Why I Find David W. Daniels' Speculation on Ahaziah's Age Confusing
It's one thing to be King James Version (KJV) Only proponent like David W. Cloud of Way of Life Literature. It's another thing to be a KJV Only who's a nutjob like the people from Chick Publications and Jesus-is-Savior. I decided to listen to this speculation by David W. Daniels of Chick Publications concerning Ahaziah. If you just think about it - he has made some mistakes. One thing worth noting is that Athaliah is not the sister of Ahab but his daughter. 2nd Kings 8:18 and 2nd Chronicles 21:6 says that Jehoram had the daughter of Ahab to wife. Yet, I wonder why does Ahaziah claim that Athaliah is Ahab's sister? The theories from KJV Today are also very messed up which is more or less the same as Daniels'.
I guess that's why Daniels has some issues with Study Bibles. Every author is biased? Yes, including him and I wonder has he read the "Geneva Study Bible" or the "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible?" for a start? I wonder what sources does he use in defending the KJV? I was thinking about the two ages of Ahaziah namely 22 and 42. I was thinking that some KJV Onlyists do a very poor job defending the translation.
The "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible" reveals this detail of Ahaziah's age:
2. Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign--(Compare 2 Kings 8:26 ). According to that passage, the commencement of his reign is dated in the twenty-second year of his age, and, according to this, in the forty-second year of the kingdom of his mother's family [LIGHTFOOT]. "If Ahaziah ascended the throne in the twenty-second year of his life, he must have been born in his father's nineteenth year. Hence, it may seem strange that he had older brothers; but in the East they marry early, and royal princes had, besides the wife of the first rank, usually concubines, as Jehoram had ( 2 Chronicles 21:17 ); he might, therefore, in the nineteenth year of his age, very well have several sons" [KEIL] (compare 2 Chronicles 21:20 , 2 Kings 8:17 ).
Athaliah the daughter of Omri--more properly, "granddaughter." The expression is used loosely, as the statement was made simply for the purpose of intimating that she belonged to that idolatrous race.
Another possible theory from Bible Focus is this:
It is not unreasonable to think the scribes were so unimpressed with Ahaziah's weakness and total subjection to his mother, they put his mother's age for the age of the monarch. Athaliah had sought power. Possibly she saw Jehoram as a way to achieve her proper place as the grandaughter of both King Omri and (likely as the daughter of Jezebel) the king of the Zidonians. She prompted her husband to kill his rival brothers. She would no doubt try to deny the prophecy given to her husband that she and her sons would be smitten. Ahaziah her son had survived and he was her way to continue to rule.
I wonder if Daniels was aware that calling a granddaughter as "daughter" here meant as a descendant? Just like Jesus is called Son of David but it refers to Him as the descendant of David with many greats-grandson. Mary would be a daughter of David through David's other son with Bathsheba namely Nathan. The bloodline of David is still intact with Jesus in the flesh because Mary His earthly mother was a blood descendant of David. Also, his whole idea that Ahaziah wasn't a real descendant of David is just mind-boggling. Both 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles clearly write Jehoram as the father of Ahaziah of Judah and make a distinction against Ahaziah of Israel, a brother of Athaliah.
Some may say that there were also "sons of Athaliah". Rabbi David Kimchi suggests that they may have been her children from other men but the Bible is silent on that. Remember Athaliah was a queen for more than just her seven years of illegitimacy. As the wife of Jehoram - she was actually two years older than her husband. Jehoram was 40 when he died and Athialah would be 42 when that event happened. Remember when Jehoram's sons were also captured and slaughtered? I would dare believe that the desecration of Solomon's Temple started with Jehoram. Jehoram after all slew all his brethren. 2nd Chronicles 21:17 also says that everyone except Jehoahaz (Ahaziah) was taken. So highly possible that these sons here also included the sons of Athaliah. If those sons of Athaliah (2nd Chronicles 24:7) were so bad to ruin the temple during their father's day - the whole siege done as appropriate punishment by a just and holy God. It's possible that the high priest Jehoiada was jobless even before the rise of Athaliah's illegitimacy. By the time Joash was rescued - Solomon's Temple was already out of order, to begin with, and Athaliah would not think of going to that place.
Speaking of 42, the reign of Omri started in 884 B.C. and the reign of Ahaziah started in 842 B.C. Again, we get 42 years since the founding of the Dynasty of Omri which led to Ahab down to Athaliah. Also, for calling Ahaziah the "son-in-law" of the House of Ahab is also mentioned by John Gill as:
he was the son of Jehoram, who was son-in-law to Ahab, having married his daughter, which accounts for his being guilty of the same idolatrous practices.
Once again, Chick Publications has really proven itself with a lot of inconsistencies just like Jesus-is-Savior.com. It's really good advice to avoid both sites or to dump them. I used to read both a lot until I realize both of them drove me paranoid for more than ten years. Besides, what do you expect from a company that turned out that has been selling bogus testimonies for a dime? It really should be a real issue to consider how you study the Bible. Sadly, it seems Chick Publications is more focused on conspiracy theories than the Scriptures. That's why I decided to retire Chick Publications as a valid source or to take what they say with a grain of salt.
See also: