Post by Lee on Sept 13, 2014 15:03:50 GMT
Yesterday I was at the house of a friend, and during a conversation the subject of inspiration came up. He contended that the Bible was not all inspired, because there were many things stated which were contradictory. He called my attention to 2 Kings 15:30, wheren it is said Hoshea slew Pekah and reigned in his stead, in the 20th year of Jotham and again to chap. 17:1, where it says he began to reign in the 12th year of Ahaz. Can you explain? It is also said that Pekah and Rezin came up to war against Ahaz, after stating that Pekah was slain by Hoshea in the time of Jotham, the father of Ahaz. It also says, in chap. 18., that Hezekiah, the son of Ahaz, began to reign in the 3rd year of Hoshea. I confess I am puzzled. I am a believer in inspiration. Can you help me?—(G.A.)
ANSWER.—Many things are apparently contradictory that are not really so when all the facts are known. This is so notorious to persons of experience that when a friend of known integrity and capacity is concerned, the most apparently palpable discrepancies are not decided against him until he have the opportunity of explaining them. The Bible is in this position. It is in so many ways a book of proved truth and divinity that none but hasty, hostile, flippant or shallow minds would found a verdict against it on the strength of chronological obscurities of the character referred to. They are all capable of reconciliation when the details are carefully adjusted.
The difficulties briefly stated are: 1st. Hoshea, King of Israel, is said to kill Pekah in the 20th of Jotham, King of Judah, when Jotham apparently reigned only 16 years. 2nd. Pekah is apparently said to end his reign in the 12th year of Ahaz, who was Jotham’s successor. 3rd. Hoshea’s 7th year is said to be the 4th year of Hezekiah, who came after Ahaz, when apparently he was dead before Hezekiah began to reign. 4th. That Pekah was alive in the reign of Ahaz, after being apparently slain in the reign of Jotham, his predecessor. These things appear very formidable. Let us try and dissolve the mist.
1. Jotham was king 16 years in his own right, but he governed the land several years before, for during his reign his father became a leper, as we undeniably learn from 2 Chron. 26:21. There would therefore be two modes of reckoning Jotham’s reign, one from the beginning of his deputy-reign and the other from the beginning of his personal reign, which might easily give rise to apparent discrepancy. This, however, does not appear to yield the solution required in the present case. Suppose, therefore, we take the date of Pekah’s assassination as it stands—the 20th of Jotham. This is given as fixing the date of the assassination, not as telling us the length of the reign of Jotham. The 20th from the commencement of Jotham’s reign would be a definite date, apart from the question of how long Jotham reigned. The question was the time of Pekah’s assassination. Actually this was in the 4th of Ahaz, yet the 4th of Ahaz would be the 20th from the beginning of Jotham’s reign. Why it was described as the 20th of Jotham instead of the 4th of Ahaz, we can only speculate. Probably, it was because Hoshea’s reign did not begin till eight years after Pekah’s assassination; and the reckoning by Jotham would still be current in the land at the time the assassination took place. Whatever be the reason, the accuracy of the chronology in the case stands unimpeached, viz., that the assassination of Pekah took place in the 20th year from the beginning of Jotham’s reign, followed by an anarchy of eight years’ duration, at the end of which (in the 12th of Ahaz, 17:1) Hoshea’s reign of nine years began.
2. Pekah is not said to end his reign in the 12th of Ahaz, but that Hoshea, his successor, began his reign in that year (2 Kings 17:1). But it may be said that, as Hoshea succeeded Pekah, the end of Pekah’s reign and the beginning of Hoshea’s must be the same. Not necessarily. There was a time of chaos between the one and the other. This will be seen by the following statement:—“In the days of Pekah, King of Israel, came Tiglath-Pileser, King of Assyria, and took Ijon, Abel-beth-Maachal, &c. . . . and Gilead and Galilee and all the land of Naphtali, and carried them captive to Assyria. And Hoshea, the son of Elah, made a conspiracy against Pekah,” &c. Pekah’s reign would be computed to the subjugation of the land by Tiglath. Then came a time of conspiracy, ending in assassination. How long time was thus occupied before Hoshea’s reign began is not stated. Chapter 15:30 would appear to make Hoshea commence his reign in the same year that he slew Pekah, but this appearance is corrected by 17:1. To say that he killed Pekah, and “reigned in his stead,” would merely be to tell us the result of the killing without telling us the interval between one and the other, though appearing to intimate there was no interval. This is a mere appearance. 17:1 tells us when the reign began. We must, therefore, put in as much time as the other statements require. The length of this time is clear. Pekah’s 20th year ended in the fourth of Ahaz (chapter 16:1). Hoshea’s reign began in the 12th of Ahaz (17:1). Therefore, the interregnum was eight years.
3. This difficulty is dissolved by the foregoing explanation. Hoshea commenced his reign in the 12th year of Ahaz, who reigned 16 years. Hoshea reigned 9 years, and consequently some years after the death of Ahaz, and therefore some years into the reign of Hezekiah, who came after Ahaz.
4. This difficulty also is dissipated by the facts. Pekah was certainly alive in the days of Ahaz. He only apparently died in the reign of Jotham, through the mode of fixing the date employed by the narrator, already referred to.
. Vol. 29: The Christadelphian: Volume 29. 2001 (electronic ed.) (424–425). Birmingham: Christadelphian Magazine & Publishing Association.
ANSWER.—Many things are apparently contradictory that are not really so when all the facts are known. This is so notorious to persons of experience that when a friend of known integrity and capacity is concerned, the most apparently palpable discrepancies are not decided against him until he have the opportunity of explaining them. The Bible is in this position. It is in so many ways a book of proved truth and divinity that none but hasty, hostile, flippant or shallow minds would found a verdict against it on the strength of chronological obscurities of the character referred to. They are all capable of reconciliation when the details are carefully adjusted.
The difficulties briefly stated are: 1st. Hoshea, King of Israel, is said to kill Pekah in the 20th of Jotham, King of Judah, when Jotham apparently reigned only 16 years. 2nd. Pekah is apparently said to end his reign in the 12th year of Ahaz, who was Jotham’s successor. 3rd. Hoshea’s 7th year is said to be the 4th year of Hezekiah, who came after Ahaz, when apparently he was dead before Hezekiah began to reign. 4th. That Pekah was alive in the reign of Ahaz, after being apparently slain in the reign of Jotham, his predecessor. These things appear very formidable. Let us try and dissolve the mist.
1. Jotham was king 16 years in his own right, but he governed the land several years before, for during his reign his father became a leper, as we undeniably learn from 2 Chron. 26:21. There would therefore be two modes of reckoning Jotham’s reign, one from the beginning of his deputy-reign and the other from the beginning of his personal reign, which might easily give rise to apparent discrepancy. This, however, does not appear to yield the solution required in the present case. Suppose, therefore, we take the date of Pekah’s assassination as it stands—the 20th of Jotham. This is given as fixing the date of the assassination, not as telling us the length of the reign of Jotham. The 20th from the commencement of Jotham’s reign would be a definite date, apart from the question of how long Jotham reigned. The question was the time of Pekah’s assassination. Actually this was in the 4th of Ahaz, yet the 4th of Ahaz would be the 20th from the beginning of Jotham’s reign. Why it was described as the 20th of Jotham instead of the 4th of Ahaz, we can only speculate. Probably, it was because Hoshea’s reign did not begin till eight years after Pekah’s assassination; and the reckoning by Jotham would still be current in the land at the time the assassination took place. Whatever be the reason, the accuracy of the chronology in the case stands unimpeached, viz., that the assassination of Pekah took place in the 20th year from the beginning of Jotham’s reign, followed by an anarchy of eight years’ duration, at the end of which (in the 12th of Ahaz, 17:1) Hoshea’s reign of nine years began.
2. Pekah is not said to end his reign in the 12th of Ahaz, but that Hoshea, his successor, began his reign in that year (2 Kings 17:1). But it may be said that, as Hoshea succeeded Pekah, the end of Pekah’s reign and the beginning of Hoshea’s must be the same. Not necessarily. There was a time of chaos between the one and the other. This will be seen by the following statement:—“In the days of Pekah, King of Israel, came Tiglath-Pileser, King of Assyria, and took Ijon, Abel-beth-Maachal, &c. . . . and Gilead and Galilee and all the land of Naphtali, and carried them captive to Assyria. And Hoshea, the son of Elah, made a conspiracy against Pekah,” &c. Pekah’s reign would be computed to the subjugation of the land by Tiglath. Then came a time of conspiracy, ending in assassination. How long time was thus occupied before Hoshea’s reign began is not stated. Chapter 15:30 would appear to make Hoshea commence his reign in the same year that he slew Pekah, but this appearance is corrected by 17:1. To say that he killed Pekah, and “reigned in his stead,” would merely be to tell us the result of the killing without telling us the interval between one and the other, though appearing to intimate there was no interval. This is a mere appearance. 17:1 tells us when the reign began. We must, therefore, put in as much time as the other statements require. The length of this time is clear. Pekah’s 20th year ended in the fourth of Ahaz (chapter 16:1). Hoshea’s reign began in the 12th of Ahaz (17:1). Therefore, the interregnum was eight years.
3. This difficulty is dissolved by the foregoing explanation. Hoshea commenced his reign in the 12th year of Ahaz, who reigned 16 years. Hoshea reigned 9 years, and consequently some years after the death of Ahaz, and therefore some years into the reign of Hezekiah, who came after Ahaz.
4. This difficulty also is dissipated by the facts. Pekah was certainly alive in the days of Ahaz. He only apparently died in the reign of Jotham, through the mode of fixing the date employed by the narrator, already referred to.
. Vol. 29: The Christadelphian: Volume 29. 2001 (electronic ed.) (424–425). Birmingham: Christadelphian Magazine & Publishing Association.