Article

# The Book of Daniel - Number Forty-Seven

Akwụkwọ Daniel—Nọmba Iri Anọ na Asaa

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

Iwepu Ozizi Nduhie: Nyocha Nkatọ banyere Daniel 8 na Ihe Ịma Aka na Nkàmmụta Okpukpe Adventist

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

January 11, 2024

Formats

PDF
Word
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.

Mgbe e ji obere mpi nke Rom nọchite anya ya n’amaokwu itoolu ruo iri na abụọ nke Daniel isi nke asatọ, ọ bụ akara e merụrụ emerụ, n’ihi na ọ bụ akara nke iyi uwe nke nwoke na nke nwanyị, onye na-agbanwe uwe n’etiti nwoke na nwanyị. Nke a kwekọrọ na nghọta ndị Millerite na Rom nọchitere anya ya site n’oge abụọ: oge mbụ bụ ọchịchị steeti Rom, oge nke abụọ bụ ọchịchị ụka Rom; ma n’ịgbanwe agbanwe nke okike n’amaokwu ndị ahụ, obere mpi ahụ apụwo n’usoro akụkọ ihe mere eme na amụma (e merụrụ emerụ). Ma amaokwu anọ ọ bụla n’ime ha na-anọchite anya akụkọ ihe mere eme nke jikọrọ kpọmkwem na ma ọchịchị steeti Rom ma ọ bụ ọchịchị ụka Rom. Rom nke ndị ọgọ mmụọ kpagburu ndị niile jụrụ ịkwado ikike alaeze ukwu ya, ma mkpagbu nke Rom ndị popu (nke nwanyị) n’amaokwu nke iri, ka e lekwasịrị anya kpọmkwem megide eluigwe.

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.

N’ịghọta nke ndị Millerite na Rom bụ alaeze nke anọ na nke ikpeazụ, ịgagharị site n’ọchịchị gaa na chọọchị, ma site na chọọchị laghachi n’ọchịchị ọzọ, agaghị abụ ihe ga-echegbu ha. Ha ahụwo ngwakọta nke ígwè na ụrọ n’ukwu ihe oyiyi ahụ dị na Daniel isi nke abụọ, ma ha ghọtara ya nfe dị ka akụkụ abụọ nke Rom, na-enweghị nchegbu ọ bụla ịkọwapụta usoro pụrụ iche nke akụkọ ihe mere eme banyere alaeze nke anọ na nke ise. Otu ihe ahụ ka ha ghọtara banyere isi nke asaa, ebe mpi ahụ nke kwuru nnukwu okwu megide Onye Kasị Elu, mere ka a tụpụ mpi atọ n’ime mpi iri mbụ nke anụ ọhịa Rom ahụ. Ọbụna ma ọ bụrụ na Miller ghọtara ngagharị mgbanwe okike nke amaokwu nke itoolu ruo nke iri na abụọ, ọ gaghị adị mkpa n’ịghọta ya na alaeze nke anọ bụ Rom. N’ịghọta nke ndị Millerite, alaeze nke anọ kwụsịrị na 1798, ihe amụma sochirinụkwa bụ Ọbịbịa nke Abụọ nke Kraịst.

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

Mpi nke nwanyị ahụ na-akọwa nwanyị ahụ nke na-eme ịkwa iko nke mmụọ na mpi nke nwoke ahụ, a na-anọchikwa ya n’amaokwu nke iri na nke iri na abụọ.

> 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.

> Ọ tolitere ibu, ruo ọbụna n’ìgwè ndị agha nke eluigwe; o wee tufuo ụfọdụ n’ime ìgwè ndị agha ahụ na ụfọdụ n’ime kpakpando ndị ahụ n’ala, wee zọpịa ha. 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.

Mkpagbu e mere megide ọchịchị papal e lebara anya megide Iso Ụzọ Kraịst (ụsụụ ndị agha nke eluigwe), ma n’amaokwu nke iri na abụọ, Rome papal (nwanyị), natara ikike iji mezue ọrụ igbu mmadụ ya site n’imehie nke ịkwa iko ya na ndị eze nke 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.

> E nyekwaara ya usuu megide aja a na-achụ kwa ụbọchị n’ihi njehie; o wee tụba eziokwu n’ala; o mekwara ihe, wee nwee ọganihu. 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.”

“Ndị agha” a kpọrọ n’amaokwu ahụ na-anọchite anya ike agha e nyere ndị papacy “megide nke ụbọchị niile.” Okwu ahụ bụ “megide” pụtara “sitere na”. Site n’aka ndị eze ekpere arụsị nke Europe (Rome ekpere arụsị), nke “nke ụbọchị niile” na-anọchi anya, e nyere ndị papacy nkwado agha (ndị agha) “n’ihi njehie.” Njikọ ụka na ọchịchị, ebe ụka na-achịkwa mmekọrịta ahụ, bụ “njehie” ahụ. Mmanya nke njehie ahụ bụ ọbara Ndị Kraịst. Ozugbo ndị papacy nwetara ọchịchị n’elu ndị agha nke Rome ekpere arụsị, Rome papal (“ọ”) “tụdara eziokwu ahụ n’ala; ọ rụkwara ọrụ, ma nwee ọganihu.”

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

N’ime Daniel isi nke iri na otu, amaokwu nke iri atọ na otu, a na-egosikwa inye ndị agha n’aka Rom nke papal:

> 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.

> Aka ga-eguzo n’akụkụ ya, ha ga-emetọkwa ebe nsọ nke ike, ha ga-ewepụkwa àjà nsure ọkụ a na-achụ kwa ụbọchị, ha ga-edokwa ihe arụ nke na-eme ka ọ bụrụ nkịtị. 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.

Amaokwu a na-akọwapụta mgbanwe akụkọ ihe mere eme sitere na Rom nke ndị ọgọ mmụọ ruo na Rom nke ndị poopu. N’amaokwu ahụ, “aka” ahụ bụ ndị eze Europe ndị malitere iguzo n’aka ndị poopu, bido na Clovis, eze ndị Franks (France), n’afọ 496. “Aka” ahụ mekwara ka “ebe nsọ nke ike” (obodo Rom) bụrụ nke e merụrụ emerụ, site n’agha na-aga n’ihu site na narị afọ nke anọ gaa n’ihu ruo n’afọ 538. “Aka” ahụ wepụrụkwa mgbochi nke ndị ọgọ mmụọ megide ịrị elu nke ọchịchị ndị poopu, ma ka ọ na-erule afọ 508, mgbochi nke ndị ọgọ mmụọ ahụ akwụsịla.

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.

Okwu a sụgharịrị dị ka “wepụ,” bụ okwu Hibru bụ “sur” ma pụtara “iwepụ”. “Ogwe-aka” ndị ahụ tinyere “ihe arụ nke na-eme ka ọ bụrụ ebe tọgbọrọ n’efu” (papacy), n’ocheeze ụwa n’afọ 538. Mgbe Daniel isi nke asatọ, amaokwu nke iri na abụọ, kọwara na e nyere “ụsụụ ndị agha” nye obere mpi nke nwanyị, ọ na-ekwenye na àmà nke amaokwu nke iri atọ na otu nke isi nke iri na otu. Akwụkwọ Mkpughe na-enyekwa àmà banyere otu eziokwu ahụ n’isi nke iri na atọ.

> 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.

> Anu-ọhịa ahụ m hụrụ dị ka agụ, ụkwụ ya dịkwa ka ụkwụ nke anụ ọhịa bea, ọnụ ya dịkwa ka ọnụ nke ọdụm: dragọn ahụ wee nye ya ike ya, na ocheeze ya, na ikike dị ukwuu. Nkpughe 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.”

Nwannaanyị White na-akọwapụta ozugbo na anụ ọhịa ahụ a kpọrọ n’amaokwu nke abụọ bụ ọchịchị popu, nakwa na dragọn ahụ dị n’amaokwu ahụ bụ Rom ndị ọgọ mmụọ. Rom ndị ọgọ mmụọ nyere ọchịchị popu ihe atọ; “ike ya, na ocheeze ya, na ọchịchị ukwu.”

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.”

E nyere ike agha ahụ site n’aka Rom nke ndị na-ekpere arụsị, malite na Clovis n’afọ 496. E nyere “oche-eze” e si achị achị ahụ n’aka ọchịchị popu n’afọ 330, mgbe eze ukwu Constantine kwagara isi obodo ya na Constantinople, hapụ isi obodo ya mbụ bụ Rome n’okpuru ọchịchị ụka popu. N’afọ 533, eze ukwu Justinian nyere iwu na popu bụ isi nke ụka na onye na-edozi ndị jụrụ okwukwe, si otu a nyefee “nnukwu ikike” ya n’aka popu nke Rome. Amaokwu nke iri na abụọ nke Daniel isi nke asatọ na-akọwapụta oge e nyere “ndị agha,” a na-agbakwa ama eziokwu amụma ahụ site n’aka ọtụtụ ndị àmà. Site n’oge ahụ gaa n’ihu (malite n’afọ 496), ọchịchị popu “gara nke ọma.”

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.

Ọ ga-anọgide “na-eme” ma “na-aga nke ọma” ruo mgbe njedebe nke iwe ahụ megide alaeze ugwu nke Izrel ruru na 1798, ma papasị nata ọnya ya na-egbu egbu.

> 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.

> Ma eze ahụ ga-eme dị ka uche nke ya si dị; ọ ga-ebulikwa onwe ya elu, mekwaa onwe ya ka ọ dị ukwuu karịa chi ọ bụla, ma kwuo ihe ndị dị ịtụnanya megide Chineke nke chi niile, ọ ga-agakwa nke ọma ruo mgbe iwe ahụ ga-emezu: n’ihi na ihe ahụ ekpebiela ga-emezu. Daniel 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.

Amaokwu nke itoolu nke isi nke asatọ na-akọwa Rom nwoke (Rom ndị ọgọ mmụọ), ma na-anọchi anya usoro mmeri nke nzọụkwụ atọ nke Rom ndị ọgọ mmụọ mezuru, nke ghọkwara ihe nnọchianya nke mpaghara ala atọ a ga-emeri ka e wee guzosie Rom papal n’ocheeze nke ụwa, dịka mpi atọ e wepụrụ gosiri na isi nke asaa. Mmeri abụọ ahụ nke nzọụkwụ atọ nke Rom ndị ọgọ mmụọ na Rom papal nọchiri anya ihe mgbochi ala atọ nke Rom nke oge a, n’amaokwu iri anọ ruo iri anọ na atọ nke Daniel iri na otu. Mgbe ahụ, n’isi nke asatọ, amaokwu nke iri na otu, a na-anọchi anya obere mpi nwoke ahụ (Rom ndị ọgọ mmụọ) ọzọ. N’amaokwu ahụ, ezi uche ahụ e doro nsọ siri ike nke ukwuu, nke mere na ndị ikom nlelị ahụ na-achị Jerusalem ji bụrụ ndị a manyere iweta ọtụtụ ụgha nkà mmụta okpukpe iji wulite ntọala adịgboroja ha.

> 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.

> Ee, o mere onwe ya ka ọ bụrụ nnukwu ọbụna ruo n’ebe Onye-isi nke usuu ndị agha dị, e wepụrụkwa àjà kwa ụbọchị site n’aka ya, a tụdakwara ebe nsọ ya. 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.

Ka anyị na-amalite ilebara mkpụrụ ego na ọla dị oke ọnụ adịgboroja ndị e webatara n’ime Adventism kemgbe 1863 anya, e kwesịkwara ịrịba ama na e nwere mpaghara abụọ bụ isi nke a na-ekwu na ha bụ ọkachamara n’ihe gbasara nkà mmụta okpukpe, nke Adventism ji anya isi, dịka ntọala ha ji akwado ozizi nke Protestantism dapụrụ n’ezi okwukwe na nke Katọlik. Ihe ndị ọkà mmụta okpukpe nke oge a n’ime Adventism na-azọrọ bụ na ha bụ ma ọ bụ ọkachamara n’akụkọ ihe mere eme nke Akwụkwọ Nsọ, ma ọ bụ ọkachamara n’asụsụ ndị Akwụkwọ Nsọ. Otu ha si etinye amaokwu ahụ n’ọrụ na-ekpughe na okwu amụma aghọwo ha dịka akwụkwọ e mechiri emechi, ma na-ekpughekwa na nkwupụta ha na ha bụ ọkachamara n’asụsụ ndị Akwụkwọ Nsọ bụ naanị ngosipụta nke oge a nke Farisii.

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.

Nke mbụ bụ ileghara ngbanwe okike okwu anya banyere obere mpi ahụ n’amaokwu nke itoolu ruo nke iri na abụọ. Ọ bụrụ na ha bụ n’eziokwu ndị ọkachamara n’asụsụ Hibru, ha agaghị agọnahụ, ma ọ bụ mebie ike, eziokwu ahụ bụ na Daniel kpachara anya jiri ngbanwe okike okwu rụọ ọrụ n’amaokwu ndị ahụ. A na-anọchi obere mpi ahụ anya n’okike okwu abụọ ahụ, okike okwu ndị ahụ na-agakwa azụ na n’ihu n’ime amaokwu ndị ahụ. Ndị nkà mmụta okpukpe na-anwa iji ihe mkpofu na mkpụrụ ego adịgboroja kpuchie eziokwu a, n’ihi na ọ na-akọwapụta nke ọma na amaokwu nke iri na otu na-akọwa Rom ndị ọgọ mmụọ, ọ bụghị Rom ndị popu. N’ezie, ha na-ekwusi ike na obere mpi nke amaokwu nke iri na otu bụ popu, ebe n’eziokwu ọ bụ Rom ndị ọgọ mmụọ.

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).

Ozugbo a mata na amaokwu abụọ n’ime amaokwu anọ ahụ banyere obere mpi bụ nke nwoke, ma abụọ bụ nke nwanyị, mgbe ahụ ọ na-adị mfe ịgụnye eziokwu Akwụkwọ Nsọ ahụ na nwanyị n’amụma Akwụkwọ Nsọ na-anọchi anya ụka, ebe nwoke na-anọchi anya ọchịchị. Ịmara nke a na-eme ka ndị niile chọrọ ịhụ wee ghọta na obere mpi nke amaokwu nke iri na otu bụ Rom nke nwoke (Rom nke ndị ọgọ mmụọ), ọ bụghị Rom nke nwanyị (Rom nke popu).

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.”

Ya mere, a na-aghọta amaokwu ahụ dịka na-akụzi na Rom nke ndị mba ọzọ (ya) weliri onwe ya elu ruo n’aka onye-isi nke usuu ndị agha, dịka Rom nke ndị mba ọzọ mere mgbe ọ kpọgidere Onye-isi nke usuu ndị agha n’obe Kalvarị. Ọ bụghị naanị na Rom nke ndị mba ọzọ weliri onwe ya elu megide Kraịst n’obe, kama amaokwu ahụ gara n’ihu ikwu na site n’aka ya (Rom nke ndị mba ọzọ) “e wepụrụ àjà a na-achụ kwa ụbọchị.”

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.

N’akwụkwọ Daniel, e nwere okwu Hibru abụọ a sụgharịrị ha abụọ dị ka “iwepụ.” Okwu ndị ahụ bụ “sur” na “rum”. A na-eji okwu abụọ ahụ eme ihe n’ọrụ ebe nsọ. Sur pụtara iwepụ ma ọ bụ ihichapụ, ma mgbe a na-ewepụ ntụ sitere n’ebe ịchụàjà n’ebe nsọ, okwu e ji kọwaa iwepụ ntụ ahụ bụ “sur”. Okwu “rum” pụtara ibuli elu na ịkwalite, ma mgbe onye nchụàjà nọ n’ebe nsọ kwesịrị ibuli àjà ifegharị efegharị, ọ ga-“rum” (bulie elu) àjà ahụ. N’amaokwu nke iri na otu, Rom nke ndị na-ekpere arụsị (“nke ụbọchị niile”) ga-“rum” (wepụ) ikpere arụsị site n’ibuli elu na ịkwalite okpukpe nke ikpere arụsị.

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.

Rom nke ndị ọgọ mmụọ ga-ebuli elu ma bulie nsọpụrụ okpukpe nke ikpere arụsị. Ndị ọkà mmụta okpukpe Adventist ndị na-ekwupụta na ha bụ ndị ọkachamara n’asụsụ Baịbụl na-ahọrọ ịtụgharị ọnọdụ ọ bụla a hụrụ “wepụ” n’akwụkwọ Daniel dịka “wepụrụ.” Ha anaghị anabata ide Daniel pụrụ iche na nke ziri ezi, ya mere ha na-etinye onwe ha n’elu onye amụma 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.”

Ndị ọkà mmụta okpukpe ndị na-ekwupụta na ha na-aghọta asụsụ ndị dị na Baịbụl na-enye arụmụka iji kwado ihe mere Daniel ji bu n’obi ikwu otu ihe ahụ, mgbe o jiri okwu abụọ dị iche iche. Ha na-eweta ọmụmụ okwu ndị dị ogologo ma na-agwụ ike iji kwado nkwupụta ụgha ha. Ndị ọkà mmụta okpukpe ndị na-ekwupụta na ha na-aghọta akụkọ ihe mere eme nke Baịbụl na-arụ ụka na itinye ihe ahụ n’ụzọ na-ezighị ezi dabeere n’ịghọta na n’oge dị iche iche nke akụkọ ihe mere eme, otu okwu ahụ pụrụ ịpụta ihe ọzọ dị iche, ya mere mgbe Daniel jiri okwu abụọ dị iche iche, naanị ọkachamara n’akụkọ ihe mere eme pụrụ ịmata ihe Daniel pụtara n’eziokwu. Ọ dị mkpa ịmata ụzọ ụgha abụọ a n’ihi na ndị ọkà mmụta okpukpe na-achọ izochi onwe ha pụọ n’usoro “ahịrị n’elu ahịrị” na-ejikarị ha eme ihe.

> 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.

> Ee, o weliri onwe ya ọbụna ruo n’iru Onye-isi nke usuu ndị agha, sitekwa n’aka ya ka ewepụrụ àjà nsure ọkụ a na-achụ kwa ụbọchị, a tụdakwara ebe nsọ ya n’ala. 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.”

Okwu a sụgharịrị dịka “e wepụrụ” n’amaokwu ahụ pụtara “ibuli elu na ikwuli elu.” Ọ pụtaghị iwepụ. Eziokwu a na-eweta mgbagwoju anya na mmegide n’etiti ndị ọkà mmụta okpukpe Adventist, n’ihi na ntọala echiche ha anaghị eguzosi ike mgbe a jiri nnyocha dị mfe nyochaa amaokwu ahụ, mgbe e tinyere n’ọrụ nkọwa ziri ezi nke okwu ahụ Daniel jiri n’amaokwu ahụ. Ha na-arụ ụka na obere mpi nke amaokwu ahụ bụ Rome papal, ya mere amaokwu ahụ ga-agụ na “site n’aka ya” (Rome papal) “e buliri kwa ụbọchị ahụ elu.”

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.

N’ezie, ha enweghị nsogbu ọ bụla ịgụnye okwu e tinyere, nke Nwanneanyị White kwuru kpọmkwem na amamihe mmadụ gbakwunyere, nakwa na ọ naghị emetụta ederede ahụ.

> “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.

> “Mgbe ahụ ahụrụ m, gbasara ‘ihe a na-eme kwa ụbọchị’ (Daniel 8:12), na okwu ahụ bụ ‘aja’ bụ ihe amamihe mmadụ tinyere, na ọ bụghị nke akụkụ Akwụkwọ Nsọ ahụ, nakwa na Onyenwe anyị nyere echiche ziri ezi banyere ya nye ndị kpọsara mkpu nke awa ikpe.” 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”.

Ha na-akọwa “ihe a na-eme kwa ụbọchị” dị ka ozi Kraịst n’ebe nsọ Ya, ya mere “àjà a na-achụ kwa ụbọchị” na-akwado echiche ahụ na “ihe a na-eme kwa ụbọchị” bụ ọrụ ịchụàjà nke Kraịst n’ebe nsọ nke eluigwe. Ma mkpughe sitere n’aka Chineke na-egosi na okwu ahụ bụ “àjà” “abụghị akụkụ nke ederede ahụ.”

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.

Mgbe ndị mmanya nke Ifrem na-akọwa “ihe a na-eme kwa ụbọchị” dị ka ọrụ Kraịst n’ebe nsọ Ya, amaokwu ahụ ga-adịzi ka, “site n’aka ya” (Rom nke popu) “e wepụrụ ihe a na-eme kwa ụbọchị,” ma ọ bụ ọ ga-adị ka, “site n’ike ọchịchị nke popu, e wepụrụ ozi Kraịst n’ebe nsọ Ya.” N’eziokwu, ha na-akụzi okwu ụgha a. Ha na-ekwusi ike na site n’ọchịchịrị nke ọchịchị popu, e wepụrụ ezi nghọta nke ozi Kraịst n’ebe nsọ Ya n’uche ụmụ mmadụ.

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?

Ma okwu a sụgharịrị dịka “wepụ,” apụtaghị iwepụ; ọ pụtara ibuli elu na ito elu. Ọ bụrụ na ndị na-ekwupụta onwe ha dị ka ndị ọkachamara n’asụsụ Baịbụl ga-etinye n’ọrụ n’ezie ihe okwu Hibru “rum” pụtara n’akụkụ amaokwu ahụ, nsụgharị ha ga-adị mkpa ikwu, “site n’ike ọchịchị papal, e buliri elu ma too ọrụ Kraịst n’ebe nsọ Ya.” Kedu mgbe papacy kpọrọ Kraịst elu ma too Ya?

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.

Ha na-achọ ịmanye nkọwa nke okwu Hibru “sur” n’elu okwu Hibru “rum.” Daniel ji okwu “sur,” nke pụtara iwepụ, n’ihe metụtara “nke ụbọchị nile” n’amaokwu abụọ ọzọ, ma n’amaokwu nke iri na otu, Daniel họọrọ okwu “rum” nke pụtara ibuli elu na ito. Ọ bụghị naanị na efere akụkọ ifo banyere amaokwu a bụ nzuzu n’ihi mgbagwoju anya e mere n’ihe okwu ahụ a sụgharịrị dịka “iwepụ” pụtara, kama ọ dịbeghị mgbe ọbụla ọrụ nsọ nke Kraịst n’ụlọ nsọ Ya e wepụrụ n’ụzọ ọbụla n’aka mmadụ.

> 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.

> Ma nwoke a, n’ihi na ọ na-adịgide ruo mgbe ebighị ebi, nwere ọkwa nchụàjà nke na-adịghị agbanwe agbanwe. Ya mere, ọ pụrụkwa ịzọpụta ruo n’ókè kacha elu ndị na-abịakwute Chineke site n’aka ya, ebe ọ bụ na ọ na-adị ndụ mgbe niile ime arịrịọ n’ihi ha. Ndị Hibru 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!

Ikwupụta, dị ka ndị ọkà mmụta okpukpe Adventist si eme, n’ịgbalị ịkwado nkenke ha ụgha banyere itinye amaokwu ahụ n’ọrụ, na e nwere oge papacy ji ụdị ikike ọ bụla wepụ arịrịọ ịrịọchitere nke ebe nsọ Kraịst, bụ ihe nzuzu!

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.

Ma ndị ọkà mmụta okpukpe anaghị akụzi na amaokwu ahụ na-egosi na ọchịchị ndị pope weliri elu ma mee ka ozi Kraịst n’ebe nsọ Ya dị ukwuu. Ha na-ezere ihe okwu Daniel pụtara, nakwa ndụmọdụ sitere n’ike mmụọ nsọ nke Ellen White, ka ha kụzie ihe ha họọrọ ịkụzi n’agbanyeghị ihe akaebe nke okwu Daniel.

> 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.

> Ee, o mere onwe ya ka ọ dị ukwuu ruo n’aka Onye-isi nke usuu ndị agha ahụ, sitekwa n’aka ya ka e wepụrụ àjà a na-achụ kwa ụbọchị, wee tụfuo ebe nsọ ya. 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.

Ndị ọkà mmụta okpukpe na-akụzi na amaokwu ahụ pụtara, “site n’ike nke Pope, e wepụrụ ozi nke ebe nsọ Kraịst,” ma nkwado nke iwepụ ozi ebe nsọ Kraịst n’uche mmadụ dị n’eziokwu ahụ bụ na, n’ime njikọ ya na iwepụ ahụ, a “tụfuru ala ebe nke ebe nsọ” Kraịst. Ọ dịghị ọbụna otu amaokwu n’Okwu Chineke nke na-akọwa na e meela ka ebe nsọ nke eluigwe, nke bụ ebe Kraịst na-arụ ọrụ arịrịọ Ya, daa n’ala mgbe ọ bụla. Ma ọ dịghịkwa akụkụ Akwụkwọ Nsọ ọ bụla nke na-akọwa na eluigwe ahụ n’onwe ya, nke bụ “ebe nke ebe nsọ ya”, e meela ka ọ daa n’ala mgbe ọ bụla. Otu ugboro ọzọ, ndị ọkà mmụta okpukpe na-edobe onwe ha n’elu onye amụma Daniel, n’ihi na ha na-ekwusi ike na “ebe nke ebe nsọ ya” dị n’amaokwu ahụ na-ezo aka n’ebe nsọ Chineke, n’agbanyeghị eziokwu ahụ bụ na Daniel na-akụzi kpọmkwem ihe megidere echiche ahụ.

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.

Ndị a na-ekwupụta onwe ha dịka ndị ọkachamara n’asụsụ Hibru na-ekwusi ike na n’amaokwu ahụ, a ghaghị ịghọta okwu Hibru “rum” n’ihe okwu Hibru “sur” pụtara. Ha na-ekwukwa na a ghaghị ịghọta okwu Hibru “miqdash” dịka okwu Hibru “qodesh.” A na-atụgharị ma “miqdash” ma “qodesh” naanị dịka “ebe nsọ” n’akwụkwọ Daniel, ma ha nwere ihe ha pụtara dị iche. “Miqdash” na-anọchi anya ebe nsọ ọbụla, ma ọ bụrụ ebe nsọ nke Chineke ma ọ bụ ebe nsọ ndị ọgọ mmụọ. Ọ bụ okwu n’ozuzu ya maka ebe nsọ, ma “qodesh” ka a na-eji naanị ya n’ime Bible anọchi anya ebe nsọ nke Chineke.

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.

Daniel maara ọdịiche dị n’etiti ebe nsọ nke ndị mba ọzọ na Ebe Nsọ nke Chineke. Ọ bụrụ na Daniel ga-akọwa ebe nsọ nke ndị ọgọ mmụọ, ọ ga-eji okwu “miqdash.” Ọ na-eju m anya na ndị a na-ekwu na ha bụ ndị ọkachamara n’asụsụ Hibru anaghị ekwupụta eziokwu ahụ bụ na n’amaokwu anọ na-esochi onwe ha, Daniel ji okwu abụọ ahụ ugboro atọ. Ojiji Daniel jiri okwu Hibru abụọ ahụ, ndị a sụgharịrị ha abụọ dịka “ebe nsọ,” na-akọwapụta ihe Daniel bu n’obi ka aghọta.

> 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.

> Ee, o mere onwe ya ka o ruo ọbụna n’aka Onye-isi nke usuu ndị agha ahụ, sitekwa n’aka ya ka e wepụrụ àjà a na-achụ kwa ụbọchị, a kwatukwara ebe nsọ ya. E nyekwara ya usuu ndị agha megide àjà a na-achụ kwa ụbọchị n’ihi mmehie, o wee tụda eziokwu n’ala; o wee mee ihe, ma mee nke ọma. Mgbe ahụ anụrụ m ka otu onye nsọ na-ekwu okwu, onye nsọ ọzọ wee sị onye nsọ ahụ nke kwuru okwu ahụ, Ruo ole mgbe ka ọhụ a ga-adị gbasara àjà a na-achụ kwa ụbọchị, na mmehie nke mbibi, iji nye ma ebe nsọ ahụ ma usuu ndị agha ahụ ka a zọọ n’okpuru ụkwụ? O wee sị m, Ruo ụbọchị puku abụọ na narị atọ; mgbe ahụ ka a ga-asachapụ ebe nsọ ahụ. 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.

N’otu amaokwu ahụ n’onwe ya nke gụnyere ntọala nke Adventism, Daniel ji mkpụrụokwu Hibru abụọ dị iche iche, nke a na-atụgharị ha abụọ dịka “ebe nsọ.” N’amaokwu nke iri na atọ na nke iri na anọ, Daniel họọrọ iji mkpụrụokwu Hibru maka “ebe nsọ” nke Akwụkwọ Nsọ ji naanị akọwa ebe nsọ nke Chineke, ma n’amaokwu nke iri na otu, Daniel jiri mkpụrụokwu Hibru nkịtị ma ọ bụ nke izugbe, nke pụrụ ịbụ ebe nsọ nke Chineke, ma ọ bụkwa ebe nsọ nke ndị ọgọ mmụọ.

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.”

Ọ bụrụ na Daniel chọrọ ịkọwa “ebe nsọ” ahụ dị n’amaokwu nke iri na otu dịka ebe nsọ nke Chineke, ọ gaara eji otu okwu Hibru ahụ o jiri ugboro abụọ n’ime amaokwu atọ sochirinụ. O doro nnọọ anya na Daniel nọ na-eme ka ọdịiche dị n’etiti ebe nsọ nke ndị ọgọ mmụọ n’amaokwu nke iri na otu, na ebe nsọ nke Chineke n’amaokwu nke iri na atọ na nke iri na anọ! Ma ndị mmanya nke Ifrem na-arụ ụka na “ebe ebe nsọ ya” ahụ nke “a tụdara ala,” n’amaokwu nke iri na otu, bụ ebe ebe nsọ nke Chineke, n’agbanyeghị na ha na-ezere okwu ahụ bụ “ebe.”

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.

Ha na-akụzi na ọchịchị Pope wepụrụ ozi ije ozi arịrịọ Kraịst ma tụfuo eziokwu banyere ebe nsọ nke eluigwe. Ma Daniel mere ka o doo anya na “ebe nsọ” dị n’amaokwu nke iri na otu abụghị ebe nsọ nke Chineke, kama ọ bụ ebe nsọ nke ndị ọgọ mmụọ. Daniel dokwara anya nke ọma na ọ bụghị “ebe nsọ” ka a tụfuru, kama ọ bụ “ebe” nke ebe nsọ ya.

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.

N’ịjụ ikweta mgbagharị okike nwoke na nwanyị nke amaokwu itoolu ruo iri na abụọ n’uche e zubere, ndị ọkà mmụta okpukpe nke oge a nabatara nkọwa nke “ihe a na-eme kwa ụbọchị” nke sitere n’ime Protestantism nke dapụrụ n’ezi okwukwe, ma malite iwulite ntọala n’elu ájá nke echiche efu mmadụ, ọdịnala na omenala. Mgbe ha rutere n’amaokwu nke iri na otu, ha ọbụna jụ ndụmọdụ sitere n’ike mmụọ nsọ nke Sister White, nke gosiri na nghọta Miller banyere “ihe a na-eme kwa ụbọchị” dịka ofufe arụsị bụ eziokwu, ma malite iji nka nke iduhie uche na echiche efu chebe ịhụnanya ha n’ebe nkà mmụta okpukpe Katọlik na Protestant nọ.

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.

Ha na-agbanwe Rome ndị na-ekpere arụsị ka ọ bụrụ Rome papal n’amaokwu ahụ, ha na-amanye nkọwa nke “iwepụ” n’elu okwu ahụ nke pụtara “ibuli elu na inye nsọpụrụ”. Ha na-akọwa akara Saitan nke “ihe a na-eme kwa ụbọchị” dị ka akara nke Chineke, ma mesịa na-esi ọnwụ na ụlọ arụsị ndị na-ekpere arụsị bụ ụlọ nsọ Chineke, ebe ha na-ezere ntụaka kpọmkwem banyere “ebe ahụ” nke ebe nsọ ahụ. Ma “ndị na-amụtaghị” (dị ka Aịsaịa si akọwapụta ha), ndị ga-aghọta naanị ma ọ bụrụ na “ndị gụrụ akwụkwọ” agwa ha na ọ dị otu a, na-anabata efere nke akụkọ ifo ruo mbibi nke onwe ha.

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

Anyị ga-aga n’ihu n’ịtụle mmụba nke ọmụma ahụ, nke e gosiri dịka mkpụrụ ọla dị oké ọnụ ahịa n’ọhụụ Miller, n’isiokwu na-esonụ.

> “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.

> “Onyeozi Pọl na-adọ anyị aka ná ntị na ‘ụfọdụ ga-esi n’okwukwe pụọ, na-aṅa ntị n’ime mmụọ ndị na-eduhie eduhie, na ozizi ndị mmụọ ọjọọ.’ Nke a bụ ihe anyị pụrụ ịtụ anya ya. Nnukwu ule anyị ga-abịa n’ihi òtù ahụ nke ndị bụbu ndị kwadoro eziokwu, ma ndị si na ya chigharia gaa n’ụwa, wee zọda ya n’okpuru ụkwụ ha n’ịkpọasị na n’ịkwa emo. Chineke nwere ọrụ ndị ohu ya kwesịrị ntụkwasị obi ga-arụ. A ga-eji eziokwu nke okwu ya zute mwakpo nke onye iro. A ghaghị ikpughe ụgha, a ghaghị ime ka agwa ya n’eziokwu pụta ìhè, ìhè nke iwu Jehova aghaghịkwa ịmụpụta n’etiti ọchịchịrị omume nke ụwa. Anyị ga-egosi ihe okwu ya na-achọ. A gaghị agụ anyị dịka ndị na-enweghị mmehie ma ọ bụrụ na anyị eleghara ọrụ nsọ a nke dị oké njọ anya. Ma ka anyị na-eguzo n’ịgbachitere eziokwu, ka anyị ghara iguzo n’ịgbachitere onwe anyị, ma mee nnukwu mkpọtụ n’ihi na a kpọrọ anyị iburu nkọcha na nkwutọ. Ka anyị ghara inwe ọmịiko n’ebe onwe anyị nọ, kama ka anyị bụrụ ndị na-ekwo ekworo nke ukwuu n’ihi iwu nke Onye Kasị Elu.”

> “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.’

> “Onyeozi ahụ na-ekwu, ‘Oge ga-abịa mgbe ha na-agaghị anagide ozizi ziri ezi; kama dịka agụụ ihe ọjọọ nke onwe ha si dị, ha ga-achịkọtara onwe ha ndị nkụzi, ebe ntị ha na-akọrọ ha akọrọ; ha ga-ewepụkwa ntị ha n’eziokwu, a ga-atụgharịkwa ha gaa n’akụkọ ifo.’ N’akụkụ niile anyị na-ahụ ndị mmadụ ka a na-eduga ha n’agha nfe site n’echiche aghụghọ nke ndị na-eme ka okwu Chineke bụrụ ihe efu; ma mgbe e wetara eziokwu n’ihu ha, ha na-ejupụta n’enweghị ndidi na iwe. Ma ndụmọdụ onyeozi ahụ nyere ohu Chineke bụ, ‘Nọgide na-eche nche n’ihe niile, tachie ahụhụ, rụọ ọrụ nke onye nkwusa ozi ọma, mezuokwa ọrụ ije ozi gị nke ọma.’ N’oge ya ụfọdụ hapụrụ ọrụ Onyenwe anyị. Ọ na-ede, ‘Demas ahapụwo m, ebe ọ hụrụ ụwa a dị ugbu a n’anya;’ ọzọkwa, ọ na-ekwu, ‘Alexander, onye na-akụ ọla kọpa, meere m ọtụtụ ihe ọjọọ: ka Onyenwe anyị kwụọ ya dị ka ọrụ ya si dị: onye ị ga-akpacharakwa anya n’ebe ọ nọ; n’ihi na o guzogidere okwu anyị nke ukwuu.’”

> “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.

> “Ndị-amụma na ndịozi nwetara ọnwụnwa ndị yiri ibe ha nke mmegide na nkọcha, ọbụna Nwa-aturu Chineke ahụ nke na-enweghị ntụpọ ka anwara ọnwụnwa n’ihe niile dịka a na-anwa anyị. Ọ nagidere mmegide nke ndị mmehie megide onwe ya.

> “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.

> “A ghaghị iji ntụkwasị-obi nile nyefee ịdọ aka ná ntị ọ bụla maka oge a; ma ‘ohu nke Onyenwe anyị ekwesịghị ịlụ ọgụ; kama ka ọ dịrị mmadụ niile nwayọọ, bụrụ onye ruru eru izi ihe, onye nwere ndidi; na-eji ịdị nwayọọ na-akụzi ndị na-emegide onwe ha.’ Anyị aghaghị ilekọta okwu nke Chineke anyị nke ọma ka arụ ọrụ aghụghọ nke ndị ahụ hapụrụ okwukwe ghara imerụ anyị. Anyị ga-eguzogide mmụọ ha na mmetụta ha site n’otu ngwa agha ahụ Nna-ukwu anyị jiri mgbe onyeisi ọchịchịrị wakporo Ya,—‘E dere ya n’Akwụkwọ Nsọ.’ Anyị kwesịrị ịmụta iji okwu Chineke eme ihe nke ọma. Ndụmọdụ ahụ bụ, ‘Mụọ ihe ike ka i gosi onwe gị dị ka onye Chineke nabatara, dịka onye ọrụ na-adịghị mkpa ihere, onye na-ekewa okwu eziokwu nke ọma.’ A ghaghị ịdị ọrụ ike na ekpere sitere n’obi na okwukwe iji zute njehie gbagọrọ agbagọ nke ndị nkuzi ụgha na ndị nduhie; n’ihi na ‘n’ụbọchị ikpeazụ oge dị ize ndụ ga-abịa. N’ihi na ndị mmadụ ga-abụ ndị hụrụ onwe ha n’anya, ndị anyaukwu, ndị na-anya isi, ndị mpako, ndị nkwulu, ndị na-adịghị erube isi nye nne na nna, ndị na-enweghị ekele, ndị na-adịghị nsọ, ndị na-enweghị ịhụnanya eke, ndị na-emebi nkwekọrịta, ndị na-ebo ebubo ụgha, ndị na-enweghị njide onwe ha, ndị obi ọjọọ, ndị na-eleda ndị ọma anya, ndị raara mmadụ nye, ndị na-eme ihe n’amaghị ama, ndị isi elu n’obi, ndị hụrụ ihe ụtọ n’anya karịa ịhụnanya ha nwere n’ebe Chineke nọ; ndị nwere ọdịdị nke nsọpụrụ Chineke, ma na-agọnahụ ike ya: si n’aka ndị dị otú ahụ wezuga onwe gị.’ Okwu ndị a na-egosi agwa ndị ikom ndị ohu Chineke ga-ezute. ‘Ndị na-ebo ebubo ụgha,’ ‘ndị na-eleda ndị ọma anya,’ ga-awakpo ndị na-eguzosi ike n’ihe nye Chineke ha n’oge a rụrụ arụ. Ma onye nnọchi anya nke Eluigwe aghaghị igosipụta mmụọ ahụ e gosipụtara n’ime Nna-ukwu. N’ịdị umeala n’obi na n’ịhụnanya ọ ghaghị ịrụ ọrụ maka nzọpụta nke mmadụ.”

> “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.

> “Pọl gara n’ihu banyere ndị ahụ na-emegide ọrụ Chineke, na-atụnyere ha na ndị ikom ahụ lụrụ ọgụ megide ndị kwesịrị ntụkwasị obi n’oge Izrel oge ochie. Ọ sịrị: ‘Ugbu a, dịka Janes na Jambres guzogidere Mosis, otú a ka ndị a kwa na-eguzogide eziokwu; ndị mmadụ uche ha rụrụ arụ, ndị a jụrụ n’ihe banyere okwukwe. Ma ha agaghị aga n’ihu ọzọ: n’ihi na a ga-eme ka nzuzu ha pụta ìhè nye mmadụ nile, dịka nke ndị ahụkwa siri bụrụ.’ Anyị maara na oge na-abịa mgbe a ga-ekpughe nzuzu nke ibuso Chineke agha. Anyị nwere ike ichere n’udo, n’ntachi obi na n’ịtụkwasị obi, n’agbanyeghị ókè a na-ekwutọ na a na-eleda anyị anya; n’ihi na ‘ọ dịghị ihe zoro ezo nke a gaghị eme ka ọ pụta ìhè,’ ma ndị na-asọpụrụ Chineke ka ọ ga-asọpụrụ n’ihu mmadụ na ndị mmụọ ozi. Anyị ga-ekere òkè n’ahụhụ ndị mmeghari ahụ. E dere, sị, ‘Nkatọ ndị ahụ nke ndị kparịrị gị dakwasịrị m.’ Kraịst na-aghọta iru újú anyị. Ọ dịghị onye ọbụla n’ime anyị a kpọrọ ka o buru obe naanị ya. Nwoke Ahụhụ nke Kalvari na-enwe mmetụ n’obi site n’ịma ahụhụ anyị, ma ebe ọ tara ahụhụ mgbe a nwara ya, ọ pụkwara inyeaka ndị ahụ nọ n’iru újú na n’ọnwụnwa n’ihi ya. ‘Ee, ma ndị nile chọrọ ibi ndụ nsọ n’ime Kraịst Jisọs ga-ata ahụhụ mkpagbu. Ma ndị ajọ mmadụ na ndị nduhie ga-akawanye njọ ma njọ, na-eduhie ma a na-eduhie ha. Ma gị onwe gị, nọgide n’ihe ndị ahụ ị mụtara.’” Review and Herald, Jenụwarị 10, 1888.

Back to Articles