Yes, it's... ANOTHER problem with JW chronology...

by Jeffro 4 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Jeffro

  According to the Watch Tower Society, Ahaziah (of Judah) reigned for a single year, in 906BCE. The Watch Tower Society also claims that Judah and Israel both used Nisan-based dating for the start of reigns.

  According to 2 Kings 9:29, Ahaziah's reign began in the 11th year of Jehoram (of Israel). But according to 2 Kings 8:25-26, Ahaziah's reign began in Jehoram's 12th year. Of course, if Judah and Israel were both using Nisan-based dating, Ahaziah's single year of reign couldn't have started in both years. To skirt around this problem Insight weakly claims that Ahaziah was "perhaps anointed to kingsip in c. 907 B.C.E."

  But that is not the only problem with the Watch Tower Society's chronology for this period. They claim that Jehu began to reign in 905 BCE, but that his reign is counted from the year after that (904 BCE). The problem (for them) here is that they have Ahaziah's single year and the final year of Jehoram (of Israel) in 906BCE. 2 Kings 8:25; 9:12-13 indicates that Jehu was anointed in Jehoram's 12th year (his final year), while Jehoram and Ahaziah (of Judah) are still alive. Whilst there is some latitude for claiming an accession period for Jehu during Jehoram's final year, there's no reason at all why the following year (905 BCE) would also not be counted as a regnal year.

  2 Kings 11:3 also indicate that Athaliah reigned for 6 years. However, JW chronology has her reign lasting 7 years.

  Hence the Watch Tower Society adds a spurious year for both Athaliah and Jehu, which is just one of several additions to the divided monarchy to pad out their false chronology.

  In reality, Judah used Tishri-based dating and Israel used Nisan-based dating for kings' regnal years, and the author of 2 Kings always counts the accession period as part of the reign. With that in mind, 2 Kings 8:25-26 and 2 Kings 9:29 indicate that Ahaziah's reign began some time after the start of Tishri (late 841BCE) but before the following Nisan (early 840BCE). Jehu was anointed in the same year, and murdered Jehoram and Ahaziah (2 Kings 9:22-29) prior to Tishri (840BCE). Athaliah then began to reign in Judah, still prior to Tishri of 840BCE.
• 

  Bart Belteshassur

  Jeffro- I was just looking at this period earlier this morning and you have already answered the question I had re your chart, with the answer I had assumed. I agree with your reasoning and will give the matter a good going over after lunch (late). Enjoy your day.

  BB
• 

  Jeffro

  I should clarify that JW literature does claim that Jehoram's 12th (final) year was 905BCE rather than 906BCE. It is therefore implied (but not stated) that his 'first' year in 917BCE was an uncounted 'accession year'. However, that 'excuse' does not work because any such accession period transitioning from Ahaziah (of Israel) to Jehoram would have been during the final year of Ahaziah (of Israel), which JWs place in 918BCE (plus, JWs claim that Ahaziah's reign was 'credited' to Jehoram as of 919BCE, further negating the likelihood of a separate accession period). Without calling 917BCE an 'accession year', that gives Jehoram a sole reign of 13 years if 905BCE is taken as his final year. That would mean that 'reconciling' the reign of Jehu in this manner would simply move the extra year back into the reign of Jehoram instead.

  I should also add that in addition to the way the reigns are given in my chart, there is another scenario that is compatible with the reigns of Ahaziah (of Judah), Athaliah, Jehoram (of Israel), Ahaziah (of Israel) & Jehu. That is that Ahaziah (of Judah) may have started his reign near the end of Jehoram's 11th year, such that it could be given as that year or rounded off to beginning in his 12th year. In this scenario, Athaliah and Jehu would still both begin to reign prior to Tishri of 840BCE.

  If Jehoram (of Israel) began his reign between Tishri & Adar (approx. October to March), it would then be possible that Ahaziah (of Judah) began his reign between Nisan & Elul (approx. April to September) of 840BCE (instead of late 841 to early 840BCE). In such a scenario, Athaliah's reign would still begin prior to Tishri of 840BCE. However, comparison of the transition from Ahaziah (of Israel) to Jehoram with the reigns of Jehoshaphat and Jehoram (of Judah) does not suggest that to be the case.
• 

  jamclark

  Most reigns start in the civil year (fall, as in 6 months after the scriptural year). The months before generally don't count and is called the ascension period.
• 

  Jeffro

  jamclark:

  Most reigns start in the civil year (fall, as in 6 months after the scriptural year). The months before generally don't count and is called the ascension period.

  I have already determined mathematically that reigns in Judah were based on the civil calendar (i.e. Tishri-based) and that reigns in Israel were based on the the sacred (not 'scriptural') calendar (Nisan-based). (Claiming that both used Tishri-based years would result in anomalies similar to those introduced by the Watch Tower Society's claim that both used Nisan-based years.) Additionally, comparison of various verses indicates that the Jews counted the accession (not 'ascension') period as part of the reign prior to Babylonian influence. (It should also be noted that the Jews had different names for the months prior to Babylonian influence.)