The
‘historical' Chronicles of the Bible.
On the infallible inerrancy of scripture.
Sola scriptura?
Historical revisionism in the Bible
The conflicting history of Kings and
Chronicles
The Bible book of Chronicles was written specifically for the purpose of
disagreeing with the portrayal of history, doctrine and the interpretation of
events in other narratives. The Chronicles consist of edited versions of events
recorded in other books. There are two ‘historical' books that share many
features in common, the books of Kings and Chronicles. The books are similar in
style and cover much of the same ground. The significance of Chronicles is
found in the numerous deletions as well as the consistent pattern of divergence
from earlier ‘historical fact' that are found in earlier books. It has been
traditional to blame these differences on a slip of the pen and copyist error,
but this explanation proves to be inadequate upon examination. Because it is
impossible to determine just which account was historical fact and which was
political propaganda or polemic these manuscripts disprove the doctrine of the
infallible inerrancy of scripture. It is impossible to establish history using
the simple principle of sola scriptura (which means only scripture). The Bible
is not inerrant, but is contradictory, and proves to be complex and not simple.
There is a consistent pattern of minor changes in seemingly inconsequential
details found throughout the books of Chronicles. If someone was said to own
three horses, in the Chronicles this would be changed to read that they owned
five. It has become customary to insist that such divergence can be considered
‘copyist errors'. However the pattern is so consistent that when one considers
the overall revisions present in the book it suggests that such changes were
deliberate. As well one must wonder how a book full of ‘copyist errors' can be
held to be ‘inerrant'. (But I digress.)
In the following example, ‘copyist error', so often held to blame when numbers
are inconsistent, was also responsible for changing calvary into infantry. We
are told that David killed 700 Aramaeans in chariots and forty thousand
horsemen, mortally wounding Shophach. (2 Samuel
Chapter 10 verse 18) In 1 Chronicles
Chapter 19 verse 18 the edited version states that David killed 7,000
Aramaeans in chariots and forty thousand infantry men, killing Shophach.
In the book of Samuel we are told
that Jesse had eight sons.
"And
Jesse made seven of his sons pass before Samuel. And Samuel said to Jesse,
"YAHWEH has not chosen these." And Samuel said to Jesse, "Are
all your sons here?" And he said, "There remains yet the youngest,
but behold, he is keeping the sheep."" (1 Samuel
Chapter 16 verse 10)
"Now David was the son of an Ephrathite of Bethlehem in Judah, named
Jesse, who had eight sons." (1 Samuel
Chapter 17 verse 12)
As was his habit, as you shall see, the Chronicler sees fit to ‘correct' the
author of Samuel on this matter. Jesse, we are told, had seven sons.
"Jesse
was the father of Eliab his first-born, Abinadab the second, Shimea the third,
Nethanel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, Ozem the sixth, David the
seventh." (1 Chronicles
Chapter 2 verse 13)
The Chronicler was also inclined to fix up certain stories which had obviously
been 'incorrectly' told in the earlier manuscripts. In the book of Samuel we
are told that Saul inquired of God, but did not receive an answer. In the
Chronicles Saul died for his unfaithfulness in not consulting God. The fault
lay not with God, for not answering, but rather will Saul for not asking. These
are minor theological 'corrections' that the Chronicler so often makes to the
earlier versions of stories.
"And
when Saul inquired of YAHWEH, YAHWEH did not answer him, either by dreams, or
by Urim, or by prophets." 1 Samuel 28:6 (1 Samuel
Chapter 28 verse 6) (1 Samuel
Chapter 28 verse 6)
"So Saul died for his unfaithfulness; he was unfaithful to YAHWEH ... and
did not seek guidance from YAHWEH. Therefore YAHWEH killed him." (1 Chronicles
Chapter 10 verse 13)
It would seem that the author of the Samuel accounts could not keep his facts
and figures straight, and delivered erroneous results of the census, requiring,
once again, editorial revision. In 2 Samuel Chapter
24 verse 9 the result of the census was Israel 800,000 and Judah
500,000. In 1 Chronicles
Chapter 21 this is ‘corrected' to read Israel 1,100,000 and Judah
470,000. The Samuel account also kept faulty books. According to 2 Samuel
Chapter 24 verse 24 David paid 50 shekels of silver for the plot
of land on which the temple was to be built. In 1 Chronicles
Chapter 21 verse 22 this is ‘corrected' to read 600 shekels of
gold. The reasoning behind this constant readjusting of figures is difficult to
know for certain. Did the author consider his sources superior?
In the book of 1 Kings Chapter 4 verse 26 we
are told that Solomon had 40,000 horses. 2
Chronicles Chapter 9 verse 25 states that he had 4,000
horses. Solomon had 3,300 foremen according to 1 Kings
Chapter 5 verse 16 , and 3,600 according to 2
Chronicles Chapter 2 verse 2 . The two pillars were 18
cubits high as described in 1 Kings Chapter 7 verse 15 .
This was of course wrong. According to 2
Chronicles Chapter 3 verse 15 they were 35 cubits high.
Solomon's molten sea held 16,000 gallons (1 Kings
Chapter 7 verse 26) or 24,000 gallons (2
Chronicles Chapter 4 verse 5) . And either 420 talents of
gold were brought from Ophir for use in the temple construction (1 Kings
Chapter 9 verse 28) or 450 talents (2
Chronicles Chapter 8 verse 18) . Solomon had 550
overseers (1 Kings Chapter 9 verse 23) or
only 250 (2 Chronicles Chapter 8 verse 10) .
When he began to reign Jehoiakim was either 18 and reigned 3 months after which
time his uncle took the throne (2 Kings Chapter 24 verse
8) or 8 and reigned 3 months and 10 days and then his brother
began to rule (2 Chronicles Chapter 36 verse 9) .
Ahaziah was either 22 when he came to the throne (2 Kings
Chapter 8 verse 26) or 42 (2
Chronicles Chapter 22 verse 2) .
Baasha died in the 26th year of Asa's reign. (I Kings
Chapter 16 verse 6) Baasha fortified the city of Ramah in the
36th year of Asa's reign. (2 Chronicles Chapter 16 verse 1) Baasha
died in the 36th year of Asa's reign. (2
Chronicles Chapter 16 verse 1) Asa did not remove the high
places (1 Kings Chapter 15 verse 14) Asa
removed the high place shrines. (2 Chronicles Chapter 14
verse 2) The Kingdom was at peace under Asa (because he knocked down
the high place shrines). (2 Chronicles Chapter 14 verse 5) There
was war between Asa and Baasha all throughout their reigns (because he did not
knock down the high places). (1 Kings Chapter 15 verse 16)
It would seem to be customary for the chronicler to disagree with the
presentation of certain kings as it is given in the books of Kings. Jehoshaphat
did not remove the high places. (1 Kings Chapter 22 verse
42) Jehoshaphat removed the high place shrines. (2
Chronicles Chapter 17 verse 5) Now it is obvious that either
he did remove them or he didn't, but you'll never find out one way or the other
by consulting the Bible. Only one of these mutually exclusive accounts can be
true, and the other was probably a piece of political propaganda.
Now it might be a little easier to understand the chronicler's penchant for
correcting everything and everybody under the sun when we keep in mind how
convoluted and contradictory the manuscripts of the Bible really are. For
example consider the following mind bender from the books of Kings. Jehoram,
the son of Ahab, began his reign in the second year of the reign of Jehoram,
son of Jehosophat. (2 Kings Chapter 1 verse 17) Jehoram
son of Jehosophat began his reign in the fifth year of Jehoram, son of
Ahab. (2 Kings Chapter 8 verse 16) And
if you can get your mind around that mobius, you might also be able to
straighten out the following. Omri became king in the 31st year of Asa's reign
and he reigned 12 years. (1 Kings Chapter 16 verse 23) When
Omri died his son Ahab came to the throne and this was in the 38th year of
Asa's reign. (This means that Omri could have only reigned 7 years, not 12 as
stated.)
The chronicler was not blind to the confused and convoluted state of affairs
found in the earlier Biblical manuscripts. Chronicles was one of the last books
written, and probably was an attempt by the priests to set things straight.
This is not to suggest that the version of events in Chronicles is thus
'correct' for the Chronicler wrote about events that were even further removed
from his own time than in the original manuscripts he worked from. The
Chronicler had an agenda as well, upgrading this king and downgrading another,
as just one example, and this has to be kept in mind when reading his work.
And, by the way, sorting all this out is very important if one wishes to use
the Bible to determine the exact age of the earth, something that was obviously
important to the priestly chronicler, as a large part of the opening of the
first book is devoted to sorting out the confused genealogies of earlier works,
important if you want to get the age of the earth nailed down (around six
thousand years, give or take) since it is allegedly by ‘decoding' all the
genealogies and the lengths of reigns of this, that or the other king that one
can trace back through the Bible to the origins of the planet. In the end,
scholars have come up with multiple historical schema based on these documents,
which should not surprise anyone, since the Bible makes nothing crystal clear
itself, and none of these schema have unanimous support.
In the book of 2 Kings Chapter 9 verse 27 , we
are told that Jehu shot Ahaziah with an arrow near Ibleam, and that Ahaziah
escaped to Meggido, where he died In 2
Chronicles Chapter 22 verse 9 we are told that Ahaziah was
captured in Samaria, where he had been hiding out. He was then brought to Jehu
who had him put to death. The Kings of Syria and Israel failed to conquer Ahaz,
according to 2 Kings Chapter 16 verse 5 ,
and, of course, according to 2 Chronicles Chapter 28 verse 5 ,
they did conquer Ahaz. (I guess we will never know for sure.) If one wishes to
attribute all these differences and inconsistencies to ‘a slip of the pen' then
one can only assume that the chronicler was an extremely inept and sloppy
printer.
God was moved to anger with Israel and so inspired David to take a
census. (2 Samuel Chapter 24 verse 13) It
was Satan who inspired David to take the census (the change was obviously made
for ‘theological' reasons). (1 Chronicles Chapter 21 verse 1) As
punishment for the census and its aftermath, David is given the choice of
running from his enemies for three months, or 7 years of famine (2 Samuel
Chapter 24 verse 13) or was it 3 years of famine (1
Chronicles Chapter 21 verse 11) .
The chronicler did not hesitate to correct other biblical authors as well. The
father of Zerubbabel was either Shealtiel (Ezra
Chapter 3 verse 2) or Pedaiah (2
Chronicles Chapter 3 verse 19) . Josiah was followed on the
throne by either Shallum (Jeremiah Chapter 22 verse 11) or
Jehoahaz (2 Chronicles Chapter 36 verse 1) .
The chronicler was not fool proof. The mother of Abijah was either Maachah,
Absalom's daughter (2 Chronicles Chapter 9 verse 20) or
Michaiah the daughter of Uriel (2 Chronicles Chapter 13
Verse 2) . But then, as the saying goes, no one is perfect.
The above catalogue of historical inconsistencies is by no means complete, but
even what you find here should be enough to keep those who attempt to harmonize
the Bible busy for a considerable time. That the Bible does not contain pure ‘historical'
documents should be self evident, since so many of the conflicts in its pages
are polemical. No amount of archeology can be expected to demonstrate the
‘historical accuracy' of Biblical narratives, because they simply are not
historical. When an archeological find mentions a person or place in the Bible,
but gives a variant version of events, we recognize that we are reading
political propaganda and polemic, and it is common to dismiss the variant.
