Magic City Morning Star

Advertising | RSS Feed | About Us 

Last Updated: Sep 10, 2014 - 2:08:00 AM 

An eclectic mix of news and information
Staff Login
Donate towards our web hosting bill!

Front Page 
  News
  -- Local
  -- State
  -- National
  Community
  Business
  -- IRS News
  -- Win at Work
  Education
  -- History
  Tech Notes
  Entertainment
  -- Comics
  International
  -- R.P. BenDedek
  -- Kenneth Tellis
  Outdoors
  Sports
  Features
  -- M Stevens-David
  -- Down the Road
  Christianity
  Today in History
  Opinion
  -- Editor's Desk
  -- Guest Column
  -- Scheme of Things
  -- Michael Devolin
  -- Tom DeWeese
  -- Ed Feulner
  -- Jim Kouri
  -- Julie Smithson
  -- J. Grant Swank
  -- Doug Wrenn
  Letters
  Agenda 21
  Book Reviews
  -- Old Embers
  Notices
  Archive
  Discontinued


Web Directory Reviews
WDR Directory of Directories
Restore The Republic - The Home of the Freedom Movement!

R.P. BenDedek

How Historians Deceive Us and Manipulate Biblical Chronology.
By R.P.BenDedek
May 8, 2013 - 1:30:36 AM

Email this article
 Printer friendly page

This article is just an excerpt from an article I have previously published at Kingscalendar.com and it concentrates on Academic mathematical fudging of chronological data.

I'm not actually going to discuss my research, but through this challenge to the Math that biased (Anti-Biblical) Historians use to demonstrate the Length of King Nebuchadrezzar's Reign, I am going to show you how careful we should be when we put our trust into the hands of 'experts'.

  • Note: Nothing in this article actually contradicts the Egyptian, Assyrian or Babylonian Records of events that transpired during the period discussed (from 609 BCE to 562 BCE.) This article does not in any way dispute the Archaeological Evidence of any of the events listed herein.

How Historians Deceive Us and Manipulate Biblical Chronology.

The purpose of this excerpt is to challenge many false academic assumptions which have been accepted by the general community as academic fact. In short, it strives to demonstrate where the Academics got it wrong!

We sometimes tend to think that our knowledge of history is based on irrefutable evidence, but as pointed out by Sir Alan Gardiner (1961) [James Et.Al 1991 p.222] in reference to Egyptian History, our knowledge is based in a collection of rags and tatters. That there are probably many errors and circular arguments in relation to ancient history is attested to by many, including Colin Renfrew, Professor of Archaeology, Cambridge University (James Et. Al. 1991 : foreword pages.xiii-xv)

As pointed out by Peet. T.E. (1924. p 75): "Archaeology is not an exact science, and deals more often in probabilities and possibilities than in irrefutable demonstrations.'

Whilst it is understandable therefore that some conclusions might be occasionally incorrect, it remains a fact however that it is sometimes difficult for scholars to admit to errors. (Aharoni 1978, p.183). A good example of this is provided by James et.al. (1991, p.250) in 'Centuries of Darkness', which cites Mazar (1986, pp231/47) in relation to Mazar's preference for accepted dating despite his own evidence to the contrary.

Sir Charles Marston (1935, p.156) made similar comments in relation to prejudiced refutation of evidence in reference to potsherds from Jericho that indicated a 15th century Exodus. His point was that rather than change the then current academic opinion, the system of pottery dating indicating a 15th century Exodus was considered questionable. In short, the evidence itself was disbelieved in preference for current academic opinion.

Unfortunately however, there is a bigger problem than merely losing a little face at having to admit that some conclusion or other was incorrect. Miller and Hayes (1986, p.74 'Taking the Account as It Stands') whilst offering an honest and even-handed approach to their examination of various historical matters, offer us insights into some of the less than scientific approaches that are taken by some academics that lead one to speculate that for some, admitting that the scriptural record of history might be right, may be sufficient incentive to ensure that that Scriptural Record be summarily rejected.

James et.al. (1991, p.162) are quite straightforward in their criticisms of Academic "poor methodology, hypercritical treatment of Scripture, blindness, prejudice and a sectarian like rejection of the Biblical Record".

Such observations lead us to consider that some historians and archaeologists would rather provide us a factually incorrect history, than one which might cause us to give credence to anything recorded in the Bible.

What is hypocritical however is when many of these same Academics, quote the very Scriptures which they consider to be fictional, to support their many and varied hypotheses.

In this except, we see through the use of a computer generated mathematical artificial calendar, that without any contradiction to any Ancient Historical Record, that the chronological data recorded in the Bible, for the period from 609 BCE to 586 BCE, is correct, and that some of the chronological conclusions reached by historians, are incorrect.

Throughout this article I have said many times, that Academics use Bible chronology to justify their own theories, despite the fact that they constantly maintain that Bible Chronology is misleading. In this Section, which forms a natural bridge between the two invasions of Jerusalem, [596 BCE & 586 BCE] I want to demonstrate Academic Mathematical fudging.

From: How long did King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon Reign? Section 6 : Academic Mathematical BS

Academics know that Nebuchadrezzar's reign ended in 562 BCE, and they (incorrectly) assign him a 43 year reign preceeded by an ascension year in 605 BCE. Therefore his First Regnal Year commences in 604 BCE. From this they can calculate that the Babylonian captivity commenced in 587 BCE.

Furthermore, because both Zedekiah and Jehoiakim each had 11 year reigns, by adding these 22 years to 587 BCE, they can determine that Jehoiakim ascended the throne of Judah in 609 BCE, which by implication, is the year in which King Josiah died.

Furthermore, they use Jeremiah 46:2 to support their claim that Jehoiakim's 4th year was Nebuchadrezzar's Accession year. [They use one mistrusted reference to support another.]

But look what happens when you actually count out these years:

  • 587 BCE - Zedekiah's 11th year.
  • 588 BCE - Zedekiah's 10th year.
  • 589 BCE - Zedekiah's 9th year.
  • 590 BCE - Zedekiah's 8th year.
  • 591 BCE - Zedekiah's 7th year.
  • 592 BCE - Zedekiah's 6th year.
  • 593 BCE - Zedekiah's 5th year.
  • 594 BCE - Zedekiah's 4th year.
  • 595 BCE - Zedekiah's 3rd year.
  • 596 BCE - Zedekiah's 2nd year.
  • 597 BCE - Zedekiah's 1st year.
  • (Not Jehoiakim)

From this Table we can see That in 597 BCE, which is supposed to be Nebuchadrezzar's 7th year and the one in which he campaigned against Jehoiakim for refusing to pay tribute, and during which year he set Jehoiachin on the throne of Judah, it was actually King Zedekiah who was ruling. So what happened to Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin?

Not a Problem. As many historians will tell you, this is not really a problem, because obviously Zedekiah really only reigned 10 years not 11 years. So let's change this calendar a little and delete one year from Zedekiah's Reign.

  • 587 BCE - Zedekiah's 10th year.
  • 588 BCE - Zedekiah's 9th year.
  • 589 BCE - Zedekiah's 8th year.
  • 590 BCE - Zedekiah's 7th year.
  • 591 BCE - Zedekiah's 6th year.
  • 592 BCE - Zedekiah's 5th year.
  • 593 BCE - Zedekiah's 4th year.
  • 594 BCE - Zedekiah's 3rd year.
  • 595 BCE - Zedekiah's 2nd year.
  • 596 BCE - Zedekiah's 1st year.
  • 597 BCE - Jehoiakim's 11th year.
  • 598 BCE - Jehoiakim's 10th year.
  • 599 BCE - Jehoiakim's 9th year.
  • 600 BCE - Jehoiakim's 8th year.
  • 601 BCE - Jehoiakim's 7th year.
  • 602 BCE - Jehoiakim's 6th year.
  • 603 BCE - Jehoiakim's 5th year.
  • 604 BCE - Jehoiakim's 4th year.
    (Not according to Historians)
  • 605 BCE - Jehoiakim's 3rd year.
  • 606 BCE - Jehoiakim's 2nd year.
  • 607 BCE - Jehoiakim's 1st year.
  • 608 BCE - Josiah's Last year
    (Out by 1 year according to Historians)

So the first thing to notice is that adding the 22 years assigned in the Bible to Zedekiah and Jehoiakim interfers with current academic chronology which puts the Death of Josiah in 609 BCE.

Not to worry though, many Academics will just say Josiah died around 609 BCE, perhaps in 608 BCE. It is one way to solve a problem, but in the process, creates another.

The Other Problem: By the reckoning of the chronology provided above, Jehoiakim's 4th year, the year which apparently corresponds to Nebuchadrezzar's accession year, (as per Jeremiah 46:2) is now 604 BCE, not 605 BCE. Coincidently, this happens to be the year insisted upon by The King's Calendar.

To correct this faulty chronology historians would have to assign Zedekiah a 10 year reign (not 11 years) and Jehoiakim a 12 year reign (not 11 years).

  • 587 BCE - Zedekiah's 10th year.
  • 588 BCE - Zedekiah's 9th year.
  • 589 BCE - Zedekiah's 8th year.
  • 590 BCE - Zedekiah's 7th year.
  • 591 BCE - Zedekiah's 6th year.
  • 592 BCE - Zedekiah's 5th year.
  • 593 BCE - Zedekiah's 4th year.
  • 594 BCE - Zedekiah's 3rd year.
  • 595 BCE - Zedekiah's 2nd year.
  • 596 BCE - Zedekiah's 1st year.
  • 597 BCE - Jehoiakim's 12th year.
  • 598 BCE - Jehoiakim's 11th year.
  • 599 BCE - Jehoiakim's 10th year.
  • 600 BCE - Jehoiakim's 9th year.
  • 601 BCE - Jehoiakim's 8th year.
  • 602 BCE - Jehoiakim's 7th year.
  • 603 BCE - Jehoiakim's 6th year.
  • 604 BCE - Jehoiakim's 5th year.
  • 605 BCE - Jehoiakim's 4th year.
    (This Fits Better.)
  • 606 BCE - Jehoiakim's 3rd year.
  • 607 BCE - Jehoiakim's 2nd year.
  • 608 BCE - Jehoiakim's 1st year.
  • 609 BCE - Death of Josiah.
    (At last the desired outcome.)
  • But only by changing the record.


But what if 596 BCE (not 597 BCE) is the year of the Babylonian Captivity, as many would claim?

  • 586 BCE - Zedekiah's 11th year.
  • 587 BCE - Zedekiah's 10th year.
  • 588 BCE - Zedekiah's 9th year.
  • 589 BCE - Zedekiah's 8th year.
  • 590 BCE - Zedekiah's 7th year.
  • 591 BCE - Zedekiah's 6th year.
  • 592 BCE - Zedekiah's 5th year.
  • 593 BCE - Zedekiah's 4th year.
  • 594 BCE - Zedekiah's 3rd year.
  • 595 BCE - Zedekiah's 2nd year.
  • 596 BCE - Zedekiah's 1st year.
  • 597 BCE - Jehoiakim's 11th year.
    (Fits Nicely)
  • 598 BCE - Jehoiakim's 10th year.
  • 599 BCE - Jehoiakim's 9th year.
  • 600 BCE - Jehoiakim's 8th year.
  • 601 BCE - Jehoiakim's 7th year.
  • 602 BCE - Jehoiakim's 6th year.
  • 603 BCE - Jehoiakim's 5th year.
  • 604 BCE - Jehoiakim's 4th year.
    (Not according to Historians)
  • 605 BCE - Jehoiakim's 3rd year.
  • 606 BCE - Jehoiakim's 2nd year.
  • 607 BCE - Jehoiakim's 1st year.

  • 608 BCE - No King at all! -:- Oops!
  • 609 BCE - Josiah's Last Year.
  • This synchronism also does not fit the picture painted for us by historians.

No matter how you look at it, those Academics who seek credibility by quoting Scripture to prove their hypotheses, are merely manipulating the gullible. At the End of the day, these Academics we trust so much are just pulling the wool over our eyes. They don't believe the Scriptures they quote from, and manipulate them to suit their own purposes.

I realise that this article will raise questions for you rather than provide answers, but it's purpose, as stated, was merely to demonstrate that one should not merely accept the word of experts.

What you do now of course, is up to you.

The Full article from which this article is an excerpt: How long did King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon Reign?

R.P.BenDedek
Email:
rpbendedek@hotmail.com

Related Articles at KingsCalendar

Most Recent Social Commentary

Putting Women and Gays in their place
by R.P. BenDedek
April 25, 2013

The Western World is asleep or otherwise so preoccupied with its politically correct agendas, that it doesn't see the forest for the trees. Islam today, is like the Christianity of the Middle Ages - determined by hook or by crook to convert the world, and like the Roman Catholic Church of old, is full of people whose 'method of conversion choice' is the sword (or in our case - terrorism).


R.P.BenDedek (pseudonym) is the Author of 'The King's Calendar: The Secret of Qumran' (
http://www.kingscalendar.com ), and is a guest columnist and stand-in Editor at Magic City Morning Star News. He is also the Editor of the 'Writers Journal' at Kingscalendar.com. An Australian, he has been teaching Conversational English in China since 2003.

Writers Journal Kingscalendar

"The King's Calendar" is a chronological study of the historical books of the Bible (Kings and Chronicles), Josephus, Seder Olam Rabbah, and the (Essene) Damascus Document of The Dead Sea Scrolls.


© Copyright 2002-2014 by Magic City Morning Star

Top of Page

R.P. BenDedek
Latest Headlines
Divine Miracles, Deliverance and Restoration: Channukah December 17th 2014
What's in the Book Basket This Week? The Vicissitudes of Life
What's in the Book Basket This Week? Searching for the Answers
What's in the Book Basket This Week? Focus on Women and Learning
You do not stand for Peace

A Dinosaur of Education - a blog by James Fabiano.
Shobe Studios
Wysong Foods - Pets and People Too

Google
 
Web magic-city-news.com