In our continuing look at apparent Biblical contradictions, we encounter the following well-known pair of passages:
“In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel did Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign. Two and twenty years old [was] Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem…” II Kings 8:25-26a
“..So Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah reigned. Forty and two years old [was] Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem…” II Chronicles 22:1b-2a
We can see that the two passages record two different ages for a king named Ahaziah: II Kings 8 says he was 22 years old when he began to reign, and II Chronicles 22 says he was 42. On the surface, this appears to be a Biblical contradiction.
When examining such problem texts, it is critically important that the context be examined. If, for example, we can determine that these verses are talking about two different kings named Ahaziah, there is no contradiction. If we can determine that king Ahaziah began to reign on two different occasions, there is no contradiction. If we have misunderstood an element of the passage that allows both numbers to be correct, there is no contradiction. We must use the context, rather than individual verses, to find a resolution.
For readers unfamiliar with the passages in question, the books of Kings and Chronicles record parallel data about the various kings of Israel and Judah. A king’s reign may be mentioned in one book, and an elaboration will be provided in another book. In some cases, an event in the life of a king may appear in only one book and be absent in the other. In many cases, the books record parallel data, often using identical or similar language.
Now let us examine the theories that would allow us to reconcile these contradictory passages. We can compare each theory to the text of the Bible to determine if it is correct.
Theory 1: There were two Ahaziahs
This theory was presented by Timothy Evans on February 26, 2010. Timothy’s theory is based on the following assumptions:
- King Joram had two sons named Ahaziah.
- The book of II Kings records the life and reign of the elder Ahaziah, but neglects to mention the younger son with the same name.
- The book of II Chronicles records the life and reign of the younger Ahaziah, but neglects to mention the older son with the same name.
The improbability of these assumptions should be an immediate warning sign. Nevertheless, let us examine the theory against the Biblical text to determine if the it has merit. The life and reign of Ahaziah is recorded in II Kings and II Chronicles, so creating and comparing a timeline is a simple task.
| II Kings | II Chronicles |
|---|---|
| Ahaziah is crowned at the time of his father Joram’s death (8:24) | Ahaziah is crowned at the time of his father Joram’s death (21:20-22:1) |
| His mother is Athaliah, daughter of Omri (8:26) | His mother is Athaliah, daughter of Omri (22:2) |
| He “walked in the way of the house of Ahab” (8:27) | He “walked in the ways of the house of Ahab” (22:3) |
| He went with Joram to war against Hazael king of Syria (8:28) | He went with Joram to war against Hazael king of Syria (22:5) |
| Joram was wounded in the battle (8:29) | Joram was wounded in the battle (22:6) |
| Ahaziah went to Judah to visit Joram (because he was sick) (8:29) | Ahaziah went to Judah to visit Joram (because he was sick) (22:6) |
| Ahaziah is killed by Jehu (9:27) | Ahaziah is killed by Jehu (22:9) |
| Athaliah killed the rest of Ahab’s (and Ahaziah’s) family except Joash (II Kings 11:1-2) | Athaliah killed the rest of Ahab’s (and Ahaziah’s) family except Joash (II Chronicles 22:10-11) |
It is easy to see that the timelines are identical and that accounts in II Kings and II Chronicles refer to the same person. The final event in the timeline will serve as proof: If Athaliah killed all of the remaining family after the death of Ahaziah the elder, she would also have killed Ahaziah the younger; this contradicts the parallel verses that claim Ahaziah was killed by Jehu.
Theory 2: Joram became king in Judah, then transferred to Israel, then became king of Judah again
Here is the theory as presented to me by Timothy Evans on March 1, 2010:
“In the 16th year of Jehosaphat’s Reign Joram was annointed King over Judah He was King for 2 years. He then resigned his throne back to his father and became King of Israel. After 5 years in Samaria he also, once again, became King of Judah. Therefore he was King over all of the nation, uniting it under one King. Three years later Jehosaphat dies. After 8 years of a Unified Kingdom Joram decides to reliquish the throne of Judah to his Eldest son, Ahaziah II. In a battle against the forces of Jehu, Both Joram and Ahaziah die by the hand of Jehu. After that battle Jehu’s army sacks the city of Jerusalem and spoil the royal house, killing all of the royal family found there but the youngest son of Joram, Jehoahaz. Immediately Jehoahaz takes the throne under the name Ahaziah (III) and reigns for one year. Jehu eventually kills him, too. Ahazaih’s (Jehoahaz’s) mother finds out he is dead and kills off the rest of the possible heirs to claim the throne for herself. She reigns in Judah Jehu reigns in Israel.”
A competent Bible student will immediately recognize the major flaw in this argument. The Bible lends absolutely no support to the idea that a single king transferred back and forth between the thrones of Judah and Israel at any time. However, lack of support for a theory is not enough to send it to the waste bin. Let us examine the facts in light of the text itself.
To avoid any confusion, please recognize that “Joram” and “Jehoram” are equivalent names. If you read much of the Hebrew Bible, you will see this variation happens from time to time. We see it in the name “Joash,” which is also rendered as “Jehoash.” (II Kings 11:2, 11:21). We see it in the name Oshea/Jehoshua/Joshua (Numbers 13:16, Numbers 14:6). So when you see the names “Joram” and “Jehoram”, recognize that they can both point to the exact same person. The Biblical text will use Joram and Jehoram interchangeably. For the remainder of this section I will use the name “Joram” for brevity and clarity.
| Joram, King of Judah | Joram, King of Israel |
|---|---|
| Joram was the son of Jehosaphat (II Kings 8:16) | Joram was the son of Ahab (II Kings 8:16) |
| Joram was the grandson of Asa (I Kings 22:41) | Joram was the grandson of Omri (I Kings 16:28) |
| Joram died an unremarkable death and was buried in the family tomb in city of David (II Kings 8:24) | Jehu killed Joram and threw his body in the field of Naboth the Jezreelite (II Kings 9:24-26) |
| Joram was succeeded by his son Ahaziah, followed by his grandson Joash (II Kings 8:25) | After his murder, Joram’s throne was stolen by Jehu (II Kings 9:24, 10:36) |
| Following Joash, Joram’s generations were: Amaziah, Azariah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, and Josiah. (I Chronicles 3:11-14) | All of Joram’s children were killed by Jehu (II Kings 10:11) |
The text makes it clear that there are two Jorams. One was king of Judah, and one was king of Israel. Each had distinct generations; that is, they had different fathers and grandfathers. One had sons and grandsons, the other did not. Each Joram died a very different death. Timothy’s theory requires the existence of a single Joram, but a careful examination of the text proves there were two.
Theory 3: Ahaziah reigned as co-regent with Joram for twenty years
Pastor Jim Talbert of Derby, Kansas proposed this theory: “He [Ahaziah] was made king when his father reigned, but after his father’s death he was confirmed king when he was forty-two years old.” (September 22, 2009 via Facebook)
II Kings 8:16-17 will suffice to disprove this theory:
“And in the fifth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel, Jehoshaphat [being] then king of Judah, Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat king of Judah began to reign. Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign; and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem.”
Jehoram (the father of Ahaziah) reigned for only eight years. If Ahaziah began to reign as co-regent with him at age 22, he could not have reached the age of 42 by the time of Jehoram’s death.
Theory 4: Ahaziah was 22 and 42 at the same time
This theory is found online at http://www.letgodbetrue.com/bible/scripture/ahaziah-contradiction.pdf. I have also saved a copy here in case the original becomes unavailable.
Briefly, the theory suggests that Ahaziah was 22 years old biologically, but 42 years old “in the kingdom of Omri and Ahab.”
The author of the theory resorts to a form of numerology to support his idea. While he concedes that Ahaziah was only 22 biological years old, he starts adding the dates of the reigns of his ancestors. Ahab, the grandfather of Ahaziah, reigned in Israel for 22 years. After Ahab’s death, his son Jehoram reigned for 12 years.
22 + 12 = 34 (Still not enough)
He then looks at the reign of a different Jehoram in a different kingdom (Judah) and finds that he reigned for 8 years.
22 + 12 + 8 = 42 (There it is!)
After the death of his father Jehoram, Ahaziah began to reign in the 42nd year since the start of Ahab’s reign. This is what the article author meant by “in the kingdom of Omri and Ahab.” Ahaziah wasn’t actually 42 years old (as the text says) but began to reign after his ancestors had been in power for 42 years.
Ignoring the tortured logic, let us examine four problems with this explanation:
- The scripture says that Ahaziah was 42 (or 22) years old. There is nothing in the context that allows us to redefine years old to mean number of years his ancestors reigned.
- To make the theory work, you have to pick kings from two different kingdoms (Israel and Judah). Ahab and Jehoram of Israel can accurately be called “of the house of Ahab,” but Jehoram of Judah cannot. (He was related by marriage, not by birth.)
- At least one intervening king is left out. There was another Ahaziah who was a son of Ahab who reigned immediately after Ahab and before Jehoram. His reign lasted two years, which would completely throw off the results of the addition (if it was included).
- The decision to start with the reign of Ahab is arbitrary. Ahaziah was a member and direct ancestor of the family of Omri, Ahab’s father. Why should the counting start with Ahab?
Theory 5: Ahaziah was the illegimate son of Athaliah and Jehosaphat
This theory can be found here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/15281186/How-Old-Was-Ahaziah-2-Kings-and-2-Chronicles
The theory proposes that, despite II Kings 8:26 and II Chronicles 22:1 which say Ahaziah was the son of Jehoram, Ahaziah was the illegitimate son of Athaliah and King Jehosaphat, Jehoram’s predecessor. Jehoram simply adopted Ahaziah for political reasons. Ahaziah began to reign twice, once under Ahab king of Israel in anticipation of the death of Jehosaphat, and once as king of Judah after the death of Jehoram. The first reign began when he was 22 years old, and the second began when he was 42 years old.
This theory can be proved incorrect by examining II Kings 8:25, which immediately precedes the verse that says Ahaziah was 22:
“In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel did Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign.”
The article supposes that Ahaziah was 22 years old when he began to reign as a co-regent or crown prince under Ahab in Israel, in the fifteenth year of Ahab’s reign. However, the context in II Kings 8 (which indicates his reign began when he was 22) clearly states that he began to reign in the twelfth year of Joram, which was two decades *after* the fifteenth year of Ahab’s reign. The theory only works if you ignore verse 25 of II Kings 8.
It is clear that each of the above theories can be disproved from the text of the Bible itself without even resorting to external evidence or assumptions. I have diligently searched for other theories that would explain this contradiction and have found none. Therefore, these contradictory passages remain unresolved.