|
The Scroll of Biblical Chronology Daniel Gregg
compared with
The Chronology of the Old Testament Floyd Nolen Jones
|
|
I was asked in an email from a U.K. reader to explain the differences between the Scroll of Biblical Chronology and Nolen Jones' Chronology of the Old Testament.
1. The edition used for this comparison is the second printing, October 2005; Master Books, PO Box 726, Green Forest, AR 72638.
2. On page 21 Jones states that he is constructing a 'Standard Chronology' and not an 'Absolute Chronology'. He states, "The overall skeletal outline as presented is believed to be within three years of absolute although the dates of individual events and persons located within the outline during the latter periods of the judges may be of greater error." The Scroll of Biblical Chronology is an absolute chronology up to the present day dating all events to the exact year. Jones' 3 year fudge factor, however, does not absolve his chronology of some outright errors.
3. On Chart 5C Jones continues the 70 years of 'Babylonian Servitude' into the reign of 'Darius the Mede'; this is not correct because Darius was Persian. The Scroll of Biblical Chronology correctly counts 66 years until the Persian takeover; this leaves 4 years to complete the 70 at the end of the age, i.e. the 42 months for the Anti-Christ whose throne will be in Babylon. The 42 months divide into 8 months, 13 months, 12 months, and 9 months (a part year, year, year, and part year), i.e. time, times, and half a time. The divisions are an educated guess, but the point is that the last 4 years are reserved to the end of the age when Babylon is destroyed according to Revelation 17-19 and Jeremiah 25:11-12.
4. In Chart 5C, the 70th year of 'Captivity' does not synchronize with the first year of Cambyses (who is the Cyrus that freed the Jewish People). It does synchronize in the Scroll of Biblical Chronology (cf. Ezra. 1:1; Jer. 29:10).
5. In Chart 5C, Jones ends the 70 years of 'desolations' for the Temple in the 6th year of Darius. This is an error, since it ended in the 4th year according to Zechariah 7:1-5.
6. In Chart 5C, Jones incorrectly re-dates the 20th year of Artaxerxes I to 454 B.C. He uses special pleading not recognized by other scholars to re-date by speculating a coregency. He does this to make his mistaken chronology of Daniel 9:24-27 fit 483 years until A.D. 30.
7. Jones' misdates the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. leading to the error with the 70 years of desolations ending in the 6th year of Darius. The Scroll of Biblical Chronology has it correctly in 587 B.C., and correctly ends the desolations in the 4th year of Darius. Zechariah 7:1-5.
8. Jones makes no account of the 40 years for the sin of Judah or the 65 years of Isaiah 7:8.
9. Jones misdates the Sabbath year and Jubilee year for Hezekiah's reign in the 18th and 19th year, when the Scripture makes it the 15th and 16th year after the Assyrian invasion in the 14th year.
10. Jones misdates the end of the 390 years for the disruption of the kingdoms to 586 B.C. when it dates to 593 B.C., the 5th year of Jehoiachin's captivity (Ezek. 1:1-2) This causes Jones to error by 8 years on the date of the division of the kingdom.
11. On page 278 Jones lists 4004 B.C. for creation, but 4003 as year 1, leaving a blank space by 4004 (which is implicitly 0), but this counts the first year as 0, which is not proper enumeration. One begins to count with 1. The Scroll of Biblical Chronology begins with 1.
12. Jones errors on page 58 by assuming that the 400 years began with Isaac's weaning rather than his birth. Jones errors by assuming that Abraham was called out of Haran, when he was called out of Ur.
13. Jones does not realize the 480th year of 1 Kings 6:1 pertains to Passover celebrations when Israel was not being oppressed by foreign nations. Therefore, he omits 134 years from the period of the Judges. Jones misses the second Philistine Servitude also.
14. Jones's chronology still does not attain the the pre-Thiele achievement of Willis Judson Beecher in 1907, whose chronology is correct all the way back to the 1st year of Eli over 100 years ago, and agrees exactly with the Scroll of Biblical Chronology.
15. Jones' dating of Daniel 9 and the Passion require special pleadings. Jones proposes a Thursday Crucifixion and Sunday resurrection. This influences his errors on choice of year for the Passion and Daniel 9. The Gospel's put the crucifixion on a Wednesday and the resurrection on the Sabbath day.
16. What can be said in Jones' favor is that he exposes Edwin Thiele's errant chronology and dependence on secular Assyriology. He also shows that the LXX is inferior to the Masoretic Text. He corrects an error in Jacob's marriage to Rachel and Leah, which was adopted by the present author in the The Scroll of Biblical Chronology and Prophecy: Mapping the Times And Seasons of The Holy Scriptures.
17. Jones' methodology leaves a lot to be desired. He engages in special pleadings and un-parsimonious 'solutions', often mentioning better solutions, but not adopting them. His method of presentation is not strictly chronological and is somewhat disorganized. He engages in long chains of obfuscating logic rather than simply demonstrating that his chronology explains all the facts. This is where the Scroll of Biblical Chronology is superior to Jones.
18. Biblical Chronologists acknowledge the validity of inclusive counting, yet Jones fails to consider this with Daniel 9, that perhaps part of a sabbatical period is counted as one 'seven'; The Scroll of Biblical Chronology properly recognizes that the 'seventy sevens' of Daniel 9 are in fact sabbatical years and proves this fact, and shows how to inclusively count them.
19. Biblical Chronology goes where most chronologists do not want to go, namely, the Sabbath resurrection. Once this is admitted, then all other problems are solvable without contradiction. If it is not admitted due to prior traditional commitment to the Sunday resurrection error, then it is not solvable. By excluding the Sabbath resurrection, the Sunday Chronologists have excluded the truth and everything dependent on it, namely the sabbatical and Jubilee year system, which framework is necessary for biblical chronology.
|