Talk:Chronology of the Bible

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Initial Comment

This article needs some further work and cleanup. It seems to be based either on James Ussher's chronology or some chronologies that highly oppose it. Summer Song 18:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

216.184.68.99 07:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
This is one of the worst articles I've seen. The purpose here is not to provide original research but to provide a summary of the field of Biblical Chronology. Let me suggest a revised structure for this article:

Intro Biblical Chronology is an academic discipline that attempts to calculate historical dates from the Bible. As a field, it is based on the assumption that the historical events related in the Bible were real.

Major Schools

  • Biblicist - Short Chronology: Chronologies strictly based on the Masoretic Hebrew Text and Textus Receptus. James Ussher, Isaac Newton, Floyd Nolan Jones
  • Septuagint - Long Chronology: Chronologies built on the Septuagint and Samaritan texts. (Vaticanus B, etc.) Diodoruc Siculus, Eusebius, etc.
  • Assyrian - Chronologies that favor data from Assyrian eponym lists as being more reliable than the Bible's text, and correct the latter accordingly. Edwin R. Thiele
  • Rabbinical Judaism - The traditional Jewish chronology from the R. Hillel and the Seder Olam.
  • Other - Chronologies by groups that have recently modified the traditional Christian canon of Scripture. Jehovah's Witness (Watchtower Society), Mormon, etc.

Constructing a Chronology Work back from a known date using Biblical data to arrive at Creation. Use one of the above as an example.

Pivotal Dates Section on the key dates on which all Biblical chronologies are constructed and the controversies surrounding them.

Chronological Problems Apparent contradictions and anachronisms that have created Gordian knots for Biblical Chronographers in the past.

Comparative Table Create a table of major historical dates with a column for each major school of chronology. Example:

Event Ussher Thiele Whiston
Creation 4004 BC ... ...

References (should include some of the major works on biblical chronology such as...)
Diodorus Siculus
Julius Africanus
Eusebius, Chronici Canones, Humphredurn Milford, London
James Ussher - Annals of the World
Edwin R. Theile - THE MYSTERIOUS NUMBERS OF THE HEBREW KINGS, 1965, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI
Floyd Nolan Jones - Chronology of the Old Testament

It is also inappropriate to use this page to argue against the general reliability of the Bible as a source of historical information. Biblical Chronology is an academic discipline based on the presupposition that the Bible is historically reliable. People who don't believe so don't generally publish works on Biblical Chronology...

Unless there are major objections I will rework this article according to this outline over the course of this Summer.
216.184.68.99 07:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I have no significant objections to the reworking of the article, but I have a few strong suggestions about wikipedia etiquette. Please follow WP:MOS when making edits, please provide properly cited references for your work, and please register if you plan to continue to make significant edits. It takes all of 30 seconds to register, and allows other editors to have discussions with you off of this talk page. I only ask for these things so that other future editors don't need to come back and un-do the work of an anonymous editor because WP:MOS wasn't properly followed. Thanks for volunteering to improve wikipedia! Nswinton\talk 18:13, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comments of IP editor

I have added other chronologies other than Ussher. A good source is Jack Finegans Handbook. Beatus came from -- VISIONS OF THE END-- , collected letters and predictions by the Church and Apocraphal Revelations. It included Columbus and the Abbot Jacob, etc.

REQUEST: bulletin boards allow posts to be deleted ot retracted by the same person who posted them. Because writing information many times is difficult for people like me, it would be nice if we could delete our previous 14 copies before we GET IT RIGHT. When i post, my final copy is all thats needed. It is one thing to correct someone else and keep both versions, another thing to correct yourself within the same day and wonder now how you can delete your previous mistakes. PLEASE TO THE EDITOR AND BOARD OF WIKIPEDIA however one addresses THEM.

I AM EDITING RE-READING TO ATTEMPT TO MAKE SURE MY WORDS ARE WELL CHOSEN AND CLERIFIED. so please excuse my NUMEROUS attempts to be understood when sharing the knowledge i have read in sources and books over the past 20 years. There is a nice chart in the back of william whistons translation of Josephus on versions of Genesis.

[edit] Improvements needed

I'm going to suggest that before anyone does any further edits on the article that they stop by WP:MOS and read up on formatting guidelines. Putting section headings and names in ALL CAPS is unacceptable. Then, check out WP:CITE and WP:REF for details on sourcing material. For the immense amount of data and claims in this article, there needs to be much more than two sources and two links in the "see also" section.
For example:

"There is[1] a conflict in definition because of[1] debating reality and myth. Some[2] feel that Bible chronology is not a discussion of where characters such as Adam and Noah are placed in time, they[2] feel that the Bible chronology must only be regarded as what actual characters or events existed. Regardless, this ignores that most of relgious history has made a record of time and calendar for these characters which should not be erased from our education despite most modern chronologies stop going back before the birth of Abraham as if to be taboo grounds for reality."[3]

  1. This is conversational wording, please replace with academic language.
  2. This needs to be verified and clarified. "Some" doesn't mean anything in this context.
  3. Possibly WP:POV definition? Shouldn't this section simply define, not present the weakness of a certain point of view?

The article needs a good definition. This section should exist. It probably needs to be re-written, though. Please read through all of the above links that I've posted and develop your understanding of wikipedia policies before adding largely unformatted text. Also, check out What Wikipedia is NOT to see how much of the current article falls under that category. The information here may be very good, but a good article is more than just good information, it's good format, it's got good images, and it's backed up with good sources. Please help make wikipedia great, and contribute to all aspects of an article as you work. Thanks. Nswinton\talk 22:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the other criticisms of this article. I'm a new user, and I was trying to clean up some style and grammar, and I believe it needs serious work.

I'm sure we all agree that this is an important article, and while I appreciate the user's extensive knowledge on the subject, I do feel it could be more focused and better cited.

I'm willing to help in any way possible.

Thank you,

Commonmen 21:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Descendents"?

I've been looking at this page and trying to figure out why some of the generations from Adam to Noah have been described as "descendents", rather than as "sons". There's no distinction whatsoever in the biblical text, for example, between Seth being Adam's son and Lamech being Methuselah's son. Yet whoever wrote this article lists Seth as "an immediate son of Adam" and Lamech as "a descendant of Methuselah".

Since there is no reason given for this inconsistency, I'm going to change the page to reflect the actual biblical text. LisaLiel 16:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi LisaLiel. We have to look at the Hebrew . If "Qara shem" is used, it means it's a direct son, so some were sons and some were descendents or very distant relatives. I'd be happy to direct you to a study on this to prove the universe was created in 11013 BC.
JCStrummerJcstrummer (talk) 10:27, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
The Hebrew in each case says vayoled, which means "and he begat". The phrase qara shem is nowhere used here, and even if it had been, that wouldn't mean either sons or descendents. It would merely mean "and his called his name". I'd be more than happy to see a page that claims (not "proves") that the universe was created when you say, but that would be at best original research. You can't use that in a Wikipedia article.
I've added citations to Genesis which establish the relative timespan between the births of each of the gentlemen in that first section. I've only changed the dates to reflect the relative years. Before you try changing the dates back again, I recommend that you deal with the citations. You need a source before you change information on Wikipedia. LisaLiel (talk) 02:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps we need multiple columns with multiple (possible) dates? However, I agree that we need to use sources for all dates, not original research. See Kingdom_of_Judah#The_Kings_of_Judah and Kingdom_of_Israel#Royal_Houses_of_Israel for good examples. Mr. Absurd (talk) 05:35, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Ish-boshet reigned as king of Judah"?

Ish-boshet never reigned as king of Judah. Not according to anyone, ever. This whole page really is a mess. I'm going to make a pretty major edit shortly LisaLiel (talk) 03:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Noah's Ark

The time of Noahs ark landing was on the 17th day of the 7th month. [1]--Everlast118 (talk) 00:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

And...? -LisaLiel (talk) 01:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Whose Chronology?

Whose chronology does this go by? Ussher places Creation at 4004, Flood at 2348, and Peleg's birth at 2246. ---G.T.N. (talk) 23:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Logic

"The system in use today was adopted sometime before 3925 AM (165 CE), and based on the calculation in the Seder Olam Rabbah of Rabbi Yose Ben Halafta in about 160 CE." A system adopted before 165CE can hardly be based on calculations made after that date. PiCo (talk) 15:03, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand you. Rabbi Yose made the calculations around 160. The system was adopted about 165. You do know that 165 CE is 5 years later than 160 CE, right? -LisaLiel (talk) 13:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I was confusing CE with BCE. But when that section talks about "the current system", what system is it actually talking about?PiCo (talk) 14:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
The dating from creation used by Jews. This year is 5768, for example. However, the statement in the article isn't precisely correct. According to Seder Olam, it would be 5770. -LisaLiel (talk) 23:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. The date of creation in the table is given as 3924, which doesn't seem to match any of the systems mentioned in the article. (or have I got my sums wrong again?)PiCo (talk) 01:31, 5 June 2008 (UTC)