To gain a proper understanding of the challenge we face it is good to examine our presuppositions. It's a given that not everyone will embrace all of these. For the purposes of this study, this is our position.

Inerrancy of Scripture

The Scriptures, in their original autographs, were completely inerrant in all details of history, geography, science and, of course, spiritual matters. If we can’t start here in agreement, then further effort to gain understanding of the truth is always built upon the foundation of, and therefore subject to, our personal inerrancy.

Diverse Calendars

People in other lands date events and time lines under the same criteria we do. This is obviously not the case, as can be attested by the Jewish day beginning and ending in the evening, and their use of a lunar calendar. We must also be aware that their calendars did not start in January, as our present one does. As many scholars have pointed out, there were differing “New Year’s” according to the kingdom and time period. Much has to be considered in this area of study, as it will have a tremendous impact on our conclusions.

Diverse Recordings of Accession Years

Some may conclude that when one king began ruling, the other’s rule must have ceased. This is not true and, as with number two above, will have bearing on our discussion as well. Sometimes there was co-regency. Also, during certain times in each kingdom, both the year of death and the year of accession were counted in the years of the king’s reign, causing the record to appear to have an extra year when the rule of the kingdom changed hands (at least to our western understanding).

Not All The Facts Are Available

We do not have all the facts before us. The “fact” is, new historical discoveries are being made every day through archeological work throughout the Near East. On top of that, it can take years before the data from these discoveries are translated, compiled and made available for research. It is well known that there is an abundance of material that has yet to be given much attention; material that may give us further insight to the challenge before us.

We Are Not Infallible

We are able to discern and compile all the evidence before us accurately. This is a dangerous assumption. One of the repercussions of the fall is that we are not infallible, as much as we’d like to think we are at times.

How many times have you balanced your checkbook only to find a slight discrepancy? Then, after going over it several times you may have even given up. Or worse yet, you may have gone to the bank and challenged them as to why your account has the wrong balance, only to have them prove to you that you have not assembled and/or interpreted the data correctly. If we can make such simple mistakes as this, how much more likely are we to make errors dealing with data that is over 2500 years removed?

We Can Still Mess Up Perfect Data

Then, even if we did have all the data and compile it accurately, can we be sure that the conclusions we draw are accurate? We are liable to make conclusions based on assumptions regarding our data that are not entirely accurate. It is a challenge for us to deal with these things by examining ourselves as scrupulously as our sources and accepting God’s testimony as true in all that it claims.

Summary

So, in light of these considerations, it may seem to us a futile effort to reconcile the apparent contradictions within the Bible itself, and between the biblical record and the secular historical record. At this point in time it may be presumptuous for us to claim, incontrovertibly, that we can figure this out, beyond doubt. However, as will be shown, we do have evidence today that, when compiled and compared, seems to give us a chronology that we can be reasonably sure is, at the very least, extremely close to the actual events.

We will attempt to approach the data as objectively as possible, searching for the truth of the matter. In the end perhaps it is better to simply know that this information is indeed reconcilable, rather than being 100% certain that we have arrived at the correct conclusions.[1]

Steemin' on,
Another Joe

Email notifications
AJ Facebook
AJ Twitter

AAC Facebook
AAC Twitter

[1] Dogmatism in this area may, in the long run, prove to be worse than ignorance. In other words, it’s better to be ignorant, admitting you don’t know, than to claim or think that you know something, proclaiming it as a fact, only to be proven wrong. Such was the case with the Pharisees who watched so dogmatically for a conquering king to deliver them from the oppression of Rome, only to miss the Lamb of God when He came to deliver them from the oppression of their own depravity and sin.

Previously in this series
~ Introduction ~