|
“The Daily” – HaTamid
Arguably, one of the most contentious prophetic phrases affecting Adventism is “the daily,” recorded five times in the book of Daniel. Most Bible expositors have identified it as the continual burnt offerings or sacrifices that occurred each morning and evening. Compounding this is its related Little Horn, contextually felt to be of the Maccabbean era, identified as Antiochus IV Epiphanes. This brought division that rivals Kellogg’s apostasy – all occurring around the same time, the 1900 era. The early Advent movement saw the pioneers viewing the daily as paganism. The new view, which was introduced around 1900 by Louis R. Conradi, claimed it to be Christ’s priestly ministry in heaven. The debate was intense, intriguing and devastating. The “pagan” view stifled deeper understanding of the end-time themes of Daniel 8 and 9. The “sanctuary” view led to questions regarding the judgment issues held by Adventists. There is growing evidence that neither view addresses the amazing legal covenant theological issues in Daniel 8 through 12. It is issue that we begin to address here. This writing takes a simple thematic approach, appealing to what seems to be the obvious. This outline is given with the hope that it will provoke deeper study into what appears to be an exciting end-time setting for the “daily.” Nothing will detract from the elevated message of the sanctuary and judgment presented in Daniel 8–12. That discussion, however, is not the purpose of this document. What is presented here will be better understood if the previous chapter on the Abomination of Desolation is studied. The word “daily” (tamid or tamiyd) as used in Daniel is preceded by “ha,” meaning “the.” HaTamid – the daily – thus acts as a noun. Here in Daniel is the only place in the Bible where it is substantiative. Everywhere else tamid is either an adjective or an adverb. In spite of this, most translators have incorrectly added the word “sacrifice” after “tamid,” assuming it related to the cultic morning and evening sacrifices (Exodus 29:42; Numbers 28:6, 10, 15, 23; Ezra 3:5; Nehemiah 10:34). “Sacrifice” was in the Septuagint but not in the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS). In his interlinear work, John R. Kohlenberger, III, addresses “sacrifice” in his “direct” expression of the Old Testament Hebrew, prejudicing his work and promulgating the error. Expositor White over 150 years ago correctly shared with her students the mistake in adding that word.1 In the Old Testament, Tamid is translated as continually (53 times), continual (26 times), daily (7 times), always (6 times), ever (3 times), perpetual (2 times), continual employment (once), evermore (once), never (once). The context governs the best expressions, which the varied translators certainly tried to capture. Tamid conveys the concept of “never stopping.” The object or issue is descriptively “ceaseless” or “perpetual.” HaTamid, then, is unique since it says “the ceaseless” or “the perpetual” or “the never stopping” was the object of adverse action. This word in Daniel is tied to an end-time setting. In fact, the very end (es qes) during the appointed time (moed – 8:19) when God begins His strange act (Daniel 8:17 (zaam); cf. Isaiah 28:21). The question then emerges, in that framework, what does that wicked power (the Little Horn or King of the North) do to “the perpetual?” Every place HaTamid is used, an antichrist or rebellious “Babylonian” type of power is contextually inflicting harm. Logically, only God can set up something that is “endless” or a “forever.” Our first clue to study this comes as we note that every place it is mentioned in Daniel, it is associated with either the word “transgression” (pesha) or “abomination” (shiqquwts). We’ve previously noted that transgression is related to rebellion against God’s authority, law and covenant. The use of “abomination” is God’s inspired Word to reveal His feelings towards setting up a false standard against a norm that He has already established. When the Roman armies went into battle they carried an emblem, flag or standard, which announced to all who they were. They also displayed symbols of their gods who allegedly would help them conquer. Every tribe of Israel had an emblem or insignia (Numbers 2:2). That identified who they were, what their position in the camp was and revealed the symbolic character of their group. The antichrist sets up an emblem which defies God. That’s the “abomination” that “the daily” is associated with. He’s a leader against God’s true emblem! These two words, transgression and abomination, distinctly portray setting up a standard or insignia that is reprehensible to God. It is a false Sabbath (see the previous study on the “Abomination Associated with Desolation – Only at the Es Qes,” EndTime Issues…, Aug. 2006, No. 80). Whatever “the daily” represents, it needs to have an association with the false “Sabbath” because of their contextual association in Daniel’s writings. These are the verses in Daniel where HaTamid is used (notice the verb that “the daily” is associated with):
From this simple contextual setting, the daily associated with the transgression or the abomination is actually the daily contrasted with the abomination when analyzing the verbs. It is a report of competing emblems of authority. Let’s look deeper and study the noted verbs tied to the HaTamid. Looking outside of Daniel is helpful to understand what happened to “the daily,” “the forever” or “the perpetual.” Rum in a non-cultic use suggests “height” or “elevation.” In a literal sense it describes the heights of the heavens (Proverbs 25:3), height of people (Deuteronomy 1:28). Figuratively, it represents man’s attitude when proud or arrogant (Proverbs 21:4, Isaiah 10:12; 2:11, 17; Jeremiah 48:29). It is also used for being elevated or rising up (angels – Ezekiel 10:16). In the Hophal verb form, as originally here in Daniel, it expresses a passive response.2 However, in the Kethiv Reading in the qere, it suggests that it should be a Hiphal expression. In that setting, one would see the “daily” being lifted up from its place by someone or something, which results in the place of the sanctuary, or God’s true church, being “cast down.” The Hophal form would suggest that the daily was abolished. That would not fit the story of “the daily” elsewhere in Daniel. It appears that the gere is correct. Therefore, in that sense, something that is supposed to be everlasting is lifted “out,” “up” or “removed.”3 In Daniel, whether in the Aramaic section (5:19-20, 23) or Hebrew area (11:12, 36; 12:7), the use of rum suggests “lifted up” and out of its place. Some transliterations say “heave.” In cultic imagery noted in Leviticus 1-7, rum is used as a sacrificial technique, related to “lifting up” the fat out of an animal (lifted up from the animal and placing it on the altar) or “lifting up” the ashes from the altar and placing them where they can be removed. Contextually, then, in verses 11 and 12, the Little Horn “lifts up”, “takes out of its place” or “removes” “the perpetual” or “the forever.” In Daniel 11 and 12 the verb is different. The daily is “taken away” (sur). The primary meaning of sur is to “turn aside from” as a verb of motion. The imagery reflects departing from (Judges 16:20; Samuel 16:14; 28:16; II Kings 10:31; 13:2, 6, 11). In the Hiphil stem here in Daniel, it suggests removing or putting away (II Chronicles 15:16, 30:14; II Kings 18:4; Amos 5:21-23). Daniel 8–12 is a Hebrew unit that unfolds repetitive themes and issues in various expressions. As the “transgression” and “abomination” associated with “desolation” refer to the same event in those chapters, so does “the daily.” Thematically, the Little Horn and its later descriptive symbol, the King of the North, lifts out of its usual place “the perpetual” and takes it away or removes it. If it represented paganism, there would be contextual issues. The Little Horn and the King of the North act as if they were God. They are anti-God and anti-covenant by Daniel’s descriptive behavior. What is this anti-God power trying to lift out of its place and remove? Is it paganism? Is it the sanctuary ministry in heaven? It is too easy to add interpretive views (like the word “sacrifice”) to Scripture. What does the Bible reveal? There are helpful clues. Daniel 8:12 notes a host (different than the “host of heaven” in verse 10) was given to the Little Horn, which waxed great. The word “host” (saba) usually relates to fighting. It is an army that is fighting on behalf of the Little Horn, which is already in a battle against the Messiah (Prince of the host or Prince of princes – vss 11, 25) and His host (host of heaven – vs 10) or God’s people. Daniel says that the Little Horn was able to get or obtain his host by “reason of transgression” or “by transgression” (bepasa). This is a strong Hebrew word for rebellion against God. Contextually, it is against His authority, law and covenant (Exodus 34:7, Numbers 14:18, Joshua 24:19, I Kings 8:50, Proverbs 19:11, Micah 7:18), which brings estrangement (Psalm 89:32, Amos 3:14).4 This host meritoriously earned their service to be in the Little Horn’s army by rebelling against God’s authority, law and covenant. Interesting – when Gabriel came to Daniel to outline what corrective action “his people” needed to bring in everlasting righteousness (Daniel 9:24), the first thing mentioned was to make an end to pasa! Why? Daniel’s people were in captivity because they had defied the shemita or Sabbath rest of each seventh year (Leviticus 25). In Daniel the pasa or pesha is related to the Sabbath. II Chronicles 36:20-21: “And them that had escaped from the sword carried he away to Babylon; where they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia: To fulfil the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths: [for] as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years.” The Hebrew people had missed 70 shemita Sabbaths. They were in captivity 70 years. They had rebelled against God’s authority, His law and covenant. Not only was the seventh-day Sabbath a perpetual requirement, but that “week of years” and its sacred seventh year was also. So important was this that God warned them that their land would become desolate if they defied His request (Leviticus 26:14-34). The daily or “the perpetual” is associated with an abomination that leads to desolation – nothing left, the land is at rest. It is most interesting that within the Sabbath commandment there is reference to:
§ God’s authority – Creator (Exodus 20:11) § Embodied in His law – the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:3-23, Deuteronomy 5:7-21) § God’s covenant – promises of deliverance and restoration (Deuteronomy 5:15)
The evidence mounts that the rebellion (be pasa), which brought supporters to the Little Horn represented active defiance against God’s Sabbath. God’s church, His sanctuary, is polluted by lifting out of its place the Sabbath and putting in its place a false Sabbath, an abomination. “And arms shall stand [host – army] on his part [King of the North], and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength [God’s church], and shall take away [remove] the daily [true Sabbath] {sacrifice}, and they shall place the abomination [false Sabbath] that maketh desolate [curse God said would come to those defying His authority, law and covenant!]” (Daniel 11:31). It is noted that this end-time force that is against God, has “indignation against the holy covenant” and works and plans with those who “forsake the holy covenant” (Daniel 11:30). By this action of the Little Horn’s supporters, “truth is cast to the ground” (Daniel 8:12). What are the players in this act on the world’s stage? Though a different study, this Little Horn represents the second rise of the papacy (represented in gender differences as the church and state powers) and apostate Protestantism, the latter, becomes part of or supports the papacy by its rejection of the Sabbath, casting “truth to the ground.” This is precisely what unfolds in Revelation 6, 13–18. There, repeatedly the issue of defiance against the Sabbath is presented related to two apostate powers – the papacy and apostate Protestantism (the false prophet)! All this won’t happen until the 2300 atonement evenings and mornings (Daniel 8:14, 17, 19) are past. Is there a “perpetual” or “forever” message related to the Sabbath? “Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it [is] a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that [ye] may know that I [am] the LORD that doth sanctify you. Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it [is] holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth [any] work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. Six days may work be done; but in the seventh [is] the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth [any] work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, [for] a perpetual covenant. It [is] a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed” (Exodus 31:13-17). There is a temptation to look for the word (tamid) elsewhere as the only exegetic tie to understand the “daily.” Since Daniel is the only place it is a noun and the context is the covenant and the Sabbath, we discover powerful ties to Exodus 31. The sin or bepasa that casts truth to the ground challenges God’s authority, law and covenant. That is exactly what defying the Sabbath does! God said in the above verses that the Sabbath was a “sign” (owth):
1. That He was the Lord (His authority) 2. He was the Lord that sanctified or made us holy (cf. Ezekiel 20:12 – observing the law was the basis for God to exercise this right). It is the ensign or standard God’s people are to use to show that they are the covenant people (the agreement between God and man, which He legally uses to restore them).
Twice within the context of these verses God conveys two most interesting thoughts:
1. Observing the Sabbath is one of man’s obligations in that covenant agreement. 2. It is a sign “forever” that identifies the God of deliverance and restoration.
The words “forever” and “perpetual” used in Exodus 31 are the Hebrew word olam. It represents “indefinite continuance.” Not even the future can confine it. The Septuagint uses the word aion with basically the same meaning. Tamid or HaTamid, used in Daniel is best understood as continuous, forever, perpetual, always or regular. It has been suggested (by Homjmel) that its origins were Arabic, meaning fixed or established. The word “established” means that it won’t change. It is a “forever” or something that God has indefinitely put in place. The Little Horn or King of the North (8:12, 11:31) removes out of place “the established.” Its followers fight “the established” because they rebelled against God’s authority, law and covenant found in the fourth commandment. His followers even take the Sabbath away and put in its place the abominable false Sabbath (11:31). This action is wicked and against the covenant (11:32; cf. Exodus 31:15). From the time “the established” or true Sabbath is taken away (something formal is decreed to cause that to happen – it involves a corporate act – “host”) and the abomination is “set up” (12:11) (that means some law or decree creates it – a false standard), it will last or be in effect 1290 days (12:11). (The Hebraic “day” (yom) with a number is literal.) The context, the linguistics, the tie to the abomination all point to the “daily” as representing the true Sabbath, which is a resisted issue at the end of time. Past views of paganism (“old view”) and Christ’s ministry within the heavenly sanctuary (“new view”) have drawn attention away from the details of the end-time setting, which so much of Daniel sets in (8:17, 8:19, 12:1-2). E. G. White, expositor of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, was cautious and non-committal regarding “the daily.” Her son Arthur reflected: “The advocates of the old view maintained that the wording of this statement placed Heaven’s endorsement on the view of the daily held by Miller and eventually repeated by Uriah Smith. The new-view advocates held that the statement must be taken in its context – the context of time setting. Ellen White’s repeated statements that ‘I have no light on the point’ (Letter 226, 1908) and ‘I am unable to define clearly the points that are questioned’ (Letter 250, 1908), and her inability to make a definite statement when the question was urged upon her, seemed to give support to their conclusion.”5 In 1910 she said in reaction to the controversy which followed the “new view:” “I now ask that my ministering brethren shall not make use of my writings in their arguments regarding this question {‘the daily’}; for I have had no instruction on the point under discussion, and I see no need for the controversy. Regarding this matter under present conditions, silence is eloquence.”6 It is being increasingly recognized in prophetic apocalyptic messages that a pivotal end-time matter will be over the Sabbath. Daniel’s hatamid begins to unfold this amazing fact. The last day antichrist will make the Sabbath and God’s everlasting covenant a legal issue. Its “host” will be pitted against the Prince or Commander of heaven’s “host.” New insights are now unfolding that show the seventh-day is prophetically unveiled as an end-time crises issue! “The daily” represents God’s true Sabbath.
Endnotes:
1White, Ellen G.; Early Writings, p. 74. 2Harris, R. Laird (Moody Press, Chicago), vol. 2, pp. 837-838. 3Blue Letter Bible on rum. 4Harris, Op cit., pp. 742-743. 5White, Arthor L.; The Latter Elmshaven Years1905-1915. 6White, Ellen G.; Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 164.
|