Is Judith 1:1 historically incorrect and does it mean that it is not scripture?

Upvote:1

The text

In the twelfth year of the reign of Nabuchodonosor, who reigned in Nineve, the great city; in the days of Arphaxad, which reigned over the Medes in Ecbatane (Judith 1:1, KJV)

--

The problem

Nineveh (sometimes spelled Nineve) was destroyed in 612 BC, and the Assyrian Empire (of which Nineveh had been the capital) was broken apart in 605 BC (source). Nebuchadnezzar the Great reigned from 605 BC to 562 BC, so it is highly unlikely that he would have been "reigning in Nineveh" in his 12th year.

--

Inerrancy

For those who accept the doctrine of scriptural inerrancy, there are two options:

  • Reconcile the apparent error in Judith
  • Reject Judith as scripture

For those who do not accept the doctrine of scriptural inerrancy, the above options are available, as well as others:

  • Accept that Judith is doctrinally true but presented in a fictional historical setting
  • Accept that Judith is doctrinally inspired but makes some minor historical errors

--

A survey of viewpoints

Catholic

Two Catholic viewpoints on the matter are presented here; the following are a few of the key arguments:

(a) According to what we may term "conservative" criticism, these apparent difficulties can every one be harmonized with the view that the book is perfectly historical and deals with facts which actually took place. Thus, the geographical errors may be ascribed to the translators of the original text or to copyists living long after the book was composed, and consequently ignorant of the details referred to.

(b) Some few Catholic writers...deem the errors of translators and of scribes to be no sufficient explanation in this matter. These few Catholics, together with the non-Catholics that do not care to throw the book over entirely into the realm of fiction, assure us that the Book of Judith has a solid historical foundation. Judith is no mythical personage, she and her heroic deed lived in the memory of the people; but the difficulties...show that the story as we now have it was committed to writing at a period long subsequent to the facts.

Protestant

Protestants do not accept the Book of Judith as inspired scripture on other grounds, so the question is moot from a Protestant standpoint.

Latter-day Saint

The Latter-day Saint viewpoint is outlined in Doctrine & Covenants 91:

1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you concerning the Apocryphaβ€”There are many things contained therein that are true, and it is mostly translated correctly;

2 There are many things contained therein that are not true, which are interpolations by the hands of men.

...

5 And whoso is enlightened by the Spirit shall obtain benefit therefrom;

6 And whoso receiveth not by the Spirit, cannot be benefited.

More post

Search Posts

Related post