by Mike James

One of the criticisms some nonbelievers make about the Bible is that it has contradictions and discrepancies. In my years of bible study, I have learned that this is not the case. The alleged discrepancies in the Bible can be resolved.

What I will begin doing in some of my future blog posts is to address some of these alleged discrepancies and their resolutions. The first one I will address has to do with King Ahaziah of Judah.

The discrepancy centers around II Kings 8:26 and II Chronicles 22:2. In the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible, II Kings 8:26 tells us that Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he became King, and he reigned in Jerusalem for one year. In II Chronicles 22:2 in the KJV, we read that Ahaziah was forty-two years old when he began his reign. The reason forty-two must be wrong is that in II Chronicles 21:20, Ahaziah's father, Jehoram, dies at age forty. How could Ahaziah be two years older than his father? Let us look at some possible answers.

What many believe happened in the manuscript used for the KJV of the Bible is that a copyist made an error in the account in II Chronicles 22:2. This is the opinion of Gesenius, a noted biblical scholar. He believes the copyist mistook the number 20 for the number 40 in Hebrew. If you look at these two numbers together, you can see the closeness in how the numeral is written.

Further evidence for this perspective comes from other bible translations. Look at how the New American Standard Bible, the New International Version, and the English Standard Version render this verse. They all say twenty-two years old in II Chronicles 22:2. Remember, different bible translations are sometimes used in different manuscripts. This leads to some differences in the various translations.

Remember that both Kings and Chronicles give us the history of Israel and Judah in slightly different ways. Just like the gospel accounts address Jesus and His ministry on earth from 4 different perspectives – Kings and Chronicles provide some exact reiteration of information, and some facts are provided in one account that the other leaves out.

Because of this difference in how Kings and Chronicles relate some of the accounts, other scholars (Lightfoot and Ben Gershon) believe the Chronicles account adds up the whole reign of the house of Omri in getting the number of forty-two. Thus Omri 6 + Ahab 22 + Ahaziah (of Israel) 2 + Joram 12=42.

Why focus on the house of Omri (King of Israel) when we are dealing with a King of Judah? This is probably because Athaliah, the daughter of King Omri, was the mother of Ahaziah, the King of Judah. There was a close relationship during this period between Israel and Judah.

Ahaziah began to reign in Judah in the last year of Joram's reign in Israel (2 Kings 8:25). Ahaziah would have ascended the throne in the 42nd year of that dynasty (Omri's) in Israel.

Some interpret the text in II Chronicles 22:2 to read, "a son of forty-two years." Ahaziah was a "son" of the dynasty of Omri, which was in its 42nd year when he took the throne. If this theory is correct, then 2 Kings 8:26 gives us Ahaziah's age, and 2 Chronicles 22:2 provides us with the age of his family's rule.

A third idea on this scripture is the 42-year age refers to Ahaziah's mother, Athaliah. This theory is based on the peculiar wording of the Hebrew in 2 Chronicles 22:2, which some say literally says that the King was "a son of forty-two years."

Some would also wonder about when exactly Ahaziah of Judah began to reign.

Looking at II Kings 9:29, we read that Ahaziah, King of Judah, became King in the 11th year of Joram, King of Israel. But II Kings 8:25 says Ahaziah began to reign in the twelfth year of Joram. Another discrepancy? No, according to the scholar Rashi, Ahaziah began to reign in the 11th year of Joram because he likely began to reign during his father's (Jehoram) sickness mentioned in II Chronicles 21:18-19. So, he could have had a two-year reign instead of one year. One year on his own, but two in total if you count when he began to reign with his father.

Another example of this type of thing can be found in I Kings 22:51, where we read that Ahaziah, son of Ahab, became King of Israel in Samaria in the seventeenth year of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and he reigned for two years. But in II Kings 3:1, we read Joram, son of Ahab, became King of Israel in Samaria in the eighteenth year of Jehoshaphat, King of Judah.

So how could Ahaziah reign for two years if he started reigning in the 17th year of Jehoshaphat when Joram seems to take over from Ahaziah in the 18th year of Jehoshaphat? That seems like another discrepancy. This is not a significant issue. Some scholars believe rather than fractionally splitting up a year and saying someone reigned for a year and two months, four months, or six months - the counting was probably done based on the next highest whole number. So the second year of Ahaziah's reign did not last a full year.

By taking our time and studying various resources, we can resolve many of the alleged discrepancies in the Bible.

Sources: Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, by John W. Haley, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1977, p. 398.

"Was Ahaziah 22 Years Old (2 Kings 8:26) or 42 Years Old (2 Chronicles 22:2) When He Started His Reign," Got Questions, https://www.gotquestions.org/Ahaziah-22-42.html.