The Book of Daniel - Number Three | English and Malay Side by Side

We are currently addressing the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six in the book of Daniel. It is hidden to those who have chosen to close their eyes, but it is there for those who wish to see. We will begin in Daniel chapter eight, and verse thirteen.

Kita kini sedang membicarakan “tujuh masa” dalam Imamat dua puluh enam di dalam kitab Daniel. Hal itu tersembunyi bagi mereka yang telah memilih untuk menutup mata, tetapi hal itu ada bagi mereka yang ingin melihat. Kita akan mulai dalam Daniel pasal delapan, ayat tiga belas.

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? Daniel 8:13.

Maka aku mendengar seorang kudus berbicara, dan seorang kudus yang lain berkata kepada kudus tertentu yang berbicara itu, “Berapa lamakah penglihatan tentang korban sehari-hari itu, dan tentang pelanggaran yang mendatangkan kebinasaan, sehingga baik tempat kudus maupun bala tentara diserahkan untuk diinjak-injak?” Daniel 8:13.

The verse begins with the word “then,” and is making a distinction between the vision of prophetic history Daniel has just seen in the previous ten verses. Verse one and two of the chapter, identify the year when Daniel received the vision and also that he received it by the Ulai river. From verse three to verse twelve, he “sees” the vision of prophetic history. “Then” he “hears” a heavenly dialogue consisting of a question and an answer. In verse fifteen, he begins to seek what the vision of prophetic history that he had just “seen” represented. It is essential to recognize the distinction between the vision that Daniel “saw” in verses three through twelve, and the heavenly dialogue, which he “heard”—for they are two different visions.

Ayat itu dimulai dengan kata “maka,” dan sedang membuat suatu pembedaan antara penglihatan tentang sejarah kenabian yang baru saja dilihat Daniel dalam sepuluh ayat sebelumnya. Ayat satu dan dua pasal itu menunjukkan tahun ketika Daniel menerima penglihatan itu dan juga bahwa ia menerimanya di tepi sungai Ulai. Dari ayat tiga sampai ayat dua belas, ia “melihat” penglihatan tentang sejarah kenabian itu. “Maka” ia “mendengar” suatu dialog surgawi yang terdiri dari suatu pertanyaan dan suatu jawaban. Dalam ayat lima belas, ia mulai berusaha memahami apa yang diwakili oleh penglihatan tentang sejarah kenabian yang baru saja “dilihatnya” itu. Sangat penting untuk mengenali pembedaan antara penglihatan yang Daniel “lihat” dalam ayat tiga sampai dua belas, dan dialog surgawi, yang “didengarnya”—karena keduanya adalah dua penglihatan yang berbeda.

But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. Matthew 13:16.

Tetapi berbahagialah matamu, kerana mata itu melihat; dan telingamu, kerana telinga itu mendengar. Matius 13:16.

The question in verse thirteen is, “How long shall be the vision,” and the word translated as “vision” is a different Hebrew word than the word translated as “vision” in verse sixteen.

Potso e mo temaneng ya bolesome le boraro e re, “Pono e tla nna lobaka lo lo kae,” mme lefoko le le ranotsweng e le “pono” ke lefoko le lengwe la Sehebere le le farologaneng le lefoko le le ranotsweng e le “pono” mo temaneng ya bolesome le borataro.

And I heard a man’s voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision. Daniel 8:16.

Улай мөрний хоёр эргийн дундаас нэгэн хүний дууг би сонслоо. Тэр дуу дуудаж, —Габриел аа, энэ хүнд үзэгдлийг ойлгуул,— гэж хэлэв. Даниел 8:16.

By translating two different Hebrew words into the English word “vision,” the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six, became “hidden in plain sight”. Biblical students who are satisfied to simply skim the surface consider these two different Hebrew words as the same word, but they do so at their own peril.

Ka jingïasnoh ha ka ktien Phareng da ka kyntien “vision” ïa ar tylli ki kyntien Hebru kiba pher, ka “seven times” jong Leviticus twenty-six ka la long kaba “rieh ha ka jaka kaba paw paidbah”. Kito kiba pule ïa ka Baibl kiba hun tang ban peit skhem tang ha sla, ki khein ïa kine ar tylli ki kyntien Hebru kiba pher kum ka juh ka kyntien, hynrei ki leh kumta ha ka jingma jong ki hi.

“To skim over the surface will do little good. Thoughtful investigation and earnest, taxing study are required to comprehend it. There are truths in the word which are like veins of precious ore concealed beneath the surface. By digging for them, as the man digs for gold and silver, the hidden treasures are discovered. Be sure that the evidence of truth is in the Scripture itself. One scripture is the key to unlock other scriptures. The rich and hidden meaning is unfolded by the Holy Spirit of God, making plain the word to our understanding: ‘The entrance of Thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple.’” Fundamentals of Christian Education, 390.

“Kung dadaanin lamang sa ibabaw ay kakaunti ang maidudulot na kabutihan. Kinakailangan ang maalab na pagsisiyasat at taimtim, mabigat na pag-aaral upang ito’y maunawaan. May mga katotohanan sa Salita na gaya ng mga ugat ng mahalagang mineral na nakatago sa ilalim ng ibabaw. Sa paghuhukay para sa mga ito, kung paanong naghuhukay ang tao para sa ginto at pilak, natutuklasan ang mga natatagong kayamanan. Tiyakin ninyong ang katibayan ng katotohanan ay nasa Kasulatan mismo. Ang isang kasulatan ang susi upang mabuksan ang ibang mga kasulatan. Ang mayaman at natatagong kahulugan ay inihahayag ng Banal na Espiritu ng Diyos, na nagpapalinaw ng Salita sa ating pagkaunawa: ‘Ang pasok ng Iyong mga salita ay nagbibigay liwanag; nagbibigay ito ng unawa sa mga simple.’” Fundamentals of Christian Education, 390.

We are informed that “every fact has its bearing” in the Word of God, and if we choose to ignore the fact there are two different Hebrew words translated as “vision” in chapter eight, we are responsible for inflicting Laodicean blindness upon ourselves. The old adage is, “there are none so blind as those who will not see.”

Re bolellwa gore “nnete nngwe le nngwe e na le seabe sa yone” mo Lefokong la Modimo, mme fa re ka tlhopha go tlhokomologa ntlha ya gore go na le mafoko a mabedi a a farologaneng a Sehebere a a ranotsweng e le “pono” mo kgaolong ya borobedi, re ikarabella ka go ipeetsa bofofu jwa Laodikea. Seane sa bogologolo se re, “ga go na bafofu ba ba kana ka bofofu go feta ba ba sa rateng go bona.”

“The Bible contains all the principles that men need to understand in order to be fitted either for this life or for the life to come. And these principles may be understood by all. No one with a spirit to appreciate its teaching can read a single passage from the Bible without gaining from it some helpful thought. But the most valuable teaching of the Bible is not to be gained by occasional or disconnected study. Its great system of truth is not so presented as to be discerned by the hasty or careless reader. Many of its treasures lie far beneath the surface, and can be obtained only by diligent research and continuous effort. The truths that go to make up the great whole must be searched out and gathered up, ‘here a little, and there a little.’ Isaiah 28:10.

“Alkitab ngemuat semua prinsip ke ti diguna mensia kena nemu ngambika diri nyau disedia, sekalika ungkup pengidup tu tauka ungkup pengidup ti deka datai. Lalu prinsip-prinsip tu ulih dipaham semua orang. Nadai siku-siku ti bisi semengat ngakim ajar iya ulih macha semengkah ayat ari Alkitab tang enda bulih nerima ari dinya siti penemu ti nulung. Tang ajar Alkitab ti pemadu berega ukai ulih diperulih ngena pengajian ti sekali-sekala tauka ti enda besangkut. Sistem pemendar iya ti besai enda dipersembah baka nya ngambika ulih ditemu ulih orang ti jampat tauka ti enda bejimat macha. Mayuh pengaya iya begulai jauh di baruh permukaan, lalu semina ulih diperulih ngena penyelidik ti rajin enggau pengeringat ti terus-merinsa. Pemendar-pemendar ti ngaga seluruh agi penyuruh nya besai mesti ditusah sereta dikumpul, ‘dia semina, dini semina.’ Isaiah 28:10.”

“When thus searched out and brought together, they will be found to be perfectly fitted to one another. Each Gospel is a supplement to the others, every prophecy an explanation of another, every truth a development of some other truth. The types of the Jewish economy are made plain by the gospel. Every principle in the word of God has its place, every fact its bearing. And the complete structure, in design and execution, bears testimony to its Author. Such a structure no mind but that of the Infinite could conceive or fashion.” Education, 123.

“အဲသို့ ရှာဖွေစိစစ်၍ စုစည်းယူလာသောအခါ၊ ထိုအရာများသည် တစ်ခုနှင့်တစ်ခု အပြည့်အဝ ကိုက်ညီစွာ တပ်ဆင်ထားကြောင်း တွေ့ရလိမ့်မည်။ ဧဝံဂေလိကျမ်းတစ်ကျမ်းစီသည် အခြားကျမ်းများကို ဖြည့်စွက်ပေးရာ ဖြစ်ပြီး၊ ပရောဖက်ပြုချက်တစ်ရပ်စီသည် အခြားတစ်ရပ်၏ အနက်အဓိပ္ပာယ်ကို ဖော်ပြပေးရာ ဖြစ်သည်။ သမ္မာတရားတစ်ရပ်စီသည် အခြားသော သမ္မာတရားတစ်ရပ်၏ ဖွံ့ဖြိုးပေါက်ဖွားခြင်း ဖြစ်သည်။ ယုဒအယူဝါဒဆိုင်ရာ စနစ်၏ ပုံရိပ်နမူနာများကို ဧဝံဂေလိတရားအားဖြင့် ထင်ရှားစွာ နားလည်နိုင်စေသည်။ ဘုရားသခင်၏ နှုတ်ကပတ်တော်၌ ရှိသမျှသော အခြေခံသဘောတရားတစ်ရပ်စီ၌ မိမိ၏ နေရာရှိ၏၊ အဖြစ်အပျက်တစ်ရပ်စီ၌လည်း မိမိဆိုင်ရာ အဓိပ္ပာယ်နှင့် ဆက်စပ်မှုရှိ၏။ ထို့ပြင် အလုံးစုံသော ဖွဲ့စည်းတည်ဆောက်မှုသည် ရည်ရွယ်ချက်နှင့် အကောင်အထည်ဖော်ဆောင်ရွက်မှု နှစ်မျိုးလုံး၌ မိမိ၏ ရေးဆွဲဖန်ဆင်းရှင်အား သက်သေခံလျက်ရှိ၏။ ထိုသို့သော ဖွဲ့စည်းတည်ဆောက်မှုမျိုးကို အနန္တတော်၏ စိတ်တော်မှတစ်ပါး အခြားမည်သည့်စိတ်မျှ မကြံစည်နိုင်၊ မဖန်ဆင်းနိုင်။” Education, 123.

The word “vision” occurs ten times in Daniel chapter eight, but those ten times consist of two different Hebrew words, and the meanings of those words are not the same. If they meant the same thing, Daniel would have only used one of those words in each of the ten occurrences. Daniel wrote two words, for each of those two words possess their own meanings, and one represents a vision Daniel “saw”, and the other a vision he “heard”. In verse thirteen, the word translated as “vision” is châzôn, and it means “a sight”, or “a vision”, “a dream” or “an oracle”. I call it the “vision of prophetic history” based upon its definition and on how Daniel employs it.

Puꞌukili “vision” daꞌ i vani mngkarnak vaꞌ i Daniel pasal lapan, tetapi puꞌukili sepuluh kali daꞌ nyi terdiri daripada dua puꞌukili Ibrani yang berlainan, dan makna bagi puꞌukili-puꞌukili itu tiada sama. Jikalau kedua-duanya membawa makna yang sama, niscaya Daniel hanya akan memakai satu daripada puꞌukili itu dalam setiap daripada sepuluh kemunculan tersebut. Daniel menulis dua puꞌukili, kerana tiap-tiap satu daripada kedua-dua puꞌukili itu mempunyai maknanya yang tersendiri, dan yang satu melambangkan suatu penglihatan yang Daniel “lihat”, sedangkan yang satu lagi suatu penglihatan yang dia “dengar”. Dalam ayat tiga belas, puꞌukili yang diterjemahkan sebagai “vision” ialah châzôn, dan maknanya ialah “suatu pemandangan”, atau “suatu penglihatan”, “suatu mimpi” atau “suatu firman nubuat”. Saya menamakannya “penglihatan sejarah kenabian” berdasarkan takrifnya dan berdasarkan cara Daniel menggunakannya.

In verse one, of Daniel chapter eight, Daniel says “a vision appeared unto me,” and in verse two he twice states that he “saw in a vision.” Then in verse thirteen, the question is raised of “how long shall be the vision.” All of those usages are the Hebrew word “châzôn.” Then in verse fifteen, we come to perhaps the most important time Daniel used that very same word, for he says, “when I”…“had seen the vision and sought for the meaning.” After Daniel had seen the châzôn vision, he wanted to understand what it meant. This is a fact that has great bearing on the hiding of the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six in the chapter.

Dalam ayat satu, pasal lapan Daniel, Daniel berkata, “suatu penglihatan telah muncul kepadaku,” dan dalam ayat dua dia dua kali menyatakan bahawa dia “melihat dalam suatu penglihatan.” Kemudian dalam ayat tiga belas, timbul pertanyaan, “berapa lama lagi penglihatan itu.” Semua penggunaan itu ialah perkataan Ibrani “châzôn.” Kemudian dalam ayat lima belas, kita sampai kepada barangkali waktu yang paling penting Daniel menggunakan perkataan yang sama itu, kerana dia berkata, “ketika aku”…“telah melihat penglihatan itu dan mencari maknanya.” Setelah Daniel melihat penglihatan châzôn itu, dia ingin memahami apa ertinya. Inilah suatu fakta yang mempunyai kaitan yang sangat besar dengan penyembunyian “tujuh masa” dalam Imamat dua puluh enam di dalam pasal itu.

He also uses the word châzôn in verses seventeen and twenty-six. The word “vision” appears ten times in Daniel chapter eight, and the word châzôn represents seven of those occurrences. Daniel uses the other Hebrew word that is translated as “vision” four times. The other Hebrew word is mar’eh, and means “appearance”.

Ia juga menggunakan kata châzôn dalam ayat tujuh belas dan dua puluh enam. Kata “penglihatan” muncul sepuluh kali dalam Daniel pasal delapan, dan kata châzôn mewakili tujuh dari kemunculan tersebut. Daniel menggunakan kata Ibrani lainnya yang diterjemahkan sebagai “penglihatan” sebanyak empat kali. Kata Ibrani yang lain itu adalah mar’eh, dan berarti “penampakan”.

Châzôn is found seven times in Daniel chapter eight, and mar’eh is found four times, and together they represent the ten times the English word “vision” occurs in Daniel chapter eight. Seven plus four is eleven, for one of the times Daniel employed the word mar’eh, it was translated just as it is defined, for in verse fifteen, when Daniel “sought for the meaning” of the châzôn vision of prophetic history, there “stood before” him “as the appearance of a man.” The word “appearance” is mar’eh. Therefore, mar’eh is used by Daniel four times in Daniel eight, and it is translated once in agreement with its primary definition of “appearance,” and the other three times it is translated as “vision.”

Châzôn ditemui tujuh kali dalam Daniel pasal lapan, dan mar’eh ditemui empat kali, dan bersama-sama kedua-duanya mewakili sepuluh kali perkataan bahasa Inggeris “vision” muncul dalam Daniel pasal lapan. Tujuh tambah empat ialah sebelas, kerana pada satu ketika Daniel menggunakan perkataan mar’eh, ia diterjemahkan tepat sebagaimana perkataan itu ditakrifkan; kerana dalam ayat lima belas, ketika Daniel “mencari maknanya” bagi penglihatan châzôn tentang sejarah nubuatan itu, “berdiri di hadapannya” “sesuatu seperti rupa seorang lelaki.” Perkataan “rupa” ialah mar’eh. Oleh itu, mar’eh digunakan oleh Daniel empat kali dalam Daniel lapan, dan ia diterjemahkan sekali selaras dengan takrif utamanya sebagai “rupa,” dan tiga kali yang lain ia diterjemahkan sebagai “vision.”

I am not suggesting any criticism of the men who translated the King James Bible. It needs to be noted though, that in verse thirteen, is found the only added word in the King James Bible (sacrifice), that inspiration states definitively, “does not belong to the text.” Inspiration further states that the added word had been “added by human wisdom.” In the very same chapter, two different Hebrew words are both translated as the same English word. The reason it is essential to recognize the distinction between these two words is profoundly important.

Ndzi nga tlhantlhi ku sola kwalomu ka vavanuna lava hundzuluxeke Bibele ya King James. Hambiswiritano, swi fanele ku xiyiwa leswaku eka ndzimana ya khume na nharhu ku kumeka rito ro ri roxe leri engeteriweke eka Bibele ya King James (sacrifice), leri mpfumawulo wu vulaka hi ku tiya leswaku “a ri nga ri ra tsalwa.” Mpfumawulo wu ya emahlweni wu vula leswaku rito leri engeteriweke “ri engeteriwe hi vutlhari bya munhu.” Eka kavanyisa rero rero, marito mambirhi yo hambana ya Xiheveru ma hundzuluxiwile hinkwawo hi rito rin’we ra Xinghezi. Xivangelo lexi endlaka leswaku swi boha ku lemuka ku hambana loku ka marito lawa mambirhi xi na nkoka lowukulu ngopfu.

And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision, and sought for the meaning, then, behold, there stood before me as the appearance of a man. And I heard a man’s voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision. Daniel 8:15, 16.

ប្រាកដណាស់ នៅពេលដែលខ្ញុំ គឺខ្ញុំដានីយ៉ែល បានឃើញនិមិត្ត ហើយបានស្វែងរកន័យរបស់វា នោះ មើលចុះ មានម្នាក់ឈរនៅមុខខ្ញុំ មានរូបរាងដូចមនុស្ស។ ហើយខ្ញុំបានឮសំឡេងមនុស្សម្នាក់ពីកណ្ដាលច្រាំងទន្លេអ៊ូឡាយ ដែលបានហៅ ហើយនិយាយថា កាប្រីយ៉ែល អើយ ចូរធ្វើឲ្យបុរសនេះយល់អំពីនិមិត្តនេះ។ ដានីយ៉ែល 8:15, 16។

As Daniel “sought for the meaning” of the “châzôn vision” which he had just “seen,” Christ informs Gabriel to “make” Daniel to understand the “mar’eh vision” which he had just “heard”. Daniel wanted to understand the vision of prophetic history, but Christ, who had been identified in verse thirteen as Palmoni (that certain saint which spake), instructed Gabriel to make Daniel understand the “mar’eh vision”, not the “châzôn vision”. In verses fifteen and sixteen, the stated purpose for Gabriel is that he is to make Daniel understand the “mar’eh vision”, which is the word translated as “vision” which means “appearance,” not the vision of prophetic history which Daniel wanted to understand. Without recognizing Gabriel’s job assignment, the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six is hidden in plain sight.

Apabila Daniel “mencari erti” bagi “penglihatan châzôn” yang baru sahaja “dilihatnya,” Kristus memberitahu Gabriel supaya “membuat” Daniel memahami “penglihatan mar’eh” yang baru sahaja “didengarnya”. Daniel ingin memahami penglihatan sejarah nubuatan itu, tetapi Kristus, yang telah dikenal pasti dalam ayat tiga belas sebagai Palmoni (orang kudus tertentu yang berkata-kata), mengarahkan Gabriel supaya membuat Daniel memahami “penglihatan mar’eh”, bukan “penglihatan châzôn”. Dalam ayat lima belas dan enam belas, tujuan yang dinyatakan bagi Gabriel ialah bahawa dia harus membuat Daniel memahami “penglihatan mar’eh”, iaitu perkataan yang diterjemahkan sebagai “penglihatan” yang bererti “penampakan,” bukan penglihatan sejarah nubuatan yang ingin difahami oleh Daniel. Tanpa mengenali penugasan tugas Gabriel, “tujuh kali” dalam Imamat dua puluh enam tersembunyi di hadapan mata.

In verse twenty-six both Hebrew words that are translated as “vision” are located in the same verse, and the verse becomes one of the primary keys to opening the truth of Daniel’s testimony of the “seven times.”

Dalam ayat dua puluh enam, kedua-dua perkataan Ibrani yang diterjemahkan sebagai “penglihatan” terdapat dalam ayat yang sama, dan ayat itu menjadi salah satu kunci utama untuk membuka kebenaran kesaksian Daniel tentang “tujuh masa.”

And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days. Daniel 8:26.

Le ponatshegelo ya mantšiboa le ya mesong yeo e begilwego ke ya therešo; ka gona tswalele ponatshegelo; gobane e tla ba ya matšatši a mantši. Daniel 8:26.

In verse twenty-six, the “vision of the evening and mornings” is the mar’eh vision, meaning “appearance”, but the vision that was to be “shut up,” is the châzôn vision of prophetic history. The expression “evening and mornings” is what isolates and identifies the distinction between the two visions. It does so with another illustration of the human factor in producing the Bible. The human factor consisted of both the prophets that recorded the words of the Bible, but also of those that translated the Bible. The Bible, as with Christ, represents a combination of divinity and humanity. That humanity descended down through history, from Adam after he sinned to those who recorded and translated the Bible. Christ and the Bible are both the Word of God, and the Word of God’s is pure, for the divinity of the combination always overruled any limitations that existed in the flesh.

Dalam ayat dua puluh enam, “penglihatan tentang petang dan pagi” ialah penglihatan mar’eh, yang bererti “penampakan”, tetapi penglihatan yang harus “dimeteraikan” ialah penglihatan châzôn tentang sejarah kenabian. Ungkapan “petang dan pagi” itulah yang mengasingkan dan mengenal pasti perbezaan antara kedua-dua penglihatan itu. Hal ini dilakukan melalui satu lagi ilustrasi tentang faktor manusia dalam penghasilan Alkitab. Faktor manusia itu terdiri bukan sahaja daripada para nabi yang mencatatkan kata-kata Alkitab, tetapi juga daripada mereka yang menterjemahkan Alkitab. Alkitab, sebagaimana Kristus, melambangkan gabungan keilahian dan kemanusiaan. Kemanusiaan itu telah turun sepanjang sejarah, daripada Adam selepas dia berdosa hingga kepada mereka yang mencatatkan dan menterjemahkan Alkitab. Kristus dan Alkitab kedua-duanya ialah Firman Tuhan, dan Firman Tuhan itu suci murni, kerana keilahian dalam gabungan itu sentiasa mengatasi apa jua keterbatasan yang wujud dalam daging.

Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh. Romans 1:1–3.

Paulus, seorang hamba Yesus Kristus, yang dipanggil menjadi rasul, yang dikhususkan bagi Injil Allah, (yang telah dijanjikan-Nya sebelumnya dengan perantaraan nabi-nabi-Nya di dalam Kitab-Kitab Suci,) tentang Anak-Nya, Yesus Kristus, Tuhan kita, yang menurut daging diperanakkan dari keturunan Daud. Roma 1:1–3.

The expression “evening and morning” is found repeatedly in God’s Word, and it is always translated as “evening and morning,” as it is in verse twenty-six, and as it is so often translated in the creation story in Genesis that repeatedly states, “and the evening and the morning were….” In fact, and every fact has its bearing (and this fact is essential to understand), the only place in the Bible that the expression “evening and morning” is not translated as “evening and morning” (as it is in verse twenty-six), is in verse fourteen of Daniel eight. There, and only there in God’s Word the phrase “evening and morning” is translated as simply “days.”

Kapinan “sore dan pagi” didapati berulang kali dalam Firman Tuhan, dan ia sentiasa diterjemahkan sebagai “sore dan pagi,” sebagaimana dalam ayat dua puluh enam, dan sebagaimana ia begitu kerap diterjemahkan dalam kisah penciptaan dalam Kejadian yang berulang kali menyatakan, “dan petang dan pagi adalah….” Sesungguhnya, dan setiap hakikat mempunyai signifikansinya (dan hakikat ini mustahak untuk difahami), satu-satunya tempat dalam Alkitab di mana kapinan “sore dan pagi” tidak diterjemahkan sebagai “sore dan pagi” (sebagaimana dalam ayat dua puluh enam), ialah dalam ayat empat belas Daniel lapan. Di sana, dan hanya di sana dalam Firman Tuhan, frasa “sore dan pagi” diterjemahkan sekadar sebagai “hari-hari.”

And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Daniel 8:14.

Le a bua le nna a re: Go fitlha malatsing a dikete di le pedi le makgolo a le mararo; foo felo ga boitshepo bo tla itshekisiwa. Daniele 8:14.

Twelve verses later, in the same chapter of Daniel, the Hebrew phrase “evening and morning” is translated as it always is; but in the verse that is the central pillar and foundation of Adventism, the phrase is simply translated as “days.” What influence led the translators of the King James Bible to make such a glaring contradiction? They had translated the phrase in verse twenty-six in agreement with every other occurrence of the phrase in the rest of the Bible. But twelve verses before verse twenty-six, in verse fourteen, their humanity placed a special distinction upon the answer to the question of verse thirteen. And the question of verse thirteen, included the one word (sacrifice), that was not to be added to the Bible. God wanted verse fourteen, to stand out in a very profound and distinctive way. In doing so, he also identified what Gabriel was instructed to make Daniel understand.

Dalam dua belas ayat kemudian, dalam pasal Daniel yang sama, frasa Ibrani “petang dan pagi” diterjemahkan sebagaimana selalu diterjemahkan; tetapi dalam ayat yang menjadi tiang pusat dan dasar Adventisme, frasa itu diterjemahkan begitu saja sebagai “hari-hari.” Pengaruh apakah yang menuntun para penerjemah Alkitab King James untuk membuat pertentangan yang begitu mencolok? Mereka telah menerjemahkan frasa itu dalam ayat dua puluh enam selaras dengan setiap kemunculan frasa itu lainnya di seluruh Alkitab. Tetapi dua belas ayat sebelum ayat dua puluh enam, yaitu dalam ayat empat belas, kemanusiaan mereka menempatkan suatu pembedaan khusus pada jawaban atas pertanyaan dalam ayat tiga belas. Dan pertanyaan dalam ayat tiga belas itu mencakup satu kata (“korban”), yang tidak boleh ditambahkan ke dalam Alkitab. Allah menghendaki agar ayat empat belas menonjol dengan cara yang sangat mendalam dan khas. Dengan berbuat demikian, Ia juga menunjukkan apa yang Gabriel diperintahkan untuk membuat Daniel mengerti.

In verse sixteen, Jesus commanded Gabriel to make Daniel understand the mar’eh vision, in spite of the fact that Daniel was seeking to understand the châzôn vision of prophetic history. Verse twenty-six says the “vision of the evenings and mornings which was told” was “true.” The châzôn vision had been a prophetic “sight”, but the mar’eh vision was “told,” for it had been spoken. It had been spoken in verse fourteen when Palmoni said “unto two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” Verse twenty-six, employs the expression “evening and mornings,” as it identifies it as the vision that had been “spoken” to identify the distinction between the two visions in Daniel chapter eight. The vision of prophetic history that Daniel had “seen”, and that Daniel wished to understand, was different from the vision that was “spoken” which Daniel had “heard”. More importantly, the vision that Daniel “heard” was the vision that Gabriel was to give Daniel understanding of.

នៅក្នុងខទីដប់ប្រាំមួយ ព្រះយេស៊ូវបានបង្គាប់ដល់កាព្រីយ៉ែលឲ្យធ្វើឲ្យដានីយ៉ែលយល់អំពីនិមិត្ត mar’eh ទោះបីជាក្នុងពេលនោះដានីយ៉ែលកំពុងស្វែងរកការយល់អំពីនិមិត្ត châzôn នៃប្រវត្តិសាស្ត្រព្យាករណ៍ក៏ដោយ។ ខទីម្ភៃប្រាំមួយចែងថា «និមិត្តអំពីល្ងាច និងព្រឹកដែលបានប្រាប់នោះ» គឺ «ពិត»។ និមិត្ត châzôn ធ្លាប់ជាការ «ឃើញ» ខាងព្យាករណ៍មួយ ប៉ុន្តែនិមិត្ត mar’eh គឺជាអ្វីដែល «បានប្រាប់» ដ្បិតវាត្រូវបាននិយាយចេញ។ វាត្រូវបាននិយាយចេញនៅក្នុងខទីដប់បួន នៅពេលដែល Palmoni បាននិយាយថា «រហូតដល់ពីរពាន់បីរយល្ងាច និងព្រឹក; បន្ទាប់មកទីបរិសុទ្ធនឹងត្រូវបានសម្អាត»។ ខទីម្ភៃប្រាំមួយប្រើពាក្យ «ល្ងាច និងព្រឹក» ដោយកំណត់ថាវាជានិមិត្តដែល «បានប្រាប់» ដើម្បីបញ្ជាក់ភាពខុសគ្នារវាងនិមិត្តទាំងពីរនៅក្នុងដានីយ៉ែលជំពូកប្រាំបី។ និមិត្តនៃប្រវត្តិសាស្ត្រព្យាករណ៍ដែលដានីយ៉ែលបាន «ឃើញ» ហើយដែលដានីយ៉ែលប្រាថ្នាចង់យល់នោះ ខុសពីនិមិត្តដែល «បានប្រាប់» ហើយដែលដានីយ៉ែលបាន «ឮ»។ អ្វីដែលសំខាន់ជាងនេះទៅទៀត គឺនិមិត្តដែលដានីយ៉ែលបាន «ឮ» នោះហើយជានិមិត្តដែលកាព្រីយ៉ែលត្រូវធ្វើឲ្យដានីយ៉ែលយល់។

The humanity that participated in creating the Holy Bible recorded the word “vision” ten times in Daniel chapter eight, and in so doing it hid the distinction of a vision that was “seen” and another vision that was “heard”. In doing so, it obscured the emphasis that identifies that Christ’s intent was for Daniel to understand the vision he had “heard”, above understanding the vision he had “seen”. We can now consider what Gabriel does in order to fulfill his job assignment.

Manusia yang turut serta dalam penulisan Alkitab Suci mencatat kata “penglihatan” sebanyak sepuluh kali dalam pasal delapan kitab Daniel, dan dengan demikian menyembunyikan pembedaan antara suatu penglihatan yang “dilihat” dan penglihatan lain yang “didengar”. Dengan berbuat demikian, ia mengaburkan penekanan yang menegaskan bahwa maksud Kristus ialah supaya Daniel memahami penglihatan yang telah “didengarnya”, lebih daripada memahami penglihatan yang telah “dilihatnya”. Sekarang kita dapat mempertimbangkan apa yang dilakukan Gabriel untuk menunaikan penugasan jabatannya.

So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision. Now as he was speaking with me, I was in a deep sleep on my face toward the ground: but he touched me, and set me upright. And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be. Daniel 8:17–19.

A dɔɔm kɛ̀ baŋ ń̀ ndzi me səŋ nɔŋ: a lɛ̀ baŋ, mɛ̀ jìŋ, mɛ̀ yì kùm nnam maŋ; à nɛ̀ kɔ me yi, Yì kɔŋ, a Mwana wa ŋwì: nɔŋ nì nàk mə̀ŋ, mvision mə̀ kɛ̀. À dɔɔm a nɛ̀ kɔ me yi, mɛ̀ bì nàŋ nnam maŋ a kùm maŋ ndzìŋ nsi: à nɛ̀ tì me, à nɛ̀ səm me nɔŋ a yì kɛ̀. À nɛ̀ kɔŋ yi, Tala, mɛ̀ kɛ̀ lɛ̀ kɔŋ yi yì nì kɛ̀ baŋ a mə̀ŋ maŋ maŋgə̀n mə̀; nɔŋ nì a nàŋ tə̀ŋ tə̀ŋ, mə̀ŋ mə̀ kɛ̀. Daniel 8:17–19.

Gabriel now begins his work of making Daniel to understand the vision of the twenty-three hundred evenings and mornings, which is true. He first informs him that the vision of prophetic history, the châzôn vision, would be at the “time of the end.” Then, while Daniel was in a prophetic sleep, Gabriel touched Daniel and set him upright. He informs him “I will make thee know.”

Kini Gabriel memulai tugasnya untuk membuat Daniel memahami penglihatan tentang dua ribu tiga ratus petang dan pagi, yang benar adanya. Mula-mula ia memberitahukan kepadanya bahwa penglihatan sejarah nubuat itu, penglihatan châzôn, akan terjadi pada “waktu kesudahan.” Kemudian, sementara Daniel berada dalam tidur kenabian, Gabriel menjamah Daniel dan menegakkannya berdiri tegak. Ia memberitahunya, “Aku akan membuat engkau mengetahui.”

That is what Palmoni (Christ), had told Gabriel to do, when he said, “Gabriel, make this man to understand the mar’eh vision” of the evening and mornings. Gabriel says that he will make Daniel “know what shall be in the last end of the indignation.” There it is! There is the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six! It is hidden by the very prophetic technique which Gabriel had led the prophets repeatedly to testify to and employ in their writings! That technique is “line upon line, here a little and there a little”.

ဤအရာပင် ပလမိုနိ (ခရစ်တော်) က ဂါဘရေလအား ပြုစေလို၍၊ “ဂါဘရေလ၊ ဤသူအား ညဉ့်နှင့် နံနက်များဆိုင်ရာ mar’eh ရူပါရုံကို နားလည်စေပါ” ဟု မိန့်တော်မူခဲ့ခြင်းဖြစ်သည်။ ဂါဘရေလက ဒံယေလအား “အမျက်တော်၏ အဆုံးကာလ၌ ဖြစ်မည့်အရာကို သိစေမည်” ဟု ဆိုသည်။ ထိုမှာပင် ရှိနေသည်။ ထိုအရာသည် လေဝိရာကျမ်း နှစ်ဆယ့်ခြောက် ၏ “ခုနစ်ကြိမ်” ပင် ဖြစ်သည်။ ယင်းသည် ဂါဘရေလက ပရောဖက်များအား မိမိတို့၏ အရေးအသားများတွင် ထပ်တလဲလဲ သက်သေခံစေ၍ အသုံးပြုစေခဲ့သော ပရောဖက်ပြုနည်းပင်အားဖြင့် ဖုံးကွယ်ထားခြင်း ဖြစ်သည်။ ထိုနည်းလမ်းမှာ “တစ်ကြောင်းပေါ် တစ်ကြောင်း၊ ဤနေရာတွင် အနည်းငယ်၊ ထိုနေရာတွင် အနည်းငယ်” ဟူသတည်း။

In the book “Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation”, by Uriah Smith (which all Adventists, and even their neighbors, should be familiar with), Smith comments on verses seventeen to nineteen of Daniel chapter eight:

Mo bukeng ya “Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation”, ya ga Uriah Smith (e e tshwanetseng go itsege mo go Badventista botlhe, tota le mo baagelaning ba bone), Smith o tlhalosa ditemana tsa lesome le bosupa go fitlha go lesome le boferabongwe tsa kgaolo ya borobedi ya Baebele ya Daniele:

“With a general statement that at the time appointed the end shall be, and that he will make him to know what shall be in the last end of the indignation, he enters upon an interpretation of the vision. The indignation must be understood to cover a period of time. What time? God told his people Israel that he would pour upon them his indignation for their wickedness; and thus he gave directions concerning the ‘profane wicked prince of Israel:’ ‘Remove the diadem, and take off the crown. . . . I will overturn, overturn, overturn it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.’ Ezekiel 21:25–27, 31.

“Ku vakwatsri bya ntlawa lesvaku ankameni ka nkarhi lowubekisiwiki makumu ma ta va kone, ni lesvaku u ta mu tivisa leswi nga ta va kone emakumelweni ya vutsa bya ku hlundzuka, u nghena eka nhlamuselo ya xivoniso. Ku hlundzuka loku ku fanele ku twisisiwa leswaku ku katsa nkarhi wo karhi. I nkarhi muni? Xikwembu xi byele tiko ra xona, Israele, leswaku xi ta chela ehenhla ka vona ku hlundzuka ka xona hikwalaho ka ku biha ka vona; kutani hi ndlela yoleyo xi nyika swileriso malunghana ni ‘hosana yo biha leyi nyamisiweke ya Israele:’ ‘Susa xidlodlo, u hluvula harhi.... Ndzi ta yi overturn, overturn, overturn: naswona a yi nge he vi kona, ku fikela loko ku ta loyi a nga ni mfanelo ya swona; kutani ndzi ta swi nyika yena.’ Ezekiel 21:25–27, 31.”

“Here is the period of God’s indignation against his covenant people; the period during which the sanctuary and host are to be trodden under foot. The diadem was removed, and the crown taken off, when Israel was subjected to the kingdom of Babylon. It was overturned again by the Medes and Persians, again by the Grecians, again by the Romans, corresponding to the three times the word is repeated by the prophet. The Jews then, having rejected Christ, were soon scattered abroad over the face of the earth; and spiritual Israel has taken the place of the literal seed; but they are in subjection to earthly powers, and will be till the throne of David is again set up,—till He who is its rightful heir, the Messiah, the Prince of peace, shall come, and then it will be given him. Then the indignation will have ceased. What shall take place in the last end of this period, the angel is now to make known to Daniel.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 201, 202.

“Inilah masa kemurkaan Allah terhadap umat perjanjian-Nya; masa ketika tempat kudus dan pasukan itu akan diinjak-injak. Serban kerajaan disingkirkan, dan mahkota ditanggalkan, ketika Israel ditaklukkan kepada kerajaan Babel. Kerajaan itu dibalikkan lagi oleh orang Media dan Persia, lagi oleh orang Yunani, lagi oleh orang Romawi, sesuai dengan tiga kali kata itu diulangi oleh nabi. Maka orang Yahudi, setelah menolak Kristus, segera tercerai-berai ke seluruh muka bumi; dan Israel rohani telah mengambil tempat benih harfiah itu; tetapi mereka berada di bawah kekuasaan kuasa-kuasa duniawi, dan akan tetap demikian sampai takhta Daud ditegakkan kembali,—sampai Dia yang adalah ahli warisnya yang sah, Mesias, Raja Damai, datang, dan pada waktu itu takhta itu akan diberikan kepada-Nya. Maka kemurkaan itu akan berakhir. Apa yang akan terjadi pada akhir terakhir dari masa ini sekarang hendak diberitahukan malaikat itu kepada Daniel.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 201, 202.

The “indignation” that Smith is identifying, began when Manasseh was carried to Babylon by the Assyrians in 677 BC. Unfortunately, Smith takes Zedekiah’s overthrow in 586 BC and assigns that as the starting point of the period of the “indignation” of verse nineteen. Smith simply does not address what it means that the verse states “the last end of the indignation.” He treats it as simply “indignation,” though if there is a “last end” of the indignation, grammar and logic demand that there is also at minimum a “first end” of the indignation. Smith knew the seventy years of captivity began with the first attack of Nebuchadnezzar against Jehoiakim in 606 BC, but determined the starting for the period of the indignation was the third of Nebuchadnezzar’s attacks, which was carried out against Zedekiah, the last Judean king.

“kemurkaan” yang dikenalpasti oleh Smith bermula apabila Manasye dibawa ke Babel oleh orang Asyur pada tahun 677 SM. Malangnya, Smith mengambil penggulingan Zedekia pada tahun 586 SM dan menetapkannya sebagai titik permulaan bagi tempoh “kemurkaan” dalam ayat sembilan belas. Smith sama sekali tidak menangani makna kenyataan ayat itu, “akhir yang terakhir dari kemurkaan itu.” Dia memperlakukannya seolah-olah hanya “kemurkaan,” sedangkan jika ada “akhir yang terakhir” bagi kemurkaan itu, tatabahasa dan logik menuntut bahawa sekurang-kurangnya mesti juga ada “akhir yang pertama” bagi kemurkaan itu. Smith mengetahui bahawa tujuh puluh tahun pembuangan bermula dengan serangan pertama Nebukadnezar terhadap Yoyakim pada tahun 606 SM, tetapi dia menetapkan permulaan bagi tempoh kemurkaan itu pada serangan ketiga Nebukadnezar, yang dilancarkan terhadap Zedekia, raja Yehuda yang terakhir.

“Though we have a more minute account of his [Daniel’s] early life than is recorded of that of any other prophet, yet his birth and lineage are left in complete obscurity, except that he was of the royal line, probably of the house of David, which had at this time become very numerous. He first appears as one of the noble captives of Judah, in the first year of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, at the commencement of the seventy years’ captivity, BC 606. Jeremiah and Habakkuk were yet uttering their prophecies. Ezekiel commenced soon after, and a little later, Obadiah; but both these finished their work years before the close of the long and brilliant career of Daniel. Three prophets only succeeded him, Haggai and Zechariah, who exercised the prophetic office for a brief period contemporaneously, BC 520–518, and Malachi, the last of the Old Testament prophets, who flourished a little season about BC 397.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 19.

“Mipun kita mempunyai catatan yang lebih terperinci tentang kehidupan awalnya [Daniel] daripada yang dicatat mengenai nabi mana pun yang lain, namun kelahiran dan salasilahnya dibiarkan dalam kegelapan yang sepenuhnya, kecuali bahawa dia berasal daripada keturunan diraja, barangkali daripada keturunan Daud, yang pada waktu ini telah menjadi sangat ramai. Dia mula-mula tampil sebagai salah seorang tawanan bangsawan Yehuda, pada tahun pertama Nebukadnezar, raja Babel, pada permulaan penawanan tujuh puluh tahun, SM 606. Yeremia dan Habakuk masih menyampaikan nubuat mereka. Yehezkiel memulakan pekerjaannya tidak lama kemudian, dan sedikit kemudian, Obaja; tetapi kedua-dua mereka ini menamatkan pelayanan mereka bertahun-tahun sebelum berakhirnya perjalanan kerjaya Daniel yang panjang dan cemerlang. Hanya tiga orang nabi yang menyusul selepasnya, Hagai dan Zakharia, yang menjalankan jabatan kenabian untuk suatu tempoh yang singkat secara sezaman, SM 520–518, dan Maleakhi, nabi terakhir Perjanjian Lama, yang giat melayani untuk seketika sekitar SM 397.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 19.

Smith correctly identified the “indignation” of verse nineteen as a period of time. He correctly identified the period as the treading down of the sanctuary and host in agreement with Daniel chapter eight verse thirteen, and he correctly identified the ending point as October 22, 1844.

Smith Mweti niu “indignation” ya verse ya kumi na tisa ta li ni kipindi kya muda. Niu mweti kipindi hicho ta li ni kukanyagwa kwa patakatifu na jeshi kwa kufuatana na Daniel chapter nane verse ya kumi na tatu, na niu mweti mwisho wa kipindi hicho ta li ni October 22, 1844.

Smith was partially correct, but missed the truth by doing what was the characteristic of his prophetic applications. He allowed history to guide his interpretation of the prophetic word, instead of allowing the prophetic word to guide his understanding of history. If we allow the Bible to define prophetic history, we then have the correct information to approach history.

Smith тӗмдэгэн зөб байһаншье, өөрынь зүгнэлтэ соо байдаг байһан зөншэлгын хэрэглэмжынь онсо шэнжэ болохо юумэ үйлэдэжэ, үнэн зүйлиие алдан өнгэрөө. Тэрэ зөнэй үгын тайлбарида түүхые хүтэлбэри болгон хэрэглэһэн, харин зөнэй үгөөр түүхын ойлгосые хүтэлүүлхэ ёһотой байһан юм. Хэрбээ бидэ Библиэр зөншэлгын түүхые тодорхойлуулбал, тиихэдэ түүхэдэ хандахын тула зүб мэдээсэлтэй болохобди.

The Bible teaches that by whom a man is overcome, he is that man’s servant.

Baebele e ruta gore motho yo mongwe a ka fenngwa ke mang, ke motlhanka wa motho yoo.

While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. 2 Peter 2:19.

E ha ba ba holofetša tokologo, bona ka noši ke bahlanka ba tshenyego; gobane yo motho a fenywago ke yena, ke yena yo a mo tlišago bohlankeng. 2 Petro 2:19.

Manasseh was taken captive to Babylon in 677 BC. It is there that Judah was overcome and brought into bondage. This is the starting point that is represented on both the 1843 and the 1850 charts, which Sister White endorses as correct. Smith starts the treading down of Daniel chapter eight, and verse thirteen with Zedekiah, the last of Judah’s kings. Zedekiah was the end of a progressive judgment and not the beginning. Sister White identifies that Manasseh’s captivity in Babylon was an “earnest” of what was to come. An “earnest” is a down payment, and marks the beginning of a purchase that has other payments to follow.

Manasseh o ile a isoa kholehong Babilona ka 677 BC. Ke moo Juda e ileng ea hlōloa teng ’me ea isoa bokhobeng. Ena ke ntlha ea qalo e emeloang lichateng ka bobeli tsa 1843 le 1850, tseo Sister White a li tšehetsang e le tse nepahetseng. Smith o qala ho hatakeloa ha Daniele khaolo ea robeli, le temana ea leshome le metso e meraro, ka Tsedekia, morena oa ho qetela oa Juda. Tsedekia e ne e le qetello ea kahlolo e tsoelang pele, eseng qalo. Sister White o supa hore kholeho ea Manasseh Babilona e ne e le “tebeletso” ea se neng se tla tla. “Tebeleletso” ke tefo ea pele, ’me e tšoaea qalo ea theko e nang le ditefo tse ling tse tlang ho latela.

“Faithfully the prophets continued their warnings and their exhortations; fearlessly they spoke to Manasseh and to his people; but the messages were scorned; backsliding Judah would not heed. As an earnest of what would befall the people should they continue impenitent, the Lord permitted their king to be captured by a band of Assyrian soldiers, who ‘bound him with fetters, and carried him to Babylon,’ their temporary capital. This affliction brought the king to his senses; ‘he besought the Lord his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers, and prayed unto Him: and He was entreated of him, and heard his supplication, and brought him again to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the Lord He was God.’ 2 Chronicles 33:11–13. But this repentance, remarkable though it was, came too late to save the kingdom from the corrupting influence of years of idolatrous practices. Many had stumbled and fallen, never again to rise.” Prophets and Kings, 382.

“Dengan setia para nabi meneruskan amaran dan seruan mereka; dengan tidak gentar mereka berbicara kepada Manasye dan kepada rakyatnya; tetapi pekabaran-pekabaran itu dihina; Yehuda yang murtad tidak mahu mengindahkan. Sebagai suatu jaminan tentang apa yang akan menimpa umat itu sekiranya mereka terus tidak bertaubat, Tuhan mengizinkan raja mereka ditawan oleh sepasukan askar Asyur, yang ‘membelenggunya dengan belenggu, dan membawanya ke Babel,’ ibu kota sementara mereka. Penderitaan ini menyedarkan raja itu; ‘ia memohon kepada TUHAN, Allahnya, dan sangat merendahkan dirinya di hadapan Allah nenek moyangnya, lalu berdoa kepada-Nya; dan Ia berkenan kepadanya, serta mendengar permohonannya, dan membawa dia kembali ke Yerusalem ke dalam kerajaannya. Maka tahulah Manasye bahawa TUHAN, Dialah Allah.’ 2 Tawarikh 33:11–13. Tetapi pertobatan ini, sungguhpun luar biasa, datang terlambat untuk menyelamatkan kerajaan itu daripada pengaruh yang merosakkan akibat bertahun-tahun amalan penyembahan berhala. Banyak orang telah tersandung dan jatuh, tidak akan bangkit lagi.” Prophets and Kings, 382.

Manasseh marked the “down payment” that began the “curse” of the “seven times,” which was the last “indignation,” for the “first indignation,” had already begun when the northern kingdom was taken into captivity in 723 BC. Then at Jehoiakim’s overthrow, when Daniel was carried into captivity, the seventy years of captivity that Jeremiah identified began in 606 BC. Two kings after Jehoiakim, Jerusalem was destroyed and the last Judean king, Zedekiah, watched as his sons were slain before him, then he had his eyes gouged out and was carried captive into Babylon.

ᱢᱟᱱᱟᱥᱮᱦ ᱫᱚ “ᱫᱟᱣᱱ ᱯᱮᱭᱢᱮᱱᱴ” ᱛᱮ ᱪᱤᱱᱦᱟᱹᱭ ᱠᱮᱫᱟ ᱡᱮ “ᱥᱮᱵᱮᱱ ᱴᱟᱭᱢᱥ” ᱨᱮᱱ “ᱠᱚᱨᱥ” ᱮᱦᱚᱵ ᱮᱱᱟ, ᱚᱱᱟ ᱫᱚ ᱢᱩᱪᱟᱹᱫ “ᱤᱱᱫᱤᱜᱱᱮᱥᱚᱱ” ᱛᱟᱦᱮᱸᱠᱟᱱᱟ, ᱪᱮᱫᱟᱠ ᱡᱮ “ᱯᱷᱟᱨᱥᱴ ᱤᱱᱫᱤᱜᱱᱮᱥᱚᱱ” ᱫᱚ ᱟᱞᱨᱮᱰᱤ ᱮᱦᱚᱵ ᱮᱱᱟ ᱡᱚᱠᱷᱚᱱ 723 BC ᱨᱮ ᱩᱛᱚᱨ ᱨᱟᱡᱽᱭ ᱠᱮ ᱠᱮᱯᱴᱤᱵᱷᱤᱴᱤ ᱨᱮ ᱱᱮᱣᱟ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ। ᱛᱟᱨᱮ ᱡᱮᱦᱚᱭᱟᱠᱤᱢ ᱨᱮᱱ ᱚᱣᱟᱨᱛᱷᱨᱚ ᱨᱮ, ᱡᱚᱠᱷᱚᱱ ᱫᱟᱱᱤᱭᱮᱞ ᱠᱮ ᱠᱮᱯᱴᱤᱵᱷᱤᱴᱤ ᱨᱮ ᱱᱮᱣᱟ ᱠᱟᱱᱟ, ᱡᱮᱨᱮᱢᱟᱭᱟᱦ ᱡᱮ 70 ᱵᱚᱪᱷᱚᱨ ᱨᱮᱱ ᱠᱮᱯᱴᱤᱵᱷᱤᱴᱤ ᱠᱚ ᱪᱤᱱᱦᱟᱹᱭ ᱠᱮᱫᱟ, ᱚᱱᱟ 606 BC ᱨᱮ ᱮᱦᱚᱵ ᱮᱱᱟ। ᱡᱮᱦᱚᱭᱟᱠᱤᱢ ᱨᱮᱱ ᱫᱩᱭ ᱨᱟᱡᱟ ᱛᱟᱭᱚᱢ, ᱡᱮᱨᱩᱥᱟᱞᱮᱢ ᱫᱷᱚᱝᱥ ᱮᱱᱟ, ᱟᱨ ᱢᱩᱪᱟᱹᱫ ᱭᱩᱫᱟᱭᱟᱱ ᱨᱟᱡᱟ, ᱡᱮᱫᱮᱠᱟᱭᱟ, ᱟᱡᱟᱜ ᱦᱟᱯᱟᱱ ᱠᱚ ᱟᱡᱟᱜ ᱢᱮᱫ ᱛᱟᱭᱚᱢ ᱨᱮ ᱜᱚᱡ ᱠᱚ ᱵᱮᱝᱜᱮᱛ ᱠᱮᱫᱟ; ᱛᱟᱨᱮ ᱟᱡᱟᱜ ᱢᱮᱫ ᱠᱚ ᱚᱫᱚᱝ ᱠᱮᱫᱟ ᱟᱨ ᱵᱟᱵᱤᱞᱚᱱ ᱨᱮ ᱠᱮᱯᱴᱤᱵᱷ ᱟᱜᱩ ᱠᱮᱫᱟ។

Smith assigned the entire progressive judgment to Zedekiah and employed the judgment of Zedekiah as the proof text for his supposition. The judgment of Zedekiah, who was the “wicked and profane prince,” did identify that the crown of Judah was to be removed until Christ came to set up a kingdom. Smith said, “they are in subjection to earthly powers, and will be till the throne of David is again set up,—till He who is its rightful heir, the Messiah, the Prince of peace, shall come, and then it will be given him.” On October 22, 1844, in fulfillment of Daniel chapter seven, and verses thirteen and fourteen, Christ, represented as the Son of man, came before the Father to receive a kingdom.

Smith tianthuam tawpa chu Zedekiah hnenah a dah a, a thupuan tihchhiatna atana Zedekiah rorelna chu a hmang bawk. Zedekiah rorelna, amah chu “lalber sual leh thianghlim lo” a ni a, Juda lalram lallukhum chu Krista a lo kal a, lalram din thar a nih hma loh chuan lak bo tûr a ni tih chu a lantîr. Smith chuan heti hian a sawi: “anmahni chu khawvêl thuneitute hnuaiah an awm a, David lalṭhutphah din thar leh a nih hma loh chuan an awm reng ang,—amah, a ro chan tûr dik tak, Messiaha, Muanna Lalber chu a lo kal ang a, tichuan chu chu amah hnênah pehin a awm ang.” October 22, 1844-ah, Daniel bung 7, châng 13 leh 14 tih hlenchhuaknaah, Krista, Mihring Fapa anga entîr chu, Pa hmaah lalram dawng tûrin a lo kal.

I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. Daniel 7:13, 14.

Ndzi vone emibonweni ya vusiku, kutani waswivo, un’wana loyi a fanaka ni N’wana wa Munhu a ta hi mapapa ya tilo, a fika eka Loyi a nga wa Masiku, kutani va n’wi tshineta emahlweni ka yena. Kutani a nyikiwa vuhosi, ni ku vangama, ni mfumo, leswaku vanhu hinkwavo, ni matiko, ni tindzimi, va n’wi tirhela: vuhosi bya yena i vuhosi lebyi nga heriki, lebyi nga tiki ku hela, naswona mfumo wa yena hi wona lowu nga ka wu nga lovisiwiki. Daniel 7:13, 14.

Sister White confirms that Daniel chapter seven, and verses thirteen and fourteen were fulfilled on October 22, 1844.

Kgaitsadi White o netefatsa gore Daniele kgaolo ya bosupa, le ditemana tsa lesome le boraro le lesome le bone, di ne tsa diragadiwa ka October 22, 1844.

“The coming of Christ as our high priest to the most holy place, for the cleansing of the sanctuary, brought to view in Daniel 8:14; the coming of the Son of man to the Ancient of Days, as presented in Daniel 7:13; and the coming of the Lord to His temple, foretold by Malachi, are descriptions of the same event; and this is also represented by the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage, described by Christ in the parable of the ten virgins, of Matthew 25.” The Great Controversy, 426.

“Kristus kwa mi hihsiam puithiam ang ni a, hmun thianghlim berah biak in thianghlimna atan a lo kal chu, Daniel 8:14-ah a lang; Mihring Fapa chu Ni hlui zette hnênah a lo kal, Daniel 7:13-ah a sawi ang khân; tin, Lalpa chu A biak inah a lo kal, Malakia’n a lo hrilh lâwk ang khân—hêngte hi thil thleng pakhat chiah sawi fiahna an ni; hei hi, Matthai 25-a nungah sawm thu tehte tehkhin thu-a Krista’n a sawi angin, mo neitu chu inneihnaa a lo kal tihin pawh a entîr bawk a ni.” The Great Controversy, 426.

Smith did not address the key element of the “last end of the indignation.” He avoided the biblical principle that identified that Judah was overcome in the time of Manasseh, and that the captivity which began two kings before Zedekiah, also represented that Judah was already in subjection to Babylon, before Zedekiah met his fate. With these blatant omissions, he still stated, “here is the period of God’s indignation against his covenant people; the period during which the sanctuary and host are to be trodden under foot.” He therefore, directly associates “the period of God’s indignation” with Daniel chapter eight, and verse thirteen’s question of “how long.” The answer in verse fourteen, was until October 22, 1844.

Smith ne osekondjel ko tok pwelette “tinik meak pigrijen irik.” E jaikui naepe jjabdewōt kabeel in Bible eo ej kwalok ke Juda ear maron in an jabdewōt tokjen ien Manasseh, im ke kabojrak eo ear jino jilu bōbōjen jemlok jen Zedekiah, ear bar lelok naan in ta ke Juda ear drolul non pein Babylon mokta jen an Zedekiah drelon an jepel. Ijin ilju in an kobban ko re melele, e jino kwalok tok, “ijjān period in an God pigrij ippa armij ro an kobaik; period eo ilo iaan temple eo im host eo renaj kioobrak ioon pein mej.” Eo kio, e jeblak in an kobaik “period in an God pigrij” ippān Daniel chapter eight, im kajjitōk eo ilo verse thirteen in “ewonaan?” Bwe in verse fourteen, ear kobaik ioon October 22, 1844.

The scattering into Babylonian slavery was a progressive history beginning in 677 BC, and continuing until 1844. That period equates to twenty-five hundred and twenty years, which is of course the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six. The end of that period of time on October 22, 1844 provided Daniel with a second witness to the “mar’eh vision” of the twenty-three hundred evening and mornings.

Kupharadzwa kuenda muuranda hweBhabhironi kwaiva nhoroondo inofambira mberi yakatanga muna 677 BC, ikaenderera mberi kusvika muna 1844. Nguva iyoyo inoenzana nemakore zviuru zviviri namazana mashanu namakumi maviri, ayo zvirokwazvo ari “nguva nomwe” dzaRevhitiko makumi maviri nenhanhatu. Kuguma kwenguva iyoyo musi wa22 Gumiguru, 1844 kwakapa Danieri chapupu chechipiri ku“mar’eh vision” chemanheru namangwanani ane zviuru zviviri namazana matatu.

Gabriel was told to make Daniel understand that vision, and what Gabriel did was provide a second witness to the termination date of October 22, 1844. Not only did he provide a second witness to establish the date of the fulfillments of both time prophecies, but as Smith correctly pointed out, the period of time associated with the second witness to 1844, had been identified in verse thirteen, as the period that the sanctuary and host were to be trodden under foot. The question in verse thirteen is, “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?” That period of time was the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six.

Gabriel telah diperintahkan untuk membuat Daniel memahami penglihatan itu, dan apa yang dilakukan Gabriel ialah memberikan saksi kedua bagi tarikh pengakhiran 22 Oktober 1844. Bukan sahaja dia memberikan saksi kedua untuk meneguhkan tarikh penggenapan kedua-dua nubuatan waktu itu, tetapi sebagaimana yang ditunjukkan dengan tepat oleh Smith, jangka masa yang berkaitan dengan saksi kedua kepada tahun 1844 itu telah dikenal pasti dalam ayat tiga belas sebagai jangka masa ketika tempat kudus dan bala tentera itu akan diinjak-injak. Pertanyaan dalam ayat tiga belas ialah, “Berapa lamakah penglihatan tentang korban harian, dan pelanggaran yang mendatangkan kebinasaan itu, sehingga baik tempat kudus mahupun bala tentera diserahkan untuk diinjak-injak?” Jangka masa itu ialah “tujuh masa” dalam Imamat dua puluh enam.

What Smith did not see, or avoided identifying, was that the “indignation” of verse nineteen, was the “last end” of that indignation. If there is a “last” then there is also a “first”, and Daniel identifies when the “first indignation” ended, in chapter eleven. He is identifying the papacy reigning during the Dark Ages, and he states that the papacy would prosper until the indignation was accomplished, or ended.

Apa yang tidak dilihat Smith, atau yang dihindarinya untuk dikenali, ialah bahwa “kemurkaan” pada ayat sembilan belas itu adalah “kesudahan” dari kemurkaan itu. Jika ada yang “terakhir”, maka ada juga yang “pertama”, dan Daniel menunjukkan kapan “kemurkaan yang pertama” berakhir, di pasal sebelas. Ia sedang menunjuk kepada kepausan yang memerintah selama Abad Kegelapan, dan ia menyatakan bahwa kepausan itu akan beruntung sampai kemurkaan itu digenapi, atau diakhiri.

And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done. Daniel 11:36.

A ƙhiar îm akan ka lung deuh e, asîh an înliar amah te, cuangh deuh e doi cuangh i, asîh an chim thilmak tak takte Pathiante Pathian chunga e, asîh an hmuingîl anga Pathian thinhengna a tâwp hma chuan: tih ruat sa chu tih a ni dâwn si. Daniel 11:36.

Verse thirty-six is widely understood to be the verse the apostle Paul paraphrases in his second letter to the Thessalonians.

Temana ya makgolo a mararo le borataro e kwešišwa kudu e le temana yeo moapostola Paulo a e hlalošago ka mantšu a mangwe lengwalong la gagwe la bobedi go Bathesalonika.

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4.

Mma onyɛ obiara nnnaadaa mo wɔ ɔkwan biara so; efisɛ saa da no remma, gye sɛ aweretɔ ba ansa, na wɔda bɔne nipa no adi, ɔyera ba no; ɔno na ɔsɔre tia na ɔma ne ho so sen biribiara a wɔfrɛ no Onyankopɔn anaa nea wɔsom no; enti ɔte Onyankopɔn asɔredan mu sɛ Onyankopɔn, na ɔda no adi sɛ ɔno ne Onyankopɔn. 2 Tesalonikafo 2:3, 4.

Paul’s “man of sin” who is also “the son of perdition,” who “opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped,” is also the “king” who “shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god.” Both passages refer to the pope of Rome. Daniel writes that the pope would prosper, which means push forward, until the “indignation be accomplished.” The indignation in verse thirty-six had been “determined.” The word “determined” means “to wound”.

“ឥស្សរជននៃបាប” របស់ប៉ូល ដែលក៏ជា “បុត្រានៃសេចក្ដីវិនាស” ហើយ “ប្រឆាំង និងលើកខ្លួនឡើងខ្ពស់ជាងអស់ទាំងអ្វីដែលត្រូវហៅថា ព្រះ ឬដែលគេថ្វាយបង្គំ” ក៏ជាស្តេច “ដែលនឹងប្រព្រឹត្តតាមបំណងចិត្តរបស់ខ្លួន ហើយនឹងលើកខ្លួន និងលើកតម្កើងខ្លួនឡើងខ្ពស់ជាងព្រះទាំងអស់” ផងដែរ។ អត្ថបទទាំងពីរនេះ សំដៅទៅលើសម្ដេចប៉ាបនៃក្រុងរ៉ូម។ ដានីយ៉ែលសរសេរថា សម្ដេចប៉ាបនឹងចម្រើនឡើង ដែលមានន័យថា នឹងរុញទៅមុខ រហូតដល់ “សេចក្ដីក្រោធត្រូវបានបំពេញសម្រេច”។ សេចក្ដីក្រោធនៅក្នុងខទីសាមសិបប្រាំមួយ ត្រូវបាន “កំណត់” រួចហើយ។ ពាក្យ “កំណត់” មានន័យថា “ធ្វើឲ្យរងរបួស”។

The papacy received its “deadly wound” in 1798, and at that point the “first indignation” was accomplished or terminated. The word “accomplish” means to end or cease. The end of “the indignation” in chapter eight, and verse nineteen identified the end of the period that the sanctuary and host were to be trampled down. It ended in 1844, but the “first” indignation ended in 1798.

Kepausan menerima “luka yang mematikan” pada tahun 1798, dan pada saat itu “murka yang pertama” telah digenapi atau diakhiri. Kata “digenapi” berarti berakhir atau berhenti. Berakhirnya “murka itu” dalam pasal delapan, ayat sembilan belas, menandai berakhirnya masa ketika tempat kudus dan bala tentara akan diinjak-injak. Masa itu berakhir pada tahun 1844, tetapi murka yang “pertama” berakhir pada tahun 1798.

The “last indignation” ended in 1844, twenty-five hundred and twenty years after king Manasseh was carried to Babylon by the Assyrians in 677 BC. The “first” indignation ended in 1798, twenty-five hundred and twenty years after the northern kingdom of Israel was carried into slavery by the Assyrians in 723 BC.

“Amarah ya mwisho” iliisha mwaka 1844, miaka elfu mbili mia tano ishirini baada ya mfalme Manase kupelekwa Babeli na Waashuru mwaka 677 KK. “Amarah ya kwanza” iliisha mwaka 1798, miaka elfu mbili mia tano ishirini baada ya ufalme wa kaskazini wa Israeli kupelekwa utumwani na Waashuru mwaka 723 KK.

There is more to say about the hidden “seven times” in the book of Daniel and we will address that in our next article.

Banyak lagi yang perlu dikatakan tentang “tujuh masa” yang tersembunyi dalam kitab Daniel, dan hal itu akan kami bahas dalam artikel kami yang seterusnya.

“‘And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write: These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the beginning of the creation of God; I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of My mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.’

“‘Și îngerului bisericii laodicenilor scrie-i: Acestea le zice Aminul, Martorul credincios și adevărat, începutul creației lui Dumnezeu: Îți cunosc faptele, că nu ești nici rece, nici fierbinte: aș vrea să fii rece sau fierbinte. Astfel, fiindcă ești căldicel și nici rece, nici fierbinte, te voi vărsa din gura Mea. Pentru că zici: Sunt bogat, m-am îmbogățit și nu duc lipsă de nimic; și nu știi că ești ticălos, vrednic de milă, sărac, orb și gol.’”

“The Lord here shows us that the message to be borne to His people by ministers whom He has called to warn the people is not a peace-and-safety message. It is not merely theoretical, but practical in every particular. The people of God are represented in the message to the Laodiceans as in a position of carnal security. They are at ease, believing themselves to be in an exalted condition of spiritual attainments. ‘Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.’

“Morena mona o re bontšha mo gore molaetša wo o swanetšego go išwa go batho ba Gagwe ke badiredi bao A ba biditšego go lemoša batho ga se molaetša wa khutšo le polokego. Ga se wa thutamodimo feela, eupša ke wa phethagatšo ka mo go feletšego. Batho ba Modimo ba emelwa molaetšeng o yago go Balaodikia ba le boemong bja tšhireletšego ya nama. Ba iketlile, ba dumela gore ba maemong a phagamego a dikatlego tša semoya. ‘Gobane o re, Ke humile, ke okeditšwe ka dithoto, gomme ga ke hloke selo; eupša ga o tsebe gore o madimabe, o a šokiša, o modiidi, o foufetše, gomme o feletšwe ke diaparo.’”

“What greater deception can come upon human minds than a confidence that they are right when they are all wrong! The message of the True Witness finds the people of God in a sad deception, yet honest in that deception. They know not that their condition is deplorable in the sight of God. While those addressed are flattering themselves that they are in an exalted spiritual condition, the message of the True Witness breaks their security by the startling denunciation of their true condition of spiritual blindness, poverty, and wretchedness. The testimony, so cutting and severe, cannot be a mistake, for it is the True Witness who speaks, and His testimony must be correct.” Testimonies, volume 3, 252.

“Nenkata engopambu ku iinongonono yi aantu oku dule ehalo lokukolelwa kutya oya yukilila eshi oya puka filufilu! Etumwalaka lOmuuliki Woshili ola hangana aantu vaKalunga mepukifo li li lii, ndele ova yuka momupya oo. Kave shi shii kutya omaupyakadi avo oha ga nyanyalifa momesho aaKalunga. Fiyo ava va kundafanwa tava li limbilike kutya ova fikama meshiimo lopamhepo la nyanyuka, etumwalaka lOmuuliki Woshili ola topola ouwa wavo wokukwatela pamwe nenyono li ya kwafukwa lomesho etumwalaka lihe na ombili loshili yoshiimo shavo shopamhepo shoupofi, oupyona, nounyemwenyo woupyakadi. Etestimoni, li li li nena neli etomhelo, kali na oku kala epuko, osheshi Omuuliki Woshili oye ta popi, netestimoni laye otali fanekwa oku kala linyanyalifi.” Testimonies, volume 3, 252.