Article

# The Book of Daniel - Number Three

Buk pa Daniel - Namba Adek

Double Visions

Neno Aryo

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

November 25, 2023

Formats

PDF
Word

We are currently addressing the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six in the book of Daniel. It is hidden to those who have chosen to close their eyes, but it is there for those who wish to see. We will begin in Daniel chapter eight, and verse thirteen.

Kombedi wa tye ka waco lok me “seven times” me Leviticus 26 i Buk Daniel. En ocano bot jo ma oyero gamo wengegi, ento tye bot jo ma mito neno. Wabicako i Daniel 8:13.

> 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? Daniel 8:13.

> Eka an owinyo ngat acel ma maleng tye ka waco, ci ngat mukene ma maleng owaco bot ngat en ma onongo tye ka waco ni, “Kare nining obedo oneno me lamo me cawa ki cawa, ki bal ma kelo ogoro, me miyo ot maleng ki lwak me goyo gi piny ki cing?” Daniel 8:13.

The verse begins with the word “then,” and is making a distinction between the vision of prophetic history Daniel has just seen in the previous ten verses. Verse one and two of the chapter, identify the year when Daniel received the vision and also that he received it by the Ulai river. From verse three to verse twelve, he “sees” the vision of prophetic history. “Then” he “hears” a heavenly dialogue consisting of a question and an answer. In verse fifteen, he begins to seek what the vision of prophetic history that he had just “seen” represented. It is essential to recognize the distinction between the vision that Daniel “saw” in verses three through twelve, and the heavenly dialogue, which he “heard”—for they are two different visions.

Rek eni ocako ki lok “eka”, kede tye ka yik congo i bot wang-neno ikom gin ma porofesi okwano iye ma Daniel ojust oneno i rec apar ma odiyo. Rec acel ki aryo pa chapta eni, kinyutu mwaka ma Daniel onwongo wang-neno, kacel ki ni onwongo ne bot Yoo pi Ulai. Ki rec adek ocito i rec apar aryo, en “neno” wang-neno ikom gin ma porofesi okwano iye. “Eka” en “winyo” lok me polo ma tye ki penyo ki dwoko. I rec apar abic, en ocako yeny ngo ma wang-neno ikom gin ma porofesi okwano iye ma en ojust “neno” nyuto. Obedo marwate madwong ni ki nyutu congo i bot wang-neno ma Daniel “neno” i rec adek ocito i apar aryo, ki lok me polo ma en “winyo”—pien gin wang-neno aryo mapat.

> But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. Matthew 13:16.

> Ento ogwede wangwu, pien gi neno; kede witwu, pien gi winyo. Matayo 13:16.

The question in verse thirteen is, “How long shall be the vision,” and the word translated as “vision” is a different Hebrew word than the word translated as “vision” in verse sixteen.

Lapeny ma i verse apar adek en ni, "Kare pa 'vision' obed nining?"; kede lok ma kityeko loko ne calo 'vision' en lok me Leb Hibru ma pat ki lok ma kityeko loko ne calo 'vision' i verse apar abicel acel.

> And I heard a man’s voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision. Daniel 8:16.

> Awinyo dwon pa dano i tung ki tung pa Ulai, ma owaco ni, “Gabriel, imi ngat man ongeyo neno.” Daniel 8:16.

By translating two different Hebrew words into the English word “vision,” the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six, became “hidden in plain sight”. Biblical students who are satisfied to simply skim the surface consider these two different Hebrew words as the same word, but they do so at their own peril.

Pien golo lok aryo mapatpat me Ibru i leb Engilisi “vision,” “seven times” me Levitiko 26 obedo ocani kun otye i wang neno maber. Jo me kwano Biblia ma ginen me ngeno i wang piny keken gicwako lok aryo mapatpat man me Ibru calo lok acel; ento gitimo mano ki peko pa gigi kene.

> “To skim over the surface will do little good. Thoughtful investigation and earnest, taxing study are required to comprehend it. There are truths in the word which are like veins of precious ore concealed beneath the surface. By digging for them, as the man digs for gold and silver, the hidden treasures are discovered. Be sure that the evidence of truth is in the Scripture itself. One scripture is the key to unlock other scriptures. The rich and hidden meaning is unfolded by the Holy Spirit of God, making plain the word to our understanding: ‘The entrance of Thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple.’” Fundamentals of Christian Education, 390.

> Yweyo keken i wii pe bi kelo ber mapol. Myero obed peny ma opore ki paro maber, kacel ki kwano ma pire tek, pi ngeyo maber ikom eni. I lok tye ada ma calo twol me dine ma wel, ma kicane i boto wii. Ka gin woyone piny, calo ka dano woyo piny pi zaabu ki feza, dong gin ma wel ma kicane ginyutu. Bed cwinya ni lagony pa ada tye i Baibul keken. Lok acel i Baibul obedo lagu me yabo lok mukene. Por ma wel ki ma kicane me lok kiyaro Tipu Maleng pa Lubanga, me dwogo leleng lok bot ngeyo wa: “Donyo pa lok me In kelo ler; omiyo ngeyo bot jo ma pe gi jenge.” Fundamentals of Christian Education, 390.

We are informed that “every fact has its bearing” in the Word of God, and if we choose to ignore the fact there are two different Hebrew words translated as “vision” in chapter eight, we are responsible for inflicting Laodicean blindness upon ourselves. The old adage is, “there are none so blind as those who will not see.”

Kimino wa ngec ni, "ada keken tye ki pimo ne" i Lok pa Lubanga; kacce wa yero me cayo ada ni i chapta aboro tye lok aryo me Leb Hibru ma giketo gi i leb calo "vision", wa dong obedo ki bal me mino bwong me wang pa Laodicea ocako i wa keken. Lok me atika waco ni, "pe tye ngat mo ma obwongo i wang calo ngat ma pe mito neno."

> “The Bible contains all the principles that men need to understand in order to be fitted either for this life or for the life to come. And these principles may be understood by all. No one with a spirit to appreciate its teaching can read a single passage from the Bible without gaining from it some helpful thought. But the most valuable teaching of the Bible is not to be gained by occasional or disconnected study. Its great system of truth is not so presented as to be discerned by the hasty or careless reader. Many of its treasures lie far beneath the surface, and can be obtained only by diligent research and continuous effort. The truths that go to make up the great whole must be searched out and gathered up, ‘here a little, and there a little.’ Isaiah 28:10.

> Biblia tye ki cik weng ma dano mito ngeyo, wek gi yub maber pi bedo man onyo pi bedo ma bino. Kede, cik magi romo ngeyo gi dano weng. Pe tye ngat mo ma cwinyne yaro mapwonyone, ma romo kwano lok acel i Biblia ka pe oyudo i iye par ma konyo mo. Ento mapwonyo pa Biblia ma pire tek pe yudore ki kwano me kare kare onyo kwano ma pe ogamo. Kit ma dit me adwogi pa ne pe kiketo kam ma ngat ma turo tutwal onyo ma pe paro maber romo neno. Jami ne ma wel mapol obedo tutwal i piny mabor, kede romo keken yudo gi ki yenyo ma rigoro kede temo ma pe ocung. Adwogi ma cweyo rwom madit weng myero ki yenyo gi ki rwako gi, ‘ka kany matin, kede ka kany matin.’ Yesaya 28:10.

> “When thus searched out and brought together, they will be found to be perfectly fitted to one another. Each Gospel is a supplement to the others, every prophecy an explanation of another, every truth a development of some other truth. The types of the Jewish economy are made plain by the gospel. Every principle in the word of God has its place, every fact its bearing. And the complete structure, in design and execution, bears testimony to its Author. Such a structure no mind but that of the Infinite could conceive or fashion.” Education, 123.

> Ka ki yaro gi kamano ki ki cobo gi bot bot, ki nongo ni girwate maber tutwal ki gin mukene. Kwena maber pire keken obedo medo i gin mukene; lagoro pire keken obedo yabu pa mukene; ada pire keken obedo donyo anyim pa ada mukene. Cal me kit me timo pa Jo-Yahudi kiketo piny ki kwena maber. I lok pa Nyasaye, kit me yore pire keken tye ki kabedo pa ne; gin adada pire keken tye ki twerone. Kede kit weng ma opong, i paro pa ne kede i timo pa ne, cwalo buk pi Lacweyo pa ne. Kit macamano, pe tye wii mo keken, labongo wii pa Lacweyo ma pe giko, ma romo cimo onyo cweyo ne. Education, 123.

The word “vision” occurs ten times in Daniel chapter eight, but those ten times consist of two different Hebrew words, and the meanings of those words are not the same. If they meant the same thing, Daniel would have only used one of those words in each of the ten occurrences. Daniel wrote two words, for each of those two words possess their own meanings, and one represents a vision Daniel “saw”, and the other a vision he “heard”. In verse thirteen, the word translated as “vision” is châzôn, and it means “a sight”, or “a vision”, “a dream” or “an oracle”. I call it the “vision of prophetic history” based upon its definition and on how Daniel employs it.

Lok "vision" otime kare apar i Kit Daniel me aboro; ento i kare apar magi kitiyo kwede lok pa Leb Hibrû aryo mapat, ki piro me lok magi pe obedo acel. Ka pirogi obedo acel, Daniel onongo bino tiyo kwede lok acel keken i kare apar weng. Daniel oco lok aryo, pien lok aryo magi keken tye ki pirogi kene; acel nyutu loka ma Daniel "oneno", ki mukene nyutu loka ma "owinyo". I rek apar adek, lok ma kiloko calo "vision" en châzôn, ki piro ne "gin ma oneno", onyo "loka", "laro", onyo "orakol". Amiyo nyingne "loka me poro me gin macon" malube ki cimo ne kacel ki kit ma Daniel otiyo kwede.

In verse one, of Daniel chapter eight, Daniel says “a vision appeared unto me,” and in verse two he twice states that he “saw in a vision.” Then in verse thirteen, the question is raised of “how long shall be the vision.” All of those usages are the Hebrew word “châzôn.” Then in verse fifteen, we come to perhaps the most important time Daniel used that very same word, for he says, “when I”…“had seen the vision and sought for the meaning.” After Daniel had seen the châzôn vision, he wanted to understand what it meant. This is a fact that has great bearing on the hiding of the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six in the chapter.

I vasi acel i chapta aboro pa Daniel, Daniel owaco ni, “vision onen an,” ki i vasi ariyo, owaco ceke aryo ni, “an oneno i vision.” Eka i vasi apar gadek, kikwayo lapeny ni, “tyen mede obed vision?” Jami weng magi tye calo lok pa Leb Ebru “châzôn.” Eka i vasi apar abich, wan obino i kare ma romo bedo ma dit loyo weng ma Daniel otiyo kwede lok acel keken eno; pien owaco ni, “ka an”... “onongo an oneno vision ki onongo apeno pi tiend ne.” Ka Daniel onongo oneno vision “châzôn,” onongo ohero ngeyo ngo ma tiend ne mite. Man en gin adaa ma tye ki teko madit i yiko me “kare abiriyo” me Leviticus pier ariyo auchiel i chapta man.

He also uses the word châzôn in verses seventeen and twenty-six. The word “vision” appears ten times in Daniel chapter eight, and the word châzôn represents seven of those occurrences. Daniel uses the other Hebrew word that is translated as “vision” four times. The other Hebrew word is mar’eh, and means “appearance”.

En bene tiyo ki lok châzôn i verse 17 ki 26. Lok "vision" tye kare apar i chapta 8 me Daniel, ki ikom gigi lok châzôn omako kare abiro. Daniel tiyo ki lok me Ibrani mukene ma gityeko loko ne calo "vision" kare angwen. Lok me Ibrani mukene en mar'eh, ki tyen ne obedo "appearance".

Châzôn is found seven times in Daniel chapter eight, and mar’eh is found four times, and together they represent the ten times the English word “vision” occurs in Daniel chapter eight. Seven plus four is eleven, for one of the times Daniel employed the word mar’eh, it was translated just as it is defined, for in verse fifteen, when Daniel “sought for the meaning” of the châzôn vision of prophetic history, there “stood before” him “as the appearance of a man.” The word “appearance” is mar’eh. Therefore, mar’eh is used by Daniel four times in Daniel eight, and it is translated once in agreement with its primary definition of “appearance,” and the other three times it is translated as “vision.”

I Daniel chapta aboro, nyinga Châzôn ocake kare abiro, ki mar'eh ocake kare angwen; ka gecel gi romo kare apar ma nyinga me Leb Engilis ‘vision’ ocake i Daniel chapta aboro. Abiro ki angwen obedo apar acel, pien i kare acel ma Daniel otiyo kwede nyinga mar'eh, kicodwoko ne calo kit ma tito ne nyutu; pien i vase apar abic, ka Daniel onongo ‘kwayo lok me neno’ me châzôn pa lok me porofet pa gin mukato, ‘otye i anyimne calo kit ma nen calo dano.’ Nyinga ‘kit ma nen’ obedo mar'eh. Omiyo mar'eh kityeko tic kwede kare angwen i Daniel chapta aboro; ki i kare acel kicodwoko ne calo ‘kit ma nen’ malube ki tito ne madit, ento i kare adek ma mukene kicodwoko ne calo ‘vision.’

I am not suggesting any criticism of the men who translated the King James Bible. It needs to be noted though, that in verse thirteen, is found the only added word in the King James Bible (sacrifice), that inspiration states definitively, “does not belong to the text.” Inspiration further states that the added word had been “added by human wisdom.” In the very same chapter, two different Hebrew words are both translated as the same English word. The reason it is essential to recognize the distinction between these two words is profoundly important.

Pe an atye ka moko bal bot joma giloko lok me King James Bible. Ento myero gicoyo ni, i lok me coc ma apar adek, nonge nyig acel keken ma kimedo i King James Bible (sacrifice), ma Inspiration owaco maber keken ni, “pe obedo pa coc.” Inspiration dok owaco ni nyig ma kimedo woko eni “kimedo ki ngec pa dano.” I pot buk acel kacel, nyig me Hebru aryo ma pe gitye acel, gityeko dwoko gi weng i Leb Engilisi ki nyig acel keken. Pabic me ni ma ber tutwal me nongo apaka ma tye i kin nyig aryo eni obedo madit tutwal.

> And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision, and sought for the meaning, then, behold, there stood before me as the appearance of a man. And I heard a man’s voice between the banks of Ulai, which called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the vision. Daniel 8:15, 16.

> En dong otime ni, ka an keken, an Daniel, oneno mere, ci akweyo lagam pa mere; dong, nen, ngat acel calo kit pa dano ocung i anyim an. Kede an owinyo dwon pa dano i tung ki yie pa Ulai, ma ololo, owaco ni, “Gabriel, imi dano man ongeyo mere me neno.” Daniel 8:15, 16.

As Daniel “sought for the meaning” of the “châzôn vision” which he had just “seen,” Christ informs Gabriel to “make” Daniel to understand the “mar’eh vision” which he had just “heard”. Daniel wanted to understand the vision of prophetic history, but Christ, who had been identified in verse thirteen as Palmoni (that certain saint which spake), instructed Gabriel to make Daniel understand the “mar’eh vision”, not the “châzôn vision”. In verses fifteen and sixteen, the stated purpose for Gabriel is that he is to make Daniel understand the “mar’eh vision”, which is the word translated as “vision” which means “appearance,” not the vision of prophetic history which Daniel wanted to understand. Without recognizing Gabriel’s job assignment, the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six is hidden in plain sight.

Ka Daniel onongo tye ka yubu tiend lok pa "châzôn vision" ma con otyeko neno, Kristo owaco bot Gabriel ni "omiyi" Daniel ongeyo "mar'eh vision" ma con owinyo. Daniel onongo mito me ngeyo cano pa mukato pa laporofet; ento Kristo, ma i verse apar adek gicimo ne ni Palmoni (la maleng acel ma owaco), omiyo Gabriel cik ni omiyi Daniel ongeyo "mar'eh vision", pe "châzôn vision". I verse apar abicel ki apar abiro, gicimo ni tic pa Gabriel en omiyo Daniel ongeyo "mar'eh vision", ma en lok ma kiyiko calo "vision" mamego nyutu "appearance", pe cano pa mukato pa laporofet ma Daniel onongo mito me ngeyo. Ka pe gineno kit tic ma kicono ne bot Gabriel, "seven times" me Leviticus apar abicel kikano i wang wang.

In verse twenty-six both Hebrew words that are translated as “vision” are located in the same verse, and the verse becomes one of the primary keys to opening the truth of Daniel’s testimony of the “seven times.”

I cik 26, lok aryo me leb Hibru ma kiloko-gi calo “vision” tye i cik acel keken; ci cik eni bedo acel i gang lagony mapire tek me yabo gin atir pa waci ma Daniel ikom “seven times.”

> And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told is true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it shall be for many days. Daniel 8:26.

> Kede neno me odhiambo ki okinyi ma owaco kwede en adier; omiyo igudu neno; pien obino bedo pi nino mapol. Daniel 8:26.

In verse twenty-six, the “vision of the evening and mornings” is the mar’eh vision, meaning “appearance”, but the vision that was to be “shut up,” is the châzôn vision of prophetic history. The expression “evening and mornings” is what isolates and identifies the distinction between the two visions. It does so with another illustration of the human factor in producing the Bible. The human factor consisted of both the prophets that recorded the words of the Bible, but also of those that translated the Bible. The Bible, as with Christ, represents a combination of divinity and humanity. That humanity descended down through history, from Adam after he sinned to those who recorded and translated the Bible. Christ and the Bible are both the Word of God, and the Word of God’s is pure, for the divinity of the combination always overruled any limitations that existed in the flesh.

I rek 26, “vision of the evening and mornings” obedo neno mar’eh, ma mitne “appearance”; ento neno ma myero “ki cego” obedo neno châzôn pa gin matime con me poro. Lok “evening and mornings” en aye ma kicano kede yaro peke i kin neno aryo. En timo kamano kede cal mukene me twero pa dano i cweyo Baibul. Twero pa dano obedo bot jo me poro ma gi coyo lok me Baibul, kede bot jo ma gi dwoko Baibul i leb mukene. Baibul, calo Kristo, nyuto rwom pa kit pa Lubanga ki pa dano. Pa dano eno ocito i kare con con, aa ki Adam ka otimo bal, nyo bot jo ma gi coyo kede gi ma gi dwoko Baibul. Kristo kede Baibul gin Lok pa Lubanga weng, kede Lok pa Lubanga tye maleng; pien kit pa Lubanga i rwom ne kare weng loyo woko gubalo ma onongo tye i ringo.

> Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh. Romans 1:1–3.

> Paulo, latic pa Yesu Kiristo, ma kiyero ne obed Apostol, ma kikwanyo ne pi lok maber pa Lubanga, (ma con Lubanga ogamo ki bot jonabi pa en i coc me maler,) konye Wod pa en Yesu Kiristo, Rwot wa, ma obino ki ipor pa Dawid ki tung ringo. Baroma 1:1-3.

The expression “evening and morning” is found repeatedly in God’s Word, and it is always translated as “evening and morning,” as it is in verse twenty-six, and as it is so often translated in the creation story in Genesis that repeatedly states, “and the evening and the morning were….” In fact, and every fact has its bearing (and this fact is essential to understand), the only place in the Bible that the expression “evening and morning” is not translated as “evening and morning” (as it is in verse twenty-six), is in verse fourteen of Daniel eight. There, and only there in God’s Word the phrase “evening and morning” is translated as simply “days.”

Nyig lok “evening and morning” tye ka nongo piny piny i Lok pa Lubanga, kede kare weng giketo ne i leb calo “evening and morning,” calo ma i namba 26, kede calo ma pol kare giketo i lok me yubu i Genesis ma piny piny waco ni, “and the evening and the morning were….” Me ada, kede ada weng tye ki tegi (kede ada man tye ma matut me ngeyo), kabedo acel keken i Puk pa Lubanga ma nyig lok “evening and morning” pe giketo ne i leb calo “evening and morning” (calo ma i namba 26), obedo i Daniel 8:14. Kany, kede kany keken i Lok pa Lubanga, nyig lok “evening and morning” giketo ne nono calo “cawa.”

> And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Daniel 8:14.

> En owaci an, “Nyaka nino alufu aryo ki mia adek; eka ot maleng bino yweyo.” Daniel 8:14.

Twelve verses later, in the same chapter of Daniel, the Hebrew phrase “evening and morning” is translated as it always is; but in the verse that is the central pillar and foundation of Adventism, the phrase is simply translated as “days.” What influence led the translators of the King James Bible to make such a glaring contradiction? They had translated the phrase in verse twenty-six in agreement with every other occurrence of the phrase in the rest of the Bible. But twelve verses before verse twenty-six, in verse fourteen, their humanity placed a special distinction upon the answer to the question of verse thirteen. And the question of verse thirteen, included the one word (sacrifice), that was not to be added to the Bible. God wanted verse fourteen, to stand out in a very profound and distinctive way. In doing so, he also identified what Gabriel was instructed to make Daniel understand.

Lok apar aryo lacen, i gonyo acel keken me Danyel, nyig lok me Ebru “evening and morning” gipoko ne calo kit ma pol kare; ento i lok ma obedo tung’ ki twolo ma lenge pa Adventism, nyig lok eno gipoko ne keken calo “days.” Lwak mane oketo jo me poko me King James Bible me timo pe rwate ma nen maber calo eni ngo? Gi onongo gipoko nyig lok eno i lok 26 ki rwate ki kabedo weng ma nyig lok en obedo iye i buk mukene ducu me Bibil. Ento lok apar aryo ma con i iye lok 26, i lok 14, kit pa dano gi omiyo lanyut makwongo i dwoko pa lapeny me lok 13. Kede, lapeny me lok 13 otye ki nyig acel (sacrifice), ma pe myero kimedo i Bibil. Lubanga onongo mito ni lok 14 obed ma onen maber i kit ma peke keken ki lanyut madwong. Ka otimo mano, bende onongo onyutu maber gin ma Gabariel ocikone me miyo Danyel ongiyo.

In verse sixteen, Jesus commanded Gabriel to make Daniel understand the mar’eh vision, in spite of the fact that Daniel was seeking to understand the châzôn vision of prophetic history. Verse twenty-six says the “vision of the evenings and mornings which was told” was “true.” The châzôn vision had been a prophetic “sight”, but the mar’eh vision was “told,” for it had been spoken. It had been spoken in verse fourteen when Palmoni said “unto two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” Verse twenty-six, employs the expression “evening and mornings,” as it identifies it as the vision that had been “spoken” to identify the distinction between the two visions in Daniel chapter eight. The vision of prophetic history that Daniel had “seen”, and that Daniel wished to understand, was different from the vision that was “spoken” which Daniel had “heard”. More importantly, the vision that Daniel “heard” was the vision that Gabriel was to give Daniel understanding of.

I coc 16, Yesu ocwako cik bot Gabriel me miyo Daniel onongo ngeyo neno mar'eh, ata ka Daniel tye katamo me ngeyo neno châzôn me gin ma poro ikom gin ma otime con. I coc 26, owaco ni “neno me i kar irot ki i kar oturo ma owaco” obedo “ada.” Neno châzôn ne obedo “neno” me poro; ento neno mar'eh ne obedo “ma owaco,” pien ki owaco kwede. Ki owaco kwede i coc 14, ka Palmoni owaco ni, “nyutu bot 2,300 i kar irot ki i kar oturo; eka gang maler obicweyo maleng'.” I coc 26, tiyo kwede lok “irot ki oturo” me nyutu ni en aye neno ma “owaco,” me poko mapire tek i kin neno aryo i But 8 pa Daniel. Neno me poro ikom gin ma otime con ma Daniel “oneno,” ki ma Daniel mito me ngeyo, ne rwate mapire tek ki neno ma “owaco” ma Daniel “owinyo.” Ma pire tek, neno ma Daniel “owinyo” en aye neno ma Gabriel onongo myero miyo Daniel ngec pa ne.

The humanity that participated in creating the Holy Bible recorded the word “vision” ten times in Daniel chapter eight, and in so doing it hid the distinction of a vision that was “seen” and another vision that was “heard”. In doing so, it obscured the emphasis that identifies that Christ’s intent was for Daniel to understand the vision he had “heard”, above understanding the vision he had “seen”. We can now consider what Gabriel does in order to fulfill his job assignment.

Dano weng ma oketo cing i yubo Baibul Maleng ocoyo nyig coc “vision” apar kare i chapta aboro me Daniel, kede man ocano yaro atir ikom “vision” ma oneno ki “vision” ma owinyo. Kotimo kamano, ocano pire tek ma nyutu ni mito pa Kristo ne obedo ni myero Daniel ongeyo “vision” ma owinyo, maloyo ngeyo pa “vision” ma oneno. Kombedi, wa twero paro ngo ma Gabriel timo wek otumu tic ma kicwalo bot en.

> So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision. Now as he was speaking with me, I was in a deep sleep on my face toward the ground: but he touched me, and set me upright. 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 8:17–19.

> En obino macok coki i kom ka an ocung; kacce obino, atye ki bwor, ci ater i wang piny; ento owaci pi an ni, “Wod dano, mii i ngeyo; pien neno man obedo pi kare me agiki.” Kombedi ka otye ka waco ki an, atye i nino madwong i wang piny; ento omoko an, ci oketo an ocung. Ci owaci ni, “Nen, abi mii in i ngeyo ngo ma bi time i agiki pa cwiny marac; pien i kare ma kiketo, agiki bi bedo.” Daniel 8:17-19.

Gabriel now begins his work of making Daniel to understand the vision of the twenty-three hundred evenings and mornings, which is true. He first informs him that the vision of prophetic history, the châzôn vision, would be at the “time of the end.” Then, while Daniel was in a prophetic sleep, Gabriel touched Daniel and set him upright. He informs him “I will make thee know.”

Gabriel kombedi ocako tic pa miyo Daniel ngeyo bision me mil aryo ki mia adek me oturo ki kinyi, ma en ada. Mukwongo, ogeone ni bision me hisitoli parofetik, bision me châzôn, obedo i "cawa me agiki." Ci ka Daniel tye i nino parofetik, Gabriel ogamo Daniel, omiyo ocung anyim. Ogeone ni, "abi mii in ingeyo."

That is what Palmoni (Christ), had told Gabriel to do, when he said, “Gabriel, make this man to understand the mar’eh vision” of the evening and mornings. Gabriel says that he will make Daniel “know what shall be in the last end of the indignation.” There it is! There is the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six! It is hidden by the very prophetic technique which Gabriel had led the prophets repeatedly to testify to and employ in their writings! That technique is “line upon line, here a little and there a little”.

Man obedo gin ma Palmoni (Krisito) owaco bot Gabriel me timo, ka owaco ni, “Gabriel, mi ngat man nongo ngeyo mar’eh me pyer ki otino.” Gabriel owaco ni obino mi Daniel nongo ngeyo ngo ma bine obedo i agiki pa kwoŋ madwong. Kany en aye! Kany obedo “seven times” me Levitiko 26! Kit me poro pa anabi keken ma Gabriel otungo anabi ka ka me gilaro ci gitiyo kwede i cocgi—en aye ma ogobo ne. Kit en aye, “rek i tung rek, kany con, kun con.”

In the book “Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation”, by Uriah Smith (which all Adventists, and even their neighbors, should be familiar with), Smith comments on verses seventeen to nineteen of Daniel chapter eight:

I buk "Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation" ma ocoyo Uriah Smith (ma jo Adventist weng, ki labilegi bene, myero gi bed ki ngeyo maber kwede), Smith omiyo tam ikom lok me coc apar abiro, apar aboro, ki apar abongwen i dul aboro pa Daniel:

> “With a general statement that at the time appointed the end shall be, and that he will make him to know what shall be in the last end of the indignation, he enters upon an interpretation of the vision. The indignation must be understood to cover a period of time. What time? God told his people Israel that he would pour upon them his indignation for their wickedness; and thus he gave directions concerning the ‘profane wicked prince of Israel:’ ‘Remove the diadem, and take off the crown. . . . I will overturn, overturn, overturn it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.’ Ezekiel 21:25–27, 31.

> Ki lok me weng ni i kare ma kiketo agiki bi obedo, kede ni obimiyo en ongene ngo ma bi time i agiki pa kwoŋ, en odonyo i nyutu pa neno. Kwoŋ man myero ki ngene ni ocwalo kare me cawa. Kare ngo? Lubanga owaco bot jo pa en, Israel, ni obiwoto i wi gi kwoŋ pa en pi tim gigi ma rac; ci keken omiyo cik ikom ‘ladit pa Israel ma pe lworo, ma rac: Kwany kete me wi, ci i kwanyo korona. ... Abi yiko woko, abi yiko woko, abi yiko woko; ci pe obedo dok, nyo ka obino en ma twero mere tye pa en; ci abi miyo ne.’ Ezekiel 21:25-27, 31.

> “Here is the period of God’s indignation against his covenant people; the period during which the sanctuary and host are to be trodden under foot. The diadem was removed, and the crown taken off, when Israel was subjected to the kingdom of Babylon. It was overturned again by the Medes and Persians, again by the Grecians, again by the Romans, corresponding to the three times the word is repeated by the prophet. The Jews then, having rejected Christ, were soon scattered abroad over the face of the earth; and spiritual Israel has taken the place of the literal seed; but they are in subjection to earthly powers, and will be till the throne of David is again set up,—till He who is its rightful heir, the Messiah, the Prince of peace, shall come, and then it will be given him. Then the indignation will have ceased. What shall take place in the last end of this period, the angel is now to make known to Daniel.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 201, 202.

> Kany obedo kare pa lony cwiny pa Lubanga i kom jo me kica pa En; kare ma i iye ot pa Lubanga ki lwak bi kete i tung cing. Diadem kikwanyo woko, ki kor me rwot kikwanyo, ka Isirael kicwalo i kom loyo pa piny pa Babulon. Okwanyo doki ki Mede ki Parsa, doki ki Grek, doki ki Loma, calo dyer adek ma lawi ocelo lok en. Juu dong, kun gikwero Kricito, pire tek gicwalogi i wang lobo weng; ki Isirael me loyo cwiny otyeko keto i kabedo pa puny me kom; ento gi tye i cwal bot twero me piny, ki bitye kamano nyaka kom pa Dawid dok okete ne,—nyaka En ma twero ne obedo ne, Mesiya, Rwot pa Kuc, obino, eka gubimiyo ne. Eka lony cwiny no obedo ojuko. Gin ma bi time i agiki pa kare man, lacam dong obino yaro ne bot Daniel. Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 201, 202.

The “indignation” that Smith is identifying, began when Manasseh was carried to Babylon by the Assyrians in 677 BC. Unfortunately, Smith takes Zedekiah’s overthrow in 586 BC and assigns that as the starting point of the period of the “indignation” of verse nineteen. Smith simply does not address what it means that the verse states “the last end of the indignation.” He treats it as simply “indignation,” though if there is a “last end” of the indignation, grammar and logic demand that there is also at minimum a “first end” of the indignation. Smith knew the seventy years of captivity began with the first attack of Nebuchadnezzar against Jehoiakim in 606 BC, but determined the starting for the period of the indignation was the third of Nebuchadnezzar’s attacks, which was carried out against Zedekiah, the last Judean king.

“Indignation” ma Smith tye ka nyuto, ocako ka jo Asuri ogolo Manasseh oketo ne i Babulon i 677 BC. Pe ber, Smith oyero kikwanyo Zedekiah ki kom i 586 BC, oketo ne calo cako me kare pa “indignation” ma i rek apar abongwen. Smith pe opako ngo ma tiyo ni rek owaco ni “agiki ma ogiko pa ‘indignation’.” Otyeko timo ne calo “indignation” keken; ento ka tye “agiki ma ogiko” pa “indignation,” grama ki lojik mito ni myero be tye “agiki me acaki” pa “indignation.” Smith ongeyo ni mwak piero abiro me golo i woko ocako ki lweny ma acel pa Nebuchadnezzar bot Jehoiakim i 606 BC, ento omoko ni cako me kare pa “indignation” obedo lweny ma adek pa Nebuchadnezzar, ma kityeko timo bot Zedekiah, rwot me Yuda ma ogiko.

> “Though we have a more minute account of his [Daniel’s] early life than is recorded of that of any other prophet, yet his birth and lineage are left in complete obscurity, except that he was of the royal line, probably of the house of David, which had at this time become very numerous. He first appears as one of the noble captives of Judah, in the first year of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, at the commencement of the seventy years’ captivity, BC 606. Jeremiah and Habakkuk were yet uttering their prophecies. Ezekiel commenced soon after, and a little later, Obadiah; but both these finished their work years before the close of the long and brilliant career of Daniel. Three prophets only succeeded him, Haggai and Zechariah, who exercised the prophetic office for a brief period contemporaneously, BC 520–518, and Malachi, the last of the Old Testament prophets, who flourished a little season about BC 397.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 19.

> “Ka wan wa tye ki lok ma ngec adwong acel pi kwede i kom kwone mapol me acel i kare me anyim [me Daniel] moloyo gin ma kigwoko i kom kwone pa lanebi mukene ducu, to pud nono nywal pa ne kacel ki doggola pa ne kicweyo i piny mung, pe kiweyo gin mo keken ma pe romo bedo ni en ne obino i doggola me ker, ma romo bedo ada ni i ot pa Daudi, ma i kare meno ne dong opong dok odoko pol ahinya. En ocako nyuto kene ka acel i kin jo ma rwodhi pa Yuda ma kiweyo ma obedo jee, i mwaka me acel pa Nebukadnezzar, rwot pa Babilon, i cakke me mwaka piero abiriyo me bedo i twec, mwaka BC 606. Yeremia kacel ki Habakkuk ne pud tye ka waco lanebi pa gin. Ezekiel ocako tic pa ne i ngeye manok, dok i nge manok odoco, Obadia; ento gin aryo magi ducu gityeko tic pa gin myaka mapol nino mapwod me yoo pa Daniel marat me tic ma lengo dok maleng. Lanebi adek keken aye obedo i ngeye, Hagai kacel ki Zekaria, ma gitedo tic me lanebi i kare ma pe lacen ka gitye i kare acel, BC 520–518, kacel ki Malaki, lanebi me agiki pa Cik Mamwonye, ma ne olengo pi kare manok i mwaka ma oromo BC 397.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 19.

Smith correctly identified the “indignation” of verse nineteen as a period of time. He correctly identified the period as the treading down of the sanctuary and host in agreement with Daniel chapter eight verse thirteen, and he correctly identified the ending point as October 22, 1844.

Smith onyuto matwal “kwiri” me vasi apar abongwen calo kare me cawa. Onyuto matwal ni kare eni obedo loyo piny gang maler ki dul me lweny, ki rwate kwede Daniel, chapta aboro, vasi apar adek; kede bene onyuto matwal kabedo me agiki ni obedo i dwe October 22, 1844.

Smith was partially correct, but missed the truth by doing what was the characteristic of his prophetic applications. He allowed history to guide his interpretation of the prophetic word, instead of allowing the prophetic word to guide his understanding of history. If we allow the Bible to define prophetic history, we then have the correct information to approach history.

Smith onongo tye atir akeny, ento orwenyo ada kun timo gin ma onongo tero tic me lanen pa iye. O weko gin ma otime con obed lami me poko lok pa lanen; dok pe o weko lok pa lanen obed lami me nongo ngec pa iye pi gin ma otime con. Ka wa weko Bibil tero gin ma otime con pa lanen, ci wa bino nongo ngec ma atir me ceto bot gin ma otime con.

The Bible teaches that by whom a man is overcome, he is that man’s servant.

Baibul mii wa ngec ni: dano ma ngat mo ogoyo, en obedo latic pa ngat eno.

> While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. 2 Peter 2:19.

> Ikare ma gi lagamogi nywero, ento gin keken gibedo latic pa tim marac; pien ngat ma o mero dano, en keken oketo ne i lacar. 2 Peter 2:19.

Manasseh was taken captive to Babylon in 677 BC. It is there that Judah was overcome and brought into bondage. This is the starting point that is represented on both the 1843 and the 1850 charts, which Sister White endorses as correct. Smith starts the treading down of Daniel chapter eight, and verse thirteen with Zedekiah, the last of Judah’s kings. Zedekiah was the end of a progressive judgment and not the beginning. Sister White identifies that Manasseh’s captivity in Babylon was an “earnest” of what was to come. An “earnest” is a down payment, and marks the beginning of a purchase that has other payments to follow.

I mwaka 677 me anyim Kristo, gicwalo Manase i Babilon ka gi otigo iye. Kono en aye ka gigoyo Yuda, ki giketo ne i kit me laco. En aye acaki ma giyarone iyie i cal 1843 ki 1850 weng, ma Sista White ocwako calo atir. Smith ocako “goyo piny” ma i Daniel chapta 8, ves 13, kun ocako ki Zedekiah, rwot me agiki pa Yuda. Zedekiah obedo agiki me keth ma otime kare ki kare, ento pe obedo acaki. Sista White onyutu ni otigo pa Manase i Babilon obedo “earnest” pa gin ma bino anyim. “Earnest” obedo paco me acaki, ki nyutu acaki me kobo ma bino mede ki paco mukene.

> “Faithfully the prophets continued their warnings and their exhortations; fearlessly they spoke to Manasseh and to his people; but the messages were scorned; backsliding Judah would not heed. As an earnest of what would befall the people should they continue impenitent, the Lord permitted their king to be captured by a band of Assyrian soldiers, who ‘bound him with fetters, and carried him to Babylon,’ their temporary capital. This affliction brought the king to his senses; ‘he besought the Lord his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers, and prayed unto Him: and He was entreated of him, and heard his supplication, and brought him again to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the Lord He was God.’ 2 Chronicles 33:11–13. But this repentance, remarkable though it was, came too late to save the kingdom from the corrupting influence of years of idolatrous practices. Many had stumbled and fallen, never again to rise.” Prophets and Kings, 382.

> "Ki adwogi maber, lanabi gityeko mede ciko gi kwanyo; labongo lworo gi waco bot Manase gi jo pa en; ento lokgi kigi yaro; Yuda ma ojwik ki Lubanga pe gi winyo. Macalo twero me nyutu ngo ma obibedo bot jo ka gityeko bedo pe gi dwogo i cwiny, Rwot Lubanga ooye rwotgi ocweyo ki dul latic pa Asuri, ma 'giketo iye ki tungu, ki gicwalo ne i Babilon,' boma me rwotgi ma pi kare. Peko man odugo wii pa rwot; 'okwayo Rwot, Lubanga pa en, ki oketo piny cwiny madwong i nyim Lubanga pa kwarone, ki okwayo bot En: En ooye kwayo pa en, ki owinyo waco me kwayo pa en, ki odwogo kelo ne dok i Yerusalem i kom rwot pa en. Eka Manase ongeyo ni Rwot en obedo Lubanga.' 2 Chronicles 33:11-13. Ento dwogo i cwiny man, ka en tye ma pire tek, o aa lacen tutwal me gwoko lobo me rwot ki yiko marac me higni mapol me yobo kicen. Jo mapol gityeko bujo ki opoto, pe dok gicako malo." Prophets and Kings, 382.

Manasseh marked the “down payment” that began the “curse” of the “seven times,” which was the last “indignation,” for the “first indignation,” had already begun when the northern kingdom was taken into captivity in 723 BC. Then at Jehoiakim’s overthrow, when Daniel was carried into captivity, the seventy years of captivity that Jeremiah identified began in 606 BC. Two kings after Jehoiakim, Jerusalem was destroyed and the last Judean king, Zedekiah, watched as his sons were slain before him, then he had his eyes gouged out and was carried captive into Babylon.

Manase onwongo nyutu "down payment" ma ocako "curse" pa "seven times," ma ne "indignation ma agiki," pien "indignation ma aceli" dong ocake ka dugu ma i tung maloyo kicwalo i twero i 723 pi anyim Kristo. Eka, i cawa me kiweyo Jehoiakim piny, ka Daniel kicwalo i twero, "seventy years" me twero ma Jeremiah onwongo nyutu ocake i 606 pi anyim Kristo. Rwot aryo malubo Jehoiakim, Jerusalem ocweyo woko, ki rwot ma agiki pa Yuda, Zedekia, noneno ka wodone kigi nwango i anyim ne; eka gi otyeko gikwanyo wangene, ci kicwalo ne i twero i Babulon.

Smith assigned the entire progressive judgment to Zedekiah and employed the judgment of Zedekiah as the proof text for his supposition. The judgment of Zedekiah, who was the “wicked and profane prince,” did identify that the crown of Judah was to be removed until Christ came to set up a kingdom. Smith said, “they are in subjection to earthly powers, and will be till the throne of David is again set up,—till He who is its rightful heir, the Messiah, the Prince of peace, shall come, and then it will be given him.” On October 22, 1844, in fulfillment of Daniel chapter seven, and verses thirteen and fourteen, Christ, represented as the Son of man, came before the Father to receive a kingdom.

Smith oketo yubu weng ma tye ka woto anyim bot Zedekiah, kadi bene otyeko ti kwede yubu pa Zedekiah macalo lok me moko pi paro ne. Yubu pa Zedekiah, ma obedo “rwot-tin marac ki ma pe pako Lubanga,” onyutu ni laro pa Yuda myero kikweyo woko nyaka Khristo obi bino me keto lobo pa Rwot. Smith owaco ni, “gin tye i cing pa teko me piny, ci gibed kamano nyaka kom pa Dawudi dok kiketo odoco,—nyaka En ma rwate ki twero pa kom en, Mesaia, Rwot me Kuc, obi bino, ci dong kom en kibimiyo bot En.” I Okotoba 22, 1844, i pobo me Buk Daniel, chapta 7, cane 13 ki 14, Khristo, ma ki yarone calo Wod Dano, obino i nyim Lacwe me gam lobo pa Rwot.

> I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. Daniel 7:13, 14.

> A neno i neno pa oturo, ci nen, acel macalo Wod Dano obino ki kuot me polo, obino bot Ladit me Nino, ci gicwalo ne macok i nyimne. Ci gimi ne twero, ki pak, ki lobo pa Rwot, wek jo weng, lwak weng, ki leb weng, limo ne: twero ne en twero ma pe ngolo kare, ma pe bi kato woko, ki lobo pa Rwot ne ma pe bi hing. Daniyeli 7:13, 14.

Sister White confirms that Daniel chapter seven, and verses thirteen and fourteen were fulfilled on October 22, 1844.

Sister White omiyo adwogi ni i Daniel chapta 7, lok 13 ki 14, gitimore woko i nino 22 me dwe October, 1844.

> “The coming of Christ as our high priest to the most holy place, for the cleansing of the sanctuary, brought to view in Daniel 8:14; the coming of the Son of man to the Ancient of Days, as presented in Daniel 7:13; and the coming of the Lord to His temple, foretold by Malachi, are descriptions of the same event; and this is also represented by the coming of the bridegroom to the marriage, described by Christ in the parable of the ten virgins, of Matthew 25.” The Great Controversy, 426.

> Bino pa Kirisito macalo jadolo wa madit i kabedo ma maleng madit loyo, pi yweyo pa kacel, ma kinyutu i Daniel 8:14; bino pa Wod pa Dano bot Ladit pa Cawa Mapol, macalo kit ma kinyutu i Daniel 7:13; kede bino pa Rwot i kacel pa En, ma Malaki onongo opoko pi en, gin lok me nyutu pa gono acel keken; ci bene, en kinyutu calo bino pa lawot me nyom i nyome, ma Kirisito otyeko nyutu i loc me por pa nyako maleng apar, i Matayo 25.

Smith did not address the key element of the “last end of the indignation.” He avoided the biblical principle that identified that Judah was overcome in the time of Manasseh, and that the captivity which began two kings before Zedekiah, also represented that Judah was already in subjection to Babylon, before Zedekiah met his fate. With these blatant omissions, he still stated, “here is the period of God’s indignation against his covenant people; the period during which the sanctuary and host are to be trodden under foot.” He therefore, directly associates “the period of God’s indignation” with Daniel chapter eight, and verse thirteen’s question of “how long.” The answer in verse fourteen, was until October 22, 1844.

Smith pe oyaro gin ma madwong me "agiki pa kwec me Lubanga." Oweko woko cik me Bibul ma nyutu ni Yuda obol i cawa pa Manasseh, kede ni otongo ma ocake con ki rwot ariyo i nyim Zedekiah, bene nyutu ni Yuda dong otye i twero pa Babulon, mapwod pe Zedekiah ogamo ki kum ma oywako ne. Kum weko woko magi ma opoto, ento pire tek, owaco ni, "kany obedo kare pa kwec me Lubanga ikom jo ma otyeko loko lagam kwede; kare ma i iye gang maler ki lwak gubedo ototo i cing." Eraco mano, oketo kube matir "kare pa kwec me Lubanga" kwede Daniel boc apar aboro, ki lapeny me coc apar adek me "nyaka kare me nining?" Adwogi i coc apar angwen, ni nyaka Ocotoba 22, 1844.

The scattering into Babylonian slavery was a progressive history beginning in 677 BC, and continuing until 1844. That period equates to twenty-five hundred and twenty years, which is of course the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six. The end of that period of time on October 22, 1844 provided Daniel with a second witness to the “mar’eh vision” of the twenty-three hundred evening and mornings.

Poyo jo i nino me Babilon obedo lok me cing ma wot mede, ma ocako i 677 me anyim Kristo, ki mede nyaka 1844. Kare meno rwate ki mwaka 2,520; en aye “kar abiro” me Levitiko 26. Giko me kare meno i Okitoba 22, 1844 ocwalo Danyel adwogi me aryo pi “mar’eh vision” me otum ki oturo 2,300.

Gabriel was told to make Daniel understand that vision, and what Gabriel did was provide a second witness to the termination date of October 22, 1844. Not only did he provide a second witness to establish the date of the fulfillments of both time prophecies, but as Smith correctly pointed out, the period of time associated with the second witness to 1844, had been identified in verse thirteen, as the period that the sanctuary and host were to be trodden under foot. The question in verse thirteen is, “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?” That period of time was the “seven times” of Leviticus twenty-six.

Kimiyo Malaika Gabriel cik me miyo Daniel ngec ikom ineno eno, ento gin ma Gabriel otimo obedo me miyo lami aryo pi nino dwe me agiki pa October 22, 1844. Pe keken omiyo lami aryo me keto piny nino dwe pa tyeko pa lok me lanen aryo ma ikare, ento macalo ma Smith onongo oyaro atir, kare ma kube ki lami aryo pi 1844, kicoyo piny ne i rek 13 calo kare ma kabedo maleng ki lwak obino yikgi i cing. Lapeny i rek 13 eni ni, “Piny kare adi bi bedo ineno ikom pako ma kare-kare, ki golo cik ma kelo yweyo, me weko kabedo maleng ki lwak oyikgi i cing?” Kare eno obedo “cawa abiro” pa Levitiko 26.

What Smith did not see, or avoided identifying, was that the “indignation” of verse nineteen, was the “last end” of that indignation. If there is a “last” then there is also a “first”, and Daniel identifies when the “first indignation” ended, in chapter eleven. He is identifying the papacy reigning during the Dark Ages, and he states that the papacy would prosper until the indignation was accomplished, or ended.

Gin ma Smith pe oneno, onyo pe otyeko nyutu, en ni “mirima” ma i lok ma namba 19, obedo “agiki pa agiki” pa mirima eno. Ka tye “agiki”, to bene tye “acaki”, ci Daniel nyutu kare ma “mirima me acaki” ogiko, i chapta 11. En nyutu telo pa Paapa ma otelo i cawa me obur, ci owaco ni telo pa Paapa bino medo maber nyo iyomok ni mirima otyeko, onyo ogiko.

> 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.

> Rwot bi timo kaka omito; kede en bigero iye, kede en bi miyo iye madit maloyo jogi weng, kede en bi waco lok ma lamal i kom Lubanga pa jogi, kede en bi bedo maber nyaka kec ma kimoko otyeko: pien gin ma kimoko bitimo. Daniel 11:36.

Verse thirty-six is widely understood to be the verse the apostle Paul paraphrases in his second letter to the Thessalonians.

Rek 36 kitamo piny ni en aye rek ma Lami Paulo oyubo lok ne i kit mapat i maco me aryo ma ocoyo bot Jo Tesalonika.

> 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 2:3, 4.

> Wek ngat mo pe obwoyo wun ki kit mo keken; pien nino en pe obino, kace pe bino golo yie con, ki nyutu ngat me richo, lakwo me bolo woko; ma ogamo ki ogoyo cing malo i wi gin weng ma gicako lwongo ni Lubanga, onyo ma gipako; omiyo, calo Lubanga, obed chien i ot pa Lubanga, kun oyaro cingi ni en aye Lubanga. 2 Tesalonika 2:3, 4.

Paul’s “man of sin” who is also “the son of perdition,” who “opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped,” is also the “king” who “shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god.” Both passages refer to the pope of Rome. Daniel writes that the pope would prosper, which means push forward, until the “indignation be accomplished.” The indignation in verse thirty-six had been “determined.” The word “determined” means “to wound”.

“Dano me richo” pa Paulo, ma obedo bende “nyathi me ogoro,” ma “oyaro kede otero iye malo ikom gin weng ma ki loro ni Lubanga, onyo ma ki woro,” en bende “Rwot” ma “obitimo ka kit cwinya ne; kede obit tero iye malo, obit yubu iye madwong’ loyo lubanga weng.” Lok aryo magi gicoyo bot Paapa me Ruma. Daanyel owaco ni Paapa obedo oromo maber, ma nyutu “oyubo anyim,” nyaka “keco otiek.” Keco ma i vasi 36 dong ki moko kare. Lok “omoko kare” nyutu “balo kom.”

The papacy received its “deadly wound” in 1798, and at that point the “first indignation” was accomplished or terminated. The word “accomplish” means to end or cease. The end of “the indignation” in chapter eight, and verse nineteen identified the end of the period that the sanctuary and host were to be trampled down. It ended in 1844, but the “first” indignation ended in 1798.

I mwaka 1798, lwak pa Papa oywako “rwom ma kelo tho”, i kare meno “kec me acel” otyeko onyo ogiko. Lok “accomplish” nyutu ni “giko” onyo “juko”. Giko pa “kec” ma i chapta aboro, ves apar abic, onyutu giko pa kare ma ot maleng ki dul onongo myero kiyangi piny. Ogiko i mwaka 1844, ento “kec me acel” ogiko i mwaka 1798.

The “last indignation” ended in 1844, twenty-five hundred and twenty years after king Manasseh was carried to Babylon by the Assyrians in 677 BC. The “first” indignation ended in 1798, twenty-five hundred and twenty years after the northern kingdom of Israel was carried into slavery by the Assyrians in 723 BC.

“Kica me agiki” otum i 1844, i mwaka me 2520 bang jo Asiriya ocwalo rwot Manasseh bot Babilon i 677 BC. “Kica me mukwongo” otum i 1798, i mwaka me 2520 bang jo Asiriya ocwalo lwak pa Israel ma tung bor i bolo i 723 BC.

There is more to say about the hidden “seven times” in the book of Daniel and we will address that in our next article.

Tye lok mapol me waco ikom "cawa abiro" ma ocano i Buk pa Daniel, ki wa wabiwaco ikom en i coc wa ma bino.

> “‘And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write: These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the beginning of the creation of God; I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of My mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.’

> Kede bot Malaika me Kanisa pa jo Laodikiya, coyo: “Gin magi waco Amin, ngat ma tye yie ki atir, Lami ma atir, acaki me cweyo pa Lubanga: An angeyo tic mamegi, ni pe itye macol onyo macic. Ageno ni onyo ibed macol, onyo ibed macic. Ento pien itye pi ma pe macol, pe macic, abiwaloi woko ki cing an. Pien i waco ni, ‘An amalu, kede jami dong opolo i an, pe amit gin mo;’ ento pe ingeyo ni itye ngat marac, ki tye i peko, ki adaka, ki ma pe ineno, ki abal.”

> “The Lord here shows us that the message to be borne to His people by ministers whom He has called to warn the people is not a peace-and-safety message. It is not merely theoretical, but practical in every particular. The people of God are represented in the message to the Laodiceans as in a position of carnal security. They are at ease, believing themselves to be in an exalted condition of spiritual attainments. ‘Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked.’

> Rwot kany nyiso wa ni lok ma myero latic ma olwongo gi me loro jo cwale bot jogi pe obedo lok pa kuc ki gwok. Pe obedo lok me tam keken, ento obedo me tic i gin weng. Jo pa Lubanga kiketo gi i lok ma bot jo Laodicea calo gitye i kit me gwok pa ring'o. Gitye i kuc, ka gicamo ni gitye i dwong ma malo i jami me cwiny ma gityeko nongo. “Pien i waco ni, An atye marwate, ki abedo ki jami mapol, ki pe amito gin mo keken; ento pe in ngeyo ni, itye ma rac tutwal, ki i kwo me bal, ki mede jami, ki pe ineno, ki pe itye ki gobo.”

> “What greater deception can come upon human minds than a confidence that they are right when they are all wrong! The message of the True Witness finds the people of God in a sad deception, yet honest in that deception. They know not that their condition is deplorable in the sight of God. While those addressed are flattering themselves that they are in an exalted spiritual condition, the message of the True Witness breaks their security by the startling denunciation of their true condition of spiritual blindness, poverty, and wretchedness. The testimony, so cutting and severe, cannot be a mistake, for it is the True Witness who speaks, and His testimony must be correct.” Testimonies, volume 3, 252.

> Ngo ruc ma loyo loyo romo donyo i cwinyo pa dano loyo geno ma gi tye kwede ni gi tye atir, ka gin bal weng! Lok pa Lami Lawii ma Atir onongo nongo jo Lubanga i ruc ma piny, ento gi bedo atir i ruc meno. Pe gi ngeyo ni kitgi obedo marac matek i wang Lubanga. Kun jo ma kicoyo bot-gi gitye kigeno ni gitye i kit me cwiny ma tye malo, lok pa Lami Lawii ma Atir okwanyo kucgi ki kwedo ma loro cwinyo, oyaro atir kitgi me leng pa cwiny, duk, ki bedo marac matek. Lawii ma cwee matek ki kedo matek pe romo bedo bal, pien en aye Lami Lawii ma Atir ma waco, ki lawii pa en myero bedo atir. Testimonies, volume 3, 252.

Back to Articles