The veracity of Bible chronology

Throughout the ages, endless and bitter attacks against the reliability of the Biblical record have come from men who were moved more by zeal than by knowledge. These charges of inaccuracies in the Word of God have been due largely to an imperfect knowledge of the facts of ancient Biblical history, manners and customs rather than to actual errors in the Biblical record.

Professor of Religion and Philosophy, Emmanuel Missionary College

THROUGHOUT the ages, endless and bitter attacks against the reliability of the Biblical record have come from men who were moved more by zeal than by knowledge. These charges of inaccuracies in the Word of God have been due largely to an imperfect knowledge of the facts of ancient Biblical history, manners and customs rather than to actual errors in the Biblical record.

Particularly bitter and vitriolic have been the attacks directed against the chronological data in the books of Kings and Chronicles. Here scholars were certain that they were in possession of evidence of unquestionable error. Not being able to put the data together into a harmonious pattern, they were certain that the data were wrong and that they constituted incontrovertible evidence of the unreliability of the Biblical record.

As early as the fourth century A.D., Jerome expressed himself as follows con­cerning the chronological materials: "Read all the books of the Old and New Testament, and you will find such a discord as to the number of the years, such a confusion as to the duration of the reigns of the kings of Judah and Israel, that to attempt to clear up this question will rather appear the occupation of a man of leisure than of a scholar." 1

Histories of Israel and Judah are replete with statements regarding the errors in the Biblical chronological data, as witness the following: "Of all the discrepancies be­tween the books of Rings and Chronicles, as usual that of the dates is the most obstin­ately conflicting. I confess that I cannot see how any exact chronology can be framed." 2 "Wellhausen has shown, by convincing rea­sons, that the synchronisms within the Book of Kings cannot possibly rest on ancient tradition, but are on the contrary simply the products of artificial reckoning." 3 "Wellhausen is surely right in believing that the synchronisms in Kings are worthless, being merely a late compilation." 4

Almost all encyclopedias, whether Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, or secular are in agreement concerning the supposed inac­curacies of the chronological data. Let us notice the following: "Almost along the whole line, the discrepancy between synchronisms and years of reign is incurable. . . . The individual numbers of years of reign, as well as the totals, are untrustworthy and useless for the purpose of a certain chronology." 5 "There is no fixed Bible chronology."6 "Errors which have vitiated more or less the entire chronology have crept in. . . . Any attempt to base a chronological scheme on them may be disregarded." 7

"Many of the numbers given, especially the synchronisms, are erroneous, as is proved by the fact that no attempt to harmonize the two series has been successful." 8

Biblical commentaries likewise point to errors and contradictions in the chronological data, and claim that these data are irreconcilable: "The chronology of the history contained in the Books of the Kings presents difficulties which have never yet been conquered. There are data in the text which are contradictory. The only means of forming any chronology at all is to sacrifice some of the statements, and the text does not offer sufficient critical grounds upon which to decide which ones are correct. ... It seems to be labor thrown away to pore over the data for the intervening details of the chronology." 9

Learned treatises on the Old Testament repeatedly declare that the chronological data are erroneous, contradictory, and unreliable. Among these the following may be noticed: "The numbers, as they have come down to us in Kings, are untrustworthy, being in part self-contradictory, in part opposed to other scriptural notices, in part improbable, if not impossible."10 "The chronology of the exilic editor in Judges and Kings is purely fictitious." 11 "We must acknowledge the artificial character of the Biblical chronological data." 12

Certain scholars are bitter in their denunciations of the Old Testament writers, accusing them not merely of carelessness and incompetence, but of deliberate falsehood. Thus Jules Oppert in his article on "Chronology" in the Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. IV, uses such terms as "flagrant contradiction," "intentional mutilation," and "ruthlessly altered" in regard to the treatment of the chronological data in Kings.

So long has this problem been under discussion, and so many and varied have been the attempts at solution, that numerous scholars have come to the conclusion that the chronological problem is beyond solution, and that efforts in that direction are merely a waste of time. Among these are the following: "The causes of the difficulties and discrepancies occurring in Scriptural chronology are manifold. . . . Many attempts, it is true, have been made to reconcile them with each other but they seem to be utterly irreconcilable." 13 "The main difficulty against the chronology given in the Biblical record arises from the apparently ascertained data supplied by the newer discoveries. . . . It is not necessary that we should enter here into the many intricacies of that difficult problem, the full solution of which will probably never be reached." 14 "The Chronology of the two Kingdoms after their separation is in many respects involved, and, from the want of sufficient data to guide us, sometimes so difficult as to baffle all efforts at certain solution." 15

W. F. Albright, one of the most learned and noted Biblical scholars of our age, is of the opinion that "It is incredible that all these numbers can have been handed down through so many editors and copyists without often becoming corrupt." 16 Albright frankly admits the complexity of the problem, and enumerates the many details concerning which he believes nothing is known. "The data given in Kings and Chronicles are complicated by a great many factors. Nowhere are we explicitly told in the Bible how regnal years were computed in Israel. . . . We do not know directly whether the civil year began in the spring ... or in the autumn. . . . We do not know to what extent coregencies were in vogue. . . . We do not know whether all the regnal years are based on the actual accession of a king or perhaps on some era. We do not know whether the numbers given for the length of reigns are based on more, or less reliable sources than the synchronisms. . . . We do not know the extent to which the synchronisms were drawn directly from analystic sources or were calculated by an ancient scribe. . . . And finally we do not know the sources from which the regnal totals were drawn, nor the method employed to select the numbers used when there were conflicts between oral and written sources. There has been great corruption of the text since the Deuteronomic History was finished in the early sixth centurv B.C." "

Professor Albright has here been extremely liberal and frank in his use of the term "We do not know." It is interesting however, that in regard to all these items we are today in a position to know the facts. They will be found in my study on Hebrew chronology, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, published in 1951 by the University of Chicago Press. (See also my study on "The Question of Coregencies Among the Hebrew Kings," in A Stubborn Faith, ed. Edward C. Hobbs, pp. 43-50.) There it is made clear that once the underlying principles of Hebrew chronology are understood, the many seeming contradictions between the Biblical data and the discrepancies with secular chronology disappear, and a pattern results which possesses internal harmony and is in perfect agreement with the contemporary chronology of Israel's neighbors.

1 Jerome, Epistle LXX1I ad Vitalem; P. L., t. XXII. 439, col. 676.

2  Henry Hart Milman, History of the Jews, vol. 1, p. 377.

3  R. Kittel, History of the Hebrews, vol. 2. p. 234.

4 Theodore H. Robinson, History of Israel, vol. 1, p. 454.

5 Karl Marti, "Chronology," Encyclopaedia Biblica, Vol. I.

6 J. A. Howlett, "Chronology," Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. Ill, p. 735.

7 S. R. and G. R. Driver, "Old Testament Chronology," Encyclopaedia Britanica, Vol. Ill, p. 511.

8 J. Frederick McCurdy, "Chronology," Jewish Encyclopedia, Vol. IV, p. 69.

9 W. G. Sumner, Appendix, "The Books of the Kings." A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, ed., John Peter Lange, trans. Philip Schaff.

10 George Rawlinson, Introduction to the Books of Kings, vol. 2, p. 475.

11 Robert Pfeiffer, Introduction to the Old Testament, p. 394.

12 Eberhard Schrader, Cuneiform Inscriptions and the Old Testament, vol. 2, p. 173.

13 John Augustine Zahm, "The Age of the Human Race According to Modern Science and Bible Chronology." American Catholic Quarterly Review, XIX (1894), p. 260.

14 Francis E. Gigot, Special Introduction to the Study of the Old Testament, p. 287.

15 Alfred Edersheim, History of Judah and Israel, Vol. V, chronological table footnote following p. 197.

16 W. F. Albright, "The Chronology of the Divided Monarchy of Israel," Bulletin of the American Schools of Ori­ental Research, No. 100 (Dec, 1945), p. 17.

17---------, "Alternative Chronology," Interpretation, January, 1952, p. 10.

 


Ministry reserves the right to approve, disapprove, and delete comments at our discretion and will not be able to respond to inquiries about these comments. Please ensure that your words are respectful, courteous, and relevant.

comments powered by Disqus

Professor of Religion and Philosophy, Emmanuel Missionary College

July 1960

Download PDF
Ministry Cover

More Articles In This Issue

Pointers for Preachers

"Ecumenism and individualism", "Where is the promise?", "Twenty new nations"

Preacher's children

A series of talks to young ministers' wives by Dorothy Lockwood Aitken.

The minister and his family

The minister who budgets his time can be a true husband and father to his family and still not neglect his church responsibilities.

Obtaining the Charter (C-Rating): The Story of Accreditation at CME—Part 1: Continued

The story of accreditation at the College of Medical Evangelists.

Is public evangelism outmoded?

Standing today with our feet almost touching the shores of eternity, facing awful events, it is the time and the place to say, "Evangelism is possible, brother."

Evangelism at the new Osaka Center

This article is a brief presentation of evan­gelistic procedures being used in the Osaka Center, Japan.

Recognizing personality differences

A subject of ever increasing importance with the passing of time, wherever two or more persons are associated in service, whether in families, churches, schools, conferences, institutions, or var­ious kinds of business, is personality problems.

The Practice of Stewardship

The all-inclusive expansion of "the ever­lasting gospel," known and loved by the Advent people as the threefold message, is intrinsically bound up with the tremendous fact of the divine Personality who is the Creator of all. This means and involves so much that we might well pause briefly and ponder its sweeping implications.

Obedience and Knowledge

One compensation of obedience is the ac­quisition of spiritual truth and knowl­edge. Generally, knowledge is looked upon as belonging to the mind. This, of course, is true of certain factual knowledge as scien­tific experiment and theoretical truth. It is certainly not true of spiritual knowledge.

View All Issue Contents

Digital delivery

If you're a print subscriber, we'll complement your print copy of Ministry with an electronic version.

Sign up

Recent issues

See All