The date the Jews return from Babylon affects the date for the Exodus,
which
is exactly 931 years earlier (i.e. 19 jubilees, 19 x 49). Ezra 6:14,15
limits the rule of Darius I to just 6 years and skips the rule of Xerxes.
The true archaeological and historical date for the Exodus cannot be
determined with a revised, politically adjusted Persian timeline. The
original timeline must be established. Based on 455 BCE as the year of
return from Babylon, the Exodus occurs in 1386 bCE, which would be year 1
of
Akhenaten. It means Amenhotep III died in the Red Sea.
==============
Accepting Ezra 6:14,15 for what it says is a true test for Bible
chronologists. It is a test whether or not you truly believe the Bible or
if that is lipservice:
"14 And the older men of the Jews were building and making progress under
the prophesying of HagŽgai the prophet and Zech·a·riŽah the grandson of
IdŽdo, and they built and finished [it] due to the order of the God of
Israel and due to the order of Cyrus and Da·riŽus and Ar·ta·xerxŽes the
king
of Persia. 15 And they completed this house by the third day of the lunar
month AŽdar, that is, in the sixth year of the reign of Da·riŽus the king.
"
And just why is this such a tough test? Because we learn two im****tant
historical facts that is not reflected in the revised Persian timeline:
1. That a king named "Artaxerxes" succeeded Darius I.
2. That Darius I died in his sixth year.
ACCESSION YEAR SYSTEM: To understand this passage fully one meeds to know
about the Babylonian custom of the "accession system." That basically was
the practice to begin a new king's first year in the spring. Therefore,
when a king died the year remained named after that king's year. Records
for the new king who succeeded him were dated to his "accession year"
until
the spring when the year became his year 1. So when a text noted
"Artaxerxes, accession year 6" it meant that the previous king died in his
sixth year.
So that is what we have here. Darius died in his sixth year, early enough
for Artaxerxes to help complete the work on the temple thus he is credited
with being the last king to work on the temple. Even so, the work was
completed in the last month of the 6th of Darius. Thus the sixth year of
Darius is the accession year of Artaxerxes.
Secular history contradicts this references potentially in two ways:
1) It assigns a 36-year rule to Darius I.
2) It is well established that "Xerxes" followed Darius I on the throne.
But I say "potentially" because the Persian kings customarily adopted a an
additional name when they became king. So just because the Bible calls
Darius' successor "Artaxerxes" doesn't mean it wasn't Xerxes! In fact,
there is an extant do***ent from the Persian Period dated year 38 of
"Arses
also known as Artaxerxes." That is a king named Arses(Xerxes) who
adopted
the additional name of Artaxerxes. This king ruled into his 38th year. No
other king ruled that long except Artaxerxes II who is said to have ruled
for 47 years, though that is contested. However, his texts note that his
alternative name was Mnemon. So that leaves only Xerxes/Artaxerxes, who
ruled for 41 years. Thus, both the Bible and Persian records would
confirm
that Xerxes and Artaxerxes were the same king! This is confirmed when
you
visit the tombs of the kings at Naq****-Rustam to find that "Artaxerxes" is
bruied between Darius I and Darius II, meaning Artaxerxes, indeed,
followed
Darius I on the throne!
So why the confusion? POLITICS! Xerxes' adoption of the name Artaxerxes
was not known to the Greeks and was discovered by Themistocles when he
fled
there which gave him the idea to have Xerxes claim he was his own son,
Artaxerxes! So at this point, we can unravel this mystery. The current
timeline does not correct this political counterintelligence.
CHRONOLOGY: Chronologically though, if Xerxes was really Artaxerxes and
Darius I only ruled for six years, that alone removes 51 fake years from
the
Persian timeline!! That is, the extra 30 years for Darius combined with
21
years for Xerxes which were ruled as Artaxerxes. 30+21=51 years.
Therefore, there is little excuse for following the current popular
timeline
that we know was fabricated. Instead the STRICT BIBLICAL chronology would
date the 1st of Cyrus to 455 BCE. Once we have that pivotal date, we can
calculate other dates, such as the 23rd year of Nebuchadnezzar which is
exactly 70 years earlier than 455 BCE.
Bottom line, the current secular timeline has been revised and does not
reflect the Bible's relative or absolute chronology. For the end-times
prophecies to work out correctly, obviously, you have to coordinate that
with the true original timeline. We know have the evidence in place to do
just that:
http://www.geocities.com/siaxares/709guide.html
Now, again, here's the challenge. It's one thing to be wary of chronology
revisionist theories, but for any Bible believer, they can't extend the
reign of Darius I past 6 years, nor can they allow a separae reign for
Xerxes, based on Ezra 6:14,15. So it is not something one can step over.
So anyone claiming they believe the Bible and who uses the dysfunctional
timeline now in place, ignoring Ezra 6:14,15 cannot claim they truly
accept
the Bible. Accepting the Bible as true history thus means using the
Bible's
timeline and not that of the current popular secular history, especially
now
that we know why it was revised.
Lars
|
