We are addressing six lines of prophetic controversy that have occurred within the history of Adventism from 1798 until the present day.
Sikhuluma ngemigqa eyisithupha yempikiswano yesiprofetho eye yavela emlandweni wobu-Adventist kusukela ngowe-1798 kuze kube namuhla.
“In history and prophecy the Word of God portrays the long continued conflict between truth and error. That conflict is yet in progress. Those things which have been, will be repeated. Old controversies will be revived, and new theories will be continually arising. But God’s people, who in their belief and fulfillment of prophecy have acted a part in the proclamation of the first, second, and third angels’ messages, know where they stand. They have an experience that is more precious than fine gold. They are to stand firm as a rock, holding the beginning of their confidence steadfast unto the end.” Selected Messages, book 2, 109.
“Emlandweni nasesiprofethweni iZwi likaNkulunkulu liveza impi ende, eqhubeke isikhathi eside, phakathi kweqiniso nephutha. Leyo mpi isaqhubeka nanamuhla. Lezo zinto ebezikhona ziyakuphindwa. Izingxabano zakudala ziyovuselelwa, futhi imfundiso ezintsha ziyoqhubeka zivela. Kodwa abantu bakaNkulunkulu, okuthe ngokukholwa kwabo nangokugcwaliseka kwesiprofetho badlala indima ekumemezeleni imiyalezo yengelosi yokuqala, eyesibili, neyesithathu, bayazi lapho bemi khona. Banolwazi oluyigugu kakhulu kunegolide elihle. Kumelwe bame baqine njengedwala, bebambelele ekuqaleni kokwethemba kwabo ngokuqina kuze kube sekupheleni.” Selected Messages, incwadi 2, 109.
The previous article addressed the first and last controversy about the Roman power, and we will now take up the controversy that occurred between Uriah Smith and James White. Uriah Smith inserted his own “private interpretation” into verse thirty-six.
Isihloko esandulele sakhuluma ngempikiswano yokuqala neyokugcina mayelana nombuso waseRoma, futhi manje sizobhekana nempikiswano eyavela phakathi kuka-Uriah Smith noJames White. U-Uriah Smith wafaka “ukuhunyushwa” kwakhe siqu evesini lamashumi amathathu nesithupha.
“VERSE 36. And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvelous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished; for that that is determined shall be done.
“IVESI 36. Inkosi iyakwenza ngokwentando yayo; futhi izoziphakamisa, izikhulise ngaphezu kwabo bonke onkulunkulu, ikhulume izinto ezimangalisayo zimelene noNkulunkulu wonkulunkulu, futhi iyakuphumelela kuze kuphele ulaka; ngokuba lokho okumisiwe kuyakwenzeka.
“The king here introduced cannot denote the same power which was last noticed; namely, the papal power; for the specifications will not hold good if applied to that power.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 292.
“Inkosi eyethulwa lapha ayinakusho amandla afanayo nalawo asanda kuphawulwa ekugcineni; okungukuthi, amandla obupapa; ngoba imininingwane echaziwe ayinakufanela uma isetshenziswa kulawo mandla.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 292.
Smith acknowledged that the power in the previous verse was “papal Rome,” but claims the characteristics of verse thirty-six are not prophetic characteristics that identify papal Rome. That claim is false. It should be remembered that in the rebellion of 1863, the seven times of Leviticus chapter twenty-six was set aside, and therefore the representation of the seven times of both tables of Habakkuk was rejected. Both the 1843 and the 1850 charts illustrate the seven times in the very center of the charts, and both illustrations place the cross in the center of the line of the seven times. When the new light of the seven times arrived in 1856 and was thereafter rejected, it marked a rejection of Habakkuk’s two tables, and also the authority of the Spirit of Prophecy, which so clearly identifies that both charts were directed by God.
USmith wavuma ukuthi amandla asevesini elandulele kwakuyi-“Roma lobupapa,” kodwa uthi izici zevesi lamashumi amathathu nesithupha azizona izici zesiprofetho ezihlonza iRoma lobupapa. Lelo zisho lingamanga. Kufanele kukhunjulwe ukuthi ekuvukeleni kwango-1863, izikhathi eziyisikhombisa zikaLevitikusi isahluko samashumi amabili nesithupha zabekwa eceleni, ngakho-ke ukumelwa kwezikhathi eziyisikhombisa zamatafula womabili kaHabakuki kwaliwa. Kokubili ishadi lika-1843 nelika-1850 kubonisa izikhathi eziyisikhombisa maphakathi nendawo yamashadi, futhi kokubili lokho kuboniswa kubeka isiphambano maphakathi nolayini wezikhathi eziyisikhombisa. Lapho ukukhanya okusha kwezikhathi eziyisikhombisa kufika ngo-1856 futhi emva kwalokho kwalahlwa, kwaphawula ukwaliwa kwamatafula amabili kaHabakuki, kanye negunya loMoya Wesiprofetho, olukhomba ngokucace kangaka ukuthi womabili amashadi ayeqondiswe nguNkulunkulu.
According to Sister White the last deception of Satan is to make of none effect the testimony of God’s Spirit, and here the first deception was to make of none effect the testimony of God’s Spirit, and it also represented a simultaneous rejection of the foundational truths upon the two charts, and more specifically the seven times.
NgokukaDade White, inkohliso yokugcina kaSathane iwukwenza ubufakazi boMoya kaNkulunkulu bube yize, futhi lapha inkohliso yokuqala kwakuwukwenza ubufakazi boMoya kaNkulunkulu bube yize, futhi yayimelela futhi ukwenqatshwa ngesikhathi esifanayo kwamaqiniso ayisisekelo asemashadini amabili, futhi ikakhulukazi izikhathi eziyisikhombisa.
At the rebellion of 1863, it was none other than Uriah Smith that produced the 1863 counterfeit chart, which removed the line of the seven times. By 1863 Uriah Smith had closed his eyes to the light of the seven times, and was unable to see that there are two “indignations” which Daniel identifies. The two indignations represent the seven times against the northern kingdom of Israel, and the southern kingdom of Judah. The first against the ten northern tribes began in 723 BC and ended in 1798, and the second began in 677 BC and ended in 1844.
Ekuvukeleni kuka-1863, kwakungekho omunye ngaphandle kuka-Uriah Smith owakhipha ishadi elingelona langempela lika-1863, elasusa umugqa wezikhathi eziyisikhombisa. Ngo-1863 u-Uriah Smith wayesevale amehlo akhe ekukhanyeni kwezikhathi eziyisikhombisa, futhi wayengasakwazi ukubona ukuthi kukhona “ulaka” olubili uDaniyeli alukhombayo. Lolu laka olubili lumelela izikhathi eziyisikhombisa ezamelana nombuso wakwa-Israyeli wasenyakatho, nombuso wakwaJuda waseningizimu. Olokuqala olumelene nezizwe eziyishumi zasenyakatho lwaqala ngo-723 BC futhi lwaphela ngo-1798, kanti olwesibili lwaqala ngo-677 BC futhi lwaphela ngo-1844.
Gabriel came to Daniel in chapter eight to explain the marah vision, and in connection with his work, he provided a second witness to 1844. The twenty-three hundred years of Daniel chapter eight ended in 1844, but so too did the last of the two indignations against the northern and southern kingdoms.
UGabriyeli weza kuDaniyeli esahlukweni sesishiyagalombili ukuzochaza umbono we-mar’ah, futhi ngokuhlobene nomsebenzi wakhe wanikeza ubufakazi besibili obuqondene no-1844. Iminyaka eyizinkulungwane ezimbili namakhulu amathathu yesahluko sesishiyagalombili sikaDaniyeli yaphela ngo-1844, kodwa kanjalo futhi kwaphela neyokugcina phakathi kokuthukuthela okubili okubhekiswe emibusweni yasenyakatho neyaseningizimu.
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 8:19.
Wayesethi: Bheka, ngiyakukwazisa okuzakwenzeka ekugcineni kokufutheka; ngokuba ngesikhathi esimisiweyo ukuphela kuyakuba khona. Danieli 8:19.
The last end presupposes a first end. The last of the two indignations, which is simply another expression of the seven times, ended in 1844, and the first indignation ended in 1798. The verse Smith claimed possessed no specifications of the papal power identified the year when the papacy would receive its deadly wound.
Ukuphela kokugcina kusikisela ukuphela kokuqala. Ukugcina kwalezo zithukuthelo ezimbili, okuyinkulumo nje enye yezikhathi eziyisikhombisa, kwaphela ngo-1844, kanti ukuthukuthela kokuqala kwaphela ngo-1798. Ivesi uSmith athi alinakho ukucaciswa kwamandla obupapa lakhomba unyaka lapho ubupapa babuzokwamukela khona inxeba lalo elibulalayo.
And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvelous 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.
Inkosi iyakwenza ngokwentando yayo; futhi iyoziphakamisela, izikhulise ngaphezu kwabo bonke onkulunkulu, ikhulume izinto ezimangalisayo imelene noNkulunkulu wonkulunkulu, iphumelele kuze kufezeke ulaka; ngokuba lokho okunqunyiwe kuyakwenziwa. Daniyeli 11:36.
“The king” in verse thirty-six would “prosper till the indignation be accomplished.” Notice what Smith writes about Daniel chapter eight, verses twenty-three and twenty-four in the same book where he claims the papal power does not possess the correct attributes to fulfill verse thirty-six.
“Inkosi” evesini lamashumi amathathu nesithupha “iyochuma kuze kuphele intukuthelo.” Qaphela lokho uSmith akubhalayo ngoDaniyeli isahluko sesishiyagalombili, amavesi amashumi amabili nantathu namashumi amabili nane, encwadini efanayo lapho ethi amandla opapa awanazo izimfanelo ezifanele ukugcwalisa ivesi lamashumi amathathu nesithupha.
“VERSE 23. And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. 24. And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practice, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. 25. And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand: and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.
“IVESI 23. Futhi esikhathini sokugcina sombuso wabo, lapho abephula umthetho sebefinyelele esilinganisweni esigcwele, kuyakuvuka inkosi enobuso obunolaka, neqondayo izisho eziyimfihlakalo. 24. Amandla ayo ayakuba makhulu, kodwa kungabi ngamandla ayo uqobo; iyakuchitha ngokwesabekayo, iphumelele, yenze ngokuthanda kwayo, ibhubhise abanamandla nabantu abangcwele. 25. Futhi ngobuqili bayo iyakwenza inkohliso iphumelele esandleni sayo; izakuzikhukhumeza enhliziyweni yayo, ibhubhise abaningi ngokuthula; iyakuvukela noMbusi wababusi; kodwa iyakwephulwa kungengasandla.”
“This power succeeds to the four divisions of the goat kingdom in the latter time of their kingdom, that is, toward the termination of their career. It is, of course, the same as the little horn of verse 9 and onward. Apply it to Rome, as set forth in remarks on verse 9, and all is harmonious and clear.
“Lawa mandla alandela izigaba ezine zombuso wembuzi esikhathini sokugcina sombuso wazo, okungukuthi, maqondana nokuphela kwenkambo yazo. Yebo, ayafana nophondo oluncane lwendimana 9 nokuqhubeka kwayo. Kusebenzise eRoma, njengoba kubekwe emazwaneni ngendimana 9, khona konke kuyavumelana futhi kucace.”
“‘A king of fierce countenance.’ Moses, in predicting punishment to come upon the Jews from this same power, calls it ‘a nation of fierce countenance.’ Deut. 28:49, 50. No people made a more formidable appearance in warlike array than the Romans. ‘Understanding dark sentences.’ Moses, in the scripture just referred to, says, ‘Whose tongue thou shalt not understand.’ This could not be said of the Babylonians, Persians, or Greeks, in reference to the Jews; for the Chaldean and Greek languages were used to a greater or less extent in Palestine. This was not the case, however, with the Latin.
“‘Inkosi enobuso obulukhuni.’ UMose, ekubikezeleni isijeziso esasizokwehlela amaJuda sivela kulawo mandla afanayo, uyibiza ngokuthi ‘isizwe esinobuso obulukhuni.’ Dut. 28:49, 50. Akukho sizwe esabonakala sisabeka kakhulu ekuhlelweni kwempi kunamaRoma. ‘Eqonda izaga ezinzima.’ UMose, embhalweni osanda kubhekiselwa kuwo, uthi, ‘olulimi lwayo ongeke uluqonde.’ Lokhu kwakungeke kushiwo ngabaseBhabhiloni, abasePheresiya, noma abaseGrisi, maqondana namaJuda; ngokuba izilimi zesiKaledi nesiGreki zazisetshenziswa, ngezinga elikhulu noma elincane, ePalestina. Kodwa-ke, lokhu kwakungenjalo ngesiLatini.”
“When the transgressors are come to the full.’ All along, the connection between God’s people and their oppressors is kept in view. It was on account of the transgressions of his people that they were sold into captivity. And their continuance in sin brought more severe punishment. At no time were the Jews more corrupt morally, as a nation, than at the time they came under the jurisdiction of the Romans.
“Lapho abaphambukayo sebefinyelele ekugcwaleni.” Kuyo yonke le ndaba, ukuxhumana phakathi kwabantu bakaNkulunkulu nababacindezelayo kugcinwa kubonakala. Kwakungenxa yeziphambeko zabantu bakhe ukuba bathengiselwe ekuthunjweni. Futhi ukuqhubeka kwabo esonweni kwaletha isijeziso esinzima nakakhulu. Akukaze kube khona isikhathi lapho amaJuda ayebole kakhulu ngokokuziphatha, njengesizwe, njengangesikhathi efika ngaphansi kokubuswa ngamaRoma.
“‘Mighty, but not by his own power.’ The success of the Romans was owing largely to the aid of their allies, and divisions among their enemies, of which they were ever ready to take advantage. Papal Rome also was mighty by means of the secular powers over which she exercised spiritual control.
“‘Unamandla, kodwa kungenjengamandla akhe siqu.’ Impumelelo yamaRoma yayibangelwa kakhulu usizo lwabalingani bawo, kanye nokwehlukana phakathi kwezitha zawo, okwakuhlale kulungele ukuba akusebenzise. IRoma lobuPapa nayo yayinamandla ngezindlela zamandla omhlaba eyayiwaphethe ngokulawula komoya.”
“‘He shall destroy wonderfully.’ The Lord told the Jews by the prophet Ezekiel that he would deliver them to men who were ‘skilful to destroy;’ and the slaughter of eleven hundred thousand Jews at the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman army, was a terrible confirmation of the prophet’s words. And Rome in its second, or papal, phase was responsible for the death of fifty millions of martyrs.
“‘Uyochitha ngendlela emangalisayo.’ INkosi yatshela amaJuda ngomprofethi uHezekeli ukuthi yayizowanikelwa kubantu ‘abanobuciko bokubhubhisa;’ futhi ukubulawa kwamaJuda ayizigidi eziyinkulungwane namakhulu ayikhulu ngesikhathi sokubhujiswa kweJerusalema yibutho lamaRoma, kwaba ukuqinisekiswa okwesabekayo kwamazwi omprofethi. Futhi iRoma esigabeni sayo sesibili, noma sobupapa, yaba yiyo eyabangela ukufa kwabafel’ ukholo abayizigidi ezingamashumi amahlanu.”
“‘And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand.’ Rome has been distinguished above all other powers for a policy of craft, by means of which it brought the nations under its control. This is true of both pagan and papal Rome. And thus by peace it destroyed many.
“‘Ngaphezu kwalokho, nangobuqili benqubomgomo yakhe, uyokwenza inkohliso iphumelele esandleni sakhe.’ IRoma iye yagqama ngaphezu kwawo wonke amanye amandla ngenqubomgomo yobuqili, eyasebenzisa ngayo ukuletha izizwe ngaphansi kokubusa kwayo. Lokhu kuyiqiniso ngeRoma yobuqaba nangeyeRoma yobupapa. Kanjalo-ke, ngokuthula yabhubhisa abaningi.
“And Rome, finally, in the person of one of its governors, stood up against the Prince of princes, by giving sentence of death against Jesus Christ. ‘But he shall be broken without hand,’ an expression which identifies the destruction of this power with the smiting of the image of chapter 2.” Uriah Smith Daniel and the Revelation, 202–204.
“NeRoma, ekugcineni, emuntwini womunye wabaphathi bayo, yasukuma yamelana neNkosana yamakhosana, ngokukhipha isigwebo sokufa ngokumelene noJesu Kristu. ‘Kepha uyakwephulwa kungekhona ngesandla,’ inkulumo ekhomba ukucekelwa phansi kwala mandla njengokufanayo nokushaywa komfanekiso wesahluko 2.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 202–204.
Smith, twice in the passage, identifies that the prophetic characteristics of pagan and papal Rome are interchangeable, for they are simply the manifestation of Rome in its two phases, such as the mixture of iron and clay in Daniel chapter two, which Sister White identifies as symbols of churchcraft and statecraft. When Daniel identifies in the verses Smith is addressing–that Rome “shall prosper, and practice,” and that Rome “shall cause craft to prosper in his hand,”–Smith claims that in verse thirty-six that the “king” who “shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished,” identifies a prophetic characteristic of both pagan and papal Rome. Then he claims that none of the characteristics of Rome in verse thirty-six refer to the papal power.
USmith, kabili kulesi siqephu, ukhomba ukuthi izimpawu zesiprofetho zaseRoma yobuqaba neyobupapa ziyashintshana, ngokuba zimane ziyisibonakaliso seRoma ezigabeni zayo ezimbili, njengokuxubana kwensimbi nobumba kuDaniyeli isahluko sesibili, uSister White akuchaza njengezimpawu zobuqili benkolo nobuciko bombuso. Lapho uDaniyeli evesini uSmith akhuluma ngalo ekhomba ukuthi iRoma “iyophumelela, yenze,” nokuthi iRoma “iyokwenza ubuqili buphumelele esandleni sayo,”—uSmith uthi evesini lamashumi amathathu nesithupha “inkosi” “eyakuphumelela kuze kugcwaliseke intukuthelo” ikhomba isici sesiprofetho seRoma yobuqaba neyobupapa kokubili. Bese ethi akukho nesisodwa sezimpawu zeRoma evesini lamashumi amathathu nesithupha esibhekisela emandleni obupapa.
We have referred to Smith in supporting the identification of Rome being the robbers who establish the vision, and one of the four prophetic characteristics in verse fourteen is that Rome exalts themselves.
Sibhekisele kuSmith ekwesekeleni ukuqondwa kokuthi iRoma iyibo abaphangi abamisa umbono, futhi esinye sezimpawu ezine zesiprofetho evesini leshumi nane ukuthi iRoma iyaziphakamisa.
And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. Daniel 11:14.
Futhi ngalezo zikhathi abaningi bayakuvukela inkosi yaseningizimu; futhi abaphangi babantu bakho bayoziphakamisa ukuze baqinise umbono; kepha bayakuwa. Daniyeli 11:14.
Smith claims that the specifications of the king in verse thirty-six do not align with the papal power, though he earlier defended that it was Rome in verse fourteen that exalts itself. Yet the king in verse thirty-six “shall exalt himself.” That very same king in verse thirty-six would “speak marvelous things against the God of gods.” In Daniel the papal power “shall speak great words against the Most High,” and in the book of Revelation the papal power blasphemes against the Most High.
USmith uthi izimfanelo zenkosi evesini lamashumi amathathu nesithupha azihambisani namandla obupapa, nakuba ngaphambili ayemele ukuthi kwakuyiRoma evesini leshumi nane eziphakamisa ngokwayo. Nokho inkosi evesini lamashumi amathathu nesithupha “iyoziphakamisa.” Leyo kanye inkosi evesini lamashumi amathathu nesithupha “iyokhuluma izinto ezimangalisayo imelene noNkulunkulu wonkulunkulu.” Encwadini kaDaniyeli amandla obupapa “ayokhuluma amazwi amakhulu emelene noPhezukonke,” futhi encwadini yesAmbulo amandla obupapa ayahlambalaza emelene noPhezukonke.
And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. Revelation 13:5, 6.
Wanikezwa umlomo wokukhuluma izinto ezinkulu nezinhlamba; wanikezwa namandla okuqhubeka izinyanga ezingamashumi amane nambili. Wayesevula umlomo wakhe ngenhlamba emelene noNkulunkulu, ukuba ahlambalaze igama lakhe, netabernakele lakhe, nalabo abahlezi ezulwini. IsAmbulo 13:5, 6.
Every prophetic specification of the papal power is identified in verse thirty-six.
Yonke incazelo engokwesiprofetho yamandla obupapa ikhonjiswe evesini lamashumi amathathu nesithupha.
And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvelous 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.
Inkosi iyakwenza ngokwentando yayo; futhi iyozikhukhumeza, iziphakamise ngaphezu kwabo bonke onkulunkulu, ikhulume izinto ezimangalisayo ngokumelene noNkulunkulu wonkulunkulu, iphumelele kuze kuphele ulaka; ngokuba lokho okumisiwe kuyakwenziwa. Daniyeli 11:36.
Human commentators are many times unreliable, but many Adventist commentators give witness to the obvious truth that it was verse thirty-six which the apostle Paul was paraphrasing in Second Thessalonians, when he addressed the man of sin.
Abahlaziyi abangabantu bavame ukungathembeki izikhathi eziningi, kodwa abahlaziyi abaningi bama-Adventist bafakaza ngeqiniso elisobala lokuthi kwakuyivesi lamashumi amathathu nesithupha umphostoli uPawulu ayelichaza ngamanye amazwi kweyesiBili kwabaseThesalonika, lapho ekhuluma ngomuntu wesono.
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 2:2, 3.
Makungabikho umuntu onikhohlisayo nganoma iyiphi indlela; ngokuba lolo suku aluyikufika, ngaphandle kokuba kufike kuqala ukuhlubuka, kwambulwe lowo muntu wesono, indodana yokubhujiswa; omelana nakho konke okubizwa ngokuthi nguNkulunkulu, noma okukhonzwayo, aziphakamise ngaphezu kwakho konke; aze ahlale ethempelini likaNkulunkulu njengokungathi unguNkulunkulu, eziveza ukuthi yena unguNkulunkulu. 2 Thesalonika 2:2, 3.
Verse thirty-six states that “he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god,” and Paul says “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.” Clearly Smith had no prophetic authority to claim that the king of verse thirty-six was different from the king under discussion in the verses leading to verse thirty-six. Grammatically he had no justification for making his flawed application, and his claim that he did so because verse thirty-six possesses no characteristics of the papal power was a wresting of the Scripture in an attempt to establish a private interpretation.
Ivesi lamashumi amathathu nesithupha lithi “uyakuziphakamisa, azikhulise ngaphezu kwabo bonke onkulunkulu,” futhi uPawulu uthi “makwambulwe lowo muntu wesono, indodana yokulahlwa; omelana nakho konke okuthiwa nguNkulunkulu, noma okukhulekwayo, aziphakamise ngaphezu kwakho konke.” Kusobala ukuthi uSmith wayengenalo igunya lesiprofetho lokusho ukuthi inkosi yevesi lamashumi amathathu nesithupha yayihlukile enkosini okukhulunywa ngayo emavesini aholela evesini lamashumi amathathu nesithupha. Ngokohlelo lolimi wayengenakuthethelelwa nhlobo ekwenzeni kwakhe lokho kusebenzisa okunephutha, futhi isimangalo sakhe sokuthi wakwenza lokho ngoba ivesi lamashumi amathathu nesithupha lingenazo izimpawu zamandla obupapa sasiwukuphambanisa umbhalo ukuze kusungulwe incazelo yangasese.
We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:19–21.
Nathi futhi izwi lesiprofetho eliqiniseke kakhulu; enenza kahle ukuliqaphela, njengokukhanya okukhanya endaweni emnyama, kuze kuse, nenkanyezi yokusa iphume ezinhliziyweni zenu: Nikwazi lokhu kuqala, ukuthi akukho siprofetho somBhalo esingesokuzichasela komuntu siqu. Ngokuba isiprofetho asizange size endulo ngentando yomuntu; kodwa abantu abangcwele bakaNkulunkulu bakhuluma beqhutshwa nguMoya oNgcwele. 2 Petru 1:19–21.
Through the years of Laodicean Adventism there have been many Adventist theologians, pastors and authors who have addressed whether they think Smith’s application is correct or incorrect. An Australian pastor, Louis Were, who is long deceased, spent the majority of his ministry in opposing Smith’s false prophetic model. The reason for his opposition was not simply that Smith ultimately identified the king that comes to his end in verse forty-five as Turkey, but Smith’s platform also produced an incorrect application of Armageddon. In the 1980’s or thereabout an Adventist author penned a book titled, Adventists and Armageddon, Have we Misunderstood Prophecy? The author’s name is Donald Mansell, and the book is still available.
Kuyo yonke iminyaka ye-Adventism yaseLawodikeya kube khona izazi zenkolo zama-Adventist eziningi, abefundisi nababhali abaye babhekana nombuzo wokuthi bacabanga yini ukuthi ukusetshenziswa kukaSmith kunembile noma akulona iqiniso. Umfundisi wase-Australia, uLouis Were, osenesikhathi eside ashona, wachitha ingxenye enkulu yenkonzo yakhe ephikisana nomfanekiso wamanga wesiprofetho kaSmith. Isizathu sokuphikisa kwakhe kwakungesikho nje kuphela ukuthi ekugcineni uSmith wakhomba inkosi efika ekupheleni kwayo evesini lamashumi amane nanhlanu njengeTurkey, kodwa isisekelo sikaSmith saphinde saveza nokusetshenziswa okungelona iqiniso kwe-Armagedoni. Ngeminyaka yawo-1980 noma cishe ngaleso sikhathi umbhali ongum-Adventist wabhala incwadi enesihloko esithi, Adventists and Armageddon, Have we Misunderstood Prophecy? Igama lombhali nguDonald Mansell, futhi le ncwadi isatholakala.
Mansell tracks the history leading up to World War One and World War Two showing that when both those wars were seen to be approaching the Adventist evangelists began to employ Smith’s false application of Turkey marching to literal Jerusalem as a sign of Armageddon and the end of the world. He demonstrates by church membership roles that as each of the wars approached many souls were brought into the membership of the Adventist church, based upon the evangelist’s prophetic emphasis drawn from Smith’s flawed view of Armageddon.
UMansell ulandelela umlando oholela eMpi Yezwe Yokuqala naseMpi Yezwe Yesibili, ekhombisa ukuthi lapho lezo zimpi zombili sezibonakala zisondela, abavangeli bama-Adventist baqala ukusebenzisa ukusetshenziswa okungamanga kukaSmith kweTurkey emasha iya eJerusalema elingokoqobo njengophawu lwe-Armagedoni nokuphela kwezwe. Ubonisa, ngokwamarekhodi obulungu besonto, ukuthi njengoba impi ngayinye yayisondela, imiphefumulo eminingi yalethwa ebulungeni bebandla lama-Adventist, ngenxa yokugcizelela okwesiprofetho kwabavangeli okwakususelwa embonweni kaSmith onephutha nge-Armagedoni.
When either war ended, and the flawed predictions were not fulfilled, the church lost more members than they had gained from the prophetic model that was constructed by Smith.
Lapho noma iyiphi yalezo zimpi iphela, futhi izibikezelo ezazinephutha zingagcwalisekanga, ibandla lalahlekelwa amalungu amaningi kunalawo elalizuzile ngomfanekiso wesiprofetho owakhiwa nguSmith.
Through Smith’s rejection of the foundational message of the Millerites, and his willingness to promote his private interpretation of verse thirty-six to forty-five of Daniel, Smith’s logic produced a prophetic model based upon current events.
Ngokwenqaba kukaSmith umyalezo oyisisekelo wamaMillerite, nangokuvuma kwakhe ukugqugquzela ukuhumusha kwakhe siqu kwamavesi amashumi amathathu nesithupha kuya kwamashumi amane nanhlanu encwadi kaDaniyeli, umqondo kaSmith wakhiqiza imodeli yesiprofetho eyayisekelwe ezenzakalweni zamanje.
In the argument between Smith and James White over the king who comes to his end in the last verse of Daniel eleven, James White presented a logic that succinctly represented Smith’s sandy prophetic foundation. White taught that “prophecy produces history, but history does not produce prophecy.”
Empikiswaneni phakathi kukaSmith noJames White mayelana nenkosi efika ekupheleni kwayo evesini lokugcina likaDaniyeli ishumi nanye, uJames White wethula umqondo owawumela ngokufingqiwe isisekelo esinesihlabathi sesiprofetho sikaSmith. UWhite wafundisa ukuthi “isiprofetho siveza umlando, kodwa umlando awuvezi isiprofetho.”
The evangelists of Adventism that worked before both wars employed the developing history to present Smith’s flawed prophetic model of Armageddon, and their work, which seemed so blessed leading up to the wars, produced a net loss when the prophetic model was demonstrated to be based upon a private interpretation.
Abavangeli bobu-Adventism abasebenza ngaphambi kwazo zombili izimpi basebenzisa umlando owawusathuthuka ukwethula imodeli kaSmith yesiprofetho se-Armagedoni enesici, futhi umsebenzi wabo, owawubonakala ubusiswe kakhulu ekuqhubekeni okuholela kulezo zimpi, wakhiqiza ukulahlekelwa okuphelele lapho leyo modeli yesiprofetho ibonakaliswa ukuthi yayisekelwe ekuhumusheni komuntu siqu.
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Matthew 7:15–20.
Qaphelani ngabaprofethi bamanga, abeza kini bembethe okwezimvu, kodwa ngaphakathi bayizimpisi ezidla ezinye. Niyakubazi ngezithelo zabo. Ingabe abantu bakha amagilebhisi emeveni, noma amakhiwane ezinkunzaneni? Kanjalo yonke imithi emihle ithela izithelo ezinhle; kodwa umuthi omubi uthela izithelo ezimbi. Umuthi omuhle awunakuthela izithelo ezimbi, nomuthi omubi awunakuthela izithelo ezinhle. Yonke imithi engatheli izithelo ezinhle iyagawulwa, iphonswe emlilweni. Ngakho-ke niyakubazi ngezithelo zabo. NgokukaMathewu 7:15–20.
Smith’s willingness to promote a private prophetic model of the king in verse thirty-six bore the fruit of also creating an incorrect application of the Sixth Plague and Armageddon.
Ukuzimisela kukaSmith ukukhuthaza umbono oyimfihlo, ongokwesiprofetho, wenkosi evesini lamashumi amathathu nesithupha kwathela izithelo zokudala futhi ukusetshenziswa okungelona iqiniso koSizi Lwesithupha ne-Armagedoni.
And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared. And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty. Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame. And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon. Revelation 16:12–16.
Ingelosi yesithupha yathulula isitsha sayo emfuleni omkhulu i-Ewufrathe; amanzi awo asesulwa, ukuze kulungiswe indlela yamakhosi avela empumalanga. Ngase ngibona imimoya emithathu engcolileyo, enjengamaxoxo, iphuma emlonyeni kadrako, nasemlonyeni wesilo, nasemlonyeni womprofethi wamanga. Ngokuba iyimimoya yamademoni, eyenza izimangaliso, ephuma iye emakhosini omhlaba nawomhlaba wonke, ukuwabutha empini yalolo suku olukhulu lukaNkulunkulu uMninimandla onke. Bhekani, ngiza njengesela. Ubusisiwe lowo olindayo, agcine izingubo zakhe, funa ahambe enqunu, babone ihlazo lakhe. Wase ebabuthanisa ndawonye endaweni ethiwa ngolimi lwesiHeberu i-Armagedoni. IsAmbulo 16:12–16.
As we have previously pointed out, the sixth plague comes after the close of human probation, so the warning contained to keep your garments, must refer to a testing issue that occurs before Michael stands up and human probation closes and the first plague begins. The sixth plague identifies the activities of the dragon, the beast and the false prophet, who are the threefold union that comes together at the soon-coming Sunday law. That threefold union is Modern Rome, and the symbol that identifies and establishes the threefold union of Modern Rome, are the “robbers of thy people,” who “exalt themselves to establish the vision” and “fall.”
Njengoba sesike sabonisa ngaphambilini, inhlupho yesithupha iza emva kokuvalwa kwesikhathi somusa kubantu; ngakho-ke isixwayiso esiqukethwe lapho sokuba ugcine izingubo zakho kufanele sibhekisele odabeni lokuvivinywa olwenzeka ngaphambi kokuba uMikayeli asukume, isikhathi somusa sabantu sivalwe, bese kuqala inhlupho yokuqala. Inhlupho yesithupha iveza imisebenzi kadrako, yesilo, neyomprofethi wamanga, okuyinhlangano emithathu ehlanganayo emthethweni weSonto osuseduze ukuza. Leyo nhlangano emithathu iyiRoma yanamuhla, futhi uphawu oluyikhombayo noluyimisayo leyo nhlangano emithathu yeRoma yanamuhla “ngabaphangi babantu bakini,” “abaziphakamisayo ukuze baqinisekise umbono,” bese “bewa.”
The warning of the sixth plague, when understood, allows a soul to keep his garments, but if it is rejected it leaves a soul naked, which is one of the five attributes of a Laodicean. The symbol that establishes that warning is the robbers of thy people, who exalt themselves and ultimately fall. Solomon said if God’s people do not have that vision, they perish.
Isixwayiso sesifo sesithupha, uma siqondwa, sivumela umphefumulo ukuba ugcine izingubo zawo; kodwa uma senqatshwa sishiya umphefumulo unqunu, okungelinye lezici eziyisihlanu zomLaodicea. Uphawu olusungula leso sixwayiso yizigebengu zabantu bakho, eziziphakamisayo futhi ekugcineni ziwe. USolomoni wathi uma abantu bakaNkulunkulu bengenawo lowo mbono, bayabhubha.
Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he. Proverbs 29:18.
Lapho kungekho khona umbono, abantu bayabhubha; kepha ogcina umthetho, uyajabula. IzAga 29:18.
The Hebrew word “perish” means “to make naked”, and John recorded, “Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.” Smith was wrong on the King of the North, and that false prophetic foundation allowed him to develop a prophetic application that, if accepted, produces nakedness, which is a symbol of the Laodiceans, who are spewed out of the mouth of the Lord.
Igama lesiHebheru elithi “perish” lisho “ukwenza abe nqunu”, futhi uJohane waloba wathi, “Ubusisiwe ogadayo, agcine izingubo zakhe, funa ahambe enqunu, babone ihlazo lakhe.” USmith wayephambukile ngeNkosi yasenyakatho, futhi leso sisekelo samanga sesiprofetho samvumela ukuba athuthukise ukusetshenziswa kwesiprofetho okuthi, uma kwamukelwa, kuveze ubuqunu, obuyisibonakaliso samaLawodikeya, abakhafulelwa ngaphandle emlonyeni weNkosi.
Smith had no problem arguing his new false identification of the King of the North against the prophetess’ husband James White. Adventist historians, and Sister White, address their famous disagreement. Ellen White rebuked both her husband and Smith for allowing their difference of opinion on who was represented by the king of the north in Daniel eleven, to be put into the public domain. In the very first Adventist publication after the Great Disappointment of 1844, James White wrote:
USmith wayengenankinga ekuphikisaneni ngokukhomba kwakhe okusha okuyiphutha kweNkosi yaseNyakatho ephikisana nomyeni womprofethikazi, uJames White. Izazi-mlando zama-Adventist, kanye noDade White, zikhuluma ngokungavumelani kwabo okwaduma kakhulu. U-Ellen White wakhuza kokubili umyeni wakhe noSmith ngokuvumela ukwehluka kwemibono yabo mayelana nokuthi ngubani owayemelwe yinkosi yasenyakatho kuDaniyeli ishumi nanye ukuba kufakwe obala emphakathini. Encwadini yokuqala ngqa yama-Adventist eyashicilelwa emva koKudumazeka Okukhulu kwango-1844, uJames White wabhala:
“That Jesus rose up, and shut the door, and came to the Ancient of days, to receive his kingdom, at the 7th month, 1844, I fully believe. See Luke 13:25; Matthew 25:10; Daniel 7:13,14. But the standing up of Michael, Daniel 12:1, appears to be another event, for another purpose. His rising up in 1844, was to shut the door, and come to his Father, to receive his kingdom, and power to reign; but Michael’s standing up, is to manifest his kingly power, which he already has, in the destruction of the wicked, and in the deliverance of his people. Michael is to stand up at the time that the last power in chapter 11, comes to his end, and none to help him. This power is the last that treads down the true church of God: and as the true church is still trodden down, and cast out by all christendom, it follows that the last oppressive power has not ‘come to his end;’ and Michael has not stood up. This last power that treads down the saints is brought to view in Revelation 13:11-18. His number is 666.” James White, A Word to the Little Flock, 8.
“Ukuthi uJesu wasukuma, wavala umnyango, futhi weza koMdala wezinsuku, ukuze amukele umbuso wakhe, ngenyanga yesi-7, ngo-1844, ngikukholwa ngokuphelele. Bheka kuLuka 13:25; kuMathewu 25:10; kuDaniyeli 7:13,14. Kodwa ukuma kukaMikayeli, kuDaniyeli 12:1, kubonakala kuyisenzakalo esinye, ngenjongo ehlukile. Ukusukuma kwakhe ngo-1844 kwakungokokuvala umnyango, nokuza kuYise, ukuze amukele umbuso wakhe, namandla okubusa; kodwa ukuma kukaMikayeli kungokokubonakalisa amandla akhe obukhosi, asevele enawo, ekubhujisweni kwababi, nasekukhululweni kwabantu bakhe. UMikayeli uyokuma ngesikhathi amandla okugcina esahlukweni 11 efika ekugcineni kwawo, kungekho omsizayo. La mandla yiwo okugcina anyathela phansi ibandla likaNkulunkulu leqiniso: futhi njengoba ibandla leqiniso lisanyathelwa phansi, futhi lisaxoshwa yibo bonke abasezweni lobuKristu, kulandela ukuthi amandla okugcina okucindezela awakafiki ‘ekugcineni kwawo;’ futhi uMikayeli akakami. La mandla okugcina anyathela phansi abangcwele avezwa kusAmbulo 13:11-18. Inani lawo lingu-666.” James White, A Word to the Little Flock, 8.
When Smith introduced his so-called “new light” on the subject of “the last power in Daniel chapter eleven,” James White saw Smith’s application, not as new light, but as an attack upon the foundations. The controversy of Rome as the king of the north in Daniel eleven that took place between Uriah Smith and James White possesses specific attributes, that as students of prophecy, we are to bring together with the other controversies of Adventist history concerning the symbol of Rome.
Lapho uSmith ethula lokho akubiza ngokuthi “ukukhanya okusha” mayelana nesihloko esithi “amandla okugcina kuDaniyeli isahluko seshumi nanye,” uJames White wabona ukusetshenziswa kukaSmith, kungesikho njengokukhanya okusha, kodwa njengokuhlasela izisekelo. Impikiswano yokuthi iRoma iyinkosi yasenyakatho kuDaniyeli isahluko seshumi nanye eyenzeka phakathi kukaUriah Smith noJames White inezimpawu eziqondile okufanele thina, njengabafundi besiprofetho, sizihlanganise nezinye izimpikiswano zomlando wama-Adventist eziphathelene nophawu lweRoma.
One of those attributes is the introduction of a private interpretation. Another attribute is that the application of the private interpretation requires a wresting of simple grammar, for Smith not only disregarded that every prophetic attribute in verse thirty-six addresses Rome, but he disregarded that the grammatical structure demands that the king of verse thirty-six must be the same king as represented in the previous passage.
Esinye salezo zimfanelo ukwethulwa kwencazelo yangasese. Esinye futhi isici siwukuthi ukusetshenziswa kwaleyo ncazelo yangasese kudinga ukuphambaniswa kohlelo lolimi olulula, ngoba uSmith akagcinanga ngokunganaki ukuthi zonke izimfanelo zesiprofetho evesini lamashumi amathathu nesithupha zibhekiswe eRoma, kodwa futhi wanganaki ukuthi ukwakheka kohlelo lolimi kufuna ukuba inkosi yevesi lamashumi amathathu nesithupha ibe yiyo kanye leyo nkosi emelwe esigabeni esandulelayo.
Another is that the private interpretation was a rejection of foundational truths. Another is that it represents a rejection of the authority of the Spirit of Prophecy. Another characteristic is that the first flawed idea concerning Rome will lead to a prophetic model that disallows a person from keeping his garments as they approach the close of human probation. Another was the willingness to promote his private interpretation publicly. Another is that the private interpretation is invariably identified as new light. All of these attributes are represented within the current discussion of the “robbers of thy people.”
Esinye isici siwukuthi ukuhumusha okuyimfihlo kwakuyikwenqaba amaqiniso ayisisekelo. Esinye siwukuthi kumele ukwenqatshwa kwegunya loMoya Wokuprofetha. Esinye isici siwukuthi umqondo wokuqala onephutha mayelana neRoma uyoholela esimisweni sokuprofetha esingavumeli umuntu ukuba agcine izingubo zakhe njengoba besondela ekuvalweni kwesikhathi sokuhlolwa kwabantu. Esinye kwakuyikuzimisela ukukhuthaza obala ukuhumusha kwakhe okuyimfihlo. Esinye siwukuthi ukuhumusha okuyimfihlo ngokungaguquki kubizwa ngokuthi ukukhanya okusha. Zonke lezi zimpawu zibonakaliswa ngaphakathi kwengxoxo yamanje “ngabaphangi babantu bakho.”
When the last controversy of Rome, which was typified by the first controversy of Rome identifying the “robbers of thy people,” is brought together with the prophetic line of Uriah Smith’s and James White’s controversy we will see that one class will be building their prophetic model upon a private interpretation, which rejects foundational truth.
Lapho impikiswano yokugcina yaseRoma, eyafanekiselwa yimpikiswano yokuqala yaseRoma ehlonza “abaphangi babantu bakho,” ihlanganiswa nomugqa wesiprofetho wempikiswano ka-Uriah Smith nekaJames White, siyobona ukuthi isigaba esithile siyobe sakha imodeli yaso yesiprofetho phezu kwencazelo yangasese, enqaba iqiniso eliyisisekelo.
The rejection of the foundational truths automatically represents a rejection of the authority of the Spirit of Prophecy, which so soundly defends those foundational truths. That class will also be willing to present their view publicly, regardless of any concerns that may be raised about the impact the teaching might have upon God’s people around the globe.
Ukwaliwa kwamaqiniso ayisisekelo ngokuzenzakalelayo kusho ukwaliwa kwegunya loMoya Wokuprofetha, ovikela lawo maqiniso ayisisekelo ngokuqina okukhulu. Lelo qembu liyakube futhi lizimisele ukwethula umbono walo obala, kungakhathaliseki noma yikuphi ukukhathazeka okungase kuvezwe ngomthelela le mfundiso engaba nawo phezu kwabantu bakaNkulunkulu emhlabeni wonke.
Immediately after 1844, in the first generation of Adventism, another controversy about Rome was introduced. That controversy continued to be agitated, until the false view was accepted in the third generation of Adventism. We will consider the controversy of the “daily” as the fourth of six lines we are now considering in the model of line upon line.
Ngokushesha ngemva kuka-1844, esizukulwaneni sokuqala soBu-Adventist, kwangeniswa enye impikiswano mayelana neRoma. Leyo mpikiswano yaqhubeka ivuswa, kwaze kwaba yilapho umbono wamanga wamukelwa esizukulwaneni sesithathu soBu-Adventist. Sizocabangela impikiswano “yemihla ngemihla” njengowesine emigqeni eyisithupha esesiyihlola manje esibonelweni somugqa phezu komugqa.
But before we take up the fourth line of the controversies of Rome, it needs to be remembered that in the previous article, when we were addressing verse ten of Daniel chapter eleven, we stated “Verse ten also directly connects the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six to the hidden history, but that line of truth is outside what we are here setting forth.”
Kodwa ngaphambi kokuba siqale ngomugqa wesine wezingxabano zaseRoma, kudingeka kukhunjulwe ukuthi esihlokweni esedlule, ngesikhathi sikhuluma ngevesi leshumi likaDaniyeli isahluko seshumi nanye, sathi: “Ivesi leshumi nalo lixhumanisa ngokuqondile ‘izikhathi eziyisikhombisa’ zikaLevitikusi amashumi amabili nesithupha nomlando ofihlekile, kodwa lowo mugqa weqiniso ungaphandle kwalokho esikubeka lapha.”
Uriah Smith was the leader in rejecting the seven times in 1863. He had rejected the increase of knowledge upon that subject that was presented in the articles on the subject, penned by Hiram Edson and published in the Review in 1856. The implications of Smith being associated with a movement that presented the seven times, but who thereafter rejected an increase of knowledge upon that very subject is also outside of the subject of the characteristics of Smith’s introduction of what he claimed was new light on the subject of the king of the north, but when we conclude our overview of the line of the Adventist controversies of Rome, we will return to both the significance of verse ten of chapter eleven of Daniel, and also what is represented by Smith’s rejection of the Laodicean message that arrived in 1856 with the increase of knowledge on the seven times.
Uriah Smith wayengumholi ekwenqabeni izikhathi eziyisikhombisa ngo-1863. Wayelwenqabile ukwanda kolwazi ngaleyo ndaba olwalwethulwe ezihlokweni ezazimayelana naleyo ndaba, ezabhalwa nguHiram Edson futhi zashicilelwa ku-Review ngo-1856. Nemiphumela yokuthi uSmith wayehlobene nenhlangano eyayethula izikhathi eziyisikhombisa, kodwa eyabe isenqaba ukwanda kolwazi ngaleso sihloko uqobo lwaso, nayo ingaphandle kwesihloko sezimpawu zokwethulwa nguSmith kwalokho ayethi kwakuyisibani esisha esihlokweni senkosi yasenyakatho; kodwa lapho sesiphetha ukubukeza kwethu umugqa wezimpikiswano zama-Adventist ngeRoma, sizobuyela kokubili ekubalulekeni kwevesi leshumi lesahluko seshumi nanye sikaDaniyeli, kanye nakulokho okumelelwa ukwenqaba kukaSmith umlayezo waseLawodikeya owafika ngo-1856 kanye nokwanda kolwazi ngezikhathi eziyisikhombisa.
“Our faith in reference to the messages of the first, second, and third angels was correct. The great waymarks we have passed are immovable. Although the hosts of hell may try to tear them from their foundation, and triumph in the thought that they have succeeded, yet they do not succeed. These pillars of truth stand firm as the eternal hills, unmoved by all the efforts of men combined with those of Satan and his host. We can learn much, and should be constantly searching the Scriptures to see if these things are so.” Evangelism, 223.
“Ukukholwa kwethu mayelana nemiyalezo yezingelosi zokuqala, zesibili, nezesithathu kwakulungele. Izimpawu ezinkulu zendlela esesedlule kuzo azinyakaziseki. Nakuba amabutho esihogo engase azame ukuzikhipha ezisekelweni zazo, futhi anqobe ngomcabango wokuthi aphumelele, nokho awaphumeleli. Lezi zinsika zeqiniso zimi ziqinile njengezintaba zaphakade, zinganyakaziswa yimizamo yonke yabantu ehlangene naleyo kaSathane nebutho lakhe. Singafunda okuningi, futhi kufanele sihlale sihlola imiBhalo ukuze sibone ukuthi lezi zinto zinjalo yini.” Evangelism, 223.
“The great waymarks of truth, showing us our bearings in prophetic history, are to be carefully guarded, lest they be torn down, and replaced with theories that would bring confusion rather than genuine light.” Selected Messages, book 2, 101, 102.
“Izimpawu ezinkulu zeqiniso, ezisibonisa ukuma kwethu emlandweni wesiprofetho, kufanele zigcinwe ngokucophelela, funa zidilizwe, bese zithathelwa indawo yizimfundiso ezingaletha ukudideka kunokukhanya kweqiniso.” Selected Messages, book 2, 101, 102.
“At this time many efforts will be made to unsettle our faith in the sanctuary question; but we must not waver. Not a pin is to be moved from the foundations of our faith. Truth is still truth. Those who become uncertain will drift into erroneous theories, and will finally find themselves infidel in regard to the past evidence we have had of what is truth. The old waymarks must be preserved, that we lose not our bearings.” Manuscript Releases, volume 1, 55
“Ngalesi sikhathi kuyokwenziwa imizamo eminingi yokuphazamisa ukholo lwethu embuzweni wendlu engcwele; kodwa akumelwe sintenge. Akukho ngisho nephini okufanele lisuswe ezisekelweni zokholo lwethu. Iqiniso lisehlale liyiqiniso. Labo ababa nokungaqiniseki bayokhukhuleka bangene emibonweni eyiphutha, futhi ekugcineni bayozithola sebengabangakholwayo maqondana nobufakazi besikhathi esedlule esibe nabo bokuthi liyini iqiniso. Izimpawu ezindala zendlela kumelwe zigcinwe, ukuze singalahlekelwa ukuqondisa kwethu.” Manuscript Releases, umqulu 1, 55