The Problem with Setting Bible Historical Dates
NOTE: The purpose of this document is not to raise questions about the accuracy of the Bible and the dates that are suggested therein, but to illustrate the unreliability of using secular dating as a basis for establishing Bible history.
Through the centuries, Bible scholars and students have been trying to establish dates for the events described in the Bible, so that some link can be made to the second coming of Jesus and the Battle of Armageddon. As the result, some have focused on the first destruction of Jerusalem as a reference point, setting its date as 587-BCE or 607-BCE (depending on the particular religious viewpoint). How did they arrive at these dates?
Well, using the accepted secular date for the destruction of Babylon, 539-BCE, and adding two years into the reign of King Darius, then subtracting seventy years (per Zechariah 1:1, 12) brings us to a destruction of Jerusalem in 607-BCE. However, popular historical data sets the destruction of Jerusalem at 587-BCE. So, which (if either) of these dates is correct? Despite all the wrangling about this matter, it's hard to tell.
To illustrate the gravity of the problem, let's just start with the accuracy of our current calendar system (Gregorian), and see how documented its starting point is:
The Gregorian calendar was established in the late 16th Century, and it dates all events from the birth of Jesus. However, it is generally thought that there is no zero (or birth of Jesus) year for this calendar, so Jesus was actually born about 2-BCEÉ and this defies all logic. The reason for this anomaly is said to be; that the calendar was based on Roman numerals, which have no zero. Yet, the creators of this calendar were fully aware of the existence of, and of the need for a zero as the time of the birth of Jesus. But be that as it may; when was Jesus born?
Notice that the date for the birth of Jesus is actually in doubt, for using the Gregorian calendar with its 'no zero year' as a starting point, some scholars place Jesus' birth as being 4-BCE, based on the description of the date of his birth found in Luke 2:1. Could this be accurate? Well, that would put the destruction of Jerusalem in 70-CE at exactly 40 years from Jesus' death (in 30-CE), which might make some sense. However, such a date would throw the prophecy of seventy weeks or 490-years, (as found in the book of Daniel) off by three years. For, many accept that the order to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem (the starting point for the prophecy) happened in 455-BCE.
At Ezra 1:1-4, it is recorded that Persian King Cyrus (pronounced Kai-russ) sent out the decree that the Temple of Jehovah in Jerusalem was to be rebuilt, even providing materials for that rebuilding work; and it says that this happened in the first year of his reign. When does secular history say that he began his reign? Secular history puts that date at 559-BCE, and it says that he is the conqueror of Babylon. However, the Bible (at Daniel 5:31) says that Darius (pronounced Dah-ree-oss) the Mede conquered Babylon at age 62, and Cyrus isn't mentioned until sometime later (See Daniel 6:28).
As for Darius; historians say that there was no such king of the Medes, for their kingdom was overthrown by Cyrus the Great in 548-BCE, and that Babylon was destroyed in 539-BCE. So, Babylon (they say) was conquered by Cyrus the Persian; and the account in Daniel, which says Darius the Mede did the conquering, is in error. They say that Darius was a Persian king whose reign (522-BCE to 486-BCE) followed that of Cyrus.
However, notice that the account in Ezra tells us of a King of Persia, also named Darius, who reigned after Cyrus and after the time of Xerxes and his son ArtaXerxes (see Ezra 4:24). But earlier (see Ezra 4:5), Darius the King of the Medes is shown to be living at the time when King Cyrus gave the order to rebuild the Temple of Jehovah in Jerusalem. So as you can see; historians have simply missed the fact that there were two kings named Darius.
Jewish historians have long claimed that there truly was a Darius, king of Media, and they say that he was the maternal uncle of Cyrus. And the fact that Darius was a Mede and that he did rule the land of the Chaldeans is once again confirmed at Daniel 9:1. Notice that in this reference, Darius' father was said to be AhasuErus, who is not the same as the later AhasuErus (Xrexes) that is mentioned in the book of Esther, but Astyages (the previous king of Media).
Then there is another mentioning of Darius as the king, immediately following the fall of Babylon, at Zechariah 1:1. That this is not Darius the king of Persia who historians say succeeded Cyrus, is confirmed at Zechariah 7:1-6, where it shows that God's Temple had not yet been rebuilt, and it mentions the seventy years of Jewish captivity as something that was ongoing. Also, the Persian king was said to have lived sixty-three years, while the Bible shows that the Median king lived at least sixty-six years.
So, which is wrong, the Bible or the historians? Probably neither. For, archaeological records tell us that there was a lesser Persian king under Cyrus, who was related to him and who had once been a king of Media. In fact, he was the grandfather of the later Darius I. His name (from Persian inscriptions) was Arsames, and it seems likely that he was the Darius mentioned in Daniel 5, Ezra 4, and Zechariah. It is not unusual for ancient kings to be known by other names; and the fact that his grandson took the same name (Darius), is a good indicator that Arsames is the same as the Darius who conquered Babylon.
Now, if secular history is right, the order of Cyrus for the Jews to return to their homeland (his first year) happened in 559-B.C.E., not 537, and this throws all the calculations for the time of Jerusalem's destruction out the window. Yet, according to Jewish historians, all of this happened some eighty-seven years later than the historical dates (see the table below):
|
The Orthodox Jewish Timeline : Chronological Dates Based On The Seder Olam Rabbah Dates |
||
|
(1) With A Year 0 |
||
|
Seder Olam Rabbah Date |
Modern Proleptic Gregorian Calendar Date |
Event In Jewish History |
|
2892 |
868 B.C.E. |
David becomes King of Israel. |
|
2924 |
836 B.C.E. |
Solomon becomes King of Israel. |
|
2928 |
832 B.C.E. |
Jerusalem: First Temple started. |
|
2935 |
825 B.C.E. |
First Temple completed. It takes 7 1/2 years to build the Temple and was completed in the autumn of the 11th year of Solomon's reign. |
|
2964 |
796 B.C.E. |
In the region of Judea: Division of the Kingdom of Israel into two kingdoms: the Kingdom of Israel in northern Judea and the Kingdom of Judah in southern Judea. |
|
3338 |
422 B.C.E. |
Babylonians destroy First Temple on the 9th of Av and exile the Jews to Babylon. |
|
3389 |
371 B.C.E. |
Babylon falls to Medes and Persians under Darius the Mede and Cyrus the Great of Persia; Cyrus reigns; Proclamation of Cyrus, he permits Jews to return to Eretz Yisrael. Return to Israel. Minority returns in Nissan - same month as Exodus from Egypt. Persian Empire. |
|
3391 |
369 B.C.E. |
Darius the Persian permits Jews to rebuild Temple in Jerusalem. Second Temple started. Medean Empire. |
|
3408 |
352 B.C.E. |
Second Temple completed. |
|
3828 |
68 C.E. |
Romans destroy Second Temple - 9th of Av. About 2,000,000 killed. Cruelty, Exile, Slavery. Destruction of Second Temple by Romans (according to some, the year was 3829 = 69 C.E.). |
Also notice that the chart above even disagrees with the current (absolute) secular date of Jerusalem's destruction, putting it at 68-B.C.E., which seems to imply no zero year. So, who is right here?
As you can see, determining the date for the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon isn't as easy as it looks, for everything hinges upon trust in 'absolute' dates, and there simply aren't any such things. So, you can go with secular history, or rely on Bible prophecies, or on Jewish history, but argue as you wish; the answer you select is improvable and still open to debate. For, secular historical data is questionable, the reference-point dates of Bible prophecies are unclear, and the Orthodox Jewish historical dates leave little room to accommodate the eras of the Greek and Roman empires.
But, if the date of the destruction of Jerusalem does in fact tie into the end of 'gentile rule' and the second coming of Jesus, as some say it does; doesn't God want us to understand when Jerusalem was destroyed by Babylon? It could be.
Using the 607-BCE date as the destruction of Jerusalem, one religious group has looked to the words of Daniel 4:32 to show when Jesus would become king and the period of gentile rule (domination of God's people) would end. For there it speaks of 'seven times' (or 2,520 days of years), which will show that, 'Jehovah is over the kingdoms of men, and He gives it to whomever He wishes.'
So, if this is a prophecy of the second coming of Jesus, and it started in 607-BCE (as the date for the destruction of Jerusalem); adding 2,520 years (with no zero year) brings us to 1914-CE as the end of 'gentile domination' and the beginning of the reign of Jesus. This did (years after it was suggested) seem plausible, since World War One ('nation rising against nation') started in that year.
However, if the date of Jerusalem's destruction is moved forward another one-hundred-and-twenty years (as an example), and if the prophecy of Daniel 4:32 does in fact have any modern application, and if we knew the actual dates without calendar aberrations, this period could yet come in the near future (see the linked document Armageddon - When?).
Confused? If so, we've done our job. Leave dogmatic conclusion to those who have stopped learning and bought into someone else's doctrines.