Note 13
Home ] Up ] Note 1 ] Note 2 ] Note 3 ] Note 4 ] Note 5 ] Note 6 ] Note 7 ] Note 8 ] Note 9 ] Note 10 ] Note 11 ] Note 12 ] [ Note 13 ] Note 14 ] Note 15 ] Note 16 ] Note 17 ] Note 18 ] Note 19 ] Note 20 ] Note 21 ] Note 22 ] Note 23 ] Note 24 ] Note 25 ] Note 26 ] Note 27 ] Note 28 ] Note 29 ] Note 30 ] Note 31 ] Note 32 ]

 

Reconciling II Kings 8:26 and II Chronicles 22:2

II Kings 8:26 – Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.

II Chronicles 22:2 – Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.

John Gill

Verse 2. Forty two and years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, &c.] In II Kings 8:26, he is said to be but twenty two years old at his accession to the throne, which is undoubtedly most correct; for this makes him to be two years older than his father when he died, who was thirty two when he began to reign, and reigned eight years, #2Ch 21:20,

Different ways are taken to solve this difficulty:

Some refer this to Jehoram, that he was forty two when Ahaziah began to reign, but he was but forty when he died;

Others to the age of Athaliah his mother, as if he was the son of one that was forty two, when he himself was but twenty two; but no instance is given of any such way of writing, nor any just reason for it;

Others make these forty two years reach to the twentieth of his son Joash, his age twenty two, his reign one, Athaliah six, and Joash thirteen;

But the two principal solutions which seem most to satisfy learned men are,

a. The one, that he was twenty two when he began to reign in his father's lifetime, and forty two when he began to reign in his own right; but then he must reign twenty years with his father, whereas his father reigned but eight years: to make this clear they observe {b}, as Kimchi and Abarbinel, from whom this solution is taken, that he reigned eight years very happily when his son was twenty two, and taken on the throne with him, after which he reigned twenty more ingloriously, and died, when his son was forty two; this has been greedily received by many, but without any proof:

b. The other is, that these forty two years are not the date of the age of Ahaziah, but of the reign of the family of Omri king of Israel; so the Jewish chronology

c. But how impertinent must the use of such a date be in the account of the reign of a king of Judah?

1) All that can be said is, his mother was of that family, which is a trifling reason for such an unusual method of reckoning:

2) It seems best to acknowledge a mistake of the copier, which might easily be made through a similarity of the numeral letters, bm, forty two, for bk, twenty two

3) And the rather since some copies of the Septuagint, and the Syriac and Arabic versions, read twenty two, as in Kings; particularly the Syriac version, used in the church of Antioch from the most early times; a copy of which Bishop Ussher obtained at a very great price, and in which the number is twenty two, as he assures us; and that the difficulty here is owing to the carelessness of the transcribers is owned by Glassius, a warm advocate for the integrity of the Hebrew text, and so by Vitringa: and indeed it is more to the honour of the sacred Scriptures to acknowledge here and there a mistake in the copiers, especially in the historical books, where there is sometimes a strange difference of names and numbers, than to give in to wild and distorted interpretations of them, in order to reconcile them, where there is no danger with respect to any article of faith or manners; and, as a learned man has observed of the New Testament,

 

WWR – I believe the correct way of reconciling differences in scriptures is to understand that we don’t understand what God is saying. When we try to make the scriptures say what we understand them to say, we always wind up in trouble.

Another way of reconciling these scriptures is to declare that II Chronicles 22:2 is speaking about the total dynasty of Omri, although there is no reason for so doing.

I Kings 16:23 - In the thirty and first year of Asa king of Judah began Omri to reign over Israel, twelve years: six years reigned he in Tirzah.

I Kings 16:29 - And in the thirty and eighth year of Asa king of Judah began Ahab the son of Omri to reign over Israel: and Ahab the son of Omri reigned over Israel in Samaria twenty and two years.

I Kings 22:52 - Ahaziah the son of Ahab began to reign over Israel in Samaria the seventeenth year of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and reigned two years over Israel.

II Kings 3:1 - Now Jehoram the son of Ahab began to reign over Israel in Samaria the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and reigned twelve years.

6 years + 22 years + 2 years + 12 years = 42 years.

While the above calculations arrive at 42 years, there seems to be no reason whatsoever for interpreting the difference between II Kings 8:26 and II Chronicles 22:2 this way.