When the little horn of Rome is represented in verses nine through twelve of Daniel chapter eight, it is a corrupted symbol for it is a symbol of transvestitism, a cross-dresser oscillating between male and female. It agrees with the Millerite understanding that Rome was represented by two phases, the first phase being the Roman statecraft and the second phase being the Roman churchcraft, but in the oscillation of genders in the verses, the little horn is out of the historical and prophetic sequence (corrupted). Yet each of the four verses represents history directly associated with either Roman statecraft or Roman churchcraft. Pagan Rome persecuted all who resisted its imperial authority, but the persecution of papal Rome (feminine) in verse ten, is specifically directed against heaven.
Bi bëñu tektalee ndaw mi bu am bënn njéll ci aaya yu juróom-ñett ba fukk ak ñaar yi ci Daniel saar ñetteel, dafa doon misaal mu yàqu, ndaxte mooy misaalu góor-jigéen yu soppiku, ku sol yérey góor ak yérey jigéen, di wër ci diggante góor ak jigéen. Loolu méngoo na ak xam-xamu Millerite ne Rooma dafa feeñ ci ñaari jàmm, jàmm bu njëkk bi di nguurug Rooma, te ñaareel bi di kërceenug Rooma; waaye ci soppikoo gi ci jënde yi ci aaya yi, ndaw mi bu am bënn njéll mi ngi génn ci toftale gu jaar-jaar ak gu yëgleb (mu yàqu). Naka noonu, ku nekk ci ñetti aaya yi dafay tegu ci jaar-jaari bind buy jëm ci benn ci ñaari mbir yii: nguurug Rooma walla kërceenug Rooma. Rooma bu bokk ci jaamono ju ñuy wax pagan dafa doon fitnaal ñépp ñi dàqoon sañ-sañam gu nguur gu réy; waaye fitnaalug Rooma bu papaal bi (bu jigéen) ci aaya fukk bi, dafa jublu bu baax ci asamaan.
In the Millerite understanding that Rome was the fourth and final kingdom, the oscillating from state to church to state to church again would not have been a concern. They had seen the mixture of iron and clay in the feet of Daniel chapter two, and simply understood it as two phases of Rome, with no concern to define a specific historical sequence of a fourth and fifth kingdom. They understood the same of chapter seven, where the horn that spake great things against the most High, had three horns plucked up from the original ten horns of the beast of Rome. Even if Miller did recognize the gender oscillation of verse nine through twelve, it would have been unimportant to his understanding of the fourth kingdom being Rome. In Millerite understanding the fourth kingdom ended in 1798, and the next prophetic event was the Second Coming of Christ.
Ci xam-xamu Millerite bi ne Rom mooy buur bu ñeenteel te mujj bi, wërante gi di dem joge ci réew, dellu ci kerk, dellu ci réew, te dellu ci kerkati, du woon lu leen war a jàpp ci yëngu-yëngu. Gis nañu woon jaxase gu weñ ak banxas bi ci tànki Daniel saaru ñaareel, te dañu ko xam rekk ne ñaari jamono la yu Rom, te sax amuñu woon njàqare gu ñuy faral di firndeel toftal gu mat sëkk ci tarix bu buur bu ñeenteel ak bu juróomeel. Noonu it lañu xamoon saaru juróomeel bi, fa baaka bu wax lu mag lu jëm ci Aji Kawe ji gën a Kowe bi, raxasee na fa ñetti baaka ci fukki baaka yi njëkk yi ci rabu Rom ba. Ndaxte sax su fekkee ne Miller seetaan na yokkute gu góor ak jigéen gu ay aaya 9 ba 12 di teggi, du woon lu am solo ci xam-xamam ne buur bu ñeenteel bi mooy Rom. Ci xam-xamu Millerite bi, buur bu ñeenteel bi jeex na ci 1798, te dhacci jëfandikookat bu topp ci waxi yonent bi mooy Ñëwug Yeesu Kirist bu Ñaareel bi.
The feminine horn identifies the woman who commits spiritual fornication with the masculine horn, and is represented in verses ten and twelve.
Bëccëg bu jigéen bi dafay xamle jigéen ji di def njaaloo gu xel ak bëccëg bu góor ga, te ñu ko wone ci aaya 10 ak 12.
And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them. Daniel 8:10.
Te moom na baax lool, ba jot ci mbooloom asamaan; mu sànni ci suuf yenn ci mbooloo ma ak ci biddéew yi, ba noomp leen. Daniel 8:10.
The persecution of the papal power was directed against Christianity (the host of heaven), and in verse twelve papal Rome (feminine), receives the power to accomplish her murderous work through the transgression of fornicating with the kings of Europe.
Fitna biñu def ci dooley baap-paa bi jëm woon ci Kiristeyaange (xarekat yi ci asamaan), te ci saraxale fukki ak ñaar, Roomu baap-paa bi (jigeen), jot na doole ngir mottali liggéeyam bu rey nit, jaarale ko ci bàkkaaru njaaloo ak buur yi ci Ërop.
And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered. Daniel 8:12.
Te mbooloo mu ñu ko jox ngir mu xeex sarax sa bëccëg-bëccëg ndax bàkkaar, te mu sànni dëgg gi ci suuf; te mu def lu mu bëgg, ba mu yokkute. Daniel 8:12.
The “host” in the verse represents the military power that was given the papacy “against the daily.” The word “against” means “from”. From the pagan kings of Europe (pagan Rome), represented by “the daily,” military support (an host) was given to the papacy “by reason of transgression.” The combination of church and state, with the church in control of the relationship is the “transgression.” The wine of that transgression is Christian blood. Once the papacy had control of the armies of pagan Rome, papal Rome (“it”) “cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered.”
“Host” bi ci aaya bi dafa tegu militar bi ñu joxoon papauté bi “contre le quotidien”. Kàddu “contre” bi tekki na “jógge ci”. Ci buur yu pagan yu Europe (Rome pagan), yi ñuy tekkaale ak “le quotidien”, ñu jox papauté bi ndimbal militar (ab host) “ndax moytu bàkkaar.” Booloo ekklesiya ak réew mi, fekk ekklesiya bi moo yor saytu gi, mooy “moytu bàkkaar” googu. Biiñu bàkkaar boobu mooy deretu Kiristaan yi. Bi papauté bi amee sañ-sañ ci mbooloom xarekat yu Rome pagan, Rome papal bi (“moom”) “daanu na dëgg gi ci suuf; te mu jëfe, te am njariñ.”
In Daniel chapter eleven, verse thirty-one, the giving of the armies to papal Rome is also represented:
Ci wàllu Daniel, sarax fukk ak benn, aaya ñetti-fukk ak benn, jébbale mbooloom xare yi ci Room bu paapal bi itam dañu ko tektal:
And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. Daniel 11:31.
Te loxo yi taxaw ci sa wàllu, te dinañu sobis bérabu sell bu doole bi, te dinañu dindi sarax su bis bu nekk, te dinañu teg sikki-sakk bi di yóbbu tasare. Daniel 11:31.
The verse is identifying the historical transition from pagan Rome to papal Rome. In the verse the “arms” are the European kings that began to stand up for the papacy beginning with Clovis, king of the Franks (France), in the year 496. The “arms” also polluted “the sanctuary of strength” (the city of Rome), through the continuous warfare from the fourth century onward to the year 538. The “arms” also removed the pagan resistance to the rise of the papacy, and by the year 508, the pagan resistance was finished.
Saar bi moo xamale soppi gu jaar ci jaar-jaari bindoon bu jëmé ci Room gu way-yàlla yu réer ba ci Room gu baat-u-pàppa. Ci saar bi, “loxo yi” mooy buur yu Tugal yi tambali woon a taxaw ngir baat-u-pàppa, tambali ci Koloowis, buur bu Farãas yi (Farãs), ci atum 496. “Loxo yi” itam sobe woon nañu “bërëb bu sell bu doole” bi (dëkkub Room), jaarale ko ci xare yu dul dog yi tambali ca ñetteelu xarnu ba agsi ci atum 538. “Loxo yi” itam dindi woon nañu bëgg-bëggu bañ bu jaamono ju réer tegu woon ngir yéegug baat-u-pàppa, te ci atum 508, bëgg-bëggu bañ bu jaamono ju réer jeex na woon.
The word translated as “take away,” is the Hebrew word “sur” and means “to remove”. The “arms” placed the “abomination that maketh desolate” (the papacy), on the throne of the earth in the year 538. When Daniel chapter eight, verse twelve identifies that “an host” was given to the feminine little horn, it is agreeing with the witness of verse thirty-one of chapter eleven. The book of Revelation also gives witness to the same truth in chapter thirteen.
Baatu bi ñu tekki ne “jëlee”, mooy baat bu Ebre “sur”, te mu tekki “dindi”. “Loxo yi” teg nañu “ñaawteef gi indi màbb” (papasi bi) ci gàngune suuf si ci atum 538. Bu Daniel saar 8, ay 12 waxee ne “kurél” was nañu ko ndaw mi bu jigéen, loolu ànd na ak seede sàrt 31 bu saar 11. Téereb Peeñ mi itam seedeel na dëgg googu ci saar 13.
And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. Revelation 13:2.
Rabu ma ma gisoon dafa mel ni mbàtt, te ay tànkam mel ni yu janax, te gémmiñam mel ni bu gaynde; te njiitax gi jox ko sa doole, ak sa nguurug toogu, ak sa sañ-sañ bu réy. Peeñu Yowaana 13:2.
Sister White directly identifies the beast of verse two as the papacy, and that the dragon in the verse is pagan Rome. Pagan Rome gave three things to the papacy; “his power, and his seat, and great authority.”
Sœur White wax na bu leer ne rab wu nekk ci bennaar bi ñaareel mooy papasi bi, te dragon bi ci bennaar boobu mooy Roomu pagaan. Roomu pagaan jox na papasi bi ñetti mbir: “dooleem, ak toogandoom, ak sañ-sañ bu mag.”
The military power was given by pagan Rome beginning with Clovis in the year 496. The “seat” to rule from, was given to the papacy in the year 330, when the emperor Constantine moved his capitol to Constantinople, leaving his former capitol city of Rome to the control of the papal church. In the year 533, the emperor Justinian decreed that the pope was the head of the church and the corrector of heretics, turning his “great authority” over to the pope of Rome. Verse twelve of Daniel chapter eight, identifies the time when a “host” was given, and that prophetic truth is testified to on many witnesses. From that point in time (beginning in the year 496), the papacy “prospered.”
Jàngoro soldaar bi, Room gu dul gawe gi moo ko jox, tàmbalee ak Clovis ci atum 496. “Toogu” ba ngir nguur, joxeef na ko papaas bi ci atum 330, ba bu buur ba, Constantine, yóbbuwaat na péeyam nguur ba Konstantinopel, bàyyi dëkkam nguur gu njëkk ga, Room, ci saytu kërkug papaas bi. Ci atum 533, buur ba Justinian dogal na ne paap bi mooy boppu kërk gi te mooy jubalikat way weddi dëgg, noonu dénk “sañ-sañam bu mag” ci paap bu Room. Saar 12 bu Daniel saar 8, xamle na jamono ji ñu joxe “mbooloo”, te dëggu waxu yonent bi seedeel na ko ci seede yu bare. Li dalee ca jamono jooju (tàmbalee ci atum 496), papaas bi “gëna yomb a yokku.”
It would continue to “practice” and “prosper” until the end of the indignation against the northern kingdom of Israel ended in 1798, and the papacy received its deadly wound.
Mu war a baaxee di “jëfandikoo” te di “yekkati” ba keroog merum Yàlla ci kaw réewum bëj-gànnaar bu Israayil jeexee ci 1798, ba baale-gàmmu paap bi jotee gaañu dee.
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.
Te buur bi dina def ni ko soobee; dina yékkati boppam, màggal boppam ëpp bépp yàlla, te dina wax ay wax yu yéem ci kaw Yàlla ju kaw yàlla yi, te dina am njàmbaar ba kerem gi mat; ndaxte li ñu dogal dees na ko def. Daniel 11:36.
Verse nine of chapter eight, describes masculine Rome (pagan Rome), and represents the three-step conquering process that pagan Rome accomplished, and which typified the three geographical areas that would be conquered in order for papal Rome to be established upon the throne of the earth, as represented by the three horns that were plucked up in chapter seven. Those two three-step conquering’s of pagan and papal Rome, represented the three geographical obstacles of modern Rome, in verses forty through forty-three of Daniel eleven. Then in chapter eight, verse eleven, the masculine little horn (pagan Rome) is again represented. In the verse, the sanctified logic is so sound, that the scornful men that rule Jerusalem were forced to introduce several theological lies in order to erect their counterfeit foundation.
Aayaat juróom-ñeent ci saraxu juróom-benn, mooy wax ci Room gu góor gi (Room gu xëytekat gi), te muy wone yoon wu ñetti jéego yi ci nànd gi Room gu xëytekat gi matale woon, te loolu doon misaal bu ñetti gox yu ñu war a nànd ngir Room gu paap bi tëdd ci gàngune suuf si, ni ko ñetti wér yu ñu buddi woon di wone ci saraxu juróom-ñaar gi. Ñaari nànd yu ñetti jéego yii, di yi Room gu xëytekat ak Room gu paap bi, dañoo doon wone ñetti tere yu goxu-yàlla yu Room gu tey ji, ci aayaat ñaar-fukk ak ñeent ba ñaar-fukk ak ñett ci Daniel fukk ak benn. Gannaaw loolu, ci saraxu juróom-benn, aayaat fukk ak benn, wér wu ndaw wu góor wi (Room gu xëytekat gi) dafa dellu ñu ko wone. Ci aayaat bi, xalaat wu sell wi dëgg na ba mat, ba tax nit ñi di ree te nguur Yerusalem, dañu war a dugal ay fen yu bare ci njàngum yàlla ngir tabax seen fondemaŋ bu nafek bi.
Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Daniel 8:11.
Waaw, mu yéekaat boppam ba tolloo ak kilifag mbooloom xarekat yi, te ci moom sarax su bes bi nekk dafa ñàkk, te barabam bu sell bi dañu ko daan. Daniel 8:11.
As we begin to address the counterfeit coins and jewels that have been introduced to Adventism since 1863, it should be noted that there are two primary fields of supposed theological expertise which Adventism boasts of, as their basis for upholding the doctrines of apostate Protestantism and Catholicism. The claim that the modern theologians of Adventism make is that they are either experts in biblical history, or experts in biblical languages. Their application of the verse, reveals the prophetic word has become as a sealed book unto them, and also reveals that their claim of being experts of the biblical languages is simply the modern manifestation of Pharisaism.
Bi nu tàmbalee di jébbalu saafara ak xonq yu fen yi ñu duggël ci Adventisme li dale ci atum 1863, war nañu seet ne am na ñaari wàll yu mag yu xalaat ne ñoom lañu xam-xam ci yoonal teoloji, te Adventisme di ci réy, ngir taxawal ci seen kaw njàngale yi Protestantisma bàkku ak Katolisisma. Li teolojiyen yu jamono jii ci Adventisme di wax mooy ne ñoom da ñuy ay xëtu ci taarixu Biibël, walla ay xëtu ci làkk yi Biibël bindoo. Ni ñuy jëfandikoo kàddu gi, dafay feeñal ne waxu yonent bi jëmm na ci ñoom mel ni téere buñ tëj, te itam dafay feeñal ne seen wax ne ñoom ay xëtu ci làkk yi Biibël mooy rekk feeñug Fariseyaan gi ci jamono jii.
First is the disregard of the oscillation of the genders for the little horn in verse nine through twelve. If they were actually experts in the Hebrew language, they would not deny, or water down, the fact that Daniel purposely employed gender oscillation in the verses. The little horn is represented in both genders, and those genders go back and forth through the verses. The theologians try to cover this fact with rubbish and counterfeit coins, for it clearly identifies that verse eleven is identifying pagan, not papal Rome. They of course insist that the little horn of verse eleven is the pope, when it is actually pagan Rome.
Njëkk ci mooy bañ a xalaat ci wërgu-yóbbute gi ci jëmm yi ngir bët bu ndaw bi nekk ci ayet ñeent-fukk ak juróom-ñent ba fukk ak ñaar. Suñu nekkon dëgg-dëgg ay xam-xamkat ci làkku Ebrë, duñu weddi, mbaa ñu yàq doole dëgg bi ne, Daniyel dafa jëfandikoo wërgu-yóbbute ci jëmm yi ak xalaat gu mat ci ayet yooyu. Bët bu ndaw bi dafa feeñ ci ñaari jëmm, te jëmm yooyu dañuy dellu gannaaw ak dëppoo ci biir ayet yi. Boroom teoloji yi dañuy jéema sutura dëgg boobu ak yëf yu ñaaw ak xaalis gu fen, ndaxte leral na ne ayet fukk ak benn mooy màndargaal Roomu pagaan, waaye du Roomu paapal. Ñoom nag, ba noppi, dañuy sax ci ne bët bu ndaw bu ayet fukk ak benn mooy paap bi, fekk moo di dëgg-dëgg Roomu pagaan.
Once it is acknowledged that two of the four little horn verses are male and two are female, then it is simple to incorporate the biblical truth that a woman in Bible prophecy represents a church, and a man represents a state. Knowing this allows all who wish to see, that the little horn of verse eleven, is masculine Rome (pagan Rome), not feminine Rome (papal Rome).
Buñ nanuñu ne ñaari kàddu yi ci ñeenti wax yu jëme ci tuuti bakk bi am nañu mbind mu góor, te ñaar yi des am nañu mbind mu jigéen, ba noppi dafa yomb a dugal ci biir loolu dëggu Biibël bi ne jigéen ci waxi yonent yi ci Biibël dafay tegtal kërceen, te góor dafay tegtal réew. Xam-xam boobu may na képp ku bëgg a gis, mu xam ne tuuti bakk bi ci aaya fukk ak benn bi, mooy Room bu góor (Room gu bokk ci ña tuumaal yàlla yi), waaye du Room bu jigéen (Room gu paapal gi).
The verse then is understood as teaching that pagan Rome (he) magnified himself to the prince of the host, as did pagan Rome when it placed the prince of the host upon the cross of Calvary. Not only did pagan Rome magnify itself against Christ at the cross, the verse goes on to say that by him (pagan Rome) “the daily sacrifice was taken away.”
Kon wii, dees bi dafa xam ne Room bu bokk ci xeet yu dul Yàlla (moom) yaatu na boppam ba jot ca Boroom mbooloom xarekat yi, ni Room bu bokk ci xeet yu dul Yàlla defee ko ba mu teg Boroom mbooloom xarekat yi ci bant ba ca Kalwaari. Du sax rekk ne Room bu bokk ci xeet yu dul Yàlla yaatu na boppam ci Kirist ca bant ba, waaye wii mi ngi yokk naan ci moom (Room bu bokk ci xeet yu dul Yàlla) lañu jële “sarax su bés bu nekk” ba tax mu nekkul.
In the book of Daniel there are two Hebrew words that are both translated as “take away.” The words are “sur” and “rum”. Both words are used in the sanctuary service. Sur means to take away or remove, and when the ashes from the altar in the sanctuary were removed, the word used to describe the removal of the ashes is “sur”. The word “rum” means to lift up and exalt, and when the priest in the sanctuary was to lift up a wave offering, he was to “rum” (lift up) the offering. In verse eleven, pagan Rome (“the daily”) would “rum” (take away) paganism by lifting up and exalting the religion of paganism.
Ci tééréb Danyeel am na ñaari baat yu Ebrë buñuy tekki ñoom ñaar ni “jàllale” mbaa “tekk ci wetu.” Baat yooyu mooy “sur” ak “rum”. Ñoom ñaar ñépp dañu leen jëfandikoo ci liggéeyu kër Yàlla ga. “Sur” dafay tekki dindi mbaa teqale, te biñuy dindi doxinu taalibe ba ci saraxaluka kër Yàlla ga, baat biñu jëfandikoo ngir melokaanu ndindig boobu mooy “sur”. Baat bi “rum” dafay tekki yékkati ak màggal, te bu saraxkat bi ci kër Yàlla ga wara yékkati saraxu yëngu-yëngu, dafa wara “rum” (yékkati) sarax ba. Ci aaya fukk ak benn, Room gu bokk ci ñi dul jaamu Yàlla (“bés bu nekk bi”) dina “rum” (“dindi”) jaamu tuur yi, ci li muy yékkati ak màggal diine ju bokk ci jaamu tuur yi.
Pagan Rome would lift up and exalt the religion of paganism. The Adventist theologians that profess an expertise of biblical languages choose to treat every occurrence of “take away” in the book of Daniel as “remove”. They fail to acknowledge the distinct and precise writing of Daniel, and thus place themselves above the prophet Daniel.
Room gu jaam buy yékkati te màggal diiney jaam buy. Teologiyen Adventist yi di wax ne ñoom am nañu xam-xam bu xóot ci làkk yi ci Biibël, tànn nañu di jëfandikoo “dindi” ngir bépp firiwu “take away” ci téereb Daniel. Ñoom nanguwuñu bindum Daniel mi beru te wóor, ba tax ñuy yékkati seen bopp mëna kaw yonent Daniel.
The theologians that profess to understand the biblical languages provide arguments to justify why Daniel intended to mean the same thing, when he employed two different words. They provide long and tedious word studies to uphold their false claims. The theologians that profess to understand biblical history, argue that the false application is based upon recognizing that in different periods of history the same word might mean something different, and therefore when Daniel employed two different words, only a historical expert can identify what Daniel actually meant. It is important to identify these two false methods for they are employed often by the theologians who seek to hide from the methodology of “line upon line.”
Boroom-kat yu wax ne xam làkk yi ci Biibël di joxe lay yu ñuy sàmmal ngir wone lu tax Dañeel bëgg a wax benn mbir bi, ba noppi mu jëfandikoo ñaari baat yu wuute. Ñuy def gëstu baat yu gudd te sonnal ngir dëggal seen wax ju dul dëgg. Boroom-kat yu wax ne xam taariixu Biibël, di werante ne jëfandikoo gu jubadi gi aju ci xam ne ci ay jamono yu wuute ci taariix, benn baat man naa am lu mu tekki yu wuute, te moo tax bu Dañeel jëfandikoo ñaari baat yu wuute, xamkat taariix rekk moo man a ràññee li Dañeel bëggoon a wax dëgg-dëgg. Am na solo ñu xamaar ñaari yoonu fen yii, ndaxte ñu leen di jëfandikoo yoon wu bari ci boroom-kat yi di sàkk a nëbbë seen bopp ci metodoloji bu “line upon line.”
Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Daniel 8:11.
Waaw, mu réy boppam ba ci Boroom njàmbaar yi; te jaare ko, saraxu saa su nekk gi ñu ko jële, te barabam bu sell bi ñu ko daane. Daniel 8:11.
The word translated as “taken away” in the verse means to “lift up and exalt”. It does not mean to remove. This fact creates confusion and contradiction for the Adventist theologians, for their premises do not hold up under a simple evaluation of the verse, when the actual definition of the word Daniel used is applied to the verse. They argue the little horn of the verse is papal Rome, and therefore the verse would read that “by him” (papal Rome) “the daily was taken away.”
Baati bi ñu tekki ni “jële nañu ko” ci kàddu gu nekk ci saraxale bi, tekki na ne “yëkkati ak màggal.” Du tekki ne dindi. Dëgg boobu moo waral na njaxlaf ak juuyoo ci biir yeneen xelkat yu Adventist, ndaxte seen ndombo yu njëkk yi maneesuñu taxaw ci jàngat bu yomb rekk bu ay tënk yi, bu ñu defe ci saraxale bi taxawaayu dëggu baat bi Daniel jëfandikoo. Ñoom da ñuy wax ne ndaw mi am bët mi ci saraxale bi mooy Room gu papal, te kon saraxale bi dafa war a jàngu ne “ci moom” (Room gu papal) “daily bi yëkkat nañu ko.”
They of course have no problem including the added word that Sister White states directly was added by human wisdom and does not apply to the text.
Ñoom la, am nañ benn jafe-jafe ci boole baat bu yokk bi, bi Rakk-ju-góor White waxee ci lu leer ne xelal nit moo ko yokk, te du ànd ak mbind mi.
“Then I saw in relation to the ‘daily’ (Daniel 8:12) that the word ‘sacrifice’ was supplied by man’s wisdom, and does not belong to the text, and that the Lord gave the correct view of it to those who gave the judgment hour cry.” Early Writings, 74.
«Noonu gis naa ne ci lu jëm ci “bés bu nekk” bi (Daniel 8:12) ne baat bi “sarax” xel nit moo ko yokk, te bokkul ci mbind mi, te Boroom bi moo jox gis-gis bu jub bi ci moom ñi yéglee xaaju waxtu àtte bi.» Early Writings, 74.
They identify “the daily” as Christ’s sanctuary ministry, so the “daily sacrifice” upholds the concept that “the daily” is Christ sacrificial work in the heavenly sanctuary. But inspiration identifies that the word “sacrifice” “does not belong to the text”.
Ñoom ñi diis nañu ne “bës bu nekk” mooy liggéeyu Kirist ci kër yu sell yi, ba tax “sarax su bës bu nekk” di taxawal xalaat bi ne “bës bu nekk” mooy jëfu saraxu Kirist ci kër yu sell yi ci asamaan. Waaye wax ju jóge ci yoonu xel mu sell mi tekki na ne baat bi “sarax” “bokkul ci mbind mi”.
When the drunkards of Ephraim identify “the daily” as Christ’s sanctuary work, the verse would then read, “by him” (papal Rome) “the daily was taken away,” or it would read, “by the papal power, Christ’s sanctuary ministry was taken away.” They actually teach this falsehood. They insist that through the darkness of the papal rule the true understanding of Christ’s sanctuary ministry was removed from the minds of men.
Bu ñi màndiikat Éfraayim jàpp ne “bés bu nekk bi” mooy liggéeyu Krist ci kër yu sell yi, kon kàddug wax ji dina jàng ne, “ci moom” (Room gu paapal gi) “dindi nañu bés bu nekk bi,” walla mu jàng ne, “ci dooley paapal bi, dindi nañu liggéeyu Krist ci këram yu sell yi.” Dañuy jàngal dëggadi boobu. Ñoom da ñuy sax ci wax ne jaarale ko ci lëndëmu nguurug paapal gi, xam-xamu dëgg ci liggéeyu Krist ci këram yu sell yi neex nañu ko ci xelu nit ñi.
Yet the word translated as “take away,” does not mean to remove, it means to lift up and exalt. If the professed experts of biblical languages would correctly apply the meaning of the Hebrew word “rum,” to the passage, their rendition would need to say, “by the papal power, Christ’s sanctuary ministry was lifted up and exalted.” When did the papacy ever lift up and exalt Christ?
Waaye baat bi ñuy tekki ne “jële” du tekki ne dindi, waaye dafay tekki yékkati ak màggal. Su ñi di wax ne ñoom a xam yeneeni làkki yi ci Biibël jëfandikoo bu baax solo bu baat bu Ebrë “rum” ci xët wi, seen tekkiin waroon na ne: “jaarale ko ci kàttanu baap, liggéeyu Kirist ci kër yu sell ya yékkatiku na te màggaliku na.” Kañ la baap ga mas a yékkati ak a màggal Kirist?
They seek to impose the definition of the Hebrew word “sur” upon the Hebrew word “rum.” Daniel uses the word “sur,” which means to remove, in connection with “the daily” in two other verses, but in verse eleven, Daniel chose the word “rum” meaning to lift up and exalt. Not only is the dish of fables concerning this verse foolishness because of the wresting of the meaning of the word translated as “take away,” but there was never a time when Christ’s sanctuary ministry was in any way removed from men.
Ñu ngi seet a teg tekkiinu baat bu Ebrë “sur” ci kaw baat bu Ebrë “rum.” Daniel jëfandikoo na baat bi “sur,” buy tekki dindi, ci njaxlaf ak “bu bés bi” ci ñaari aaya yu miiran, waaye ci aaya fukki ak benn bi, Daniel tànn na baat bi “rum” buy tekki yékkati ak màggal. Du li rekk ne mbind mi fees ak léeb yu fen ci aaya bii ndax dëggu baat bi ñu tekki ne “dindi” dañu ko jengal ba mu soppiku, waaye sax amul woon benn jamono bu liggéeyu Kirist ci bérabu sellam mën nañu koo dindi ci menn anam ci nit ñi.
But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. Hebrews 7:24, 25.
Waaye nit kii, ndaxte moom day sax ba fàww, am na sarxalkat gu dul soppiku. Moo tax man na it a musal ba ci mujj ñi ñëw ci Yàlla jaarale ko ci moom, ndaxte moom day dund ba fàww ngir di leen ñaanal. Héber 7:24, 25.
To claim, as the Adventist theologians do, in an attempt to prop up their false application of the verse, that there was a period of time when the papacy exercised some type of power to remove Christ’s sanctuary intercession is absurd!
Ngir wax ni, ni ñuy def ci yeneen teolojiyeer yu Adventist yi, ngir taxawal seen jëfandikoo bu dëggul bu aaya bii, ne amoon na ab waxtu bu papas bi jëfandikoo benn xeetu kàttan ngir dindi ràmmu santees bu Kirist ci kër-yàllaam, loolu lu yéeme la!
But the theologians do not teach that the verse identifies that the papacy lifted up and exalted Christ’s sanctuary ministry. They avoid the meaning of Daniel’s words, and the inspired counsel of Ellen White, to teach what they choose to teach in spite of the testimony of Daniel’s words.
Waaye boroom xam-xamu yàlla yi jàngale wuñu ne kàddug verset boobu mooy wone ne papee gi yékkati na te màggal liggéeyu Krist ci màkkanam bu sell bi. Ñoom dañuy dëddu tekki baat yi Daniyel wax, ak ndigalu Ellen White buy jóge ci xel mu ñu solal, ngir jàngale li ñoom tànn a jàngale, doonte seede baat yi Daniyel wax.
Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Daniel 8:11.
Waaw, mu réy boppam ba ci Boroom mbind mi, te ci moom lañu jële saraxu bis bu nekk bi, te barabam bu sell bañu ko daan. Daniel 8:11.
The theologians teach that the verse means “by the papal power, Christ’s sanctuary ministry was removed,” and the removal of Christ’s sanctuary ministry from the minds of men is supported by the fact that in association with the removal, the place of Christ’s “sanctuary was cast down.” There is not one verse in God’s Word that identifies the heavenly sanctuary, which is where Christ performs his intercession, has ever been cast down. Nor is there any biblical passage that identifies that heaven itself, which is the “place of his sanctuary”, is ever cast down. Once again, the theologians place themselves above the prophet Daniel, for they insist that “the place of his sanctuary” in the verse is referring to God’s sanctuary, in spite of the fact that Daniel teaches directly opposite of that idea.
Boroom xam-xamu yàlla yi di jàngale ne aaya bi tekki na ne “ci kàttanu pàppa bi, liggéeyu Kirist ci màggalu bérab bu sell biñ ko jële woon,” te neñu itam ne jëlew liggéeyu Kirist ci màggalu bérab bu sell bi ci xel yi nit ñi dëggal na ko lii: boolees na ko ak ne bérabu “santuwéeram” Kirist “daanu nañu ko.” Waaye amul benn aaya ci Kàddu Yàlla buy wax ne santuwéer bu asamaan bi, fa Kirist di def ay ñaanam ngir nit ñi, dafa mas a daanu. Nataal itam, amul benn làqumbi Mbind mi buy wax ne asamaan bi ci boppam, mi di “bérabu santuwéeram,” dafa mas a daanu. Benn yoonaatam, boroom xam-xamu yàlla yi yékkatiw nañu seen bopp ëpp yonent bi Danyeel, ndaxte dañuy sax ci ne “bérabu santuwéeram” ci aaya bi muy wax ci santuwéeru Yàlla, doonte li Danyeel jàngale ci yoon wu jub a ngaaree ak xalaat woowu.
The professed experts of the Hebrew language insist that in the verse the Hebrew word “rum,” needs to be understood with the meaning of the Hebrew word “sur.” They also insist that the Hebrew word “miqdash” needs to be understood as the Hebrew word “qodesh.” “Miqdash” and “qodash” are both translated simply as “sanctuary” in the book of Daniel, yet they have different meanings. “Miqdash” represents any sanctuary, whether it is God’s sanctuary or a pagan sanctuary. It is the general word for sanctuary, but “qodesh” is only used in the Bible to represent God’s sanctuary.
Ñi koykat yu wax ñi xam-xami làkk Ebre yi da ñu sax ci ne, ci benn kàddu boobu, baat bu Ebre bi “rum” war nañu koo degg ak tekkiinu baat bu Ebre bi “sur.” Itam da ñu sax ci ne, baat bu Ebre bi “miqdash” war nañu koo degg ni baat bu Ebre bi “qodesh.” “Miqdash” ak “qodash” ñépp dañu leen di tekki rekk ne “sàkkuwaay bu sell” ci téereb Daniel, waaye am nañu ay tekki yu wuute. “Miqdash” dafay teewlu bépp sàkkuwaay, muy kër Yàlla walla sàkkuwaayu ñaari yàlla yu fen; mooy baat bu yëpp ngir wax sàkkuwaay, waaye “qodesh” de, ci Biibël bi, ñu koy jëfandikoo rekk ngir teewlu kër Yàlla gu sell.
Daniel knew the difference between a pagan sanctuary and God’s sanctuary. If Daniel was going to identify a pagan sanctuary, he would use the word “miqdash.” It is amazing to me that the supposed experts of the Hebrew language never address the fact that in four consecutive verses, Daniel uses both words three times. Daniel’s usage of the two Hebrew words, both translated as “sanctuary” defines the meaning Daniel intended to be understood.
Danyeel xamoon na wuute bi nekk ci diggante kër yu sellu buy jamoo xeer ak kër gu sell gu Yàlla. Su fekkee ne Danyeel dafa nar a tudde ab kër gu sell gu ñuul-kat, dina jëfandikoo baat bi “miqdash.” Lu yéeme la ci man ne ñi ñuy wax ne ñoo xamkat yi ci làkku Ebraay, mënuñu sax a jàngat mbir mi ne ci ñeenti aaya yu toppante, Danyeel jëfandikoo na ñaari baat yi ñetti yoon. Njàngale ak jëfandikoo bu Danyeel def ci ñaari baat yu Ebraay yi, ñoom ñépp ñu leen tekki “kër gu sell,” moo tax nu xam maana wi Danyeel bëggoon ñu degg te xam ko.
Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered. Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Daniel 8:11–14.
Waaw, mu yékkati boppam ba ci Boroom gàngoor ga, te jëlal na ko sarax su bés bu nekk, te barabam bu sell bi dafa tasaaru. Te jébbalees na ko mbooloo ci kaw sarax su bés bu nekk ngir moytou bàkkaar; te dafa sànni dëgg bi suuf, te dafa jëfandikoo kàttanam, ba am ndam. Noonu ma dégg benn aji-sell muy wax, te beneen aji-sell ne aji-sell boobu waxoon na ko: “Ba kañ la gis-gis bii di jot, ci mbirum sarax su bés bu nekk ak moytou yàqug gi, ngir jox sell mi ak mbooloo mi ñu tacc ci suuf?” Te mu ne ma: “Ba ci ñaari junni ak ñetti téeméeri fan; noonu lañuy setal kër gu sell gi.” Daniel 8:11–14.
In the very passage that includes the foundation of Adventism, Daniel employs two different Hebrew words that are both translated as “sanctuary.” In verses thirteen and fourteen Daniel chose to use the Hebrew word for “sanctuary,” that is only used biblically to identify God’s sanctuary, but in verse eleven, Daniel used the general or generic Hebrew word that can be God’s sanctuary, or it can be a pagan sanctuary.
Ci bopp bi sax bi ëmb sas bu Adventism, Daniel jëfandikoo ñaari baat yu hebreu yu wuute te ñépp ñu di leen tekki ni “barab bu sell bi.” Ci ay sarax 13 ak 14, Daniel tànn na jëfandikoo baatu hebreu buy wax “barab bu sell bi,” bi Mbind mi di jëfandikoo rekk ngir màggal barab bu sell bi Yàlla; waaye ci sarax 11, Daniel jëfandikoo na baatu hebreu bu yaatu walla bu réy-doole, bu man a doon barab bu sell bi Yàlla, mbaa mu doon itam barab bu sell bu ñu bokkale ak xëtu-réew yu dëkk ci càkkuteef.
If Daniel had wanted to identify the “sanctuary” in verse eleven, as God’s sanctuary, he would have used the same Hebrew word that he used twice within the next three verses. It is absolutely clear that Daniel was making a distinction between a pagan sanctuary in verse eleven, and God’s sanctuary in verses thirteen and fourteen! But the drunkards of Ephraim argue that the “place of his sanctuary” that was “cast down,” in verse eleven, was the place of God’s sanctuary, though they avoid the word “place.”
Bu Dañeel bëggoon na won “bërab bu sell bi” ci sarax bu fukk ak benn ne mooy bërab bu sellu Yàlla, kon dafa waroon jëfandikoo benn baat bu hebre bi mu jëfandikoo ñaari yoon ci ñetti sarax yi topp. Loolu leer na ba noppi ne Dañeel dafa doon sàkkale wuute diggante ab bërab bu sellu ñaawteef ci sarax bu fukk ak benn, ak bërab bu sellu Yàlla ci sarax yi fukk ak ñett ak fukk ak ñeent! Waaye màndarga yi Efrayim di wax ne “bérab bu sellam” bi “ñu daaneel,” ci sarax bu fukk ak benn, mooy bérab bu sellu Yàlla, doonte ñuy moytu baat bi di “bérab.”
They teach that the papacy took away Christ’s ministry of intercession and cast down the truth of the heavenly sanctuary. But Daniel was clear that the “sanctuary” in verse eleven, was not God’s sanctuary, but a pagan sanctuary. Daniel was just as clear that it was not the “sanctuary” that was cast down, but “the place” of his sanctuary.
Ñuy jàngale ne baat ne nguurug pap bi dindi na liggéeyu Krist ci ñaanal ngir nit ñi, te daane na dëggu kër-yàllaaju asamaan bi. Waaye Danyeel leer na bu baax ne “kër-yàllaaj” bi ci sarax 11, du woon kër-yàllaaju Yàlla, waaye ab kër-yàllaaju xët-wër. Danyeel noonu itam leer na ne du woon “kër-yàllaaj” bi la daane, waaye “bérab” bu kër-yàllaajam.
Refusing to acknowledge the purposeful gender oscillation of verses nine through twelve, the modern theologians adopted the definition of “the daily” that originated within apostate Protestantism, and began to construct a foundation upon the sand of human conjecture, tradition and custom. When they arrive at verse eleven, they even reject the inspired counsel of Sister White that identified that Miller’s understanding of “the daily” as paganism was correct, and begin to employ the art of misdirection and conjecture to defend their love of Catholic and Protestant theology.
Bàyyikatul yoon ñent ba fukk ak ñaar yi ci ay saar bi, te bañ a nangu ne toggalin jigeen ak góor gi am na jëf ju war a am, teologi yu bees yi jël nañu tekki “lu bes ba nekk” bi, bi tàmbalee ci Protestanti yu seedeel seen bopp, te ñu tàmbali di sampu ab ndëgëm ci suuf su tàbbiwul, ci xelub nit, àddina ak aada. Bi ñuy agsi ci saar fukk ak benn, sax dañuy weddi ndigal lu xel mu Sell mi joxoon ci Sister White, bi misee ne xam-xam bu Miller ci ne “lu bes ba nekk” mooy ngëneel, dafa jub; te ñu tàmbali di jëfandikoo pexe mu yóbbul xel ak xalaat yu nit ngir aar seen bëgg-bëgg ci teoloji Katolig ak Protestanti.
They change pagan Rome into papal Rome in the verse, and they force the definition of “remove” upon the word that means “lift up and exalt”. They define the satanic symbol of “the daily”, as a godly symbol, and then insist that a pagan temple is God’s temple, while avoiding the direct reference to “the place” of the sanctuary. And the “unlearned” (as Isaiah identifies them), who will only understand if the “learned” tell them it is so, accept the dish of fables unto their own destruction.
Ñuy soppi Room gu bokk ci ay jaamkat yu dul Yàlla, dañuy ko soppi muy Room gu paapal ci benn sarax ci Mbind mi, te dañuy jëfandikoo ci kàddu ga tekki “dindi” benn melokaan bu ñu dëgërël ci baat bi mu tekki “yékkati te màggal”. Dañuy firndeel màndarga Seytaane bi ñuy wax “bés bu nekk bi” ne màndarga Yàlla la, te gannaaw loolu dañuy tënk ne kër yàllay xeer bu jaamkat yu dul Yàlla mooy kër Yàlla, fekk dañuy moytu wax bu jub ci “barab” bu kër-gu-sell gi. Te “ñi amul njàngum xam-xam” yi (ni Isaaya leen tudde), ñiy man a xam rek su “ñi jang te xam” waxee ne noonu la, dañuy nangu ndab bu léeb ak léebu ngir seen bopp rekk a sànku.
We will continue our consideration of the increase of the knowledge represented as the jewels in Miller’s dream in the next article.
Dina yokk sunu xalaat ci yokkute xam-xam, mi ñu melal ni ay jawhar ci géntu Miller, ci bataaxal bi ci topp.
“The apostle Paul warns us that ‘some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.’ This is what we may expect. Our greatest trials will come because of that class who have once advocated the truth, but who turn from it to the world, and trample it under their feet in hate and derision. God has a work for his faithful servants to do. The attacks of the enemy must be met with the truth of his word. Falsehood must be unmasked, its true character must be revealed, and the light of the law of Jehovah must shine forth into the moral darkness of the world. We are to present the claims of his word. We shall not be held guiltless if we neglect this solemn duty. But while we stand in defense of the truth, let us not stand in defense of self, and make a great ado because we are called to bear reproach and misrepresentation. Let us not pity ourselves, but be very jealous for the law of the Most High.
“Ndaw Pool moo nu artu ne: ‘ñenn dinañu bàyyi ngëm gi, di déglu rab yu nax ak njàngalem seytaane yi.’ Loolu mooy li nu mën a seentu. Nattu yi gën a tar ci sunu kaw dinañu joge ci ñoom ñi jëkk a doon waare dëgg gi, waaye ñu dëddoo ak moom ba dellu addina, te di ko xas ci seen tànk ak bañ ak reetaan. Yàlla am na liggéey bu mu teg ay jaamam yu takku ñi. Fàtteb noon bi war nañu ko daje ak dëggug kàddoom. Fen war nañu ko wéral, fàww seetam dëgg feeñ, te leeru yoonu Yexowa war na leer ci biir lëndëmu àddina ci wàllu jikko. War nañu wone ay daanug kàddoom. Duñu mucc ci tooñ su nu gàntalee wareef bu tedd bii. Waaye bi nuy taxaw ngir aar dëgg gi, bu nu taxaw ngir aar sunu bopp, te di def jafe-jafe yu bare ndax dees na nu woo ngir yeb ci sunu kaw xas ak wax ju jubadiwul. Bu nu yërëm sunu bopp, waaye na nu wone kaaraange gu tar ngir yoonu Kawe Kawe ji.”
“Says the apostle, ‘The time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.’ On every side we see men easily led captive by the delusive imaginations of those who make void the word of God; but when the truth is brought before them, they are filled with impatience and anger. But the exhortation of the apostle to the servant of God is, ‘Watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.’ In his day some left the cause of the Lord. He writes, ‘Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world;’ and again, he says, ‘Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works: of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words.’
“Ndi ndawul bi nee na: ‘Jamono ji dina ñëw bu ñu dul muñ njàng mu wér; waaye ci seen bopp bëgg-bëgg lañuy dajale jàngalekat yu bari ngir seen bopp, ndax da ñuy daw saytu yu neex; te dinañu dëddu seen nopp ci dëgg, ba jublu ci léebu.’ Fu ne nu xool, gis nanu nit ñuy yomb a nekk jaam ci xel yu réer yu ñi di yàq Kàddug Yàlla di leen jëriñ; waaye bu ñu leen indilee dëgg, dañuy fees ak muñadi ak mer. Waaye ndigal li ndawul bi jox jaamub Yàlla mooy: ‘Yaw nag, xoolal ci bépp mbir, muñal tiis yi, def liggéeyu waarekat xebaar bu baax bi, matal sa liggéeyu ndawul.’ Ci jamonoom, am na ñu bàyyi woon mbiru Boroom bi. Mu bind ne: ‘Demas bàyyi na ma, ndaxte sopp na addina sii fi nekk;’ te dellu ne: ‘Aleksàndar, suulëerkat ba, def na ma lu bon lool; na Boroom bi fey ko ni ay jëfam; moytu ko itam, ndaxte dafa taxaw lool di weddi sunuy wax.’”
“Prophets and apostles experienced similar trials of opposition and reproach, and even the spotless Lamb of God was tempted in all points like as we are. He bore the contradiction of sinners against himself.
“Yonent ak ndaw yi dañu jànkoonte woon ak nattu yu mel ni dañuy xeex ak seen topptoo; te sax Mbiir mu sell mi Yàlla, mi amul benn sikk, nattu nañu ko ci lépp, ni ñu nattu nun. Mu muñ na weddi gu jóge ci bàkkaarkat yi, ci boppam.”
“Every warning for this time must be faithfully delivered; but ‘the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient; in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves.’ We must cherish carefully the words of our God lest we be contaminated by the deceptive workings of those who have left the faith. We are to resist their spirit and influence with the same weapon our Master used when assailed by the prince of darkness,—‘It is written.’ We should learn to use the word of God skillfully. The exhortation is, ‘Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.’ There must be diligent work and earnest prayer and faith to meet the winding error of false teachers and seducers; for ‘in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.’ These words portray the character of the men the servants of God will have to meet. ‘False accusers,’ ‘despisers of those that are good,’ will attack those who are faithful to their God in this degenerate age. But the embassador of Heaven must manifest the spirit that was displayed in the Master. In humility and love he must labor for the salvation of men.
“Bépp waxtu bii, war nañu jottali ko ak kóllëre; waaye ‘jaamub Boroom bi warul xulóo, waaye na lewet ci nit ñépp, xamloo, muñ; di jàngale ak lewet ñi di bëgg a weddi bopp seen bopp.’ War nañu sàmm bu baax kàdduy Yàlla sunu Boroom ngir bañ a gàqoo ak liggéeyu naxtey ñi bàyyi ngëm gi. War nañu dëgër ci seen xel ak seen dooley jëfandikoo benn ngànnaay gi sunu Sang bi jëfandikoo bi ko buuru lëndëm tëjjee, mooy: ‘Bind na ko.’ War nañu jàng a jëfandikoo Kàddug Yàlla ak xereñ. Ndigal li mooy: ‘Takku ngir feeñ ci kanam Yàlla ne ku mu nangu, liggéeykat bu warul rus, di rëccoo Kàddug dëgg gi bu jub.’ War na am liggéey bu saytu ak ñaan gu dëgër ak ngëm ngir jëkkëre njuumte mu xareel mi jàngalekat yu dul dëgg ak naxkat yi; ndaxte ‘ci fan yu mujj yi, ay waxtu yu metti dinañu ñëw. Ndax nit ñi dinañu bëgg seen bopp, bëgg xaalis, di réy seen bopp, di màggal seen bopp, di saaga, di moytu déglu waajur, di amul ngërëm, di bañ a sell; di amul mbëggeel gu cosaan, di bañ a dëggal kàddu, di jiiñ nit ak fen, di moytu tëggaat seen bopp, di doyadi, di bañ ñi baax, di wor seen moroom, di gaw a def lu fees, di màggal seen xel, di gën a bëgg bànneex yu àddina ju gën a bëgg Yàlla; di yor melow ragal Yàlla, waaye di weddi dooleem: soreel sa bopp ak noonu.’ Kàddu yii dafa nataal jikkoj nit ñi surga yi Yàlla war a dajeek. ‘Ñiy jiiñ nit ak fen,’ ‘ñiy bañ ñi baax,’ dinañu song ñi takku ci seen Yàlla ci jamono jii ju yàqu. Waaye ndawsi Asamaan bi war na wone xel mi nekkoon ci Boroom bi. Ci suufeel ak mbëggeel war na liggéey ngir muccug nit ñi.”
“Paul continues concerning those who oppose the work of God, comparing them to the men who made war against the faithful in the time of ancient Israel. He says: ‘Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth; men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.’ We know that the time is coming when the folly of warring against God will be revealed. We can afford to wait in calm patience and trust, no matter how much maligned and despised; for ‘nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest,’ and those who honor God shall be honored by him in the presence of men and angels. We are to share in the sufferings of the reformers. It is written, ‘The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me.’ Christ understands our grief. Not one of us is called to bear the cross alone. The suffering Man of Calvary is touched with the feeling of our woes, and as he has suffered being tempted, he is able also to succor them that are in sorrow and trial for his sake. ‘Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned.’” Review and Herald, January 10, 1888.
“Pool moo taxawal ci ñi di weddi liggéeyu Yàlla, te mu mengoo leen ak góor ña ñoo xeexoon ñi takku woon ci jamonoy Israayil gu yàgg ga. Mu ne: ‘Léegi ni Yànees ak Yaamberes jànkoontewoon ak Muusaa, noonu lañuy itam weddi dëgg; ay nit ñu yàqute xel, te ñu ñàkk njariñ ci mbëggeelug ngëm. Waaye duñu yokk dara; ndax seeni ndof dina feeñ ci kanam nit ñépp, ni seen bi itam feeñoon.’ Xam nanu ne waxtu wi ngi ñëw, bi ndofug xeex ak Yàlla di feeñ. Man nanu muñ ci dal ak muñu xol ak wóor, luñu man a rëbbe walla xeeb ci sunu kaw; ndaxte ‘amul dara lu nëbbu, bu dul feeñ,’ te ñi teral Yàlla, mooy leen teral ci kanam nit ñi ak malaaka yi. War nanu bokk ci coonoy ñi yégle woon coppite. Bind nañu ne: ‘Yéefeer yi ñu la yéefeer, dal nañu ma.’ Almasi bi xam na sunuy metit. Benn ci nun wooñu ko ngir yëngu bant ba moom keppam. Góor gu sonn bi Kalfari dafa yëg sunuy tiis, te gannaaw moo sonn ci nattu, man na itam dimbali ñi nekk ci naqari xol ak nattu ndax moom. ‘Waaw, ñépp ñi bëgg a dund ci ragal Yàlla ci Kirist Yeesu, dees na leen fitnaal. Waaye nit ñaaw yi ak naxarkat yi dinañu gëna bon ba gëna bon, di nax te ñu di naxanteel. Waaye yaw saxal ci li nga jàng te nangoo ko.’” Review and Herald, 10 Samwiye 1888.