Is the Bible Infallible?: Infallibility: Inerrancy:"once we start to treat historical Biblical documents with the same dignity as any other nation's historical documents, it is possible to see that the chronological data recorded therein, is reliable and trustworthy, and, for the most part, agrees with modern calculations in relation to Ancient Near Eastern Chronology. It is the hope of the King's Calendar, that historians and other academics will overcome their 'loss of face' and 'anti-Biblical bias' and take a fresh look at their results, for clearly, some of them are wrong."
I recently received an email sent through the internal email facility at KingsCalendar. This article is my answer to said email. Internal King's Calendar emails go to my hotmail account, but I am unable to reply to them unless a return address is stipulated in the body of the text. As the writer did not include his return address, I could not answer the email directly.
The message is written in such a way as to make me believe that I have corresponded with the writer at an earlier date. Unfortunately I can't find any record of a previous correspondence. Here is the Message:
I am sorry that you don't understand that Judah and Babylon used TWO different start dates for their years. And of course there was no use of a Roman year (Gregorian year) It is impossible to understand synchronisms without knowing the BASIC facts of year starts. If I were to advise you --it would be to get the understanding (of different year starts) --before even trying to decipher chronology. My observation is that there is no wonder that YOU see contridictions in various passages in the Bible. Learn to crawl--before you attempt to walk (certainly before running. I could point out some things in your book- But I don't detect that you want critique, Am I correct?? Cheers, A. B.
I want to explain some things, and will do so in point fashion.
1. I do understand that Judah and Babylon used TWO different start dates for their years
2. Re: "It is impossible to understand synchronisms without knowing the BASIC facts of year starts"
This assertion is based on a presumption that the Biblical chronologies were recorded in a fashion that aligns with one's own particular and specific approach to chronology. By this I mean that if you presume that 2000 years after the event that you know the method and purpose of the Bible Redactor's Chronology, then you must find a way to make that chronology fit your preconceived notions.
One only has to read the many and various presumptive methods of calculating Biblical History, to know that the assertion made by A.B. in his email, whilst logical, is nowhere near as simple as it sounds.
3. Re: "no wonder that YOU see contridictions in various passages in the Bible"
Anyone who maintains there are no errors in the Bible is Blind beyond belief. It is a self deception. It is such a simple thing to see errors in chronology, and no amount of double speak will remove the fact that there are errors in the Biblical texts. This refusal to see quite plain error results from an insecurity of faith. If one's faith in dependant upon 'Biblical Infallibility', then any error requires that one cannot trust the Bible and one's faith becomes unjustified. This of course is not permitted.
If you go to the Apologetics Press website, which staunchly defends the Bible and the Biblical Creation Account, you will see that this immature kind of faith in the Bible is not that to which they subscribed.
If scholars defend the integrity of ancient authors partly by acknowledging that many of the mistakes contained within their writings are the result of copyists' errors, it is only reasonable for these same scholars (whether atheists, agnostics, skeptics, or Christians) to recognize that alleged problems within the biblical text may be the result of scribal errors rather than mistakes on the part of one or more of the original Bible writers.
The simple answer to this Problem is that a copyist, not an inspired writer, made a mistake.
The ultimate answer to this challenge to the Bible's integrity is found in the fact that the last part of John 5:3 and the entirety of verse four were not a part of the original inspired autograph by John.
NOTE: Those who are fearful that the integrity of the text of the Bible is compromised by the reality of textual variants need to be reminded that the world's foremost textual critics have demonstrated that currently circulating copies of the New Testament do not differ substantially from the original (see Miller, 2005a, Is Mark..., 25:89-95).]
The King's Calendar makes two fundamental assertions. Firstly that the redactors deliberately set out to rerecord chronological history in an artificial way, and secondly, that they made errors in doing so.
When your religious faith absolutely requires that no error appears in the Biblical Texts as they appear today, you become automatically incapable of dealing with Scripture as it appears, and must invent ways to explain away alleged errors. It ultimately requires altering the alleged unalterable Word of God.
Scriptural errors do exist, most specifically in the chronological record. Even those who are taught to crawl before they walk or run, are cautioned to open their eyes first.
4. Re: "But I don't detect that you want critique". Wrong! In fact I encourage it.
What I sense from this email is that the real objection to my work is found in the concept of Biblical Infallibility. Since the Bible can't be wrong, we must accept alleged discrepancies as 'non discrepancies', even if we can't find a real or logical explanation.
I am currently working on an article specifically related to Biblical Contradictions and will soon publish it.
Biblical Infallibility and the King's Calendar
The issue of Biblical Infallibility aside, the problem of Bible Chronology is that no matter who you turn to, everyone has a complex set of explanations as to how it all works. All involve adding co-regencies where none are mentioned. Some involve disputes about the correct dating for various astronomical events listed in the Bible. Most require explaining why writers have not written clearly.
The most important thing that I have noted, is that every alleged discrepancy is dealt with as a separate issue, and while explanations seem very good, when you run all the chronological details together, the various solved problems still do not synchronize with each other.
The King's Calendar is a mathematical formula that is used to "computer generate" a 2000 year calendar. Each Biblical year is assigned a value of 12 months of 4 weeks of 7 days, (336 days), as an artificial division of the Essene 364 day year (13 x 4 x 7).
When this formula is applied to the Biblical synchronisms, 95% of all synchronistic difficulties disappear. The problems that are left, result from inaccurate copying, either by confusing names of kings, or miscalculation. Such errors become demonstrable when you reference all Biblical Material surrounding them.
That the King's Calendar insists that there are errors in chronology is not to say that the Bible is not the Word of God, or that it is errant in the history it records or that these errors leads to some theological discord in its presentation of God's working in the History of Israel.
Like every other chronological offering , the King's Calendar offers a way of solving the difficulties. The real difference between the King's Calendar and other schemes, is that it is scientifically testable. Since it is mathematical, it can be proved or disproved. If anyone can actually prove that any given day, month or year in the King's Calendar reconstruction is wrong, then whatever discrepancy adjustment would be required, would have to be applied to every single year listed in the King's Calendar. In short, the King's Calendar is right or wrong. Not right in one place and wrong in another.
The King's Calendar chronological reconstruction results in dates for various events, that are acceptable within the extreme parameters of currently accepted history for those various events.
It is the express claim of the King's Calendar that the reason that no one can authoritatively synchronize the Biblical Record with the Historical Record, is that researchers have commenced with the presumption that the redactors must have recorded their data in accordance with our worldview on how chronological history should be recorded.
It is expressly the claim of the King's Calendar that the redactors intentionally changed chronological references to conceal the true chronological history of Israel. They set out to hide the truth, and did so successfully. As for those who believe that there can be no new revelation to come from the Bible, perhaps one could reconsider the words in the Books of Daniel and Revelation in relation to things being sealed until the end of time.
To repeat what I wrote here,"once we start to treat historical Biblical documents with the same dignity as any other nation's historical documents, it is possible to see that the chronological data recorded therein, is reliable and trustworthy, and, for the most part, agrees with modern calculations in relation to Ancient Near Eastern Chronology. It is the hope of the King's Calendar, that historians and other academics will overcome their 'loss of face' and 'anti-Biblical bias' and take a fresh look at their results, for clearly, some of them are wrong."
As for those whose religious faith and relationship to the Divine is dependant upon every literal word as it now appears in the Bible, there is enough warning in both New and Old Testaments of the futility of looking for salvation, righteousness and acceptance in such exercises. Jesus himself warns that many who see themselves as spiritual, are ultimately deceived by their own failure to look to the source of their religion. Forgive me if I am wrong, but does the New Testament not say that it is Jesus who is the Word of God? Does Isaiah not warn that it is not in Sacrifices (formal religion) that God takes pleasure? And was it not Ezekiel who warns that many come to hear God's words for the sake of edification, but in their hearts they pay no attention?
(Isaiah58:1-7) Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a horn, and declare unto My people their transgression, and to the house of Jacob their sins. Yet they seek Me daily, and delight to know My ways; as a nation that did righteousness, and forsook not the ordinance of their God, they ask of Me righteous ordinances, they delight to draw near unto God. 'Wherefore have we fasted, and Thou seest not? Wherefore have we afflicted our soul, and Thou takest no knowledge?'--Behold, in the day of your fast ye pursue your business, and exact all your labours. Behold, ye fast for strife and contention, and to smite with the fist of wickedness; ye fast not this day so as to make your voice to be heard on high. Is such the fast that I have chosen? the day for a man to afflict his soul? Is it to bow down his head as a bulrush, and to spread sackcloth and ashes under him? Wilt thou call this a fast, and an acceptable day to the LORD? Is not this the fast that I have chosen? to loose the fetters of wickedness, to undo the bands of the yoke, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke? Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, and that thou bring the poor that are cast out to thy house? when thou seest the naked, that thou cover him, and that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh?
(Isaiah 28:13) And so the word of the LORD is unto them precept by precept, precept by precept, line by line, line by line; here a little, there a little; that they may go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.
(Ezekiel 33:30-32) And as for thee, son of man, the children of thy people that talk of thee by the walls and in the doors of the houses, and speak one to another, every one to his brother, saying: Come, I pray you, and hear what is the word that cometh forth from the LORD; and come unto thee as the people cometh, and sit before thee as My people, and hear thy words, but do them not--for with their mouth they show much love, but their heart goeth after their covetousness; and, lo, thou art unto them as a love song of one that hath a pleasant voice, and can play well on an instrument; so they hear thy words, but they do them not--
If any reader of the material at King's Calendar finds fault with that material, I would encourage them to write to me. I would just love for the Forum section to start up again with lively arguement on such issues. But from a personal perspective, a true critique of the King's Calendar is not a matter of saying: "You have done it all wrong!" That would be an opinion to which you are entitled, and one that you are free to express. A true critique however would be to find fault with the process or results of the work. And therein lies the rub! So far, everyone who has tried, has ended up damning me to hell as a heretic or damning me to a psyche ward as a lunatic. No one to date has been able to demonstrate error.
As the author of the work, I know better than anyone else it's weakenesses, it's assumptions, and it's limitations. I am happy to argue points, and I am always open to factual correction. Telling me that the Bible has no errors is neither factual nor useful. Telling me that someone disagrees with me is useful, provided that that someone has proven that they are right. Unfortunately, as Peet. T.E. (1924. p 75) stated: "Archaeology is not an exact science, and deals more often in probabilities and possibilities than in irrefutable demonstrations.'
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.
After I finished this article and before I could publish it, I received an email from Jim Liles from http://www.bibletimeline.org . Since much of my reply to that email is contained in this article, I wish to just add here one section of my reply to that email.
Point 2. Rejection of Academic Chronological Calculations.
In as much as you simply wipe away the academic world's calculations, there can be no arguement about your results. Anything that does not fit someone else's alleged history merely proves that the other person is wrong. No academic could possibly convince you of any error, since you cannot be wrong, because the Bible can't be wrong.
Neither those who have the truth and those who are deceived by the lie, can ever admit to being wrong, and neither will deny what they believe to be true. That is the very nature of both Truth and Deception.
Nevertheless, as already stated, maybe God will indeed demonstrate that you are "in fact" (not "in faith') correct.
I have no problem with any date you offer prior to Solomon. Everything beyond the Divided Kingdom Period is up for grabs as far as I personally am concerned. As far as any date after the Burning of Solomon's Temple is concerned, that is a matter for the Historians and Archaeologists.
The bottom line however is that you can't start with the premise that the Bible as currently delivered, is infallible, and then think that anything you come up with is 'proven' let alone 'irrefutably' proven.
This Bible Timeline shows the exact dates and years of over 35 of the most important events recorded in Scripture. Over 4000 years of The Bible's history from Creation to the Ascension of Jesus are accurately dated. The accuracy and inerrancy of God's Word using simple and precise language is presented in a unique manner. This new information gives fresh insight into the study of God's Word and explains many of the past mysteries of Bible Chronology. Daniel and other Writers of Scripture had no way of knowing their predictions about future events that were given in years were often accurate to a very specific day on God's Calendar. The Timeline's amazing display of God's Sovereignty is seen as irrefutable proof that the very Words of The Bible are inspired by God.
Academics have for a long time been Shifting Previous Historical Perspectives, trying to establish themselves in one way or another. For a variety of reasons they would rather not give credit where it is due; not admit that which they know to be true; not wanting to delve too deeply into something that might show them up for what they are.
The worst of the bunch however, are those who prefer to rewrite history to suit their own political ideologies. In that endeavour, it makes no 'nevermind' whether it is Islamic rewriting of history, or the secularist anti-God, anti-Judeo/Christian who does the writing. The end result is the same: We are deceived about our own history, and our faith is undermined.
Fortunately for us, someone comes along now and then and proves these liars wrong. But instead of always waiting for the 'hard evidence' to turn up and PROVE them wrong, maybe we should be asking them to provide the hard evidence that proves them right.
The demolition came as row between the church and government escalated over allegations the church refused to pay a £450 arbitrary road usage fee. Pastor Zhang Di was summoned for questioning last month and accused of assaulting police officers and attacking a village official. So when I read reports as in the link you sent and see the ACTUAL TRUTH in the middle of the article, I know that there is a lot more going on than is being reported.
Well obviously I am misrepresenting the meaning of the protester here. What they mean is that they support the right of one section of society to have and to hold their own culture and beliefs and they do this by protesting against another section of society’s right to have and to hold their own culture and beliefs.
As for a non-Muslim who posits that Islamic Terrorists do not truly practice Islam or truly believe in Allah, they are speaking either from complete ignorance, or subjective rationale relative to whatever it is that they have been told, or heard, or read. The word subjective relates a personal position relative to a particular situation. That does not of course mean that the subjective perception is ABSOLUTELY / ULTIMATELY incorrect. It may well be correct – the ultimately provable fact of the matter.
And so I began using the LIKE button. Ah such freedom! New sunrise photo – LIKE! Second day of school award for my granddaughter – LIKE! My 98 year old grandmother passed away yesterday – LIKE! But then the weirdest thing happened. Someone posted an article about two homosexuals who were given a public flogging in Indonesia. So I hit LIKE! Bloody hell! 23 threats of physical violence upon my person, and 17 announcements that I was about to be defriended. WTF?
So there you have it. The Patriarch Joseph was born in 1683BC. He was set over the Kingdom of Egypt in 1656BC. The Israelite Sojourn in Egypt commenced in 1648BC. Joseph died in 1582BC. The Hyksos were expelled in 1554BC. Moses was born in 1523BC.The Exodus commenced in 1449BC. The Israelites entered Caanan in 1412BC and 480 years later in the 4th year of Solomon the first temple commenced construction in 970 BC.
Since 2004 he has been writing academic articles, social commentaries and photographic 'Stories from China' both here at KingsCalendar, and formerly as a contributing columnist at Magic City Morning Star News (Maine USA) where from 2009 to 2015 he was Stand-in Editor. He currently has a column at iPatriot.com and teaches English to Business English and Flight Attendant College Students in Suzhou City Jiangsu Province People's Republic of China.)
BenDedek originally created the site 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
(The Download book does not contain a section on Seder Olam)
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 5. to see how it synchronises the Divided Kingdom Period]