Assyria, Babylon, 7th Century BCE: Josiah: Nebuchadrezzar:Concealed within the Biblical Texts are difficulties that go unnoticed when one in ignorance accepts the word of historians, as to the timing of the actual event, for in fact, there is absolutely no evidence to support the historical contention that King Josiah died in 609 BCE in what historians insist was an incident related to The Battle for Haran, in the 17th year of Nabopolassar. A cursory reading of Thiele (1966, preface - p.10), and Wiseman (1985, p.33), will offer some understanding of the lengths to which academics go, (and to which they will disagree), in order to understand and solve complex issues involved.
In this article you will find nothing that contradicts the Egyptian, Assyrian or Babylonian Records.
This article is devoted to demonstrating that pieces of the historical jigsaw in relation to Ancient Near Eastern History that were thought to fit the jigsaw, have actually been forced to fit; and many pieces thought by Historians to have been superfluous and which were consequently thrown away, actually do belong.
This Article is divided into the following sections:
1. The King's Calendar Chronology for King Josiah
2. King Josiah's Reforms
3. Where did King Josiah Die?
4. In What Year did King Josiah of Judah Die?
5. The Justification for a 609 BCE Death of King Josiah
6. How, Where and When did King Josiah Die?
7. Article Summary
8. Article Conclusion.
1 :
The King's Calendar Chronology for King Josiah
King Josiah of Judah was 8 years old when he began to reign
He reigned 31 years [2 Kings 22:1 and 2 Chronicles 34:1]
By the standard of the King's Calendar he was born in 642 BCE.
He commenced to reign in April of 634 BCE.
He reigned 31 Artificial or 28 solar years
His 31st Year commenced December 607 BCE
King Josiah died around September 606 BCE.
He died in the 19th year of King Nabopolassar of Babylon.
He died 3 years later than currently accepted.
His death was not connected to an Egyptian/Assyrian attempt to recapture Haran
King's Calendar Chronology for Josiah
2 : King Josiah's Reforms
King Josiah of Judah is pre-eminently known for his religious reforms. According to 2 Kings 22:3 in his 18th year King Josiah ordered repairs to the House of the Lord to be carried out. In the process of doing so, the Book of the Law was uncovered, and so began a process of restoring purity to religious observance in the Kingdom. 2 Chronicles 34:4 says that "in the twelfth year he began to purge Judah and Jerusalem from the high places, and the Asherim, and the graven images, and the molten images." - and - Verse 8: Now in the eighteenth year of his reign, when he had purged the land, and the house, he sent [officers] to repair the house of the LORD his God.
According to an article entitled: Josiah (640-609) and Religious Reforms [Old Testament History The Rise of Babylon and Exile (640 BC-538 BC) by Dennis Bratcher]
By 622 - Josiah was ready to launch sweeping reforms of the nation itself.
These are probably the most well known of the religious reforms in biblical history, since so much attention is given them (2 Kings 22:3-23:25, 2 Chron 34:1-35:19).
After consulting the prophetess Huldah, who confirmed the content of the Torah, Josiah used the book as a basis for the continuing reforms.
[He] actively promoted centralized worship in Jerusalem and outlawed magic and sorcery.
However, it is not at all clear about the true extent of the reforms or how deeply they affected the life of the nation. [Jeremiah] seems not to have been too enthusiastic about them.
Part of the covenant perspective of Deuteronomy was that obedience to God brings blessings and long life, and yet the best king Israel had seen in a long time, who had faithfully obeyed God in restoring proper worship, was tragically killed as a relatively young man. That may well have raised questions about the validity of the Deuteronomic theology, and perhaps even raised questions about the viability of Yahweh worship (cf. Jer 44:15-19).
As Mr. Bratcher points out, from a Biblical Perspective, King Josiah's death is problematical, but as we shall see, the problem is not just theological. (Anti-Biblical ViewpointAnother Flaw in the Perfect-Harmony Theory by Farrell Till)
When it comes to a discussion of the Death of King Josiah of Judah, the are usually two questions that immediately come to mind.
1.Where did he Actually Die? - A point of contention with skeptics,- and -
2. When Did he Die? - A point of contention with the King's Calendar.
In Josiah's days, Pharaoh Necho king of Egypt 'went up' to the king of Assyria to the river Euphrates.
King Josiah went up to meet him
Pharaoh Necho slew him at Megiddo, when he saw him.
His servants carried him dead in a chariot from Megiddo.
2 Chronicles 35:20-24 says:
Necho was on his way to fight at Carchemish on the Euphrates
Josiah went out against him
Necho sent envoys to forestall Josiah's intent
Josiah disguised himself in order to fight with him
Josiah joined battle at Megiddo and was wounded
Josiah died later in Jerusalem.
Why the Discrepancy?
The Apologetics Press explanation of the apparent discrepancy is that The only difference in the texts is that one is more descriptive than the other.See:Where Did Josiah Die? by Jim Estabrook
Whilst that article might resolve for you a difficulty involving a 'Biblical infallibility' issue related to Biblical Discrepancies, a more important issue relating to the year in which King Josiah Died, is far from resolved.
Concealed within the Biblical Texts are difficulties that go unnoticed when one in ignorance accepts the word of historians, as to the timing of the actual event, for in fact, there is absolutely no evidence to support the historical contention that King Josiah died in 609 BCE in what historians insist was an incident related to The Battle for Haran, in the 17th year of Nabopolassar.
4 : In What Year did King Josiah of Judah Die?
Section 5. of King's Calendar Chapter Two entitled: The Issue of Josiah's Death - "Who killed him and in what year?" commences with the following passages.
The issue of Josiah's death has tremendous ramifications for the 'King's Calendar' in relation to current perspectives for the chronological placement of the reigns of Nebuchadrezzar and his father.
Currently Josiah's death is accepted to have occurred in 609 BCE at Megiddo, in connection with a battle between Egyptians and Babylonians, during Nabopolassar's 17th year. 'The King's Calendar' however, places his death in 606 BCE.
The question of which opinion is correct, is far from simple, for at the heart of the matter, lies academic reliance upon biblical chronology.
Since the contention of the 'King's Calendar', is that reliance upon biblical chronology in terms of currently accepted concepts of chronological 'years', leads to error, the claim here is, that the very foundation of academic argument (the Biblical Narrative) is flawed.
This may seem a somewhat bold statement to make, but a cursory reading of Thiele (1966, preface - p.10), and Wiseman (1985, p.33), will offer some understanding of the lengths to which academics go, (and to which they will disagree), in order to understand and solve complex issues involved.
Before proceeding further, it is really important for religious students who accept the current Academic chronological placement of Josiah's Death to understand that generally speaking, Academics do not put any faith in or reliance upon either Biblical Chronology or Narrative. See: Academic Deceit and Manipulation. (If however, the information is no longer correct (for whatever reason), then modern Academics demonstrate a highly unscientific approach to history, when they quote Scripture to support various archaeological and Historical propositions.)
The very same academics who quote Biblical Chronological data pertinent to Kings Jehoiakim and Zedekiah of Judah, to demonstrate that King Josiah died in 609 BCE, reject most Biblical references between the time of King Uzziah and the Fall of Jerusalem in 586 BCE. If you would like to see exactly how the academics pull the wool over your eyes, look at This File which visually demonstrates the deceit.
It must be stated and recognised, that there are absolutely no historical records, Egyptian, Assyrian, or Babylonian by which to date King Josiah's reign or activities. So when Academics quote the Bible, they do so only to justify their personal perspectives, and since the Bible provides no date or specific chronological detail by which Josiah's date can be established, (other than backdating 22 years from 587 BCE for the reigns of Zedekiah and Jehoiakim), what passes for 'fact' is merely 'presumption'. Presumption can rightly be described as an attempt to establish as a fact something for which no legal evidence or proof exists. (See: Bates, 1985, p.46) Refer: Legal Bibliography at end of Article - also:Articles in the Rules of Evidence Series
Let's be clear about this, there is no reference anywhere to connect Josiah's death to the year 609 BCE.
It can only be demonstrated by adding the sum of the reigns of his descendants and backdating them from the Fall of Jerusalem. But this is not proof that 609 BCE is correct, because those same Biblical Texts that lead us to 609 BCE do not synchronise with the Babylonian Records or the Opinions of Academics who insist that 609 BCE is correct.
For Example: The Bible says that King Jehoiachin of Judah was held captive for 37 years and released by Amel-Marduk. Whilst it is accepted that King Jehoiachin was released by Nebuchadrezzar's successor, Amel Marduk, from an academic perspective the Bible chronology is incorrect, because backtracking 37 years from Amel Marduk's accession or First Regnal Year, does not coincide with a fall of Jerusalem in 597 BCE [the currently accepted date] or 596 BCE [as demonstrated by the King's Calendar]. The academics will tell you that in this matter, Bible chronology is wrong.
When it comes to a clash between what the Bible says and what Academics say, it is always the Academic who is considered correct, not the Bible. It is the premise of the King's Calendar however, that the figures provided in the Bible for the reigns of the Kings of Israel and Judah are correct, but that they do not reflect true 365 day solar years.
Therefore, whilst the stated lengths of reign for the Kings of Judah between Josiah and Zedekiah (Babylonian Exile) do appear to indicate a 609 BCE termination date for King Josiah, the real time difference between true time and artificial time is insufficient during these 22 Biblical years to be immediately obvious. The real time difference is less than 2 years. (One of these years gets absorbed when using a 587 BCE date for the fall of Jerusalem, therefore, little discrepancy in Biblical Chronology is noticed.)
If on the other hand, you continue counting back the Biblical Years from Josiah's death, you will soon realise that the reigns of Manasseh and Hezekiah do not fit the picture painted by Biblical Chronology (if counted in real solar years) and Known History. See:
This is to say that because Biblical chronology seems to support a 609 BCE death of King Josiah, we just accept that he did die in 609 BCE. (Of course if we accept 609 BCE because we trust Academics, then we have a circular self sustaining self deception.) Once you begin to extend the time frame of Biblical Chronology however, you do begin to notice quite drastic "discrepancies". [To see the effect of following Biblical Chronology using standard solar calculations go to: Appendix 4: which visually demonstrates the difficulties.]
Once you understand that Academics as a matter of course reject Biblical Chronology because of it's unreliability, then you can no longer trust their use of it to support their theories. Speaking plainly, one could say that in relation to the timing of King Josiah's Death, that they are asking you to trust that a known liar is for once telling the truth. Neither secular nor religious people should accept any Biblical Proof when proffered by Academics endeavouring to have their theories accepted.
Once you recognise that Academics generally speaking make educated guesses, but that the King's Calendar uses a Mathematical formula that succeeds in synchronising Biblical Chronology, it is not difficult to believe that Biblical Chronological data does not have a standard chronological value. That being the case, it may become more feasible for you to understand that the result of counting back the reigns of the Kings of Judah, from the time of the Fall of Jerusalem to the Death of King Josiah, does not arrive at 609 BCE. This is demonstrated in the following Chart.
5 : The Justification for a 609 BCE Death of King Josiah
As stated in Chapter two of the King's Calendar, justification for a 609 BCE death of King Josiah, rests on 3 basic premises, one of which was just mentioned.
A second justification, which is connected to the one mentioned above, relates to the belief that Jeremiah 46:2 correctly synchronises Nebuchadnezzar's (first) accession year with Jehoiakim's 4th year, and thereby justifies placing Josiah's death in 609 BCE.
Quite apart from the King's Calendar chronological position on this matter, a significant problem arises when one relies on Jeremiah 46:2, because it contradicts Jeremiah 25:1. [See King's Calendar Chapter 2 : Section 6. Contradiction of Jeremiah 25:1 and 46:2]
Since Jeremiah 25 equates the 4th of Jehoiakim with the 1st of Nebuchadrezzar, and Jeremiah 46 equates the 4th of Jehoiakim with the accession year of Nebuchadrezzar, the chronological synchronisms are contradictory. If one adds the 22 years of Zedekiah and Jehoiakim to 587 BCE, one arrives at 609 BCE for Josiah's Death - and - one arrives at 605 BCE for Nabopolassar's 21st and last year (Nebuchadrezzar's Ascension year) when the Battle of Carchemish occurred.
In Brief Jeremiah 25:1 is a prophetic word (not specifically related to the Battle of Carchemish), given in the 4th year of Jehoiakim. It includes a redactorial insertion to the effect that this 4th year was equivalent to Nebuchadrezzar's 1st year.
Jeremiah 25:1-3 The word that came to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah, that was the first year of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon which Jeremiah the prophet spoke unto all the people of Judah, and to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying: From the thirteenth year of Josiah the son of Amon, king of Judah, even unto this day, these three and twenty years, the word of the LORD hath come unto me, and I have spoken unto you, speaking betimes and often; but ye have not hearkened.
Jeremiah 46:2 on the other hand is a specific prophecy related to the Battle of Carchemish, and definitively indicates that this battle occurred in the 4th year of Jehoiakim. Since the Babylonian Chronicles clearly indicate that this battle occurred in Nebuchadrezzar's ascension year, these two biblical references are contradictory.
Jeremiah Chapter 46: 1-2 The word of the LORD which came to Jeremiah the prophet concerning the nations. Of Egypt: concerning the army of Pharaoh-neco king of Egypt, which was by the river Euphrates in Carchemish, which Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon smote in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah.
By the standard of the King's Calendar (chart above) the prophecy in Jeremiah 46:1-2 refers to the Battle of Carchemish in the 21st and last year of Nabopolassar, in the ascension year of Nebuchadrezzar, as can be found in the Babylonian Chronicles - Wiseman: (1961) B.M. 22047 (p.65) and BM 21946 Lines 1-5 (p.67)
The King's Calendar position is therefore:
Jeremiah 46:2 relates to Jehoiakim's 3rd not 4th year, during the accession year of Nebuchadrezzar.
Jeremiah 25:1 relates to the following and therefore 4th year of Jehoiakim during the 1st Regnal year of Nebuchadrezzar
Academics have chosen the Biblical Data that best suits their agenda
I don't propose to discuss the issue further here. (See: King's Calendar Chapter Two issues and charts that demonstrate that Jeremiah 25:1 is the correct reference.
The purpose here is to point out that relying on Biblical Chronology is not that straightforward, and relying on the Academics who quote Bible verses is dangerous. Furthermore: If one has freedom to choose which of two contradictory chronological references one wishes, then from a legal perspective, citing Jeremiah 46:2 as proof of a fact, is erroneous. It is just an opinion.
Academic chronology for Josiah's death and Jehoiakim's 4th year, are not demonstrably factual.
The final academic justification for placing King Josiah's death in 609 BCE, is that Academics believe that the Bible indicates that Josiah died while Necho was on his way to assist Assur-Uballit in his final attempt to capture Harran during Nabopolassar's 17th Regnal year. (Wiseman, 1961, p.63. Lines 66 - 67)
The fact of the matter is however, that there is no indication in Biblical or other texts (Egyptian, Assyrian or Babylonian) to identify the year or precise event to which Josiah's death is to be affixed. The word Precise is noteworthy when discussing the background to King Josiah's Death.
A Background to King Josiah's Death
In order to provide a background to King Josiah's Death, the following two excerpts from online sources are provided.
After the reign of Hezekiah there is no record in the Assyrian inscriptions of any further raid on Judah. Till Assyria's end in 612 BC, no king of Judah apparently dared defy the mighty power of the Assyrians. From the archaeological point of view this fact is regrettable, since it means that from that point on the Assyrian records have virtually no occasion to mention the Jews. Therefore, the important Manesseh-Amon-Josiah era (687-609 BC) is almost a blank as far as archaeology is concerned.
The Assyrians were too occupied elsewhere to pay much attention to Israel. Josiah managed to regain control of portions of northern Israel that had been in Assyrian hands since the invasion that had destroyed Samaria in 721 BC.
As Assyria grew weaker, the Babylonians were growing stronger and soon threatened to dominate Assyria.
By 618 the Babylonians were pressing into Assyrian territory from the south, and the Egyptians sent troops to help defend Assyria.
In 614 the ancient Assyrian capital of Asshur fell, and in 612 the capital city of Ninevah was destroyed by the Babylonians who also killed Sin-Shar-ishkin.
Remnants of the Assyrian army fled to the west
in 610 the Babylonian alliance captured Haran
the Egyptians under Pharaoh Necho decided to send more troops to rescue the embattled Assyrians.
Necho had to march through Israel along the major north-south corridor known as the Via Maris ("way of the sea") that passed the Israelite fortress of Megiddo and then through the Valley of Jezreel.
Josiah decided to intervene and try to stop Necho at the fortress of Megiddo.
Josiah marched north and intercepted the Egyptians near Megiddo, but was killed in the ensuing battle and the Israelites were defeated. Necho continued northward and joined the struggling Assyrians for one last-ditch effort to reestablish Assyrian control of Haran. But the effort failed and the last remnants of the Assyrian army were wiped out.
The Problem with this Background
Some of these issues are discussed in greater detail in the article entitled:
The problems associated with the background to Josiah's death are many and complex. They include issues related to:
The Contradiction between Jeremiah 25:1 and Jeremiah 46:2
Discrepancies between the Biblical Narratives in relation to Nebuchadrezzar and Daniels Captivity and the Babylonian Chronicles
Discrepancies between the Babylonian Chronicles and the Biblical Record concerning Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin and Zedekiah
Biblical chronological contradictions in relation to the Burning of the Jerusalem Temple
Biblical chronological contradictions in relation to Jehoiachin's captivity and the Death of Nebuchadrezzar
An absence of specific details relating to Nebuchadrezzar's reign -and-
Issues relating to the 'apparently stated facts' found within the Biblical Texts .
There are so many pertinent issues that they can't all be covered here. They are mentioned however in Chapter Two of 'The King's Calendar: The Secret of Qumran', and in a variety of Articles published at King's Calendar. Also See:
The Issue to be dealt with in this article, relates to the last point: 'apparently stated facts'.
6 : How, Where and When did King Josiah Die?
Three particular points of interest: Our current perception of what is recorded in relation to the Death of Josiah has been influenced by two very prominent things, one of which is the wording in the Biblical Historical narrative, and the other is 'academic opinion' in relation to Ancient History. On this latter point it has to be reiterated that Academic Opinion only relies on Biblical Texts when there is an absence of other evidence. In fact our perceptions of this Biblical Event may not be correct within the true historical context. For Example:
1. In relation to Josiah's intent in going to meet with Necho
2. In relation to the name of the place at which Josiah was wounded/killed,
3. In relation to Pharaoh Necho's destination; Carchemish.
Robinson (1932, p.424) and Herrman (1981, p.271), make several interesting comments which provide a basis for a whole new perspective of the biblical narratives. Robinson suggests that the whole episode at Megiddo is a corruption of an event that Herodotus places at Magdolos (Migdol) near Kadytis (Kadesh) on the Orontes, suggesting that the event has nothing to do with the campaign leading to the battle of Carchemish in 609 BCE. (during the 17th year of Nabopolassar when Assur-Uballit attempted to capture Haran).
Herrman sees no necessity to link these events to 'The' Battle of Carchemish, indicating that the biblical reference is not to a 'specific battle', but to the general scenario of the times. He also finds nothing hostile in the rendering of the account but that it merely records an instance of Josiah going 'up' to Necho, not a going up 'against' him as has been assumed in the English translation.
From these two writers we can take note of three things:
1. Reference to Megiddo may in fact be corrupt. The event may have occurred much further north, well away from Judah.
2. Reference to Carchemish may have nothing to do with the Battle for Harran in 609 BCE
3. Josiah's intent toward Necho may not have been hostile, but rather that he meant to 'join' him.
Additionally, Miller and Hayes (1986, p.402) indicate that the Biblical accounts are misleading, whilst Jagersma,(1983, p.171) finds them 'vague'. That the accounts are vague, misleading and unreliable, makes them ineffective 'direct evidences' in the establishing of a fact. Their limited and conflicting data makes them unreliable in the pursuit of any 'dependable and demonstrable' opinion of events to which they relate.
Despite their unreliable and imprecise nature however, Thiele, (1966, p.194) in reliance upon Professor Wiseman's work, maintains that the 609 BCE date for Josiah's death, is 'fixed beyond question'. In Fact, there is much to question about the chronology of Josiah's Death.
The biblical narratives, do not provide unequivocal evidence:
that Josiah stood in opposition to Necho;
that this opposition occurred at Megiddo;
that he was killed by him or his troops;
or that the event occurred in the 17th regnal year of Nabopolassar.
The fact of the matter is, that the two biblical accounts are contradictory. In a court of law, neither testimony would be accepted without corroboration by direct or circumstantial evidence (Bates,1985,p.2 / p.82). In this case, not only is there no circumstantial evidence (the Babylonian Chronicles), or direct evidence (other material or records), but the one source from which corroboration ought to have been expected, the Biblical Record, is contradictory. [Note: This is a legal not theological point.]
In short:
There is no 'legitimate' or 'substantial' evidence to support current opinion that Josiah died in the Battle related to the 17th year of Nabopolassar, currently dated to 609 BCE.
The King's Calendar can mathematically demonstrate that Josiah died in 606 BCE,
-and-
Can demonstrate that the reigns of Nabopolassar and Nebuchadrezzar can be legitimately moved by one year, thus requiring Nabopolassar's 17th year to be shifted to 608 BCE. See:How long did King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon Reign?
More than this, the King's Calendar, having synchronized King Josiah's last year with the 19th year of Nabopolassar, notes that in the Babylonian Chronicles for the 19th year of Nabopolassar, that:
In Tishri (Sept/Oct) of Nabopolassar's 19th year
(around the time that the 'King's Calendar' maintains that Josiah died),
Nabopolassar mustered his army and traveled to Kimuhu to meet the renewed threat of Egyptian attack down the Euphrates Valley.
He captured Kimuhu in Kislev (Nov/Dec). (Babylonian Chronicles, (BM 22047- Line 12 /13)
From this the 'King's Calendar' perceives Josiah's meeting with Necho in the context of Necho's march on the Babylonian Garrisons, and Jehoahaz' captivity in the context of Necho's return to Egypt after Kimuhu is retaken.
See 604 : Aug to Oct : Jehoiakim's 3rd year : Lines 9-13
These Details appear in Text format at the end of this article.
7 :
Article Summary
Given that there is no "Direct" or Corroborating" evidence to indicate that Josiah's death occurred during the 17th year of Nabopolassar currently dated to 609 BCE, there is no evidential proof that the King's Calendar date for King Josiah's Death is incorrect. See:How long did King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon Reign?
Given that archaeological records for Nebuchadrezzar are incomplete, and no direct or corroborating evidence can be provided to prove that Nebuchadrezzar reigned 43 years, there is no evidential proof that the 42 year reign of Nebuchadrezzar provided by the King's Calendar is incorrect. See Chart on the Length of Nebuchadrezzar's ReignHERE
Given that some Academics find the Biblical narratives surrounding King Josiah's death to be misleading, using those narratives to demonstrate an unstated fact is unscientific.
Given that most Academics insist that the Biblical Narratives and Chronologies Records are erroneous and untrustworthy, the use of Biblical Chronology to support academic chronological theories is both unscientific and open to refutation from a legal perspective.
8:
Article Conclusion.
The evidence for the timing of King Josiah's death is ultimately just an academic calculation derived from "Circumstantial Evidence" found only in the Biblical Chronological Material, which is generally rejected by the academic community as being an unreliable witness in the presentation of evidence.
Not only have historians failed to recognise the artificial nature of Biblical Chronology, but in choosing between contradictory Biblical references, have chosen the wrong ones.
Given that historians can provide no actual evidence of their chronological determinations, there can be no refutation of the King's Calendar chronological determinations, unless it can be proved either that the King's Calendar mathematical process is mathematically incorrect, or that the mathematical hypothesis of the King's Calendar is unjustified.
Needless to say, given that the King's Calendar computer generated Mathematical Synchronisation of the Biblical Chronological Data for the Divided Kingdom generally demonstrates the accuracy of the current academically determined history of Israel, the only way to prove that the King's Calendar mathematical hypothesis is wrong, is to prove beyond reasonable doubt that two specific chronological determinations which are separated by Biblical time, are in fact wrong, thereby demonstrating that the King's Calendar value for Biblical Years is incorrect.
Until that time, the legitimacy of the King's Calendar chronology for Israel and Judah in general, and for King Josiah of Judah specifically, is incontestable. Therefore:
The King's Calendar determines that:
King Josiah reigned 31 Artificial years,
between April 634 BCE, and September 606 BCE,
a total of 27.5 Solar Years.
Definition: King's Calendar Chronological Research
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 and Judah, into an artificial form, with listed years as each comprised of 12 months of 4 weeks of 7 days, or 336 days per year, thus creating a 13th artificial year where 12 solar years existed.
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. [Refer to Appendix Five to see how it synchronises the Divided Kingdom Period]
General formula for Biblical Data conversion:
The formula for constructing the artificial calendar was:
'X' times 364 equals 'Y' days
'Y' days divided by 336 equals 'Z' artificial years.
Values are:
'X' = any given number of 'real/solar' years
364 = perceived days in the sectarian calendar
'Y' = number of days calculated
336 = number of days in an artificial year
'Z' = artificial years = 1.083'X' and represents the original number of the converted years plus 8%.
To reverse the process by hand:
'Z' years times 336 equals 'Y' divided by 364 equals the Number of 'X' years converted.
To see how effective this method is, SEE:Appendix 5:Diagrammatic Reconstruction of Israelite History from 936 to 586 BCE:
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. To see how effective this method is, SEE:Appendix 5: Diagrammatic Reconstruction of Israelite History from 936 to 586 BCE
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'.
Bibliography
Cornfeld.G. (1982) Josephus: The Jewish War. Zondervan Publishing House Michigan. (Antiquities Book 10:5:1 (74-77)
Herrman (1981, p.271) Herrmann,S. (1981) A History of Israel in Old Testament Times. Philadelphia. Fortress Press.
Jagersma,H. (1983) A History of Israel in the Old Testament Period. Philadelphia. Fortress Press (p.171)
Miller,J.M., Hayes,J.M. (1986) A History of Ancient Israel and Judah. USA. Westminster Press. (p.402)
Robinson,T.H. (1932) A History of Israel. Vol I. Oxford. Clarendon Press. the kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Paternoster Press (p.194)
Thiele.E.R. (1966) The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings: a reconstruction of the chronology of
Whiston. W. (1993) The Works of Josephus. Hendrickson Publishers. Massachusetts. USA
Wiseman.D.J. (1961) Chronicles of the Chaldaean Kings (626-556 BC) in the British Museum. Trustees of the British Museum. London,
Wiseman.D.J. (1985) Nebuchadrezzar and Babylon. The Schweich Lectures. Oxford University Press (p.33),
Bates.F. (1985) Principles of Evidence. 3rd Edition. Sydney The Law Book Company Limited.[Circumstantial Evidence p.2 Martin v Osborne (1936) 55 CLR 367 at 375 & Corroborative evidence p.82]
Freckelton. I.R. (1987) The Trial of the Expert. A Study of Expert Evidence and Forensic Experts. Melbourne.Aust.Oxford University Press.
Ligertwood. A.L.C. [ 1988 ] Australian Evidence. First Edition. Butterworths P/l. North Ryde
Vinson.D.E. (1985) How to Persuade Jurors. American Bar Association Journal 72, 76
Gobbo. J.A., Byrne. D., Heydon J.D. (1979) Cross on Evidence 2nd Edition. Sydney. Aust. Butterworths Pty.Ltd.
Vinson.D.E. (1985) How to Persuade Jurors. American Bar Association Journal 72, 76
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 currently (2013) teaches Conversational English in SuZhou City Jiangsu Province in China.
Dates for Nabopolassar & Nebuchadrezzar Kings of Babylon - and - Josiah and Jehoiakim Kings of Judah as per (Wiseman.D.J. (1961) Chronicles of the Chaldaean Kings (626-556 BC) in the British Museum. Trustees of the British Museum. London) Using Babylonian Chronicles B.M. 22047 (p.65) and BM 21946 (p.67) But with a one (1) year adjustment for the Reigns of Nabopolassar and Nebuchadrezzar.
607 bce - Sep - Nabopolassar engaged at Bit-Hanunia / Urartu - 18th year - B.M. 22047 Line 1-4
607 bce - Dec - Josiah's 31st year commences
607 bce - Dec/Jan - Nabopolassar returns to Babylon - B.M. 22047 Line 1-4
606 bce - May/Jun - Campaigning to the north - 19th year - B.M. 22047 Lines 5-7
606 bce - Jun/Jul - Nabopolassar returns to Babylon - B.M. 22047 Line 8
606 bce - Jul/Aug - Necho heads North for Carchemish
606 bce - Aug/Sep - Nebuchadrezzar returns to Babylon - B.M. 22047 Line 12
606 bce - Aug/Sep - Josiah of Judah slain
606 bce - Aug/Sep - Jehoahaz becomes king of Judah
606 bce - Sep/Oct - Nabopolassar Heads to Kimuhu - B.M. 22047 Line 12
606 bce - Nov - Nabopolassar captures Kimuhu - B.M. 22047 Line 14
606 bce - Nov - Jehoahaz deposed by Pharaoh Necho - taken to Riblah
606 bce - Nov - Jehoiakim commences - 1st Artificial year commences.
Topic 1. What is the Seder Olam Rabbah Topic 2. Seder Olam Chronological Chart : Adam to Abraham: Topic 3. Seder Olam & The 430 year Covenant with Abraham: Topic 4. Joseph in Seder Olam Rabbah: Topic 5. Seder Olam & The Pharaoh who knew not Joseph: Topic 6. Seder Olam & Israel Wandering in the Wilderness: Topic 7. 850 year/17 Jubilee Period, Joshua to Ezekiel's Vision in 14th year Exile: Topic 8. Comparative Chronologies:Seder Olam Rabbah, Josephus, Book of Judges: Topic 9. Ehud & 80 years of Peace - Judges 3:30 and Erroneous Biblical Chronology: Topic 10. Seder Olam:How Long was the Ark of the Covenant at Kiriath Jearim?: Topic 11. Seder Olam Rabbah's Confusing Chronology : Samuel, Saul and David: Topic 12: Seder Olam Chronological Discrepancies regarding Samuel, Saul & David. Topic 13: Apportioning the 63 years left for Samuel & Saul Topic 14: Seder Olam Rabbah : How many days in a Biblical year? Topic 15: Chronologies of Samuel,Saul, David & Solomon
