All Biblical and Extra Biblical chronological data relating to the pre-Babylonian Exile period, are recorded in an artificial form. Synchronous Chronology Israel and Judah: Divided Kingdom Bible History: Bible and the Ancient Near East. The Principle of Linear Causality. Essene artificial calendars. Sectarian chronological records of Israel. Mathmatical and chronological predictions are able to be 'proved' or 'disproved'
The King's Calendar is a computer generated mathematical synchronism primarily of all the Biblical Chronological Data for the Divided Kingdom of Israel, but extending its' application to the chronologies of Josephus, Seder Olam Rabbah and the Damascus Documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
It assigns a value of 336 days per Biblical Year derived from the Hypothesis that:
The Proto-Essenes or Hasidim, firstly in Babylonia and later in Palestine, altered the true solar year history of Israel.
Counting each year as comprised of 364 days
They divided these 364 days into 7 day periods
And divided these into 4 week months
To create an artificial year of 12 months of 4 weeks of 7 days.
The Premise:
Between the 5th and 3rd centuries BCE (but continuing down to at least 104 BCE)
Sectarian redactors transcribed the legitimate 'solar year' chronological records of Israel into the artificial form
Altering the legitimate history of Israel
And extending it, by creating 13 artificial years where 12 solar years once stood
When the Synchronous Chronological Data provided in the Books of Kings and Chronicles for the Divided Kingdom Period are measured in years of 336 days, the synchronisms actually align.
To see how effective it synchronises the Divided Kingdom Period SEE : Appendix 5: which is an Actual Calendar of events, listing every true and artificial year, and records all the Synchronous Biblical Chronological Data from 936 to 586 BCE.
The Best way to explain what the kings Calendar is, is to show you
The King's Calendar is a series of calendars that visually depict the Biblical chronological synchronisms. All but Appendix 5 have Line Numbers so as to provide a ready reckoning for the purposes of calculations.
The following is a sample of a Bare [Raw Data] Calendar, as it applies to the Divided Kingdom Period.
This next calendar is an example of how the Biblical Data is applied to that calendar.
2. The formula for constructing the artificial calendar
Take 'X' number of Solar years
Multiply it by 364
To arrive at 'Y' number of days
Divide these 'Y' number of days by 336
The Result is 'Z' number of artificial years
'Z' artificial years = 1.083 'X' and represents the original number of converted years plus 8%.
To reverse the process by hand:
'Z' years times 336 equals 'Y' divided by 364 = the Original Number of 'X' years converted.
3.The Principle of Linear Causality
The King's Calendar is a very simple approach to Biblical Chronology. It substitutes a value of 336 days for every year listed in Scripture. As far as the Divided Kingdom is concerned, when you use this 336 day year value, the synchronisms actually work.
Because it is a mathematical system, the King's Calendar must abide by certain mathematical rules, the most important of which, is that if you change any date for any day, month, or year every other day, month, or year is effected and must also change. It's like a 'domino effect'. Chronological references cannot be 'forced' to fit, and nor can they simply be ignored or 'compressed' as is the usual case with historians and archaeologists.
If any King's Calendar chronological determination disagrees with anything in the history books, it must argue the case as to why the history books are wrong, or why the evidence for an assertion is untrustworthy. If the King's Calendar successfully defends its' position, then the history books cannot be treated as definitive, and if the King's Calendar is 'proven' wrong, then every other chronological reference it provides is also wrong.
Because of this, the King's Calendar Chronological Reconstruction of Israel's history is unique, in that its' methodology can be scientifically (mathematically) tested and demonstrated to be either true or false. Its' chronological predictions are able to be 'proved' or 'disproved'.
4. Solar Year Calculations
The Biblical Data as it stands exceeds available history for the parameters it sets. The KingsCalendar, which assigns each Biblical Year a value of 336 days, reduces the overall Biblical Data by roughly 8%. When working in Solar Years, many problems arise. For example, Counting from 586 BCE to 701 BCE in literal Solar Years.
586 BCE is one date for the commencement of the Babylonian Captivity and the destruction of Solomon's Temple. 701 BCE is accepted by all as King Hezekiah's 14th year of Reign. When you follow the Biblical Chronological data for the Kings of Judah, and count out the years back to 701 BCE and beyond, the following discrepancies occur:
a). 701 BCE becomes Hezekiah's 24th year not his 14th year.
b) 702 BCE Hezekiah's 23rd year
c) 703 BCE Hezekiah's 22nd year
d) 713 BCE Hezekiah's 12th year
e) 722 BCE (Fall of Samaria) is Hezekiah's 3rd year not his 6th year.
f) 724 BCE (Siege of Samaria) is Hezekiah's 1st year not his 4th year.
g) 729 BCE Ahaz' 12th year
h) 730 BCE Ahaz' 11th year
i) 730 BCE Hoshea of Samaria 1st year
j) 734-732 BCE Syro-Ephraimic War – Ahaz & Pekah.
k) 740 BCE Ahaz' 1st year.
The two great significances of these figures is that 701 BCE is supposed to be [according to the Bible and Historians], Hezekiah's 14th year, which it is plainly not; and that 740 BCE as Ahaz' 1st year, completely messes up all Biblical chronology in relation to Uzziah, Jotham, Menehem and Pekah.
However
When working in Solar years counting down from the accepted date for the commencement of the reigns of Jehu (Israel) and Athaliah [Judah], that is, from 841 BCE to 701 BCE, the following is the result.
a) 701 BCE = Ahaz 13 th year (Not Hezekiah's 14th year)
b) 702 BCE Hoshea commences to rule in Samaria
c) 703 BCE is Pekah's 28 th year.
d) 713 BCE is Ahaz' 1st year (18th of Pekah)
e) 722 BCE is Jotham's 8th Year & Pekah's 9th Year (but is supposed to be Hoshea's 9th year)
f) 724 BCE is Jotham's 6th Year & Pekah's 7th Year
g) 729 BCE is Jotham's 1st year & 2nd Year of Pekah
h) 730 BCE is Uzziah's 52nd year
i) 730 BCE is Pekah's 1st year
j) 734-732 BCE when the Syro-Ephraimitic War occurred, King Uzziah of Judah was on the throne.
k) 740 BCE is Uzziah's 42nd Year & Menehem's 4th year.
The Significance
The Significance of these figures, is that they throw all the Biblical data out the window and contradict known history.
The Result:
Using Solar Year Calculations to synchronise Biblical Data is insufficient to understand Biblical and Extra Biblical Chronology and Historical Narrative, and contradicts known history.
In order to get around this problem, Historians have to reject what the Bible says.
The King's Calendar however does not have to reject it. When each Biblical Year is given a different value than the 365 day Solar Year, the Synchronisms work and align with known history.
5. King's Calendar Application to other Chronological Data
To determine that the hypothesis of the King's Calendar was valid, Chronological references from Josephus and the Damascus document of the Dead Sea Scrolls were given the same mathematical values, and chronological (calendar) charts were created to measure the references provided.
The results demonstrated that almost all Biblical and Extra Biblical chronological data relating to the pre-Babylonian Exile period, are recorded in an artificial form.
To guarantee the accuracy of the Historical results and application of the King's Calendar Reconstruction of Israelite History, extensive research was undertaken of historical and archaeological evidence, which threatened at certain points to undo the King's Calendar mathematical predictions.
In order to justify its' Predictions, the King's Calendar has also had to rely upon the Legal Rules of Evidence and Testimony to demonstrate that many of the assumptions and opinions of historians, archaeologists and other academics are fundamentally flawed.
6. Josephus' chronological references in relation to King David and the Exodus
The King's Calendar presents calendars that include the chronological references of Josephus, so that these references can be 'visually measured' against the backdrop of Israelite history. In some cases during the study of Seder Olam Rabbah, reference was made to Josephus' statements, and various Line Numbers were provided.
Of special interest in studying Josephus' material, is that he appears to use original and unique data that is no longer available to us. The following, is the conclusion to Chapter 20 of the King's Calendar, on Josephus.
From this study of Josephus' data, it also seems reasonable to believe that he had access to at least Six (6) original, artificially correct, chronological pieces of datum, that are no longer available to us. These are:
That Jerusalem was founded 995 years prior to David's reign.
That 'an' Exodus (Hyksos expulsion from Egypt) occurred 589 years prior to David's reign.
That 52.5 years elapsed from the Exile to and including Cyrus' kingship in Babylon.
That 995 years elapsed from the commencement of David's reign to and including that of Aristobulus in 104 BCE.
That 423 years elapsed between Cyrus' accession as King of the Medes, and the death of Judas Maccabeus.
That 908.5 years elapsed between the Israelite entrance into Canaan under Joshua, and the Babylonian Exile.
7. Regarding 1 King's 6:1 and The King's Calendar Reconstruction of Historical Events
The 480 years of 1 King's 6:1 are Artificial years
They were originally recorded as Solar years extending from the Exodus to Solomon's 1st year – From 1449 BCE to 970 BCE
They were transcribed into an artificial Calendar that ought to have shown 480 years from Entry into Canaan to Solomon's 4th year, but the reference first parameter was left as at Exodus whilst the final parameter was changed to Solomon's 4th year.
1 King's 6:1 actually records 480 Artificial years from the Entrance into Canaan to Solomon's 4th year.
Therefore The Time frame for the Period of the Judges plus King Saul = 480 less 4 years for Solomon, and 40 years for David = 436 years.
One result of the King's Calendar investigation into Josephus, was that it was seen that Josephus' reference to the 'Exodus' was actually a reference to the Hyksos Exodus from Egypt, and that as measured by the KingsCalendar, the year 1554 BCE is identified. [Chapter 20 "Josephus" Example (viii) From the Departure from Egypt to Fall of Jerusalem in 586 BCE 1062.5 years elapse - Antiquities Book 10:8:5 Re: The burning of the temple]
Grimal (1992, p. 392) places the Hyksos Expulsion at 1552BCE - Refer also to Dollinger.A. (2000) An Introduction to the History and Culture of Pharaonic Egypt. Herodotus: Hyksos
The King's Calendar date of 1554 BCE does however fall within various dates provided by various Academics for the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt. Such dates range from 1583 BCE (Marston 1935, p 83) until after the commencement of the 18th Dynasty under Ahmose (c. 1570 - 1550 BCE)
9. On Evidence and Giving Testimony – Legal Rules
There is a complete set of articles at King's Calendar on The Law, Rules of Evidence and Archaeology which challenge the way in which Historians and Archaeologists foist opinions and assumptions onto the unsuspecting public, giving the impression that they are presenting the facts of history, when they are anything but facts.
In the presentation of articles at King's Calendar, the following legal issues are constantly borne in mind.
Direct Evidence is evidence of the facts in issue themselves and will be constituted either by the testimony of a witness who perceived the event or the production of a legally admissible document which constitutes the fact in issue.'(Bates,1985,p.2)
Circumstantial Evidence is evidence of facts which are not in issue, from which a fact in issue may be inferred. (Bates, 1985, p.2)
Corroboration Corroborating testimony must be independent, and must directly indicate or implicate a direct relation to the issue in question. (Bates, 1985, p.82)
Presumption and assumption are generally speaking, synonymous. In law, presumptions cannot be given concrete value. That we believe (presume or assume) that something is so, is insufficient in law to justify legal 'action'. Presumption and assumption are not permitted as evidence in legal issues. (See Bates, 1985, p.46)
Opinions, Assumptions and Presumptions are not facts in relation to evidence. [For a sociological explanation of why presumption is often accepted as fact, see Bates, 1985, p.46]
Presumption can rightly be described as an attempt to establish as a fact something for which no legal evidence or proof exists.
A clear connection may be seen between 'Opinion' and 'subjective inferences', which like presumption and assumption, are inadmissible in court. [Ligertwood (1988, p.284) in discussing 'opinion evidence' makes it clear, that opinion is an attempt to establish a fact from other facts]
In law, expert witnesses are not permitted to become involved in final decision making with regard to the 'fact' of a disputed matter or issue. [Gobbo. Et.Al.(1979, p.430) The exception occurs when there is no other way of concluding the matter. In such cases, experts must be both highly qualified and impartial.
Issues relating to Authentic and Accurate Evidence Refer to : Rule 902. Self-authentication : Extrinsic evidence of authenticity as a condition precedent to admissibility in relation to both authenticity and accuracy of documents.
Conflicting Expert Opinions When we rely on the 'testimony' of 'highly qualified expert witnesses', the question of "doubt" becomes clouded by our inability to assess the validity of the testimony. This is especially so in cases in which 'experts' offer 'conflicting opinion'. (Freckelton.I.R. 1987. p.165)
Vested Interests of Experts Experts must be free from prejudice. ([See also: Legal Information Institute : Federal Rules of Evidence : ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS - may testify if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.]
Discussion on cognitive and affective decision making processes in relation to decisions made by jurors when experts testify (Frekelton .I.R. 1987.p 137 & Vinson.D.E.1985)
I hope that this has provided you with some insight into what the King's Calendar Research is.
Copyright 2013 is held by the nominated authors on this article page.
The Download book does not contain a section on Seder Olam
About the KingsCalendar Publisher
R.P.BenDedek is the owner and Editor of KingsCalendar.com which was originally set up to publicize his research results into the Chronology of Ancient Israel. Those results were published under the title: 'The King's Calendar: The Secret of Qumran'.
Whilst there have been many attempts to solve the chronological riddle of the Bible's synchronisms of reigns of the kings of Israel and Judah and their synchronism with other Ancient Near Eastern Nations, no other research is based on a simple mathematical formula which could, if it is incorrect, be disproved easily. To date, no one has been able to dismiss the mathematical results of this research.
Free to air Academic articles set forth Apologetics for and results of his discovery of an "artificial chronological scheme" running through the Bible, Josephus, the Damascus Documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Seder Olam Rabbah.
Check the Chapter Precis Page to see details of each chapter and to gain access to the Four Free to Air Chapters
R.P. BenDedek also writes social commentaries and photographic 'Stories from China' both at KingsCalendar, and as a contributing columnist at Magic City Morning Star News in Maine USA.
He has been teaching Conversational English in China since 2003 and currently (2013) is teaching in Suzhou City Jiangsu Province.
