Article

# Rome Establishes the Vision - Number Six

Roma Inosimbisa Chiratidzo — Nhamba Yechitanhatu

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

Mikangano ya Kinabii katika Historia ya Waadventista: Kuelewa Mgogoro kati ya Uriah Smith na James White kuhusu Danieli 11:36

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

August 14, 2024

Formats

PDF
Word
Song MP3

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

Tiri kugadzirisa mitsara mitanhatu yemakakatanwa echiporofita akaitika mukati menhoroondo yeAdventism kubvira muna 1798 kusvikira nanhasi.

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

> “Katika historia na unabii, Neno la Mungu huonyesha pambano la muda mrefu lililoendelea kati ya kweli na kosa. Pambano hilo bado linaendelea. Mambo yaliyokuwapo hapo awali yatarudiwa. Mabishano ya zamani yatafufuliwa, na nadharia mpya zitaendelea kujitokeza daima. Lakini watu wa Mungu, ambao katika imani yao na katika utimilifu wa unabii wamechukua sehemu katika kutangazwa kwa jumbe za malaika wa kwanza, wa pili, na wa tatu, wanajua wanaposimama. Wana uzoefu ulio wa thamani kuliko dhahabu safi. Wao wanapaswa kusimama imara kama mwamba, wakilishika sana tumaini la mwanzo la imani yao mpaka mwisho.” Selected Messages, kitabu cha 2, 109.

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

Muchinyorwa chapfuura kwakakurukurwa gakava rokutanga nerechipedzisira pamusoro pesimba reRoma, uye zvino tichatora gakava rakaitika pakati paUriah Smith naJames White. Uriah Smith akaisa “dudziro yake pachake” mundima yemakumi matatu nenhanhatu.

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

> “NDIMA 36. Uye mambo achaita sezvaanoda; achazvikudza, achizviita mukuru kupfuura mwari mumwe nomumwe, uye achataura zvinhu zvinotyisa pamusoro paMwari wavamwari; uye achabudirira kusvikira kutsamwa kwapera; nokuti zvakatarwa zvichaitwa.

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

> “ముందుగా ఇక్కడ పరిచయం చేయబడిన రాజు, కాస్తముందు ప్రస్తావించబడిన అదే అధికారాన్ని—అంటే, పాపసంబంధ అధికారాన్ని—సూచించలేడు; ఎందుకంటే ఈ విశేషణాలను ఆ అధికారానికి అన్వయిస్తే అవి సరిపోవు.” ఉరియా స్మిత్, Daniel and the Revelation, 292.

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

USmith wavuma ukuthi amandla asesahlukweni esandulelayo ayeyi-“Roma yobupapa,” kodwa uthi izimfanelo zevesi lamashumi amathathu nesithupha aziyona imfanelo yesiprofetho ekhomba iRoma yobupapa. Lowo mbono ungamanga. Kufanele kukhunjulwe ukuthi ekuhlubukeni kwango-1863, izikhathi eziyisikhombisa zesahluko samashumi amabili nesithupha sikaLevitikusi zabekelwa eceleni, ngakho-ke ukumelwa kwezikhathi eziyisikhombisa kwamatafula womabili kaHabakuki kwenqatshwa. Kokubili amashadi ka-1843 naka-1850 abonisa izikhathi eziyisikhombisa maphakathi impela emashadini, futhi kokubili lokho kuboniswa kubeka isiphambano maphakathi komugqa wezikhathi eziyisikhombisa. Lapho ukukhanya okusha kwezikhathi eziyisikhombisa kufika ngo-1856 kwase kuthi emva kwalokho kwenqatshwa, kwaphawula ukwenqatshwa kwamatafula amabili kaHabakuki, kanye negunya loMoya weSiprofetho, ochaza ngokucacile kangaka ukuthi womabili amashadi ayeqondiswe nguNkulunkulu.

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

Maererano na Hanzvadzi White, kunyengera kwekupedzisira kwaSatani ndiko kuita kuti uchapupu hwoMweya waMwari husashande; uye pano kunyengera kwekutanga kwaiva kuita kuti uchapupu hwoMweya waMwari husashande, uye kwaimirirawo panguva imwe chete kurambwa kwezvokwadi dzakavambwa pamachati maviri aya, uye zvikurukuru nguva nomwe.

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

Muupanduki wa mu 1863, tali uuli umbi kanofye Uriah Smith ewafumishe ekitabo kya bufi kya mu 1863, ico cafumishepo ulubali lwa nshita cinelubali. Pantu mu 1863 Uriah Smith ali asangile amenso yakwe ku lubuto lwa nshita cinelubali, kabili tali uwalingile ukumona ukuti pali “ukukalipa” kubili uko Daniele alondolola. Uku kukalipa kubili kulenga nshita cinelubali pa bufumu bwa ku kabanga bwa Israele, ne pa bufumu bwa ku masamba bwa Yuda. Ukwa kutendeka pa fyalo ikumi fya ku kabanga kwatendeke mu 723 BC kabili kwapwile mu 1798, kabili ukwa cibili kwatendeke mu 677 BC kabili kwapwile mu 1844.

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

Gabrieli akauya kuna Danieri muchitsauko 8 kuti atsanangure chiratidzo chemarah, uye maererano nebasa rake, akapa chipupuriro chechipiri kuna 1844. Makore zviuru zviviri nemazana matatu eDhanieri muchitsauko 8 akaguma muna 1844, asiwo ndipo pakagumira kwekupedzisira kwehasha mbiri dzakanangana noushe hwokumusoro nnoushe hwokumaodzanyemba.

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

> Akati, Tarira, ndichakuzivisa zvichava pamagumo ekupedzisira ekutsamwa uku; nokuti pakatarwa nguva, kuguma kuchasvika. Danieli 8:19.

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

Mugumo wa kuumalizia hutangulia kuhusisha mugumo wa kwanza. Mugumo wa mwisho kati ya ile miwili ya ghadhabu, ambao ni usemi mwingine tu wa zile nyakati saba, uliisha mwaka 1844, na ghadhabu ya kwanza iliisha mwaka 1798. Aya ambayo Smith alidai haikuwa na maelezo maalum ya mamlaka ya kipapa, ilitambulisha mwaka ambao upapa ungepokea jeraha lake la mauti.

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

> Mambo wamambo achaita sezvaanoda; achazvikudza, achizvikurisa pamusoro pavamwari vose, uye achataura zvinhu zvinoshamisa achipikisa Mwari wavamwari, uye achabudirira kusvikira kutsamwa kwapera; nokuti chakatemwa chichaitwa. Danieri 11:36.

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

“Mambo” katika aya ya thelathini na sita “atafanikiwa hata ghadhabu itakapokamilika.” Angalia Smith anavyoandika kuhusu Danieli sura ya nane, aya ya ishirini na tatu na ishirini na nne katika kitabu hichohicho ambamo anadai kwamba mamlaka ya upapa hayana sifa sahihi za kuitimiza aya ya thelathini na sita.

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

> “Vhesi 23. Uye panguva yokupedzisira youmambo hwavo, vadariki vachinge vazadzisa kuyera kwavo, mambo ane chiso chinotyisa, anonzwisisa zvirevo zvakavanzika, achasimuka. 24. Simba rake richava guru, asi risingabvi pasimba rake pachake; uye achaparadza nenzira inoshamisa, achabudirira, nokuita zvaanoda, uye achaparadza vane simba navanhu vatsvene. 25. Uye nouchenjeri hwakewo achaita kuti kunyengera kubudirire muruoko rwake; achazvikudza mumwoyo make, uye norugare achaparadza vazhinji; achamukawo kuzorwa noMuchinda wamachinda; asi achaputswa asina kuitwa noruoko.

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

> “Simba iri rinotsiva zvikamu zvina zvoumambo hwembudzi munguva yokupedzisira youmambo hwazvo, ndiko kuti, richiswedera kumagumo okufamba kwahwo. Chokwadi, ndiro rimwe chetero nerunyanga ruduku rwendima 9 zvichienda mberi. Rishandise kuRoma, sezvakaratidzwa mumashoko endima 9, uye zvose zvinowirirana uye zvinobuda pachena.

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

> “‘අති දරුණු මුහුණුවරක් ඇති රජෙක්.’ යුදෙව්වරුන් පිට මෙහිම බලයෙන් පැමිණෙන දඬුවම පිළිබඳව මෝසෙස් පූර්වකථනය කරද්දී, එය ‘දරුණු මුහුණුවරක් ඇති ජාතියක්’ යයි හඳුන්වයි. ද්විතීය කථාව 28:49, 50. යුධ සැරසිල්ලෙන් පෙනී සිටි විට රෝමවරුන්ට වඩා භයානක පෙනුමක් දක්වූ ජනතාවක් තවත් නොවීය. ‘අඳුරු වාක්‍ය අවබෝධ කරන.’ මෝසෙස්, දැන් සඳහන් කළ ඒම ශුද්ධ ලේඛන කොටසෙහි, ‘ඔවුන්ගේ භාෂාව නුඹ නොතේරුම් ගන්නෙහිය’ යයි කියයි. යුදෙව්වරුන් සම්බන්ධයෙන් මෙය බබිලෝනියන්වරුන්, පර්සියානුවන් හෝ ග්‍රීකයන් පිළිබඳව කියවිය නොහැකි ය; මක්නිසාද කලදායන්ගේත් ග්‍රීක භාෂාවත් පලස්තීනයේ කිසි විටෙක අඩු වැඩි වශයෙන් භාවිත වූ බැවිනි. එහෙත් ලතින් භාෂාව සම්බන්ධයෙන් එසේ නොවීය.”

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

> “Kana vapanduki vasvika pakuzara.” Kubatana kuri pakati pavanhu vaMwari navanovadzvinyirira kunoramba kuchionekwa kubva pakutanga kusvikira pakuguma. Vakaiswa muuranda nokuda kwezvivi zvevanhu vake. Uye kuramba kwavo vari muchivi kwakauyisa chirango chakanyanya kuomarara. Panguva ipi neipi, sevaJudha sorudzi, havana kumbova vakaora mutsika kupfuura panguva yavakauya pasi pesimba rokutonga revaRoma.

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

> “‘Ane simba, asi risiri nesimba rake amene.’ Kubudirira kwavaRoma kwakakonzerwa zvikuru nerubatsiro rwevabatsiri vavo, uye nokupesana kwakanga kuripo pakati pavavengi vavo, izvo zvavaigara vakagadzirira kushandisa mukana wazvo. Roma yePapa yakavawo nesimba kubudikidza namasimba enyika ayo yaitonga pakunamata.”

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

> “‘Iye achaparadza nenzira inotyisa.’ Ishe akaudza vaJudha nomuprofita Ezekieri kuti aizovaisa mumaoko avanhu vakanga ‘vane unyanzvi hwokuparadza;’ uye kuurayiwa kwevaJudha vane mamiriyoni rimwe nezana rimwe rezviuru pakaparadzwa Jerusarema neuto reRoma, kwakava chisimbiso chinotyisa chamashoko omuprofita. Uye Roma muchikamu chayo chechipiri, kana kuti cheupapa, ndiyo yakava nomutoro werufu rwemamiriyoni makumi mashanu evafiri vechitendero.

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

> “‘Uye kupfurikidza noungwaru hwakewo achaita kuti kunyengera kubudirire muruoko rwake.’ Roma yakazivikanwa kupfuura masimba ose namano okunyengetedza, ayo yaishandisa kuisa ndudzi pasi pokutonga kwayo. Izvi ndezvechokwadi zvose pamusoro peRoma yechihedheni neRoma yapapa. Uye nokudaro, norugare, yakaparadza vazhinji.

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

> “Uye Roma, pakupedzisira, mumunhu womumwe wavabati varo, yakasimuka ichipesana noMuchinda wamachinda, nokupa mutongo worufu pamusoro paJesu Kristu. ‘Asi achaputswa asina ruoko,’ mashoko anoratidza kuenzaniswa kokuparadzwa kwesimba iri nokurohwa kwechifananidzo chechitsauko 2.” Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, 202–204.

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

Smith, ka-lwiri mubindu ibi mu ndima iyi, alondolola kuti imibele ya ubupolofita iya Roma ya bufi ne ya Bupapa ishinsha ukupalana, pantu fyena ni ukumonekela fye kwa Roma mu miputule yakwe ibili, nga fintu caba mu kusankanishiwa kwa cisengo ne bulongo mu cipandwa caibili ca buku lya Daniele, ifyo Sister White alondolola ukuti fyaba ifishibilo fya churchcraft na statecraft. Ilyo Daniele alanda mu mavesi ayo Smith alebombelapo ukuti Roma “ikalunduluka, no kucita,” kabili ukuti Roma “ikacusha ubucenjeshi ukulunduluka mu kuboko kwakwe,” Smith atila mu vesi ya makumi yatatu na mutanda “imfumu” iyo “ikakula mpaka ubukali bwafikilishiwa” ilangisha imibele ya ubupolofita iya Roma ya bufi na ya Bupapa yonsi. Elyo ashimikila ukuti tapali nangu cimo pa mibele yakwe Roma mu vesi ya makumi yatatu na mutanda icilelanda ku maka ya Bupapa.

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

Tataura kuna Smith mukutsigira kuzivikanwa kweRoma sevapambi vanosimbisa chiratidzo, uye chimwe chezvinhu zvina zvechiporofita zviri mundima yegumi neina ndechekuti Roma vanozvikudza.

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

> Uye panguva idzodzo vazhinji vachamukira mambo wezasi; navapambi vavanhu vako vachazvikudza kuti vasimbise chiono; asi vachawa. Danieri 11:14.

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

Smith anoti zvinotaurwa pamusoro pamambo mundima yechitatu nemakumi matanhatu hazvienderani nesimba repasipapa, kunyange hazvo pakutanga akadzivirira kuti yaiva Roma mundima yechina negumi inosimudzira pachayo. Asi mambo ari mundima yechitatu nemakumi matanhatu “achazvikudza.” Iyeyo mambo mumwe chete ari mundima yechitatu nemakumi matanhatu “achataura zvinhu zvinoshamisa achipesana naMwari wavamwari.” Muna Danieri simba repasipapa “richataura mashoko makuru richipesana noWokumusoro-soro,” uye mubhuku raZvakazarurwa simba repasipapa rinomhura richipesana noWokumusoro-soro.

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

> Akapiwa kinywa cha kunena maneno makuu na makufuru; naye akapewa mamlaka ya kuendelea kwa muda wa miezi arobaini na miwili. Akafumbua kinywa chake katika kumkufuru Mungu, kulikufuru jina lake, na maskani yake, na hao wakaao mbinguni. Ufunuo 13:5, 6.

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

Tsatanetsatane lililonse laulosi lokhudza mphamvu ya upapa limadziwika mu vesi la makumi atatu ndi chisanu ndi chimodzi.

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

> Ugoko umwami azakora uko yishakiye; kandi azishyira hejuru, yikuze arushe imana yose, kandi azavuga amagambo y’igitangaza arwanya Imana y’imana; kandi azagubwa neza kugeza ubwo uburakari buzaba busohoye; kuko icyagennwe kizasohozwa. Daniyeli 11:36.

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

Vatsinhiri va vanhu a hi vo ku tshembeka minkarhi yo tala, kambe vatsinhiri vo tala va va-Adventist va nyika vumbhoni eka ntiyiso lowu vonakaka erivaleni leswaku a ku ri ndzimana ya makume nharhu na tsevu leyi muapostola Pawulo a a yi hlamusela hi marito man’wana eka Va-2 Vathesalonika, loko a vulavula hi munhu wa xidyoho.

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

> Musarega kuti munhu upi zvake akunyengedzei nenzira ipi neipi; nokuti zuva iro haringasviki, kusati kwatanga kuuya kutsauka kutanga, uye munhu uya wechivi agoziviswa, mwanakomana wokurasika; iye anopikisa nokuzvikudza achizvikwidziridza pamusoro pezvose zvinonzi Mwari kana zvinonamatwa; zvokuti iye, saMwari, anogara mutemberi yaMwari, achizviratidza kuti ndiye Mwari. 2 VaTesaronika 2:2, 3.

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

Vhesi rechi makumi matatu nenhanhatu rinoti, “achazvikudza, achazvikwidziridza pamusoro pamwari mumwe nomumwe,” uye Pauro anoti, “munhu uya wechivi azarurwe, mwanakomana wokurasika; iye anopikisa, achizvikwidziridza pamusoro pechinhu chose chinonzi Mwari, kana chinonamatwa.” Zviri pachena kuti Smith akanga asina simba rechiporofita rokutaura kuti mambo wevhesi rechi makumi matatu nenhanhatu akanga akasiyana namambo ari kutaurwa mundima dzinotungamirira kuvhesi iroro. Pachimiro chegirama akanga asina chikonzero chokururamisa kushandisa kwake kwakakanganisika, uye kutaura kwake kuti akaita saizvozvo nokuti vhesi rechi makumi matatu nenhanhatu harina zviratidzo zvesimba roupapa kwaiva kumonyora Rugwaro mukuedza kusimbisa dudziro yake pachake.

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

> Tinezvewowo shoko rechiporofita rakatonyanya kusimbiswa; uye munoita zvakanaka kana muchiriteerera, sechiedza chinopenya panzvimbo ine rima, kusvikira mambakwedza achisviba, uye nyamasase ichibuda mumwoyo yenyu; muchiziva ichi pakutanga, kuti hapana chiporofita cheRugwaro chinobva mukududzirwa kwomunhu pachake. Nokuti chiporofita hachina kumbouya kare nokuda kwokuda kwomunhu; asi vanhu vatsvene vaMwari vakataura sezvavaisundwa noMweya Mutsvene. 2 Petro 1:19–21.

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

Mumakore ose eAdventism yeRaodhikia kwave kune vazhinji vevadzidzi vezveumwari vechiAdventist, vafundisi, navanyori vakataura pamusoro pokuti vanofunga here kuti kushandiswa kwaSmith kwakarurama kana kuti hakuna kururama. Mumwe mufundisi wekuAustralia, Louis Were, akafa kare, akapedza chikamu chikuru choushumiri hwake achirwisa muenzaniso waSmith wenhema wechiprofita. Chikonzero chokupikisa kwake hachina kungova chokuti Smith pakupedzisira akazivisa mambo anosvika kumugumo wake mundima yemakumi mana neshanu saTurkey, asiwo kuti hwaro hwaSmith hwakabudisawo kushandiswa kusiri kwechokwadi kweAmagedhoni. Mumakore ekuma1980 kana pedyo nawo, mumwe munyori wechiAdventist akanyora bhuku rine musoro unoti, Adventists and Armageddon, Have we Misunderstood Prophecy? Zita romunyori ndiDonald Mansell, uye bhuku iroro richiri kuwanikwa.

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

Mansell anotevera nhoroondo yakatungamirira kuHondo Yenyika Yekutanga neHondo Yenyika Yechipiri, achiratidza kuti panguva iyo hondo mbiri idzodzo dzakaonekwa sokuti dzaiva pedyo, vaparidzi vechiAdventist vakatanga kushandisa kushandisirwa zvisiri kwechokwadi kwaSmith kweTurkey kuenda kuJerusarema chaiyo sechiratidzo cheAmagedhoni nekuguma kwenyika. Anoratidza, kubudikidza nemagwaro enhengo dzechechi, kuti sezvo imwe neimwe yehondo idzodzo yaiswedera, mweya mizhinji yakapinzwa muuhengo hwechechi yechiAdventist, zvichibva pakusimbisa kwechiporofita kwevaparidzi kwakatorwa pamaonero aSmith akakanganisika pamusoro peAmagedhoni.

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

Xivutiso xin’wana ni xin’wana xi helela, naswona vuprofeta lebyi nga hetisekangiki a byi nga hetiseki, kereke yi lahlekeriwe hi swirho swo tlula leswi a yi swi kumile hi xipimelo xa vuprofeta lexi akiweke hi Smith.

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

Kupfurikidza nokuramba kwaSmith shoko renheyo revaMillerite, uye nokuda kwake kukurudzira dudziro yake pachake yendima makumi matatu nenhanhatu kusvika makumi mana nemashanu dzaDanieri, pfungwa yaSmith yakaburitsa muenzaniso wechiporofita wakavakirwa pazviitiko zvenguva iyoyo.

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

Mukukakavadzana kwaSmith naJames White pamusoro pamambo anosvika kumagumo ake mundima yokupedzisira yaDhanieri gumi neimwe, James White akaburitsa pfungwa yakanyatsopfupikisa hwaro hwechiporofita hwaSmith hwakavakwa pamusoro pejecha. White akadzidzisa kuti “chiporofita chinobereka nhoroondo, asi nhoroondo haibereki chiporofita.”

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

Vaparidzi veAdventism vakashanda hondo mbiri dzisati dzaitika vakashandisa nhoroondo yaive ichiri kusimukira kuti varatidze muenzaniso waSmith wakakanganisika wechiporofita cheAmagedhoni, uye basa ravo, iro raiita serakakomborerwa zvikuru panguva yaitungamirira kuhondo idzodzo, rakazobereka kurasikirwa kukuru apo muenzaniso uyu wechiporofita wakaratidzwa kuti wakanga wakavakirwa pakududzira kwega.

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

> Chenjererai vaporofita venhema, vanouya kwamuri vakapfeka sembatya dzemakwai, asi mukati mavo imhumhi dzinoparadza. Muchavaziva nezvibereko zvavo. Vanhu vanotanha mazambiringa paminzwa here, kana maonde parukato here? Saizvozvowo muti wose wakanaka unobereka chibereko chakanaka; asi muti wakaora unobereka chibereko chakaipa. Muti wakanaka haungabereki chibereko chakaipa, uyewo muti wakaora haungabereki chibereko chakanaka. Muti mumwe nomumwe usingabereki chibereko chakanaka unotemwa, ukakandirwa mumoto. Naizvozvo muchavaziva nezvibereko zvavo. Mateo 7:15–20.

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

Kuda kwaSmith kusimudzira muchivande muenzaniso wechiporofita wemambo uri mundima yemakumi matatu nenhanhatu kwakaberekawo chibereko chokugadzira kushandiswa kusiri kwechokwadi kweDenda Rechitanhatu neAmagedhoni.

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

> Uye mutumwa wechitanhatu akadurura ndiro yake pamusoro porwizi rukuru Yufratesi; mvura yarwo ikapwa, kuti nzira yamadzimambo anobva kumabvazuva igadzirirwe. Zvino ndakaona mweya mitatu isina kuchena, yakanga yakaita samatatya, ichibuda mumuromo meshato, nomumuromo mechikara, nomumuromo momuporofita wenhema. Nokuti iyoyo imweya yemadhimoni, inoita zviratidzo zvinoshamisa, iyo inobuda ichienda kumadzimambo enyika napasi pose, kuti iwaunganidze kuhondo yezuva iro guru raMwari Wemasimbaose. Tarirai, ndinouya sembavha. Akaropafadzwa uyo anorinda, achichengeta nguvo dzake, kuti arege kufamba asina kupfeka, uye kuti kunyara kwake kurege kuonekwa. Zvino akavaunganidza pamwe chete panzvimbo inonzi norurimi rwechiHebheru Armagedhoni. Zvakazarurwa 16:12–16.

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

Sezvatakamboratidza kare, denda rechitanhatu rinouya mushure mokunge nguva yokuedzwa kwavanhu yapera; naizvozvo yambiro iri mukuti “chengetedza nguo dzako” inofanira kureva nyaya yokuedzwa inoitika Michael asati asimuka, nguva yokuedzwa kwavanhu isati yavharwa, uye denda rokutanga risati ratanga. Denda rechitanhatu rinoratidza mabasa eshato, echikara, nomuprofita wenhema, avo vari mubatanidzwa wakapetwa katatu unouya pamwe chete pamutemo weSvondo uri kuuya nokukurumidza. Mubatanidzwa iwoyo wakapetwa katatu iRoma yanhasi, uye chiratidzo chinoratidza nokusimbisa mubatanidzwa iwoyo wakapetwa katatu weRoma yanhasi ndivo “makororo avanhu vako,” avo “vanozvikudza kuti vasimbise chiratidzo,” asi “vachawa.”

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

Yambiro yechirwere chechitanhatu, kana ichinzwisiswa, inobvumira mweya kuchengeta nguo dzawo; asi kana ikarambwa, inosiya mweya usina kupfeka, icho chiri chimwe chezviratidzo zvishanu zveMuRaodhikia. Chiratidzo chinosimbisa yambiro iyoyo imakororo avanhu vako, vanozvikudza uye pakupedzisira vanowa. Soromoni akati kana vanhu vaMwari vasina chiratidzo ichocho, vanoparara.

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

> Apho kungekho khona umbono, abantu bayabhubha; kodwa ogcina umthetho, uyajabula. IzAga 29:18.

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

Izwi lesiHebheru elithi “perish” lisho ukuthi “ukwambula ubuze”, futhi uJohane waloba wathi, “Ubusisiwe lowo olindayo, agcine nezambatho zakhe, funa ahambe enqunu, babone ihlazo lakhe.” USmith wayephambukile ngeNkosi yaseNyakatho, futhi leso sisekelo samanga sesiprofetho samvumela ukuba akhe ukusebenza kwesiprofetho okuthi, uma kwamukelwa, kuveze ubuze, okuyisifanekiselo samaLawodikeya, akhishwa emlonyeni weNkosi.

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

Smith haana dhibic ku ahayn inuu ku dooddo aqoonsigiisa cusub ee beenta ah ee Boqorka Waqooyi isagoo ka soo horjeeda James White, ninkii nebiyaddii. Taariikhyahannada Adventist-ka, iyo Sister White, waxay ka hadlaan khilaafkoodii caanka ahaa. Ellen White waxay canaanatay labadaba ninkeeda iyo Smith, iyada oo ku eedaysay inay u oggolaadeen kala duwanaanshahooda ra’yiga ee ku saabsan cidda uu matalayay boqorka waqooyi ee Daanyeel kow iyo tobnaad, in lagu geliyo fagaaraha dadweynaha. Daabacaaddii ugu horraysay ee Adventist-ka ka dib Niyad-jabkii Weynaa ee 1844, James White wuxuu qoray:

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

> “येशू उठेर ढोका बन्द गरी आफ्नो राज्य ग्रहण गर्न प्राचीन दिनहरूका परमपुरुषकहाँ, सन् 1844 को सातौँ महिनामा, आउनुभयो भन्ने कुरामा म पूर्णतः विश्वास गर्छु। हेर्नुहोस् लूका 13:25; मत्ती 25:10; दानिएल 7:13,14। तर दानिएल 12:1 मा उल्लिखित मिखाएलको उभिनु भने अर्को उद्देश्यका लागि भएको अर्को घटनाजस्तो देखिन्छ। उहाँको सन् 1844 मा उठ्नु भनेको ढोका बन्द गर्न, आफ्नो राज्य र राज्य गर्नको अधिकार ग्रहण गर्न आफ्ना पिताकहाँ आउनका लागि थियो; तर मिखाएलको उभिनु भने उहाँसँग पहिले नै भएको आफ्नो राजकीय शक्ति दुष्टहरूको विनाशमा तथा आफ्ना जनहरूको छुटकारामा प्रकट गर्नु हो। अध्याय 11 को अन्तिम शक्ति आफ्नो अन्तमा पुग्नेछ र उसलाई सहायता गर्ने कोही हुनेछैन, त्यही समयमा मिखाएल उभिनुहुनेछ। यही शक्ति परमेश्वरको साँचो मण्डलीलाई कुल्चने अन्तिम शक्ति हो; र साँचो मण्डली अझै पनि सम्पूर्ण ख्रीष्टियन जगतद्वारा कुल्चिइरहेको र बहिष्कृत भइरहेकाले, यसबाट यो निष्कर्ष निस्कन्छ कि त्यो अन्तिम दमनकारी शक्ति अझै ‘आफ्नो अन्तमा पुगेको’ छैन; र मिखाएल पनि उभिनुभएको छैन। सन्तहरूलाई कुल्चने यो अन्तिम शक्ति प्रकाश 13:11-18 मा देखाइएको छ। त्यसको संख्या 666 हो।” James White, A Word to the Little Flock, 8.

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

Smith pa “mwenje mutsva” wake waanodaidza kudaro panyaya ye“simba rokupedzisira muna Danieri chitsauko chegumi nerimwe,” James White akaona mashandisirwo aSmith aya, kwete semwenje mutsva, asi sekurwisa nheyo dzacho. Gakava pamusoro peRoma samambo wokumusoro muna Danieri 11 rakaitika pakati paUriah Smith naJames White rine hunhu hwakatarwa, hwatinofanira, sevadzidzi vechiporofita, kuunganidza pamwe chete nemamwe makakatanwa enhoroondo yeAdventist ane chokuita nechiratidzo cheRoma.

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

Chimodzi mwa makhalidwe amenewo ndicho kuyambitsa kumasulira kwachinsinsi. Makhalidwe ena n’chakuti kugwiritsa ntchito kumasulira kwachinsinsi kumeneko kumafuna kupotoza galamala yosavuta, pakuti Smith sanangonyalanyaza kuti makhalidwe onse a uneneri a m’vesi la makumi atatu ndi chisanu ndi chimodzi akunena za Roma yokha, komanso ananyalanyaza kuti kapangidwe ka galamala kakufuna kuti mfumu ya m’vesi la makumi atatu ndi chisanu ndi chimodzi ikhale mfumu yomweyi monga mwaimiridwa m’ndime yapitayo.

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

Esinye isokuba loo ngcaciso yabucala yayikukwala iinyaniso ezisisiseko. Esinye isokuba imela ukwala igunya loMoya weSiprofeto. Olunye uphawu kukuba loo ngcamango yokuqala enesiphako malunga neRoma iya kukhokelela kumzekelo wesiprofeto ongavumeli umntu ukuba agcine izambatho zakhe njengoko esondela ekuvalweni kwexesha lovavanyo loluntu. Esinye yayikukuzimisela ukukhuthaza esidlangalaleni loo ngcaciso yakhe yabucala. Esinye isokuba loo ngcaciso yabucala isoloko ichazwa njengokukhanya okutsha. Zonke ezi mpawu zimelwe phakathi kwengxoxo yangoku “ngabaphangi babantu bakowenu.”

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

Pa mlandu wotsiriza wa Roma, umene unayimiridwa mwa mlandu woyamba wa Roma wozindikiritsa “akuba a anthu ako,” uphatikizidwa pamodzi ndi mzere wa ulosi wa mlandu wa Uriah Smith ndi James White, tidzaona kuti gulu lina lidzakhala likumanga chitsanzo chawo cha ulosi pa kumasulira kwachinsinsi, kumene kumakana choonadi cha maziko.

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

Kukanwa kwa kweli za msingi kwa hakika kunawakilisha pia kukataliwa kwa mamlaka ya Roho ya Unabii, ambayo hutetea kwa uthabiti mkubwa kweli hizo za msingi. Kundi hilo pia litakuwa tayari kuwasilisha hadharani mtazamo wao, bila kujali mashaka yoyote yanayoweza kuibuliwa kuhusu athari ambayo mafundisho hayo yanaweza kuwa nayo juu ya watu wa Mungu duniani kote.

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

Pakarepo tuviri ya 1844, mukati me chizvarwa chokutanga chechiAdventisti, kwakapinzwa imwe hondo yedzidziso pamusoro peRoma. Hondo iyoyo yakaramba ichimutsa nyonganiso, kusvikira maonero enhema agamuchirwa muchizvarwa chechitatu chechiAdventisti. Tichafunga nezvehondo yedzidziso ye“daily” sechina pamitsetse mitanhatu yatiri zvino kutarisa mumuenzaniso we line upon line.

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

Asi tisati tatora mutsetse wechina wezvinopikisana neRoma, zvinofanira kurangarirwa kuti munyaya yakapfuura, patakanga tichitsanangura ndima yegumi yaDhanieri chitsauko chegumi nerimwe, takati, “Ndima yegumi inobatanidzawo zvakananga ‘nguva nomwe’ dzaRevhitiko makumi maviri nenhanhatu nenhoroondo yakavanzika, asi mutsetse iwoyo wechokwadi uri kunze kwezvatiri pano kuisa pachena.”

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

Uriah Smith alikuwa kiongozi katika kukataa vipindi saba mwaka 1863. Alikuwa amekataa kuongezeka kwa maarifa juu ya somo hilo kulikowasilishwa katika makala kuhusu somo hilo, zilizoandikwa na Hiram Edson na kuchapishwa katika Review mwaka 1856. Madhara ya Smith kuhusishwa na vuguvugu lililowasilisha vipindi saba, lakini baadaye akakataa kuongezeka kwa maarifa juu ya somo hilo hilo, nayo pia yako nje ya mada ya sifa za utangulizi wa Smith wa kile alichodai kuwa nuru mpya juu ya somo la mfalme wa kaskazini; lakini tutakapokamilisha muhtasari wetu wa mstari wa mabishano ya Waadventista kuhusu Roma, tutarudi katika umuhimu wa aya ya kumi ya sura ya kumi na moja ya Danieli, na pia katika kile kinachowakilishwa na kukataa kwa Smith ujumbe wa Laodikia uliowasili mwaka 1856 pamoja na kuongezeka kwa maarifa juu ya vipindi saba.

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

> “Chikhulupiriro chathu chokhudza mauthenga a angelo woyamba, wachiwiri, ndi wachitatu chinali cholondola. Zizindikiro zazikulu za njira zimene tadutsamo n’zosasunthika. Ngakhale magulu a ku gehena angayesere kuzichotsa pa maziko ake, ndi kusangalala m’ganizo lakuti apambana, komabe sapambana. Mizati iyi ya choonadi yayima yolimba monga mapiri osatha, yosasunthitsidwa ndi zoyesayesa zonse za anthu pamodzi ndi za Satana ndi gulu lake. Titha kuphunzira zambiri, ndipo tiyenera kufufuza Malemba mosalekeza kuti tione ngati zinthu izi zili choncho.” Evangelism, 223.

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

> “Nzira huru dzokuratidza chokwadi, dzinotiratidza panomira isu munhoroondo yechiporofita, dzinofanira kuchengetedzwa nokungwarira, kuti dzirege kuputswa pasi, dzotsiviwa nedzidziso dzingaunze nyonganiso panzvimbo pechiedza chechokwadi.” Selected Messages, bhuku 2, 101, 102.

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

> “Panguva ino kuedza kuzhinji kuchaitwa kuti kuzununguse kutenda kwedu panyaya yenzvimbo tsvene; asi hatifaniri kuzunguzika. Hapana kana pini inofanira kufambiswa kubva panheyo dzekutenda kwedu. Chokwadi chichiri chokwadi. Avo vanova vasina chokwadi vachatsaukira mudzidziso dzenhema, uye pakupedzisira vachazviwana vava vasingatendi maererano neumboo hwekare hwatakagamuchira pamusoro pechiri chokwadi. Zviratidzo zvekare zvomunzira zvinofanira kuchengetedzwa, kuti tirege kurasikirwa nekuziva kwedu kwatiri.” Manuscript Releases, volume 1, 55

Back to Articles