Notes and Explanations.
The history of Judah’s and of Israel’s sovereigns is recorded in Kings and repeated in Chronicles. Had I used both Kings and Chronicles in the preparation of this chapter, the number of various answers would have been increased. Some Christian scholars, however, admit that Chronicles is not entirely free from errors, while Kings, on the other hand, is denominated a “marvel of accuracy.” To avoid any objections that might be raised were Chronicles used—to assail only that which is deemed unassailable—I have confined myself to Kings.
To prevent confusion in regard to names, the reader should remember that Israel had two kings named Jeroboam, and that Israel and Judah each had kings named Ahaziah, Jehoram, and Jehoash. In Israel Jehoram succeeded Ahaziah; in Judah, Ahaziah succeeded Jehoram. The contracted form of Jehoram is Joram, and of Jehoash, Joash. Both forms are used. Azariah is also called Uzziah.
In computing time, ordinal numbers are reckoned the same as cardinal numbers. It may be urged that the phrase, “in the eighteenth year,” does not denote the full period of eighteen completed years. In justification of the method pursued, I may say that it is not only the method generally followed by chronologists, but it is the method authorized by the Bible. See 2 Kings xvii, 1; 2 Kings xvii, 6. Also 1 Kings xv, 9, 10; 2 Chron. xvi, 13. Its adoption simplifies the form without increasing the number of solutions.
To reconcile other discrepancies, some Bible chronologists have assumed an interregnum of eleven years between the reigns of Jeroboam II. and Zachariah, and another of nine years between Pekah and Hosea. The language of the Bible utterly precludes these assumptions.
“And Jeroboam slept with his fathers, even with the kings of Israel, and Zachariah his son reigned in his stead” (2 Kings xiv, 29).
“And Hoshea the son of Elah made a conspiracy against Pekah the son of Remaliah, and smote him, and slew him, and reigned in his stead” (2 Kings xv, 30).
That these interregnums did not occur, nor indeed any interregnums between the reigns of Israel’s kings, is attested by Josephus, who by Christians is esteemed an authority second only to the writers of the Scriptures. The ninth book of his “Antiquities” bears the following title: “Containing the interval of one hundred and fifty-seven years from the death of Ahab to the captivity of the ten tribes.” This forbids the idea of any interregnum.
But if it could be shown that these or other interregnums really did occur, the fact would increase rather than diminish the difficulties connected with the solution of this question.
We search the writings of Bible commentators in vain for an explanation or attempted reconciliation of many of the conflicting statements to be found in the passages that I have quoted. These exegetes have either been ignorant of their existence, or have purposely ignored them. Some of the more noticeable ones they have attempted to reconcile; but the explanations offered are of such a character as to make it seemingly impossible for an honest scholar to advance them, or an intelligent reader to accept them.
These pretended reconciliations have been abridged, and, in the shape of marginal notes, transferred to the popular editions of the Bible. Where different and conflicting dates are assigned for the commencement of a king’s reign, opposite the first will be found such explanatory notes as “prorex,” “viceroy,” “in consort,” or “in partnership with his father;” and opposite the last, “began to reign alone;” and all this without a word or hint, either in the Bible or elsewhere, to authorize it.
The demonstration of a single error in the Bible destroys the dogmas of its divinity and infallibility. Yet notwithstanding this single error, or even twenty errors, it might still be valuable as a historical record. But when it can be demonstrated that it abounds with glaring contradictions, that its every chapter teems with flagrant errors, it is utterly unworthy of credit, and must be rejected even as a human record of events.
CHAPTER XVII.
INSPIRED NUMBERS.
In the second chapter of Ezra is given a register of the Jews who returned from Babylon to Jerusalem. The register begins with these words:
“Now these are the children of the province that went up out of the captivity, of those which had been carried away, whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away unto Babylon, and came again unto Jerusalem and Judah, every one unto his city.”
In the seventh chapter of Nehemiah, beginning with the sixth verse, is a copy of the same register. Nehemiah says:
“And I found a register of the genealogy of them which came up at the first, and found written therein,
“These are the children of the province, that went up out of the captivity, of those that had been carried away, whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away, and came again to Jerusalem and to Judah, every one unto his city.”
Then follows in each a list of the families with the number of persons belonging to them. But in transcribing the numbers, either Ezra or Nehemiah has made many errors. A careful examination reveals no less than twenty, as shown by the following: