signifie suivre ou pourchasser quelque chose avec l’intention de l’obtenir ou de l’atteindre. Elle implique une action future par laquelle un individu ou un groupe s’engage à rechercher activement un but ou un objectif.
The phrase can be applied in various contexts: “She will pursue a career in medicine,” meaning she plans to work towards becoming a medical professional. “He will pursue a degree in engineering,” indicating he intends to study engineering at a higher educational institution. “The team will pursue the project until completion,” suggesting the team will continue working on the project until it is finished. “They will pursue legal action against the company,” meaning they intend to take legal steps to address a grievance or seek justice. Overall, “will pursue” implies determination, commitment, and a clear intention to achieve a specific goal or outcome in the future.
Fraz la ka aplike nan divès kontèks: « Li pral pouswiv yon karyè nan medsin », sa vle di li planifye travay pou l vin yon pwofesyonèl nan domèn medikal. « Li pral pouswiv yon diplòm nan jeni », sa endike li gen entansyon etidye jeni nan yon enstitisyon siperyè. « Ekip la pral pouswiv pwojè a jouk li fini », sa sijere ekip la ap kontinye travay sou pwojè a jiskaske li fin acheve. « Yo pral pouswiv aksyon legal kont konpayi an », sa vle di yo gen entansyon pran mezi legal pou adrese yon doleyans oswa chèche jistis. An jeneral, « pral pouswiv » vle di detèminasyon, angajman, ak yon entansyon klè pou reyalize yon objektif oswa yon rezilta presi nan lavni.
The private interpretation that is employed to teach that Romanism of the Old World is past history, is thereafter employed as a plank to uphold an incorrect application of a triple application of prophecy. It argues that the triple application of Rome represents pagan Rome, followed by papal Rome and then the United States as the third of the three Rome’s. A very similar flawed application was employed shortly after September 11, 2001, when a group separated from the movement over the book of Joel.
Entèpretasyon prive yo itilize pou anseye ke romanis Ansyen Monn lan se yon bagay ki fè pati listwa pase a; apre sa, yo sèvi avè l kòm yon planch pou soutni yon aplikasyon kòrèkman fo sou yon aplikasyon trip pwofesi a. Li fè konnen aplikasyon trip lavil Wòm nan reprezante Wòm payen an, apre sa Wòm papal la, epi ansuit Etazini kòm twazyèm nan twa Wòm yo. Yo te sèvi ak yon aplikasyon ki gen menm defo sa a yon ti tan apre 11 septanm 2001, lè yon gwoup te separe ak mouvman an poutèt liv Joèl la.
The controversy then began at a camp meeting in Canada where the triple application of the three woes was incorporated into the book of Joel to teach that Islam of the third woe was the nation that came against the land in verse six of chapter one. That nation is papal Rome, but a private interpretation was introduced claiming the nation was Islam. The triple application of three woes had established Islam as the power of September 11, 2001, and the new private interpretation insisted the papal power of Joel chapter one was actually Islam. A private interpretation that rejected the correct identification of papal power in the book of Joel was bolstered up by an incorrect application of the three woes. Now a private interpretation setting aside the papal power for the United States is being introduced.
Kontrovès la te kòmanse nan yon reyinyon kan an Kanada, kote yo te entegre aplikasyon trip twa malè yo nan liv Joèl la pou anseye ke Islam nan twazyèm malè a se te nasyon ki te vini kont peyi a nan vèsè sis chapit premye a. Nasyon sa a se Wòm papal, men yo te entwodui yon entèpretasyon prive ki te pretann nasyon an se te Islam. Aplikasyon trip twa malè yo te deja etabli Islam kòm pouvwa 11 septanm 2001 an, epi nouvo entèpretasyon prive a te ensiste ke pouvwa papal Joèl chapit premye a te an reyalite Islam. Yon entèpretasyon prive ki te rejte idantifikasyon ki kòrèk pouvwa papal la nan liv Joèl la te jwenn soutyen nan yon move aplikasyon twa malè yo. Kounye a, yo ap entwodui yon entèpretasyon prive k ap mete sou kote pouvwa papal la an favè Etazini.
The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. Is there anything whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us. Ecclesiastes 1:9, 10.
Bagay ki te la deja, se li menm ki pral la ankò; e sa ki te fèt la, se li menm ki pral fèt ankò; e pa gen anyen nouvo anba solèy la. Èske gen yon bagay yo ka di sou li: Gade, men yon bagay nouvo? Li te la deja depi nan tan lontan, nan tan ki te la anvan nou. Eklezyas 1:9, 10.
The controversies of the last days include the repetition of old controversies, and Daniel chapter eleven has the controversy of Uriah Smith placing his private interpretation upon the symbol of the king of the north. In so doing he manufactured an understanding of Daniel chapter eleven that only produced darkness. In these last days the controversies that are repeated are especially identifying the fruit of applying private interpretations to established truth. This is what Smith did in his book, Daniel and the Revelation. This is what was done in the controversy in the book of Joel, and it is the same dynamics that are being employed when one paragraph from The Great Controversy avoids the definition within the world and within the writings of Ellen White as to what “Christendom” represents, along with the rejection of the basic rules of grammar that identify the phrase “will pursue” identifies a future event. From that point of reference, the flawed concept that the “Old World” is the history of the papal power from 538 unto 1798, is then used to argue against the established understanding of the definition of a triple application of prophecy.
Kontwovès dènye jou yo gen ladan yo repetisyon ansyen kontwovès yo, epi Danyèl chapit onz la genyen kontwovès Ourya Smith la ki te mete entèpretasyon prive pa l sou senbòl wa nò a. Lè li te fè sa, li te fabrike yon konpreyansyon sou Danyèl chapit onz ki te pwodui sèlman fènwa. Nan dènye jou sa yo, kontwovès ki ap repete yo se sitou idantifikasyon fwi ki soti nan aplike entèpretasyon prive sou verite etabli a. Se sa Smith te fè nan liv li a, Daniel and the Revelation. Se sa ki te fèt nan kontwovès ki nan liv Joèl la, epi se menm dinamik yo yo ap itilize lè yon paragraf nan The Great Controversy evite definisyon ki egziste nan mond lan ak nan ekriti Ellen White yo konsènan sa “Lakrètyente” reprezante, ansanm ak rejè règ fondamantal gramè yo ki idantifye ekspresyon “will pursue” la kòm yon evènman alavni. Apati pwen referans sa a, yo sèvi ak konsèp defektye selon ki “Old World” la se istwa pouvwa papal la soti nan 538 rive 1798, pou yo plede kont konpreyansyon etabli sou definisyon yon aplikasyon pwofesi an twa fwa.
“All that God has in prophetic history specified to be fulfilled in the past has been, and all that is yet to come in its order will be. Daniel, God’s prophet, stands in his place. John stands in his place. In the Revelation the Lion of the tribe of Judah has opened to the students of prophecy the book of Daniel, and thus is Daniel standing in his place. He bears his testimony, that which the Lord revealed to him in vision of the great and solemn events which we must know as we stand on the very threshold of their fulfillment.
“Tout ce que Dieu a précisé, dans l’histoire prophétique, comme devant s’accomplir dans le passé, s’est accompli; et tout ce qui doit encore venir, en son ordre, viendra. Daniel, le prophète de Dieu, se tient à sa place. Jean se tient à sa place. Dans l’Apocalypse, le Lion de la tribu de Juda a ouvert aux étudiants de la prophétie le livre de Daniel; ainsi, Daniel se tient à sa place. Il rend son témoignage, celui que le Seigneur lui a révélé en vision au sujet des événements grands et solennels que nous devons connaître alors que nous nous tenons sur le seuil même de leur accomplissement.
“In history and prophecy the Word of God portrays the long continued conflict between truth and error. That conflict is yet in progress. Those things which have been, will be repeated. Old controversies will be revived, and new theories will be continually arising. But God’s people, who in their belief and fulfillment of prophecy have acted a part in the proclamation of the first, second, and third angels’ messages, know where they stand. They have an experience that is more precious than fine gold. They are to stand firm as a rock, holding the beginning of their confidence steadfast unto the end.” Selected Messages, book 2, 109.
“Nan listwa ak nan pwofesi, Pawòl Bondye a dekri konfli ki dire lontan ant verite ak erè. Konfli sa a toujou ap kontinye. Sa ki te deja fèt yo, yo pral repete ankò. Ansyen kontwovès yo pral leve ankò, epi nouvo teyori pral parèt san rete. Men pèp Bondye a, ki nan kwayans yo ak nan akonplisman pwofesi yo te jwe yon wòl nan pwoklamasyon mesaj premye, dezyèm, ak twazyèm zanj yo, konnen kote yo kanpe. Yo gen yon eksperyans ki pi presye pase lò rafine. Yo dwe rete fèm tankou yon wòch, kenbe kòmansman konfyans yo byen fèm jouk nan lafen.” Selected Messages, liv 2, 109.
It can be easily demonstrated that Sister White identifies Paul’s “beginning of their confidence,” as the foundational truths of Adventism. The Millerites taught the robbers of thy people was the papal power, and from 1989 onward the movement of the one hundred and forty-four thousand has repeatedly identified the same understanding of the symbol as did the Millerites. There is now a “new theory” as to who the robbers of thy people are, and it has revived an old controversy in the sense that it uses an incorrect identification of an established prophetic symbol to build a prophetic model that is erected upon sand. Whether it was Smith’s private interpretation, or the false application of the nation in Joel chapter one, or the identification of the United States as Modern Rome; all three fallacies attack the correct understanding of papal Rome in the last days, and in so doing they attack the symbol that establishes the prophetic vision that identifies whether God’s people perish or live.
Li ka fasilman demontre ke Sè White idantifye “kòmansman konfyans yo” Pòl la kòm verite fondamantal Advantis yo. Millerit yo te anseye ke vòlè pèp ou a se te pouvwa papal la, epi depi 1989 mouvman san karant-kat mil yo repete plizyè fwa menm konpreyansyon senbòl la jan Millerit yo te fè a. Kounye a gen yon “nouvo teyori” konsènan kiyès vòlè pèp ou a ye, e li reviv yon ansyen konfli nan sans ke li sèvi ak yon move idantifikasyon yon senbòl pwofetik ki deja tabli pou konstwi yon modèl pwofetik ki bati sou sab. Kit se te entèpretasyon prive Smith la, oswa fo aplikasyon nasyon an nan Joel chapit youn, oswa idantifikasyon Etazini kòm Wòm Modèn nan; tout twa erè sa yo atake bon konpreyansyon Wòm papal la nan dènye jou yo, epi lè yo fè sa yo atake senbòl ki tabli vizyon pwofetik la ki idantifye si pèp Bondye a peri oswa viv.
In the future Romanism in Europe and apostate Protestantism in the Americas “will pursue” persecution of Sabbath-keepers as has been done throughout sacred history.
Alavni, women nan Ewòp ak pwotestantis apostazi nan Amerik yo “pral pouswiv” pèsekisyon kont moun k ap obsève Saba a, jan sa te fèt pandan tout istwa sakre a.
“God will arouse His people; if other means fail, heresies will come in among them, which will sift them, separating the chaff from the wheat. The Lord calls upon all who believe His word to awake out of sleep. Precious light has come, appropriate for this time. It is Bible truth, showing the perils that are right upon us. This light should lead us to a diligent study of the Scriptures and a most critical examination of the positions which we hold. God would have all the bearings and positions of truth thoroughly and perseveringly searched, with prayer and fasting. Believers are not to rest in suppositions and ill-defined ideas of what constitutes truth.” Gospel Workers, 299.
“Bondye va reveye pèp Li a; si lòt mwayen echwe, erezi va antre nan mitan yo, ki pral pase yo nan van, separe pay la ak ble a. Senyè a rele tout moun ki kwè pawòl Li pou yo leve soti nan dòmi. Yon limyè presye vini, ki apwopriye pou tan sa a. Se verite Bib la, ki montre danje ki deja sou tèt nou. Limyè sa a ta dwe mennen nou nan yon etid dilijan sou Ekriti yo ak nan yon egzamen ki pi sevè sou pozisyon nou kenbe yo. Bondye ta vle pou tout aspè ak tout pozisyon verite yo fouye byen fon e san dekourajman, avèk lapriyè ak jèn. Moun ki kwè yo pa dwe repoze sou sipozisyon ak sou lide ki pa byen defini konsènan sa ki konstitye verite.” Gospel Workers, 299.
We will continue these thoughts in the next article.
N ap kontinye refleksyon sa yo nan pwochen atik la.