How's that for a Title of an article? And how's this for my comment on the title: 'Absolutely True!'

No! This was not the title of some article written about me on some website, or a statement made about me in someone's article. It is the purposeful title given by me to this article. So what is the purpose of such a 'self-denigrating' title?

It is simply to say that: 'I am a no-one!'

I can't stress this enough, for you see, many people write to me about their chronological schemes in relation to the history of Ancient Israel and many of them seem to think that I am actually some famous person hiding behind a pseudonym. I'm not!

I am not famous! I am not on any archaeological or historical organization's list of board members, faculty or researchers and I belong to no 'peer review' committee. I'm not even a 'Professor' except in China where being the holder of a 'Masters Degree', even if only in 'Watching Paint Dry', entitles you to be addressed as such.

So why do these Bible Chronology people write to me? That is a good question!

Between 1992 and 2002 I wrote and published on the internet (2003), a book called 'The King's Calendar: The Secret of Qumran'. It is a book about my research into Bible Chronology. Its popularity has only ever been surpassed by one other book, titled: 'How to watch paint dry!'

My book is about the Chronological History of Ancient Israel as seen through the lens of an artificial calendar in which years are assigned a value of 336 days. But enough about my book!

Now the reason that I have given this article the title that it has, is because I keep getting people writing to me, basically to say, 'Please look at 'my' work and tell me that 'my chronology' is correct, and help me tell the world that I am right and that you and everyone else are wrong!'

Well I don't mind looking at people's schemes in relation to the chronological history of Ancient Israel because one just never knows what one might learn, but it does eat into my time somewhat, and it does tend to set me at odds with people who arrive uninvited into my life.

Not being one to discourage other people's lines of enquiry, and remembering the wonderful help I received from two particular academics, (one of whom is world famous), I do try to be of some assistance to those people who write to me.

The problem with Bible Chronology (or Ancient Near Eastern History) is that most people have no idea of just how complex the chronological problems of Ancient history are, and when it comes to the Bible, the problems take on an extra twist, because the books of Kings and Chronicles which provide the Divided Kingdom Period synchronous chronology for the Northern and Southern Kingdoms of Ancient Israel 'do not consistently synchronize with each other or with known history'.

Unfortunately, because the Bible provides so much information that is lacking in other ancient records, Academics rely heavily on it for 'Information', whilst at the same time stressing that Bible History is in error and therefore unreliable.

Just today I finally got around to checking the charts of one 'Chronologist' with whom I have exchanged emails over the last few months. I did check his material when he first wrote, and pointed out that he had failed to provide any 'apologetics' for some of the dates that he had provided. His answer to that was to send me a number of charts that 'proved' that his figures are correct. I told him honestly that it would be some time before I could devote time to 'studying' those charts, and asked him in the meantime to answer some basic questions. He did not address issues related to 'apologetics' but did tell me some of his viewpoints, which I will paraphrase here, as things like:

'We can't trust the Academics and their history books'

'The Bible is not infallible - it does contain errors'

'I can use all the Bible chronology - as is - and make it fit history'

The strange thing about these statements, is that they are true. I too make these statements. But when I finally sat down to study his charts, I found that he had simply 'ignored' the synchronous data provided in the Bible, and changed the dates in the history books simply because his chronology insisted that these dates must be changed.

When it comes to Bible Chronology, the reality is that no matter who you are and what your theory is, you must at least make some show of following scientific and mathematical methodology when 'demonstrating' where one differs from the 'standard' dates in history.

Let me give you an example of what I mean.

The history books state that in 722 BCE the Northern Kingdom of Israel during the reign of King Hoshea, fell to the Assyrians during the reign of Shalmaneser IV. In this chronologist's estimation however, the Northern Kingdom fell in 708 BC. Since he has not provided apologetics for this shift in historical data, one must assume that the date was shifted so as to fit the chronology he had calculated, without any attention paid to the ongoing 'ripple effect'.

The dates for King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon are fairly well 'fixed in time', but if one shifts the reign of king Shalmaneser IV of Assyria by 10 years or so, it has an ongoing effect on the following kings of Assyria and therefore by extension, the Kings of Babylon. Stating that the History books are wrong because they don't match your chronology 'doesn't work', because the same Bible records from which you calculate your Bible Chronology, also synchronize with the reigns of the Kings of Assyria and Babylon.

Now let me make something quite plain to you! I love Gnostic investigations and understand why people undertake them. I get a good giggle out of numerology and understand people's fascination with numbers, meanings and secret codes. I like conspiracy theories and understand what leads people to imagine the worst about everything, and I just love it when Academics have to admit that their previous 'certainties' were erroneous and that they didn't really understand everything about those things about which they previously claimed to know everything. (The Genesis of the universe and evolution's 'missing link' would be good examples)

What I don't understand is why it is that people who write to me to 'prove' that their chronologies are correct, object to having to 'justify' their theories and dates. As anyone who have ever studied 'anything' at university (before they turned classrooms into cloning rooms) knows, one is required to provide 'apologetics' (the logical reasoning for an assertion) for one's theories and conclusions on just about everything.

It, for some reason or another (unless you are affiliated with some Politically Correct organization) is simply 'not good enough' to say, "this is what I believe and I believe that I am always right - so this is totally right and I don't care what you believe or how many facts and proofs to the contrary you throw at me!"

Providing a proper logical argument to support your theory on something, does not automatically mean that you are correct - but - at least you have provided something that enables honest researchers to test your theory.

Scientific Methodology requires that every theory and experiment be subjected to repeated testing to verify or prove erroneous, the theory being tested and the results previously obtained.

When it comes to Bible History, one of the common problems that I encounter with people who send me their material is that they quote Scripture to justify their timelines for the Northern and Southern Kingdoms of Israel but completely ignore the fact that those same Scriptures "synchronize that material" and that their chronological charts often contradict the Biblical Synchronisms.

For Example: In a chart I looked at today, everything looked really good, despite The Northern Kingdom lasting a dozen years beyond what the academics say it did. Everything looked good and sensible and fitted well with history - except that when you check the books of Kings and Chronicles which aligns the reigns of these kings, that alignment was missing in the charts. Where Jehoshaphat (according to the Bible synchronism) was supposed to commence his reign in the 4th year of Ahab, it was clear that he started in the 2nd year of Ahab. Questions:

• Did the Bible get it wrong?
• What else did it get wrong?
• Now that you shifted things by 2 years won't that mess up the following synchronisms?

In the charts I was looking at, Where the Bible ascribes 393 years for the reigns of the Kings of the Southern Kingdom (Rehoboam to Zedekiah), the chart provided only 343 years - and - did not provide any reason for doing so.

The problem with Bible Chronology is that if you believe that the Bible is accurate, you can't just throw out something that it says, and if you believe that the Bible is not always accurate, then you have to provide 'justification' for accepting one thing and rejecting another.

Everyone is entitled to their beliefs, and anyone who sits down to work through Bible Chronology is to be admired because it is no mean feat. But one simply cannot maintain that one's chronology is the correct chronology based solely on one's personal belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong. They have to show where and why other chronologies are wrong and 'why' (using sound testable logic) their particular chronology is right.

Do you know why so many people spend their time trying to figure out the Chronology of the Ancient Near East?

It's simple really: Because current history does not match the chronology of the Bible and because Academics today are not the 'real researchers' that they were a century ago. Guesstimates, probabilities, and 'I Believe' are relied upon now to convince the unsuspecting public of 'The Academic Gospel of History' - and - these guys remain totally and immovably correct until proven wrong by incontrovertible new discoveries.

Of course there is another reason why so many spend time on Biblical Chronology - because it needs to be correct in order for God to be correct, to prove that the Bible is infallible and therefore by extension, justify the 'faith' that people have that their lives have meaning and that they are worthy and righteous and 'all will be well' when their life has run its course. (No such luck for evolutionists who are just pond scum who made it to the top of the pyramid and then --?)

FACT: I not only 'don't believe' in Biblical Infallibility but I know for a fact that the Bible contains many chronological and textual (historical narratives) errors.

The real problem with the Skeptic's approach, is that they have fallen into the same trap into which many fundamentalists have fallen; Biblical Infallibility. The skeptic's arguments are designed to find fault with the Bible so as to prove that it is incorrect and therefore not infallible. The trap they fall into is that only fundamentalists require the Bible to be infallible in order to believe that what is recorded therein is true. Errors of fact or transmission do not prove that a story is false. (Biblical Infallibility and Bible Skepticism)

Unlike so many others, I never set out to prove some theory such as that the Bible is Correct. I simply set out to understand 'why the chronology doesn't synchronize' the way it was designed to synchronize.

I came to the conclusion that Biblical Chronological Records were totally corrupted - or - that they were not recorded in a way currently recognized by the academic world. I made a choice to allow all 'contradictions' to be 'apparent but not real' contradictions until I was able to understand what methodology had been used by the ancient redactors.

I did my experimenting, provided my methodology, assumptions and limitations, provided apologetics for those places where my chronology disagrees with the currently accepted dates, and did my best to demonstrate why those currently accepted dates cannot be accepted as gospel.

The rest, as they say - is history!

So! If you are really into Bible Chronology, then before you decide you want to show me that you are right (without apologetics provided), and that I am wrong (without any apologetics provided), would you please take a look at my Methodology and at my Assumptions & Limitations, and perhaps even my Research Proposal (Appendix Two), and note that 'I believe I am right' just doesn't work in the real world - and ignoring what the Bible says, doesn't work in the Biblical World.

Somewhere in the Bible it says something like 'Always stand ready to give a Defense (Apologetic) of your Faith'.

YOU may believe that you are right, and if 'belief' is all it takes to be right, then let me state for the record that "I BELIEVE in providing proper apologetics for what I BELIEVE".

If you can only give me your belief and faith and guesstimates and probabilities, then please don't send me your material and kindly remember that my opinion doesn't count for squat because: "In Bible Chronology R.P. BenDedek is a 'No-one'!"

R.P.BenDedek

Email: rpbendedek@hotmail.com

R.P.BenDedek is the Author of 'The King's Calendar: The Secret of Qumran' and a guest columnist and stand-in Editor at Magic City Morning Star News. He has been teaching Conversational English in China since 2003

Academic Articles at Magic City

"The King's Calendar" [ on sale - while the economic recession is on], 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. See Chapter Precis page.