Do we know what the way marks are? One of the points in this handout that we began giving out last night is the way marks. You have that handout on page 12. The 16th point that we refer to from time to time is the way marks. And if you take the 18th, forget the date, it's the Webster's Dictionary that was contemporary with Ellen White. If you take that dictionary and you look up the word way mark, the definition, which is very simple, it's marks along the way. That's what a way mark is, is a mark along the way. And we talk about way marks, and we may not realize that we need to understand what the way marks are. The quote on the top of page 12 from Selected Messages, book 2, page 101 says, The great way marks of truth, showing us our bearing 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. So it's a serious question. Do we know what the way marks are? Because we have the responsibility to protect the way marks, and how can we protect the way marks if we don't know what they are? And in connection with that, she has warned us that whatever the way marks may be, there will be an attempt to tear them down in Adventism. I would submit to you that the way marks that need to be guarded are the events that took place in the Millerite time period. And we won't take time to go into that, but in the next quote there, from Councils to Writers and Editors, page 26, it says, The proclamation of the first, second, and third angels' message have been located by the word of inspiration. This is emphasizing where they arrived in history. It's not talking about what the theological meaning of the first, second, and third angels' message are. It's saying that the first, second, and third angels' message have a point where they came into history. The proclamation of the first, second, and third angels' message have been located by the word of inspiration. Not a peg or pin is to be removed. No human authority has any more right to change the location of these messages than to substitute the New Testament for the old. The first and second angels' messages were given in 1843 and 1844, and we are now under the proclamation of the third, but all three of these messages are still to be proclaimed. It is just as essential now as ever before that they shall be repeated to those who are seeking for the truth. By pen and voice, we are to sound the proclamation, showing their order and the application of the prophecies that bring us to the third angels' message. There cannot be a third without a first and second. These messages we are to give to the world in publications and discourses, showing in the line of prophetic history the things which have been and the things which will be. The way marks, the historical steps that took place in the Millerite time period, we are to understand and defend because there will be an attack upon the correct understanding of the location, purpose, understanding of these messages, and we are to continue to present these truths to the very end. Yet here at the end of the world, we are unfamiliar with the history where these way marks arrived, and by and large, we don't understand that there has already been attacks on these foundational understandings, foundational way marks. So we're going to enter—the song set me off there. That was added to whatever we're going to do here. I want to emphasize for you, once again, that the 2520, although it was understood by the Millerites, it really, from my study—and I haven't studied but a small percentage of pioneer history—from my understanding, there wasn't much discussion or agitation about the 2520 time prophecy after, say, 1856, when Hiram Edson's articles came out. One of the most—perhaps the most important prophetic truths that we present is the last six verses of Daniel 11. Don't have time to cover that here this afternoon. Daniel 11, verse 40, is describing the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989, and Daniel 11, verse 41, is describing the Sunday Law in the United States. Seventh-day Adventists need to understand that the final events of prophecy were marked by the collapse of the Soviet Union, and that the next thing that's going to happen is the Sunday Law in the United States. That's how serious these verses are, but we do not have time, really, to look at them at this point. And the argument of those verses—and the argument of those verses, by the way, brothers and sisters, it has went back and forth in self-supporting ministry in Adventism, and it's went back and forth all the way to the highest levels of the General Conference. This discussion has taken place on the understanding that we present of the last six verses of Daniel 11. And the argument that really—where the argument really takes place on the last six verses of Daniel 11 is verse 41 of Daniel 11, because in verse 41 of Daniel 11, the King of the North enters the Glorious Land, and the Glorious Land of Daniel 11, verse 41, is the United States of America. And the counter-argument to that is that the Glorious Land is the Seventh-day Adventist Church. And we've participated in this dialogue and discussion for ten years, with the main self-supporting ministries in Adventism, and with the theologians that guide the Biblical Research Institute of the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Whether you're aware of these discussions or not doesn't deny that they have taken place. And the issue always boils down to the Glorious Land. What is the Glorious Land? And we have contended for at least 18 strong reasons that the Glorious Land is the United States of America. It is not the Seventh-day Adventist Church. So about three years ago, some friends of ours who regularly read the Pioneer's materials, they were reading these articles by Hiram Edson, where he deals with the 2520. And Hiram Edson's logic in these articles, if you have the time you need to read these articles, is he believed in the scattering and gathering, and he believed that the gathering was going to take place at the end of this 2520 time period. And based upon Bible prophecy, and his articles are powerful upon Bible prophecy, he demonstrates that when the Lord raises up His covenant people, His spiritual modern Israel at the end of the world, He would do it after the scattering time, and that He would do it in the United States of America. It's one of the most powerful defenses of the Adventist understanding of the United States in Bible prophecy that you'll find. And in his presentation, there is a point where he says that the Glorious Land of Daniel 1141 is the United States of America. Now you have to understand, we've had many, many formal and informal arguments for many, many years about the Glorious Land being the United States, as opposed to the Glorious Land being the Seventh-day Adventist Church. So when these friends found that Hiram Edson, one of the primary pioneers, concluded that the Glorious Land of Daniel 11, verse 41, was the United States, they got on the phone with me and they said, you know what, Hiram Edson, he agrees with your contention that the Glorious Land, verse 41, is the United States, which is good. Which is good, if you can say, hey, this is a pioneer position. But it was for that reason, about three years ago or so, that we began reading these articles of Hiram Edson. You know, if you're going to bring him in as one of the points of reference on that subject, then you need to look at the material and become familiar with it, but his basic argument in these articles was the 2520. So about three years ago, there was a group of us that began to be confronted with the 2520, and I promise you that I knew less about the 2520 three years ago than you did before you got here this morning. I didn't know anything about it either, but even though I had been promoting the 1843 chart for over a decade, the 1843 chart was important enough to me that over ten years ago we had this chart translated into Spanish and printed into Spanish. We have this chart in Spanish. I knew over a decade ago that for me, this chart was important to look at, and even though I was promoting this chart in more than one language around the world, I still hadn't seen the 2520. It was sealed up to my understanding as well as yours, but when we came upon Hiram Edson's articles, then it was very interesting. I mean, even if you haven't tested it, even if you don't accept it, how many followed the logic of this morning's presentation on the 2520? Fairly easy to see, right? And interesting, even if you don't buy it or if you don't understand how it impacts our personal salvation or anything like that, it's easy to see. So that's how we got led into looking at the 2520, and after a period of time, at the beginning of last year's when the light came on that, hey, William Miller and Hiram Edson, though they were disagreeing with one another, they were both right. And once you see that the 2520 is on both the southern and northern kingdom, then it turns on many other lights. And I would submit to you, I would twist your arm spiritually to go ahead and get a hold of the Idaho Blythe DVDs and look at these subjects in depth. There's more to be said, and the understanding of the 2520 is only unfolding. In the past two months, I've had three very good emails from people around the world that are looking at this thing that are finding any other truths connected with the 2520 that have never been recognized before. It's a bigger subject than we realized. But the purpose, what we're trying to accomplish here, among other things this weekend, is to reacquaint ourselves with some of the foundations of Adventism, because the foundations of Adventism were established between 1840 and 1844 by the Millerites. And this chart is absolutely part of that history that we read last night. It's in this handout, James White's statement that if you don't believe that that chart was brought about through inspiration, then you leave the original faith. That's how James White related to this chart. You have that quote in the notes. It was part of the history. Every Millerite was using this chart. Every Millerite preacher had this chart. Sister White says this chart was directed by the hand of the Lord, and it should not be altered. How many are familiar with the quote where Sister White says, we have many things to learn? Now, that's only half the sentence. Sister White has a quote. She uses the quote more than once. She says, we have many things to learn, and many, many to unlearn. You familiar with that quote? Lot to learn, but evidently somewhere along the line we've learned some things that are incorrect. One of those things, I believe, is illustrated on this chart. I'm going to move away from the 2520. Where we're going, by the way. Brothers and sisters, where we're going. I'll give you an overview because I would hope, but I'm a realist and I have an experience in this. I know that the biggest group of people was here last meeting, and we're going to dwindle down throughout the day, and very few of you are going to return tomorrow. But the reality of this presentation is the punchline comes tomorrow. The most important part is tomorrow, and you can't give the punchline without preparing the logical structure to put the punchline in place. So the Holy Spirit can convict us of the seriousness of it. It's just wrong to come out and tell you that Luke 21 is absolutely identifying that we are the final generation, and that probation is about to close. But by the end of the day tomorrow, you will see that, Lord willing, in a very profound way. And that's where we're going. We're using this chart as a point of reference to get there. And what we're suggesting is that the foundational understanding of the Millerites is illustrated upon this chart. And I selected the 2520 as a hook, because from my experience when you do the 2520, it's easy to understand, and it's interesting, and it awakens a curiosity, a sanctified curiosity. And I'm hoping that that keeps you hanging on. But we want to deal with one other aspect of the chart that's located right here in the dead center. A friend of mine that says, you know, Jeff, Sister White says the 1843 chart was directed by the hand of the Lord, and it should not be altered, and therefore, this brother contends that not only the information on this chart was directed by the hand of the Lord, but the actual preparation of this chart, and he says the very dead center of this chart is the cross, but right below it, still in the center, is the year 508. And brothers and sisters, when it comes to the year 508, we have many things to learn, and many, many things to unlearn. So we're going to take up 508 a little bit here. And where we're going, just as an overview of where we get to tomorrow, is we're going to go down here to the trumpets. Brothers and sisters, the pioneers of Adventism had a very specific understanding of the seven trumpets of Revelation. If you maintain their understanding of the trumpets, as we very rarely do in Adventism today, if you maintain the pioneer position of the trumpets, then you understand, you can demonstrate from Bible prophecy that September 11, 2001, was a fulfillment of Bible prophecy, and that at that point in time, the third woe began in the history of the world. But if you throw out the pioneer understanding, you will have no logical...you just don't have the point of reference to make that case. We'll try to make that case for you tomorrow. But here, we want to deal with this. Brothers and sisters, in the passage in early writings, where Sister White first talks about the scattering and gathering, I'm in the same paragraph, I'm cutting into the middle of that paragraph, she says, after she talks about the scattering and gathering, she says, I have seen that the 1843 chart was directed by the hand of the Lord, and that it should not be altered, that the figures were as he wanted them, and that his hand was over and hid a mistake in some of the figures, so that none could see it until his hand was removed. Notice what she says next. Then I saw in relation to the daily, that the word sacrifice was added by human wisdom and does not belong to the text, and that the Lord gave the correct view of it to those who gave the judgment our cry. How many of you understand that Wagner lost confidence in the spirit of prophecy, Wagner of Jones and Wagner fame? It's a historical fact. Wagner lost his confidence in Ellen White as a prophetess. Do you know what the main component to that loss of confidence was? It's the two sentences that we just read. He came to understand that the daily in the book of Daniel represented Christ's sanctuary ministry in heaven, and he understood that Sister White here was clearly endorsing the Millerite position that the daily in the book of Daniel represented paganism, and therefore she was endorsing an erroneous position, and he could not resolve that problem in his mind, because he expected the prophet to be perfect. Don't you? Sister White says here very plainly, brothers and sisters, the Lord gave the correct view of the daily to those who gave the judgment our cry, and all you have to do is go back and look to the pioneer writings that have been recorded, and you find that the pioneers understood that the daily in the book of Daniel represented paganism. In fact, the understanding that the daily in the book of Daniel represented Christ's sanctuary ministry had pre-existed the Millerite time period, it was the old Protestant view, and it was only resurrected by a man named Conradi from Europe. How many know who Conradi is? Conradi is someone that, Louis Conradi, that ultimately rejected Adventism, but the historians correctly identify that the main reason that the European Adventists have very little regard for the spirit of prophecy is from the influence of Louis Conradi on his way into darkness. But he, in the turn of the 20th century, he introduced a new idea on the daily. It's called the new view in Adventist history, but it's not the new view, it's simply the old Protestant view. And if you're going to cover the daily, if I'm going to cover the daily, and touch every little point along the way that I'm convicted needs to be touched, it takes several presentations, I'm not going to do that, so just relax, I'm just going to touch a couple points, the Lord willing. You need to understand a little bit about the history, but not much. There's probably 10 or 15 arguments that are commonly brought up about the daily when it's discussed. One of the arguments, by the way, the first one you receive, there's probably some, based on my experience, there's probably some right here in this audience that are saying, you know, Pippinger's stepping over the line right now because Sister White says that we're not supposed to agitate or talk about the subject of the daily. And brothers and sisters, she sort of says that, but she doesn't say that. She does not say that. And you will not believe how many times, how many different countries in the world I've had Adventists tell me, Sister White says we're not supposed to touch the subject of the daily. And I say, give me the quote, brother, give me the quote, sister. Because when she says that, and she says it more than once, if you read the entire passage, she always qualifies it. She says under the current circumstances, in the present situation, under these conditions, it's always qualified to the argument that was going on at that time and place. Never once are you going to find her saying that we should never discuss the daily. She doesn't say that. There's arguments such as that on the subject of the daily that pop up. There's several of them. You become familiar with them as you discuss the daily. That's one of the first ones you become familiar with. But what I want to remind you of today in Adventism, we teach that the daily represents Christ's sanctuary ministry. Maybe a better way to articulate that. If you've been following the Sabbath school quarterlies over the past couple of years, then you know what I mean. That's what we are teaching today. And that was the old Protestant view. And William Miller faced that argument. William Miller actually dealt with that argument. And you know what William Miller said? He says if you believe the daily in the book of Daniel represents Christ's sanctuary ministry, you destroy 1844 and the 2300 year prophecy. That's what William Miller said. Why would he say that? Let me show you something, if you would, without... And I'm familiar... Brothers and sisters, I understand that we know very little about the daily. That's my experience with Adventists. I understood very little about the daily early on. Because we generally understand very little about the daily in the book of Daniel, then we have no real information base that allows us to determine whether it's important or unimportant to even discuss it or pursue it. You may be in the position right now that you're thinking, you know, maybe what they say Sister White says, though she never said it, about not discussing the daily is correct. Maybe that's correct. Why are we discussing this? Is it important or is it not important? For me, the reason that I'm discussing it is because I'm under conviction that it is very important. The logic that it is very important is this, brothers and sisters, it's a very simple logic. The daily represents paganism in a general sense, but in a specific sense it represented pagan Rome. That's the pioneer. The pioneers say that too. The pioneers say the daily in the book of Daniel represents paganism in its general sense. Paganism at large, but in a specific sense, the daily represents pagan Rome. And brothers and sisters, pagan Rome is the power that placed the papacy on the throne of the Earth in 538, and Christ is the first and the last. Christ portrays the end of the world with the beginning of the world. He portrays the end of the papacy with the beginning of the papacy, and the power that placed the papacy on the throne of the Earth in 538 is pagan Rome. And pagan in Rome is prefiguring the work of the power that at the end of the world places the papacy on the throne of the Earth. Then what's the power that places the papacy on the throne of the Earth here at the end of the world? It's the United States of America. If you do not understand in its complete form the role of pagan Rome placing the papacy on the throne of the Earth in 538, you cannot intelligently from prophecy understand what George Bush in the United States and the Congress is doing in the world today, and you and I need to understand that because that is the third angel's message. If you remove one of the main teachings of what pagan Rome is, the daily, you limit your ability to understand what's going on in the United States and in the world today. So for me, it's important to understand the daily correctly. But let's go back to William Miller's logic. As I said, there's probably 10 or 15 points on the discussion of the daily. I want to show you a very simple one in Daniel chapter 8, if you would go there with me. If you're there, please say amen. In Daniel chapter 8, you will find the word vision about 10 times. Verse 1, you see the word vision. Two times in verse 2, you see the word vision. In verse 13, you see the word vision. In verse 15, you see the word vision. In verse 16, you see the word vision. In verse 17, you see the word vision. In verse 26, you see the word vision twice. And in verse 27, you see the word vision. But brothers and sisters, that word vision, it's two different Hebrew words. And it's not until you understand the meaning of those two different Hebrew words and you correctly put the definition in each of the verses that you really begin to bring some clarity into Daniel chapter 8. There was a time about three or four years ago where a brother called together a meeting. He contacted the leadership of the general conference and said, would you submit a man to come teach us what the last six verses of Daniel 11 are, and we're going to have others teaching with the last six verses of Daniel 11, and we're going to come together and see if we can come into agreement on what these verses are speaking about. And the general conference sent a brother that was a biblical scholar. I covet, you can covet certain things, I covet his gifts. I mean, he had an understanding of biblical literature, biblical languages that was just wonderful. I wish I had that. I don't have that. You know, he was one of these brethren that you turn to the Old Testament and the King James and you read it and he'll tell you what it was in the Hebrew off the top of his head. And if you turn to the New Testament and read it, he's going to tell you what it was in the Greek. And he was, from all my human perspective, he was a nice Christian gentleman and his understanding of the last six verses of Daniel 11 was different than what we were presenting. And he would present for 45 minutes, then have 30 minutes questions, answers, and we would do the same. And we went back and forth for a while doing that. And he would agree with, he agreed with the two definitions of the word vision that I'm going to give you. What I'm saying is an opponent, an adversary. I had no problem with the definitions that I'm going to hang up on these two Hebrew words that are translated vision. So you need to test them out for yourself. But they're, it's a fair representation. One of these words means the complete vision. The Hebrew word chauzon that's translated vision, it means the entire complete vision. The other word that's translated vision in Daniel chapter 8, mare, means snapshot. This is my definition, snapshot, means a singular vision. In fact, there's one verse in Daniel 8 where it isn't translated as vision, this word mare that means snapshot. It's translated appearance, it's a singular appearance. So one of the words that's translated vision means the complete vision. And one means just a singular appearance. You know the old movie film you had on a roll that was hundreds of slides connected together, hundreds of pictures. Well, the chauzon vision is the complete roll of film, and the mare vision is just one of those slides. You follow the logic? You need to follow this logic. Once you see this logic, you can see what William Miller meant, all right? Look at verse 13 of Daniel 8. Then I heard one saint speaking unto, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, how long shall be the vision? Now brothers and sisters, this word vision is chauzon, it means the complete vision. The question here is how long shall be the complete vision? Brothers and sisters, what we're dealing with here, Daniel 8 13. This is the question that brings about the answer in Daniel 8 14, right? Unto 2300 days and then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. We're dealing with the foundation of Adventism. In terms of the understanding that justifies the message, experience, and history of Adventism, this is sacred ground. You are required to be listening to what I say, not to accept it, but to determine whether what I'm saying is accurate or not, because if I'm teaching something here that is erroneous, I'm teaching something erroneous on the very foundation of Adventism. We're on sacred ground. Please pay close attention. The question is not about a point in time, it's about duration. The question is how long. If the question was about a point in time, it would say when. Follow my logic? How long shall be the complete vision? Am I losing you? I get a sense that you're following me here. The question is about duration. How long shall be the complete vision? And then the verse is going to tell us what the complete vision is about. How long is the complete vision concerning the daily sacrifice? Now brothers and sisters, if you all have a King James Version, you'll see that word sacrifice is italicized, right? What's it mean when a word in the King James Version is italicized? It was added by the translators, it's not in the original language. Their understanding and translating, it's a word that just brings clarity into the verse. And if you thumb through your King James Bible, how many added words do you assume there are in the King James Bible? Hundreds, right? Every page has italicized words. So let me ask you a question. And remember, we have a quote. We started with, it was one of the points we made last night. Mr. White tells us, every fact has its bearing. How many added words in the Bible has Inspiration specifically told us that they don't belong there? Of the hundreds of added words in the Bible, of those hundreds of words, how many times does Inspiration say that word don't belong there? Just once. And it's in this quote in early writings. Then I saw in relation to the daily that the word sacrificed was supplied by human wisdom and does not belong to the text. So brothers and sisters, every fact has its bearing. The question in verse 13 is how long shall be the complete vision concerning the daily and the transgression of desolation. And when you say daily and the transgression of desolation, then you're identifying two desolating powers. That's how the pioneers related to it. First desolating power is represented by the word daily. The second desolating power is represented by the word transgression. There are two desolating powers here. But the question is, how long shall these two powers, and then it tells what they're going to do. First the verse says that these two powers are going to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden underfoot. The pioneer view is that you have two desolating powers here. One represented by the word daily. One represented by the word transgression. That we're going to trample down the sanctuary and the host and we're going to do it over a period of time. Because the question is, how long is the complete vision? So with that in mind, let's consider William Miller's logic. William Miller says, because he was dealing simply with the old Protestant view that was resurrected in 1901 by Conradi, that the daily in the book of Daniel represented Christ's sanctuary ministry. And William Miller says that the daily represents Christ's sanctuary ministry. Then you destroy 1844 and the 2300 year prophecy. And here's his logic. The question is, is how long? Whatever the daily represents, brothers and sisters, the question is about duration. How long is the complete vision concerning the daily and the transgression of desolation? If you followed the Sabbath school quarterlies over the past few years, and some of the books that have been written, and the teachings that are available on this subject in Adventism for many years, we now teach, we now believe that the daily represents Christ's sanctuary ministry. And that the transgression of desolation in this verse represents the papacy. Now brothers and sisters, the pioneers believed that the transgression of desolation in this verse represented the papacy, the papal power. So when it comes to the transgression of desolation in verse 13, the pioneers and the modern theologians are in agreement. But when it comes to the daily, the pioneers and the modern theologians disagree. The Millerites believed that the daily represented paganism, a desolating power. We now teach that it represents Christ's sanctuary ministry. But verse 13 is a question about duration of time. So let's assume that the daily in verse 13 represents Christ's sanctuary ministry. When was it that Christ began his high priestly sanctuary ministry? I don't know why this always, this question always brings about silence. I know it's a simple question, but I don't know why we're afraid to answer this simple question. When did Christ ascend to the heavenly sanctuary? After his death. When did he anoint and begin the sanctuary service? At Pentecost. What year was that? How about 31 AD? So Christ began his sanctuary ministry in 31 AD. If you understand that, say amen. If you don't understand that, say amen. I don't know. We need to nail this down. What we're saying here is that we all understand that when Christ ascended after the cross, he began the work as high priest in the heavenly sanctuary, and the year 31 AD is the year that we can all agree upon, right? So the question is about duration, and the question is, how long is the complete vision concerning Christ's sanctuary ministry and the papacy that tramples down the sanctuary and the host? Brothers and sisters, the earliest that we can say that Christ began his sanctuary ministry was the year 31. We just all agreed upon that, correct? The question is about duration. It's about the complete vision. The question is, how long is this complete vision about Christ's sanctuary ministry and the work of the papacy in obscuring his work in the heavenly sanctuary and trampling it down? That's the way the modern theologians state this question, but the question, you can't get away from it. It's about duration. What is the answer to the question? Verse 14, under 2,300 days. So what is the answer? It's 1844, right? We know that 2,300 years ended in 1844, right? The answer is under 2,300 days or 100 years, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Brothers and sisters, the complete vision of verse 13 that includes Christ's sanctuary ministry and the work of the papacy, the earliest that you can start it based upon the verse is 31 AD, if you believe the daily represents Christ's sanctuary ministry. And if you take that position, then you have to add 2,300 years to 31 AD, and it's not until the year 2331 that the sanctuary is cleansed and Christ begins the judgment. And that's why William Miller says, if you believe the daily represents Christ's sanctuary ministry, you destroy the 2,300-year prophecy. And that's why Sister White says, those that gave the judgment our cry were correct in their understanding of the daily. Because the complete vision of Daniel chapter 8 begins in the times of the Medes and the Persians, and the Medes and the Persians were pagans. They were followed by Greece, who were pagans. They were followed by pagan Rome, who were pagans. And verse 13, as the pioneers understand it, is how long is the complete vision of Daniel 8 that begins with the Medes and the Persians and describes the two desolating powers, paganism, the daily, and the papacy, the transgression of desolation, that both trample down the sanctuary and the host for 2,300 years. And the pioneers go back to the year 457 in the time period of the Medes and Persians, which is right there in the history of Daniel 8, and therefore qualifies with the complete vision, how long shall be the complete vision. And they say, you add 2,300 years to that, and you come to 1844. Brothers and sisters, this date here, 508, is symbolic of the pioneer understanding of the daily representing paganism. There are five verses in Daniel that deal with the daily. They all add a different component to the understanding of the daily, but we teach a completely different thing about the daily today than the pioneers taught. William Miller says that if we teach today what the Protestants taught in his time period, that we destroy the 2,300 years, and I hope, even if you've never looked at this before, I hope you see the simple math. William Miller was correct. The question in verse 13 is obviously about duration, and it's about the complete vision of whoever the daily and the transgression of desolation are. We have many things to learn. We have many, many things to unlearn. And without a doubt, this subject creates a shaking, so I know that there may be a little shaking in this congregation right now over this subject, but you test it out. Let me show you something else. If my disagreement with the modern theologians of Adventism on this subject could be boiled down to its very basic, my problem with it, the part that I play in my disagreement with our understanding of the daily, if you could boil it down to its simplest form, it's probably because I'm just a little bit too simple-minded. I don't know if I do it on purpose or just automatically because I'm not a theologian. When I understand that Daniel says something or the Bible says something, I take it at face value and start there, all right? Let me show you something, if you would. Daniel 8, 11, concerning the daily. Yea, he magnified himself, even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away. Notice whatever the daily is, it was taken away. Turn to Daniel 11, 31. In verse 31 of Daniel 11, it says, "...and arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice." So, this is the second time that whatever the daily is, it's taken away. We're going to talk about take away for a minute, that's the point I'm making here. And then if you look at chapter 12, verse 11, it says, "...and from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away." So the daily, whatever it is, it gets taken away in Daniel 8, 11, and Daniel 11, 31, and Daniel 12, 11. You follow my point, even if you don't know where I'm going, right? The chart here, 508, this is the date the pioneers believed that the daily was taken away. And you need to come up with a date if you're going to deal with verse 11 of chapter 12. It says, "...and from the time that the daily was taken away." And then there's a time prophecy of 1290 and 1335 years. This is a time prophecy, and there is a specific point in history when the daily, whatever it is, is taken away, that you need to ascertain if you're going to correctly understand these time prophecies. The pioneers understood that to be 508. We're not dealing with that at this point. What we're dealing with is the word take away. In chapters 11 and 12, the word that is translated as take away is the Hebrew word sir, but in chapter 8, when the daily is taken away, it's a different Hebrew word. And this is what I mean. This is the problem with me. I'm too simplistic. When I see Daniel choose a different word, that means that Daniel is saying to me something different. If Daniel wanted to be teaching the same thing in all three verses when it comes to take away, then he would have used the same Hebrew word all three times. But in chapter 8, the word that was translated as take away is a different Hebrew word. Sir, that you find in 11 and 12, it means to remove. Room, if you look at the Hebrew, means to lift up and exalt. Now if you're going to determine the meaning of a word in the Bible, where's the first place you look? At the Hebrew dictionary, right? The concordance, right? I don't think so. The first place you look is you find out if that Bible prophet has used that word in other places. You know, there may be a word, this word may be sir, may mean remove. It does mean remove, let me say it that way. But if Daniel uses the word sir ten times, and never once does he use it to illustrate remove, he uses it to illustrate fly away, then we know that when Daniel uses the word sir, it means fly away. The first place we look is we try to see if we can determine how the prophet himself understands the word. We want to look at the Hebrew meaning too. But you don't want to move away from how the prophet understands it. But in the Hebrew, we're talking about the Hebrew right now, go to your concordances in the Hebrew. The word that's translated take away in chapter 11 and chapter 12, it means to remove. And this word means to lift up and exalt. And both these words are used in the sanctuary service, all right? Sir, in the sanctuary service, when the priest came in and they cleaned out the ashes underneath the altar and they removed them out of the sanctuary area, they sir-ed it, they removed it. It's a physical taking away. So when the translators in Daniel seen the word sir and they translated it take away, that was accurate. In the sanctuary, when the priest would take an offering that they were to lift up, a wave offering before the Lord, they would lift it up and exalt it. They would room it. So both of these words are used in the sanctuary services in the Bible. And there is a sense that if I lift up this hymnal and exalt it, there is a sense that I just removed it from the top of the pulpit here. I lifted it up. There is a sense that it's removed. But the Hebrew definition of the word room is to lift up and exalt. So when it comes to grappling with the fact that we see the daily in these three places that is taken away in these three places, but Daniel used two different Hebrew words. And what does it mean that he used a different word in chapter eight than he used in chapter 11 and 12? Then we must ask ourselves, well, has Daniel used this word room anywhere else? And sure enough, Daniel has used this word in a, I think, five other places in his writings. Let me get to my notes here. Daniel 5 verse 20. Turn with me if you would there. Verse 20 of Daniel 5 says, but when his heart was lifted up, this term lifted up is the Hebrew word room. And room means to lift up and exalt. In verse 23 of the same chapter, it says, but has lifted up thyself? The Hebrew word that is translated as lifted up is room. Daniel uses the Hebrew word room to identify a lifting up, which is the definition of the Hebrew word. In Daniel 11 verse 12, it says, and when he hath taken away the multitude, his heart will be lifted up. The Hebrew word that is translated as lifted up is room. So I ask you, there's three places. The Bible says upon the testimony of two or three, a thing is established. How does Daniel understand the word room? He understands it in agreement with the Hebrew definition of room, which is to lift up and exalt. Now, he also uses this word in verse 36 of Daniel 11. Verse 36 of Daniel 11, it says, and the king should do according to his will, and he shall exalt himself. And the Hebrew word that is translated as exalt here is the Hebrew word room. And room means lift up and exalt. Daniel uses the word in agreement with the Hebrew meaning. In Daniel 12 verse 7, the fifth place, Daniel 12 verse 7 says, and I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand. The Hebrew word that is translated as held up in this verse is room. And room means lift up and exalt. And that's five places where Daniel uses the Hebrew word to mean lift up and exalt. And in Daniel 11 31 and Daniel 12 11, when Daniel is addressing the daily, whatever that may be, he says that the daily in Daniel 11 31 and Daniel 12 11 is served. It's taken away. It's removed. But in Daniel 8 11, when Daniel is dealing with the daily, whatever that may be, Daniel does not say that the daily in verse 11 of Daniel 8 is served. He says it's room. And according to the Hebrew definition and according to the prophet's usage of the word room means lift up and exalt no matter what the modern theologians may say. So let's go to verse 11 of Daniel 8. The pioneers believed that verse 11 of Daniel 8 was dealing with pagan Rome. We now teach that verse 11 of Daniel 8 is dealing with papal Rome, and it makes a great deal of difference on whether this verse is dealing with papal Rome or pagan Rome. Brothers and sisters, the pioneers believe that verse 11 was dealing with pagan Rome. We now believe that verse 11 is dealing with papal Rome. Let me walk through this verse with you and treat verse 11 as if it is dealing with papal Rome. Yea, he papal Rome. Yes, papal Rome magnified himself even to the prince of the host. There is no argument between the modern theologians or the pioneers on the prince of the host. Everyone agrees the prince of the host in this verse is Christ. So if you believe that verse 11 is dealing with papal Rome, then it says the papacy magnified itself against Christ. And by him, by the papacy, by papal Rome, the daily, the ministry of Christ in the sanctuary above was roomed. What does Daniel define, how does Daniel use the word room? Lift up and exalt. So if we're going to be faithful to the Hebrew and to Daniel's usage, and we're going to say that verse 11 is dealing with the papacy's brothers and sisters, think about this. What it's saying is, yes, by the papacy magnified itself against Christ and by the papacy, the work of Christ in the sanctuary was lifted up and exalted. Can you tell me when the papacy lifted up and exalted the work of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary? I don't think so. And by him, the papacy, the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Now, brothers and sisters, I know that we read sometimes casually, and we read this verse sometimes and we say, whether it's the papacy or pagan Rome, the sanctuary was cast down here. But that isn't what the verse says, is it? It says the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Where's Christ's sanctuary now? In heaven. Bible teaches that upon the testimony of two or three, a thing is established. If you're telling me that the papacy here in verse 11 cast down the place of Christ's sanctuary, then you're telling me that the papacy cast down heaven. And I need at least one other verse in the Bible to correspond to that, to establish that as truth. Where's the other verse in the Bible that says the papacy cast down heaven itself? Because that's the place of Christ's sanctuary. It's not there. It's not there. Now, brothers and sisters, there's another thing here. This is another thing that I stumble over. I hope you stumble over it too. There are two words that are translated sanctuary in the writings of Daniel. I could be spelling these wrong. Kodesh. I don't think there's a U. I always put a U after the Q. I think the U isn't there. Kodesh and Mikdash. That's a Q, believe it or not. Kodesh, Mikdash, two Hebrew words, both translated sanctuary. In the Bible, the Hebrew word Kodesh is only God's sanctuary. Whenever you find it, it's either God's heavenly sanctuary or God's earthly sanctuary, but that's it. Now, Mikdash, it can be God's sanctuary, no doubt about it, but it also can be a pagan sanctuary. So this word, Mikdash, can be God's sanctuary, but it can be a pagan sanctuary. But this word here, it's only God's sanctuary. When you see this word in God's word that's translated as sanctuary, you know it's speaking either about God's earthly or heavenly sanctuary exclusively. And here's the problem I have with this. Look at verse 13 and 14 of Daniel 8. In verse 13, the last phrase, it says, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden underfoot. That word translated sanctuary, it's Kodesh. Verse 13, it's absolutely talking about God's sanctuary, whatever it's teaching there in verse 13. Without a doubt, it's God's sanctuary. Look at verse 14, and he said unto me, unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. This is Kodesh, it's God's sanctuary. Daniel's using this Hebrew word to tell us that verse 13 and verse 14 is speaking about God's sanctuary. Follow the logic? Here's the problem I have with this. This is why I stumble over it, one of the reasons. In verse 11, when it says, in the place of his sanctuary was cast down, it's Mikdash. It's not Kodesh. And for me, if I think verse 11 is talking about God's sanctuary, I wonder why Daniel would use two different Hebrew words to identify God's sanctuary within only four verses of each other. For me, the fact that Daniel uses Mikdash in verse 11 is proof that Daniel's trying to say that this is a different sanctuary than verse 13 and 14. Why not use Kodesh in verse 11 if he wants us to understand that this is God's sanctuary? Daniel uses a different Hebrew word, which can be a pagan sanctuary. Now, brothers and sisters, the pioneers approach verse 11 this way. They say, this isn't pagan Rome. This isn't papal Rome. This is pagan Rome. They say, yea, he, pagan Rome, magnified himself against Christ at his birth, when they tried to kill him, and at his death, when they did put him on the cross. And through pagan Rome, the daily paganism was lifted up and exalted. Now, brothers and sisters, was Babylon a pagan country? Was it? Babylon was pagan. Were the Medes and the Persians pagan? Was Greece pagan? Was pagan Rome pagan? Well, why don't we call Babylon pagan Babylon? Why don't we call the Medes and the Persians pagan Medes and Persians, and Greece pagan Greece? Why don't we? No. They all practice it. We just agreed on that. It's because pagan Rome was the power in history that most exalted paganism. They're the preeminent power to lift up paganism above any other, and that's what Daniel's saying. And through pagan Rome, the daily paganism was lifted up and exalted. That's an agreement with history. They lifted up and exalted paganism to such an extent that in history, they're called pagan Rome. What do we do? I'm only at 10 seconds left, Glenn, and I have a little bit more to say. The way that pagan Rome exalted paganism is when it conquered a new territory that practiced a pagan religion that was then unknown in Rome. They would take the deities of that particular worship and the priests of that particular worship and they would bring them back to the city of Rome and they would build them their own little niche in the most famous temple of paganism in history called the Pantheon Temple, which was in the city of Rome. And it was that practice that won the title for pagan Rome as pagan Rome. They exalted paganism wherever they found a new manifestation of paganism. They brought it back to the city of Rome and put it in the Pantheon Temple and exalted it. And the pioneers would tell you that verse 11 is saying, yay, pagan Rome magnified itself against Christ at his birth and its death. And through pagan Rome, paganism was lifted up and exalted and the place of its sanctuary was cast down. The city of Rome was cast down by Constantine in the year 330 when he moved the capital of the Roman Empire from Rome to the city of Constantinople. Brothers and sisters, this truth is another versus in Daniel and Revelation. Revelation 13.2 says pagan Rome gave three things to the papacy, its power, its seat and authority. It gave its seat to the papacy in the year 330 when Constantine cast down the city of Rome as the capital of the empire and chose Constantinople. The pioneer position on verse 11 is self-consistent. It's talking about the activities of pagan Rome in exalting paganism and even dealing with the Pantheon Temple and the city of Rome where it was located. And the Pantheon Temple was a pagan sanctuary. It was a mikdash sanctuary. We have a little bit more to say upon this in our next presentation. So he's saying two minutes, but at this point, we'll let this run out. Whatever happens, happens. Are there any questions? Let's have a word of prayer to end the tape, please. Heavenly Father, we understand that we are at the end of time, the end of 6,000 years of sin. We are the least capable human beings in all of history to understand your revealed will and that we do have things to learn, but things to unlearn. And this can only be accomplished through the presence of your Holy Spirit. And we ask that your Holy Spirit would help us to rightly divide the word of truth and enable us to be changed into your image that we can give the final warning message, which is a message of your character, but also understand the warning message of the hour as illustrated in your word and warn those around us that Babylon and all that it represents is falling and that very soon you are to return to receive those that are willing to be received by you. Help us to be effective tools in your hand, we ask in Jesus' name, amen. If you want to take a break, if you need to take a break, if you need to go home, feel free, but if you have questions and answers, or questions, maybe answers, fire away. If not, we'll take a break. How long are we taking a break for when we're done here?