Article

# The Book of Daniel - Number Fifty

Daniels Bog - Nummer halvtreds

Unlocking the Prophetic Mysteries of Daniel 8: Palmoni’s Revelation

Oplåsning af de profetiske mysterier i Daniel 8: Palmonis åbenbaring

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

January 14, 2024

Formats

PDF
Word
Song MP3

In Daniel chapter eight, Daniel is given a vision of the kingdoms of Bible prophecy, and thereafter he hears a heavenly dialogue represented by a question and an answer.

I Daniels ottende kapitel gives Daniel et syn af de riger, der omtales i Bibelens profeti, og derefter hører han en himmelsk samtale, fremstillet ved et spørgsmål og et svar.

> Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Daniel 8:13, 14.

> Da hørte jeg en hellig tale, og en anden hellig sagde til den, som talte: Hvor længe skal synet om det daglige offer og ødelæggelsens overtrædelse vare, så både helligdommen og hæren bliver givet til at trædes ned? Og han sagde til mig: Indtil to tusind og tre hundrede dage; så skal helligdommen blive renset. Daniel 8,13-14.

The first twelve verses represent the vision, and verses thirteen and fourteen identify another vision. As with the two different Hebrew words that are both translated as “take away,” and the two different Hebrew words that are both translated as “sanctuary,” in Daniel chapter eight there are also two different Hebrew words, that are both translated as “vision.”

De første tolv vers fremstiller synet, og vers tretten og fjorten identificerer et andet syn. Ligesom der i Daniels Bog, kapitel otte, findes to forskellige hebraiske ord, som begge oversættes med „tage bort“, og to forskellige hebraiske ord, som begge oversættes med „helligdom“, findes der også to forskellige hebraiske ord, som begge oversættes med „syn“.

When it comes to the two words translated as “take away,” the theologians of Adventism argue that the words should both be understood to mean “remove.” When it comes to the two words translated as “sanctuary,” the theologians of Adventism argue that the words should both be understood to mean “God’s sanctuary”, and when it comes to the two words translated as “vision,” the theologians of Adventism, once again, gloss over the distinctions between the two words. The distinction was important enough to Daniel, that he purposely used two very different Hebrew words, so we should identify and uphold the distinction. The word “vision,” in verse thirteen is the Hebrew word “chazon,” and it means a dream, revelation, or oracle—a vision.

Når det gælder de to ord, der oversættes med „tage bort“, hævder adventismens teologer, at begge ord bør forstås som „fjerne“. Når det gælder de to ord, der oversættes med „helligdom“, hævder adventismens teologer, at begge ord bør forstås som „Guds helligdom“, og når det gælder de to ord, der oversættes med „syn“, overser adventismens teologer endnu en gang forskellene mellem de to ord. Forskellen var vigtig nok for Daniel til, at han med forsæt brugte to meget forskellige hebraiske ord, så vi bør identificere og fastholde forskellen. Ordet „syn“ i vers tretten er det hebraiske ord „chazon“, og det betyder en drøm, åbenbaring eller gudsudsagn — et syn.

The word “vision,” occurs ten times in Daniel chapter eight, but it represents two different Hebrew words. “Chazon,” that is located in verse thirteen, is also found in verse one, then twice in verse two, of course verse thirteen, and one time in verses fifteen, seventeen and twenty-six. Seven of the ten times the word “vision” occurs in Daniel chapter eight, it is the word “chazon,” simply meaning “a vision”.

Ordet »vision« forekommer ti gange i Daniels bog, kapitel otte, men det repræsenterer to forskellige hebraiske ord. »Chazon«, som findes i vers tretten, forekommer også i vers et, dernæst to gange i vers to, naturligvis i vers tretten, og én gang i versene femten, sytten og seksogtyve. Syv af de ti gange, ordet »vision« forekommer i Daniels bog, kapitel otte, er det ordet »chazon«, som ganske enkelt betyder »en vision«.

The other three times the word “vision” occurs in Daniel chapter eight, it is the Hebrew word “mareh,” meaning a view; or an appearance. In chapter eight, the Hebrew word “mareh,” is also translated one time not as “vision,” but as “appearance,” thus identifying more perfectly the meaning of the word. Why did Daniel use two different Hebrew words, that are so close in meaning that the translators would treat them as the same word? Does it matter?

De tre andre gange, ordet „vision“ forekommer i Daniels bog kapitel otte, er det det hebraiske ord „mareh“, som betyder et syn; eller en fremtræden. I kapitel otte oversættes det hebraiske ord „mareh“ også én gang ikke som „vision“, men som „fremtræden“, hvorved ordets betydning identificeres mere fuldkomment. Hvorfor brugte Daniel to forskellige hebraiske ord, som ligger så tæt i betydning, at oversætterne ville behandle dem som det samme ord? Har det betydning?

> “Every principle in the word of God has its place, every fact its bearing. And the complete structure, in design and execution, bears testimony to its Author. Such a structure no mind but that of the Infinite could conceive or fashion.” Education, 123.

> „Hvert princip i Guds ord har sin plads, hvert faktum sin betydning. Og hele strukturen vidner, både i plan og udførelse, om sin Ophavsmand. En sådan struktur kunne intet andet sind end den Uendeliges udtænke eller danne.“ Education, 123.

The answer to the second question is Yes, that it really does matter why Daniel made the distinction, so it therefore becomes the responsibility of the student of prophecy to seek to understand the first question, which asks why Daniel made the distinction. The distinctions he made concerning the word translated as “sanctuary,” and the word translated as “take away,” have eternal consequences, so why would anyone expect less of an importance with the word translated as “vision?” “Every fact” has “its bearing” “in the word of God,” and impacts the prophetic “structure,” and the fulfillment of the prophecy when it is “executed.”

Svaret på det andet spørgsmål er ja, at det virkelig har betydning, hvorfor Daniel foretog sondringen; derfor bliver det den profetistuderendes ansvar at søge at forstå det første spørgsmål, som spørger, hvorfor Daniel foretog sondringen. De sondringer, han foretog vedrørende det ord, der er oversat som „helligdom“, og det ord, der er oversat som „tage bort“, har evige konsekvenser; hvorfor skulle nogen da forvente mindre betydning af det ord, der er oversat som „syn“? „Hvert faktum“ har „sin betydning“ „i Guds ord“ og påvirker den profetiske „struktur“ og profetiens opfyldelse, når den bliver „udført“.

As we begin to consider the word “vision,” in chapter eight, a “fact” that has “bearing” on Daniel’s testimony, is who it was that answered the question of Daniel eight, verse thirteen with, “Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.”

Når vi begynder at betragte ordet „syn“ i kapitel otte, er et „faktum“, som har „betydning“ for Daniels vidnesbyrd, hvem det var, der besvarede spørgsmålet i Daniel 8, vers 13, med ordene: „Indtil to tusinde og tre hundrede dage; så skal helligdommen renses.“

There are four facts that have a direct “bearing” upon Daniel chapter eight, which I intend to address. One is that the vision of the Ulai River has been identified as a prophecy for the last days, and it is also the symbol of the “knowledge” of the book of Daniel which was “unsealed” at the “time of the end” in 1798.

Der er fire kendsgerninger, som har direkte „betydning“ for Daniels bog, kapitel otte, og som jeg agter at behandle. Den ene er, at synet ved Ulai-floden er blevet identificeret som en profeti for de sidste dage, og at det også er symbolet på den „kundskab“ i Daniels bog, som blev „åbnet“ ved „endetiden“ i 1798.

> “There is need of a much closer study of the Word of God. Especially should Daniel and the Revelation have attention as never before in the history of our work. We may have less to say in some lines, in regard to the Roman power and the papacy, but we should call attention to what the prophets and the apostles have written under the inspiration of the Spirit of God. The Holy Spirit has so shaped matters, both in the giving of the prophecy, and in the events portrayed, as to teach that the human agent is to be kept out of sight, hid in Christ, and the Lord God of heaven and His law are to be exalted.

> “Der er behov for et langt nærmere studium af Guds ord. Særligt bør Daniel og Johannes’ Åbenbaring få opmærksomhed som aldrig før i vort værks historie. Vi har måske mindre at sige på visse områder med hensyn til den romerske magt og pavedømmet, men vi bør henlede opmærksomheden på det, som profeterne og apostlene har skrevet under Guds Ånds inspiration. Helligånden har således ledet forholdene, både ved profetiens givelse og i de begivenheder, der skildres, for at lære, at det menneskelige redskab skal holdes ude af syne, skjult i Kristus, og at himmelens Herre Gud og hans lov skal ophøjes.”

> “Read the book of Daniel. Call up, point by point, the history of the kingdoms there represented. Behold statesmen, councils, powerful armies, and see how God wrought to abase the pride of men, and lay human glory in the dust. God alone is represented as great. In the vision of the prophet He is seen casting down one mighty ruler and setting up another. He is revealed as the monarch of the universe, about to set up His everlasting kingdom—the Ancient of days, the living God, the Source of all wisdom, the Ruler of the present, the Revealer of the future. Read and understand how poor, how frail, how short-lived, how erring, how guilty, is man in lifting up his soul unto vanity.

> „Læs Daniels Bog. Fremkald, punkt for punkt, historien om de riger, der dér er fremstillet. Se statsmænd, rådslagninger, mægtige hære, og se, hvorledes Gud virkede for at ydmyge menneskers stolthed og lægge menneskelig herlighed i støvet. Gud alene fremstilles som stor. I profetens syn ses Han styrte én mægtig hersker og indsætte en anden. Han åbenbares som universets monark, rede til at oprette Sit evige rige — den Gamle af dage, den levende Gud, Kilden til al visdom, Herskeren over nutiden, Åbenbareren af fremtiden. Læs og forstå, hvor fattigt, hvor skrøbeligt, hvor kortlivet, hvor fejlende, hvor skyldigt mennesket er, når det ophøjer sin sjæl til forfængelighed.

> “The Holy Spirit through Isaiah points us to God, the living God, as the chief object of attention—to God as revealed in Christ. ‘Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon His shoulder: and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace’ [Isaiah 9:6].

> Helligånden peger os gennem Esajas hen på Gud, den levende Gud, som den fornemste genstand for opmærksomhed — på Gud, sådan som Han er åbenbaret i Kristus. »For et barn er os født, en søn er os givet; og herredømmet skal være på hans skulder; og hans navn skal kaldes Underfuld, Rådgiver, Vældig Gud, Evigheds Fader, Fredsfyrste« [Esajas 9:6].

> “The light that Daniel received direct from God was given especially for these last days. The visions he saw by the banks of the Ulai and the Hiddekel, the great rivers of Shinar, are now in process of fulfillment, and all the events foretold will soon have come to pass.

> Det lys, som Daniel modtog direkte fra Gud, blev givet særligt for disse sidste dage. De syner, han så ved bredden af Ulai og Hiddekel, de store floder i Sinear, er nu ved at gå i opfyldelse, og alle de forudsagte begivenheder vil snart være sket.

> “Consider the circumstances of the Jewish nation when the prophecies of Daniel were given. The Israelites were in captivity, their temple had been destroyed, their temple service suspended. Their religion had centered in the ceremonies of the sacrificial system. They had made the outward forms all-important, while they had lost the spirit of true worship. Their services were corrupted with the traditions and practices of heathenism, and in the performance of the sacrificial rites they did not look beyond the shadow to the substance. They did not discern Christ, the true offering for the sins of men. The Lord wrought to bring the people into captivity, and to suspend the services in the temple, in order that the outward ceremonies might not become the sum total of their religion. Their principles and practices must be purged from heathenism. The ritual service ceased in order that heart service might be revived. The outward glory was removed that the spiritual might be revealed.

> »Betragt omstændighederne for det jødiske folk, da Daniels profetier blev givet. Israelitterne var i fangenskab, deres tempel var blevet ødelagt, deres tempeltjeneste indstillet. Deres religion havde haft sit centrum i offersystemets ceremonier. De havde gjort de ydre former til det altoverskyggende, samtidig med at de havde mistet den sande tilbedelses ånd. Deres gudstjenester var blevet fordærvet af hedenskabets traditioner og skikke, og i udførelsen af offerriterne så de ikke videre end fra skyggen til virkeligheden. De erkendte ikke Kristus, det sande offer for menneskenes synder. Herren greb ind for at føre folket i fangenskab og standse tjenesten i templet, for at de ydre ceremonier ikke skulle blive hele summen af deres religion. Deres principper og skikke måtte renses for hedenskab. Den rituelle tjeneste ophørte, for at hjertets tjeneste kunne blive genoplivet. Den ydre herlighed blev fjernet, for at det åndelige kunne blive åbenbaret.«

> “In the land of their captivity, as the people turned unto the Lord with repentance, He manifested Himself unto them. They lacked the outward representation of His presence; but the bright beams of the Sun of Righteousness shone into their minds and hearts. When they called unto God in their humiliation and distress, visions were given to His prophets which unfolded the events of the future—the overthrow of the oppressors of God’s people, the coming of the Redeemer, and the establishment of the everlasting kingdom.” Manuscript Releases, volume 16, 333–335.

> „I landet for deres fangenskab, da folket vendte sig til Herren med omvendelse, åbenbarede Han sig for dem. De manglede den ydre repræsentation af Hans nærvær; men de klare stråler fra Retfærdighedens Sol skinnede ind i deres sind og hjerter. Når de råbte til Gud i deres ydmygelse og nød, blev syner givet til Hans profeter, som åbenbarede fremtidens begivenheder—undertrykkerne af Guds folks fald, Forløserens komme og oprettelsen af det evige rige.“ Manuscript Releases, bind 16, 333–335.

The “fact” that the vision of the Ulai River was given for the last days demands that a student of prophecy makes the effort to understand what it has foretold of the events represented in the vision. The prophetic “matters” associated with the vision of the Ulai River were “shaped” by the “Holy Spirit” “both in the giving of the prophecy, and in the events portrayed.” What was happening with a prophet when they receive a vision, as well as the events of prophecy the prophet identifies are to be studied, with the knowledge that both are a prophetic representation of what will be fulfilled in the last days. The previous passage emphasizes that we should recognize that Daniel was in the captivity of the “seven times.”

Det „faktum“, at synet ved Ulai-floden blev givet for de sidste dage, kræver, at en studerende i profetien gør sig den anstrengelse at forstå, hvad det har forudsagt om de begivenheder, der er fremstillet i synet. De profetiske „forhold“, der er forbundet med synet ved Ulai-floden, blev „formet“ af „Helligånden“ „både i selve overgivelsen af profetien og i de begivenheder, der skildres“. Hvad der skete med en profet, når han modtager et syn, såvel som de profetiske begivenheder, profeten identificerer, skal studeres med den erkendelse, at begge dele er en profetisk fremstilling af det, der skal opfyldes i de sidste dage. Det foregående afsnit understreger, at vi bør erkende, at Daniel var i fangenskabet under de „syv tider“.

Daniel represents those who recognize their captivity at the conclusion of the three-and-a-half days of Revelation eleven, who then turn to the Lord with repentance, fulfill the Leviticus twenty-six prayer, separate the precious from the vile, and then the Lord fulfills his promise to gather those who have been scattered, as he manifests Himself unto them. Their “chief object of attention,” then is “God as revealed in Christ.”

Daniel repræsenterer dem, som erkender deres fangenskab ved afslutningen af de tre og en halv dage i Åbenbaringen 11, som derpå vender om til Herren i anger, opfylder bønnen i Tredje Mosebog 26, skiller det dyrebare fra det ringe, og derpå opfylder Herren sit løfte om at samle dem, som er blevet spredt, idet han åbenbarer sig for dem. Deres „vigtigste genstand for opmærksomhed“ er da „Gud, som åbenbaret i Kristus.“

The “bearing” of the vision of the Ulai River, and how it contributes to the “structure” of the prophetic message which was “designed” by Christ, is the first “fact” we have briefly considered, and the passage cited identifies that our chief object should be the revelation of God, as “revealed in Christ.” In Daniel chapter eight, Christ is not presented as He was by Isaiah, when Isaiah identified that Christ’s “name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.” In Daniel chapter eight, God is revealed in Christ as Palmoni, meaning the Wonderful Numberer, or the Numberer of Secrets.

„Bæringen“ af synet ved Ulaj-floden, og hvordan det bidrager til den „struktur“ i det profetiske budskab, som blev „udformet“ af Kristus, er det første „faktum“, vi kort har overvejet, og det citerede afsnit fastslår, at vort hovedanliggende bør være åbenbaringen af Gud, som „åbenbaret i Kristus“. I Daniels bog kapitel otte fremstilles Kristus ikke sådan, som han blev fremstillet af Esajas, da Esajas fastslog, at Kristi „navn skal kaldes Underfuld, Rådgiver, den Vældige Gud, den evige Fader, Fredsfyrsten“. I Daniels bog kapitel otte åbenbares Gud i Kristus som Palmoni, hvilket betyder den Underfulde Tæller eller Hemmelighedernes Tæller.

That “fact” demands that the “bearing” of the name “Palmoni” must be sought for, along with how that name contributes to the “structure” and “design” of the prophecy. A third “fact” in Daniel chapter eight, that should be recognized, is that it is in that chapter that the central doctrinal pillar of the Millerite movement is set forth. Miller’s brightest jewel was found in verse fourteen, and we should seek to understand the “bearing” that “fact” has upon the vision of the Ulai River, that is now in the process of fulfillment.

Dette „faktum“ kræver, at betydningen af navnet „Palmoni“ må efterspores, sammen med hvordan dette navn bidrager til profetiens „opbygning“ og „udformning“. Et tredje „faktum“ i Daniels ottende kapitel, som bør erkendes, er, at det er i dette kapitel, at Millerbevægelsens centrale læremæssige søjle fremsættes. Millers klareste juvel fandtes i vers fjorten, og vi bør søge at forstå, hvilken betydning dette „faktum“ har for synet ved floden Ulai, som nu er i færd med at blive opfyldt.

In Miller’s dream, when the casket was placed upon the table in the center of his room, it shone with the brightness of the sun, but in the last days the casket is larger and shines ten times brighter than it shone when initially placed upon Miller’s table. What is it about the vision of the Ulai River, that includes the central pillar to the Millerite movement, that increases the light of that doctrine by ten times in the last days? What is revealed in the last days that was not revealed at the time of the end in 1798? What are “the events” of the vision of the Ulai River, which Sister White says “are now in the process of fulfillment?”

I Millers drøm, da kisten blev sat på bordet midt i hans værelse, skinnede den med solens glans, men i de sidste dage er kisten større og skinner ti gange klarere, end den gjorde, da den først blev sat på Millers bord. Hvad er det ved synet om floden Ulai, som indbefatter den centrale søjle i Milleritebevægelsen, der i de sidste dage forøger lyset over denne lære ti gange? Hvad åbenbares i de sidste dage, som ikke blev åbenbaret ved endens tid i 1798? Hvad er „begivenhederne“ i synet om floden Ulai, som søster White siger „nu er i færd med at blive opfyldt“?

If we candidly bring these first three facts together (the vision of the Ulai, Christ revealed as Palmoni and the central doctrinal pillar), we should be willing to accept a simple premise that will impact our study of the vision of the Ulai River. Those combined facts inform those who wish to see that the message that was unsealed in 1798 was a message that was “hung upon time.” Without the element of predictive time prophecy Miller’s message would not have existed.

Hvis vi oprigtigt sammenholder disse første tre kendsgerninger (synet ved Ulai, Kristus åbenbaret som Palmoni og den centrale læremæssige søjle), bør vi være villige til at acceptere en enkel forudsætning, som vil få betydning for vort studium af synet ved floden Ulai. Disse samlede kendsgerninger viser dem, som ønsker at se, at det budskab, der blev afseglet i 1798, var et budskab, som var „ophængt på tid“. Uden elementet af forudsigende tidsprofeti ville Millers budskab ikke have eksisteret.

The fourth “fact” that has bearing on this chapter is that the Millerites presented a message based upon prophetic time. To emphasize this fact, God was revealed in Christ, in verse thirteen and fourteen as the Wonderful Numberer (Palmoni). The idea that the vision consisted of only identifying October 22, 1844, as the conclusion of the twenty-three hundred days of verse fourteen, is to throw cold water on the revelation of God being revealed through Christ as Palmoni.

Det fjerde „faktum“, som har betydning for dette kapitel, er, at Milleritterne frembar et budskab baseret på profetisk tid. For at understrege dette faktum blev Gud åbenbaret i Kristus i vers tretten og fjorten som den Vidunderlige Tæller (Palmoni). Forestillingen om, at synet alene bestod i at identificere 22. oktober 1844 som afslutningen på de to tusind tre hundrede dage i vers fjorten, er at kaste koldt vand på åbenbaringen af Gud, der bliver åbenbaret gennem Kristus som Palmoni.

The theologians of Adventism have diligently worked to bury the significance of the question of verse thirteen of Daniel chapter eight in order to produce the flavor in their dish of fables, that they have determined will keep the unlearned with the itching ears, from being concerned about the truths connected with the central pillar of Adventism.

Adventismens teologer har flittigt arbejdet på at begrave betydningen af spørgsmålet i vers tretten i Daniels bog, kapitel otte, for at frembringe den smag i deres fabelret, som de har bestemt skal hindre de ulærde med kløende ører i at beskæftige sig med de sandheder, der er forbundet med adventismens centrale søjle.

> “The scripture which above all others had been both the foundation and central pillar of the Advent faith was the declaration, ‘Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’ [Daniel 8:14.] These had been familiar words to all believers in the Lord’s soon coming. By the lips of thousands was this prophecy repeated as the watchword of their faith. All felt that upon the events therein foretold depended their brightest expectations and most cherished hopes. These prophetic days had been shown to terminate in the autumn of 1844. In common with the rest of the Christian world, Adventists then held that the earth, or some portion of it, was the sanctuary. They understood that the cleansing of the sanctuary was the purification of the earth by the fires of the last great day, and that this would take place at the second advent. Hence the conclusion that Christ would return to the earth in 1844.

> Det skriftsted, som frem for alle andre både havde været grundlaget og den centrale søjle i adventtroen, var erklæringen: »Indtil to tusind og tre hundrede aftener og morgener; så skal helligdommen blive renset.« [Daniel 8:14.] Dette var velkendte ord for alle dem, der troede på Herrens snare komme. Fra tusinders læber blev denne profeti gentaget som deres tros løsen. Alle følte, at deres lyseste forventninger og kæreste håb afhang af de begivenheder, der dér var forudsagt. Det var blevet påvist, at disse profetiske dage ville ende i efteråret 1844. Ligesom resten af den kristne verden antog adventisterne dengang, at jorden, eller en del af den, var helligdommen. De forstod helligdommens renselse som jordens renselse ved den sidste store dags ild, og at dette ville finde sted ved det andet komme. Deraf drog de den slutning, at Kristus ville vende tilbage til jorden i 1844.

> “But the appointed time had passed, and the Lord had not appeared. The believers knew that God’s Word could not fail; their interpretation of the prophecy must be at fault; but where was the mistake? Many rashly cut the knot of difficulty by denying that the 2300 days ended in 1844. No reason could be given for this, except that Christ had not come at the time they expected him. They argued that if the prophetic days had ended in 1844, Christ would then have returned to cleanse the sanctuary by the purification of the earth by fire; and that since he had not come, the days could not have ended.

> „Men den fastsatte tid var forbi, og Herren var ikke fremtrådt. De troende vidste, at Guds Ord ikke kunne slå fejl; deres fortolkning af profetien måtte være fejlagtig; men hvor lå fejlen? Mange huggede overilet vanskelighedens knude over ved at benægte, at de 2300 dage endte i 1844. Der kunne ikke anføres nogen grund hertil, bortset fra at Kristus ikke var kommet på det tidspunkt, de havde forventet ham. De hævdede, at hvis de profetiske dage var endt i 1844, ville Kristus da være vendt tilbage for at rense helligdommen ved jordens renselse med ild; og eftersom han ikke var kommet, kunne dagene ikke være endt.

> “To accept this conclusion was to renounce the former reckoning of the prophetic periods. The 2300 days had been found to begin when the commandment of Artaxerxes for the restoration and building of Jerusalem went into effect, in the autumn of B. C. 457. Taking this as the starting-point, there was perfect harmony in the application of all the events foretold in the explanation of that period in Daniel 9:25–27. Sixty-nine weeks, the first 483 of the 2300 years, were to reach to the Messiah, the Anointed One; and Christ’s baptism and anointing by the Holy Spirit, A. D. 27, exactly fulfilled the specification. In the midst of the seventieth week, Messiah was to be cut off. Three and a half years after his baptism, Christ was crucified, in the spring of A. D. 31. The seventy weeks, or 490 years, were to pertain especially to the Jews. At the expiration of this period, the nation sealed its rejection of Christ by the persecution of his disciples, and the apostles turned to the Gentiles, A. D. 34. The first 490 years of the 2300 having then ended, 1810 years would remain. From A. D. 34, 1810 years extend to 1844. ‘Then,’ said the angel, ‘shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’ All the preceding specifications of the prophecy had been unquestionably fulfilled at the time appointed. With this reckoning, all was clear and harmonious, except that it was not seen that any event answering to the cleansing of the sanctuary had taken place in 1844. To deny that the days ended at that time was to involve the whole question in confusion, and to renounce positions which had been established by unmistakable fulfillments of prophecy.

> At antage denne konklusion var at give afkald på den tidligere beregning af de profetiske tidsperioder. De 2300 dage var blevet fastslået til at begynde, da Artaxerxes’ befaling om Jerusalems genoprettelse og opbygning trådte i kraft i efteråret 457 f.Kr. Når dette blev taget som udgangspunkt, var der fuldkommen harmoni i anvendelsen af alle de begivenheder, der var forudsagt i forklaringen af denne periode i Daniel 9:25–27. Niogtres uger, de første 483 af de 2300 år, skulle nå frem til Messias, den Salvede; og Kristi dåb og salvelse ved Helligånden i år 27 e.Kr. opfyldte nøjagtigt denne angivelse. Midt i den halvfjerdsindstyvende uge skulle Messias ryddes af vejen. Tre og et halvt år efter sin dåb blev Kristus korsfæstet i foråret år 31 e.Kr. De halvfjerds uger, eller 490 år, skulle især vedrøre jøderne. Ved udløbet af denne periode beseglede nationen sin forkastelse af Kristus ved forfølgelsen af hans disciple, og apostlene vendte sig til hedningerne i år 34 e.Kr. Da de første 490 år af de 2300 således var afsluttet, ville 1810 år være tilbage. Fra år 34 e.Kr. strækker 1810 år sig til 1844. “Da,” sagde englen, “skal helligdommen renses.” Alle profetiens foregående enkeltheder var uden tvivl blevet opfyldt til den fastsatte tid. Med denne beregning var alt klart og harmonisk, bortset fra at man ikke så, at nogen begivenhed svarende til helligdommens renselse havde fundet sted i 1844. At benægte, at dagene udløb på dette tidspunkt, var at kaste hele spørgsmålet ud i forvirring og at give afkald på standpunkter, som var blevet fastslået ved umiskendelige profetiopfyldelser.

> “But God had led his people in the great Advent movement; his power and glory had attended the work, and he would not permit it to end in darkness and disappointment, to be reproached as a false and fanatical excitement. He would not leave his word involved in doubt and uncertainty. Though many abandoned their former reckoning of the prophetic periods, and denied the correctness of the movement based thereon, others were unwilling to renounce points of faith and experience that were sustained by the Scriptures and by the witness of the Spirit of God. They believed that they had adopted sound principles of interpretation in their study of the prophecies, and that it was their duty to hold fast the truths already gained, and to continue the same course of Biblical research. With earnest prayer they reviewed their position, and studied the Scriptures to discover their mistake. As they could see no error in their reckoning of the prophetic periods, they were led to examine more closely the subject of the sanctuary.” The Great Controversy, 409, 410.

> „Men Gud havde ledt sit folk i den store adventbevægelse; hans kraft og herlighed havde ledsaget værket, og han ville ikke tillade, at det endte i mørke og skuffelse og blev udsat for bebrejdelse som en falsk og fanatisk ophidselse. Han ville ikke lade sit ord være indviklet i tvivl og usikkerhed. Skønt mange opgav deres tidligere beregning af de profetiske tidsperioder og nægtede rigtigheden af den bevægelse, der var grundet derpå, var andre uvillige til at give afkald på tros- og erfaringspunkter, som blev støttet af Skrifterne og af Guds Ånds vidnesbyrd. De troede, at de i deres studium af profetierne havde antaget sunde fortolkningsprincipper, og at det var deres pligt at holde fast ved de sandheder, de allerede havde vundet, og at fortsætte den samme bibelske forskningsvej. Med inderlig bøn gennemgik de på ny deres standpunkt og granskede Skrifterne for at opdage deres fejl. Da de ikke kunne se nogen fejltagelse i deres beregning af de profetiske tidsperioder, blev de ledt til at undersøge spørgsmålet om helligdommen nærmere.“ The Great Controversy, 409, 410.

We have been informed by Sister White, in the same passage where the vision of the Ulai River is identified, that there “is need of a much closer study of the Word of God.” The theologians will present the subject of “prophetic periods” in the previous passage from The Great Controversy, as if the “prophetic periods” Sister White is limiting her commentary to, is the five prophecies that are represented within the twenty-three hundred year prophecy. After all, they claim, four of those prophecies are specifically addressed in the passage. But a “much closer study” of the subject demonstrates that the term “prophetic periods” in the plural, in Sister White’s writings more accurately refers to the two prophecies that were to be fulfilled on October 22, 1844.

Vi er blevet underrettet af søster White, i det samme afsnit hvor synet om Ulai-floden identificeres, om, at der “er behov for en langt grundigere undersøgelse af Guds ord”. Teologerne vil fremstille emnet “profetiske tidsperioder” i det foregående afsnit fra Den Store Strid, som om de “profetiske tidsperioder”, hvortil søster White begrænser sin kommentar, er de fem profetier, der er repræsenteret inden for profetien om de to tusind tre hundrede år. De hævder jo, at fire af disse profetier specifikt behandles i afsnittet. Men et “langt grundigere studium” af emnet påviser, at udtrykket “profetiske tidsperioder” i flertal i søster Whites skrifter mere præcist henviser til de to profetier, der skulle opfyldes den 22. oktober 1844.

There are five specific time prophecies that Gabriel identified for Daniel that are part of the twenty-three hundred years. The first identifies forty-nine years, when the “streets and walls would be built in troublous times.” The second was Christ’s baptism after four hundred and eighty-three years from the starting point of 457 BC. The third was His crucifixion, the fourth identified when the gospel would go to the Gentiles at the end of the four hundred and ninety-years that were set apart especially for the Jewish nation, and the fifth, and only the fifth, time prophecy, ended on October 22, 1844. The previous four time prophecies ended well before 1844. So, what does Sister White actually mean when she uses the expression “prophetic periods” in the plural, that were to end in 1844?

Der er fem specifikke tidsprofetier, som Gabriel udpegede for Daniel, og som er en del af de to tusind tre hundrede år. Den første angiver niogfyrre år, hvor »gader og mure skulle genopbygges under trængselsfulde tider«. Den anden var Kristi dåb efter fire hundrede og treogfirs år fra udgangspunktet i 457 f.Kr. Den tredje var Hans korsfæstelse; den fjerde angav, hvornår evangeliet skulle gå til hedningerne ved afslutningen af de fire hundrede og halvfems år, som særligt var afsat for den jødiske nation; og den femte, og kun den femte, tidsprofeti endte den 22. oktober 1844. De foregående fire tidsprofetier endte længe før 1844. Hvad mener Søster White derfor faktisk, når hun bruger udtrykket »profetiske perioder« i flertal, som skulle ende i 1844?

Addressing the first disappointment of the Millerites she identifies the answer to that question:

Idet hun tager fat på milleritternes første skuffelse, identificerer hun svaret på dette spørgsmål:

> “I saw the people of God joyful in expectation, looking for their Lord. But God designed to prove them. His hand covered a mistake in the reckoning of the prophetic periods. Those who were looking for their Lord did not discover this mistake, and the most learned men who opposed the time also failed to see it. God designed that His people should meet with a disappointment. The time passed, and those who had looked with joyful expectation for their Saviour were sad and disheartened, while those who had not loved the appearing of Jesus, but embraced the message through fear, were pleased that He did not come at the time of expectation. Their profession had not affected the heart and purified the life. The passing of the time was well calculated to reveal such hearts. They were the first to turn and ridicule the sorrowful, disappointed ones who really loved the appearing of their Saviour. I saw the wisdom of God in proving His people and giving them a searching test to discover those who would shrink and turn back in the hour of trial.

> „Jeg så Guds folk glade i forventning, idet de så hen til deres Herre. Men Gud havde til hensigt at prøve dem. Hans hånd skjulte en fejltagelse i beregningen af de profetiske tidsperioder. De, som så hen til deres Herre, opdagede ikke denne fejltagelse, og heller ikke de mest lærde mænd, som modsatte sig tidspunktet, formåede at se den. Gud havde til hensigt, at Hans folk skulle møde en skuffelse. Tiden gik, og de, som med glædesfuld forventning havde set frem til deres Frelser, blev bedrøvede og modløse, mens de, som ikke havde elsket Jesu tilsynekomst, men havde taget imod budskabet af frygt, var tilfredse med, at Han ikke kom på det forventede tidspunkt. Deres bekendelse havde ikke påvirket hjertet og renset livet. Tidens forløb var vel egnet til at åbenbare sådanne hjerter. De var de første til at vende sig bort og håne de bedrøvede, skuffede, som virkelig elskede deres Frelsers tilsynekomst. Jeg så Guds visdom i at prøve Sit folk og give dem en ransagende prøve for at opdage dem, som ville vige tilbage og vende om i prøvelsens stund.״

> “Jesus and all the heavenly host looked with sympathy and love upon those who had with sweet expectation longed to see Him whom their souls loved. Angels were hovering around them, to sustain them in the hour of their trial. Those who had neglected to receive the heavenly message were left in darkness, and God’s anger was kindled against them, because they would not receive the light which He had sent them from heaven. Those faithful, disappointed ones, who could not understand why their Lord did not come, were not left in darkness. Again they were led to their Bibles to search the prophetic periods. The hand of the Lord was removed from the figures, and the mistake was explained. They saw that the prophetic periods reached to 1844, and that the same evidence which they had presented to show that the prophetic periods closed in 1843, proved that they would terminate in 1844.” Early Writings, 235–237.

> „Jesus og hele den himmelske hærskare så med medfølelse og kærlighed på dem, som med sød forventning havde længtes efter at se Ham, som deres sjæle elskede. Engle svævede omkring dem for at styrke dem i deres prøvelses time. De, som havde undladt at modtage det himmelske budskab, blev ladt i mørke, og Guds vrede optændtes imod dem, fordi de ikke ville modtage det lys, som Han havde sendt dem fra himmelen. Disse trofaste, skuffede sjæle, som ikke kunne forstå, hvorfor deres Herre ikke kom, blev ikke ladt i mørke. Atter blev de ført til deres bibler for at granske de profetiske tidsperioder. Herrens hånd blev fjernet fra tallene, og fejltagelsen blev forklaret. De så, at de profetiske tidsperioder nåede til 1844, og at det samme bevis, som de havde fremført for at vise, at de profetiske tidsperioder afsluttedes i 1843, beviste, at de ville ende i 1844.“ Early Writings, 235–237.

The “prophetic periods” were the “prophetic periods” that “reached to 1844,” which the Millerites had initially believed reached to 1843. The “prophetic periods” that reached to 1844, were three prophetic periods,” and all are represented upon Habakkuk’s tables. One of the three periods simply “touches” 1844, and the other two reach to October 22, 1844. The thirteen hundred and thirty-five days reached to the very first day of 1844, when the first disappointment of the Millerites arrived, and the tarrying time of both Habakkuk chapter two, and of the parable of the ten virgins in Matthew twenty-five began.

De „profetiske perioder“ var de „profetiske perioder“, som „nåede til 1844“, og som milleritterne oprindeligt havde troet nåede til 1843. De „profetiske perioder“, som nåede til 1844, var tre profetiske perioder, og alle er fremstillet på Habakkuks tavler. Den ene af de tre perioder „berører“ blot 1844, og de to andre når frem til 22. oktober 1844. De tretten hundrede og femogtredive dage nåede frem til selve den første dag i 1844, da milleritterne oplevede deres første skuffelse, og ventetiden i både Habakkuks kapitel to og lignelsen om de ti jomfruer i Matthæus femogtyve begyndte.

The twenty-three hundred days of Daniel chapter eight, verse fourteen reached to October 22, 1844, and the twenty-five hundred and twenty years, of the “seven times” against the southern kingdom of Judah ended there as well. Palmoni introduces himself as the Wonderful Numberer in verse thirteen of Daniel eight, and the prophetic “structure” and “design” that he then set forth included at least ten interconnected time prophecies.

De to tusind tre hundrede dage i Daniels Bog, kapitel otte, vers fjorten, nåede frem til den 22. oktober 1844, og de to tusind fem hundrede og tyve år, af de „syv tider“ imod Judas sydlige rige, endte også dér. Palmoni fremstiller sig selv som den underfulde talregner i vers tretten i Daniel otte, og den profetiske „struktur“ og det „mønster“, som han derpå fremlagde, omfattede mindst ti indbyrdes forbundne tidsprofetier.

We will begin to consider these truths further in the next article.

Vi vil begynde at behandle disse sandheder nærmere i den næste artikel.

> “Christ gave to the world a lesson that should be engraved on mind and soul. ‘This is life eternal,’ he said, ‘that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.’ But Satan works on human minds, saying, Do this or that action, and ye shall be as gods. By deceptive reasoning he led Adam and Eve to doubt God’s word, and to supply its place with a theory that led to transgression and disobedience. And his sophistry is doing today what it did in Eden. When Christ came to our world, he selected humble fishermen as the foundation of his church. To these disciples he tried to explain the nature of his kingdom and mission. But their limited comprehension imposed a restraint upon him. They had been receiving the sayings of the scribes and Pharisees, and therefore much of what they believed was untrue. And though Christ had many things to say to them, they were unable to hear much of what he longed to communicate.

> "Kristus gav verden en lære, som burde indgraveres i sind og sjæl. »Dette er det evige liv,« sagde han, »at de kender dig, den eneste sande Gud, og Jesus Kristus, som du har udsendt.« Men Satan arbejder på menneskers sind og siger: Gør denne eller hin handling, og I skal blive som guder. Ved bedragerisk ræsonnement fik han Adam og Eva til at tvivle på Guds ord og sætte det til side for en teori, som førte til overtrædelse og ulydighed. Og hans sofisteri udretter i dag det samme, som det gjorde i Eden. Da Kristus kom til vor verden, udvalgte han ydmyge fiskere som grundvold for sin menighed. For disse disciple søgte han at forklare arten af sit rige og sin mission. Men deres begrænsede fatteevne lagde bånd på ham. De havde modtaget de skriftkloges og farisæernes udsagn, og derfor var meget af det, de troede, usandt. Og skønt Kristus havde meget at sige dem, var de ude af stand til at høre meget af det, han længtes efter at meddele."

> “Christ finds the religionists of this time so full of erroneous sentiments that there is no room in their minds for the truth. With the education given, teachers mingle the sentiments of infidel authors. Thus they have sown tares in the minds of the youth. They give utterance to sentiments that should not be presented to young or old, never thinking of what kind of seed they are sowing, or of the harvest they will have to garner as the result.” Review and Herald, July 3, 1900.

> »Kristus finder denne tids religionsbekendere så fyldt med vildfarne anskuelser, at der ikke er plads i deres sind for sandheden. Med den undervisning, der gives, sammenblander lærerne gudløse forfatteres anskuelser. Således har de sået ukrudt i de unges sind. De giver udtryk for anskuelser, som ikke burde fremføres for hverken unge eller gamle, uden nogen sinde at tænke på, hvilken slags sæd de sår, eller på den høst, de som følge heraf vil komme til at indsamle.« Review and Herald, 3. juli 1900.

Back to Articles