Question about Ezekiel's chronology

opusdei1972

I am writing an article in Spanish about the failed prophecies of Ezekiel . However, I have found a problem when researching. For instance, In chapter 26 Ezekiel says that Yahweh gave him the prophecy against Tyre in the eleventh year. What is the starting point for this date?. If the eleventh year is eleven years after the carrying away of Jehoiachin (597 BCE), we are in 597-11 = 586 BCE, the year of the fall of Jerusalem or some time later. Ok, this makes sense. Nevertheless, Josephus said that "in the seventh year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar he began to besiege Tyre" (Against Apion 1.21). But the seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar must be 605 - 7 = 598 a.C. So I found a contradiction. Where I am wrong?

Bart Belteshassur

You are not wrong that is what Josephus says, however I would suspect that as he is quoting a source outside the Bible of the Trye king list it is likely that it that source which dates it as the seventh year, from the point when Trye came under Babylonian control. If this is the case and the Biblical date gives circa 586BCE, then Tyre must have come under Babylonian control 7 years earlier, circa 593BCE.

Need more confirmation on this though, and remember Josephus is not totally reliable with old his dates and it is likely that he had access to the Jewish Biblical scrolls taken from the temple prior to its destruction in 70CE, and they may not be the same as our current texts.

BB

opusdei1972

Bart Belteshassur Thank you for your thoughts. Josephus said that after quoting Menander of Ephesus, because Josephus wanted to prove that the 70 years were exactly fulfilled. Here is what Josephus said:

http://www.livius.org/men-mh/menander/menander_of_ephesus.html

[Josephus quotes Menander to prove that the Babylonian Exile was as long as the Bible suggests, because the Tyrian chronology separates Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus with the same number of years.]

I will now add the records of the Phoenicians; for it will not be superfluous to give the reader demonstrations more than enough on this occasion. In them we have this enumeration of the times of their several kings:

Nebuchadnezzar besieged Tyre for thirteen years in the days of Ithobaal [III], their king; after him reigned Baal [II], ten years; after him were judges appointed, who judged the people: Ecnibalus, the son of Baslacus, two months; Chelbes, the son of Abdeus, ten months; Abbar, the high priest, three months; Mitgonus and Gerastratus, the sons of Abdelemus, were judges six years; after whom Balatorus reigned one year; after his death they sent and fetched Merbalus from Babylon, who reigned four years; after his death they sent for his brother Hiram, who reigned twenty years. Under his reign Cyrus became king of Persia.

So that the whole interval is fifty-four years besides three months; for in the seventh year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar he began to besiege Tyre, and Cyrus the Persian took the kingdom in the fourteenth year of Hiram.

opusdei1972

I don't see where the 70 years are suggested....

Bart Belteshassur

Yes that text is the same as mine which is a copy of Winston. Whilst the notes detail various different copies in which the date for Temple completion vary for Darius he appears to find no problem with this seventh year date for Neb in relation to Tyre. Its nice to know that the figures for Tyre come from Menander though.

BB

AnnOMaly

opusdei1972, regarding Josephus' statement about Nebuchadnezzar besieging Tyre in his 7th year - this may prove useful:

H. Jacob Katzenstein's History of Tyre (1997 edition) on p. 328 says,

"Josephus's statement that 'it was in the seventh year of his reign that Nabuchodonosor began the siege of Tyre' (C.Ap. I, 159) has always puzzled scholars, and much ink has been spilled over the phrase 'in the seventh year of his reign'. A Latin version quoted by Niese may provide a clue to the real meaning of this sentence. Here we read: 'septimo siquidem anno regni sui (i.e. Ithobali!) Nabuchodonoser coepit ...'. We have, therefore, to read our text as follows: 'It was in the seventh year of his (=Ethobaal's) reign' - and now comes a completion: that is in the twentieth year of his (=Nebuchadnezzar's) reign - 'that Nabuchodonosor began the siege of Tyre'. We must, consequently, assume that in a very early stage a haplography caused the text to come down to us in its present form. Our assumption is also in agreement with the information regarding the beginning of the siege and with the total sum of the different reigns of the kings and judges given by Josephus, as we have already mentioned above. Thus the long siege started in the twentieth year of Nebuchadnezzar, i.e. in 585 B.C.E. and came to an end ca. 572 B.C.E. (=Nebuchadnezzar's thirty-third year)."

A sidebar on Ezekiel's way of counting. The difficulties with marrying up Ezekiel's way of counting years with other biblical and secular dates is well-known. You have to figure out if he was counting inclusively (1,2,3) or not (0,1,2) and whether he was counting Nisan to Nisan or Tishri to Tishri. I recommend Rodger C. Young's 2004 article, 'When Did Jerusalem Fall?'- particularly the subheading on p. 25, 'III. The Chronology of Ezekiel.'

opusdei1972

AnnOMaly Many thanks for your quote. Indeed, I have noted that Ezekiel's chronology is a mess. For instance, in the first chapter Ezekiel says that the thirtieth year is the fifth year of the exile of King Jehoiachin . So, I see that Ezekiel's starting point is not the same in all his chapters.

Phizzy

Thanks for the link Ann.

From R.C. Young's excellent paper it seems plain from Ezekiel that the destruction of Jerusalem took place in the month of Tammuz, our July, and not in October as the WT usually claims. (Of course the WT have the year out by twenty years too !).

Has the WT ever actually commented on Ezekiel's conflict with their view ? I guess they just assume they are right and Ezekiel fits in with their Chronology, which of course it patently does not.

Keep up the good work Opus !

AnnOMaly

Hi Phizzy,

The WTS say 4th month/Tammuz/June-July for the breach of Jerusalem's walls and the 5th month/Ab/July-Aug. for Jerusalem's destruction. This is the dating in the Bible. However, they start the '70 years' clock from when Gedaliah was assassinated in the 7th month/Tishri/Sept.-October, when they believe the land became 'desolate, without an inhabitant.'

*** Scripture Inspired (1990), p. 285 par. 6 Study Number 3—Measuring Events in the Stream of Time ***

The “seventy years” that ended in the autumn of the year 537 B.C.E. must have begun, then, in the autumn of 607 B.C.E. The facts bear this out. Jeremiah chapter 52 describes the momentous events of the siege of Jerusalem, the Babylonian breakthrough, and the capture of King Zedekiah in 607 B.C.E. Then, as verse 12 states, “in the fifth month, on the tenth day,” that is, the tenth day of Ab (corresponding to parts of July and August), the Babylonians burned the temple and the city. However, this was not yet the starting point of the “seventy years.” Some vestige of Jewish sovereignty still remained in the person of Gedaliah, whom the king of Babylon had appointed as governor of the remaining Jewish settlements. “In the seventh month,” Gedaliah and some others were assassinated, so that the remaining Jews fled in fear to Egypt. Then only, from about October 1, 607 B.C.E., was the land in the complete sense “lying desolated . . . to fulfill seventy years.”—2 Ki. 25:22-26; 2 Chron. 36:20, 21.

AnnOMaly

Hi opus,

Indeed, I have noted that Ezekiel's chronology is a mess. For instance, in the first chapter Ezekiel says that the thirtieth year is the fifth year of the exile of King Jehoiachin . So, I see that Ezekiel's starting point is not the same in all his chapters.

I think Young (and others) offers a solution to that anomaly by saying the 30th year is in relation to Jubilee cycles and corresponds to Jehoiachin's 5th year.

Question about Ezekiel's chronology

Share this