In Daniel chapter eight, Daniel is given a vision of the kingdoms of Bible prophecy, and thereafter he hears a heavenly dialogue represented by a question and an answer.
Nínú orí kẹjọ ìwé Dáníẹ́lì, a fi ìran kan fún Dáníẹ́lì nípa àwọn ìjọba inú àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ Bíbélì, lẹ́yìn èyí sì ni ó gbọ́ ìjíròrò ọ̀run kan tí a ṣàfihàn nípa ìbéèrè kan àti ìdáhùn kan.
Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Daniel 8:13, 14.
Lẹ́yìn náà, mo sì gbọ́ ẹni mímọ́ kan ń sọ̀rọ̀, ẹni mímọ́ mìíràn sì wí fún ẹni mímọ́ kan náà tí ń sọ̀rọ̀ pé, Yóò ti pẹ́ tó fún ìran náà nípa ẹbọ ìgbà gbogbo, àti ìrékọjá ìdahoro, láti fi ibi mímọ́ àti ogun náà jọ fún ìtẹ̀ mọ́lẹ̀? Ó sì wí fún mi pé, Títí di ẹgbẹ̀rún méjì àti ọ̀ọ́dúnrún ọjọ́; nígbà náà ni a óò wẹ ibi mímọ́ náà mọ́. Danieli 8:13, 14.
The first twelve verses represent the vision, and verses thirteen and fourteen identify another vision. As with the two different Hebrew words that are both translated as “take away,” and the two different Hebrew words that are both translated as “sanctuary,” in Daniel chapter eight there are also two different Hebrew words, that are both translated as “vision.”
Àwọn ẹsẹ̀ méjìlá àkọ́kọ́ ṣàfihàn ìran náà, àti pé ẹsẹ̀ kẹtàlá àti ẹ̀kẹrìnlá sọ ìran mìíràn di mímọ̀. Gẹ́gẹ́ bí ó ti rí pẹ̀lú ọ̀rọ̀ Heberu méjì ọ̀tọ̀ọ̀tọ̀ tí a túmọ̀ gbogbo wọn sí “kó kúrò,” àti ọ̀rọ̀ Heberu méjì ọ̀tọ̀ọ̀tọ̀ tí a túmọ̀ gbogbo wọn sí “ibi mímọ́,” nínú Danieli orí kẹjọ, bẹ́ẹ̀ náà ni àwọn ọ̀rọ̀ Heberu méjì ọ̀tọ̀ọ̀tọ̀ wà tí a túmọ̀ gbogbo wọn sí “ìran.”
When it comes to the two words translated as “take away,” the theologians of Adventism argue that the words should both be understood to mean “remove.” When it comes to the two words translated as “sanctuary,” the theologians of Adventism argue that the words should both be understood to mean “God’s sanctuary”, and when it comes to the two words translated as “vision,” the theologians of Adventism, once again, gloss over the distinctions between the two words. The distinction was important enough to Daniel, that he purposely used two very different Hebrew words, so we should identify and uphold the distinction. The word “vision,” in verse thirteen is the Hebrew word “chazon,” and it means a dream, revelation, or oracle—a vision.
Ní ti ọ̀ràn àwọn ọ̀rọ̀ méjì tí a túmọ̀ sí “gbé kúrò,” àwọn onímọ̀ ẹ̀sìn Adventism ń jiyàn pé ó yẹ kí a lóye àwọn ọ̀rọ̀ náà méjèèjì gẹ́gẹ́ bí “yọ kúrò.” Ní ti ọ̀ràn àwọn ọ̀rọ̀ méjì tí a túmọ̀ sí “ibi mímọ́,” àwọn onímọ̀ ẹ̀sìn Adventism ń jiyàn pé ó yẹ kí a lóye àwọn ọ̀rọ̀ náà méjèèjì gẹ́gẹ́ bí “ibi mímọ́ Ọlọ́run,” àti ní ti ọ̀ràn àwọn ọ̀rọ̀ méjì tí a túmọ̀ sí “ìran,” àwọn onímọ̀ ẹ̀sìn Adventism, lẹ́ẹ̀kan sí i, ń bojú kọ àwọn ìyàtọ̀ tó wà láàárín àwọn ọ̀rọ̀ méjèèjì. Ìyàtọ̀ náà ṣe pàtàkì tó bẹ́ẹ̀ fún Dáníẹ́lì, tí ó fi mọ̀ọ́mọ̀ lo àwọn ọ̀rọ̀ Hébérù méjì tí wọ́n yàtọ̀ pátápátá, nítorí náà ó yẹ kí a mọ ìyàtọ̀ náà kí a sì pa á mọ́. Ọ̀rọ̀ náà “ìran,” nínú ẹsẹ̀ kẹtàlá, ni ọ̀rọ̀ Hébérù “chazon,” ó sì túmọ̀ sí àlá, ìfihàn, tàbí ọ̀rọ̀ àsọtẹ́lẹ̀—ìran kan.
The word “vision,” occurs ten times in Daniel chapter eight, but it represents two different Hebrew words. “Chazon,” that is located in verse thirteen, is also found in verse one, then twice in verse two, of course verse thirteen, and one time in verses fifteen, seventeen and twenty-six. Seven of the ten times the word “vision” occurs in Daniel chapter eight, it is the word “chazon,” simply meaning “a vision”.
Ọ̀rọ̀ náà “ìran,” farahàn ní ìgbà mẹ́wàá nínú Dáníẹ́lì orí kẹjọ, ṣùgbọ́n ó dúró fún ọ̀rọ̀ Hébérù méjì ọ̀tọ̀ọ̀tọ̀. “Chazon,” tí ó wà ní ẹsẹ̀ kẹtàlá, ni a tún rí ní ẹsẹ̀ kìíní, lẹ́yìn náà lẹ́ẹ̀mejì ní ẹsẹ̀ kejì, dájúdájú ní ẹsẹ̀ kẹtàlá, àti lẹ́ẹ̀kan ní ẹsẹ̀ kẹẹ̀ẹ́dógún, kẹtàdínlógún àti kẹrìnlélógún. Ní ìgbà méje nínú ìgbà mẹ́wàá tí ọ̀rọ̀ náà “ìran” ti farahàn nínú Dáníẹ́lì orí kẹjọ, ọ̀rọ̀ náà ni “chazon,” èyí tí ó túmọ̀ lásán sí “ìran kan”.
The other three times the word “vision” occurs in Daniel chapter eight, it is the Hebrew word “mareh,” meaning a view; or an appearance. In chapter eight, the Hebrew word “mareh,” is also translated one time not as “vision,” but as “appearance,” thus identifying more perfectly the meaning of the word. Why did Daniel use two different Hebrew words, that are so close in meaning that the translators would treat them as the same word? Does it matter?
Ní àwọn ìgbà mẹ́ta yòókù tí ọ̀rọ̀ náà “ìran” ti hàn nínú orí kẹjọ ìwé Dáníẹ́lì, ọ̀rọ̀ Hébérù náà ni “mareh,” tí ó túmọ̀ sí ìwòye; tàbí ìfarahàn. Nínú orí kẹjọ, ọ̀rọ̀ Hébérù náà “mareh,” ni a tún túmọ̀ ní ìgbà kan kì í ṣe gẹ́gẹ́ bí “ìran,” ṣùgbọ́n gẹ́gẹ́ bí “ìfarahàn,” báyìí ni ó ṣe túmọ̀ ọ̀rọ̀ náà ní ọ̀nà tí ó péye síi. Kí ló dé tí Dáníẹ́lì fi lo ọ̀rọ̀ Hébérù méjì ọ̀tọ̀ọ̀tọ̀, tí wọ́n sún mọ́ ara wọn ní ìtumọ̀ tó bẹ́ẹ̀ gẹ́gẹ́ bíi pé àwọn atúmọ̀ èdè yóò ka wọ́n sí ọ̀rọ̀ kan náà? Ṣé ó ṣe pàtàkì?
“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.
“Gbogbo ìlànà nínú ọ̀rọ̀ Ọlọ́run ní ipò tirẹ̀, gbogbo òtítọ́ sì ní ìtumọ̀ àti ìbáṣepọ̀ rẹ̀. Àti pé gbogbo àkópọ̀ ẹ̀yà rẹ̀ pátápátá, nínú ètò àti ìmúṣẹ rẹ̀, ń jẹ́rìí sí Ẹlẹ́dàá rẹ̀. Irú àkópọ̀ bẹ́ẹ̀, kò sí ọgbọ́n kankan bí kò ṣe ti Aláìlópin tí ó lè gbé e yẹ̀ wò tàbí dá a ṣe.” Education, 123.
The answer to the second question is Yes, that it really does matter why Daniel made the distinction, so it therefore becomes the responsibility of the student of prophecy to seek to understand the first question, which asks why Daniel made the distinction. The distinctions he made concerning the word translated as “sanctuary,” and the word translated as “take away,” have eternal consequences, so why would anyone expect less of an importance with the word translated as “vision?” “Every fact” has “its bearing” “in the word of God,” and impacts the prophetic “structure,” and the fulfillment of the prophecy when it is “executed.”
Ìdáhùn sí ìbéèrè kejì ni Bẹ́ẹ̀ni, pé ó ṣe pàtàkì gan-an ìdí tí Dáníẹ́lì fi ṣe ìyàtọ̀ náà; nítorí náà ó di ojúṣe akẹ́kọ̀ọ́ àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ láti wá láti lóye ìbéèrè àkọ́kọ́, èyí tí ń béèrè ìdí tí Dáníẹ́lì fi ṣe ìyàtọ̀ náà. Àwọn ìyàtọ̀ tí ó ṣe nípa ọ̀rọ̀ tí a túmọ̀ sí “ibi-mímọ́,” àti ọ̀rọ̀ tí a túmọ̀ sí “mú kúrò,” ní àbájáde ayérayé; nítorí náà, kí ló dé tí ẹnikẹ́ni yóò fi retí pé ọ̀rọ̀ tí a túmọ̀ sí “ìran” yóò ṣe kéré sí i ní pàtàkì? “Gbogbo òtítọ́” ní “ìbáṣepọ̀ tirẹ̀” “nínú ọ̀rọ̀ Ọlọ́run,” ó sì ń ní ipa lórí “ètò ìṣètò” àsọtẹ́lẹ̀, àti ìmúṣẹ àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà nígbà tí a bá “ṣe é.”
As we begin to consider the word “vision,” in chapter eight, a “fact” that has “bearing” on Daniel’s testimony, is who it was that answered the question of Daniel eight, verse thirteen with, “Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.”
Bí a ṣe ń bẹ̀rẹ̀ sí í ronú lórí ọ̀rọ̀ náà “ìran,” nínú orí kẹjọ, “òtítọ́” kan tí ó ní “ìfarahàn” sí ẹ̀rí Dáníẹ́lì ni ẹni tí ó dáhùn ìbéèrè tó wà nínú Dáníẹ́lì orí kẹjọ, ẹsẹ̀ kẹtàlá pé, “Títí yóò fi di ẹgbẹ̀rún méjì ọ̀ọ́dúnrún mẹ́ta; lẹ́yìn náà ni a óò wẹ ibi mímọ́ náà.”
There are four facts that have a direct “bearing” upon Daniel chapter eight, which I intend to address. One is that the vision of the Ulai River has been identified as a prophecy for the last days, and it is also the symbol of the “knowledge” of the book of Daniel which was “unsealed” at the “time of the end” in 1798.
Àwọn òtítọ́ mẹ́rin wà tí wọ́n ní “ìnípò taara” lórí Dáníẹ́lì orí kẹjọ, èyí tí mo ní ète láti sọ̀rọ̀ rẹ̀. Ọ̀kan ni pé, a ti dá ìran Odò Ulai mọ̀ gẹ́gẹ́ bí àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ fún àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn, ó sì tún jẹ́ ààmì “ìmọ̀” ìwé Dáníẹ́lì tí a “ṣí i” ní “àkókò òpin” ní ọdún 1798.
“There is need of a much closer study of the Word of God. Especially should Daniel and the Revelation have attention as never before in the history of our work. We may have less to say in some lines, in regard to the Roman power and the papacy, but we should call attention to what the prophets and the apostles have written under the inspiration of the Spirit of God. The Holy Spirit has so shaped matters, both in the giving of the prophecy, and in the events portrayed, as to teach that the human agent is to be kept out of sight, hid in Christ, and the Lord God of heaven and His law are to be exalted.
“Ó ṣe pàtàkì kí a máa kẹ́kọ̀ọ́ Ọ̀rọ̀ Ọlọ́run pẹ̀lú ìfarabalẹ̀ tímọ́tímọ́ jù bẹ́ẹ̀ lọ. Ní pàtàkì, a gbọ́dọ̀ fi àkíyèsí sí Dáníẹ́lì àti Ìfihàn bí a kò tíì ṣe rí rí rí nínú ìtàn iṣẹ́ wa. Ó lè jẹ́ pé a ó ní díẹ̀ láti sọ ní àwọn ọ̀nà kan ní ti agbára Róòmù àti ti ipò póòpù, ṣùgbọ́n a gbọ́dọ̀ pe àkíyèsí sí ohun tí àwọn wòlíì àti àwọn àpọ́sítélì ti kọ lábẹ́ ìmísí Ẹ̀mí Ọlọ́run. Ẹ̀mí Mímọ́ ti ṣètò ọ̀ràn báyìí, nínú fífi àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà hàn, àti nínú àwọn ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀ tí a ṣàpèjúwe, láti kọ́ni pé a gbọ́dọ̀ mú kí aṣojú ènìyàn wà ní àìfarahàn, kí a fi í pamọ́ nínú Kristi, kí a sì gbé Olúwa Ọlọ́run ọ̀run àti òfin Rẹ̀ ga.
“Read the book of Daniel. Call up, point by point, the history of the kingdoms there represented. Behold statesmen, councils, powerful armies, and see how God wrought to abase the pride of men, and lay human glory in the dust. God alone is represented as great. In the vision of the prophet He is seen casting down one mighty ruler and setting up another. He is revealed as the monarch of the universe, about to set up His everlasting kingdom—the Ancient of days, the living God, the Source of all wisdom, the Ruler of the present, the Revealer of the future. Read and understand how poor, how frail, how short-lived, how erring, how guilty, is man in lifting up his soul unto vanity.
“Kà ìwé Dáníẹ́lì. Pe ìtàn àwọn ìjọba tí a ṣojú fún níbẹ̀ wá sí ìrántí, ní kókó lẹ́yìn kókó. Wo àwọn òṣèlú, àwọn ìgbìmọ̀, àwọn ọmọ-ogun alágbára, kí o sì rí bí Ọlọ́run ṣe ṣiṣẹ́ láti rẹ ìgbéraga ènìyàn sílẹ̀, kí ó sì da ògo ènìyàn sínú erùpẹ̀. Ọlọ́run nìkan ni a ṣojú gẹ́gẹ́ bí ẹni ńlá. Nínú ìran wòlíì ni a ti rí i tí ó ń ju ọba alágbára kan lulẹ̀, tí ó sì ń gbé òmíràn dìde. A fihàn án gẹ́gẹ́ bí Ọba ayé àti ọ̀run, ẹni tí ó fẹ́ dá ìjọba Rẹ̀ tí kì yóò láéláé sílẹ̀—Àgbàjọ Ọjọ́, Ọlọ́run alààyè, Orísun gbogbo ọgbọ́n, Alákóso ìsinsin yìí, Olùfihàn ọjọ́ iwájú. Kà á, kí o sì lóye bí ènìyàn ṣe jẹ́ tálákà, aláìlera, aláìpẹ́, aláṣìṣe, ẹlẹ́bi púpọ̀, nígbà tí ó ń gbé ọkàn rẹ̀ sókè sí asán.”
“The Holy Spirit through Isaiah points us to God, the living God, as the chief object of attention—to God as revealed in Christ. ‘Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon His shoulder: and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace’ [Isaiah 9:6].
“Ẹ̀mí Mímọ́ nípasẹ̀ Isaiah ń tọ́ka wa sí Ọlọ́run, Ọlọ́run alààyè, gẹ́gẹ́ bí ohun àkọ́kọ́ tí a gbọ́dọ̀ fi àkíyèsí sí—sí Ọlọ́run gẹ́gẹ́ bí a ti fi hàn nínú Kristi. ‘Nítorí a bí ọmọ kan fún wa, a sì fi ọmọkùnrin kan fún wa: ìjọba yóò sì wà lórí èjìká Rẹ̀: a ó sì máa pè orúkọ Rẹ̀ ní Alágbàyanu, Olùgbìmọ̀ràn, Ọlọ́run Alágbára, Bàbá Ayérayé, Ọba Àlàáfíà’ [Isaiah 9:6].”
“The light that Daniel received direct from God was given especially for these last days. The visions he saw by the banks of the Ulai and the Hiddekel, the great rivers of Shinar, are now in process of fulfillment, and all the events foretold will soon have come to pass.
“Ìmólè tí Dáníẹ́lì gbà tààrà láti ọ̀dọ̀ Ọlọ́run ni a fi fún un ní pàtàkì fún àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn wọ̀nyí. Àwọn ìran tí ó rí létí odò Ulai àti Hiddekel, àwọn odò ńlá ti Ṣina, ti bẹ̀rẹ̀ sí í mú ṣẹ, àti pé gbogbo ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀ tí a ti sọ tẹ́lẹ̀ yóò ṣẹ ní kíákíá.
“Consider the circumstances of the Jewish nation when the prophecies of Daniel were given. The Israelites were in captivity, their temple had been destroyed, their temple service suspended. Their religion had centered in the ceremonies of the sacrificial system. They had made the outward forms all-important, while they had lost the spirit of true worship. Their services were corrupted with the traditions and practices of heathenism, and in the performance of the sacrificial rites they did not look beyond the shadow to the substance. They did not discern Christ, the true offering for the sins of men. The Lord wrought to bring the people into captivity, and to suspend the services in the temple, in order that the outward ceremonies might not become the sum total of their religion. Their principles and practices must be purged from heathenism. The ritual service ceased in order that heart service might be revived. The outward glory was removed that the spiritual might be revealed.
“Ẹ ronú nípa ipò orílẹ̀-èdè Júù nígbà tí a fi àwọn àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ Dáníẹ́lì hàn. Àwọn ọmọ Ísírẹ́lì wà ní ìgbèkùn, a sì ti pa tẹ́ńpìlì wọn run, a sì ti dá iṣẹ́ ìsìn tẹ́ńpìlì wọn dúró. Ìsìn wọn ti dá lórí àwọn ayẹyẹ ètò ẹbọ. Wọn ti sọ àwọn ìrísí òde di ohun pàtàkì jù lọ, nígbà tí wọ́n ti pàdánù ẹ̀mí ìjọsìn tòótọ́. Àwọn iṣẹ́ ìsìn wọn ti bàjẹ́ pẹ̀lú àṣà àti ìṣe àwọn aláìnígbàgbọ́, àti ní ṣíṣe àwọn ààtò ẹbọ wọn kò wo kọjá òjìji náà sí ohun gidi náà. Wọn kò mọ̀ Kristi, ẹbọ tòótọ́ fún ẹ̀ṣẹ̀ ènìyàn. Olúwa ṣiṣẹ́ láti mú àwọn ènìyàn lọ sí ìgbèkùn, àti láti dá àwọn iṣẹ́ ìsìn inú tẹ́ńpìlì dúró, kí àwọn ayẹyẹ òde má bàa di àkópọ̀ gbogbo ìsìn wọn. Ó yẹ kí a wẹ àwọn ìlànà àti ìṣe wọn kúrò nínú ẹ̀sìn àwọn aláìnígbàgbọ́. Iṣẹ́ ààtò ìsìn náà dáwọ́ dúró kí iṣẹ́ ọkàn lè tún jí dìde. A mú ògo òde kúrò kí ti ẹ̀mí lè farahàn.
“In the land of their captivity, as the people turned unto the Lord with repentance, He manifested Himself unto them. They lacked the outward representation of His presence; but the bright beams of the Sun of Righteousness shone into their minds and hearts. When they called unto God in their humiliation and distress, visions were given to His prophets which unfolded the events of the future—the overthrow of the oppressors of God’s people, the coming of the Redeemer, and the establishment of the everlasting kingdom.” Manuscript Releases, volume 16, 333–335.
“Nínú ilẹ̀ ìgbèkùn wọn, bí àwọn ènìyàn náà ṣe yí padà sọ́dọ̀ Olúwa pẹ̀lú ìrònúpìwàdà, Ó fi ara Rẹ̀ hàn sí wọn. Wọn kò ní àfihàn òde gbangba ti ìwàláàyè Rẹ̀; ṣùgbọ́n àwọn ìmọ́lẹ̀ didán ti Oòrùn Òdodo tàn wọ inú ọkàn àti èrò inú wọn. Nígbà tí wọ́n ké pe Ọlọ́run nínú ìrẹ̀lẹ̀ àti ìpọ́njú wọn, a fi ìran fún àwọn wòlíì Rẹ̀, èyí tí ó ṣí ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀ ọjọ́ iwájú sílẹ̀—ìṣubú àwọn aninilára àwọn ènìyàn Ọlọ́run, wíwá Olùdáǹdè, àti ìdásílẹ̀ ìjọba àìnípẹ̀kun.” Manuscript Releases, volume 16, 333–335.
The “fact” that the vision of the Ulai River was given for the last days demands that a student of prophecy makes the effort to understand what it has foretold of the events represented in the vision. The prophetic “matters” associated with the vision of the Ulai River were “shaped” by the “Holy Spirit” “both in the giving of the prophecy, and in the events portrayed.” What was happening with a prophet when they receive a vision, as well as the events of prophecy the prophet identifies are to be studied, with the knowledge that both are a prophetic representation of what will be fulfilled in the last days. The previous passage emphasizes that we should recognize that Daniel was in the captivity of the “seven times.”
“Otítọ́” pé a fi ìran Odò Ulai fún àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn ń béèrè pé kí akẹ́kọ̀ọ́ àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ ṣe ìsapá láti lóye ohun tí ó ti sọ tẹ́lẹ̀ nípa àwọn ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀ tí a ṣojú fún nínú ìran náà. Àwọn “ọ̀ràn” àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ tí ó ní í ṣe pẹ̀lú ìran Odò Ulai ni “Ẹ̀mí Mímọ́” “ṣe àwòṣe” wọn “mejeeji nínú fífúnni ní àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà, àti nínú àwọn ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀ tí a yàwòrán.” Ohun tí ń ṣẹlẹ̀ sí wòlíì kan nígbà tí wọ́n bá gba ìran, pẹ̀lú àwọn ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀ àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ tí wòlíì náà tọ́ka sí, ni a gbọ́dọ̀ kẹ́kọ̀ọ́, pẹ̀lú ìmọ̀ pé àwọn méjèèjì jẹ́ àṣojú àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ ohun tí a óo mú ṣẹ ní àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn. Àyọkà tó ṣáájú tẹnu mọ́ ọn pé a gbọ́dọ̀ mọ̀ pé Dáníẹ́lì wà nínú ìgbèkùn “àkókò méje.”
Daniel represents those who recognize their captivity at the conclusion of the three-and-a-half days of Revelation eleven, who then turn to the Lord with repentance, fulfill the Leviticus twenty-six prayer, separate the precious from the vile, and then the Lord fulfills his promise to gather those who have been scattered, as he manifests Himself unto them. Their “chief object of attention,” then is “God as revealed in Christ.”
Dáníẹ́lì dúró fún àwọn tí wọ́n mọ̀ ìgbèkùn wọn ní ìparí ọjọ́ mẹ́ta àtààbọ̀ ti Ìfihàn orí kọkànlá, tí wọ́n sì yípadà sí ọ̀dọ̀ Olúwa pẹ̀lú ìrònúpìwàdà, tí wọ́n mú àdúrà Lefitiku mẹ́rìndínlọ́gbọ̀n ṣẹ, tí wọ́n ya ohun iyebíye kúrò lọ́dọ̀ ohun ẹlẹ́gbin, lẹ́yìn náà ni Olúwa sì mú ìlérí Rẹ̀ ṣẹ láti kó àwọn tí a ti tú ká jọ, bí Ó ti ń fi Ara Rẹ̀ hàn sí wọn. “Ohun àkọ́kọ́ tí ó ń fa àkíyèsí wọn,” nígbà náà, ni “Ọlọ́run gẹ́gẹ́ bí a ti fi hàn nínú Kristi.”
The “bearing” of the vision of the Ulai River, and how it contributes to the “structure” of the prophetic message which was “designed” by Christ, is the first “fact” we have briefly considered, and the passage cited identifies that our chief object should be the revelation of God, as “revealed in Christ.” In Daniel chapter eight, Christ is not presented as He was by Isaiah, when Isaiah identified that Christ’s “name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.” In Daniel chapter eight, God is revealed in Christ as Palmoni, meaning the Wonderful Numberer, or the Numberer of Secrets.
“Ìrísí” ìran Odò Ulai, àti bí ó ṣe ń ṣàfikún sí “ètò” ìfiranṣẹ́ àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ tí Kristi “ṣe àgbékalẹ̀” rẹ̀, ni “òtítọ́” àkọ́kọ́ tí a ti fi ṣókíyèsí; àyọkà tí a tọ́ka sí sì fi hàn pé ohun pàtàkì jùlọ tí ó yẹ kí ó jẹ́ kókó wa ni ìṣípayá Ọlọ́run, gẹ́gẹ́ bí a ti “ṣí i payá nínú Kristi.” Nínú orí kẹjọ ìwé Dáníẹ́lì, a kò fi Kristi hàn bí Isaiah ṣe fi í hàn, nígbà tí Isaiah sọ pé “a óo pe orúkọ rẹ̀ ní Iyanilẹnu, Olùgbìmọ̀, Ọlọ́run Alágbára, Baba Ayérayé, Ọmọ-aládé Àlàáfíà.” Nínú orí kẹjọ ìwé Dáníẹ́lì, a ṣí Ọlọ́run payá nínú Kristi gẹ́gẹ́ bíi Palmoni, èyí tí ìtumọ̀ rẹ̀ jẹ́ Alákànsí Iyanilẹnu, tàbí Alákànsí Àwọn Àṣírí.
That “fact” demands that the “bearing” of the name “Palmoni” must be sought for, along with how that name contributes to the “structure” and “design” of the prophecy. A third “fact” in Daniel chapter eight, that should be recognized, is that it is in that chapter that the central doctrinal pillar of the Millerite movement is set forth. Miller’s brightest jewel was found in verse fourteen, and we should seek to understand the “bearing” that “fact” has upon the vision of the Ulai River, that is now in the process of fulfillment.
“Òtítọ́” yẹn béèrè pé kí a wá “ìtumọ̀” orúkọ náà “Palmoni,” pẹ̀lú bí orúkọ náà ṣe ń fi àfikún kún “ètò” àti “àwòrán ìkọ́lé” àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà. “Òtítọ́” kẹta kan nínú Danieli orí kẹjọ, tí ó yẹ kí a mọ̀, ni pé nínú orí náà ni a ti gbé ọ̀pá àárín ẹ̀kọ́-ìsìn ti ìṣísẹ̀ Millerite kalẹ̀. Ọ̀ṣọ́ iyebíye tí ó tan jùlọ ti Miller wà nínú ẹsẹ̀ kẹrìnlá, a sì yẹ kí a wá láti lóye “ìtumọ̀” tí “òtítọ́” náà ní lórí ìran Odò Ulai, tí ó wà nísinsìnyí nínú ìlànà ìmúṣẹ.
In Miller’s dream, when the casket was placed upon the table in the center of his room, it shone with the brightness of the sun, but in the last days the casket is larger and shines ten times brighter than it shone when initially placed upon Miller’s table. What is it about the vision of the Ulai River, that includes the central pillar to the Millerite movement, that increases the light of that doctrine by ten times in the last days? What is revealed in the last days that was not revealed at the time of the end in 1798? What are “the events” of the vision of the Ulai River, which Sister White says “are now in the process of fulfillment?”
Nínú àlá Miller, nígbà tí a fi àpótí òkú náà lé orí tábìlì ní àárín yàrá rẹ̀, ó ń tàn pẹ̀lú ìmólẹ̀ bí ìmọ́lẹ̀ oòrùn; ṣùgbọ́n ní àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn àpótí òkú náà tóbi jù, ó sì ń tàn ní ìmọ́lẹ̀ tí ó pọ̀ ní ìgbà mẹ́wàá ju bí ó ti tàn lọ nígbà tí a kọ́kọ́ fi í lé orí tábìlì Miller. Kí ni ó wà nípa ìran Odò Ulai, tí ó ní ọ̀pá àárín náà fún ìṣípò Millerite, tí ó mú ìmólẹ̀ ẹ̀kọ́ náà pọ̀ sí i ní ìgbà mẹ́wàá ní àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn? Kí ni a ń ṣípayá ní àwọn ọjọ́ ìkẹyìn tí a kò ṣípayá ní àkókò ìparí ní ọdún 1798? Kí ni “àwọn ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀” ìran Odò Ulai náà, tí Sister White wí pé “ní báyìí ni wọ́n wà nínú ìlànà ìmúṣẹ?”
If we candidly bring these first three facts together (the vision of the Ulai, Christ revealed as Palmoni and the central doctrinal pillar), we should be willing to accept a simple premise that will impact our study of the vision of the Ulai River. Those combined facts inform those who wish to see that the message that was unsealed in 1798 was a message that was “hung upon time.” Without the element of predictive time prophecy Miller’s message would not have existed.
Bí a bá fi òtítọ́ ọkàn mú àwọn òtítọ́ mẹ́ta àkọ́kọ́ wọ̀nyí jọ (ìran Ulai, Kristi tí a fihàn gẹ́gẹ́ bí Palmoni àti ọ̀pá àárín ẹ̀kọ́ ìgbàgbọ́), ó yẹ kí a múra tán láti gba ìpìlẹ̀ ìròyìn kan tí ó rọrùn, èyí tí yóò ní ipa lórí ìkẹ́kọ̀ọ́ wa nípa ìran Odò Ulai. Àwọn òtítọ́ wọ̀nyí tí a so pọ̀ ń fi yé àwọn tí ó fẹ́ rí i pé ìhìnrere tí a tú ìdì rẹ̀ sílẹ̀ ní ọdún 1798 jẹ́ ìhìnrere kan tí a “fi sórí àkókò.” Láìsí ìsọdọtẹ́lẹ̀ àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ àkókò, ìhìnrere Miller kì bá ti wà.
The fourth “fact” that has bearing on this chapter is that the Millerites presented a message based upon prophetic time. To emphasize this fact, God was revealed in Christ, in verse thirteen and fourteen as the Wonderful Numberer (Palmoni). The idea that the vision consisted of only identifying October 22, 1844, as the conclusion of the twenty-three hundred days of verse fourteen, is to throw cold water on the revelation of God being revealed through Christ as Palmoni.
“Òtítọ́” kẹrin tí ó ní í ṣe pẹ̀lú orí yìí ni pé àwọn ọmọlẹ́yìn Miller gbé ìhìn-iṣẹ́ kan kalẹ̀ tí ó dá lórí àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀. Láti fi òtítọ́ yìí hàn gbangba, a ṣí Ọlọ́run payá nínú Kristi, nínú ẹsẹ̀ kẹtàlá àti kẹrìnlá gẹ́gẹ́ bí Alákànpín Ìyanu (Palmoni). Èrò náà pé ìran náà kàn ní í ṣe pẹ̀lú ìdámọ̀ Oṣù Kẹwàá 22, 1844, gẹ́gẹ́ bí ìparí ẹgbẹ̀rún méjì ó lé ọ̀ọ́dúnrún ọjọ́ ti ẹsẹ̀ kẹrìnlá, jẹ́ pípa omi tútù sórí ìfihàn Ọlọ́run tí a ṣí payá nípasẹ̀ Kristi gẹ́gẹ́ bí Palmoni.
The theologians of Adventism have diligently worked to bury the significance of the question of verse thirteen of Daniel chapter eight in order to produce the flavor in their dish of fables, that they have determined will keep the unlearned with the itching ears, from being concerned about the truths connected with the central pillar of Adventism.
Àwọn onímọ̀-ìsìn ti Adventism ti fi ìsapá púpọ̀ ṣiṣẹ́ láti sin ìtumọ̀ pàtàkì ìbéèrè inú ẹsẹ̀ kẹtàlá ti Danieli orí kẹjọ mọ́lẹ̀, kí wọ́n lè mú adùn wá sínú oúnjẹ àròsọ wọn, èyí tí wọ́n ti pinnu pé yóò jẹ́ kí àwọn aláìkọ́, tí etí wọn ń yún, má ṣe ní ìbànújẹ nípa àwọn òtítọ́ tí ó ní ìbáṣepọ̀ pẹ̀lú ọ̀pá àárín Adventism.
“The scripture which above all others had been both the foundation and central pillar of the Advent faith was the declaration, ‘Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’ [Daniel 8:14.] These had been familiar words to all believers in the Lord’s soon coming. By the lips of thousands was this prophecy repeated as the watchword of their faith. All felt that upon the events therein foretold depended their brightest expectations and most cherished hopes. These prophetic days had been shown to terminate in the autumn of 1844. In common with the rest of the Christian world, Adventists then held that the earth, or some portion of it, was the sanctuary. They understood that the cleansing of the sanctuary was the purification of the earth by the fires of the last great day, and that this would take place at the second advent. Hence the conclusion that Christ would return to the earth in 1844.
“Ìwé Mímọ́ tí, ju gbogbo àwọn míì lọ, jẹ́ ìpìlẹ̀ àti ọ̀pá àárín gbùngbùn ìgbàgbọ́ Advent ni ìkéde yìí pé, ‘Títí yóò fi di ẹgbẹ̀rún méjì àti ọ̀ọ́dúnrún ọjọ́; lẹ́yìn náà ni a óò wẹ ibi mímọ́ náà mọ́.’ [Danieli 8:14.] Ọ̀rọ̀ wọ̀nyí ti di ọ̀rọ̀ tí gbogbo àwọn tí ń gbàgbọ́ nínú bíbọ Olúwa tó súnmọ́ mọ̀ dáadáa. Nípasẹ̀ ètè ẹgbẹ̀rúnlọ́pọ̀ ènìyàn ni a ti máa ń tún àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ yìí sọ gẹ́gẹ́ bí ọ̀rọ̀-ìpè ìgbàgbọ́ wọn. Gbogbo wọn ní ìmọ̀lára pé lórí àwọn ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀ tí a sọ tẹ́lẹ̀ nínú rẹ̀ ni àwọn ìrètí wọn tí ó mọ́lẹ̀ jùlọ àti àwọn ìrètí tí wọ́n ṣeyebíye jùlọ gbé lé. A ti fi hàn pé àwọn ọjọ́ àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ wọ̀nyí yóò parí ní ìgbà ìrẹ̀wé ọdún 1844. Pẹ̀lú ìfarakanra pẹ̀lú àwọn ìyókù ayé Kristẹni, àwọn Adventist ní àkókò náà gbà pé ayé, tàbí apá kan nínú rẹ̀, ni ibi mímọ́ náà. Wọ́n lóye pé ìwẹ̀nùmọ́ ibi mímọ́ náà ni ìmímọ́ ayé kúrò nípasẹ̀ iná ọjọ́ ńlá ìkẹyìn, àti pé èyí yóò ṣẹlẹ̀ ní ìgbà bíbọ keji. Nítorí náà ni wọ́n ṣe pinnu pé Kristi yóò padà wá sí ayé ní ọdún 1844.
“But the appointed time had passed, and the Lord had not appeared. The believers knew that God’s Word could not fail; their interpretation of the prophecy must be at fault; but where was the mistake? Many rashly cut the knot of difficulty by denying that the 2300 days ended in 1844. No reason could be given for this, except that Christ had not come at the time they expected him. They argued that if the prophetic days had ended in 1844, Christ would then have returned to cleanse the sanctuary by the purification of the earth by fire; and that since he had not come, the days could not have ended.
“Ṣùgbọ́n àkókò tí a yàn ti kọjá, Olúwa kò sì ti fara hàn. Àwọn onígbàgbọ́ mọ̀ pé Ọ̀rọ̀ Ọlọ́run kò lè kùnà; ìtumọ̀ wọn sí àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà gbọ́dọ̀ jẹ́ aláìtọ́; ṣùgbọ́n níbo ni àṣìṣe náà wà? Ọ̀pọ̀lọpọ̀ fi ìkánjú gé ìdè ìṣòro náà nípa pípa mọ́́ pé ọjọ́ 2300 náà kò parí ní 1844. Kò sí ìdí kankan tí a lè fi hàn fún èyí, àfi pé Kírísítì kò wá ní àkókò tí wọ́n retí rẹ̀. Wọ́n jiyàn pé bí ọjọ́ àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà bá ti parí ní 1844, nígbà náà ni Kírísítì ì bá ti padà wá láti sọ ibi mímọ́ di mímọ́ nípa ìwẹ̀nùmọ́ ayé pẹ̀lú iná; àti pé níwọ̀n bí kò ti wá, ọjọ́ náà kò lè ti parí.”
“To accept this conclusion was to renounce the former reckoning of the prophetic periods. The 2300 days had been found to begin when the commandment of Artaxerxes for the restoration and building of Jerusalem went into effect, in the autumn of B. C. 457. Taking this as the starting-point, there was perfect harmony in the application of all the events foretold in the explanation of that period in Daniel 9:25–27. Sixty-nine weeks, the first 483 of the 2300 years, were to reach to the Messiah, the Anointed One; and Christ’s baptism and anointing by the Holy Spirit, A. D. 27, exactly fulfilled the specification. In the midst of the seventieth week, Messiah was to be cut off. Three and a half years after his baptism, Christ was crucified, in the spring of A. D. 31. The seventy weeks, or 490 years, were to pertain especially to the Jews. At the expiration of this period, the nation sealed its rejection of Christ by the persecution of his disciples, and the apostles turned to the Gentiles, A. D. 34. The first 490 years of the 2300 having then ended, 1810 years would remain. From A. D. 34, 1810 years extend to 1844. ‘Then,’ said the angel, ‘shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’ All the preceding specifications of the prophecy had been unquestionably fulfilled at the time appointed. With this reckoning, all was clear and harmonious, except that it was not seen that any event answering to the cleansing of the sanctuary had taken place in 1844. To deny that the days ended at that time was to involve the whole question in confusion, and to renounce positions which had been established by unmistakable fulfillments of prophecy.
“Láti gba ìpinnu yìí ni láti kọ ìṣírò àtẹ́lẹwọ́ ti àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ sílẹ̀. A ti rí i pé ọjọ́ 2300 bẹ̀rẹ̀ nígbà tí àṣẹ Atasasẹsì fún ìmúpadàbọ̀sípò àti kíkọ́ Jérúsálẹ́mù bẹ̀rẹ̀ sí í ṣiṣẹ́, ní ìgbà ìrẹ́danu ọdún 457 S.K. Nípa gbígba èyí gẹ́gẹ́ bí ibi ìbẹ̀rẹ̀, ìbámu pípé wà nínú ìlò gbogbo ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀ tí a ti sọ tẹ́lẹ̀ nínú àlàyé àkókò náà nínú Dáníẹ́lì 9:25–27. Ọ̀sẹ̀ mọ́kàndínláàádọ́rin, ìyẹn àkọ́kọ́ ọdún 483 nínú ọdún 2300, ni yóò dé ọ̀dọ̀ Mèsáyà, Ẹni Tí A Fi Òróró Yàn; àti ìrìbọmi Kristi àti fífi Ẹ̀mí Mímọ́ yàn án ní ọdún 27 L.K. mú àlàyé náà ṣẹ ní pípé gẹ́gẹ́ bí a ti sọ ọ́. Ní àárín ọ̀sẹ̀ àádọ́rin náà, a ní láti gé Mèsáyà kúrò. Ọdún mẹ́ta àtààbọ̀ lẹ́yìn ìrìbọmi rẹ̀, a kan Kristi mọ́ àgbélébùú, ní ìgbà ìrúwé ọdún 31 L.K. Àwọn ọ̀sẹ̀ àádọ́rin náà, tàbí ọdún 490, ni wọ́n jẹ́ ti àwọn Júù ní pàtàkì. Nígbà tí àkókò yìí parí, orílẹ̀-èdè náà fi ìkọ̀sílẹ̀ Kristi hàn nípa inúnibíni sí àwọn ọmọ-ẹ̀yìn rẹ̀, àwọn àpọ́sítélì sì yí padà sí ọ̀dọ̀ àwọn aláìkọlà, ní ọdún 34 L.K. Nígbà náà tí ọdún 490 àkọ́kọ́ nínú ọdún 2300 ti parí, ọdún 1810 ni yóò kù. Láti ọdún 34 L.K., ọdún 1810 náà gùn dé 1844. ‘Lẹ́yìn náà,’ ni angẹli náà wí, ‘a ó wẹ ibi mímọ́ náà mọ́.’ Gbogbo àwọn àlàyé àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ tó ṣáájú ni a ti mú ṣẹ láìsí àní-àní ní àkókò tí a yàn. Pẹ̀lú ìṣírò yìí, ohun gbogbo ṣe kedere, ó sì ní ìbámu, àfi pé a kò rí i pé ìṣẹ̀lẹ̀ kankan tí ó bá ìwẹ̀nùmọ́ ibi mímọ́ náà mu ti ṣẹlẹ̀ ní 1844. Láti sẹ́ pé àwọn ọjọ́ náà parí ní àkókò náà ni láti dá gbogbo ọ̀ràn náà rú sínú ìdàrúdàpọ̀, àti láti kọ àwọn ipò tí a ti fi ìmúṣẹ àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ tí kò ṣeé ṣiyèméjì múlẹ̀ sílẹ̀.”
“But God had led his people in the great Advent movement; his power and glory had attended the work, and he would not permit it to end in darkness and disappointment, to be reproached as a false and fanatical excitement. He would not leave his word involved in doubt and uncertainty. Though many abandoned their former reckoning of the prophetic periods, and denied the correctness of the movement based thereon, others were unwilling to renounce points of faith and experience that were sustained by the Scriptures and by the witness of the Spirit of God. They believed that they had adopted sound principles of interpretation in their study of the prophecies, and that it was their duty to hold fast the truths already gained, and to continue the same course of Biblical research. With earnest prayer they reviewed their position, and studied the Scriptures to discover their mistake. As they could see no error in their reckoning of the prophetic periods, they were led to examine more closely the subject of the sanctuary.” The Great Controversy, 409, 410.
“Ṣùgbọ́n Ọlọ́run ti darí àwọn ènìyàn rẹ̀ nínú ìṣísẹ̀ Advent ńlá náà; agbára àti ògo rẹ̀ sì ti bá iṣẹ́ náà lọ, kò sì ní jẹ́ kí ó parí nínú òkùnkùn àti ìdààmú, kí a sì fi ẹ̀gàn kàn án gẹ́gẹ́ bí ìfarahàn ìgbóná-ìfẹ́kúfẹ̀ẹ́ èké àti ìwèrè. Kò ní fi ọ̀rọ̀ rẹ̀ sílẹ̀ nínú iyèméjì àti àìdánilójú. Bí ó tilẹ̀ jẹ́ pé ọ̀pọ̀lọpọ̀ kọ ìṣírò wọn tẹ́lẹ̀ nípa àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà sílẹ̀, tí wọ́n sì sẹ́ pé ìṣísẹ̀ tí a dá lé wọn lórí náà tọ́, àwọn mìíràn kò fẹ́ kọ àwọn kókó ìgbàgbọ́ àti ìrírí sílẹ̀ tí Ìwé Mímọ́ àti ẹ̀rí Ẹ̀mí Ọlọ́run ti fìdí rẹ̀ múlẹ̀. Wọ́n gbàgbọ́ pé wọ́n ti gba àwọn ìlànà tútùú ti ìtumọ̀ nínú ìkẹ́kọ̀ọ́ wọn nípa àwọn àsọtẹ́lẹ̀, àti pé ojúṣe wọn ni láti di àwọn òtítọ́ tí wọ́n ti ní rí mú ṣinṣin, àti láti tẹ̀síwájú nínú ipa ọ̀nà kan náà ti ìwádìí Ìwé Mímọ́. Pẹ̀lú àdúrà títẹ́ra, wọ́n tún ipò wọn yẹ̀wò, wọ́n sì kẹ́kọ̀ọ́ Ìwé Mímọ́ láti ṣàwárí àṣìṣe wọn. Níwọ̀n bí wọn kò ti lè rí àṣìṣe kankan nínú ìṣírò wọn nípa àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà, a mú wọn lọ sí ìwádìí jinlẹ̀ sí i nípa kókó ẹ̀kọ́ ibi mímọ́.” The Great Controversy, 409, 410.
We have been informed by Sister White, in the same passage where the vision of the Ulai River is identified, that there “is need of a much closer study of the Word of God.” The theologians will present the subject of “prophetic periods” in the previous passage from The Great Controversy, as if the “prophetic periods” Sister White is limiting her commentary to, is the five prophecies that are represented within the twenty-three hundred year prophecy. After all, they claim, four of those prophecies are specifically addressed in the passage. But a “much closer study” of the subject demonstrates that the term “prophetic periods” in the plural, in Sister White’s writings more accurately refers to the two prophecies that were to be fulfilled on October 22, 1844.
Arábìnrin White ti jẹ́ kí a mọ̀, nínú àyọkà kan náà níbi tí a ti dá ìran Odò Ulai mọ̀, pé “àìní ń bẹ fún ìkẹ́kọ̀ọ́ Ọ̀rọ̀ Ọlọ́run tí ó súnmọ́ gidigidi jù báyìí lọ.” Àwọn onímọ̀ ẹ̀sìn yóò gbé kókó-ọrọ̀ “àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀” kalẹ̀ nínú àyọkà tí ó ṣáájú láti inú The Great Controversy, bí ẹni pé “àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀” tí Arábìnrin White fi àlàyé rẹ̀ dí mọ́ ni àwọn àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ márùn-ún tí a ṣojú fún nínú àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ ọdún ẹgbàá méjì ọ̀ọ́dúnrún. Lẹ́yìn gbogbo rẹ̀, gẹ́gẹ́ bí wọ́n ti sọ, mẹ́rin nínú àwọn àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ wọ̀nyẹn ni a tọ́ka sí ní pàtó nínú àyọkà náà. Ṣùgbọ́n “ìkẹ́kọ̀ọ́ tí ó súnmọ́ gidigidi jù báyìí lọ” nípa kókó-ọrọ̀ náà fi hàn pé ọ̀rọ̀ náà “àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀” nínú ọ̀pọ̀, nínú àwọn ìkọ̀wé Arábìnrin White, ní ìtóótọ́ ń tọ́ka dáadáa sí àwọn àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ méjì tí ó yẹ kí ó ṣẹ ní October 22, 1844.
There are five specific time prophecies that Gabriel identified for Daniel that are part of the twenty-three hundred years. The first identifies forty-nine years, when the “streets and walls would be built in troublous times.” The second was Christ’s baptism after four hundred and eighty-three years from the starting point of 457 BC. The third was His crucifixion, the fourth identified when the gospel would go to the Gentiles at the end of the four hundred and ninety-years that were set apart especially for the Jewish nation, and the fifth, and only the fifth, time prophecy, ended on October 22, 1844. The previous four time prophecies ended well before 1844. So, what does Sister White actually mean when she uses the expression “prophetic periods” in the plural, that were to end in 1844?
Àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ àkókò pàtó márùn-ún wà tí Gébéríẹ́lì fihàn fún Dáníẹ́lì, tí wọ́n jẹ́ apá kan nínú ẹgbẹ̀rún méjì àti ọ̀ọ́dúnrún ọdún náà. Àkọ́kọ́ sọ ọdún mẹ́rìnlélógójì, nígbà tí “àwọn ojú pópó àti ògiri yóò tún kọ́ ní àkókò ìṣòro.” Èkejì ni ìrìbọmi Kristi lẹ́yìn ọdún ẹgbẹ̀rún mẹ́rìndínlọ́gọ́rin [483] láti ibi ìbẹ̀rẹ̀ ọdún 457 BC. Ẹ̀kẹta ni kíkàn án mọ́ àgbélébùú, ẹ̀kẹrin sì fihàn ìgbà tí ìhìnrere yóò lọ sí àwọn Kèfèrí ní òpin ọdún ẹgbẹ̀rún mẹ́rìndínlọ́gọ́rin [490] tí a yà sọ́tọ̀ ní pàtàkì fún orílẹ̀-èdè Júù; ìkarùn-ún náà sì, àti ìkarùn-ún nìkan, ni àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ àkókò tí ó parí ní October 22, 1844. Àwọn àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ àkókò mẹ́rin tó ṣáájú ti parí dáadáa kí ọdún 1844 tó dé. Nítorí náà, kí ni Arabinrin White túmọ̀ sí ní tòótọ́ nígbà tí ó lo ọ̀rọ̀ náà “àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀” ní ọ̀nà púpọ̀, tí wọ́n yẹ kí wọ́n parí ní 1844?
Addressing the first disappointment of the Millerites she identifies the answer to that question:
Nígbà tí ó ń ṣàlàyé ìbànújẹ àkọ́kọ́ àwọn Millerite, ó tọ́ka sí ìdáhùn sí ìbéèrè náà:
“I saw the people of God joyful in expectation, looking for their Lord. But God designed to prove them. His hand covered a mistake in the reckoning of the prophetic periods. Those who were looking for their Lord did not discover this mistake, and the most learned men who opposed the time also failed to see it. God designed that His people should meet with a disappointment. The time passed, and those who had looked with joyful expectation for their Saviour were sad and disheartened, while those who had not loved the appearing of Jesus, but embraced the message through fear, were pleased that He did not come at the time of expectation. Their profession had not affected the heart and purified the life. The passing of the time was well calculated to reveal such hearts. They were the first to turn and ridicule the sorrowful, disappointed ones who really loved the appearing of their Saviour. I saw the wisdom of God in proving His people and giving them a searching test to discover those who would shrink and turn back in the hour of trial.
“Mo rí àwọn ènìyàn Ọlọ́run pẹ̀lú ayọ̀ nínú ìrètí, wọ́n ń retí Oluwa wọn. Ṣùgbọ́n Ọlọ́run pinu láti dán wọn wò. Ọwọ́ Rẹ̀ bò àṣìṣe kan nínú ìṣírò àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà. Àwọn tí wọ́n ń retí Oluwa wọn kò ṣàwárí àṣìṣe yìí, àwọn ọkùnrin tí wọ́n kẹ́kọ̀ọ́ jùlọ tí wọ́n sì tako àkókò náà, àwọn náà kò rí i. Ọlọ́run ti pinu pé kí àwọn ènìyàn Rẹ̀ pàdé ìdánilójú-burúkú. Àkókò náà kọjá, àwọn tí wọ́n ti fi ayọ̀ ìrètí ń retí Olùgbàlà wọn sì kún fún ìbànújẹ́, wọ́n sì rẹ̀wẹ̀sì ní ọkàn, nígbà tí àwọn tí kò fẹ́ ìfarahàn Jésù, ṣùgbọ́n tí wọ́n gba ìhìn náà mọ́ra nítorí ìbẹ̀rù, yọ̀ pé Kò wá ní àkókò tí a retí. Ìjẹ́wọ́ wọn kò kan ọkàn, bẹ́ẹ̀ ni kò sọ ìgbésí ayé di mímọ́. Ìkọjá àkókò náà jẹ́ ohun tí a ṣe ìṣírò rẹ̀ dáadáa láti fi irú àwọn ọkàn bẹ́ẹ̀ hàn. Àwọn wọ̀nyí ni wọ́n kọ́kọ́ yípadà, wọ́n sì bẹ̀rẹ̀ sí í fi àwọn tí wọ́n ní ìbànújẹ́, tí ìdánilójú-burúkú sì bá, ṣe yẹ̀yẹ́—àwọn tí wọ́n nífẹ̀ẹ́ gidi sí ìfarahàn Olùgbàlà wọn. Mo rí ọgbọ́n Ọlọ́run nínú bí Ó ṣe ń dán àwọn ènìyàn Rẹ̀ wò, tí Ó sì ń fún wọn ní àdánwò tí ń ṣàwárí jinlẹ̀, láti fi àwọn tí yóò fà sẹ́yìn tí yóò sì padà sẹ́hìn ní wákàtí ìdánwò hàn.”
“Jesus and all the heavenly host looked with sympathy and love upon those who had with sweet expectation longed to see Him whom their souls loved. Angels were hovering around them, to sustain them in the hour of their trial. Those who had neglected to receive the heavenly message were left in darkness, and God’s anger was kindled against them, because they would not receive the light which He had sent them from heaven. Those faithful, disappointed ones, who could not understand why their Lord did not come, were not left in darkness. Again they were led to their Bibles to search the prophetic periods. The hand of the Lord was removed from the figures, and the mistake was explained. They saw that the prophetic periods reached to 1844, and that the same evidence which they had presented to show that the prophetic periods closed in 1843, proved that they would terminate in 1844.” Early Writings, 235–237.
“Jesu àti gbogbo ogun ọ̀run fi àánú àti ìfẹ́ wo àwọn tí wọ́n ti fi ìretí dídùn retí láti rí Ẹni tí ọkàn wọn fẹ́ràn. Àwọn angẹli ń fòyà káàkiri wọn, láti gbé wọn ró ní wákàtí ìdánwò wọn. Àwọn tí wọ́n ti ṣàìgbọ́wọ̀ láti gba ìhìn iṣẹ́ ọ̀run ni a fi sílẹ̀ nínú òkùnkùn, ìbínú Ọlọ́run sì ru sí wọn, nítorí wọn kò fẹ́ gba ìmọ́lẹ̀ tí Ó ti rán sí wọn láti ọ̀run wá. Àwọn olóòtítọ́ wọ̀nyẹn tí ìrẹ̀wẹ̀sì bá, tí wọn kò lè lóye ìdí tí Olúwa wọn kò fi dé, a kò fi sílẹ̀ nínú òkùnkùn. Lẹ́ẹ̀kan sí i ni a tún darí wọn sí àwọn Bíbélì wọn láti yẹ àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ wò. A yọ ọwọ́ Olúwa kúrò lórí àwọn nọ́mbà náà, a sì ṣàlàyé àṣìṣe náà. Wọ́n rí i pé àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà gùn dé ọdún 1844, àti pé ẹ̀rí kan náà tí wọ́n ti gbé kalẹ̀ láti fi hàn pé àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ náà parí ní 1843, ni ó fi hàn pé wọn yóò dópin ní 1844.” Early Writings, 235–237.
The “prophetic periods” were the “prophetic periods” that “reached to 1844,” which the Millerites had initially believed reached to 1843. The “prophetic periods” that reached to 1844, were three prophetic periods,” and all are represented upon Habakkuk’s tables. One of the three periods simply “touches” 1844, and the other two reach to October 22, 1844. The thirteen hundred and thirty-five days reached to the very first day of 1844, when the first disappointment of the Millerites arrived, and the tarrying time of both Habakkuk chapter two, and of the parable of the ten virgins in Matthew twenty-five began.
“Àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀” ni “àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀” náà tí “ó dé 1844,” tí àwọn Mílléráítì ti gbàgbọ́ ní ìbẹ̀rẹ̀ pé ó dé 1843. “Àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀” tí ó dé 1844, jẹ́ “àwọn àkókò àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ mẹ́ta,” a sì ṣojú gbogbo wọn lórí àwọn tábìlì Hábákúkù. Ọ̀kan nínú àwọn àkókò mẹ́tẹ̀ẹ̀ta náà kan “fọwọ́ kàn” 1844 lásán, àwọn méjì yòókù sì dé October 22, 1844. Ẹgbẹ̀rún kan ó lé ọ̀ọ́dúnrún mẹ́ta-dín-lọ́gbọ̀n ọjọ́ dé ọjọ́ àkọ́kọ́ pátápátá ti 1844, nígbà tí ìbànújẹ́ àkọ́kọ́ ti àwọn Mílléráítì dé, tí àkókò ìdádúró ti Hábákúkù orí kejì, àti ti òwe àwọn wúńdíá mẹ́wàá nínú Mátíù ogún-dín-lọ́gbọ̀n sì bẹ̀rẹ̀.
The twenty-three hundred days of Daniel chapter eight, verse fourteen reached to October 22, 1844, and the twenty-five hundred and twenty years, of the “seven times” against the southern kingdom of Judah ended there as well. Palmoni introduces himself as the Wonderful Numberer in verse thirteen of Daniel eight, and the prophetic “structure” and “design” that he then set forth included at least ten interconnected time prophecies.
Ẹgbẹ̀rún méjì ó lé ọ̀ọ́rùn-ún mẹ́ta ọjọ́ tí ó wà nínú Dáníẹ́lì orí kẹjọ, ẹsẹ̀ kẹrìnlá dé ọjọ́ kejìlélógún, oṣù Kẹwàá, ọdún 1844, àti ẹgbẹ̀rún méjì ó lé ọ̀ọ́rùn-ún márùndínlógún ọdún, ti “àkókò méje” sí ìjọba gúúsù Júdà, parí níbẹ̀ pẹ̀lú. Pálímónì fi ara rẹ̀ hàn gẹ́gẹ́ bí Oníṣirò Àgbàyanu nínú ẹsẹ̀ kẹtàlá ti Dáníẹ́lì 8, àti “ètò” àti “àpẹrẹ” àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ tí ó sì tẹ̀ síwájú láti gbé kalẹ̀ níbẹ̀ ní ó ní ó kéré tán, àsọtẹ́lẹ̀ àkókò mẹ́wàá tí ó so pọ̀ mọ́ ara wọn.
We will begin to consider these truths further in the next article.
A ó bẹ̀rẹ̀ sí í ronú jinlẹ̀ sí i lórí àwọn òtítọ́ wọ̀nyí nínú àpilẹ̀kọ tí ó kàn.
“Christ gave to the world a lesson that should be engraved on mind and soul. ‘This is life eternal,’ he said, ‘that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.’ But Satan works on human minds, saying, Do this or that action, and ye shall be as gods. By deceptive reasoning he led Adam and Eve to doubt God’s word, and to supply its place with a theory that led to transgression and disobedience. And his sophistry is doing today what it did in Eden. When Christ came to our world, he selected humble fishermen as the foundation of his church. To these disciples he tried to explain the nature of his kingdom and mission. But their limited comprehension imposed a restraint upon him. They had been receiving the sayings of the scribes and Pharisees, and therefore much of what they believed was untrue. And though Christ had many things to say to them, they were unable to hear much of what he longed to communicate.
“Kristi fi ẹ̀kọ́ kan fún ayé, tí ó yẹ kí a fi kọ sínú ọkàn àti ẹ̀mí. Ó ní pé, ‘Èyí ni ìyè àìnípẹ̀kun, kí wọ́n lè mọ̀ ọ́, Ọlọ́run òtítọ́ kan ṣoṣo, àti Jesu Kristi, ẹni tí ìwọ rán.’ Ṣùgbọ́n Satani ń ṣiṣẹ́ lórí ọkàn ènìyàn, ó ń wí pé, Ṣe èyí tàbí èyí, ẹ ó sì dàbí àwọn ọlọ́run. Pẹ̀lú ìmọ̀ràn ẹ̀tàn ni ó fi mú Adamu àti Efa ṣiyèméjì sí ọ̀rọ̀ Ọlọ́run, kí wọ́n sì fi ìmọ̀ tí ó di ipò rẹ̀ rọ́pò ó, ìmọ̀ tí ó ṣamọ̀nà sí ìrékọjá àti àìgbọràn. Àti pé ẹ̀tàn ọgbọ́n rẹ̀ ń ṣe lónìí ohun tí ó ṣe ní Edeni. Nígbà tí Kristi wá sí ayé wa, ó yan àwọn apẹja onírẹ̀lẹ̀ gẹ́gẹ́ bí ìpìlẹ̀ ìjọ rẹ̀. Ó gbìyànjú láti ṣàlàyé ìwà ìjọba rẹ̀ àti iṣẹ́-ìránṣẹ́ rẹ̀ fún àwọn ọmọ-ẹ̀yìn wọ̀nyí. Ṣùgbọ́n òye wọn tí ó kù díẹ̀ fi ìdènà lé e lórí. Wọ́n ti ń gba àwọn ọ̀rọ̀ àwọn akọ̀wé àti àwọn Farisi, nítorí náà ọ̀pọ̀ nínú ohun tí wọ́n gbàgbọ́ kò jẹ́ òtítọ́. Àti bí Kristi tilẹ̀ ní ọ̀pọ̀ ohun láti sọ fún wọn, wọn kò lè gbọ́ púpọ̀ nínú ohun tí ó ń fẹ́ gidigidi láti sọ fún wọn.”
“Christ finds the religionists of this time so full of erroneous sentiments that there is no room in their minds for the truth. With the education given, teachers mingle the sentiments of infidel authors. Thus they have sown tares in the minds of the youth. They give utterance to sentiments that should not be presented to young or old, never thinking of what kind of seed they are sowing, or of the harvest they will have to garner as the result.” Review and Herald, July 3, 1900.
“Kristi rí i pé àwọn olùṣe-ẹ̀sìn ti àkókò yìí kún fún àwọn èrò tí ó ṣìnà tó bẹ́ẹ̀ gẹ́ẹ́ tí kò sí ààyè nínú ọkàn wọn fún òtítọ́. Pẹ̀lú ẹ̀kọ́ tí a fi ń kọ́ni, àwọn olùkọ́ darapọ̀ mọ́ ọn àwọn èrò ti àwọn akọ̀wé aláìgbàgbọ́. Báyìí ni wọ́n ti fún irúgbìn èpò sínú ọkàn àwọn ọdọ. Wọ́n máa ń sọ àwọn èrò jáde tí kò yẹ kí a gbé kalẹ̀ níwájú ọdọ tàbí àgbà, láì ronú rárá nípa irú irúgbìn tí wọ́n ń fún, tàbí nípa ikórè tí wọ́n yóò ní láti kó jọ gẹ́gẹ́ bí àbájáde rẹ̀.” Review and Herald, July 3, 1900.