Article

# Rome Establishes the Vision - Number Six

Roma Ishyiraho Iyerekwa - Umubare wa Gatandatu

The Prophetic Controversies in Adventist History: Understanding the Conflict Between Uriah Smith and James White on Daniel 11:36

Impaka z’Ubuhanuzi mu Mateka y’Abadiventisiti: Gusobanukirwa n’Amakimbirane Hagati ya Uriah Smith na James White ku bya Daniyeli 11:36

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

August 14, 2024

Formats

PDF
Word
Song MP3

We are addressing six lines of prophetic controversy that have occurred within the history of Adventism from 1798 until the present day.

Turasesengura ku mirongo itandatu y’impaka z’ubuhanuzi zabaye mu mateka y’Abadiventisiti uhereye mu 1798 kugeza kuri uyu munsi.

> “In history and prophecy the Word of God portrays the long continued conflict between truth and error. That conflict is yet in progress. Those things which have been, will be repeated. Old controversies will be revived, and new theories will be continually arising. But God’s people, who in their belief and fulfillment of prophecy have acted a part in the proclamation of the first, second, and third angels’ messages, know where they stand. They have an experience that is more precious than fine gold. They are to stand firm as a rock, holding the beginning of their confidence steadfast unto the end.” Selected Messages, book 2, 109.

> “Mu mateka no mu buhanuzi, Ijambo ry’Imana rigaragaza intambara yamaze igihe kirekire hagati y’ukuri n’ikinyoma. Iyo ntambara iracyakomeje. Ibyabaye bizongera bibe. Impaka za kera zizongera kuzuka, kandi inyigisho nshya zizakomeza kuvuka ubutitsa. Ariko ubwoko bw’Imana, mu kwizera kwabwo no mu gusohozwa k’ubuhanuzi, bwagize uruhare mu kwamamaza ubutumwa bw’abamarayika ba mbere, aba kabiri, n’aba gatatu, bumenya aho buhagaze. Bafite ubunararibonye buruta kure izahabu inoze. Bagomba guhagarara bashikamye nk’urutare, bakomeza badakebakeba ibyiringiro byabo bya mbere kugeza ku iherezo.” Selected Messages, igitabo cya 2, 109.

The previous article addressed the first and last controversy about the Roman power, and we will now take up the controversy that occurred between Uriah Smith and James White. Uriah Smith inserted his own “private interpretation” into verse thirty-six.

Ingingo ibanziriza iyi yasesenguye impaka za mbere n’iza nyuma zerekeye ububasha bw’Abaroma, none ubu tugiye kwita ku mpaka zabaye hagati ya Uriah Smith na James White. Uriah Smith yinjije mu murongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu “ubusobanuro bwe bwite.”

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

> “UMURONGO WA 36. Kandi umwami azakora ibyo yishakiye; kandi azishyira hejuru, kandi azikuza kuruta imana yose, kandi azavuga amagambo ateye ubwoba arwanya Imana y’imana, kandi azagubwa neza kugeza ubwo uburakari buzaba busohoye; kuko ibyagenwe bizasohora.

> “The king here introduced cannot denote the same power which was last noticed; namely, the papal power; for the specifications will not hold good if applied to that power.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 292.

> “Umwami uvugwa hano ntashobora gusobanura ubwo butware bumwe bwari buherutse kuvugwa; ari bwo, ubutware bwa papa; kuko ibisobanuro byabwo bitaba bihuje n’ukuri iyo byerekejwe kuri ubwo butware.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 292.

Smith acknowledged that the power in the previous verse was “papal Rome,” but claims the characteristics of verse thirty-six are not prophetic characteristics that identify papal Rome. That claim is false. It should be remembered that in the rebellion of 1863, the seven times of Leviticus chapter twenty-six was set aside, and therefore the representation of the seven times of both tables of Habakkuk was rejected. Both the 1843 and the 1850 charts illustrate the seven times in the very center of the charts, and both illustrations place the cross in the center of the line of the seven times. When the new light of the seven times arrived in 1856 and was thereafter rejected, it marked a rejection of Habakkuk’s two tables, and also the authority of the Spirit of Prophecy, which so clearly identifies that both charts were directed by God.

Smith yemeye ko imbaraga zivugwa mu murongo ubanziriza uyu zari “Roma ya gipapa,” ariko akavuga ko ibiranga umurongo wa mirongo itatu na gatandatu atari ibiranga ubuhanuzi bimenyekanisha Roma ya gipapa. Icyo kirego ni ikinyoma. Bikwiye kwibukwa ko mu bugome bwo kwigomeka bwo mu 1863, ya bihe birindwi byo mu gitabo cy’Abalewi igice cya makumyabiri na gatandatu byashyizwe ku ruhande, bityo ishusho ihagarariye ya bihe birindwi byo ku mbaho zombi za Habakuki irangwa no kuba yaranzwe n’iyangwa. Imbonerahamwe zo mu 1843 no mu 1850 zombi zigaragaza ya bihe birindwi hagati rwagati ku mbonerahamwe, kandi izo shusho zombi zishyira umusaraba hagati rwagati ku murongo wa ya bihe birindwi. Igihe umucyo mushya wa ya bihe birindwi wagezaga mu 1856 maze nyuma ukangwa, byaranzwe n’iyangwa ry’imbaho ebyiri za Habakuki, kandi n’ubutware bw’Umwuka w’Ubuhanuzi na bwo burangwa no kuba bwaranzwe n’iyangwa, uwo Mwuka ugaragaza neza cyane ko izo mbonerahamwe zombi zari zarayobowe n’Imana.

According to Sister White the last deception of Satan is to make of none effect the testimony of God’s Spirit, and here the first deception was to make of none effect the testimony of God’s Spirit, and it also represented a simultaneous rejection of the foundational truths upon the two charts, and more specifically the seven times.

Dukurikije Mushiki wa White, uburiganya bwa nyuma bwa Satani ni uguhindura ubuhamya bw’Umwuka w’Imana ubusa; kandi aha uburiganya bwa mbere bwari uguhindura ubuhamya bw’Umwuka w’Imana ubusa, kandi nanone byagereranyaga kwangwa icyarimwe kw’ukuri shingiro kuri za mbonerahamwe zombi, cyane cyane bya bihe birindwi.

At the rebellion of 1863, it was none other than Uriah Smith that produced the 1863 counterfeit chart, which removed the line of the seven times. By 1863 Uriah Smith had closed his eyes to the light of the seven times, and was unable to see that there are two “indignations” which Daniel identifies. The two indignations represent the seven times against the northern kingdom of Israel, and the southern kingdom of Judah. The first against the ten northern tribes began in 723 BC and ended in 1798, and the second began in 677 BC and ended in 1844.

Mu gihe cy’ubwigomeke bwo mu 1863, uwakoze koko igishushanyo mpimbano cyo mu 1863, cyakuyeho umurongo w’ibihe birindwi, ntiyari undi uretse Uriah Smith. Mu 1863, Uriah Smith yari yarahumye amaso ku mucyo w’ibihe birindwi, kandi ntiyashoboraga kubona ko hariho “uburakari” bubiri Daniyeli agaragaza. Uburakari bubiri bugereranya ibihe birindwi byategetswe ubwami bw’amajyaruguru bwa Isirayeli n’ubwami bw’amajyepfo bwa Yuda. Ubwa mbere bwagiriye imiryango icumi yo mu majyaruguru, butangira mu 723 BC burangira mu 1798, naho ubwa kabiri butangira mu 677 BC burangira mu 1844.

Gabriel came to Daniel in chapter eight to explain the marah vision, and in connection with his work, he provided a second witness to 1844. The twenty-three hundred years of Daniel chapter eight ended in 1844, but so too did the last of the two indignations against the northern and southern kingdoms.

Gaburiyeli yaje kwa Daniyeli mu gice cya munani kugira ngo amusobanurire iyerekwa rya marah, kandi mu isano n’umurimo we, yatanze umuhamya wa kabiri uhamya 1844. Iyo myaka ibihumbi bibiri na magana atatu yo muri Daniyeli igice cya munani yarangiye mu 1844, kandi ni na bwo ubwa nyuma muri izo nzika ebyiri zerekeye ubwami bw’amajyaruguru n’ubw’amajyepfo bwarangiriye.

> And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be. Daniel 8:19.

> Nuko aravuga ati: Dore, ngiye kukumenyesha ibizaba ku iherezo ry’uburakari; kuko iherezo rizabaho mu gihe cyagenwe. Danieli 8:19.

The last end presupposes a first end. The last of the two indignations, which is simply another expression of the seven times, ended in 1844, and the first indignation ended in 1798. The verse Smith claimed possessed no specifications of the papal power identified the year when the papacy would receive its deadly wound.

Iherezo rya nyuma risaba ko habaho iherezo rya mbere. Irya nyuma muri ayo makuba yombi, ari na ryo ubundi buryo bwo kuvuga ya bihe birindwi, ryasojwe mu 1844, naho uburakari bwa mbere bwasojwe mu 1798. Umurongo Smith yavugaga ko utagaragazaga ibisobanuro by’ububasha bwa gipapa, ni wo wagaragaje umwaka ubwo ubupapa bwari kuzahabwa igikomere cyica.

> And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvelous 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.

> Umwami azakora ibyo ashaka; kandi azishyira hejuru, yiyubahishe arushe imana zose, kandi azavuga ibitangaza birwanya Imana y’imana zose; kandi azagubwa neza kugeza aho umujinya uzarangirira; kuko icyagennwe kizasohozwa. Daniyeli 11:36.

“The king” in verse thirty-six would “prosper till the indignation be accomplished.” Notice what Smith writes about Daniel chapter eight, verses twenty-three and twenty-four in the same book where he claims the papal power does not possess the correct attributes to fulfill verse thirty-six.

“Umwami” uvugwa mu murongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu “azagubwa neza kugeza aho uburakari buzuzurira.” Itegereze ibyo Smith yanditse ku byerekeye Daniyeli igice cya munani, umurongo wa makumyabiri na gatatu n’uwa makumyabiri na kane, muri icyo gitabo nyine aho avuga ko ububasha bwa papa butagira ibimuranga bikwiye kugira ngo busohoze umurongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu.

> “VERSE 23. And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors are come to the full, a king of fierce countenance, and understanding dark sentences, shall stand up. 24. And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power: and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall prosper, and practice, and shall destroy the mighty and the holy people. 25. And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand: and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.

> “UMURONGO WA 23. Kandi mu gihe cy’imperuka cy’ubwami bwabo, ubwo abagome bazaba bageze ku rugero rwuzuye, hazahaguruka umwami ufite uburakari bukaze mu maso, kandi usobanukiwe n’amagambo y’amarenga. 24. Kandi imbaraga ze zizaba zikomeye, ariko atari ku bw’imbaraga ze bwite; kandi azarimbura mu buryo butangaje, kandi azagubwa neza, kandi azasohoza imigambi ye, kandi azarimbura abanyambaraga n’ubwoko bwera. 25. Kandi ku bw’uburiganya bwe na bwo, azatuma uburiganya bugubwa neza mu kuboko kwe; kandi azishyira hejuru mu mutima we, kandi ku bw’amahoro azarimbura benshi; kandi na none azahagurukira Umutware w’abatware; ariko azavunagurwa bitakozwe n’ukuboko.”

> “This power succeeds to the four divisions of the goat kingdom in the latter time of their kingdom, that is, toward the termination of their career. It is, of course, the same as the little horn of verse 9 and onward. Apply it to Rome, as set forth in remarks on verse 9, and all is harmonious and clear.

> “Ubu butegetsi busimbura amacakubiri ane y’ubwami bw’isekurume y’ihene mu gihe cya nyuma cy’ubwami bwabo, ni ukuvuga bugana ku musozo w’igihe cyabwo. Birumvikana rero ko ari bumwe n’ihembe rito rivugwa mu murongo wa 9 no mu ikurikiraho. Nibwifashishwe kuri Roma, nk’uko byasobanuwe mu bisobanuro ku murongo wa 9, maze byose bizaba bihuje kandi bisobanutse.”

> “‘A king of fierce countenance.’ Moses, in predicting punishment to come upon the Jews from this same power, calls it ‘a nation of fierce countenance.’ Deut. 28:49, 50. No people made a more formidable appearance in warlike array than the Romans. ‘Understanding dark sentences.’ Moses, in the scripture just referred to, says, ‘Whose tongue thou shalt not understand.’ This could not be said of the Babylonians, Persians, or Greeks, in reference to the Jews; for the Chaldean and Greek languages were used to a greater or less extent in Palestine. This was not the case, however, with the Latin.

> “‘Umwami ufite igitsure gikaze.’ Mose, ubwo yahanuye igihano cyari kuzagera ku Bayuda giturutse kuri ubwo butware bwari bumwe, acyita ‘ishyanga rifite igitsure gikaze.’ Gutegeka kwa Kabiri 28:49, 50. Nta bwoko na bumwe bwagaragaraga buteye ubwoba kurusha Abaroma iyo bari batondetse mu mirongo y’intambara. ‘Usobanukiwe imigani y’urusobe.’ Mose, mu Byanditswe bimaze kuvugwa, aravuga ati: ‘Ururimi rwabo ntuzarwumva.’ Ibyo ntibyashoboraga kuvugwa ku Banyababuloni, Abaperesi, cyangwa Abagiriki, ku byerekeye Abayuda; kuko indimi z’Abakaludaya n’iz’Abagiriki zakoreshwaga, ku rugero runaka, muri Palesitina. Ariko siko byari bimeze ku Kilatini.”

> “When the transgressors are come to the full.’ All along, the connection between God’s people and their oppressors is kept in view. It was on account of the transgressions of his people that they were sold into captivity. And their continuance in sin brought more severe punishment. At no time were the Jews more corrupt morally, as a nation, than at the time they came under the jurisdiction of the Romans.

> “Iyo abanyabyaha bazaba bageze ku gipimo cyuzuye.” Mu buryo bwose, isano iri hagati y’ubwoko bw’Imana n’ababukandamizaga yakomeje kuzirikanwa. Ni kubera ibicumuro by’ubwoko bwayo ko bwagurishijwe bukajyanwa mu bunyage. Kandi gukomeza kubaho mu cyaha kwabuzaniye igihano kirushaho gukomera. Nta kindi gihe Abayahudi bigeze barushaho kubora mu mico, nk’ishyanga, kuruta igihe binjiraga munsi y’ubutegetsi bw’Abaroma.

> “‘Mighty, but not by his own power.’ The success of the Romans was owing largely to the aid of their allies, and divisions among their enemies, of which they were ever ready to take advantage. Papal Rome also was mighty by means of the secular powers over which she exercised spiritual control.

> “‘Afite imbaraga, ariko si ku bwe bw’imbaraga ze bwite.’ Intsinzi y’Abaroma yaterwaga ahanini n’ubufasha bw’abafatanyabikorwa babo, no n’amacakubiri yari hagati y’abanzi babo, ayo bahoraga biteguye kubyazamo inyungu. Roma ya gipapa na yo yari ikomeye ibikesha ubutegetsi bw’isi yari ifiteho ububasha bw’umwuka.

> “‘He shall destroy wonderfully.’ The Lord told the Jews by the prophet Ezekiel that he would deliver them to men who were ‘skilful to destroy;’ and the slaughter of eleven hundred thousand Jews at the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman army, was a terrible confirmation of the prophet’s words. And Rome in its second, or papal, phase was responsible for the death of fifty millions of martyrs.

> “‘Azarimbura mu buryo butangaje.’ Uwiteka yabwiye Abayuda abinyujije ku muhanuzi Ezekiyeli ko azabagabiza abantu ‘bafite ubuhanga bwo kurimbura;’ kandi iyicwa ry’Abayuda ibihumbi magana cumi na kimwe mu kurimbuka kwa Yerusalemu n’ingabo z’Abaroma, ryabaye ihamya iteye ubwoba y’amagambo y’uwo muhanuzi. Kandi Roma mu cyiciro cyayo cya kabiri, ari cyo cy’ubupapa, ni yo yari ishinzwe urupfu rw’abamaritiri miliyoni mirongo itanu.”

> “‘And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand.’ Rome has been distinguished above all other powers for a policy of craft, by means of which it brought the nations under its control. This is true of both pagan and papal Rome. And thus by peace it destroyed many.

> “‘Kandi kandi binyuze mu migambi ye, azatuma uburyarya bugwizwa mu kuboko kwe.’ Roma yaranzwe kurusha andi mabasha yose n’umugambi w’uburyarya, uwo yakoresheje kugira ngo ishyire amahanga munsi y’ubutegetsi bwayo. Ibi ni ukuri kuri Roma ya gipagani kimwe na Roma ya gipapa. Nuko rero, biciye mu mahoro, yarimbuye benshi.

> “And Rome, finally, in the person of one of its governors, stood up against the Prince of princes, by giving sentence of death against Jesus Christ. ‘But he shall be broken without hand,’ an expression which identifies the destruction of this power with the smiting of the image of chapter 2.” Uriah Smith Daniel and the Revelation, 202–204.

> “Kandi Roma, amaherezo, mu muntu w’umwe mu bayobozi bayo, yahagurukiye kurwanya Umutware w’abatware, itanga urubanza rw’urupfu kuri Yesu Kristo. ‘Ariko azamenagurwa atakozweho n’ukuboko,’ imvugo igaragaza isenyuka ry’ubwo butware ko rihura no gukubitwa kw’icyo gishushanyo cyo mu gice cya 2.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 202–204.

Smith, twice in the passage, identifies that the prophetic characteristics of pagan and papal Rome are interchangeable, for they are simply the manifestation of Rome in its two phases, such as the mixture of iron and clay in Daniel chapter two, which Sister White identifies as symbols of churchcraft and statecraft. When Daniel identifies in the verses Smith is addressing–that Rome “shall prosper, and practice,” and that Rome “shall cause craft to prosper in his hand,”–Smith claims that in verse thirty-six that the “king” who “shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished,” identifies a prophetic characteristic of both pagan and papal Rome. Then he claims that none of the characteristics of Rome in verse thirty-six refer to the papal power.

Mu murongo urimo kuvugwa, Smith agaragaza incuro ebyiri ko ibimenyetso by’ubuhanuzi biranga Roma ya gipagani na Roma ya gipapa bisimburana, kuko ari uguhishurwa kwa Roma mu byiciro byayo bibiri gusa, nk’uruvange rw’icyuma n’ibumba muri Daniyeli igice cya kabiri, uwo Sister White agaragaza ko ari ibimenyetso by’ubukorikori bw’idini n’ubw’ubutegetsi bwa leta. Igihe Daniyeli avuga mu mirongo Smith arimo asobanura ko Roma “izatera imbere, kandi ikore,” kandi ko Roma “izatuma uburiganya butera imbere mu kuboko kwayo,” Smith avuga ko mu murongo wa mirongo itatu na gatandatu, “umwami” “uzatera imbere kugeza ubwo uburakari buzaba busohoye,” agaragaza ikimenyetso cy’ubuhanuzi kiranga Roma ya gipagani na Roma ya gipapa byombi. Hanyuma akavuga ko nta na kimwe mu biranga Roma bivugwa mu murongo wa mirongo itatu na gatandatu cyerekeza ku butware bwa gipapa.

We have referred to Smith in supporting the identification of Rome being the robbers who establish the vision, and one of the four prophetic characteristics in verse fourteen is that Rome exalts themselves.

Twifashishije Smith mu gushyigikira ko Roma ari bo banyazi bashyiraho iyerekwa, kandi kimwe mu biranga ubuhanuzi bine bivugwa mu murongo wa cumi na kane ni uko Roma yishyira hejuru.

> And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall. Daniel 11:14.

> Muri ibyo bihe benshi bazahagurukira kurwanya umwami w’ikusi; kandi n’abanyazi bo mu bwoko bwawe bazishyira hejuru kugira ngo bashyikwe n’ibyo yeretswe; ariko bazagwa. Daniyeli 11:14.

Smith claims that the specifications of the king in verse thirty-six do not align with the papal power, though he earlier defended that it was Rome in verse fourteen that exalts itself. Yet the king in verse thirty-six “shall exalt himself.” That very same king in verse thirty-six would “speak marvelous things against the God of gods.” In Daniel the papal power “shall speak great words against the Most High,” and in the book of Revelation the papal power blasphemes against the Most High.

Smith avuga ko ibisobanuro biranga umwami uvugwa mu murongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu bidahura n’ububasha bwa gipapa, nubwo mbere yari yaravuze ko ari Roma yivuga mu murongo wa cumi n’ine yishyira hejuru. Nyamara uwo mwami uvugwa mu murongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu “azishyira hejuru.” Uwo mwami nyine uvugwa muri uwo murongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu “azavuga ibitangaza birwanya Imana y’imana.” Mu gitabo cya Daniyeli, ububasha bwa gipapa “buzavuga amagambo akomeye burwanya Isumbabyose,” kandi mu gitabo cy’Ibyahishuwe ububasha bwa gipapa butuka Isumbabyose.

> And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. Revelation 13:5, 6.

> Nuko ahabwa akanwa kavuga ibintu bikomeye n’ibitutsi byo gutuka Imana; ahabwa n’ubushobozi bwo kumara amezi mirongo ine n’abiri. Nuko abumbura akanwa ke ngo atuke Imana, atuke izina ryayo n’Ingoro yayo, n’abatuye mu ijuru. Ibyahishuwe 13:5, 6.

Every prophetic specification of the papal power is identified in verse thirty-six.

Buri kimenyetso cyose cy’ubuhanuzi kiranga ububasha bw’ubupapa kigaragazwa mu murongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu.

> And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvelous 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.

> Nuko umwami azakora ibyo yishakiye; kandi aziyishyira hejuru, kandi azihimbaza arenge imana zose, kandi azavuga ibitangaza birwanya Imana y’imana zose; kandi azaroranirwa kugeza ubwo uburakari buzaba busohoye; kuko ibyagenewe bizakorwa. Danieli 11:36.

Human commentators are many times unreliable, but many Adventist commentators give witness to the obvious truth that it was verse thirty-six which the apostle Paul was paraphrasing in Second Thessalonians, when he addressed the man of sin.

Abasobanuzi b’abantu incuro nyinshi ntibiringirwa, ariko abasobanuzi benshi b’Abadivantisiti bahamya ukuri kugaragara ko ari umurongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu intumwa Pawulo yasubiragamo mu magambo yayo bwite muri 2 Abatesalonike, igihe yavugaga iby’umuntu w’icyaha.

> Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 2 Thessalonians 2:2, 3.

> Ntihakagire umuntu n’umwe ubashuka mu buryo ubwo ari bwo bwose; kuko uwo munsi utazaza hatabanje kubaho ukwimūra ku kwizera, kandi umuntu w’icyaha akabanza guhishurwa, wa mwana wo kurimbuka; urwanya kandi akishyira hejuru y’icyitwa Imana cyose, cyangwa icyose gisengwa; ku buryo yicara mu rusengero rw’Imana nk’Imana, yiyereka ko ari Imana. 2 Abatesalonike 2:2, 3.

Verse thirty-six states that “he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god,” and Paul says “that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped.” Clearly Smith had no prophetic authority to claim that the king of verse thirty-six was different from the king under discussion in the verses leading to verse thirty-six. Grammatically he had no justification for making his flawed application, and his claim that he did so because verse thirty-six possesses no characteristics of the papal power was a wresting of the Scripture in an attempt to establish a private interpretation.

Umurongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu uvuga ko “azishyira hejuru, kandi yikuze hejuru ya buri mana yose,” kandi Pawulo aravuga ati “wa muntu w’icyaha azahishurwa, ari we mwana wo kurimbuka; urwanya kandi ukiyishyira hejuru y’icyitwa Imana cyose, cyangwa icyose gisengwa.” Biragaragara neza ko Smith nta butware ubwo ari bwo bwose bwa gihanuzi yari afite bwo kuvuga ko umwami uvugwa mu murongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu yari atandukanye n’umwami wavugwaga mu mirongo ibanziriza uwo murongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu. Mu buryo bw’ikibonezamvugo nta mpamvu yari afite yo gukora iyo mikoreshereze ye irimo amakosa, kandi ikirego cye cy’uko yabikoze kubera ko umurongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu udafite ibiranga ubushobozi bwa gipapa cyari ugoreka Ibyanditswe ashaka gushyiraho ubusobanuro bwe bwite.

> We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:19–21.

> Dufite kandi ijambo ry’ubuhanuzi rirushaho gukomera; kandi mukora neza kuritaho, nk’aho mwita ku mucyo urabagirana ahantu hijimye, kugeza igihe umuseke uzasingira, kandi inyenyeri yo mu ruturuturu ikazamukira mu mitima yanyu: Mumenye mbere na mbere yuko nta buhanuzi ubwo ari bwo bwose bwo mu Byanditswe busobanurwa n’umuntu ku giti cye. Kuko ubuhanuzi butigeze buza mu bihe bya kera ku bw’ubushake bw’umuntu; ahubwo abantu bera b’Imana bavuze bayobowe na Mwuka Wera. 2 Petero 1:19–21.

Through the years of Laodicean Adventism there have been many Adventist theologians, pastors and authors who have addressed whether they think Smith’s application is correct or incorrect. An Australian pastor, Louis Were, who is long deceased, spent the majority of his ministry in opposing Smith’s false prophetic model. The reason for his opposition was not simply that Smith ultimately identified the king that comes to his end in verse forty-five as Turkey, but Smith’s platform also produced an incorrect application of Armageddon. In the 1980’s or thereabout an Adventist author penned a book titled, Adventists and Armageddon, Have we Misunderstood Prophecy? The author’s name is Donald Mansell, and the book is still available.

Mu myaka yose y’Ubudiventisiti bwa Lawodikiya habayeho abahanga mu by’iyobokamana b’Abadiventisiti, abapasitori n’abanditsi benshi bavuze ku kibazo cy’uko batekereza niba uburyo Smith yakoresheje ari bwo cyangwa se atari bwo. Umupasitori w’Umunya-Australia witwa Louis Were, wamaze igihe kirekire yarapfuye, yamaze igice kinini cy’umurimo we ahanganye n’icyitegererezo cy’ubuhanuzi cy’ibinyoma cya Smith. Impamvu yo kumurwanya ntiyari gusa uko Smith yaje kumenya ko umwami ugera ku iherezo rye uvugwa mu murongo wa mirongo ine n’itanu ari Turukiya, ahubwo urubuga rwa Smith rwabyaye n’ubundi buryo butari bwo bwo gusobanura Harumagedoni. Mu myaka ya 1980 cyangwa hafi yayo, umwanditsi w’Umudiventisiti yanditse igitabo cyiswe, Adventists and Armageddon, Have we Misunderstood Prophecy? Izina ry’uwo mwanditsi ni Donald Mansell, kandi icyo gitabo kiracyaboneka.

Mansell tracks the history leading up to World War One and World War Two showing that when both those wars were seen to be approaching the Adventist evangelists began to employ Smith’s false application of Turkey marching to literal Jerusalem as a sign of Armageddon and the end of the world. He demonstrates by church membership roles that as each of the wars approached many souls were brought into the membership of the Adventist church, based upon the evangelist’s prophetic emphasis drawn from Smith’s flawed view of Armageddon.

Mansell akurikirana amateka yagejeje ku Ntambara ya Mbere y’Isi n’Intambara ya Kabiri y’Isi, agaragaza ko igihe byabonwaga ko izo ntambara zombi zegereje, abavugabutumwa b’Abadiventisiti batangiye gukoresha uko Smith yakoresheje nabi ibya Turukiya igana i Yerusalemu nyakuri nk’ikimenyetso cya Harimagedoni n’iherezo ry’isi. Yerekana, yifashishije inyandiko z’abanyamuryango b’itorero, ko uko buri ntambara yagendaga yegereza, abantu benshi binjizwaga mu banyamuryango b’itorero ry’Abadiventisiti, bishingiye ku gushimangira ubuhanuzi kw’abavugabutumwa kwakomotse ku mitekerereze ya Smith ifite inenge ku byerekeye Harimagedoni.

When either war ended, and the flawed predictions were not fulfilled, the church lost more members than they had gained from the prophetic model that was constructed by Smith.

Igihe intambara iyo ari yo yose yarangiraga, kandi ubuhanuzi bwari bufite inenge ntibusohozwe, itorero ryatakazaga abanyamuryango benshi kurusha abo ryari ryungutse binyuze kuri uwo murongo w’ubuhanuzi wubatswe na Smith.

Through Smith’s rejection of the foundational message of the Millerites, and his willingness to promote his private interpretation of verse thirty-six to forty-five of Daniel, Smith’s logic produced a prophetic model based upon current events.

Binyuze mu kwanga kwa Smith ubutumwa bw’ishingiro bw’Abamileriti, no kuba yari yiteguye guteza imbere ubusobanuro bwe bwite bw’umurongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu kugeza kuri mirongo ine n’itanu bwo muri Daniyeli, logique ya Smith yabyaye icyitegererezo cy’ubuhanuzi gishingiye ku byabaga muri icyo gihe.

In the argument between Smith and James White over the king who comes to his end in the last verse of Daniel eleven, James White presented a logic that succinctly represented Smith’s sandy prophetic foundation. White taught that “prophecy produces history, but history does not produce prophecy.”

Mu mpaka hagati ya Smith na James White ku byerekeye umwami ugera ku iherezo rye mu murongo wa nyuma wa Daniyeli cumi na umwe, James White yagaragaje imitekerereze yasobanuye mu ncamake urufatiro rw’ubuhanuzi rwa Smith rwubakiye ku mucanga. White yigishije ati: “ubuhanuzi butanga amateka, ariko amateka ntatanga ubuhanuzi.”

The evangelists of Adventism that worked before both wars employed the developing history to present Smith’s flawed prophetic model of Armageddon, and their work, which seemed so blessed leading up to the wars, produced a net loss when the prophetic model was demonstrated to be based upon a private interpretation.

Ababwirizabutumwa b’Abadiventisiti bakoze mbere y’intambara zombi bakoresheje amateka yagendaga asobanuka kugira ngo berekane icyitegererezo cy’ubuhanuzi cya Smith gifite inenge ku byerekeye Arumagedoni; kandi umurimo wabo, wari usa n’uwaheshejwe umugisha cyane mu gihe cyabanzirizaga izo ntambara, warangiye uteje igihombo rusange igihe byagaragazwaga ko icyo cyitegererezo cy’ubuhanuzi cyari gishingiye ku isobanura ryihariye.

> Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Matthew 7:15–20.

> Mwirinde abahanuzi b’ibinyoma baza babasanga bambaye uruhu rw’intama, nyamara imbere ari amasega aryana. Muzabamenyera ku mbuto zabo. Mbese abantu batora inzabibu ku mahwa, cyangwa imitini ku byuru? Ni ko n’igiti cyiza cyose cyera imbuto nziza, ariko igiti kibi cyera imbuto mbi. Igiti cyiza ntigishobora kwera imbuto mbi, kandi n’igiti kibi ntigishobora kwera imbuto nziza. Igiti cyose kitera imbuto nziza gicibwa hasi, kikajugunywa mu muriro. Nuko rero muzabamenyera ku mbuto zabo. Matayo 7:15–20.

Smith’s willingness to promote a private prophetic model of the king in verse thirty-six bore the fruit of also creating an incorrect application of the Sixth Plague and Armageddon.

Ukwemera kwa Smith guteza imbere icyitegererezo cy’ubuhanuzi cyihariye cy’umwami uvugwa mu murongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu byabyaye n’ingaruka yo no gushyira mu buryo butari bwo Icyorezo cya Gatandatu na Harimagedoni.

> And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared. And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty. Behold, I come as a thief. Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame. And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon. Revelation 16:12–16.

> Maze marayika wa gatandatu asuka igikombe cye ku ruzi runini Ufurate; amazi yarwo arakama, kugira ngo inzira y’abami b’iyo iburasirazuba itegurwe. Nuko mbona imyuka itatu ihumanye imeze nk’ibikeri iva mu kanwa k’ikiyoka, no mu kanwa k’inyamaswa, no mu kanwa k’umuhanuzi w’ibinyoma. Kuko ari imyuka y’abadayimoni ikora ibitangaza, ikajya ku bami bo mu isi no ku b’isi yose, kugira ngo ibateranyirize ku rugamba rw’uwo munsi ukomeye w’Imana Ishoborabyose. Dore, ndaza nk’umujura. Hahirwa ūhora maso, akabungabunga imyenda ye, kugira ngo atagenda yambaye ubusa, maze bakabona isoni ze. Nuko ibateranyiriza hamwe ahantu hitwa mu rurimi rw’Igiheburayo Harumagedoni. Ibyahishuwe 16:12–16.

As we have previously pointed out, the sixth plague comes after the close of human probation, so the warning contained to keep your garments, must refer to a testing issue that occurs before Michael stands up and human probation closes and the first plague begins. The sixth plague identifies the activities of the dragon, the beast and the false prophet, who are the threefold union that comes together at the soon-coming Sunday law. That threefold union is Modern Rome, and the symbol that identifies and establishes the threefold union of Modern Rome, are the “robbers of thy people,” who “exalt themselves to establish the vision” and “fall.”

Nk’uko twabigaragaje mbere, icyorezo cya gatandatu kiza nyuma y’isozwa ry’igihe cy’igeragezwa cy’abantu; bityo umuburo urimo wo kurinda imyambaro yawe ugomba kuba werekeza ku kibazo cy’igeragezwa kiba mbere y’uko Mikayeli ahaguruka, igihe cy’igeragezwa cy’abantu kigafungwa, maze icyorezo cya mbere kigatangira. Icyorezo cya gatandatu kigaragaza ibikorwa by’ikiyoka, cy’inyamaswa n’icy’umuhanuzi w’ibinyoma, ari bo bumwe bw’impande eshatu buhurira hamwe mu itegeko rya ku Cyumweru rigiye kuza vuba. Ubwo bumwe bw’impande eshatu ni Roma ya Kijyambere, kandi ikimenyetso kigaragaza kandi kigashyiraho ubwo bumwe bw’impande eshatu bwa Roma ya Kijyambere, ni “abambuzi bo mu bwoko bwawe,” “biyangkatiza kugira ngo bashyireho iyerekwa” maze “bakagwa.”

The warning of the sixth plague, when understood, allows a soul to keep his garments, but if it is rejected it leaves a soul naked, which is one of the five attributes of a Laodicean. The symbol that establishes that warning is the robbers of thy people, who exalt themselves and ultimately fall. Solomon said if God’s people do not have that vision, they perish.

Iburira ryo mu cyorezo cya gatandatu, iyo risobanuwe neza, rituma umuntu arinda imyambaro ye; ariko iyo ryanzwe, risiga umuntu yambaye ubusa, kandi iyo ni imwe mu mico itanu iranga Umunyalawodikiya. Ikimenyetso gishyiraho iryo burira ni ibisahuzi byo mu bwoko bwawe, byishyira hejuru maze amaherezo bikagwa. Salomo yavuze ko niba ubwoko bw’Imana butagira iryo yerekwa, burimbuka.

> Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he. Proverbs 29:18.

> Aho kutagira iyerekwa, abantu bararimbuka; ariko ukomeza amategeko, ahirwa ni we. Imigani 29:18.

The Hebrew word “perish” means “to make naked”, and John recorded, “Blessed is he that watcheth, and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame.” Smith was wrong on the King of the North, and that false prophetic foundation allowed him to develop a prophetic application that, if accepted, produces nakedness, which is a symbol of the Laodiceans, who are spewed out of the mouth of the Lord.

Ijambo ry’Igiheburayo “kurimbuka” risobanura “kwambura ubusa”, kandi Yohana yaranditse ati: “Hahirwa ūraindira, kandi akabika imyenda ye, kugira ngo atagenda yambaye ubusa, maze abantu ntibabone isoni ze.” Smith yari yaribeshye ku Mwami w’Amajyaruguru, kandi uwo musingi w’ubuhanuzi w’ibinyoma wamwemereye guteza imbere uburyo bwo gushyira mu bikorwa ubuhanuzi, iyo bwemerwa, butera ubwambure, ari bwo kimenyetso cy’Abalawodikiya, baseswa bavanwa mu kanwa k’Umwami.

Smith had no problem arguing his new false identification of the King of the North against the prophetess’ husband James White. Adventist historians, and Sister White, address their famous disagreement. Ellen White rebuked both her husband and Smith for allowing their difference of opinion on who was represented by the king of the north in Daniel eleven, to be put into the public domain. In the very first Adventist publication after the Great Disappointment of 1844, James White wrote:

Smith ntiyagize ikibazo cyo kujya impaka arengera ikimenyetso gishya cy’ibinyoma yahaye Umwami w’Amajyaruguru, abikora ahanganye na James White, umugabo w’umuhanuzikazi. Abanditsi b’amateka b’Abadiventisiti, ndetse na Mushiki wa White, bavuze kuri ukwo kutumvikana kwabo kwamamaye. Ellen White yacyashye umugabo we na Smith bombi kubera ko bemeye ko itandukaniro ry’ibitekerezo byabo ku birebana n’uwari ahagarariwe n’umwami w’amajyaruguru muri Daniyeli igice cya cumi na kimwe, rishyirwa ahagaragara imbere ya rubanda. Mu gitabo cya mbere cy’Abadiventisiti cyasohotse nyuma y’Ihungabana Rikomeye ryo mu 1844, James White yaranditse ati:

> “That Jesus rose up, and shut the door, and came to the Ancient of days, to receive his kingdom, at the 7th month, 1844, I fully believe. See Luke 13:25; Matthew 25:10; Daniel 7:13,14. But the standing up of Michael, Daniel 12:1, appears to be another event, for another purpose. His rising up in 1844, was to shut the door, and come to his Father, to receive his kingdom, and power to reign; but Michael’s standing up, is to manifest his kingly power, which he already has, in the destruction of the wicked, and in the deliverance of his people. Michael is to stand up at the time that the last power in chapter 11, comes to his end, and none to help him. This power is the last that treads down the true church of God: and as the true church is still trodden down, and cast out by all christendom, it follows that the last oppressive power has not ‘come to his end;’ and Michael has not stood up. This last power that treads down the saints is brought to view in Revelation 13:11-18. His number is 666.” James White, A Word to the Little Flock, 8.

> “Yuko Yesu yahagurutse, agakinga urugi, kandi akaza ku Mukambwe w’Iminsi, kugira ngo ahabwe ubwami bwe, mu kwezi kwa 7, mu 1844, ibi ndabyizera rwose. Reba Luka 13:25; Matayo 25:10; Daniyeli 7:13,14. Ariko guhaguruka kwa Mikayeli, muri Daniyeli 12:1, bisa n’aho ari ikindi gikorwa, kigamije indi mpamvu. Guhaguruka kwe mu 1844, kwari ukugira ngo akinge urugi, aze kwa Se, ahabwe ubwami bwe n’ububasha bwo gutegeka; ariko guhaguruka kwa Mikayeli ni ukugaragaza ububasha bwe bw’ubwami, asanganywe, mu kurimbura abanyabyaha no mu gukiza ubwoko bwe. Mikayeli azahaguruka mu gihe cya bwa bubasha bwa nyuma buvugwa mu gice cya 11, buzaba busohoye iherezo ryabwo, nta n’umwe ubufasha. Ubu ni bwo bubasha bwa nyuma bukandamiza Itorero ry’ukuri ry’Imana: kandi nk’uko Itorero ry’ukuri rigikandamijwe, kandi rigisunikwa hanze n’abakristo bose muri rusange, birakurikirana ko bwa bubasha bwa nyuma bw’igitugu butaragera ku iherezo ryabwo; kandi ko Mikayeli atarahaguruka. Ubu bubasha bwa nyuma bukandamiza abera bugaragazwa mu Ibyahishuwe 13:11-18. Umubare wabwo ni 666.” James White, A Word to the Little Flock, 8.

When Smith introduced his so-called “new light” on the subject of “the last power in Daniel chapter eleven,” James White saw Smith’s application, not as new light, but as an attack upon the foundations. The controversy of Rome as the king of the north in Daniel eleven that took place between Uriah Smith and James White possesses specific attributes, that as students of prophecy, we are to bring together with the other controversies of Adventist history concerning the symbol of Rome.

Igihe Smith yatangizaga icyo yise “umucyo mushya” ku byerekeye “imbaraga ya nyuma ivugwa muri Daniyeli igice cya cumi na kimwe,” James White yabonye ishyirwa mu bikorwa rya Smith, atari nk’umucyo mushya, ahubwo nk’igitero ku musingi. Impaka zerekeye Roma nk’umwami wo mu majyaruguru muri Daniyeli igice cya cumi na kimwe, zabaye hagati ya Uriah Smith na James White, zifite ibiranga byihariye, twe nk’abiga ubuhanuzi dukwiriye guhuza n’izindi mpaka zo mu mateka y’Abadivantisiti zerekeye ikimenyetso cya Roma.

One of those attributes is the introduction of a private interpretation. Another attribute is that the application of the private interpretation requires a wresting of simple grammar, for Smith not only disregarded that every prophetic attribute in verse thirty-six addresses Rome, but he disregarded that the grammatical structure demands that the king of verse thirty-six must be the same king as represented in the previous passage.

Kimwe muri ibyo biranga ni ukwinjiza ubusobanuro bwihariye. Ikindi kiranga ni uko gukoresha ubwo busobanuro bwihariye bisaba kugoreka ikibonezamvugo cyoroheje, kuko Smith atirengagije gusa ko buri kiranga cyose cy’ubuhanuzi kiri mu murongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu cyerekeza kuri Roma, ahubwo yanirengagije ko imiterere y’ikibonezamvugo isaba ko umwami uvugwa mu murongo wa mirongo itatu n’itandatu agomba kuba ari wa mwami umwe n’uwagaragajwe mu gice kibanziriza icyo.

Another is that the private interpretation was a rejection of foundational truths. Another is that it represents a rejection of the authority of the Spirit of Prophecy. Another characteristic is that the first flawed idea concerning Rome will lead to a prophetic model that disallows a person from keeping his garments as they approach the close of human probation. Another was the willingness to promote his private interpretation publicly. Another is that the private interpretation is invariably identified as new light. All of these attributes are represented within the current discussion of the “robbers of thy people.”

Ikindi ni uko ubusobanuro bwihariye bwari ukwanga ukuri shingiro. Ikindi ni uko bugaragaza ukwanga ubutware bwa Mwuka w’Ubuhanuzi. Ikindi kiranga ni uko igitekerezo cya mbere kirimo inenge cyerekeye Roma kizaganisha ku ngero y’ubuhanuzi ibuza umuntu kurinda imyambaro ye uko begera iherezo ry’igihe cy’igeragezwa cy’umuntu. Ikindi cyari ubushake bwo guteza imbere ku mugaragaro ubusobanuro bwe bwihariye. Ikindi ni uko ubusobanuro bwihariye buri gihe bugaragazwa nk’umucyo mushya. Ibi biranga byose bihagarariwe mu mpaka zirimo kuba ubu zerekeye “abambuzi b’ubwoko bwawe.”

When the last controversy of Rome, which was typified by the first controversy of Rome identifying the “robbers of thy people,” is brought together with the prophetic line of Uriah Smith’s and James White’s controversy we will see that one class will be building their prophetic model upon a private interpretation, which rejects foundational truth.

Iyo impaka ya nyuma ya Roma, yagereranyijwe n’impaka ya mbere ya Roma zigaragaza “abambuzi bo mu bwoko bwawe,” nitahuzwa n’umurongo w’ubuhanuzi w’impaka za Uriah Smith na James White, tuzabona ko hari itsinda rimwe rizaba ryubaka urugero rwaryo rw’ubuhanuzi ku isobanuro ryihariye, ryanga ukuri kw’ishingiro.

The rejection of the foundational truths automatically represents a rejection of the authority of the Spirit of Prophecy, which so soundly defends those foundational truths. That class will also be willing to present their view publicly, regardless of any concerns that may be raised about the impact the teaching might have upon God’s people around the globe.

Kwanga ukuri kw’ibanze bihita biba no kwanga ubutware bwa Mwuka w’Ubuhanuzi, urengera icyo kuri kw’ibanze mu buryo bukomeye cyane. Iryo tsinda na ryo rizaba ryiteguye gutangaza ku mugaragaro icyo ryemera, hatitawe ku mpungenge zose zishobora kugaragazwa ku ngaruka iyo nyigisho ishobora kugira ku bwoko bw’Imana hirya no hino ku isi.

Immediately after 1844, in the first generation of Adventism, another controversy about Rome was introduced. That controversy continued to be agitated, until the false view was accepted in the third generation of Adventism. We will consider the controversy of the “daily” as the fourth of six lines we are now considering in the model of line upon line.

Ako kanya gato nyuma ya 1844, mu gisekuru cya mbere cy’Abadiventisiti, hadutse indi mpaka yerekeye i Roma. Iyo mpaka yakomeje kubibwaho impaka, kugeza ubwo icyo gitekerezo cy’ibinyoma cyemerewe mu gisekuru cya gatatu cy’Abadiventisiti. Tuzareba impaka zerekeye “ibya buri munsi” nk’umurongo wa kane mu mirongo itandatu ubu turimo gusuzuma mu rugero rw’umurongo ku murongo.

But before we take up the fourth line of the controversies of Rome, it needs to be remembered that in the previous article, when we were addressing verse ten of Daniel chapter eleven, we stated “Verse ten also directly connects the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six to the hidden history, but that line of truth is outside what we are here setting forth.”

Ariko mbere y’uko twinjira ku murongo wa kane w’impaka za Roma, birakenewe kwibuka ko mu nyandiko ibanziriza iyi, igihe twasobanuraga umurongo wa cumi wo muri Daniyeli igice cya cumi na kimwe, twavuze tuti: “Umurongo wa cumi na wo uhuza mu buryo butaziguye ‘ibihe birindwi’ byo mu Balewi makumyabiri na gatandatu n’amateka yahishwe, ariko uwo murongo w’ukuri uri hanze y’ibyo turi gushyira ahagaragara hano.”

Uriah Smith was the leader in rejecting the seven times in 1863. He had rejected the increase of knowledge upon that subject that was presented in the articles on the subject, penned by Hiram Edson and published in the Review in 1856. The implications of Smith being associated with a movement that presented the seven times, but who thereafter rejected an increase of knowledge upon that very subject is also outside of the subject of the characteristics of Smith’s introduction of what he claimed was new light on the subject of the king of the north, but when we conclude our overview of the line of the Adventist controversies of Rome, we will return to both the significance of verse ten of chapter eleven of Daniel, and also what is represented by Smith’s rejection of the Laodicean message that arrived in 1856 with the increase of knowledge on the seven times.

Uriya Smith ni we wari umuyobozi mu kwanga bya bihe birindwi mu 1863. Yari yaranze ukwiyongera k’ubumenyi kuri iyo ngingo kwatanzwe mu ngingo zavugaga kuri iyo nsanganyamatsiko, zanditswe na Hiram Edson kandi zigatangazwa muri Review mu 1856. Ingaruka z’uko Smith yari afitanye isano n’umutwe watangazaga bya bihe birindwi, ariko nyuma akaza kwanga ukwiyongera k’ubumenyi kuri iyo ngingo nyirizina, na byo biri hanze y’insanganyamatsiko y’ibiranga uburyo Smith yazanye icyo yavugaga ko ari umucyo mushya ku ngingo yerekeye umwami wo mu majyaruguru; ariko niturangiza isesengura ryacu ry’umurongo w’impaka z’Abadiventisiti ku byerekeye Roma, tuzagaruka ku busobanuro bw’umurongo wa cumi w’igice cya cumi na kimwe cya Daniyeli, kandi no ku cyo guhakanwa na Smith ubutumwa bw’Abalawodikiya bwageze mu 1856 buhagarariye hamwe n’ukwiyongera k’ubumenyi kuri bya bihe birindwi.

> “Our faith in reference to the messages of the first, second, and third angels was correct. The great waymarks we have passed are immovable. Although the hosts of hell may try to tear them from their foundation, and triumph in the thought that they have succeeded, yet they do not succeed. These pillars of truth stand firm as the eternal hills, unmoved by all the efforts of men combined with those of Satan and his host. We can learn much, and should be constantly searching the Scriptures to see if these things are so.” Evangelism, 223.

> “Ukwizera kwacu ku byerekeye ubutumwa bw’abamarayika ba mbere, aba kabiri, n’uwa gatatu kwari ukw’ukuri. Ibimenyetso bikomeye by’inzira twanyuzemo ntibinyeganyezwa. Nubwo ingabo z’ikirenga z’i kuzimu zishobora kugerageza kubikura ku rufatiro rwabyo, kandi zikanezererwa zitekereza ko zabigezeho, nyamara ntizibigeraho. Izi nkingi z’ukuri zihagaze zishikamye nk’imisozi y’iteka ryose, zitanyeganyezwa n’imbaraga zose z’ab’abantu zifatanyije n’iza Satani n’ingabo ze. Dushobora kwiga byinshi, kandi dukwiriye guhora dushakashaka Ibyanditswe kugira ngo turebe ko ibyo bintu ari ko biri.” Evangelism, 223.

> “The great waymarks of truth, showing us our bearings in prophetic history, are to be carefully guarded, lest they be torn down, and replaced with theories that would bring confusion rather than genuine light.” Selected Messages, book 2, 101, 102.

> “Imirongo migari y’ukuri itugaragariza aho duhagaze mu mateka y’ubuhanuzi, igomba kurindanwa ubwitonzi bwinshi, kugira ngo itazasenywa ngo isimburwe n’inyigisho zazana urujijo aho kuzana umucyo nyakuri.” Selected Messages, igitabo cya 2, 101, 102.

> “At this time many efforts will be made to unsettle our faith in the sanctuary question; but we must not waver. Not a pin is to be moved from the foundations of our faith. Truth is still truth. Those who become uncertain will drift into erroneous theories, and will finally find themselves infidel in regard to the past evidence we have had of what is truth. The old waymarks must be preserved, that we lose not our bearings.” Manuscript Releases, volume 1, 55

> “Muri iki gihe hazakorwa imihati myinshi yo guhungabanya kwizera kwacu ku kibazo cy’ubuturo bwera; ariko ntitugomba kunyeganyega. Nta n’urushinge na rumwe rugomba kwimurwa ku rufatiro rw’ukwizera kwacu. Ukuri kuracyari ukuri. Abahinduka abanyeganyeza bazatwarwa n’inyigisho z’ibinyoma, maze amaherezo basange bihinduye abatizera ku birebana n’ibihamya twahawe kera by’icyo ukuri ari cyo. Ibirango bya kera by’inzira bigomba kurindwa, kugira ngo tudatakaza icyerekezo cyacu.” Manuscript Releases, volume 1, 55

Back to Articles