Our dear Heavenly Father, once more we come to your presence. This morning we ask that you open our minds, that we may fully understand this message. God, this morning I ask that your Holy Spirit may descend on us, that you may purify us with the fire of the Holy Spirit and prepare us to be true to you, so that when the test comes we'll be ready to go with you. We ask this morning, once again, that you be with your servant, our brother Bipinjer, that this word that he has for us, we can use it and spread it to others. In your church and outside your church, I ask these favors in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen. At this point we're going to take up a new topic. We started with some foundational principles, then we tried to lay out the sequence of events at the end of time with the study on the purification of God's church. We went through Daniel 11, 40-45, and I consider the last presentation, Adventism's Parable, as part of the study on Daniel 11, 40-45, but now we'll switch gears a little bit and take a look at the daily in the book of Daniel, and there's a lot to look at there, and hopefully I've broken it up in logical compartments. We're going to start with the history of this first presentation, and I know that for whatever reason, from my experience, the daily is a subject that is hard to grasp, at least the first time through for many of us, and this is for a variety of reasons. When you realize that there's been a concerted effort to establish the wrong understanding of the daily in God's church here at the end, then you realize that that complicates our ability to come to understand it as simply as the pioneers did, and not only was that taking place in our church, but Satan has had an effort to just shut us down as students of prophecy, and that further complicates the problem of trying to understand the daily correctly. I remember back on night number one, we gave you a book called The Mystery of the Daily by John Peters. On this subject, that's the homework, and it's hard. He's a theologian. You have to read it, and read it, and read it to get it, but once you get the concepts that he's laying down, very good book, important book, so know that you have more information on this than what we're going to be able to cover here. This statement right here is a pivotal statement in this study of the daily, early writing 74-75. I have seen that the 1843 chart, and you'll see the 1843 chart hanging on the wall here, and you received one in the handout, I've 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, 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. Then I saw in relation to the daily, Daniel 8-12, that the word sacrifice was supplied by man's wisdom, and does not belong to the text, and that the Lord gave the correct view of it to those who gave the judgment our cry. When union existed before 1844, nearly all were united on the correct view of the daily, but in the confusion since 1844, other views have been embraced, and darkness and confusion have followed. Time has not been a test since 1844, and it will never again be a test." I think we could just simply take this at its word, and let that be the simple answer for the daily, because there's a simple way to trace down what the daily is here. Just find out what the people that gave the judgment our cry believed the daily, and bam, you got it. Whatever they'd said it was, if you wanted to make it simple, but if that's not good enough for you, then you've got to go a little bit further. She says in there that the 1843 chart was directed by the Lord, and should not be altered. For me, there's some mistakes, as she said on that chart, but the reason that we don't want to alter that chart is it's historical evidence. You want to keep it just as it was. We need to come to understand the pioneers' reasoning and what went on, even if there were some mistakes. It's not a big problem to understand that the earth wasn't the sanctuary in 1844. There was some misunderstandings there, and the 1843 chart, those misunderstandings on there are excellent study when we come to understand why and what they are. Then she also says in there that in relation to the daily, the word sacrifice does not belong to the text, and in the book of Daniel, you'll see the daily I think about five times, and what we know is that next to all of those, the word sacrifice is in italics, and it should be removed. So what inspiration says, it does not belong to the text, and that the Lord gave the correct view of the daily to those who gave the judgment hour a cry, and that other views of the daily bring darkness and confusion, and that time has not been attest since 1844, and never again will it be attest, and when you study the daily in its fullest sense, from my understanding, you realize that those among us that are attempting to reapply time prophecies at the end of the world in a day for day fashion, one of their big stumbling blocks that leads them down this road is the daily. So you're seeing her emphasize that here too, that this, the testing of time has some kind of connection to the daily according to inspiration. And the champion for reapplying time prophecies at the end of the world, I don't know if champions the right word, but the name in Adventism that you hear more than most, there's a few well-known names, is a sister named Mary and Barry, and in our books out there, we have one of our newsletters that we deal with Mary and Barry, and the setting of time, if you didn't receive that newsletter, if there are still some of those available out there, feel free to take one, we have more at home if we run out. But let's ask the question, who gave the Judgment Hour cry, and here are some men that were directly involved with the Judgment Hour cry, William Miller, Josiah Litch, Sylvester Bliss, Joseph Bate, J.N. Andrews, Hiram Edson, James White, Uriah Smith, but anyway, Stephen Haskell, O.A. Johnson, J.G. Mattson, F.C. Gilbert, L.A. Smith, and J.N. Loughborough all believed the daily symbolized paganism, and they presented this truth in their writings. If you want to argue that Uriah Smith wasn't giving the Judgment Hour cry, I wouldn't argue with that, but Uriah Smith is the biggest voice in Adventism that puts in print the position of those that gave the Judgment Hour cry on the daily. These are the men that believed the daily was paganism based upon that understanding that was derived by William Miller, and here's William Miller's reasoning on how he came to understand the daily, and if you remember William Miller's practice of Bible study is that he would read the Bible, and when he came to a passage he did not understand, then he would break open his concordance, and he would look where that word or phrase that he was having trouble with, wherever it was found in the Bible, he'd look at every place where it was in the Bible, and he continued to do that until he figured out what he thought it meant, and then he'd move on in his Bible study, and it's in this passage here that he's telling that same technique, that he was using that same technique, trying to figure out what the daily that's taken away in the book of Daniel is, and you'll notice in the red, if you can, but in any case, if you just read along, even if you can't see it in the color up there, that he quotes three passages out of the book of Daniel connected to the daily, and that's good, because he lets us know he's talking about the daily in chapter 8, chapter 11, and chapter 12, he's understanding that the daily in chapter 8, 11, and 12 are all the same symbol, okay, but he says this, I read on and could find no other case in which it, the daily, was found, but in Daniel I then, by aid of a concordance, took those words which stood in connection with it, take away, he shall take away the daily, from the time that the daily's taken away, I read on and thought I would find no light on the text, finally I came to 2 Thessalonians 2, verses 7 and 8, for the mystery of Nicodemus does already work, only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way, and then shall that wicked be revealed, and I'm going to come back to this, but in the book on the mystery of the daily by John Peters, he will, he points out for you that this word letteth and let is restraineth, and he calls him the restrainer, and he puts that in there because it's more accurate to the Greek, says only he who now restraineth will continue to restrain until the restrainer, the one that's been restraining, is taken out of the way, the Greek word is restraineth, he's talking about something that was restraining the papacy from rising to power, but anyway you'll find that in the book. Back to William Miller, and when I had come to that text, what text, 2 Thessalonians 2, verse 78, William Miller says, and when I had come to that text, oh how clear and glorious the truth appeared, there it is, that's the daily, well now, what does Paul mean by he who now letteth or hindereth, by the man of sin and the wicked, potpourri is meant, well what is it that hinders potpourri from being revealed, why it is paganism, well then, the daily must mean paganism, that's William Miller's logic, his reading, have you ever done that in the Bible though, where you're looking for something, or maybe you're not even looking for it, it's just something you never quite ran down and find that you see it there in the Bible, and you think, oh how glorious, he remembers that when he came across the takeaway, that it was one of those points where suddenly lights were turned on, and that's how he arrived at it, that's his logic, and here are the places in Daniel where we find the daily, Daniel 8 through 11, three times in that passage, once in Daniel 11, 31, and once in Daniel 12, 11, and as you notice what William Miller said, his key to coming to the understanding that the daily was paganism is he was tracing down the words that stood in connection with it, which was takeaway, and I'll point out here, we're going to deal with it later, that in Daniel 8, one of the words translated as takeaway is different, the word that is translated as takeaway in Daniel 8 is different than the Hebrew word that is translated as takeaway in both chapter 11 and 12, and those people that are teaching Conrady's view of the daily are forced to try to say that both these Hebrew words mean the same thing, and I would submit to you that if Daniel wanted them to mean the same thing, he would have used the same Hebrew word, when Daniel uses a different word, it's because he has been inspired to make a distinction between two things, that's my simplistic position upon it, here is 2 Thessalonians, chapter 2 that William Miller was referring to, and these are the phrases that he refers to tying all the passages of the daily in the book of Daniel into his definition of paganism, why am I saying that? Because, and I've made this point once already, the people that reapply time prophecy at the end of the world, many of them, maybe all of them for all I know, try to teach that the daily in chapter 11 of Daniel is different than the daily in chapter 12, there's no justification for making that claim, they have to be the same, it's the same vision, it's just a few thoughts later in terms of Daniel writing out that vision, read it sometime, ask yourself how long does it take you to read from Daniel 12, 31, where he writes down daily, on through Daniel 12, 11, I mean that's how big of a thought it was for daily, for Daniel when he was writing it out, why would suddenly the daily 20 seconds later be used to symbolize something else than when he first used it? So one thing, if you go to Paul's letter, where William Miller arrived at, the one thing that seems significant to point out here, let's read this, that you be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letters from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 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 exalted himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he, as God, setteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. Remember ye not that when I was with you, I told you these things, and the logic of this is that to, for Paul to specifically say, in order to say that he was with you, that he was with

letter in the Roman Empire, during that day and age, for him to write a letter and send it on the Roman roads to the Church of Thessalonia, and say, Pagan Rome is the power that's going to be removed for Papal Rome to be established, would be dangerous for Paul. It would be dangerous for the readers, because if Pagan Rome, seeing someone making a prediction that they were going to be done away with, would be considered rebellion and sedition, and it would have put the brethren in jeopardy, so Paul didn't have to do that. He just says, remember when I was with you, I gave you this sermon, and I told you that Pagan Rome falls, and then the papacy is established. That's what he's saying here. So the Thessalonians knew from a previous sermon, remember not that I told you these things when I was with you. They already knew. He was just reminding them of that, and instead of saying the Empire of Rome, he said the power that restrains the man of sin must be taken away before the man of sin is established. And you see here, the restraineth. Now letteth, restraineth, and know you not what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time for the mystery of iniquity doth already work? Only he who now restraineth will continue to restrain until he be taken out of the way. Pagan Rome precedeth or withheld the papacy from rising to power. And now you know that Pagan Rome withholdeth the mystery of iniquity, the papacy. And now you know that Pagan Rome restrains the papacy and will continue to restrain the papacy until Pagan Rome is taken out of the way. And now you know that Pagan Rome restrains the papacy until Pagan Rome is taken away. Pagan Rome, paganism. This is the logic of Miller. This is the understanding of this passage in Thessalonians, the correct understanding I would submit to you. Now, Brother Ron talked about this a little bit last night, the abomination of desolation. Matthew 24, 15. When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place. Whoso readeth, let him understand. Here's a passage where Jesus is saying, make sure you understand this. Make sure you understand the abomination of desolation in the book of Daniel. Now, Daniel 8, 13. Daniel 11, 31. Daniel 12, 11. Deal with this power. Let's read those, just so we can get them in our head. We're going to be dealing with these verses for a while. Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, how long shall be the vision, that's the complete vision, the whole vision, concerning the daily sacrifice and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden underfoot. And our arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be 1,290 days. So, Jesus tells us to understand the abomination of desolation. And we have the transgression of desolation in Daniel 8, 13. Abomination that maketh desolate in Daniel 11, 31. Abomination that maketh desolate in Daniel 12, 11. And the pioneers understood all of these as symbolizing the papal power. Are all three of these the papal power? Okay, then what was Jesus saying? What was Jesus saying? And the Savior warned his followers, when you therefore see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place. Whoso readeth, let him understand, then let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains. When the idolatrous standards of the Romans, what Romans? This is the pagan Romans, right? When the idolatrous standards of the pagan Romans should be set up in the holy ground, which has sent some furlongs outside the city of walls, then the followers of Christ were to find safety in the flight. When the warning sign should be seen, those who would escape must make no delay. Now, the passages in Daniel, where you see the transgression of desolation and the abomination of desolation, they're all connected every time with the daily. So if we're going to understand the abomination of desolation or the daily correctly, we're going to have to understand them together because they are always together. And Jesus said the abomination of desolation is something that we need to understand. And you all, as the pioneers do, just said that the transgression of desolation and the abomination of desolation in the book of Daniel was the papal power. But Sister White is saying the abomination of desolation here that Jesus was speaking about was the pagan power. And we were told to understand this. How do we understand this in the book of Daniel? I see some lips moving. Let's see how the pioneers understood it. Do you see the distinction I'm making? Jesus says, understand the abomination of desolation. And when it was fulfilled, it was the pagan power. But when we see abomination that makes it desolate in the book of Daniel, it's the papal power. So what's the discrepancy there? And there isn't one, but I want you to challenge your thinking so we can put all these things in perspective. This is from the same article where we just quoted from from William Miller. It says this. The daily sacrifice is the present reading of the text, but no such thing as sacrifice is found in the original. This is just what Sister White says in early writing. This is a pioneer understanding. This is an important enough pioneer understanding that inspiration confirmed it in early writings, that sacrifice doesn't belong next to daily in the book of Daniel. This is acknowledged on all hands. It is a gloss or construction put on it by the translators. The true reading is the daily and the transgression of desolation. Daily and transgression being connected together by and. The daily and the transgression of desolation. They are two desolating powers which were to desolate the sanctuary and the host. The pioneers saw the discrepancy of Matthew 24, 15 when it says, when Jesus says, understand the abomination of desolation in Matthew 24, 15. They saw the discrepancy that the transgression of desolation and the abomination that make it desolate in the book of Daniel was the papal power. Yet the fulfillment of Jesus' word was the pagan power. And they understood that Jesus was speaking about Daniel 9, 26. And after three score and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself. And the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. This is the destruction of Jerusalem in 80, 70 and to the end thereof shall be with the flood. And under the end of the war, desolations are determined. The pioneers understood that there were two desolating powers connected with Rome. Pagan Rome and papal Rome. And they're both symbolized under the phrase by Jesus as the abomination that make it desolate, the abomination of desolation. And that's where the pioneers go to with Matthew 24, 15, is that Jesus was speaking about these two desolation powers. He was speaking about them in a general sense. But if you're going to get specific, then you divide them up with the daily representing the first desolating power and the transgression or the abomination that make it desolate, the second desolating power. And what I'm saying here is that Rome gives two testimonies in the book of Daniel. The first witness is pagan Rome. The second witness is papal Rome. Those two witnesses are identifying modern Rome. And in the two witnesses of Rome in Daniel, you will find both phases of Rome portrayed in each vision of Daniel. In Daniel chapter 2, the two legs of iron, both phases of Rome, pagan and papal Rome. Now, if you did not see Rome illustrated in two phases anywhere else in the book of Daniel, maybe that would be a stretch. But the reasoning that the pioneers use on the shoulders in Daniel 2, saying these two shoulders, what do the two shoulders represent? The Medes and the Persians. The two shoulders, two parts. So that kind of reasoning is valid with the two legs, the two legs, both phases of pagan Rome. In Daniel 7, you'll find that Rome is the fourth kingdom and it's diverse from the other kingdoms before it. And when finally the little horn of the papacy comes in at the end of the pagan Roman kingdom, it's diverse from the one before it. So Rome in both its phases in Daniel chapter 7 is generalized as the diverse kingdom, the diverse power. In Daniel chapter 8, verse 9, we see the little horn. And the pioneers correctly understood, and we're going to deal with this, that the little horn in verse 9 is both phases of Rome. It's primarily pagan Rome in that verse, but the little horn represents both phases of Rome. And in Daniel 11, in verse 16, pagan Rome becomes the king of the north. And in verse 31, papal Rome becomes the king of the north. So we see pagan and papal Rome portrayed in both its phases in Daniel 2, under the iron legs. In both its phases in Daniel 7, under the diverse kingdoms. In both phases in Daniel 8, under the little horn. In both phases in Daniel 11, under the king of the north. And Jesus summarized both phases with the term, the abomination of desolation, in the book of Daniel. He's trying to teach us that if we're going to understand Rome to the depth we need to understand it, we must make a distinction between the two kingdoms, and then we must realize that they're pretty much the same. They're given an identical story in order that you and I can understand modern Rome at the end of the world. Well, how are they the same? This is just some of them, but both Romes have time prophecies that begin when the third geographical obstacle is overcome. Both persecute God's people. Both attack His word. Both stand against Christ. Both trample down God's sanctuary. Both were pagans. And both's leader was Pontifus Maximus. Both were prophetically divided into three parts. We haven't dealt with that much, but you've been reading it with Russell a little bit as he's reading through the trumpets, if you're seeing it. It says a third part of the man, a third part of the trees. The pioneers were understanding these third parts of the Roman kingdom to be identified by the fact that both eastern Rome was divided in three and western Rome was divided in three. Together they provide two witnesses. Together pagan and papal Rome provide two witnesses that identified modern Rome. Jesus symbolizes both phases of Rome under the term abomination of desolation. He also counsels us to understand this truth. In 1901, there was a new view brought into Adventism that came from Conradi in Germany. And it's called the New View, but it really wasn't the New View. Although by being clear about this, it gets a little bit more confusing. There was a view of the daily before William Miller came to his understanding. So in reality, if you consider the whole span of Protestant Christianity from the Reformation onward, William Miller's was the New View, but it was the established view in Adventism. So when Conradi introduced this view in Advent history, it's called the New View. But it was nothing more than the old Protestant view that existed before William Miller came to understand what the daily was. But if you're going to read Adventist literature, they're going to call it the New View. And really, it's the Old View. Enough being said about that. We're acknowledging that we understand that Conradi just pulled this out of the fallen Protestant churches. Eventually, Conradi totally apostatizes. In fact, Conradi, if you're going to be fair, not be critical, but if you're going to be fair, Conradi is the man that has basically turned European Adventism into an Adventism that has no respect for the spirit of prophecy. I mean, we have no respect pretty much for the spirit of prophecy over here, but it's a bit worse over there from his influence way back when, because on his way out, he did many things to undermine the spirit of prophecy. Eventually, he totally apostatized. E.J. Wagner accepts the New View, and he repudiates Ellen White. He states this, because he accepted Conradi's view that the Daily symbolizes the work of Christ in the sanctuary, and he says this, He's saying that early writing supports William Miller's position that the Daily is paganism. Wagner could see that. Now, I say that because most of the people that take this argument up, they try to take the early writings passage and make a case that she's really not supporting William Miller. Wagner was honest, and he was right on. And he's speaking about a writing by O.A. Johnson when he says, So, he's not just saying that he recognizes that Sister White in early writing upholds William Miller's view. He's saying that there are also been people that have done research on what Uriah Smith writes in the book Daniel and the Revelation, and it also holds up.

William Miller's position that the Daily is paganism. By the way, from what I understand, I don't know the exact date, but the last time that they tried to try to update the book Daniel and the Revelation by Uriah Smith was in the 1945 time period, and they were going to remove the pioneer position of the Daily out of that book. But as they came together and looked at it, editorially they determined it was possible, impossible. If you were going to pull it out of there, you would just destroy the whole book and it had to stay in there. And that book was written, by the way, with the understanding that as new information, new historical information came to light, that they would reprint that book by incorporating the new information into it. So it was designed that way. It's not so sinister. If you've never heard about the evolution of Uriah Smith's book Daniel and Revelation, and finally you hear that at different points in time it was republished and they changed things, well that was part of the design. It was to be the book on Daniel and Revelation for Adventism, and when new light came in, they wanted to be able to, you know, strengthen it and uphold it. But some of the attempts that were made on that book didn't fall into the category of strengthening it, but when they did try to take the daily out of it in the 1940s, it couldn't be done. Anyway, Wagner teaches Prescott, who then teaches Daniels, and they both begin to work on Willie White. Prescott eventually abandons the sanctuary doctrine. You know that Jones and Wagner were the champions of the 1888 message, but there's one other person that Sister White identified as an 1888 messenger. You know who it was? Prescott. When he was down preaching in Australia, you can look at some of his sermons in the book that Ralph Larson wrote. You all know this book. Ralph Larson wrote a book on the part of the title The Word Made Flesh, and he has some of Prescott's sermons in there, and he has the statements that Sister White made about those sermons in that time period, and she's clearly identifying him as one of the 1888 messengers, and he accepts a new view and eventually abandons the sanctuary doctrine. A.T. Jones accepts the new view, apostatized completely. W.H. Olson argues new view requires a repudiation of Ellen White, agreeing with Wagner. Adds also that 1844 falls apart, and the whole 1844 structure falls hopelessly apart, and this is true. You can show it if you take your time. If you take your time and carefully analyze the daily in the book of Daniel, if you try to uphold the teaching that the daily represents the work of Christ in the sanctuary, you do destroy the 2300-day prophecy. Hopefully we will make that clear as we proceed, but people have already recognized that a long time ago. Now, by the way, this historical little passage I'm in here, why people left the truth is for a lot of reasons, and I certainly don't know what they are. We're just dealing with the daily, and this is not an evidence one way or another, this is just some facts along the way that some of the people that are known in Adventism that did lose their way, you go back and look closely, and somewhere along their way of losing their way, they took the wrong view on the daily. Ballinger receives a new view, apostatizes completely. Fletcher receives a new view, apostatizes completely. Some of these people, I don't even know who they are. This is taken from other people's research. Snide receives a new view, apostatizes completely. It's coming down through history, though. Greve receives new view, apostatizes completely. Brimsmead receives new view, apostatizes completely. The one time I've been in Australia, on our trip from one side of Australia to another side of Australia, we stopped at the most famous farm in Australia, and the most famous farm in Australia is Brimsmead's farm. People, it's like a Disneyland, or I don't know what they have in Germany or England, but it's a tourist attraction, and people, it's got every kind of fruit you could ever think of growing in this farm, and people come and look at the different fruit trees, and I actually brought home a whole selection of very exotic jellies, remember, from that farm. It's kind of a nice place, but, and he was before my time. I was coming into Adventism when he was going out, so I'm not a contemporary with him, but there's people in here that have close connections to that time period. They know him better than I do, or his work, but he's totally out. He's not a Christian any longer either, in any way. He's totally gone. Hilbert receives a new view, apostatizes completely. Sibley receives a new view, apostatizes completely. Ford, Desmond Ford, now that's, I was there, right when that was starting. I was there, went down, there was a trip that Desmond Ford had to make from California to the meetings in Glacier View. Is that where they were, the Glacier Views? And along the way, he had meetings in Palmdale, California. I was raised in Palmdale, California, spent most of my life in Palmdale, California. I wasn't living there at that time, but I heard there was this guy, I never knew him from the man of the moon, speaking in Palmdale, and some of the brethren in the church where I lived, they knew who he was, and they wanted to go hear him, because they really liked him, and I didn't know who he was. And I went down there, and I really liked him. I'd never heard anybody preach such a wonderful story on the cross in my life, and I bought the audio tapes, and they just sat there for years. You know, by that time, I knew who Desmond Ford was, and at some point in time, I see Desmond Ford's tapes, and I thought, what do I got to tell you? And I remembered, yeah, I did hear him, and I put him in, and I remembered that I thought those were the best sermons on the cross I'd ever heard, and then I realized, wow, this is the most satanic stuff I ever have heard, because it sounds good, but it's so untrue. But I wasn't trained at that time, and I can see how people swallowed that poison, and he took a whole bunch of people out with him, and he was wrong on the daily, and he still is. In 1945, an attempt is made to change the daily position in Uriah Smith's Daniel and Revelation, but it cannot be logically accomplished. So, making that point, you know, I believe the early writings, 74 and 75, is a divine endorsement for the daily being paganism, but people have been arguing that for a long time. But, if you're not going to buy that one, you can also use the 1843 and the 1850 chart to make that case. Brethren and sisters, the 1850 chart is hanging here on the wall. You may not be familiar with it, but you're probably familiar with this story that I'm going to tell you. The vision where Sister White received instruction to tell her husband James to begin publishing a magazine that today is The Review, the vision that got The Review and Herald started in that same vision, she told her to have James print a new chart, and that chart's the 1850 chart. In the very first Review and Heralds that came out, when they were published, they were advertising that chart. And, you'll notice that both charts, 1843 and 1850, still identify the daily as paganism. And, the point is, is it's not like after 1844, suddenly the pioneers forgot what they believed on paganism. It's still, you can still historically confirm it in 1850, but both of these charts have the divine endorsement on it. But, if you won't accept that, we've already read what Sister White said about the book Daniel and the Revelation by Uriah Smith, and what did she say? She says, we need to get this out to the world. In one place, she said it right between patriarchs and prophets and the Great Controversy, and therefore, in the book Daniel and the Revelation by Uriah Smith, he soundly upholds the pioneer position on paganism. So, there's another argument that paganism as the daily has a divine endorsement on it. So, we're moving through this history very quickly. A.G. Daniels, General Conference President for a long time, said in the 1930s, stated that he had an interview with Sister White concerning the daily in 1910. And, if you go into the logbooks at the Ellen White estate, you'll find that there is no record of him having an interview with Ellen White. And, normally in the logbooks, if someone is going to have an interview, they're not just going to put that he had an interview, whoever the person was, they're going to make a note of what the interview was discussing. But, anyway, 15 years after Ellen White was laid to rest, Daniel says that he had an interview in 1910 with Ellen White, and he says that in that interview, Sister White confirmed that his new idea on the daily, which he had been, which had received through Conrady, that the daily represented the work of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary. In any variation of that that you want to put it, he said that Ellen White confirmed that in that interview. During the 1910, 1901, 1950 time period, when Sister White was alive, and when the argument over the daily was raging, the champion of that history to defend and uphold the pioneer position was a brother named F.C. Gilbert. He was a convert from Judaism. He spoke Hebrew, and he defended the pioneer position to be paganism from the Hebrew of the book of Daniel. And he said that he had an interview with Sister White on the subject of the daily in 1910. He's saying the same thing that Daniel's had, but both Daniels and he are on different sides of the issues. Daniel's saying that the daily represents the work of Christ in the sanctuary, and Gilbert says that he agrees with William Miller it represents paganism. In the Ellen White estate logbook, the interview of F.C. Gilbert with Ellen White is recorded, and it's recorded that they discussed the daily. So you've got to put some weight to F.C. Gilbert's recollections, and he put his recollections down the very same year that he had the interview, not 20 years later, which would mean something if you were going to take material like this into a court of law. Here's some of the, some of the excerpts that F.C. Gilbert said in his recollections of the interview. This is Gilbert's testimony about what he says Sister White said to him in the interview. Daniels and Prescott would give, and this is in terms of them promoting Conradi's view of the daily. Daniel and Prescott would not give the older brethren in the cause any chance to say anything. Daniel was here to, notice that Sister White, according to F.C. Gilbert, Sister White says, Daniels was here to see me, and I would not see him. I would not have anything to say to him about anything, about the daily that they're trying to work up. There is nothing to it. When I was in Washington, there seemed to be something that just encased their minds, and I could not, could not seem to touch them. We are to have nothing to do with this subject of the daily. This is what F.C. Gilbert said that Sister White told to him, so this is secondhand information that's almost a hundred years old. I knew they would work against my message, and then the people would not think there was anything to my message. I have written to him and told him that if he was shown himself not fit to be president of the General Conference, not the man to keep in the presidency. If the message of the daily were a testing message the Lord would have shown me, these people do not see the end from the beginning, and they're saying I utterly refuse to see any of them who are engaged in this work. The light that was given me of God is that Brother Daniels has stood in the presidency long enough, and I was told not to have any more conversation, I was told not to have any more conversation with him about any of these things. I would not see Daniels about this matter, and I would not have one word with him. They pled with me to give him an interview, but I would not. I was told to warn our people not to have anything to do with this thing. I was forbidden of the Lord to listen to it. I've expressed myself as not having a particle of confidence in it. The whole thing they are doing is a scheme of the devil, and the reason that I'm trying to emphasize this, brothers and sisters, is the history of it is is that when Daniels came out with his statement in the 1930s, everybody grabbed that statement and said, well, Ellen White confirms Conradi's view of the daily. The daily is the work that Christ is doing in the heavenly sanctuary, and they basically said that Gilbert's interview was, well, what did they say? I guess they just forgot about it. The point is, when they started publishing manuscript releases, there came out a letter where Sister White's dealing with Daniels and Prescott on the daily, and not only does it say that their position of the daily comes from the devil, she uses the very same things, she says the very same that F.C. Gilbert just said. So it sounds like he was pretty accurate about the interview. This is this manuscript releases. This is Sister White, and let me back up. This is, this here is part of the manuscript releases that the Ellen White estate puts in to give you a historical context for this manuscript release. A.G. Daniels was elected president of the General Conference in 1901. This suggests that this document was written in 1910, a time when Mrs. White was very concerned about Daniels' neglect of the cities. So in the very year that Gilbert and Daniels both claimed to interview him, that's when this following manuscript is written. Not all of it is in it, but at this stage of our experience we are not to have our minds drawn away from the special light given to us to consider at the at the important gathering of our Congress.

And there was brother Daniel's whose mind the enemy was working Who's the enemy This is a prophet saying the enemy is working this man's mind and Your mind and elder Prescott's mind were being worked by the angels that were expelled from heaven Satan work was to divert your minds that jots and tittles should not be brought in which the Lord did not inspire you to bring in They were not essential, but this meant much to the cause of truth and the ideas of your mind if you could be drawn If you could be drawn away to jots and tittles is a work of Satan's devising To correct little things in the books written and that's what Daniel's and Prescott wanted to do They wanted to go back into the pioneer books and remove what they were teaching about the daily That was the part of the argument to correct little things in the books written You suppose you'd be doing a great work But I am charged silence and L is eloquence now when you come to the study of the daily in Adventism People will throw throw up look at sister white says on the subject of the daily silence is eloquence read the passages very carefully She's saying to Daniel's and Prescott your safety is in keeping your mouth shut She's talking to the to the troublers in the midst in a specific way and in a general way She's talking to the rest of Adventism because when it started they were the minority and she's telling the church at large drop this subject Let's just not let's not allow this subject to be Agitated agitated agitated. So in a general way, she was telling the church silence is eloquence But in a specific way, she was telling Daniel's and Prescott Silence is your safety. So you got to read what she says in context and it's there. I Am to say stop picking your flaws if this purpose of the devil could be carried out Then it appears to you that your work would be considered as most wonderful in conception. That's what the FC Gilbert said She said it was the purpose of the devil It was the enemy the enemy's plan to get all the supposed Objectional features where all classes of minds did not agree and what then the very work that pleases the devil would come to pass There would be a representation given to it outsiders not of our faith Just what would suit them and would develop traits of character which would cause great confusion and occupy the golden minutes Which should be used zealously to bring the great message before the people the presentations upon any subject we have worked upon could not all harmonize and the results would be to confuse the minds of believers and Unbelievers Gilbert says she says their position would bring in confusion This is a this is according to his testimony this is the very thing that Satan had planned that should take place anything that could be magnified as a Disagreement and I was shown I was shown She was shown because there's places where Some of the arguments about discussing the daily is that People Daniels went to sister white and and he came away and he was told that she had no light on the subject Well brothers and sisters Early writing 74 and 75 was light on the subject This is light on the subject But there is a time when someone comes and asks a prophet questions about things and the prophet realizes that the Lord has already given those answers and the prophet just basically takes the position I Have no light for you on this subject you need to go back to where you went off in the darkness and get right with the Lord and and and Repent and get back on track and then light comes but and I was shown from the first that the Lord had given neither Elder Daniels or Prescott the burden of this work should Satan wiles. Here's how she's summer summarizes their work Satan's wiles since should Satan's wiles be brought in should this daily be such a great manner as to be brought into Confused mind and hinder the advancement of the work at this important period of time It should not whatever may be this subject should not be introduced for the spirit would be brought in for the spirit that would be brought in would be forbidding and Lucifer is Watching every movement satanic agencies would commence his work and there would be confusion brought into our ranks You have no call to hunt up the difference of opinion. That is not a testing question. But your silence is eloquence. I Have the matter all Plainly before me if the devil could involve any of our people on these subjects as he has proposed to do Satan cause would Triumph now the work now the work without delay is to be taken up and not a difference of opinion expressed now when I saw how you were working my mind took in the whole Situation and the results if you should go forward and give the parties that have left us the least chance to bring Confusion into our ranks your lack of wisdom would be just what Satan would have it Your loud proclamation was not under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. I was instructed to say to you That you're picking flaws in the writings of men that have been led of God is not Inspired of God who were the men that have been led of God It's the ones that proclaim the judgment our message and If this is the wisdom that elder Danner Daniels would give to the people by no means give him an official pitch position for he cannot reason from calm cause to effect There's FC Gilbert again Your silence on this subject is your wisdom Now everything like picking flaws in the publication of men who are not alive is not the work of God has given any of you To do for if these men elder Daniels and Prescott had followed the directions Given in working the cities there would have been many very many convinced of the truth and converted able men that are now in positions Where they never will be reached brothers and sisters when you go out and you share a Bible prophecy You run in I don't maybe it's not appropriate for me to say this, but I've seen this this is this is Subjective on my part all right But I've seen people or saw people That they have their own preconceived ideas about certain things and they're gonna argue with you About those you know to the bitter end, and there's never any light. There's only you know heat That's generated, but you know what a Good Portion of us Adventists that are like that that are willing to have these battles over certain pieces of information We're not doing a thing for the Lord We're not doing a thing for the Lord we come to the meetings because we want to push our own opinions But when we go home we turn on the TV And the next morning we go to work We're not doing any kind of service for the Lord, and that's what she's saying here These men were running down a false Theological track and if they would have got to work and went into work in the city the actual work of serving the Lord Would have lifted them up and beyond this nonsense, but they weren't working They had a burden on their heart that they had to establish This new light and in order to do it they had to change the pioneer writings And I think that's what she's saying here I've been instructed that hasty movements should not have been made such as selecting you as president of the conference Even another year there's echoes of brother Gilbert, but the Lord forbids any more such hasty transactions until the matter is Brought before the Lord in prayer And as you have had the message come to you that the work of the Lord resting upon the president is the most solemn responsibility you've had no moral right to blaze out as you did upon the subject of the daily and Suppose your influence would decide the question The Lord will have to see in you is showing of a different experience for if ever men needed to be Reconverted at this present time it is elder Daniels and elder Prescott Seven men should be chosen that are men of wisdom and Through the working of the grace of God give evidence of a reconversion for any men Who are so blinded that they cannot reason from cause to effect and by the way in manuscript releases this came out 70s 80s 80s I guess When it came out it didn't matter it didn't matter by this time We all by this time the majority of Seventh-day Adventists didn't know what the daily was at all They didn't care and those of us that that had learned what the daily was we'd learned the wrong view and we didn't even know There was a right view and when this come out it didn't mean a thing Just just oh well, but along with that when it came out. This is an incomplete letter This was a letter that sister white was writing and evidently she never handed it off to her editors to finalize it So and when you go in and read it in its entirety, I've cut parts out of it it like in this paragraph here It's a little bit rough Elders Daniels and Prescott both need reconversion Elder Daniels you are not to fill at liberty to let your voice be heard on high as you have done under similar circumstances He has not liberty to meddle with the writings and printed books from pens that God has accepted Did God accept Uriah Smith's book even though it had a couple flaws in it? Yes it wasn't right for Anyone to meddle with it now. I'm to tell them When I was shown this matter She was shown it when elders Daniels was lifting up his voice like a trumpet in Advocating his ideas of the daily the after results were presented our people were becoming confused I saw the result and Then there were given me Cautions that if elder Daniel without respect to the outcome should thus be impressed and let himself believe he was under the inspiration of God Skepticism would be sown among our ranks everywhere, and we should be where Satan would carry out his messages That's a very brief Overview of the history of the daily William Miller Came to understand the daily is paganism and brothers and sisters. It works perfectly that way in the book of Daniel and in the early part of the last century one of the primary Apostates from Advent history Introduced the old Protestant view they handed it off to men like Daniel and Prescott and they began to promote it They made no headway with it until sister white was laid to rest In please notice just as a point of reference that this crisis over the daily took place in the history of what else? The alpha of apostasy this is the same time period and that's why the other night I was saying I believe the alpha of apostasy and the mega of apostasy is just what sister white said it was it has to do with pantheism of John Harvey Kellogg that history illustrating the Omega at the end what I was saying I wasn't saying the daily was the alpha or that the glorious land was the Omega I was saying that the daily from from my humble human perspective is the Alpha of prophetic error in Advent history that just so happens that the the error of the daily did come in in the very time period that the alpha of Omega came in and what I was saying is that the the pioneer view is that the daily represents a work of Satan paganism and that Conrad II's view is that the daily represents the work of Christ and Boy you're on pretty shaky ground when you start saying that Christ's works is Satan and Satan's work is Christ But now that I call the alpha because today The prophetic argument is on the glorious land and the glorious land is the United States fulfilling its role as a satanic power the false prophet leading the world to Armageddon and The argument against that true understanding is that no, it's not the United States. It's the Seventh-day Adventist Church I mean is it is the glorious land a satanic power or a godly power? So because of the the same relationship in the arguments in both those prophetic issues I'm saying that they're the alpha and the mega of prophetic misunderstanding They just happened to start at the same time period that the alpha started and you know what they're impacting the world Right when the Omega is impacting it. So there I think they're kind of connected but that's the history we are going to continue on in this study and Go through and see if we can come to understand the daily in the book of Daniel shall we pray Heavenly Father forgive me if I've Transgressed in talking about these historical figures but you have counseled us to understand the sacred history of your church and This is certainly part of it I Understand that you use these men that you love these men and I have no idea What the eternal? position is With these men in the judgment I'm simply looking at the the history and trying to see what happened to a truth that was one of the foundation truths of Adventism that Stayed that way for 50 years and Trying to make sure that we understand the purpose of that prophetic symbol here at the end so Let that be understood about this presentation. This isn't about the men back there. It's about the issues And the truth and we thank you for continue to be with us We ask that you'd be with us in a large measure as we continue through in our study of the daily because many times it's Hard for us to to hold these thoughts Clearly in our mind and we ask your help in this and we thank you for what you've done so far in Jesus name You