Article

# The Book of Daniel - Number Forty-Seven

Phau Ntawv Daniyee - Zaj Lus Naj Npawb Plaub Caug Xya

Unmasking Deceptive Doctrines: A Critical Analysis of Daniel 8 and the Challenges to Adventist Theology

Qhia Tej Lus Qhuab Qhia Dag Ntxias Tawm: Kev Ntsuam Xyuas Tob Txog Daniyee 8 thiab Cov Kev Sib Tw Rau Kev Ntseeg Vajtswv Adventist

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

January 11, 2024

Formats

PDF Unavailable
Word Unavailable
Song MP3

When the little horn of Rome is represented in verses nine through twelve of Daniel chapter eight, it is a corrupted symbol for it is a symbol of transvestitism, a cross-dresser oscillating between male and female. It agrees with the Millerite understanding that Rome was represented by two phases, the first phase being the Roman statecraft and the second phase being the Roman churchcraft, but in the oscillation of genders in the verses, the little horn is out of the historical and prophetic sequence (corrupted). Yet each of the four verses represents history directly associated with either Roman statecraft or Roman churchcraft. Pagan Rome persecuted all who resisted its imperial authority, but the persecution of papal Rome (feminine) in verse ten, is specifically directed against heaven.

Thaum tus kub me ntawm Loos raug sawv cev nyob rau hauv nqe cuaj txog kaum ob ntawm Daniyee tshooj yim, nws yog ib lub cim uas twb raug ua kom qias lawm, rau qhov nws yog ib lub cim ntawm kev hnav cev hla-pojniam-txiv neej, ib tug neeg hnav khaub ncaws hloov mus ua txivneej thiab pojniam sib pauv mus los. Qhov no phim raws li txoj kev to taub ntawm cov Millerite tias Loos raug sawv cev los ntawm ob theem, thawj theem yog Roman statecraft, hos theem ob yog Roman churchcraft; tiam sis nyob rau hauv qhov kev pauv mus los ntawm pojniam thiab txivneej hauv cov nqe ntawd, tus kub me nyob tawm ntawm kab keeb kwm thiab yaj saub (raug ua kom qias lawm). Txawm li cas los xij, txhua nqe ntawm plaub nqe ntawd sawv cev rau keeb kwm uas txuas ncaj qha nrog Roman statecraft lossis Roman churchcraft. Loos pagan tsim txom txhua tus uas tawm tsam nws txoj cai kav teb chaws, tiam sis kev tsim txom ntawm papal Rome (pojniam) hauv nqe kaum, yog tsom tshwj xeeb rau saum ntuj ceeb tsheej.

In the Millerite understanding that Rome was the fourth and final kingdom, the oscillating from state to church to state to church again would not have been a concern. They had seen the mixture of iron and clay in the feet of Daniel chapter two, and simply understood it as two phases of Rome, with no concern to define a specific historical sequence of a fourth and fifth kingdom. They understood the same of chapter seven, where the horn that spake great things against the most High, had three horns plucked up from the original ten horns of the beast of Rome. Even if Miller did recognize the gender oscillation of verse nine through twelve, it would have been unimportant to his understanding of the fourth kingdom being Rome. In Millerite understanding the fourth kingdom ended in 1798, and the next prophetic event was the Second Coming of Christ.

Hauv txoj kev to taub ntawm cov Millerite tias Loos yog lub nceeg vaj plaub thiab kawg, qhov uas txav rov mus los ntawm lub xeev mus rau pawg ntseeg thiab ntawm pawg ntseeg rov mus rau lub xeev dua yuav tsis yog ib yam uas ua rau muaj kev txhawj xeeb. Lawv twb pom qhov sib tov ntawm hlau thiab av nplaum nyob hauv ko taw ntawm Daniyees tshooj ob lawm, thiab tsuas to taub tias nws yog ob theem ntawm Loos xwb, tsis muaj kev txhawj txog kev txhais kom meej ib qho txheej txheem keeb kwm tshwj xeeb ntawm lub nceeg vaj plaub thiab lub nceeg vaj tsib. Lawv kuj to taub tib yam txog tshooj xya, qhov uas tus kub uas hais tej yam loj tawm tsam tus Siab Tshaj, tau muab peb lub kub rho tawm ntawm thawj kaum lub kub ntawm tus tsiaj nyaum ntawm Loos. Txawm yog Miller yeej pom qhov kev hloov mus los ntawm poj niam los txiv neej hauv nqe cuaj mus txog kaum ob, los qhov ntawd yuav tsis tseem ceeb rau nws txoj kev to taub tias lub nceeg vaj plaub yog Loos. Hauv txoj kev to taub ntawm cov Millerite, lub nceeg vaj plaub xaus rau xyoo 1798, thiab qhov txheej xwm yaj saub tom ntej yog Kev Rov Los Zaum Ob ntawm Khetos.

The feminine horn identifies the woman who commits spiritual fornication with the masculine horn, and is represented in verses ten and twelve.

Tus kub pojniam qhia txog tus pojniam uas ua kev nkauj nraug sab ntsuj plig nrog tus kub pojniam, thiab raug sawv cev rau hauv nqe kaum thiab kaum ob.

> And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them. Daniel 8:10.

> Nws loj hlob heev, mus txog rau pab tub rog saum ntuj ceeb tsheej; thiab nws muab qee leej ntawm pab tub rog thiab ntawm cov hnub qub pov rau hauv av, thiab tsuj lawv. Daniel 8:10.

The persecution of the papal power was directed against Christianity (the host of heaven), and in verse twelve papal Rome (feminine), receives the power to accomplish her murderous work through the transgression of fornicating with the kings of Europe.

Kev tsim txom ntawm hwjchim papal tau raug tsom rau tawm tsam txoj Kev Ntseeg Khetos (tus tswv tsev saum ntuj), thiab hauv nqe kaum ob, Loos papal (pojniam), tau txais lub hwjchim los ua kom tiav nws txoj haujlwm tua neeg los ntawm txoj kev ua txhaum ntawm kev ua nkauj ua nraug nrog cov vajntxwv ntawm Tebchaws Europe.

> And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered. Daniel 8:12.

> Thiab ib pab tub rog raug muab rau nws tawm tsam txoj kev fij txi txhua hnub vim yog kev txhaum, thiab nws muab qhov tseeb pov rau hauv av; thiab nws tau ua li ntawd, thiab vam meej. Daniel 8:12.

The “host” in the verse represents the military power that was given the papacy “against the daily.” The word “against” means “from”. From the pagan kings of Europe (pagan Rome), represented by “the daily,” military support (an host) was given to the papacy “by reason of transgression.” The combination of church and state, with the church in control of the relationship is the “transgression.” The wine of that transgression is Christian blood. Once the papacy had control of the armies of pagan Rome, papal Rome (“it”) “cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered.”

Lo lus “host” hauv nqe vajlugkub no sawv cev rau lub hwj chim tub rog uas tau muab rau lub hwj chim papacy “tawm ntawm tus daily.” Lo lus “against” txhais hais tias “tawm ntawm.” Tawm ntawm cov vaj ntxwv pagan ntawm teb chaws Europe (pagan Rome), uas raug sawv cev los ntawm “tus daily,” kev txhawb nqa tub rog (ib host) tau muab rau lub papacy “vim yog kev txhaum.” Kev koom ua ke ntawm pawg ntseeg thiab lub xeev, uas pawg ntseeg yog tus tswj txoj kev sib raug zoo ntawd, yog “kev txhaum” ntawd. Cawv txiv hmab ntawm txoj kev txhaum ntawd yog cov ntshav Khixatia. Thaum lub papacy twb tau tswj hwm cov tub rog ntawm pagan Rome lawm, papal Rome (“nws”) “ntxeev qhov tseeb pov rau hauv av; thiab nws tau xyaum ua, thiab vam meej.”

In Daniel chapter eleven, verse thirty-one, the giving of the armies to papal Rome is also represented:

Hauv Daniyees tshooj kaum ib, nqe peb caug ib, kuj sawv cev txog kev cob cov tub rog rau Loos papas:

> And 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. Daniel 11:31.

> Thiab cov caj npab yuav sawv ntawm nws sab, thiab lawv yuav ua kom lub chaw dawb huv uas muaj zog qias tuaj, thiab lawv yuav muab txoj kev txi niaj hnub tshem tawm mus, thiab lawv yuav tsa yam qias neeg uas ua rau muaj kev puam tsuaj. Daniel 11:31.

The verse is identifying the historical transition from pagan Rome to papal Rome. In the verse the “arms” are the European kings that began to stand up for the papacy beginning with Clovis, king of the Franks (France), in the year 496. The “arms” also polluted “the sanctuary of strength” (the city of Rome), through the continuous warfare from the fourth century onward to the year 538. The “arms” also removed the pagan resistance to the rise of the papacy, and by the year 508, the pagan resistance was finished.

Nqe lus no tab tom txheeb xyuas txog kev hloov keeb kwm ntawm Loos kev teev dab mus rau Loos ntawm lub hwj chim papacy. Hauv nqe lus no, cov “caj npab” yog cov vaj ntxwv European uas pib sawv los txhawb papacy, pib nrog Clovis, vaj ntxwv ntawm cov Franks (Fabkis), nyob rau xyoo 496. Cov “caj npab” kuj ua kom “lub tuam tsev dawb huv ntawm lub zog” (lub nroog Loos) qias tuaj, los ntawm kev ua tsov rog tsis tu ncua txij xyoo pua plaub mus ntxiv mus txog xyoo 538. Cov “caj npab” kuj tshem tawm txoj kev tawm tsam ntawm kev teev dab uas tawm tsam kev sawv los ntawm papacy, thiab txog xyoo 508, txoj kev tawm tsam ntawm kev teev dab ntawd twb xaus lawm.

The word translated as “take away,” is the Hebrew word “sur” and means “to remove”. The “arms” placed the “abomination that maketh desolate” (the papacy), on the throne of the earth in the year 538. When Daniel chapter eight, verse twelve identifies that “an host” was given to the feminine little horn, it is agreeing with the witness of verse thirty-one of chapter eleven. The book of Revelation also gives witness to the same truth in chapter thirteen.

Lo lus uas tau txhais ua “rho tawm,” yog lo lus Henplais “sur” thiab txhais hais tias “tshem tawm”. Cov “caj npab” tau tsa “yam qias neeg uas ua rau puam tsuaj” (lub hwj chim papacy), rau saum lub zwm txwv ntawm lub ntiaj teb hauv xyoo 538. Thaum Daniyee tshooj yim, nqe kaum ob qhia tias “ib pab tub rog” raug muab rau tus kub me poj niam, nws yog tab tom pom zoo nrog zaj lus tim khawv ntawm nqe peb caug ib ntawm tshooj kaum ib. Phau Ntawv Qhia Tshwm kuj ua tim khawv rau tib qhov tseeb ntawd hauv tshooj kaum peb.

> And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. Revelation 13:2.

> Thiab tus tsiaj nyaum uas kuv pom zoo li ib tug tsov txaij, thiab nws ob txhais ko taw zoo li ob txhais ko taw dais, thiab nws lub qhov ncauj zoo li lub qhov ncauj tsov ntxhuav; thiab tus zaj muab nws lub hwj chim, thiab nws lub zwm txwv, thiab txoj cai loj rau nws. Tshwm Sim 13:2.

Sister White directly identifies the beast of verse two as the papacy, and that the dragon in the verse is pagan Rome. Pagan Rome gave three things to the papacy; “his power, and his seat, and great authority.”

Muam White qhia meej tseeb tias tus tsiaj nyaum nyob hauv nqe ob yog lub hwj chim papacy, thiab tias tus zaj nyob hauv nqe ntawd yog Loos pagan. Loos pagan tau muab peb yam rau lub hwj chim papacy; “nws lub hwj chim, thiab nws lub zwm txwv, thiab txoj cai loj.”

The military power was given by pagan Rome beginning with Clovis in the year 496. The “seat” to rule from, was given to the papacy in the year 330, when the emperor Constantine moved his capitol to Constantinople, leaving his former capitol city of Rome to the control of the papal church. In the year 533, the emperor Justinian decreed that the pope was the head of the church and the corrector of heretics, turning his “great authority” over to the pope of Rome. Verse twelve of Daniel chapter eight, identifies the time when a “host” was given, and that prophetic truth is testified to on many witnesses. From that point in time (beginning in the year 496), the papacy “prospered.”

Lub hwjchim tub rog tau raug muab los ntawm Loos uas pe hawm dab mlom, pib nrog Clovis hauv xyoo 496. “Lub zwm txwv” uas siv los kav ntawd, raug muab rau txoj kev ua Vajlugkub ntawm papacy hauv xyoo 330, thaum huab tais Constantine txav nws lub peev mus rau Constantinople, tso nws lub qub peev nroog Loos tseg rau hauv kev tswj hwm ntawm pawg ntseeg papal. Nyob rau xyoo 533, huab tais Justinian tau tshaj tawm tias tus pope yog tus thawj ntawm pawg ntseeg thiab yog tus kho cov neeg ntseeg cuav, muab nws “lub hwjchim loj” rau tus pope ntawm Loos. Nqe kaum ob ntawm Daniyees tshooj yim qhia txog lub sijhawm thaum ib “pab tub rog” raug muab, thiab qhov tseeb yaj saub ntawd raug ua tim khawv los ntawm ntau tus pov thawj. Txij lub sijhawm ntawd mus (pib hauv xyoo 496), papacy tau “vam meej.”

It would continue to “practice” and “prosper” until the end of the indignation against the northern kingdom of Israel ended in 1798, and the papacy received its deadly wound.

Nws yuav tseem “ua” thiab “vam meej” mus txog thaum kawg ntawm txoj kev chim siab tawm tsam lub nceeg vaj qaum teb ntawm Ixayees xaus rau xyoo 1798, thiab lub hwj chim papacy tau txais nws lub qhov txhab uas txaus tuag.

> And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done. Daniel 11:36.

> Thiab vajntxwv yuav ua raws li nws lub siab nyiam; thiab nws yuav tsa nws tus kheej siab, thiab ua kom nws tus kheej loj dua txhua tus vajtswv, thiab yuav hais tej lus txawv txawv tawm tsam tus Vajtswv ntawm cov vajtswv, thiab nws yuav vam meej mus txog thaum txoj kev chim siab tiav lawm: rau qhov yam uas tau txiav txim cia lawm yuav tsum muaj tiav. Daniyees 11:36.

Verse nine of chapter eight, describes masculine Rome (pagan Rome), and represents the three-step conquering process that pagan Rome accomplished, and which typified the three geographical areas that would be conquered in order for papal Rome to be established upon the throne of the earth, as represented by the three horns that were plucked up in chapter seven. Those two three-step conquering’s of pagan and papal Rome, represented the three geographical obstacles of modern Rome, in verses forty through forty-three of Daniel eleven. Then in chapter eight, verse eleven, the masculine little horn (pagan Rome) is again represented. In the verse, the sanctified logic is so sound, that the scornful men that rule Jerusalem were forced to introduce several theological lies in order to erect their counterfeit foundation.

Nqe cuaj ntawm tshooj yim piav txog Loos pojniam txivneej (Loos pagan), thiab sawv cev rau txoj kev kov yeej peb theem uas Loos pagan tau ua tiav, thiab uas yog ib daim qauv ua ntej txog peb thaj chaw thaj av uas yuav raug kov yeej kom Loos papal thiaj raug tsa rau saum lub zwm txwv ntawm lub ntiajteb, raws li peb tug kub uas raug muab rho tawm hauv tshooj xya sawv cev. Ob txoj kev kov yeej peb theem ntawd ntawm Loos pagan thiab Loos papal sawv cev rau peb yam teeb meem thaj chaw ntawm Loos niaj hnub no, nyob hauv nqe plaub caug mus txog plaub caug peb ntawm Daniyees kaum ib. Ces nyob hauv tshooj yim, nqe kaum ib, tus kub me txivneej (Loos pagan) raug sawv cev dua ib zaug ntxiv. Nyob hauv nqe ntawd, lub laj thawj dawb huv ruaj khov heev, txog npaum li cov txiv neej saib tsis taus uas kav Yeluxalees raug yuam kom coj los qhia ob peb qho lus dag kev ntseeg xibhwb txhawm rau tsa lawv lub hauv paus cuav.

> Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Daniel 8:11.

> Yog lawm, nws tsa nws tus kheej kom loj txawm mus txog rau Tus Tub Vaj Ntxwv ntawm pab tub rog, thiab los ntawm nws txoj kev ua, kev txi niaj hnub raug muab tshem tawm, thiab qhov chaw ntawm nws lub chaw dawb huv raug rhuav pov tseg. Daniel 8:11.

As we begin to address the counterfeit coins and jewels that have been introduced to Adventism since 1863, it should be noted that there are two primary fields of supposed theological expertise which Adventism boasts of, as their basis for upholding the doctrines of apostate Protestantism and Catholicism. The claim that the modern theologians of Adventism make is that they are either experts in biblical history, or experts in biblical languages. Their application of the verse, reveals the prophetic word has become as a sealed book unto them, and also reveals that their claim of being experts of the biblical languages is simply the modern manifestation of Pharisaism.

Thaum peb pib hais txog cov nyiaj cuav thiab cov hniav nyiaj hniav kub cuav uas tau raug coj los rau hauv Adventism txij xyoo 1863 los, tsim nyog yuav tsum nco ntsoov tias muaj ob thaj chaw tseem ceeb ntawm yam uas raug hu ua kev txawj ntse sab kev ntseeg uas Adventism khav txog, ua lub hauv paus rau lawv txoj kev txhawb nqa cov lus qhuab qhia ntawm Protestantism uas thim rov qab thiab Catholicism. Qhov kev thov uas cov neeg txawj txhais kev ntseeg niaj hnub no hauv Adventism hais tseg yog tias lawv yog cov kws tshaj lij hauv keeb kwm Vajlugkub, los sis yog cov kws tshaj lij hauv cov lus ntawm Vajlugkub. Lawv txoj kev siv nqe Vajlugkub ntawd qhia tias lo lus faj lem tau dhau los ua ib phau ntawv kaw ruaj rau lawv, thiab kuj qhia tias lawv txoj kev lees tias yog cov kws tshaj lij ntawm cov lus Vajlugkub tsuas yog kev tshwm sim niaj hnub no ntawm txoj kev ua Falixais xwb.

First is the disregard of the oscillation of the genders for the little horn in verse nine through twelve. If they were actually experts in the Hebrew language, they would not deny, or water down, the fact that Daniel purposely employed gender oscillation in the verses. The little horn is represented in both genders, and those genders go back and forth through the verses. The theologians try to cover this fact with rubbish and counterfeit coins, for it clearly identifies that verse eleven is identifying pagan, not papal Rome. They of course insist that the little horn of verse eleven is the pope, when it is actually pagan Rome.

Ua ntej tshaj plaws yog qhov tsis quav ntsej txog kev hloov mus los ntawm txivneej‑pojniam kev qhia rau tus kub me hauv nqe cuaj mus txog kaum ob. Yog lawv yeej yog cov kws txawj tiag tiag hauv lus Henplais, lawv yuav tsis tsis lees paub, lossis txo kom nqaim, qhov tseeb tias Daniel tau txhob txwm siv kev hloov mus los ntawm txivneej‑pojniam kev qhia hauv cov nqe ntawd. Tus kub me raug sawv cev nyob rau hauv ob hom txivneej‑pojniam kev qhia, thiab cov kev qhia ntawd hloov mus los sib law liag thoob plaws cov nqe ntawd. Cov kws ntseeg‑vajlugkub sim npog qhov tseeb no nrog tej yam khib nyiab thiab tej npib cuav, rau qhov nws qhia meej tias nqe kaum ib tab tom txheeb kom pom Loos pagan, tsis yog Loos papal. Lawv, yeej tsis poob li, hais tawv tias tus kub me hauv nqe kaum ib yog tus pope, thaum qhov tseeb nws yog Loos pagan.

Once it is acknowledged that two of the four little horn verses are male and two are female, then it is simple to incorporate the biblical truth that a woman in Bible prophecy represents a church, and a man represents a state. Knowing this allows all who wish to see, that the little horn of verse eleven, is masculine Rome (pagan Rome), not feminine Rome (papal Rome).

Thaum twb lees paub lawm tias ob nqe ntawm plaub nqe hais txog lub hwj me muaj xeem txiv neej thiab ob nqe muaj xeem poj niam, ces kuj yooj yim los koom nrog qhov tseeb hauv Vajlugkub tias ib tug poj niam hauv kev yaj saub hauv Vajlugkub sawv cev rau ib lub koom txoos, hos ib tug txiv neej sawv cev rau ib lub xeev. Kev paub qhov no ua rau txhua tus uas xav pom, pom tseeb tias lub hwj me hauv nqe kaum ib yog Loos xeem txiv neej (Loos pagan), tsis yog Loos xeem poj niam (Loos papal).

The verse then is understood as teaching that pagan Rome (he) magnified himself to the prince of the host, as did pagan Rome when it placed the prince of the host upon the cross of Calvary. Not only did pagan Rome magnify itself against Christ at the cross, the verse goes on to say that by him (pagan Rome) “the daily sacrifice was taken away.”

Yog li no raug to taub hais tias Loos uas pe hawm tej dab mlom (nws) tau tsa nws tus kheej kom siab mus txog Tus Tub Vaj Ntxwv ntawm pab tub rog, ib yam li Loos uas pe hawm tej dab mlom tau ua thaum nws muab Tus Tub Vaj Ntxwv ntawm pab tub rog ntsia rau saum tus ntoo khaub lig ntawm Kalvari. Tsis yog tsuas yog Loos uas pe hawm tej dab mlom tau tsa nws tus kheej tawm tsam Khetos ntawm tus ntoo khaub lig xwb, nqe vaj lug kub ntawd tseem hais ntxiv tias los ntawm nws (Loos uas pe hawm tej dab mlom) “txoj kev txi niaj hnub raug muab tshem tawm lawm.”

In the book of Daniel there are two Hebrew words that are both translated as “take away.” The words are “sur” and “rum”. Both words are used in the sanctuary service. Sur means to take away or remove, and when the ashes from the altar in the sanctuary were removed, the word used to describe the removal of the ashes is “sur”. The word “rum” means to lift up and exalt, and when the priest in the sanctuary was to lift up a wave offering, he was to “rum” (lift up) the offering. In verse eleven, pagan Rome (“the daily”) would “rum” (take away) paganism by lifting up and exalting the religion of paganism.

Hauv phau ntawv Daniyee muaj ob lo lus Henplais uas ob leeg raug txhais ua “tshem tawm.” Ob lo lus ntawd yog “sur” thiab “rum”. Ob lo lus no puav leej raug siv hauv txoj haujlwm pabcuam hauv lub chaw dawb huv. “Sur” txhais tias tshem tawm lossis muab tshem mus, thiab thaum cov hmoov tshauv saum lub thaj hauv lub chaw dawb huv raug tshem tawm, lo lus uas siv los piav txog kev tshem cov hmoov tshauv ntawd yog “sur”. Lo lus “rum” txhais tias tsa kom siab thiab qhuas kom muaj meejmom, thiab thaum tus pov thawj hauv lub chaw dawb huv yuav tsum tsa ib qho khoom fij viav tes, nws yuav tsum “rum” (tsa kom siab) qhov khoom fij ntawd. Nyob hauv nqe kaum ib, Loos uas pe dab mlom (“the daily”) yuav “rum” (tshem tawm) kev teev dab qhuas los ntawm kev tsa kom siab thiab qhuas kom muaj meejmom rau txoj kev ntseeg ntawm kev pe dab mlom.

Pagan Rome would lift up and exalt the religion of paganism. The Adventist theologians that profess an expertise of biblical languages choose to treat every occurrence of “take away” in the book of Daniel as “remove”. They fail to acknowledge the distinct and precise writing of Daniel, and thus place themselves above the prophet Daniel.

Loos Thee Kheev uas yog neeg pe dab mlom yuav tsa kom siab thiab qhuas txhawb txoj kev ntseeg ntawm kev pe dab mlom. Cov kws xibhwb kev ntseeg Adventist uas lees tias lawv txawj ntse tshwj xeeb txog cov lus hauv Vajlugkub xaiv los txhais txhua qhov uas lo lus “rho tawm” tshwm hauv phau ntawv Daniel ua “tshem tawm”. Lawv tsis lees paub Daniel txoj kev sau uas txawv thiab meej tseeb, thiab yog li ntawd lawv muab lawv tus kheej tsa siab dua tus yaj saub Daniel.

The theologians that profess to understand the biblical languages provide arguments to justify why Daniel intended to mean the same thing, when he employed two different words. They provide long and tedious word studies to uphold their false claims. The theologians that profess to understand biblical history, argue that the false application is based upon recognizing that in different periods of history the same word might mean something different, and therefore when Daniel employed two different words, only a historical expert can identify what Daniel actually meant. It is important to identify these two false methods for they are employed often by the theologians who seek to hide from the methodology of “line upon line.”

Cov xibfwb kev ntseeg uas lees tias lawv to taub cov lus hauv Phau Vajlugkub, muab tej lus sib cav los ua pov thawj tias vim li cas Daniyees thiaj npaj kom txhais ib yam nkaus, thaum nws siv ob lo lus sib txawv. Lawv nthuav tej kev kawm lus ntev thiab nkees mloog los txhawb lawv tej lus dag. Cov xibfwb kev ntseeg uas lees tias lawv to taub keeb kwm hauv Phau Vajlugkub, sib cav tias qhov kev siv tsis tseeb ntawd yog raws li kev lees paub tias nyob rau ntau tiam keeb kwm sib txawv, tib lo lus kuj yuav txhais tau ib yam txawv, thiab vim li ntawd thaum Daniyees siv ob lo lus sib txawv, tsuas yog tus kws paub keeb kwm xwb thiaj txheeb tau yam uas Daniyees yeej txhais tiag. Nws yog ib qho tseem ceeb uas yuav tsum txheeb kom paub ob txoj kev dag no, rau qhov cov xibfwb kev ntseeg uas nrhiav kev zais lawv tus kheej ntawm txoj kev qhia “kab saum kab” siv lawv ntau zaus.

> Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Daniel 8:11.

> Muaj tseeb tiag, nws tau tsa nws tus kheej loj hlob mus txog rau Tus Tub Vaj Ntxwv ntawm pab tub rog, thiab vim nws thiaj muab txoj kev txi niaj hnub raug tshem tawm, thiab qhov chaw ntawm nws lub chaw dawb huv raug muab pov tseg. Daniel 8:11.

The word translated as “taken away” in the verse means to “lift up and exalt”. It does not mean to remove. This fact creates confusion and contradiction for the Adventist theologians, for their premises do not hold up under a simple evaluation of the verse, when the actual definition of the word Daniel used is applied to the verse. They argue the little horn of the verse is papal Rome, and therefore the verse would read that “by him” (papal Rome) “the daily was taken away.”

Lo lus uas raug txhais ua “muab tshem tawm” hauv nqe vajlugkub no txhais tias “tsa kom siab thiab qhuas kom loj”. Nws tsis txhais hais tias tshem tawm. Qhov tseeb no ua rau muaj kev ntxhov siab thiab kev sib txeeb hauv cov kws ntseeg Adventist, vim lawv tej kev xav ua thawj tsis ruaj khov thaum muab nqe vajlugkub no los tshuaj xyuas yooj yim, thaum siv lub ntsiab txhais tiag tiag ntawm lo lus uas Daniyees tau siv rau hauv nqe vajlugkub no. Lawv sib cav tias tus kub me hauv nqe vajlugkub no yog Loos papal, thiab yog li ntawd nqe vajlugkub no yuav nyeem tias “los ntawm nws” (Loos papal) “kev niaj hnub raug tsa kom siab.”

They of course have no problem including the added word that Sister White states directly was added by human wisdom and does not apply to the text.

Lawv yeej tsis muaj teeb meem li uas yuav suav nrog lo lus uas raug ntxiv ntawd, uas Muam White hais meej tias yog tibneeg txoj kev txawj ntse ntxiv nkag los thiab tsis siv rau nqe ntawd.

> “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 hour cry.” Early Writings, 74.

> “Tom qab ntawd kuv tau pom hais txog lo lus ‘txhua hnub’ (Daniel 8:12) tias lo lus ‘kev txi’ yog tibneeg lub tswvyim ntxiv nkag los, thiab tsis yog ib feem ntawm zaj ntawv ntawd, thiab tias tus Tswv tau muab txoj kev to taub uas raug txog qhov no rau cov uas tau tshaj tawm txoj xov quaj txog lub sijhawm txiav txim.” Early Writings, 74.

They identify “the daily” as Christ’s sanctuary ministry, so the “daily sacrifice” upholds the concept that “the daily” is Christ sacrificial work in the heavenly sanctuary. But inspiration identifies that the word “sacrifice” “does not belong to the text”.

Lawv txheeb tias “yam niaj hnub” yog Khetos txoj hauj lwm qhuab qhia hauv lub tuam tsev dawb huv, yog li “kev txi niaj hnub” txhawb nqa lub ntsiab uas “yam niaj hnub” yog Khetos txoj hauj lwm txi nyob hauv lub tuam tsev dawb huv saum ntuj ceeb tsheej. Tiamsis kev tshoov siab qhia meej tias lo lus “kev txi” “tsis yog ib feem ntawm zaj ntawv qub”.

When the drunkards of Ephraim identify “the daily” as Christ’s sanctuary work, the verse would then read, “by him” (papal Rome) “the daily was taken away,” or it would read, “by the papal power, Christ’s sanctuary ministry was taken away.” They actually teach this falsehood. They insist that through the darkness of the papal rule the true understanding of Christ’s sanctuary ministry was removed from the minds of men.

Thaum cov neeg qaug cawv ntawm Efa‑i‑ees txheeb “qhov niaj hnub” tias yog Khetos txoj haujlwm hauv lub chaw dawb huv, nqe ntawd ces yuav nyeem hais tias, “los ntawm nws” (Loos papal) “qhov niaj hnub raug muab tshem tawm,” los yog nws yuav nyeem hais tias, “los ntawm lub hwj chim papal, Khetos txoj hauj lwm qhuab qhia hauv lub chaw dawb huv raug muab tshem tawm lawm.” Lawv yeej qhia txoj kev dag no tiag tiag. Lawv hais khov kho tias, los ntawm qhov tsaus ntuj ntawm txoj kev kav papal, txoj kev to taub tseeb txog Khetos txoj hauj lwm qhuab qhia hauv lub chaw dawb huv raug muab tshem tawm ntawm tib neeg lub siab.

Yet the word translated as “take away,” does not mean to remove, it means to lift up and exalt. If the professed experts of biblical languages would correctly apply the meaning of the Hebrew word “rum,” to the passage, their rendition would need to say, “by the papal power, Christ’s sanctuary ministry was lifted up and exalted.” When did the papacy ever lift up and exalt Christ?

Txawm li cas los xij, lo lus uas tau txhais ua “tshem tawm,” tsis txhais hais tias tshem mus, tabsis nws txhais hais tias tsa kom siab thiab qhuas kom loj. Yog cov uas tshaj tawm tias yog cov kws txawj ntawm tej lus hauv Vajlugkub yuav siv raws nraim lub ntsiab ntawm lo lus Henplais “rum” rau nqe ntawd, lawv qhov kev txhais yuav tsum hais tias, “los ntawm hwjchim papal, Khetos txoj hauj lwm qhuab ntuas hauv lub chaw dawb huv tau raug tsa kom siab thiab qhuas kom loj.” Thaum twg papacy puas tau tsa kom siab thiab qhuas Khetos?

They seek to impose the definition of the Hebrew word “sur” upon the Hebrew word “rum.” Daniel uses the word “sur,” which means to remove, in connection with “the daily” in two other verses, but in verse eleven, Daniel chose the word “rum” meaning to lift up and exalt. Not only is the dish of fables concerning this verse foolishness because of the wresting of the meaning of the word translated as “take away,” but there was never a time when Christ’s sanctuary ministry was in any way removed from men.

Lawv nrhiav yuam kom lo lus txhais ntawm lo lus Henplais “sur” raug muab rau saum lo lus Henplais “rum.” Daniel siv lo lus “sur,” uas txhais tias tshem tawm, nrog rau “txoj kev txhua hnub” hauv ob nqe lus ntxiv, tiam sis hauv nqe kaum ib, Daniel xaiv lo lus “rum” uas txhais tias tsa kom siab thiab qhuas kom loj. Tsis yog xwb tias cov dab neeg cuav uas hais txog nqe no yog kev ruam vim yog kev ntxeev lub ntsiab ntawm lo lus uas raug txhais tias “rho tawm mus,” tab sis yeej tsis muaj ib lub sij hawm twg li uas Khetos txoj hauj lwm qhuab qhia hauv lub chaw dawb huv raug tshem tawm ntawm tib neeg hauv ib yam dab tsi li.

> But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. Hebrews 7:24, 25.

> Tiamsis tus no, vim hais tias nws nyob mus ib txhis, muaj txoj kev ua pov thawj hwj uas hloov tsis tau. Yog li ntawd nws kuj muaj peev xwm cawm tau kom kawg nkaus cov uas los cuag Vajtswv los ntawm nws, vim nws muaj sia nyob mus ib txhis los thov sawv cev rau lawv. Hebrews 7:24, 25.

To claim, as the Adventist theologians do, in an attempt to prop up their false application of the verse, that there was a period of time when the papacy exercised some type of power to remove Christ’s sanctuary intercession is absurd!

Kev hais tseg, raws li cov kws ntseeg Adventist ua, nyob rau hauv ib qho kev sim txhawb lawv qhov kev siv nqe Vajlugkub no yuam kev, tias tau muaj ib ntus sijhawm uas txoj kev ua thawj coj ntawm lub hwj chim papacy tau siv ib yam hwj chim twg los tshem Khetos txoj kev thov ntuj sawv cev hauv lub chaw dawb huv, yog ib qho tsis tsim nyog thiab tsis muaj qab hau hlo li!

But the theologians do not teach that the verse identifies that the papacy lifted up and exalted Christ’s sanctuary ministry. They avoid the meaning of Daniel’s words, and the inspired counsel of Ellen White, to teach what they choose to teach in spite of the testimony of Daniel’s words.

Tiamsis cov kws kawm txog kev ntseeg tsis qhia tias nqe vajlugkub ntawd qhia tias txoj kev tswj hwm ntawm papacy tau tsa kom siab thiab qhuas tsa Khetos txoj hauj lwm ua pov thawj hauv lub chaw dawb huv. Lawv zam qhov ntsiab lus ntawm Daniyee cov lus, thiab Ellen White cov lus ntuas uas tau tshoov siab los, kom qhia yam uas lawv xaiv yuav qhia txawm yog tawm tsam Daniyee cov lus tim khawv.

> Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Daniel 8:11.

> Muaj tseeb tiag, nws tsa nws tus kheej kom siab mus txog rau Tus Tub Vaj Ntxwv ntawm pab tub rog, thiab yog vim nws thiaj raug muab tshem tawm txoj kev txi niaj hnub, thiab qhov chaw ntawm nws lub tuam tsev dawb huv raug muab rhuav tshem pov tseg. Daniel 8:11.

The theologians teach that the verse means “by the papal power, Christ’s sanctuary ministry was removed,” and the removal of Christ’s sanctuary ministry from the minds of men is supported by the fact that in association with the removal, the place of Christ’s “sanctuary was cast down.” There is not one verse in God’s Word that identifies the heavenly sanctuary, which is where Christ performs his intercession, has ever been cast down. Nor is there any biblical passage that identifies that heaven itself, which is the “place of his sanctuary”, is ever cast down. Once again, the theologians place themselves above the prophet Daniel, for they insist that “the place of his sanctuary” in the verse is referring to God’s sanctuary, in spite of the fact that Daniel teaches directly opposite of that idea.

Cov kws paub Vajlugkub qhia tias nqe Vajlugkub no txhais hais tias “los ntawm lub hwj chim papal, Khetos txoj hauj lwm ua qhauj nyob hauv lub tuam tsev dawb huv raug muab tshem tawm,” thiab qhov kev muab Khetos txoj hauj lwm ua qhauj nyob hauv lub tuam tsev dawb huv tshem tawm ntawm tibneeg lub siab raug txhawb los ntawm qhov tseeb tias, nrog rau qhov kev tshem tawm ntawd, qhov chaw ntawm Khetos “lub tuam tsev dawb huv raug muab ntog pov tseg.” Tsis muaj ib nqe hauv Vajtswv Txoj Lus li uas qhia meej tias lub tuam tsev dawb huv saum ntuj ceeb tsheej, uas yog qhov chaw Khetos ua Nws txoj hauj lwm thov qhuab qhia sawv cev, yeej tau raug muab ntog pov tseg. Thiab kuj tsis muaj ib nqe Vajlugkub twg uas qhia tias saum ntuj ceeb tsheej nws tus kheej, uas yog “qhov chaw ntawm nws lub tuam tsev dawb huv,” puas tau raug muab ntog pov tseg. Ib zaug ntxiv, cov kws paub Vajlugkub no tsa lawv tus kheej siab dua tus yaj saub Daniyees, vim lawv hais tawv ncauj tias “qhov chaw ntawm nws lub tuam tsev dawb huv” hauv nqe no yog hais txog Vajtswv lub tuam tsev dawb huv, txawm yog qhov tseeb tias Daniyees qhia ncaj qha tawm tsam lub tswv yim ntawd.

The professed experts of the Hebrew language insist that in the verse the Hebrew word “rum,” needs to be understood with the meaning of the Hebrew word “sur.” They also insist that the Hebrew word “miqdash” needs to be understood as the Hebrew word “qodesh.” “Miqdash” and “qodash” are both translated simply as “sanctuary” in the book of Daniel, yet they have different meanings. “Miqdash” represents any sanctuary, whether it is God’s sanctuary or a pagan sanctuary. It is the general word for sanctuary, but “qodesh” is only used in the Bible to represent God’s sanctuary.

Cov neeg uas lees tias yog cov kws txawj txog lus Henplais hais tawv tias hauv nqe ntawd lo lus Henplais “rum,” yuav tsum to taub raws li lub ntsiab ntawm lo lus Henplais “sur.” Lawv kuj hais tawv tias lo lus Henplais “miqdash” yuav tsum to taub zoo li lo lus Henplais “qodesh.” “Miqdash” thiab “qodash” ob lo lus no raug txhais ib yam xwb tias yog “lub chaw dawb huv” hauv phau Daniyee, los ob lo lus no muaj ntsiab txawv. “Miqdash” sawv cev rau txhua yam chaw dawb huv, txawm yog Vajtswv lub chaw dawb huv los yog lub chaw dawb huv teev dab cuav. Nws yog lo lus dav dav rau lub chaw dawb huv, tiam sis “qodesh” tsuas yog siv hauv Phau Vajlugkub xwb los sawv cev rau Vajtswv lub chaw dawb huv.

Daniel knew the difference between a pagan sanctuary and God’s sanctuary. If Daniel was going to identify a pagan sanctuary, he would use the word “miqdash.” It is amazing to me that the supposed experts of the Hebrew language never address the fact that in four consecutive verses, Daniel uses both words three times. Daniel’s usage of the two Hebrew words, both translated as “sanctuary” defines the meaning Daniel intended to be understood.

Daniyees paub qhov txawv ntawm ib lub chaw dawb huv cuav teev dab mlom thiab Vajtswv lub chaw dawb huv. Yog Daniyees yuav qhia kom paub tias yog ib lub chaw dawb huv cuav teev dab mlom, nws yuav siv lo lus “miqdash.” Ua rau kuv ceeb heev uas cov uas raug xav tias yog cov kws txawj ntawm lus Henplais yeej tsis quav ntsej txog qhov tseeb tias, hauv plaub nqe txuas sib law liag, Daniyees siv ob lo lus ntawd tib si peb zaug. Daniyees txoj kev siv ob lo lus Henplais ntawd, uas ob leeg raug txhais ua “chaw dawb huv,” yog yam txhais meej lub ntsiab uas Daniyees npaj kom to taub.

> Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered. 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 8:11–14.

> Muaj tseeb, nws tau tsa nws tus kheej loj mus txog rau tus thawj ntawm pab tub rog, thiab yog vim nws thiaj muab txoj kev txi niaj hnub raug tshem tawm, thiab qhov chaw ntawm nws lub chaw dawb huv raug muab pov tseg. Thiab ib pab tub rog raug muab rau nws tawm tsam txoj kev txi niaj hnub vim yog kev txhaum, thiab nws tau muab qhov tseeb ntog rau hauv av; thiab nws tau ua raws li nws lub siab, thiab vam meej. Ces kuv hnov ib tug neeg dawb huv hais lus, thiab muaj dua ib tug neeg dawb huv hais rau tus neeg dawb huv uas hais lus ntawd tias, Lub zeem muag hais txog txoj kev txi niaj hnub, thiab txoj kev txhaum uas ua rau kev puam tsuaj, uas muab ob qho tib si lub chaw dawb huv thiab pab tub rog rau raug tsuj taw, yuav kav ntev npaum li cas? Thiab nws hais rau kuv tias, Mus txog ob txhiab peb puas hnub; ces lub chaw dawb huv yuav raug ntxuav kom dawb huv. Daniel 8:11–14.

In the very passage that includes the foundation of Adventism, Daniel employs two different Hebrew words that are both translated as “sanctuary.” In verses thirteen and fourteen Daniel chose to use the Hebrew word for “sanctuary,” that is only used biblically to identify God’s sanctuary, but in verse eleven, Daniel used the general or generic Hebrew word that can be God’s sanctuary, or it can be a pagan sanctuary.

Nyob rau hauv nqe lus ntawd kiag uas muaj lub hauv paus ntawm Adventism, Daniyees siv ob lo lus Henplais sib txawv uas ob leeg raug txhais ua “lub chaw dawb huv.” Hauv nqe kaum peb thiab kaum plaub, Daniyees xaiv siv lo lus Henplais rau “lub chaw dawb huv” uas hauv Vajluskub tsuas yog siv los txheeb xyuas Vajtswv lub chaw dawb huv xwb; tiam sis hauv nqe kaum ib, Daniyees siv lo lus Henplais dav dav lossis lo lus siv rau txhua yam uas tej zaum yuav yog Vajtswv lub chaw dawb huv, los sis kuj yuav yog ib lub chaw dawb huv teev dab cuav thiab.

If Daniel had wanted to identify the “sanctuary” in verse eleven, as God’s sanctuary, he would have used the same Hebrew word that he used twice within the next three verses. It is absolutely clear that Daniel was making a distinction between a pagan sanctuary in verse eleven, and God’s sanctuary in verses thirteen and fourteen! But the drunkards of Ephraim argue that the “place of his sanctuary” that was “cast down,” in verse eleven, was the place of God’s sanctuary, though they avoid the word “place.”

Yog Daniyee xav txheeb kom meej txog “lub tuam tsev dawb huv” nyob hauv nqe kaum ib tias yog Vajtswv lub tuam tsev dawb huv, nws yuav tau siv tib lo lus Henplais uas nws tau siv ob zaug nyob hauv peb nqe tom qab ntawd. Nws meej kawg nkaus tias Daniyee tab tom qhia qhov txawv nruab nrab ntawm ib lub tuam tsev dawb huv ntawm lwm haiv neeg pe dab pe mlom nyob hauv nqe kaum ib, thiab Vajtswv lub tuam tsev dawb huv nyob hauv nqe kaum peb thiab kaum plaub! Tiamsis cov neeg qaug cawv ntawm Efa‑i sib cav tias “thaj chaw ntawm nws lub tuam tsev dawb huv” uas tau “raug muab pov tseg,” nyob hauv nqe kaum ib, yog thaj chaw ntawm Vajtswv lub tuam tsev dawb huv, txawm yog lawv pheej zam tsis hais lo lus “thaj chaw.”

They teach that the papacy took away Christ’s ministry of intercession and cast down the truth of the heavenly sanctuary. But Daniel was clear that the “sanctuary” in verse eleven, was not God’s sanctuary, but a pagan sanctuary. Daniel was just as clear that it was not the “sanctuary” that was cast down, but “the place” of his sanctuary.

Lawv qhia tias lub hwj chim papacy tau tshem tawm Khetos txoj hauj lwm ua tus sawv nruab nrab thov cawm seej thiab muab qhov tseeb txog lub tuam tsev dawb huv saum ntuj pov tseg. Tiamsis Daniyee tau hais meej tias “lub tuam tsev dawb huv” hauv nqe kaum ib ntawd tsis yog Vajtswv lub tuam tsev dawb huv, tiam sis yog ib lub tuam tsev dawb huv ntawm lwm haiv neeg pe dab qhuas. Daniyee kuj tau hais meej ib yam nkaus tias qhov uas raug pov tseg tsis yog “lub tuam tsev dawb huv,” tab sis yog “qhov chaw” ntawm nws lub tuam tsev dawb huv.

Refusing to acknowledge the purposeful gender oscillation of verses nine through twelve, the modern theologians adopted the definition of “the daily” that originated within apostate Protestantism, and began to construct a foundation upon the sand of human conjecture, tradition and custom. When they arrive at verse eleven, they even reject the inspired counsel of Sister White that identified that Miller’s understanding of “the daily” as paganism was correct, and begin to employ the art of misdirection and conjecture to defend their love of Catholic and Protestant theology.

Vim tsis kam lees paub txog qhov kev txav mus los ntawm kev hloov pojniam-txiv neej uas muaj lub hom phiaj nyob hauv nqe cuaj mus txog nqe kaum ob, cov kws ntseeg kev ntseeg niaj hnub no tau txais yuav lub ntsiab txhais ntawm “the daily” uas muaj keeb kwm hauv Protestantism uas tau poob kev ntseeg tseg lawm, thiab pib txhim tsa ib lub hauv paus saum cov xuab zeb ntawm tibneeg tej kev kwv yees, kab lig kev cai, thiab kev xyaum uas ib txwm muaj. Thaum lawv los txog nqe kaum ib, lawv tseem tsis lees txais Sister White tej lus ntuas uas raug tshoov siab, uas tau qhia meej tias Miller txoj kev nkag siab txog “the daily” tias yog kev pe dab qhuas yeej yog lawm, thiab pib siv kev txawj ntawm kev coj kom yuam kev thiab kev kwv yees los tiv thaiv lawv txoj kev nyiam Catholic thiab Protestant theology.

They change pagan Rome into papal Rome in the verse, and they force the definition of “remove” upon the word that means “lift up and exalt”. They define the satanic symbol of “the daily”, as a godly symbol, and then insist that a pagan temple is God’s temple, while avoiding the direct reference to “the place” of the sanctuary. And the “unlearned” (as Isaiah identifies them), who will only understand if the “learned” tell them it is so, accept the dish of fables unto their own destruction.

Lawv hloov Loos txheej dab qhuas ua Loos ntawm cov vajlugkub kav ntuj hauv nqe ntawd, thiab lawv yuam lo lus uas txhais tias “tsa kom siab thiab qhuas kom loj” kom txais lub ntsiab txhais tias “tshem tawm”. Lawv txhais lub cim uas yog Xatas li ntawm “yam niaj hnub”, ua ib lub cim uas yog Vajtswv li, thiab tom qab ntawd tseem hais khov kho tias ib lub tuam tsev dab qhuas yog Vajtswv lub tuam tsev, thaum lawv zam kev hais ncaj qha txog “qhov chaw” ntawm lub chaw dawb huv. Thiab cov “tsis txawj kawm” (raws li Yaxayas hu lawv), uas tsuas yuav to taub xwb yog tias cov “txawj kawm” qhia lawv tias yeej yog li ntawd, txais yuav lub tais puv dab neeg cuav ntawd mus txog lawv tus kheej txoj kev puam tsuaj.

We will continue our consideration of the increase of the knowledge represented as the jewels in Miller’s dream in the next article.

Peb yuav txuas ntxiv peb txoj kev txiav txim txog kev nce ntxiv ntawm txoj kev paub uas tau sawv cev ua tej nyiaj kub nplua nuj hauv Miller txoj kev npau suav hauv tsab xov xwm tom ntej.

> “The apostle Paul warns us that ‘some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.’ This is what we may expect. Our greatest trials will come because of that class who have once advocated the truth, but who turn from it to the world, and trample it under their feet in hate and derision. God has a work for his faithful servants to do. The attacks of the enemy must be met with the truth of his word. Falsehood must be unmasked, its true character must be revealed, and the light of the law of Jehovah must shine forth into the moral darkness of the world. We are to present the claims of his word. We shall not be held guiltless if we neglect this solemn duty. But while we stand in defense of the truth, let us not stand in defense of self, and make a great ado because we are called to bear reproach and misrepresentation. Let us not pity ourselves, but be very jealous for the law of the Most High.

> “Tus tubtxib Povlauj ceeb toom peb tias, ‘ib txhia yuav ncaim ntawm txojkev ntseeg mus, mloog dab phem ntxias thiab tej lus qhuab qhia ntawm dab.’ Qhov no yog yam uas peb yuav tsum cia siab tias yuav muaj los. Peb tej kev sim siab loj tshaj yuav los vim pawg neeg ntawd uas ib zaug tau txhawb nqa qhov tseeb, tiamsis lawv tig nraub qaum ntawm nws mus rau lub ntiajteb, thiab muab nws tsuj rau hauv qab lawv ko taw hauv kev ntxub thiab kev thuam. Vajtswv muaj ib tes haujlwm rau nws cov tub qhe ncaj ncees ua. Tej kev tawm tsam ntawm tus yeeb ncuab yuav tsum raug ntsib nrog qhov tseeb ntawm nws Txojlus. Kev dag ntxias yuav tsum raug muab nthuav tawm, nws tus yam ntxwv tiag yuav tsum raug qhia kom pom, thiab qhov kaj ntawm Yehauvas txoj kevcai yuav tsum ci ntsa iab tawm mus rau hauv txojkev tsaus ntuj sab kev coj ncaj ncees ntawm lub ntiajteb. Peb yuav tsum nthuav qhia tej lus thov cai ntawm nws Txojlus. Peb yuav tsis raug suav tias tsis muaj txim yog peb tsis quav ntsej tes haujlwm loj thiab dawb huv no. Tiamsis thaum peb sawv tiv thaiv qhov tseeb, cia peb tsis txhob sawv tiv thaiv peb tus kheej, thiab ua kom muaj suab nrov loj vim raug hu kom ris kev thuam thiab kev piav tsis tseeb. Cia peb tsis txhob khuv leej peb tus kheej, tiamsis cia peb kub siab heev rau txoj kevcai ntawm Tus Siab Tshaj Plaws.”

> “Says the apostle, ‘The time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.’ On every side we see men easily led captive by the delusive imaginations of those who make void the word of God; but when the truth is brought before them, they are filled with impatience and anger. But the exhortation of the apostle to the servant of God is, ‘Watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.’ In his day some left the cause of the Lord. He writes, ‘Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world;’ and again, he says, ‘Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works: of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words.’

> “Tus tubtxib hais tias, ‘Lub sij hawm yuav los thaum lawv yuav tsis kam ua siab ntev rau txoj kev qhuab qhia uas yog; tiam sis raws li lawv tus kheej txoj kev ntshaw lawv yuav khaws tej xibfwb los rau lawv tus kheej, vim lawv pob ntseg khaus; thiab lawv yuav tig lawv pob ntseg ntawm qhov tseeb mus, thiab yuav raug tig mus rau tej dab neeg cuav.’ Nyob txhua sab peb pom neeg raug ntes mus yooj yim los ntawm tej kev xav dag ntxias ntawm cov uas ua kom Vajtswv Txojlus poob hwj chim; tab sis thaum muab qhov tseeb coj los tso rau ntawm lawv xub ntiag, lawv puv npo kev tsis ua siab ntev thiab kev npau taws. Tiamsis txoj lus ntuas uas tus tubtxib muab rau tus qhev ntawm Vajtswv yog, ‘Koj cia li ceev faj rau txhua yam, ua siab ntev tiv kev txom nyem, ua tes haujlwm ntawm tus tshaj txoj moo zoo, ua kom tiav nplua mias rau koj tes haujlwm qhuab qhia.’ Nyob hauv nws tiam, muaj qee leej tso tus Tswv tes haujlwm tseg lawm. Nws sau hais tias, ‘Demas tau tso kuv tseg lawm, vim nws hlub lub ntiajteb tam sim no no;’ thiab dua nws hais tias, ‘Alexander tus kws ntaus tooj liab tau ua phem rau kuv heev: tus Tswv yuav pauj rau nws raws li nws tej haujlwm: koj kuj yuav tsum ceev faj txog nws thiab; rau qhov nws tau tawm tsam peb tej lus heev kawg.’”

> “Prophets and apostles experienced similar trials of opposition and reproach, and even the spotless Lamb of God was tempted in all points like as we are. He bore the contradiction of sinners against himself.

> “Cov yaj saub thiab cov tubtxib tau ntsib tej kev sim siab zoo sib xws ntawm kev tawm tsam thiab kev thuam thuam, thiab txawm yog tus Menyuam Yaj uas tsis muaj chaw txhaum ntawm Vajtswv los kuj raug ntxias nyob hauv txhua yam ib yam li peb raug. Nws tau ris kev tawm tsam ntawm cov neeg txhaum tawm tsam nws tus kheej.

> “Every warning for this time must be faithfully delivered; but ‘the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient; in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves.’ We must cherish carefully the words of our God lest we be contaminated by the deceptive workings of those who have left the faith. We are to resist their spirit and influence with the same weapon our Master used when assailed by the prince of darkness,—‘It is written.’ We should learn to use the word of God skillfully. The exhortation is, ‘Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.’ There must be diligent work and earnest prayer and faith to meet the winding error of false teachers and seducers; for ‘in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.’ These words portray the character of the men the servants of God will have to meet. ‘False accusers,’ ‘despisers of those that are good,’ will attack those who are faithful to their God in this degenerate age. But the embassador of Heaven must manifest the spirit that was displayed in the Master. In humility and love he must labor for the salvation of men.

> “Txhua lo lus ceeb toom rau lub sijhawm no yuav tsum raug tshaj tawm nrog kev ncaj ncees; tiam sis ‘tus Tswv tus tub qhe yuav tsum tsis txhob sib cav sib ceg; tab sis yuav tsum ua siab mos siab muag rau sawv daws, txawj qhia, ua siab ntev; qhia cov uas tawm tsam lawv tus kheej hauv kev txo hwj chim.’ Peb yuav tsum khaws cia kom zoo zoo tej lus ntawm peb tus Vajtswv tsam peb raug paug los ntawm tej haujlwm dag ntxias ntawm cov uas twb tso txoj kev ntseeg tseg lawm. Peb yuav tsum tawm tsam lawv tus ntsuj plig thiab lawv tej kev cuam tshuam nrog tib rab riam phom uas peb tus Xib Hwb siv thaum tus thawj ntawm txoj kev tsaus ntuj tuaj tawm tsam Nws,—‘Muaj lus sau tseg lawm.’ Peb yuav tsum kawm siv Vajtswv txoj lus kom txawj thiab raug cai. Lo lus ntuas yog, ‘Cia li rau siab kawm kom koj qhia tau tias koj yog tus uas Vajtswv pom zoo, yog ib tug neeg ua haujlwm uas tsis tsim nyog txaj muag, ncaj nraim faib txoj lus tseeb.’ Yuav tsum muaj kev ua haujlwm uas mob siab rau thiab kev thov ntuj uas kub siab thiab txoj kev ntseeg kom thiaj li tiv taus tau tej kev yuam kev nkhaus ntxhias ntawm cov xib hwb cuav thiab cov neeg dag ntxias; rau qhov ‘hauv hnub kawg tej sijhawm txaus ntshai yuav los txog. Rau qhov neeg yuav hlub lawv tus kheej, ntshaw nyiaj txiag, khav theeb, muaj siab hlob, hais lus thuam Vajtswv, tsis mloog niam txiv lus, tsis ua tsaug, tsis dawb huv, tsis muaj kev hlub raws ntuj tsim, rhuav kev sib cog lus, liam cuav, tswj tsis tau tus kheej, ua nruj ua tsiv, ntxub cov uas zoo, ntxeev siab, ua siab kub lug, siab tsa, hlub kev lom zem tshaj hlub Vajtswv; muaj daim duab ntawm kev pe hawm Vajtswv, tab sis tsis lees lub hwj chim ntawm kev pe hawm ntawd: ntawm cov ntawd cia li tig ncaim mus.’ Cov lus no piav txog tus yam ntxwv ntawm cov neeg uas Vajtswv cov tub qhe yuav tau ntsib. ‘Cov liam cuav,’ ‘cov ntxub cov uas zoo,’ yuav tawm tsam cov uas ncaj ncees rau lawv tus Vajtswv hauv tiam neeg uas poob qab no. Tab sis tus sawv cev ntawm Saum Ntuj Ceeb Tsheej yuav tsum qhia tawm tus ntsuj plig uas tau tshwm hauv tus Xib Hwb. Hauv kev txo hwj chim thiab kev hlub nws yuav tsum ua haujlwm rau tibneeg txoj kev cawm seej.

> “Paul continues concerning those who oppose the work of God, comparing them to the men who made war against the faithful in the time of ancient Israel. He says: ‘Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth; men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.’ We know that the time is coming when the folly of warring against God will be revealed. We can afford to wait in calm patience and trust, no matter how much maligned and despised; for ‘nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest,’ and those who honor God shall be honored by him in the presence of men and angels. We are to share in the sufferings of the reformers. It is written, ‘The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me.’ Christ understands our grief. Not one of us is called to bear the cross alone. The suffering Man of Calvary is touched with the feeling of our woes, and as he has suffered being tempted, he is able also to succor them that are in sorrow and trial for his sake. ‘Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned.’” Review and Herald, January 10, 1888.

> “Povlauj tseem hais ntxiv txog cov uas tawm tsam Vajtswv tes haujlwm, muab lawv piv rau cov txiv neej uas tau ua rog tawm tsam cov neeg ncaj ncees nyob rau tiam Ixayees thaum ub. Nws hais tias: ‘Tam sim no ib yam li Yannes thiab Yambres tau tawm tsam Mauxes, cov no kuj tawm tsam qhov tseeb thiab; lawv yog cov neeg siab ntsws puas tsuaj, raug tsis lees txais hais txog txoj kev ntseeg. Tiamsis lawv yuav tsis mus ntxiv lawm: rau qhov lawv txoj kev ruam yuav tshwm rau txhua tus neeg pom, ib yam li lawv tug kuj tau tshwm lawm thiab.’ Peb paub tias lub sijhawm tab tom los uas txoj kev ruam ntawm kev ua rog tawm tsam Vajtswv yuav raug qhia tawm. Peb muaj cuab kav tos nrog txoj kev ua siab tus thiab kev ntseeg siab, txawm yuav raug cem thuam thiab saib tsis taus npaum li cas los xij; rau qhov ‘tsis muaj dab tsi zais cia uas yuav tsis raug qhia tawm,’ thiab cov uas hwm Vajtswv yuav raug nws hwm nyob rau ntawm tibneeg thiab timtswv xub ntiag. Peb yuav tsum koom nrog txoj kev txom nyem ntawm cov neeg kho dua tshiab. Muaj lus sau tseg tias, ‘Cov lus thuam ntawm cov uas thuam koj tau poob los rau saum kuv.’ Khetos nkag siab peb txoj kev tu siab. Tsis muaj ib tug ntawm peb raug hu kom ris tus ntoo khaublig ib leeg. Tus Txiv Neej ntawm Kalakali uas tau raug kev txom nyem raug kov los ntawm peb txoj kev nyuaj siab, thiab vim nws twb raug kev txom nyem thaum raug sim ntxias lawm, nws kuj muaj peev xwm pab cawm cov uas nyob hauv kev tu siab thiab kev sim siab vim nws lub npe. ‘Yog lawm, thiab txhua tus uas yuav ua neej raws li Vajtswv txoj kev hauv Khetos Yexus yuav raug kev tsim txom. Tiamsis cov neeg phem thiab cov neeg dag ntxias yuav hajyam phem zuj zus mus, dag lwm tus thiab raug dag lawv tus kheej. Tiamsis koj cia li nyob ruaj khov rau hauv tej yam uas koj tau kawm lawm.’ Review and Herald, January 10, 1888.

Back to Articles