Article

# The Book of Daniel - Number Fifty

Buk me Daniel - Namba 50

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

Yabo siri me lanabi pa Daniel 8: Nyiso pa Palmoni

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

January 14, 2024

Formats

PDF
Word

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

I kit 8 pa Daniel, kimiyo Daniel lok me neno ikom lobo pa rwodi ma i lamal me Bibul, ci lacen owinyo kube pa polo ma ki yaro kwede penyo ki dwoko.

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

> Eka awinyo ngat acel ma maleng tye ka waco; ki ngat mukene ma maleng owaco bot ngat ma maleng ma otyeko waco ni, “Obed adii wang neno me lamo me nino ka nino, kede golo cik me goro, me miyo Ka Maleng kede lweny obed kigoyo i ti?” En owaco bot an ni, “Nino alufu aryo kede miya adek; eka Ka Maleng bino yweyo.” Daniel 8:13, 14.

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

Vesi apar aryo ma anyim tye calo neno, ki vesi apar adek ki apar angwen nyutu neno mukene. Macalo kaka lok aryo me Leb Ebrania ma mukene ma gicobo weng calo “take away,” ki lok aryo me Leb Ebrania ma mukene ma gicobo weng calo “sanctuary,” i Daniel chapta aboro bene tye lok aryo me Leb Ebrania ma mukene ma gicobo weng calo “vision.”

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

Ka obino i lok aryo ma kityeko poko-gi calo "take away," jo tiolojia pa Adventism gi waco ni gin aryo eni keken myero ongenyo calo "kwanyo woko." Ka obino i lok aryo ma kityeko poko-gi calo "sanctuary," jo tiolojia pa Adventism gi waco ni gin aryo eni keken myero ongenyo calo "ot pa Lubanga me lamer"; kede ka obino i lok aryo ma kityeko poko-gi calo "vision," jo tiolojia pa Adventism, dok coki, gi weko piny rwate ma patpat ma tye ikin lok aryo eni. Rwate eno onongo obedo matek bot Daniel, ki en ki aimito ocako lok aryo me Leb Hebru ma patpat tutwal; eka wa myero wanyutu rwate eno ka wagwoko ne. Lok "vision," i ves apar adek obedo lok me Leb Hebru "chazon," kede nono ne nyutu neno i nino, yaro, onyo "orakol"—"vision."

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

Lok “vision” omede kare 10 i kapita 8 me Daniel, ento tye calo lok aryo mapat i Leb Hibrw. “Chazon,” ma nonge i rek 13, bene nonge i rek 1, ci nonge aryo i rek 2, keken i rek 13, ki nonge acel i rek 15, 17, ki 26. I kare 10 ma “vision” omede i kapita 8 me Daniel, kare 7 obedo lok “chazon,” ma tung keken nyutu “a vision.”

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

Yore adek mukene ma lok “vision” oneno i Pot Buk Daniel, pot me aboro, en lok me Leb Hebru “mareh,” ma twero bedo “neno,” onyo “kit ma oneno.” I pot me aboro keken, lok me Leb Hebru “mareh” kityeko dwoko ne i yore acel, pe calo “vision” ento calo “appearance”; ka mano, miyo pinyruo maber pire keken ikom piny pa lok en. Pingo Daniel otime kwede lok aryo me Leb Hebru, ma pinyruo gi tye macok coki, omiyo jo me dwoko lok mii gi calo lok acel? Tye gin ma ber ikome?

> “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.

> Yore acel acel ma i lok pa Lubanga tye ki kabedo ne; tyen acel acel tye ki mite ne. Kede yik ma opong weng, i ciko ne ki i timo ne, tye ka miyo adwogi bot Lacweyo ne. Yik ma calo man, pe tye wic mo labongo wic pa En ma pe tye ki agiki, ma romo ciko onyo yiko ne. Education, 123.

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

Dwoko pa lapeny aryo en Eyo; ni tye ma tek tutwal pingo Daniel opoko gi, eka obedo tegi pa lami ngec me poro me yeny me nongo ngec pa lapeny acel, ma penyo pingo Daniel opoko gi. Poko ma otimo i kom lok ma kiyiko calo "sanctuary", kacel ki lok ma kiyiko calo "take away", tye ki adok pa kare weng; ento pingo ngat mo oneno ni dwong pa lok ma kiyiko calo "vision" obed manok? "Every fact" tye ki "its bearing" "i Lok pa Lubanga", kede loko "structure" me poro, kacel ki tyeko pa poro ka kitimo ne "executed".

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

Ka wa cako paro lok “neno” i chapta aboro, gin acel me ada ma tye ki rwom i lagam pa Danyel en obedo: ngo mane odwoko penyo me Danyel, chapta aboro, rwom apar adek, ki waci, “nyo i ceng 2300; ci Ka Maleng bi yweyo.”

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

Tye gin me adaa angwen ma tye ki ‘nyutu ma matir’ ikom Daniel 8, ma an mito yweyo. Gin acel en ni neno me Ulai River kityeko yaro ne calo lok me poro pi kare me agiki, ci en bene lacar pa ‘ngec’ me Kitabu me Daniel ma kikwanyo ‘laka’ ne i ‘kare me agiki’ i 1798.

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

> Tye mito madwong tutwal me kwano ki yaro matek Lok pa Lubanga. Loyo gin weng, Daniel ki Apokor myero kiketo gi i wang cwiny madwong, macalo pe pwod otime con i tari pa tic wa. Wa twero bedo ka waco manok i yore mogo ikom twero pa Roma ki kit pa Papa; ento myero wakwaco ngec pi gin ma jonabi ki joapostol gicono i kom twero pa Roho Maleng pa Lubanga. Roho Maleng ocweyo gin weng i kit man, kacel i mino poropheti ki i gin ma otyeko nyutu, wek opwony wa ni ngat pa dano ma tye latic myero kigoyo woko ki wang, kican i Kristo; ento Rwot Lubanga pa polo ki cik pa En myero kigolo malo.

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

> Kwan buk pa Daniel. Poyo keken keken kit ma con otime i lobo loyo ma ki nyuto kany. Nen lutic me lobo, bung me tam, lwak lweny ma tye ki dwong; kede nen kit ma Lubanga otimo me keto piny dwong pa dano, kede oketo dwong pa dano i mot. Lubanga keken ki nyutu calo madwong. I neno pa lacam, ki nene ka oketo piny rwot acel ma tye ki dwong, kede oketo malo mukene. Ki nyutu ni en Rwot ma loyo piny weng, tye ka keto lobo loyo pa en ma pe giko—Ladit me nino, Lubanga mangima, Tyen me ngec weng, Rwot me kombedi, En ma nyuto gin ma bino. Kwan kede ngene ni dano obedo lacan, obedo lalar, ngima pa dano matidi, tye ka luwo bal, kede tye ki bal, ka yweyo cwinye woko i gin ma pe tye.

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

> Pwonye Maleng ki wic pa Isaya nyutu wa bot Lubanga, Lubanga ma tye ngima, macalo en ma meko wii wa loyo gin weng—bot Lubanga ma oyabu i Kiristo. “Pi wa, lati okoko; pi wa, laco kimiyo wa: ci twero pa lobo obedo i puke ne: ci gicako waco nyingne ni: Ma Ogoc, Lamac, Lubanga Makwongo, Won me Kare Weng, Ladit me Kuc” [Isaya 9:6].

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

> Ler ma Daniel otyeko yudo pire kene ki bot Lubanga, gimiyo ne pire kene pi ceng me agiki man. Gin ma oneno i te pi Ulai ki Hiddekel, pi madit me Shinar, kombedi tye ka pongone, ki gin weng ma kiloko con ka manok gityeko time.

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

> Paro kit ma dul pa jo Yahuudi onongo tye kwede ka kicwalo lok me poro pa Daniel. Jo Israeel onongo tye i twech; hekalu gi onongo ogoyo piny, tic me hekalu gi onongo kigolo woko. Dini gi onongo otyeko bedo i cike me coyo sadaka. Gicweyo dwong bot kit ma i wang weng, atika ka gikwanyo cwinya me yabo ma adwong. Tic gi onongo kiloro ki kit ki tim pa jo ma pe yie, ka i coyo cike me sadaka pe gineno woko ki tutunu me cito bot gin ma adwong. Pe gineroni Kiristo, sadaka ma adwong pi richo pa dano. Rwot otimo ni jo ocito i twech, kede ni tic i hekalu ocung woko, pi kit ma i wang pe obed jami weng pa dini gi. Cikgi ki timgi myero giyweyo woko ki kit pa jo ma pe yie. Tic me rito cike ocung woko pi tic me cwinya obed odonyo. Maleng me i wang kigolo woko, pi ma me cwinya onyutu.

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

> I lobo me cawa-gi, ka jo dwogo bot Rwot ki lok cwiny, En oyubore botgi. Gin pe onongo tye ki cal ma i wang dano me bedo pa En; ento can ma mere pa Ceng me Bedo Kare odonyo i wii gi ki i cwinya gi. Ka gilonge bot Lubanga i pinyruo gi ki i pire me tek, Lubanga omiyo lanabi ne neno ma oyubo lok pa kare ma bino—golo piny pa jocuc jo pa Lubanga, bino pa Lurwoko, ki katero cing ma pe giko kare. Manuscript Releases, volume 16, 333-335.

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

Lok "ada" ni "vijon" pa "Ulai River" omii pi "cawa me agiki" mito ni ngat ma tye ka kwano i "porofeci" otimo temo me poyo ngec i gin ma oponjo pi "jami" ma kicweyo cal i "vijon". "Jami" me porofeci ma okube ki "vijon" pa "Ulai River" kigin "oketo gi i kit" ki "Lamo Maleng" "ka acel i miyo porofeci, ka acel i jami ma kicweyo cal." Gin ma time ki "porofet" ka oywako "vijon", kacel ki "jami" me porofeci ma porofet owero, myero kikwany, kwede ngec ni "ka acel ka acel" obedo "cal me porofeci" pa gin ma bi pome i "cawa me agiki". Lok ma con ociko ni myero wa ngeyo ni Daniel onongo tye i "golo" me "kare abiro."

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

Daniel nyutu jo ma ngeyo otira pa gi i agiki me ceng adek ki aboro me Revelation apar acel, ma ci gedok ite i Rwot ki lok pa cwiny, gityeko kwayo me Levitiko apar abicel, giyabo woko gin mamer ki gin marac, ci Rwot tyeko kica pa En me atera jo ma kicego-gi, ka onyuto kene botgi. Dong “gin ma rwom madit me neno” pa gi obedo “Lubanga calo onwongo onyutore i Kristo.”

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

Pire tek pa neno me Kwer Ulai, kede en kaketo kit pa lok pa joneno ma Kristo oketo kit ne, obedo gin matye me acel ma wan ocimo macokcok; kede lok ma kicweyo otyeko nyutu ni jami ma madit maloyo ma wan mito en obedo nyutu pa Lubanga, macalo kinyutu iye i Kristo. I Daniel chapta aboro, pe kiwaco Kristo calo kit ma Isaiah owaco, ka Isaiah owaco ni nying pa Kristo “binenge Ma Ber Tutwal, Lami Tam, Lubanga Ma Tek Tutwal, Lacoo Ma Pe Giko, Lawi Rwot me Kuc.” I Daniel chapta aboro, Lubanga ginyutu iye i Kristo calo “Palmoni,” pire ne “Jalimo Ma Ber Tutwal,” onyo “Jalimo me Siri.”

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

Gin "atir" meno kwayo ni "rwom" pa nying "Palmoni" myero oyeny, kadi ki ngec me kit ma nyinge meno medo i "kit" ki "tamit" pa poro. Gin "atir" mar adek i chapta aboro pa Daniel, ma myero wangeyo, en ni iye chapta meno kitero piny lalar me pwonye ma i tung acaki pa dul pa Millerite. Gin ma maler loyo weng pa Miller ononge iye i reco apar angwen, ci myero wa yeny me ngeyo "rwom" ma "gin atir" meno tye kwede bot neno pa Pi Ulai, ma kombedi tye ka pongone.

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

I neno me nindo pa Miller, ka sanduku keti me mokwongo i wi meza i tung kany i ot pa iye, o lero calo ler pa ceng; ento i cawa me agiki sanduku obedo madongo loyo, kede o lero ma oloyo lero ne ki gonyo apar ka ne keti me mokwongo i wi meza pa Miller. Ngo matye i neno pa Ulai River, ma tye ki nguzo me tung kany pa dul pa Millerite, ma medo ler pa yore me yubu meno gonyo apar i cawa me agiki? Ngo ma onyuuto i cawa me agiki ma pe onyuuto i cawa me agiki me 1798? Gin ngo "gik ma otime" me neno pa Ulai River, ma Sister White owaco ni "tye kombedi i yo me tyeko piregi"?

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

Ka wa cobo pire kany ma pire tek gin ada aryo adek magi (ludito pa pi Ulai, Kristo ma kigonyo calo Palmoni, ki cok me tito me yie ma i tung-tung), myero wa bedo ki wiye me yaro lapok tic macek ma bini tero loyo i kom nongo ngec wa pi ludito pa pi Ulai. Gin ada ma ocobo pire kany magi gimiyo ngec bot jo ma hero neno ni leb ma kigolo cing iye i higa 1798 obedo leb ma “kibbo i kare.” Labongo dul me lamal pa kare ma poko anyim, leb pa Miller onongo pe obedo.

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

Adwogi ma angwen ma rwate ki pot-buk man, en ni jo Millerite gicwalo kwena ma kene iye kare pa lagam. Me medo dwong i adwogi man, Lubanga ononge woko i Kristo, i rek apar adek ki apar angwen, calo Lupongo ma pire tek (Palmoni). Miti ni lanyut obedo keken me nyutu nino 22 me dwe October, 1844, macalo agiki pa ceng alufu aryo ki mia adek ma i rek apar angwen, en calo kwanyo pi macal ikom nyutu pa Lubanga ma ki nyutu ki kom Kristo macalo Palmoni.

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

Jogi me wange pa Lubanga i Adventism gitye otime ki rwom madwong me kanyo kit ma pire tek me penyo ma tye i lok apar adek i kit aboro me buk Daniel, pi me cweyo tami i nyuka pa lok ma pe adier pa gi, ma gi dong golo cing ni bi gwoko jo ma pe ngeyo, ma litgi tye ka kwec, ki mede weko gi pe pako cwinygi i adiera ma makube ki dogola ma i tung pa Adventism.

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

> Makwalo me Lubanga ma maloyo mukene weng, ma onongo obedo but ki otut me tung i yie me Advent, en obedo lok ma owaco ni, 'Pore i ceng alufu aryo gi mia adek; eka Ka Maleng obiyweyo.' [Daniel 8:14.] Lok eni ne racel bot jo yie weng i bino cok pa Rwot. Jo mapol i kin alufu ne gicoyo lajwaki man macok ki macok, calo nyig-lok me yiegi. Jo weng ne ginen ni geno-gi ma ler madit ki mito-gi ma gihero loyo onongo orwati ikom gin ma lajwaki man opon owaco kany. Ceng pajwaka man ne kiyaro ni gigutum i cawa me cim pa 1844. Calo ka ki piny Kristiani mukene weng, Jo Advent onongo gitye ki paro ni piny, onyo dul acel pa en, obedo Ka Maleng. Ginen ni yweyo pa Ka Maleng en obedo yweyo pa piny ki mac pa ceng madit me agiki, ki ni man obitimo i dwogo me aryo. Kumeno gicutogi ni Kricito obidwogo i piny i 1844.

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

> Ento cawa ma kiketo otyeko woko, ki Rwot pe onenyo. Joma geno ongiyo ni Lok pa Lubanga pe twero bal; poko pa gi me lagam myero tye ki bal; ento bal obedo kwene? Jo mapol ki lacer ogolo rwate me peko, ka loro woko ni ceng 2300 pe otyeko i 1844. Pe tye pingo ma twero waco pi man, ka keken ni Kirisito pe obino i cawa ma gi gineno. Giwaco ni, ka ceng me lagam otyeko i 1844, ci Kirisito obi odwogo me yweyo santuari, ki yweyo piny ki mac; ki pien pe obino, ceng pe onongo otyeko.

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

> Yero adwok man obedo yweyo kano ma con me kare me poropheti. Nino 2300 kineno ni gicako ka cik pa Artaxerxes me dwogo ci cweyo Jerusalem ocake katic, i otum pa B.C. 457. Ka wamako man calo kacako, romo maber tutwal oneno i tic me keto jami weng ma kiwaco kigne i poro pa kare meno i Daniel 9:25-27. Cabit 69—acaki 483 me mwaka me 2300—onongo myero onyutu bot Mesia, En ma kipako mo; ci baptiiso pa Kristo kacel ki pako ne ki Tipu Maleng, i A.D. 27, oketo atir tito meno. I tung kany me cabit ma 70, onongo myero Mesia kigolo woko. Mwaka adek ki aboro inyim baptiiso ne, Kristo okeco iye i kom, i otum me odira pa A.D. 31. Cabit 70, onyo mwaka 490, onongo kiketo pi jo Yahudi patpat. Ka kare meno otum woko, dul pa Yahudi ocunge maber kwero gi bot Kristo ki cwero lutic ne, ci apoostol odwogo bot jo ma pe Yahudi, i A.D. 34. Ka mwaka 490 me acaki i 2300 gutum woko, dong mwaka 1810 otede. Ki A.D. 34, mwaka 1810 onyutu i 1844. ‘Eyo bene,’ malaika owaco, ‘Ka Maleng obicwec.’ Tito weng ma ocake i poropheti onongo kikonyo woko labongo piny i kare ma kicimo. Ki kano man, gin weng onongo obedo pigi ber kacel ki romo; ento pe gineno ni tye jami mo ma rwate ki cweco pa Ka Maleng ma otime i 1844. Kwaro ni nino gutum i kare meno obedo keteo penyo weng i bur, ci yweyo kabedo ma kicweyo matek ki tyeko me poropheti ma pe ki kwene.

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

> Ento Lubanga orwate jo pa en i wot me Advent ma madit; pire tek kacel ki kica obedo kwede i tic, ki pe onwongo ye mi otyeko i okuk kacel ki lwenyo cwinya, wek kikobo ne calo bwongo ki lalaro me fanatik. Pe onwongo weko lokne ocwe i paro me dirica ki bedo ma pe atir. Kare ma jo mapol ogoyo woko rweny ma con ikom kare me porofesi, ki ogamo woko atir pa wot ma obedo i kom eni, ento mukene pe giweko woko dul me yie ki temo ma kigwoko gi ki Coc me Lok pa Lubanga kacel ki lagam pa Roho pa Lubanga. Gigeno ni gikwanyo cikke pa loro lok ma atir i kwano me porofesi, ki ni rwom pa gi en me mako tek adwogi ma dong gicamo, kacel ki mede i yo acel pa yaro me Baibul. Ki lapeny ma matek gineno dok di bar megi, kacel gikwano Coc me Lok pa Lubanga me nongo bale megi. Pien pe gineno bal mo keken i rweny megi ikom kare me porofesi, gimiyo gi me yaro maber tutwal lok ikom Ka Maleng. The Great Controversy, 409, 410.

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

Dako White owacowa i item acel acel, kama neno pa Pii Ulai kijwero, ni ‘tye mito me nyutu piny maber ikom Lok pa Lubanga.’ Lapwonye me Lok pa Lubanga gibiyubo kit me ‘kare me porofeti’ i item ma con i The Great Controversy, macalo ni ‘kare me porofeti’ ma Dako White oketo iye lok me tamne keken, obedo lok me porofeti abicel ma gitweyo calo iyie porofeti me mwaka 2300. Piny gi, gi waco ni, porofeti angwen megi kigamo gi maber i item meno. Ento ‘nyutu ma piny maber’ ikom kit meno nyutu ni, nying ‘kare me porofeti’ i kit mapol, i coc pa Dako White, cobo maber-loyo ikom lok me porofeti aryo ma myero opongo i 22 October 1844.

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

Tye porofesi me kare namba 5 ma Gabiriēl onongo otyeko nyutu bot Daniel, ma obedo but me omwaka 2300. Ma namba 1 onongo onyuto omwaka 49, kare ma “yoo ki olol bin cweyo i kare me peko.” Ma namba 2 obedo baptiiso pa Kristo bang omwaka 483, ki cako i 457 BC. Ma namba 3 obedo keto ne i wi lacar. Ma namba 4 onongo onyuto kare ma ngec maber obino bot jo mape Yahudi, i agiki pa omwaka 490 ma kimeyo peke pi ogwanga pa Yahudi. Ci ma namba 5, ci keken, porofesi me kare, ogiko i October 22, 1844. Porofesi me kare angwen ma con ogiko tutwal con mapud pa 1844. Ento, obedo ngo matwal ma Sister White tye nyuto ka teto lok “kare me porofesi” i orwate, ma kimegi ni myero ogiko i 1844?

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

Ka owaco pi kwer-cwiny ma acel pa Millerite, en nyutu lagam pa lapeny man:

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

> Atyeko neno jo pa Lubanga tye ki mor i geno, gitye ka laryo bino pa Rwotgi. Ento Lubanga ogamo ni obitemo gi. Lacwe ocano bal i coyo cawa me porofesi. Jogi ma gitye ka laryo Rwotgi pe ginyuto bal man, kede jo ma gi ngec maber loyo ma gitalo kare bene pe gineno. Lubanga ogamo ni jogi myero gicobo cwinye. Kare okato, jo ma gineno ki mor i geno pa Lagwokogi gicwinyi obur kede gipe kuc, ento jo ma pe gimalo neno pa Yesu, ento gikwano kwena kun bwil, ginego ki mor ni pe obino i kare me geno. Lok me yaro ma giwaco pe otyeko donjo i cwiny, kadong oyeko kwo. Pako pa kare ne kigamo maber me nyuto cwinyo macalo mano. Gin obedo me acel me dwogo cen ka gicoyo jo ma cwinye obur kede ma gicobo cwinye, ma gimalo madwong neno pa Lagwokogi. Atyeko neno ngec maber pa Lubanga i temo jogi kacel ki miyo gi teme ma oyenyo matek, me nongo gin ma bicwec kede bidwogo cen i cawa me temo.

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

> Yesu kede lwak me polo weng gineno botgi ki kica ki hera, bot jo ma ki keno ma mit ki mito me neno En ma cwinya gi hero. Malaika gityeko otungogi, me konyogi i kare me temgi. Gin ma pe gi nongo kwena me polo gicalo gi i tuc, kede kwer pa Lubanga ocako pye botgi, pien pe gi nongo ler ma En ocwalo botgi ki i polo. Ento gin ma tye ki geno maleng, gin ma keno gi ocoyo, ma pe ginen ngeyo pingo Rwotgi pe obino, pe gicalo gi i tuc. Doki, gidwogo i Bibulgi me yenyo cawa me porofeti. Cim pa Rwot okwanyo woko ki bot namba, ki bal kinyutu maber. Gineno ni cawa me porofeti ogiko i 1844, kede ni yaro acel keken ma gi onongo otero me nyutu ni cawa me porofeti ogiko i 1843, okwero piny ni gibigiko i 1844.

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

‘Prophetic periods’ gin ‘kare me janabi’ ma ‘otyeko oko i 1844,’ ma ju pa Miller i acaki ginen geno ni ‘otyeko oko i 1843.’ ‘Kare me janabi’ ma otyeko oko i 1844 gin kare adek me janabi, ki gi weng gicwalo i tabul pa Habakkuk. Acel i kare adek meno ‘rwate’ keken 1844, ento aryo ma mukene gityeko oko i October 22, 1844. Ceng 1335 otyeko oko i ceng me acel pa 1844 pire kene, ka ‘first disappointment’ pa ju pa Miller obino, ki kare me kuro me Habakkuk dul aryo kede me lalim pa ‘ten virgins’ i Matayo 25 ocake.

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

Ceng 2300 ma i Daniel 8:14 orome i 22 October 1844, ki higa 2520 me “seven times” ma i bot lwak me tung cam me Yuda bene otyeko i kany. Palmoni ogamo pire kityo ni en “Wonderful Numberer” i Daniel 8:13, ki “structure” ki “design” me poropheti ma ne oketo i anyim kuno, onongo ocake ki pe piny apar poropheti me cawa ma gicobo kacel.

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

Wabicako paro adwogi magi dok keken i coc ma bino anyim.

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

> Kristo omiyo piny kwena ma myero kipyeo i wii ki i cwinya. Owaco ni, ‘Man en ngima matwal: me gi ngeyi in, Lubanga ma acel keken ma adaa, ki Yesu Kristo, ma icwalo.’ Ento Setani tye katic i wii dano, waco ni, ‘Tim tic eni onyo en, ci obino obedo calo jogi.’ Ki tam ma rib oduku Adamu ki Iva me pe giyie i lok me Lubanga, kede oketo i kabedo ne tam ma okelo i kwero cik ki pe winyo. Kede tam me rib pa en tye ka timo kombedi gin acel calo ma otimo i Eden. Ka Kristo obino i piny wa, oyer jo yawo ma pe golo wii wek obed kit ma oketo iye kanisa ne. Bot lacare magi otemo me yaro kit me lobo pa en ki tic me cwalo ne. Ento ngecgi ma piny opungu ne. Gityeko nwako lok me jo coc ki Farisayo, ci pieno mapol me lok ma giyie iye obedo pe adaa. Kacel, ka Kristo onongo tye ki lok mapol me waco botgi, ento pe ginywako mapol pi gin ma onongo odwaro tutwal me waco botgi.

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

> Kristo neno ni jo me dini pa cawa man opong ki tam marac, macalo ni pe tye kabedo mo i cwinye gi pi gin ma atir. Ki ngec ma kigi miyo, lapwon gubo kacel tam pa lami coc ma pe geno. Kamano, gi keto yik me lum marac i cwinye pa lutino. Gi waco tam ma pe myero ki yaro bot lutino onyo bot jo madito, pe gi paro kit yik mane gi tye kiceto, onyo pi cero mane gityeko myero gicobo pien giceto yik kamano. Review and Herald, July 3, 1900.

Back to Articles