| |
THE CHRONOLOGY FROM DANIEL TO CHRIST
For orientation to biblical chronology see:
Biblical chronology
The big question that remains is by which system of measurement can
we trace the year from Cyrus' decree to the completion of the first 483
years? For according to the accepted chronology, that decree was made in
536 BC. But counting forward 483 years brings us to 53 BC, a whopping 82
years before the formal presentation of Messiah to the nation of Israel
in AD 30. The answer lies in the actual length of the Persian Empire and
determining the actual list of Persian kings who reigned between Cyrus
and Alexander the Great who conquered Persia in 331 BC.
I shall let another give the details. D. L. Cooper gave an excellent
analysis of this in Messiah: His First Coming Scheduled which was published
in 1937 by his Biblical Research Society. I here provide an orientation
to this chronological problem as presented in chapter 14, pages 446 to
451.
The Uncertainty of the Data Underlying the Present System of Chronology
An examination of the data that underlie the current system of reckoning
time will reveal the fact that it is not built upon the firm foundation
of established facts but upon surmises, guesses, and hypotheses. The following
quotations from Anstey will make this point clear.
"The Sedar Olam Rabbah, i.e., The Large Chronicle of the World,
commonly called the Larger Chronicon, is a Jewish Talmudic Tract, containing
the chronology of the world as reckoned by the Jews. It treats of Scripture
times, and is continued down to the reign of Hadrian (A.D. 76-138). The
author is said to have been Rabbi Jose ben Chaliptha, who flourished a
little after the beginning of the 2nd Century after Christ, and was Master
to Rabbi Judah Hakkodesh, who composed the Mishna. Others say it dates
from A.D. 832, and that it was certainly written after the Babylonian Talmud,
as it contains many fables taken from thence.
"The Sedar Olam Zeutah, i.e., Small Chronicle of the World, commonly
called the Lesser Chronicle, is said to have been written A. D. 1123. It
is a short chronicle of the events of history from the beginning of the
world to the year A.D. 522.
"Both contain the Jewish tradition respecting the duration of the
Persian Empire. This tradition is 'that in the last year of Darius Hystaspes,
the prophets Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi died, that thereon the spirit
of prophecy ceased from among the Children of Israel, and that this was
the obsignatian or sealing up of vision and prophecy spoken of by the prophet
Daniel (Dan. 9: 24). The same tradition tells us that the Kingdom of the
Persians ceased also the same year, for they will have it that this was
the Darius whom Alexander the Great conquered, and that the whole continuance
of the Persian Empire was only 52 years, which they reckon thus
Darius the Median reigned 1 year
Cyrus 3 years
Cambyses
(whom they identify with the Ahasuerus who married Esther) 16 years
Darius (whom they will have to be the son of Esther) 32 years
Total = 52 years
"'This last Darius, they say, was the Artaxerxes who sent Ezra
and Nehemiah to Jerusalem to restore the state of the Jews, for they tell
us that Artaxerxes among the Persians was the common name for their Kings,
as that of Pharaoh was among the Egyptians.'
"Now we may say with Dr. Prideaux in his Historical Connection
of the Old and New Testaments, published in 1858, from which the above
extract is taken, that 'this shows how ill they have been acquainted with
the affairs of the Persian Empire,' and that 'their countryman, Josephus,
in the account which he gives of those times, seems to have been but very
little better informed concerning them,' or, we may draw the contrary conclusion,
that Josephus knew the history of his own country better than Ptolemy.
"How long did the Persian Empire last? We may ask the Persians
themselves, and if we do they will tell us that they have no records of
the period, these having been all swept away by the Greek and Mohammedan
Invasions. But they have certain vague, floating, national traditions,
cast into an epic poem by Firdusi, and from these we learn that the succession
of the Persian Monarchs was as follows: (1) Darius Hystaspes, (2) Artaxerxes
Longimanus, (3) Queen Homai, the mother of Darius Nothus, (4) Darius Nothus,
the bastard son of Artaxerxes Longimanus, and (5) Darius, who was conquered
by Alexander the Great. All the Kings between these two Dariuses they omit.
"Or again we may ask the Jews, and if we do they will tell us that
the Persian Empire lasted only 52 years, from the first of Cyrus to the
first of Alexander the Great. We may go to Ptolemy, and if we do he will
determine the length of the period and make out a list of kings for us
by means of astronomical calculations and conjectural identifications of
recorded with calculated eclipses, and then we shall get a Persian Empire
lasting 205 years. But if we take the account given in Nehemiah, and the
years specified by the prophet Daniel, we shall find that the Persian Empire
continued for a period of 123 years.
"The Jews shortened it to 52 years. 'Some of them,' says Sir Isaac
Newton, 'took Herod for the Messiah, and were thence called Herodians.
They seem to have grounded their opinion on the 70 weeks, which they reckoned
from the first year of Cyrus. But afterwards, in applying the prophecy
to Theudas and Judas of Galilee, and at length to Bar Cochab, they seem
to have Shortened the reign of the Kingdom of Persia.' This explains why
the Jews underestimated the duration of the Persian Empire, and it shows
that originally they reckoned about 123 years.
"Now, From 1st year Cyrus to 1st year Alexander the Great 123 years
From 1st year Alexander the Great to Herod (B.C. 331-4) 327 years
From 1st year Cyrus to the birth of Christ 450 years
"If, then, the wise men from the East had heard of Daniel's prophecy,
and had kept an accurate account of the years, and if the Jews of Palestine
were also expecting the Messiah at the very time when He was born (B.C.
4) on the ground that it was then within 33 years of the 483 predicted
in Daniel for His appearance, and therefore now time for Him to be born,
this would indicate that they reckoned the time between the 1st year of
Cyrus and the birth of Christ as a period of 450 years. And since the 327
years (B.C. 331 to B.C. 4) from Alexander the Great to the birth of Christ
were in all probability accurately computed by the Greeks, for they began
their reckoning by Olympiads within 60 years of Alexander's death, it leaves
exactly these 123 years for the duration of the Persian Empire, and abridges
the accepted Ptolemaic chronology by 82 years for 205 - 123 = 82, which
is the exact year expressed for these events in the Chronology of the Old
Testament, as developed in these pages, for Cyrus' 1st year is shown to
be the year AN. HOM. 3589, whence 3589 + 483 = 4071 (inclusive reckoning),
for the Crucifixion, and as Christ was about 30 years of age when He began
His ministry, and His ministry lasted three years, He was born AN. HOM.
4038, or exactly 450 years after the 1st year of Cyrus, Christ having been
born four years before the commencement of the Christian Era. But 450 years
before the actual date of the birth of Christ is B.C. 454. The true date
of the 1st year of Cyrus is therefore B.C. 454, not B.C. 536, which makes
the Chronology of this period 82 years too long.
"It may be objected that in the Battle of Marathon, which was fought
B.C. 490, Darius Hystaspes was defeated by the Greeks, and that the Greek
Chronology, which was reckoned by Olympiads from B.C. 776 onward, cannot
be at fault to the extent of 82 years. But that is just the very point
in dispute. The Greeks did not make a single calculation in Olympiads,
nor had they any accurate chronological records till sixty years after
the death of Alexander the Great. All that goes before that is guesswork,
and computation by generations, and other contrivances, not the testimony
of contemporary records.
"The Sedar Olam, therefore, may be called as a witness, and it
is not to be ruled out of court by any objection raised by the Greeks,
but it must be called as a witness only, not as arbitrator or Judge."
In another connection Anstey gives us the facts concerning the insecurity
of the chronology which is based upon Greek and Roman history. He also
calls our attention to the way in which the present era was begun. All
of the facts lead one to the conclusion that one cannot depend upon the
present scheme as it has been worked out and given to us. Mr. Anstey's
summary of the situation is very enlightening.
"It is through the Greeks that we have received our knowledge of
the history of the great Empires and civilizations of the East. Even Sanchoniathon
and Berosus and Manetho, have all come to us through the Greeks. It was
the Greeks who created the framework of the Chronology of the civilized
ages of the past, and fitted into it all the facts of history, which have
reached us through them. Apart from the Bible, the vague floating national
traditions of the Persians and the later Jews, and the direct results of
modern exploration, all our chronological knowledge reaches us through
Greek spectacles. Here as everywhere else it is 'thy sons 0 Zion against
thy sons, 0 Greece' (Zech. 9:13). It is Nehemiah and Daniel against Ptolemy
and Eratosthenes. It is Hebraic Chronology against Hellenic chronology.
And here the Greek has stolen a march upon the Hebrew, for he has stolen
his Old Testament and forced his own Greek Chronology into the Hebrew record,
Hellenizing the ages of the Hebrew Patriarchs in the Greek LXX.
"Are we then to accept the testimony of the Greek as correcting
or antiquating the testimony of the Hebrew? By no means. Let the Greek
be heard as a witness, but let him not presume to pronounce sentence as
a Judge. Clinton's Fasti Hellenici is perhaps the most valuable treatise
on Chronology ever produced. But it is not infallible. Clinton's standard
is Ptolemy's Canon; Sayce's standard is the Monuments. But neither of these
sources is competent to correct the Hebrew Old Testament, which must be
placed in the witness-box alongside of them, not in the dock, to be sentenced
by them.
"To begin at the beginning, the point of departure for Greek Chronology,
the 1st Olympiad, B.C. 776, upon which everything else depends, rests upon
no firmer foundation than that of tradition and computation by conjecture.
"The opening sentence of Clinton's Tables reveals the basis upon
which he builds. He says: 'The first Olympiad is placed by Censorinus in
the 1014th year before the Consulship of Ulpius and Pontianus, A.D. 238
= B.C. 776. Solinus attests that the 207th Olympiad fell within the Consulship
of Gallus and Verannius. These were Consuls A.D. 49, and if the 207th Games
were celebrated in July, A.D. 49, 206 Olympiads, or 824 years had elapsed,
and the first games were celebrated in July, 776.'
"But Censorious wrote his De Die
Natali, A.D. 238, and Solinus
also belongs to the 3rd Century A.D. They are not, therefore, contemporary
witnesses, and we do not know how far their computations were derived from
hypothesis and conjecture, or how far they rest upon a basis of objective
fact. Nevertheless, this point has been made the first link in the chain
of the centuries, a chain flung out to float in the air, or attached, not
to the solid staple of fixed fact, but only to the rotten ring of computation
and conjecture. The Canon of Ptolemy rests upon this calculation. Eusebius
(A.D. 264-349) adopted it, and set the example of making Scripture dates
fit into the years of the Greek Era. Eusebius is based upon Manetho (3rd
Century B.C.), Berosus (3rd Century B.C.), Abydenus (2nd Century B.C.),
Polyhister (1st Century B.C.), Josephus (A.D. 37-103), Cephalion (1st Century
AD.), Africanus (3rd Century B.C.), and other sources now lost. Eusebius'
Chronology was contained in his 'chronocon.' This was translated by Jerome,
and has been followed by all subsequent writers down to the present day.
"The one infallible connecting link between sacred and profane
Chronology is given in Jeremiah 25:1. 'The fourth year of Jehoiakim, which
was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar.' If the events of history had been
numbered forward from this point to the birth of Christ, or back from Christ
to it, we should have had a perfectly complete and satisfactory chronology.
But they were not. The distance between the 1st year of Nebuchadnezzar
and the birth of Christ was not known. It has been fixed by conjecture,
with the assistance of Ptolemy. Clinton fixes it at B.C. 606, Sayce at
B.C. 604, and from this date, thus fixed, Chronologers reckon back to Adam
and on to Christ. The distance between the 1st year of Nebuchadnezzar and
the birth of Christ has not been measured by the annals or chronicles of
any well-attested dated events. It was originally fixed by Ptolemy, by
means of computation and conjecture and recorded events have been fitted
into the interval by computing Chronologers as far as the fictitious framework
would allow.
"The opening sentence of Sir Isaac Newton's Introduction to his
Short Chronicle from the first memory of things in Europe to the Conquest
of Persia by Alexander the Great shows how entirety fluid and indeterminate
were those first years of Grecian history.
"'The Greek Antiquities,' says Newton, 'are full of poetic fictions,
because the Greeks wrote nothing in prose before the conquest of Asia by
Cyrus the Persian.'
"The uncertainty as to the epoch of the foundation of Rome and
the Era which dates from that event, is just as great as the uncertainty
as to the beginnings of the history of Greece. The following is a list
of the dates that have been sanctioned by various writers
"Varro, Tacitus, Plutarch, Dion, Aulus
Gellius, Censorinus, etc.
753 B.C.
Cato, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Solinus, Eusebius, etc. . .752 B.C.
Livy, Cicero, Pliny, and Velleius Paterculus 753 or 752 B.C.
Polybius 751 B.C.
Fabius Pictor and Diodorus Siculus 747 B.C.
L. Cincius 728 B.C.
A margin of 25 years.
"These uncertainties in Greek and Roman chronology, and the late
and purely conjectural character of the foundation upon which they rest,
show how impossible it is for us to erect the Chronology of the classic
literature of Greece and Rome into a standard by which to correct the Chronology
of the Hebrew Old Testament.
"Nearly all the great Empires of the East seem to have thrown the
origin of their dated history back into the 8th Century.
"Babylon (Nabonassarean Era) 747 B.C.
Greece (1st Olympiad) 776 B.C.
Rome (Foundation of the City) 753 B.C.
Lydia 716 B.C.
China 781 B.C.
Media 711 B.C.
"It may be of interest to add the following remarks respecting
the origin of the Vulgar Christian Era
"It was not until the year A.D. 532 that the Christian Era was
invented by Dionysius Exiguus, a Scythian by birth, and a Roman Abbot.
He flourished in the reign of Justinian (A.D. 527-565). He was unwilling
to connect his cycles of dates with the era of the impious tyrant and persecutor
Diocletian, which began with the year A.D. 284, but chose rather to date
the times of the years from the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ 'to
the end that the commencement of our hope might be better known to us and
that the cause of man's restoration, namely, our Redeemer's passion, might
appear with clearer evidence.' The year following that in which Dionysius
Exiguus wrote these words to Bishop Petronius was the year 248 of the Diocletian
Era. Hence the new Era of the Incarnation as it was then reckoned was 284
+ 248 = A.D. 532. Dionysius abhorred the memory of Diocletian with good
reasons, for in the 1st year of his reign, from which the Diocletian Era
begins, he caused a number of Christians who were celebrating Holy Communion
in a cave to be buried alive there. The Diocletian Era was, from this fact,
sometimes called the Era of the Martyrs.
"Dionysius reckoned the year of our Lord's birth to be the year
A.U.C. 753, according to Varro's computation, i.e., the year 45 of the
Julian Era. Dionysius obtained this date from Luke's statements that 'John
the Baptist began his ministry in the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius,'
and that 'Jesus was beginning to he about 30 years of age' (Luke 3:1-23).
Tiberius succeeded Augustus, August 19th, A.U.C. 767. Therefore his 15th
year was A.U.C. 782. Subtract the assumed year of the Nativity, 753, and
the remainder is 29 years complete or 30 current.
"But according to Matthew, Christ was born before the death of
Herod, that is, according to the computation of the Chronologers, before
749. Hence the year of the Incarnation, the year A.D. 1, was fixed four
years too late, and to remedy this we have to express the true date of
our Lord's birth by saying that He was born B.C. 4. It was subsequently
discovered that the source of the error lay, not with the Evangelists,
Matthew or Luke, but in the fact that Tiberius began to reign as colleague
or partner with Augustus some years before Augustus died, and that the
length of his reign after Augustus' death was not 26 years, but 22. In
this way the difficulties were cleared up. The Era of the Incarnation was
allowed to remain and the birth of Christ was set down as having occurred
in the year B.C. 4."
The accepted chronology contradicts many of the outstanding facts which
are clearly set forth in various writers during the period 480-340 B.C.E.
It creates more problems than it solves; in fact, it unravels none hut
makes many difficulties which otherwise would never appear. It necessitates
the forcing upon the record strained and unnatural meanings. We must, therefore,
reject it and take our stand upon the chronology which is afforded by the
correct interpretation of Daniel's inspired prophecy, and which was shown
in the preceding chapter.
CONCLUSION
The evidence which has been presented in this chapter shows conclusively
that a most serious error has been made in the received chronology with
reference to the length of the Persian period. Insurmountable difficulties
have been discovered which prevent one's accepting this system, that, as
we have seen, is based upon speculation and assumption. It is utterly impossible
to square the known facts, presented in the Scriptures, with this system
of reckoning time.
The decree for the rebuilding of Jerusalem, announced by Gabriel, was
issued by Cyrus. He did this in 3589 A.H. Zerubbabel with his principal
associate, Joshua the High Priest, began the long trek homeward and the
work of rehabilitation.
Since the history of the Persian period is in such hopeless confusion,
one cannot rely upon it for material out of which to construct a chronological
system.
The time from 3589 A.H. must be reckoned by the seventy weeks of Daniel's
prophecy. From that year to the cutting off of King Messiah were to be
483 years (inclusive reckoning). We take our stand upon the infallible
Word of God and are convinced that He came on scheduled time.
The chronological difficulties that may be brought
to mind in reference to Ezra, Nehemiah and Esther are easily resolved but
explanations are too lengthy for the scope of this article. Please inquire
if you find data that appears to be insurmountable to taking the written
word of God at its literal face value in reference to the decree of Cyrus
and the cutting off of the Messiah 483 years later.
|
|
