Article

# The Book of Daniel - Number Forty-Seven

Doniyor kitobi — Qirq yettinchi bo‘lim

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

Aldamchi Ta’limotlarni Fosh Etish: Doniyor 8 ning Tanqidiy Tahlili va Adventist Ilohiyotiga Qarshi Qiyinchiliklar

Author

Jeff Pippenger

Published

January 11, 2024

Formats

PDF
Word
Song MP3

When the little horn of Rome is represented in verses nine through twelve of Daniel chapter eight, it is a corrupted symbol for it is a symbol of transvestitism, a cross-dresser oscillating between male and female. It agrees with the Millerite understanding that Rome was represented by two phases, the first phase being the Roman statecraft and the second phase being the Roman churchcraft, but in the oscillation of genders in the verses, the little horn is out of the historical and prophetic sequence (corrupted). Yet each of the four verses represents history directly associated with either Roman statecraft or Roman churchcraft. Pagan Rome persecuted all who resisted its imperial authority, but the persecution of papal Rome (feminine) in verse ten, is specifically directed against heaven.

Doniyor kitobining sakkizinchi bobidagi to‘qqizinchi-o‘n ikkinchi oyatlarda Rimning kichik shoxi tasvirlanganida, u buzilgan ramz sifatida namoyon bo‘ladi, chunki u transvestitizmning — erkak va ayol o‘rtasida tebranib turuvchi, qarama-qarshi jins kiyimini kiyuvchi shaxsning — ramzidir. Bu Milleritlarning Rim ikki bosqich bilan ifodalangan, degan tushunchasiga mos keladi: birinchi bosqich Rimning davlat hokimiyati, ikkinchi bosqich esa Rimning cherkov hokimiyati bo‘lgan; biroq oyatlardagi jinslarning almashinib turishi sababli, kichik shox tarixiy va bashoratli ketma-ketlikdan tashqaridadir (buzilgandir). Shunga qaramay, to‘rt oyatning har biri Rimning davlat hokimiyati yoki Rimning cherkov hokimiyati bilan bevosita bog‘liq tarixni ifodalaydi. Butparast Rim uning imperiyaviy hokimiyatiga qarshilik ko‘rsatganlarning barchasini quvg‘in qilgan, ammo o‘ninchi oyatdagi papalik Rimining (ayollik) ta’qibi aynan osmonga qaratilgandir.

In the Millerite understanding that Rome was the fourth and final kingdom, the oscillating from state to church to state to church again would not have been a concern. They had seen the mixture of iron and clay in the feet of Daniel chapter two, and simply understood it as two phases of Rome, with no concern to define a specific historical sequence of a fourth and fifth kingdom. They understood the same of chapter seven, where the horn that spake great things against the most High, had three horns plucked up from the original ten horns of the beast of Rome. Even if Miller did recognize the gender oscillation of verse nine through twelve, it would have been unimportant to his understanding of the fourth kingdom being Rome. In Millerite understanding the fourth kingdom ended in 1798, and the next prophetic event was the Second Coming of Christ.

Millerchilar tushunchasida Rim to‘rtinchi va so‘nggi shohlik bo‘lganligi sababli, davlatdan jamoatga, so‘ng yana davlatga, yana jamoatga o‘tib turuvchi tebranish tashvish uyg‘otmagan bo‘lar edi. Ular Doniyor kitobining ikkinchi bobidagi oyoqlardagi temir bilan loyning aralashmasini ko‘rganlar va buni shunchaki Rimning ikki bosqichi deb tushunganlar, to‘rtinchi va beshinchi shohlikning muayyan tarixiy ketma-ketligini belgilash haqida esa tashvish chekmaganlar. Yettinchi bob haqida ham ular xuddi shunday tushunganlar: bu yerda Eng Oliy Zotga qarshi ulug‘ so‘zlarni so‘zlagan shox Rim maxluqining asl o‘nta shoxidan uchta shoxni sug‘urib tashlagan edi. Hatto Miller to‘qqizinchi oyatdan o‘n ikkinchi oyatgacha bo‘lgan jinsiy tebranishni anglagan bo‘lsa ham, bu uning to‘rtinchi shohlik Rim ekanligi haqidagi tushunchasi uchun muhim bo‘lmagan bo‘lur edi. Millerchilar tushunchasida to‘rtinchi shohlik 1798-yilda yakunlangan, navbatdagi bashoratli voqea esa Masihning Ikkinchi Kelishi bo‘lgan.

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

Ayollik jinsidagi shox erkak jinsidagi shox bilan ruhiy zinokorlik qiladigan ayolni ko‘rsatadi va o‘ninchi hamda o‘n ikkinchi oyatlarda tasvirlanadi.

> And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them. Daniel 8:10.

> U haddan tashqari ulugʻayib, hatto osmon lashkarigacha yetdi; u lashkardan va yulduzlardan baʼzilarini yerga qulatib, ularni oyoq osti qildi. Doniyor 8:10.

The persecution of the papal power was directed against Christianity (the host of heaven), and in verse twelve papal Rome (feminine), receives the power to accomplish her murderous work through the transgression of fornicating with the kings of Europe.

Papalik hokimiyatining quvg‘ini xristianlikka (osmon lashkariga) qarshi qaratilgan edi, va o‘n ikkinchi oyatda papalik Rim (ayol jinsida) Yevropa shohlari bilan zinokorlik qilish gunohi orqali o‘zining qotillik ishini amalga oshirish qudratini oladi.

> And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered. Daniel 8:12.

> Va gunoh sababli unga kundalik qurbonlikka qarshi bir lashkar berildi; u haqiqatni yerga qulatdi; va u ish ko‘rdi hamda ravnaq topdi. Doniyor 8:12.

The “host” in the verse represents the military power that was given the papacy “against the daily.” The word “against” means “from”. From the pagan kings of Europe (pagan Rome), represented by “the daily,” military support (an host) was given to the papacy “by reason of transgression.” The combination of church and state, with the church in control of the relationship is the “transgression.” The wine of that transgression is Christian blood. Once the papacy had control of the armies of pagan Rome, papal Rome (“it”) “cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered.”

Ushbu oyatdagi “lashkar” papalikka “kundalik”ka qarshi berilgan harbiy qudratni anglatadi. “Qarshi” so‘zi “dan” ma’nosini bildiradi. “Kundalik” bilan ifodalangan Yevropaning butparast shohlaridan (butparast Rimdan) papalikka “gunoh sababli” harbiy yordam (bir lashkar) berildi. Jamoat bilan davlatning birikishi, bunda jamoat bu munosabat ustidan nazoratni qo‘lida tutishi, o‘sha “gunoh”dir. O‘sha gunohning sharobi masihiylarning qonidir. Papalik butparast Rim qo‘shinlari ustidan nazoratni qo‘lga kiritgach, papalik Rimi (“u”) “haqiqatni yerga uloqtirdi; va u amal qildi hamda ravnaq topdi.”

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

Doniyor kitobining o‘n birinchi bobi, o‘ttiz birinchi oyatida ham qo‘shinlarning papalik Rimiga topshirilishi tasvirlangan:

> And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate. Daniel 11:31.

> Va uning tarafidan qo‘shinlar chiqib kelur, va ular qudratli muqaddas maskanni harom qilur, va kundalik qurbonlikni yo‘q qilur, va vayron qiluvchi jirkanchlikni o‘rnaturlar. Doniyor 11:31.

The verse is identifying the historical transition from pagan Rome to papal Rome. In the verse the “arms” are the European kings that began to stand up for the papacy beginning with Clovis, king of the Franks (France), in the year 496. The “arms” also polluted “the sanctuary of strength” (the city of Rome), through the continuous warfare from the fourth century onward to the year 538. The “arms” also removed the pagan resistance to the rise of the papacy, and by the year 508, the pagan resistance was finished.

Bu oyat butparast Rimdan papalik Rimiга tarixiy o‘tishni ko‘rsatmoqda. Oyatda “qo‘llar” deb milodiy 496-yilda franklar (Fransiya) qiroli Klovisdan boshlab papalikni qo‘llab-quvvatlash uchun ko‘tarila boshlagan Yevropa qirollari nazarda tutilgan. “Qo‘llar” shuningdek to‘rtinchi asrdan boshlab milodiy 538-yilgacha davom etgan uzluksiz urushlar orqali “qudrat ma’badi”ni (Rim shahrini) ham bulg‘adi. “Qo‘llar” papalikning yuksalishiga qarshi bo‘lgan butparast qarshilikni ham bartaraf etdi, va milodiy 508-yilga kelib, butparast qarshilik tugatilgan edi.

The word translated as “take away,” is the Hebrew word “sur” and means “to remove”. The “arms” placed the “abomination that maketh desolate” (the papacy), on the throne of the earth in the year 538. When Daniel chapter eight, verse twelve identifies that “an host” was given to the feminine little horn, it is agreeing with the witness of verse thirty-one of chapter eleven. The book of Revelation also gives witness to the same truth in chapter thirteen.

“Olib tashlamoq” deb tarjima qilingan so‘z ibroniycha “sur” so‘zi bo‘lib, “olib tashlamoq” degan ma’noni anglatadi. “Qo‘shinlar” milodiy 538-yilda “vayron qiluvchi jirkanch narsani” (papalikni) yerning taxtiga o‘tqazdilar. Daniel kitobining sakkizinchi bobi, o‘n ikkinchi oyati ayol jinsidagi kichik shoxga “bir qo‘shin” berilganini bildirganida, bu o‘n birinchi bobning o‘ttiz birinchi oyatidagi guvohlikka hamohang bo‘ladi. Vahiy kitobi ham o‘n uchinchi bobda ayni shu haqiqatga guvohlik beradi.

> And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. Revelation 13:2.

> Men ko‘rgan mahluq qoplonga o‘xshar edi, uning oyoqlari ayiqning oyoqlariday, og‘zi esa sherning og‘ziday edi; ajdaho unga o‘z qudratini, taxtini va buyuk hokimiyatini berdi. Vahiy 13:2.

Sister White directly identifies the beast of verse two as the papacy, and that the dragon in the verse is pagan Rome. Pagan Rome gave three things to the papacy; “his power, and his seat, and great authority.”

Opa Uayt ikkinchi oyatdagi maxluqni to‘g‘ridan-to‘g‘ri papalik deb, oyatdagi ajdarhoni esa butparast Rim deb aniq ko‘rsatadi. Butparast Rim papalikka uch narsani berdi: “o‘z qudratini, o‘z taxtini va ulkan hokimiyatni.”

The military power was given by pagan Rome beginning with Clovis in the year 496. The “seat” to rule from, was given to the papacy in the year 330, when the emperor Constantine moved his capitol to Constantinople, leaving his former capitol city of Rome to the control of the papal church. In the year 533, the emperor Justinian decreed that the pope was the head of the church and the corrector of heretics, turning his “great authority” over to the pope of Rome. Verse twelve of Daniel chapter eight, identifies the time when a “host” was given, and that prophetic truth is testified to on many witnesses. From that point in time (beginning in the year 496), the papacy “prospered.”

Harbiy qudrat butparast Rim tomonidan milodiy 496-yilda Klovisdan boshlab berildi. Hukmronlik qilish uchun “taxt” esa milodiy 330-yilda, imperator Konstantin poytaxtini Konstantinopolga ko‘chirib, avvalgi poytaxt shahri Rimni papalik cherkovi nazoratiga qoldirganida, papalikka berildi. Milodiy 533-yilda imperator Yustinian papaning jamoat boshlig‘i va bid’atchilarni tuzatuvchi ekanini farmon qildi va o‘zining “buyuk hokimiyati”ni Rim papasiga topshirdi. Doniyor kitobining sakkizinchi bob, o‘n ikkinchi oyati “lashkar” berilgan vaqtni ko‘rsatadi, va bu bashoratli haqiqat ko‘plab guvohlar orqali tasdiqlanadi. O‘sha vaqtdan boshlab (milodiy 496-yildan boshlab), papalik “ravnaq topdi.”

It would continue to “practice” and “prosper” until the end of the indignation against the northern kingdom of Israel ended in 1798, and the papacy received its deadly wound.

U shimoliy Isroil shohligiga qarshi g‘azab nihoyasiga yetib, 1798-yilda papalik o‘limli yarasini olgunicha “faoliyat yuritishda” va “ravnaq topishda” davom etardi.

> 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.

> Shoh o‘z irodasiga ko‘ra ish tutadi; u o‘zini yuksaltiradi, har qanday xudodan yuqori qo‘yib ulug‘laydi, xudolar Xudosiga qarshi ajabtovur so‘zlar aytadi va g‘azab ado bo‘lguncha ravnaq topadi; chunki belgilab qo‘yilgan narsa bajo bo‘ladi. Doniyor 11:36.

Verse nine of chapter eight, describes masculine Rome (pagan Rome), and represents the three-step conquering process that pagan Rome accomplished, and which typified the three geographical areas that would be conquered in order for papal Rome to be established upon the throne of the earth, as represented by the three horns that were plucked up in chapter seven. Those two three-step conquering’s of pagan and papal Rome, represented the three geographical obstacles of modern Rome, in verses forty through forty-three of Daniel eleven. Then in chapter eight, verse eleven, the masculine little horn (pagan Rome) is again represented. In the verse, the sanctified logic is so sound, that the scornful men that rule Jerusalem were forced to introduce several theological lies in order to erect their counterfeit foundation.

Sakkizinchi bobning to‘qqizinchi oyati erkak jinsida ifodalangan Rimni (butparast Rimni) tasvirlaydi va butparast Rim amalga oshirgan uch bosqichli zabt etish jarayonini ifodalaydi; bu esa yettinchi bobda sug‘urib tashlangan uchta shox orqali ifodalanganidek, papalik Rimi yer yuzining taxti ustiga o‘rnatilishi uchun zabt etilishi lozim bo‘lgan uchta geografik hududni timsollashtirgan edi. Butparast va papalik Rimning ana shu ikki uch bosqichli zabt etishi Doniyor o‘n birning qirqinchi oyatidan qirq uchinchi oyatigacha bo‘lgan joyda zamonaviy Rimning uchta geografik to‘sig‘ini ifodalagan edi. So‘ng sakkizinchi bobning o‘n birinchi oyatida erkak jinsidagi kichik shox (butparast Rim) yana ifodalanadi. Ushbu oyatda muqaddas mantiq shu qadar sog‘lomki, Quddusni boshqarayotgan masxarachi odamlar o‘zlarining qalbaki poydevorini qurish uchun bir nechta ilohiyotchilik yolg‘onlarini joriy etishga majbur bo‘ldilar.

> Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Daniel 8:11.

> Hatto, u o‘zini hatto lashkar Amirigacha ulug‘ladi; va uning tomonidan kundalik qurbonlik olib tashlandi, hamda Uning muqaddas maskanining joyi qulatildi. Doniyor 8:11.

As we begin to address the counterfeit coins and jewels that have been introduced to Adventism since 1863, it should be noted that there are two primary fields of supposed theological expertise which Adventism boasts of, as their basis for upholding the doctrines of apostate Protestantism and Catholicism. The claim that the modern theologians of Adventism make is that they are either experts in biblical history, or experts in biblical languages. Their application of the verse, reveals the prophetic word has become as a sealed book unto them, and also reveals that their claim of being experts of the biblical languages is simply the modern manifestation of Pharisaism.

1863-yildan beri Adventizmga kiritilgan qalbaki tangalar va javohirlarni ko‘rib chiqishga kirishar ekanmiz, shuni ta’kidlash lozimki, Adventizm murtad Protestantizm va Katoliklik ta’limotlarini qo‘llab-quvvatlash uchun asos sifatida faxrlanadigan go‘yoki ilohiyotchilikdagi mutaxassislikning ikkita asosiy sohasi mavjud. Adventizmning zamonaviy ilohiyotchilari ilgari suradigan da’vo shuki, ular yo Muqaddas Kitob tarixining mutaxassislari, yo bo‘lmasa Muqaddas Kitob tillarining mutaxassislaridir. Ularning oyatni qo‘llashlari bashoratli kalom ular uchun muhrlangan kitobga aylanganini ochib beradi, shuningdek, Muqaddas Kitob tillarining mutaxassislari ekanliklari haqidagi da’volari shunchaki farziylikning zamonaviy ko‘rinishi ekanini ham namoyon qiladi.

First is the disregard of the oscillation of the genders for the little horn in verse nine through twelve. If they were actually experts in the Hebrew language, they would not deny, or water down, the fact that Daniel purposely employed gender oscillation in the verses. The little horn is represented in both genders, and those genders go back and forth through the verses. The theologians try to cover this fact with rubbish and counterfeit coins, for it clearly identifies that verse eleven is identifying pagan, not papal Rome. They of course insist that the little horn of verse eleven is the pope, when it is actually pagan Rome.

Birinchisi — to‘qqizinchi oyatdan o‘n ikkinchi oyatgacha bo‘lgan parchada kichik shoxga nisbatan jinslarning almashinuviga e’tiborsizlik qilinishidir. Agar ular ibroniy tilining chinakam mutaxassislari bo‘lganlarida, Daniel bu oyatlarda jins almashinuvini qasddan qo‘llaganini inkor etmas edilar va bu haqiqatni xiralashtirmas edilar. Kichik shox har ikkala jinsda ham ifodalanadi va bu jinslar oyatlar davomida navbatma-navbat almashinib boradi. Ilohiyotchilar bu haqiqatni bema’niliklar va qalbaki tangalar bilan berkitishga urinadilar, chunki bu 11-oyat papalik Rimini emas, balki majusiy Rimni nazarda tutayotganini ravshan ko‘rsatadi. Ular, albatta, 11-oyatdagi kichik shox papadir, deb turib oladilar, holbuki u aslida majusiy Rimdir.

Once it is acknowledged that two of the four little horn verses are male and two are female, then it is simple to incorporate the biblical truth that a woman in Bible prophecy represents a church, and a man represents a state. Knowing this allows all who wish to see, that the little horn of verse eleven, is masculine Rome (pagan Rome), not feminine Rome (papal Rome).

To‘rtta kichik shox haqidagi oyatdan ikkitasi erkak jinsida, ikkitasi esa ayol jinsida ekanligi tan olingach, Muqaddas Kitob bashoratida ayol jamoatni, erkak esa davlatni ifodalashi haqidagi Injil haqiqatini kiritish oson bo‘ladi. Buni bilish, ko‘rishni istaganlarning barchasiga, o‘n birinchi oyatdagi kichik shox ayol jinsidagi Rim (papalik Rimi) emas, balki erkak jinsidagi Rim (butparast Rim) ekanini anglash imkonini beradi.

The verse then is understood as teaching that pagan Rome (he) magnified himself to the prince of the host, as did pagan Rome when it placed the prince of the host upon the cross of Calvary. Not only did pagan Rome magnify itself against Christ at the cross, the verse goes on to say that by him (pagan Rome) “the daily sacrifice was taken away.”

Shunday qilib, bu oyatning ma’nosi shuki, butparast Rim (u) o‘zini lashkarning Amirigacha ulug‘ladi; xuddi butparast Rim lashkarning Amirini Qalvariya xochiga mixlatganida bo‘lgani kabi. Butparast Rim nafaqat xochda Masihga qarshi o‘zini ulug‘ladi, balki oyat davom etib, u (butparast Rim) tomonidan “kundalik qurbonlik olib tashlandi”, deb aytadi.

In the book of Daniel there are two Hebrew words that are both translated as “take away.” The words are “sur” and “rum”. Both words are used in the sanctuary service. Sur means to take away or remove, and when the ashes from the altar in the sanctuary were removed, the word used to describe the removal of the ashes is “sur”. The word “rum” means to lift up and exalt, and when the priest in the sanctuary was to lift up a wave offering, he was to “rum” (lift up) the offering. In verse eleven, pagan Rome (“the daily”) would “rum” (take away) paganism by lifting up and exalting the religion of paganism.

Doniyor kitobida ikkitadan ibroniycha so‘z bor bo‘lib, ularning har ikkisi ham “olib tashlamoq” deb tarjima qilinadi. Bu so‘zlar “sur” va “rum”dir. Har ikkala so‘z ham ma’bad xizmatida qo‘llanadi. “Sur” olib tashlamoq yoki chetlatmoq degan ma’noni bildiradi, va ma’baddagi qurbongohdan kul olib tashlanganda, kulning olib tashlanishini ifodalash uchun ishlatilgan so‘z “sur”dir. “Rum” esa ko‘tarmoq va ulug‘lamoq degan ma’noni anglatadi, va ma’badda ruhoniy silkitiladigan nazrni ko‘tarishi kerak bo‘lganda, u nazrni “rum” (ko‘tarishi) lozim edi. O‘n birinchi oyatda, butparast Rim (“kundalik”) butparastlik dinini ko‘tarib va ulug‘lab, butparastlikni “rum” (“olib tashlar”) edi.

Pagan Rome would lift up and exalt the religion of paganism. The Adventist theologians that profess an expertise of biblical languages choose to treat every occurrence of “take away” in the book of Daniel as “remove”. They fail to acknowledge the distinct and precise writing of Daniel, and thus place themselves above the prophet Daniel.

Majusiy Rim majusiylik dinini ko‘tarib, ulug‘lar edi. Injil tillari bo‘yicha mutaxassislik da’vo qiluvchi adventist ilohiyotchilar Doniyor kitobidagi “olib tashlamoq” iborasining har bir uchrashini “yo‘q qilmoq” deb talqin etishni tanlaydilar. Ular Doniyorning o‘ziga xos va aniq ifodasini tan olmaydilar va shu tariqa o‘zlarini Doniyor payg‘ambardan yuqori qo‘yadilar.

The theologians that profess to understand the biblical languages provide arguments to justify why Daniel intended to mean the same thing, when he employed two different words. They provide long and tedious word studies to uphold their false claims. The theologians that profess to understand biblical history, argue that the false application is based upon recognizing that in different periods of history the same word might mean something different, and therefore when Daniel employed two different words, only a historical expert can identify what Daniel actually meant. It is important to identify these two false methods for they are employed often by the theologians who seek to hide from the methodology of “line upon line.”

Muqaddas Kitob tillarini tushunamiz deb da’vo qiladigan ilohiyotchilar Doniyor ikki xil so‘zni qo‘llaganida, go‘yoki u bir xil narsani nazarda tutganini oqlash uchun dalillar keltiradilar. Ular o‘zlarining soxta da’volarini qo‘llab-quvvatlash uchun uzun va zerikarli so‘z tadqiqotlarini taqdim etadilar. Muqaddas Kitob tarixini tushunamiz deb da’vo qiladigan ilohiyotchilar esa, bu soxta tatbiq tarixning turli davrlarida ayni bir so‘z boshqa ma’noni anglatishi mumkinligini e’tirof etishga asoslanadi, deb ta’kidlaydilar; shu bois, Doniyor ikki xil so‘zni qo‘llaganida, Doniyor aslida nimani nazarda tutganini faqat tarix bo‘yicha mutaxassis aniqlay oladi. Bu ikki soxta usulni aniqlab olish muhimdir, chunki ular “satr ustiga satr” metodologiyasidan yashirinishga intiladigan ilohiyotchilar tomonidan tez-tez qo‘llanadi.

> Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Daniel 8:11.

> Ha, u o‘zini hatto lashkar Amirigacha yuksaltirdi; va uning tomonidan kundalik qurbonlik olib tashlandi, hamda Uning muqaddas maskanining joyi qulatib tashlandi. Doniyor 8:11.

The word translated as “taken away” in the verse means to “lift up and exalt”. It does not mean to remove. This fact creates confusion and contradiction for the Adventist theologians, for their premises do not hold up under a simple evaluation of the verse, when the actual definition of the word Daniel used is applied to the verse. They argue the little horn of the verse is papal Rome, and therefore the verse would read that “by him” (papal Rome) “the daily was taken away.”

Oyatda “olib tashlandi” deb tarjima qilingan so‘z “yuqoriga ko‘tarish va ulug‘lash” ma’nosini anglatadi. U olib tashlash degani emas. Bu haqiqat Adventist ilohiyotchilar uchun chalkashlik va ziddiyat keltirib chiqaradi, chunki Doniyor qo‘llagan so‘zning asl ta’rifi oyatga tatbiq etilganda, ularning asoslari oyatning oddiy tahliliga ham bardosh bera olmaydi. Ular oyatdagi kichik shox papalik Rimidir, deb da’vo qiladilar, va shu bois oyat “u orqali” (papalik Rimi orqali) “kundalik yuqoriga ko‘tarildi” deb o‘qilishi kerak bo‘ladi.

They of course have no problem including the added word that Sister White states directly was added by human wisdom and does not apply to the text.

Albatta, ular White opa to‘g‘ridan-to‘g‘ri insoniy hikmat bilan qo‘shilganini va matnga tatbiq etilmasligini aytgan qo‘shimcha so‘zni kiritishda hech qanday muammo ko‘rmaydilar.

> “Then I saw in relation to the ‘daily’ (Daniel 8:12) that the word ‘sacrifice’ was supplied by man’s wisdom, and does not belong to the text, and that the Lord gave the correct view of it to those who gave the judgment hour cry.” Early Writings, 74.

> “So‘ng men «kundalik»ka (Daniel 8:12) oid holda shuni ko‘rdimki, «qurbonlik» so‘zi inson donoligi tomonidan qo‘shib qo‘yilgan bo‘lib, matnga tegishli emas va hukm soati haqidagi nido berganlarga Rabbiy bu boradagi to‘g‘ri qarashni bergan.” Early Writings, 74.

They identify “the daily” as Christ’s sanctuary ministry, so the “daily sacrifice” upholds the concept that “the daily” is Christ sacrificial work in the heavenly sanctuary. But inspiration identifies that the word “sacrifice” “does not belong to the text”.

Ular “muntazam”ni Masihning muqaddas maskandagi xizmati deb biladilar, shuning uchun “muntazam qurbonlik” degan tushuncha “muntazam” osmondagi muqaddas maskanda Masihning qurbonlik xizmati ekanligi haqidagi qarashni qo‘llab-quvvatlaydi. Ammo ilhom “qurbonlik” so‘zi “matnga tegishli emas”ligini bildiradi.

When the drunkards of Ephraim identify “the daily” as Christ’s sanctuary work, the verse would then read, “by him” (papal Rome) “the daily was taken away,” or it would read, “by the papal power, Christ’s sanctuary ministry was taken away.” They actually teach this falsehood. They insist that through the darkness of the papal rule the true understanding of Christ’s sanctuary ministry was removed from the minds of men.

Efrayimning mastlari “kundalik”ni Masihning muqaddasxona xizmati deb talqin qilganlarida, oyat shunday o‘qilgan bo‘lur edi: “u tomonidan” (papalik Rim tomonidan) “kundalik olib tashlandi”, yoki u shunday o‘qilgan bo‘lur edi: “papalik hokimiyati tomonidan Masihning muqaddasxonadagi xizmati olib tashlandi.” Ular amalda aynan shu yolg‘onni ta’lim beradilar. Ular papalik hukmronligining zulmati orqali Masihning muqaddasxonadagi xizmatining haqiqiy tushunchasi insonlar ongidan olib tashlanganini qat’iy ta’kidlaydilar.

Yet the word translated as “take away,” does not mean to remove, it means to lift up and exalt. If the professed experts of biblical languages would correctly apply the meaning of the Hebrew word “rum,” to the passage, their rendition would need to say, “by the papal power, Christ’s sanctuary ministry was lifted up and exalted.” When did the papacy ever lift up and exalt Christ?

Biroq “olib tashlamoq” deb tarjima qilingan so‘z olib tashlashni anglatmaydi; u ko‘tarish va ulug‘lashni anglatadi. Agar Muqaddas Kitob tillarining da’vo qilingan mutaxassislari ibroniycha “rum” so‘zining ma’nosini ushbu parchaga to‘g‘ri tatbiq etganlarida, ularning tarjimasi shunday bo‘lishi kerak edi: “papalik hokimiyati orqali Masihning muqaddas maskandagi xizmati ko‘tarildi va ulug‘landi.” Papalik qachon Masihni ko‘targan va ulug‘lagan?

They seek to impose the definition of the Hebrew word “sur” upon the Hebrew word “rum.” Daniel uses the word “sur,” which means to remove, in connection with “the daily” in two other verses, but in verse eleven, Daniel chose the word “rum” meaning to lift up and exalt. Not only is the dish of fables concerning this verse foolishness because of the wresting of the meaning of the word translated as “take away,” but there was never a time when Christ’s sanctuary ministry was in any way removed from men.

Ular ibroniycha “sur” so‘zining ta’rifini ibroniycha “rum” so‘ziga majburan tatbiq etishga urinadilar. Doniyor “sur” so‘zini, ya’ni “olib tashlamoq” ma’nosini, “kundalik” bilan bog‘liq holda yana ikki boshqa oyatda qo‘llaydi, biroq o‘n birinchi oyatda Doniyor “rum” so‘zini tanladi; bu esa “ko‘tarmoq” va “ulug‘lamoq” degan ma’noni anglatadi. Bu oyatga doir afsonaviy uydirmalar to‘plami nafaqat “olib tashlamoq” deb tarjima qilingan so‘zning ma’nosini buzib talqin qilish sababli nodonlikdir, balki Masihning ma’baddagi xizmati odamlarning nazaridan biror tarzda olib tashlangan biron bir davr ham hech qachon bo‘lmagan.

> But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. Hebrews 7:24, 25.

> Ammo bu Zot abadiy qolganligi sababli, Uning ruhoniyligi o‘zgarmasdir. Shuning uchun U O‘zi orqali Xudoga keladiganlarni tamomila najot berishga ham qodirdir, chunki U ular uchun shafoat qilish uchun hamisha tirikdir. Ibroniylarga 7:24, 25.

To claim, as the Adventist theologians do, in an attempt to prop up their false application of the verse, that there was a period of time when the papacy exercised some type of power to remove Christ’s sanctuary intercession is absurd!

Adventist ilohiyotchilari, oyatga bergan o‘zlarining soxta tatbiqlarini qo‘llab-quvvatlash maqsadida, papalik Masihning muqaddasxonadagi shafoatini yo‘qotadigan qandaydir hokimiyatni amalga oshirgan bir davr bo‘lgan, deb da’vo qilishlari — bema’nilikdir!

But the theologians do not teach that the verse identifies that the papacy lifted up and exalted Christ’s sanctuary ministry. They avoid the meaning of Daniel’s words, and the inspired counsel of Ellen White, to teach what they choose to teach in spite of the testimony of Daniel’s words.

Biroq ilohiyotshunoslar bu oyat papalik Masihning muqaddas ma’baddagi xizmatini yuksaltirib ulug‘laganini ko‘rsatadi, deb ta’lim bermaydilar. Ular Doniyor so‘zlarining ma’nosidan va Ellen Uaytning ilhomlangan nasihatidan chetlab o‘tib, Doniyor so‘zlarining guvohligiga qaramay, o‘zlari o‘rgatishni tanlagan narsani ta’lim beradilar.

> Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. Daniel 8:11.

> Haqiqatan, u hatto lashkarning Shahzodasigacha o‘zini ulug‘ladi; va uning tomonidan kundalik qurbonlik olib tashlandi, hamda Uning muqaddas maskanining o‘rni qulatildi. Doniyor 8:11.

The theologians teach that the verse means “by the papal power, Christ’s sanctuary ministry was removed,” and the removal of Christ’s sanctuary ministry from the minds of men is supported by the fact that in association with the removal, the place of Christ’s “sanctuary was cast down.” There is not one verse in God’s Word that identifies the heavenly sanctuary, which is where Christ performs his intercession, has ever been cast down. Nor is there any biblical passage that identifies that heaven itself, which is the “place of his sanctuary”, is ever cast down. Once again, the theologians place themselves above the prophet Daniel, for they insist that “the place of his sanctuary” in the verse is referring to God’s sanctuary, in spite of the fact that Daniel teaches directly opposite of that idea.

Ilohiyotchilar bu oyatning ma’nosi “papalik hokimiyati orqali Masihning muqaddasxonadagi xizmati olib tashlandi”, deb ta’lim beradilar; va Masihning muqaddasxonadagi xizmatining insonlar ongidan olib tashlanganini, bu olib tashlash bilan bog‘liq holda Masihning “muqaddasxonasining joyi yerga tashlangan” degan dalil qo‘llab-quvvatlaydi. Xudoning Kalomida Masih O‘zining shafoat xizmatini ado etadigan samoviy muqaddasxona qachonlardir yerga tashlanganini ko‘rsatadigan birorta ham oyat yo‘q. Shuningdek, “Uning muqaddasxonasining joyi” bo‘lgan osmonning o‘zi qachonlardir yerga tashlanganini ko‘rsatadigan birorta ham Injil parchasi yo‘q. Yana bir bor ilohiyotchilar o‘zlarini Doniyor payg‘ambardan ustun qo‘yadilar, chunki ular oyatdagi “Uning muqaddasxonasining joyi” Xudoning muqaddasxonasiga ishora qiladi, deb turib oladilar, holbuki Doniyor bu fikrning aynan teskarisini bevosita o‘rgatadi.

The professed experts of the Hebrew language insist that in the verse the Hebrew word “rum,” needs to be understood with the meaning of the Hebrew word “sur.” They also insist that the Hebrew word “miqdash” needs to be understood as the Hebrew word “qodesh.” “Miqdash” and “qodash” are both translated simply as “sanctuary” in the book of Daniel, yet they have different meanings. “Miqdash” represents any sanctuary, whether it is God’s sanctuary or a pagan sanctuary. It is the general word for sanctuary, but “qodesh” is only used in the Bible to represent God’s sanctuary.

Ibroniy tili bo‘yicha o‘zini mutaxassis deb biluvchilar ushbu oyatda ibroniycha “rum” so‘zi ibroniycha “sur” so‘zining ma’nosida tushunilishi kerak, deb qat’iy ta’kidlaydilar. Ular, shuningdek, ibroniycha “miqdash” so‘zi ibroniycha “qodesh” so‘zi sifatida tushunilishi kerak, deb ham turib oladilar. “Miqdash” va “qodesh” so‘zlarining ikkalasi ham Doniyor kitobida oddiygina “muqaddas joy” deb tarjima qilinadi, ammo ularning ma’nolari turlichadir. “Miqdash” har qanday muqaddas joyni, u Xudoning muqaddas joyi bo‘ladimi yoki butparastlarning muqaddas joyi bo‘ladimi, ifodalaydi. Bu muqaddas joy uchun ishlatiladigan umumiy so‘zdir, ammo “qodesh” esa Muqaddas Kitobda faqat Xudoning muqaddas joyini ifodalash uchun qo‘llanadi.

Daniel knew the difference between a pagan sanctuary and God’s sanctuary. If Daniel was going to identify a pagan sanctuary, he would use the word “miqdash.” It is amazing to me that the supposed experts of the Hebrew language never address the fact that in four consecutive verses, Daniel uses both words three times. Daniel’s usage of the two Hebrew words, both translated as “sanctuary” defines the meaning Daniel intended to be understood.

Doniyor butparastlarning muqaddas joyi bilan Xudoning Muqaddas maskani o‘rtasidagi farqni bilardi. Agar Doniyor butparastlarning muqaddas joyini nazarda tutmoqchi bo‘lganida, u “miqdash” so‘zini ishlatgan bo‘lardi. Meni hayratga soladigani shuki, ibroniy tili bo‘yicha go‘yoki mutaxassis hisoblanganlar Doniyor ketma-ket to‘rt oyatda har ikkala so‘zni uch marta ishlatganini hech qachon muhokama qilmaydilar. Doniyorning “muqaddas joy” deb tarjima qilinadigan bu ikki ibroniycha so‘zni qo‘llashi, Doniyor anglatilishini istagan ma’noni belgilab beradi.

> Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered. Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. Daniel 8:11–14.

> Ha, u hatto lashkar Amirigacha o‘zini ulug‘ladi; va uning tomonidan kundalik qurbonlik olib tashlandi, hamda Uning muqaddas maskanining joyi qulatildi. Va gunohkorlik sababli kundalik qurbonlikka qarshi unga bir lashkar berildi; u esa haqiqatni yerga uloqtirdi; va ish yuritib, ravnaq topdi. So‘ng men bir muqaddas zotning so‘zlayotganini eshitdim, va boshqa bir muqaddas zot so‘zlayotgan o‘sha muayyan muqaddas zotga dedi: Kundalik qurbonlik, vayron qiluvchi gunoh va ham muqaddas maskan, ham lashkar oyoq osti qilinishi uchun berilishi haqidagi vahiy qachongacha davom etadi? Va u menga dedi: Ikki ming uch yuz kecha-kunduzgacha; shunda muqaddas maskan poklanadi. Doniyor 8:11–14.

In the very passage that includes the foundation of Adventism, Daniel employs two different Hebrew words that are both translated as “sanctuary.” In verses thirteen and fourteen Daniel chose to use the Hebrew word for “sanctuary,” that is only used biblically to identify God’s sanctuary, but in verse eleven, Daniel used the general or generic Hebrew word that can be God’s sanctuary, or it can be a pagan sanctuary.

Aynan Adventizmning poydevorini o‘z ichiga olgan ushbu parchada, Doniyor “muqaddas joy” deb tarjima qilinadigan, biroq aslida ikki xil ibroniycha so‘zni qo‘llaydi. O‘n uchinchi va o‘n to‘rtinchi oyatlarda Doniyor “muqaddas joy” uchun Muqaddas Kitobda faqat Xudoning muqaddas joyini anglatish uchun ishlatiladigan ibroniycha so‘zni tanlagan, ammo o‘n birinchi oyatda esa Doniyor umumiy yoki jinsiy ma’nodagi ibroniycha so‘zni ishlatgan; bu so‘z Xudoning muqaddas joyini ham anglatishi mumkin, yoki butparastlarning muqaddas joyini ham.

If Daniel had wanted to identify the “sanctuary” in verse eleven, as God’s sanctuary, he would have used the same Hebrew word that he used twice within the next three verses. It is absolutely clear that Daniel was making a distinction between a pagan sanctuary in verse eleven, and God’s sanctuary in verses thirteen and fourteen! But the drunkards of Ephraim argue that the “place of his sanctuary” that was “cast down,” in verse eleven, was the place of God’s sanctuary, though they avoid the word “place.”

Agar Doniyor o‘n birinchi oyatdagi “ma’bad”ni Xudoning ma’badi sifatida aniqlamoqchi bo‘lganida, keyingi uch oyat ichida ikki marta qo‘llagan ayni ibroniycha so‘zni ishlatgan bo‘lur edi. Doniyor o‘n birinchi oyatda butparastlarning ma’badi bilan o‘n uchinchi va o‘n to‘rtinchi oyatlardagi Xudoning ma’badi o‘rtasida farq qilayotganligi mutlaqo ravshandir! Ammo Efrayimning mastlari o‘n birinchi oyatda “yerga qulatilgan” “uning ma’badining joyi” Xudoning ma’badi joyi edi, deb da’vo qiladilar, holbuki ular “joy” so‘zidan qochadilar.

They teach that the papacy took away Christ’s ministry of intercession and cast down the truth of the heavenly sanctuary. But Daniel was clear that the “sanctuary” in verse eleven, was not God’s sanctuary, but a pagan sanctuary. Daniel was just as clear that it was not the “sanctuary” that was cast down, but “the place” of his sanctuary.

Ular papalik Masihning shafoat xizmatini olib tashlaganini va samoviy ma’bad haqidagi haqiqatni yerga qulatganini ta’lim beradilar. Ammo Doniyor o‘n birinchi oyatdagi “ma’bad” Xudoning ma’badi emas, balki majusiylar ma’badi ekanini aniq bayon qilgan edi. Doniyor xuddi shuningdek, yerga qulatilgan narsa “ma’bad” emas, balki uning ma’badining “o‘rni” ekanini ham aniq ko‘rsatgan edi.

Refusing to acknowledge the purposeful gender oscillation of verses nine through twelve, the modern theologians adopted the definition of “the daily” that originated within apostate Protestantism, and began to construct a foundation upon the sand of human conjecture, tradition and custom. When they arrive at verse eleven, they even reject the inspired counsel of Sister White that identified that Miller’s understanding of “the daily” as paganism was correct, and begin to employ the art of misdirection and conjecture to defend their love of Catholic and Protestant theology.

To‘qqizinchi oyatdan o‘n ikkinchi oyatgacha bo‘lgan oyatlarning maqsadli jinsiy tebranishini tan olishdan bosh tortgan zamonaviy ilohiyotchilar murtad protestantizm ichida paydo bo‘lgan “kundalik” ta’rifini qabul qildilar va insoniy taxmin, an’ana hamda urf-odat qumi ustiga poydevor qurishni boshladilar. O‘n birinchi oyatga kelganlarida esa, ular hatto Oq opa-singilning Millerning “kundalik”ni majusiylik deb tushunganini to‘g‘ri deb belgilagan ilhomlangan maslahatini ham rad etadilar va katolik hamda protestant ilohiyotiga bo‘lgan muhabbatlarini himoya qilish uchun chalg‘itish va taxmin san’atini ishga sola boshlaydilar.

They change pagan Rome into papal Rome in the verse, and they force the definition of “remove” upon the word that means “lift up and exalt”. They define the satanic symbol of “the daily”, as a godly symbol, and then insist that a pagan temple is God’s temple, while avoiding the direct reference to “the place” of the sanctuary. And the “unlearned” (as Isaiah identifies them), who will only understand if the “learned” tell them it is so, accept the dish of fables unto their own destruction.

Ular bu oyatda butparast Rimni papalik Rimiga aylantiradilar va “ko‘tarib yuksaltirmoq” ma’nosini beradigan so‘zga “olib tashlamoq” degan ta’rifni majburan yuklaydilar. Ular “kundalik”ning shaytoniy ramzini ilohiy ramz sifatida ta’riflaydilar va so‘ng “muqaddas joy”ning “o‘rni”ga bo‘lgan bevosita ishoradan qochgan holda, butparast ma’badni Xudoning ma’badi deb turib oladilar. Va faqat “olimlar” ularga shunday deb aytsagina tushunadigan “bilimsizlar” (Ishayo ularni shunday ataganidek) bu afsonalar taomini o‘z halokatlari sari qabul qiladilar.

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

Kelgusi maqolada biz Millerning tushida marvaridlar sifatida ifodalangan bilimning ortishini ko‘rib chiqishni davom ettiramiz.

> “The apostle Paul warns us that ‘some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.’ This is what we may expect. Our greatest trials will come because of that class who have once advocated the truth, but who turn from it to the world, and trample it under their feet in hate and derision. God has a work for his faithful servants to do. The attacks of the enemy must be met with the truth of his word. Falsehood must be unmasked, its true character must be revealed, and the light of the law of Jehovah must shine forth into the moral darkness of the world. We are to present the claims of his word. We shall not be held guiltless if we neglect this solemn duty. But while we stand in defense of the truth, let us not stand in defense of self, and make a great ado because we are called to bear reproach and misrepresentation. Let us not pity ourselves, but be very jealous for the law of the Most High.

> “Havoriy Pavlus bizni shunday ogohlantiradi: ‘Ba’zilar iymondan qaytib, aldovchi ruhlarga va jinlarning ta’limotlariga quloq tutadilar.’ Biz kutishimiz mumkin bo‘lgan narsa mana shudir. Eng katta sinovlarimiz bir vaqtlar haqiqatni yoqlagan, ammo undan yuz o‘girib dunyoga ketgan va uni nafrat hamda masxara bilan oyoqlari ostida toptagan o‘sha toifa sababli keladi. Xudoning O‘zining sodiq xizmatkorlari uchun bajariladigan bir ishi bor. Dushmanning hujumlari Uning kalomining haqiqati bilan qarshi olinishi kerak. Yolg‘onning niqobi yechilishi, uning asl qiyofasi oshkor etilishi, Yahovaning qonunining nuri esa dunyoning axloqiy zulmatiga porlab kirishi kerak. Biz Uning kalomining da’volarini taqdim etishimiz lozim. Agar bu tantanavor burchni e’tiborsiz qoldirsak, aybsiz deb topilmaymiz. Ammo haqiqatni himoya qilib turganimizda, o‘zimizni himoya qilib turmaylik va bizga malomat hamda noto‘g‘ri talqinlarni ko‘tarish nasib etgani uchun ortiqcha shov-shuv ko‘tarmaylik. O‘zimizga achinmaylik, aksincha, Taoloning qonuni uchun nihoyatda g‘ayratli bo‘laylik.”

> “Says the apostle, ‘The time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.’ On every side we see men easily led captive by the delusive imaginations of those who make void the word of God; but when the truth is brought before them, they are filled with impatience and anger. But the exhortation of the apostle to the servant of God is, ‘Watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.’ In his day some left the cause of the Lord. He writes, ‘Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world;’ and again, he says, ‘Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works: of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words.’

> “Havoriy shunday deydi: ‘Shunday vaqt keladiki, ular sog‘lom ta’limotga chiday olmaydilar; balki o‘z nafs-havaslariga ko‘ra quloqlari qichib, o‘zlariga ko‘plab ustozlar to‘playdilar; va quloqlarini haqiqatdan buradilar hamda afsonalarga og‘adilar.’ Har tomonda biz Xudoning kalomini bekor qiladiganlarning aldamchi xayollari tomonidan odamlarning osongina asir etilib ketayotganini ko‘ramiz; ammo haqiqat ularga taqdim etilganda, ular toqatsizlik va g‘azabga to‘ladilar. Ammo havoriyning Xudoning xizmatkoriga bergan nasihati shudir: ‘Har narsada hushyor bo‘lgin, azob-uqubatlarga sabr qil, xushxabar voizining ishini bajo keltir, xizmat vazifangni to‘la ado et.’ Uning davrida ba’zilar Rabbiyning ishini tark etdilar. U shunday yozadi: ‘Demas hozirgi dunyoni sevib, meni tark etdi;’ va yana shunday deydi: ‘Misgar Iskandar menga ko‘p yomonlik qildi: Rabbiy uni o‘z ishlariga yarasha mukofotlasin: sen ham undan ehtiyot bo‘lgin; chunki u bizning so‘zlarimizga qattiq qarshilik ko‘rsatdi.’”

> “Prophets and apostles experienced similar trials of opposition and reproach, and even the spotless Lamb of God was tempted in all points like as we are. He bore the contradiction of sinners against himself.

> “Payg‘ambarlar va havoriylar qarshilik hamda ta’na-malomatning o‘xshash sinovlarini boshdan kechirdilar, hatto Xudoning beg‘ubor Qo‘zisi ham biz kabi har jihatdan vasvasaga solingan edi. U gunohkorlarning O‘ziga qarshi bo‘lgan zid so‘zlariga chidadi.

> “Every warning for this time must be faithfully delivered; but ‘the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient; in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves.’ We must cherish carefully the words of our God lest we be contaminated by the deceptive workings of those who have left the faith. We are to resist their spirit and influence with the same weapon our Master used when assailed by the prince of darkness,—‘It is written.’ We should learn to use the word of God skillfully. The exhortation is, ‘Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.’ There must be diligent work and earnest prayer and faith to meet the winding error of false teachers and seducers; for ‘in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.’ These words portray the character of the men the servants of God will have to meet. ‘False accusers,’ ‘despisers of those that are good,’ will attack those who are faithful to their God in this degenerate age. But the embassador of Heaven must manifest the spirit that was displayed in the Master. In humility and love he must labor for the salvation of men.

> “Bu zamon uchun berilgan har bir ogohlantirish sadoqat bilan yetkazilishi kerak; ammo ‘Rabbiyning quli janjallashmasligi, balki hamma odamlarga muloyim, ta’lim berishga qobiliyatli, sabrli bo‘lishi; o‘zlariga qarshi turuvchilarni kamtarlik bilan nasihat qilishi’ lozim. Imondan qaytganlarning aldovchi amallari bilan bulg‘anib qolmasligimiz uchun Xudoyimizning so‘zlarini ehtiyotkorlik bilan asrashimiz kerak. Ularning ruhi va ta’siriga Ustozimiz zulmat shahzodasi tomonidan hujumga uchraganida ishlatgan o‘sha qurol bilan qarshi turmog‘imiz lozim,—‘Yozilgandir’. Biz Xudoning Kalomini mahorat bilan ishlatishni o‘rganishimiz kerak. Nasihat shudir: ‘O‘zingni Xudo huzurida maqbul ko‘rsatishga tirishgin, uyalishga hojat qolmaydigan ishchi bo‘lib, haqiqat kalomini to‘g‘ri talqin qilgin.’ Soxta ustozlar va yo‘ldan ozdiruvchilarning chigal xatolariga qarshi turish uchun tirishqoq mehnat, jiddiy ibodat va imon bo‘lishi kerak; chunki ‘oxirgi kunlarda og‘ir zamonlar keladi. Zero, odamlar o‘zlarini sevuvchi, tamagir, maqtanchoq, mag‘rur, kufr so‘zlovchi, ota-onaga itoatsiz, noshukur, nopok, tabiiy mehr-shafqatdan mahrum, sulhni buzuvchi, tuhmatchi, o‘zini tuta bilmaydigan, yovuz, yaxshilikni sevuvchilarni yomon ko‘ruvchi, xoin, shoshqaloq, kibor, Xudoni sevishdan ko‘ra lazzatni sevuvchi bo‘ladilar; taqvodorlikning shakliga ega bo‘lib, ammo uning qudratini inkor etadilar: bundaylardan yuz o‘gir.’ Bu so‘zlar Xudoning xizmatkorlari duch kelishiga to‘g‘ri keladigan odamlarning fe’l-atvorini tasvirlaydi. ‘Tuhmatchilar,’ ‘yaxshilikni sevuvchilarni yomon ko‘ruvchilar’ bu buzuq asrda o‘z Xudosiga sodiq bo‘lganlarga hujum qiladilar. Ammo Osmon elchisi Ustozda namoyon bo‘lgan ruhni namoyon etmog‘i kerak. U kamtarlik va muhabbat bilan odamlarning najoti uchun mehnat qilmog‘i lozim.”

> “Paul continues concerning those who oppose the work of God, comparing them to the men who made war against the faithful in the time of ancient Israel. He says: ‘Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth; men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.’ We know that the time is coming when the folly of warring against God will be revealed. We can afford to wait in calm patience and trust, no matter how much maligned and despised; for ‘nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest,’ and those who honor God shall be honored by him in the presence of men and angels. We are to share in the sufferings of the reformers. It is written, ‘The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me.’ Christ understands our grief. Not one of us is called to bear the cross alone. The suffering Man of Calvary is touched with the feeling of our woes, and as he has suffered being tempted, he is able also to succor them that are in sorrow and trial for his sake. ‘Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned.’” Review and Herald, January 10, 1888.

> “Pavlus Xudoning ishiga qarshi chiquvchilar haqida so‘z yuritishni davom ettirib, ularni qadimgi Isroil davrida sodiqlarga qarshi urush qilgan kishilarga qiyoslaydi. U shunday deydi: ‘Yannay bilan Yambray Musoga qanday qarshi turgan bo‘lsalar, bular ham haqiqatga shunday qarshilik ko‘rsatadilar; aql-zakovati buzuq, imon borasida rad etilgan odamlardir. Ammo ular bundan nariga o‘ta olmaydilar; chunki ularning nodonligi hammaning oldida oshkor bo‘ladi, xuddi ularningkidek bo‘lgani kabi.’ Biz bilamizki, Xudoga qarshi jang qilishning nodonligi fosh etiladigan vaqt kelmoqda. Biz, qanchalik tuhmat qilinmaylik va nafratlanmaylik, xotirjam sabr-toqat va ishonch bilan kutishga qodirmiz; chunki ‘oshkor qilinmaydigan hech qanday sir yo‘q,’ va Xudoni ulug‘laydiganlar insonlar hamda farishtalar oldida U tomonidan ulug‘lanadilar. Biz islohotchilarning azob-uqubatlariga sherik bo‘lishimiz kerak. Shunday yozilgan: ‘Senga ta’na qilganlarning ta’nalari mening ustimga tushdi.’ Masih bizning qayg‘umizni tushunadi. Hech birimiz xochni yolg‘iz ko‘tarishga chaqirilmaganmiz. Qalvariyning Iztirobli Insoni dardlarimizni chuqur his etadi, va O‘zi vasvasaga uchrab azob chekkanligi sababli, Uning haqi uchun qayg‘u va sinovda bo‘lganlarga ham yordam bera oladi. ‘Ha, Masih Isoda taqvodor hayot kechirishni istaganlarning hammasi quvg‘in qilinadi. Lekin yovuz odamlar va aldoqchilar tobora battarroq bo‘lib boradilar, o‘zlari aldanib, boshqalarni aldaydilar. Sen esa o‘rgangan narsalaringda sobit qol.’” Review and Herald, January 10, 1888.

Back to Articles