When Bible Chronology Goes Wrong
‘Jesus is about to return! We’ve calculated the date!’
How many times have you heard that? Probably too often! Our timeline of failed apocalyptic predictions lists the best-known ones.
You may be interested to learn, however, that most of these failed prophecies came from one specific version of the Bible text dating from the Middle Ages which seems to have had its chronology deliberately altered.
The oldest version of the text, found in the Greek Septuagint, preserves an older, more original chronology before the changes took place. The Bible quoted by Jesus and the apostles read very much like the Septuagint, and it presents a notably different timeline — one we find more historically sound. If people had used this, then many of these failed prophecies would have been avoided.
This article uses the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ 1975 prediction as a case study. They believed that 6,000 years of human history would end in that year, and it would very likely usher in Armageddon. It shows how using inaccurate manuscripts can lead to significant errors.
A Flawed Assumption: William Miller
The specific idea of a 6,000-year countdown didn’t just appear out of thin air in the 20th century, it was even mentioned in the ancient world. The more recent revival of the idea was partially inspired by William Miller, a 19th century American Baptist preacher.
Miller was a dedicated student of the Bible, and he became convinced that he could pinpoint the time of Christ’s Second Coming by meticulously studying biblical prophecies, particularly those in Daniel. Using a ‘day-for-a-year’ principle for interpreting various numbers in the prophecies, he initially calculated that Christ would return sometime between March 21, 1843 and March 21, 1844. He quickly gained a following, and by 1843, thousands were convinced that the end of the world was imminent.
When this period passed without event, Miller and his followers revised their calculations, settling on October 22, 1844. That failure is famously known as the ‘Great Disappointment.’ Yet, despite this profound letdown, Miller’s methodology and the belief that human history was approaching a 6,000-year point, didn’t entirely vanish. It planted a seed that would sprout in other religious movements.
The ‘Cosmic Week’: 6,000 Years to a Sabbath Millennium
Central to Miller’s chronological framework, and to many who followed, was the appealing idea of a ‘cosmic week’. This theory draws a parallel between the seven days of creation and the span of human history.
Their reasoning went like this:
Just as God created the world in six days and rested on the seventh, human history will be patterned as six ‘days’ of 1,000 years each, totaling 6,000 years. This period of human toil and suffering would then be followed by a seventh ‘day’ – a 1,000-year Sabbath of peace and divine rule (often equated with the Millennial reign of Christ in Revelation).
This interpretation made the 6,000-year mark incredibly significant. If one could accurately calculate when Adam was created, one could then supposedly determine when this grand 6,000-year period would conclude! Yes, you could calculate the date when the prophesied Millennium would begin!
It’s easy to see how such a concept would fuel anticipation for the end of the world.
From Visible Expectation to Invisible Event
So, what happens when a confidently predicted date for a dramatic, visible event like Christ’s return passes, and nothing happens? For many of Miller’s followers after the Great Disappointment of 1844, the answer wasn’t to throw it all away. Instead, they reinterpreted the event!
They began to argue that the 1844 date had been significant, but not in the way they initially thought. Rather than a visible, physical return of Christ to Earth, some reasoned that an invisible event had taken place in heaven. For instance, some came to believe that Christ had begun an ‘investigative judgment’ in heaven, or had entered into the ‘Most Holy part of a heavenly sanctuary.’
This reinterpretation was crucial. It allowed them to keep their core chronology, despite nothing happening. The date was still ‘correct,’ they argued; they had merely misunderstood the nature of the event.
This pivot to an ‘invisible’ fulfillment would become a recurring pattern.
Passing the Chronological Baton
Among the most prominent group to develop this chronological framework were the Bible Students, founded by Charles Taze Russell. The core of this movement then developed into the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Russell and his followers heavily leaned on the idea that 6,000 years of human history were drawing to a close. Though their specific calculations and predicted dates evolved over time (initially focusing on 1914, then on 1925), the underlying Masoretic-based chronology pointing towards a ~6,000-year conclusion remained a cornerstone of their theology.
Similarly, Herbert W. Armstrong, founder of the Worldwide Church of God, also adopted a chronology that anticipated the end of 6,000 years of human self-rule. Like the Witnesses, Armstrong’s movement placed strong emphasis on specific prophetic interpretations tied to this timeline.
For both these influential 20th-century movements, William Miller’s flawed chronology, based on Hebrew texts, became a central pillar for their end-time expectations. Eventually, it led them both to look with anticipation towards the mid-1970s.
1975: Anticipation Reaches Fever Pitch
As the 1960s progressed, the focus on the end of a 6,000-year period sharpened dramatically, particularly within the Jehovah’s Witnesses. A key catalyst for this was the 1966 release of a book by the Witnesses’ leadership, entitled, Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God.
On pages 28 and 29, it stated:
‘According to this trustworthy Bible chronology, six thousand years from man’s creation will end in 1975, and the seventh period of a thousand years of human history will begin in the fall of 1975 C.E. So six thousand years of man’s existence on earth will soon be up, yes, within this generation.’
The book went on to speculate how ‘appropriate’ and ‘fitting’ it would be for Jehovah God to usher in Christ’s Millennial reign to coincide with this seventh millennium of man’s existence.
As noted in the article, The Euphoria of 1975, it didn’t take long for members to find the chart starting on page 31 of the book, which graphically showed 6,000 years of human existence ending in 1975. Discussion of this date ‘overshadowed about everything else.’
The primary author of the book, Fred Franz (who was then the Vice-President of the Watchtower Society), made comments at a Baltimore assembly of Jehovah’s Witnesses following the book’s release, where he addressed the meaning of 1975. While he presented the chronology as something individuals could ‘accept or reject,’ he also spent considerable time showing the ‘feasibility’ of the calculations. This, combined with the book’s strong suggestions, fueled a widespread belief that Armageddon was imminent.
Despite any subsequent attempts by the organization to distance itself from direct predictions, the message received by many ordinary Jehovah’s Witnesses was clear: 1975 could well be the year of Armageddon, the end of the current political system, and the beginning of Jesus’ Millennial reign.
The 1975 Calculation
The calculation that led to the 1975 date was paved with numerous chronological assumptions, errors, and dubious interpretations. We’ll discuss nine major Biblical errors that led to them thinking that Adam was created exactly 6,000 years before AD 1975.
We start our journey into the past over 2,500 years ago, around the end of the Jewish exile to Babylon.
Error 1: The Misdated 70 Years
In order to count backwards in time using the Bible, we have to use all the various time periods mentioned within it. One of those is the ‘70 years’ prophecy given to Jeremiah and later quoted by Daniel.
This 70 years is actually a foundational pillar of the Witnesses’ chronology and entire religion. They claim that the 70 years mentioned by Jeremiah and Daniel ended in 537 BC when the first group of Jews returned to their homeland from Babylonian captivity.
However, this can be shown to be incorrect with just one verse.
As detailed in our article ‘How Long Was the Babylonian Exile?,’ we can read in Jeremiah 25:11-12 that Judah would serve Babylon for 70 years, and after these 70 years were over, Yahweh would ‘call the king of Babylon to account.’
Or, as our translation puts it:
‘And you’ll serve that nation for 70 years…
As well as Babylon’s king.
‘And after the 70 years are fulfilled;
On the king of Babylon and his wicked nation,
I will then bring My vengeance.
God took out his vengeance upon the Babylonian Empire in 539 BC when it fell to the Medes and Persians. That means the 70 years were already over, done, and finished by that point. The 70 years couldn’t have continued for another two years until 537 BC, because there was no ‘King of Babylon’ or Babylonian nation to take vengeance upon after that point. They were already gone.
So, if we count back 70 years from the fall of Babylon, we get 609 BC.
This initial two-year discrepancy is just the start.
Error 2: The Uncertain 390 Years of Ezekiel
The Bible’s chronology is very unclear on the length of the period of the Israelite kings (see our timeline), so the Witnesses’ chronology relies on a commonly-held assumption: That the ‘390 years’ from Ezekiel 4:1-9 (representing the ‘error’ of the northern kingdom of Israel) are the precise duration from Solomon’s death to Jerusalem’s destruction.
However, while using Ezekiel’s 390 years is a common approach to bypass this problem, its exact start and end is just an educated guess.
- Does it begin with Solomon’s death, or when the kingdom of Israel was split into two? Or something else? Nobody knows.
- Did the number include accession years, or not? Nobody knows.
- Was it exactly 390 years, or a rounded figure? Nobody knows.
- Was it exact to the month? Nobody knows.
These uncertainties mean this link in the chronological chain could easily be off by several years, if not more.
Any hope of pinpointing an exact year is now gone, already, and the calculation hasn’t even reached the time of King David yet!
Error 3: The Date of the Exodus is Probably Wrong
The 1968 Watchtower article, which explains the 1975 date, suggested that Egyptian hieroglyphics are ‘conspicuously silent’ about Israel’s Exodus, implying their chronology is needed to locate it.
However, if one uses the chronology derived from the Septuagint, the Exodus would be placed roughly around 1525 BC, during the reign of Pharaoh Ahmose I.
As we discuss in our article, Who Was the Pharaoh in the Exodus?, there is evidence that Pharaoh Ahmose I was the Pharaoh of the Exodus.
If that is correct, then the Witnesses’ have miscalculated the Exodus date by a few years, again spoiling the 1975 date.
Error 4: The 215-Year Sojourn in Egypt is Probably Wrong
A critical point in the calculation involves the length of the Israelite stay in Egypt. And most religious groups get this wrong, not just the Witnesses.
The Hebrew version of Exodus 12:40 states the dwelling of the Israelites in Egypt was 430 years. However, the Septuagint and Samaritan Pentateuch versions clarify that this 430-year period includes their dwelling…
‘…in the land of Egypt and in the land of Canaan.‘
The Watchtower article followed the common interpretation of most Churches, and divided this into 215 years in Canaan and only 215 years in Egypt. However, this is a biological near-impossibility! A population growing from just 75 individuals (Genesis 46:27) to over a million (implied by the 600,000 men on foot in Exodus 12:37) in only 215 years, is just not mathematically possible.
You can see the calculations in our article, How Long Were the Israelites in Egypt?
However, a longer 400-year stay in Egypt (as possible by either a different reading or the Septuagint’s broader timeline) would make this demographic growth far more plausible.
Error 5: Guesswork over Abraham’s Dad
The Bible features a gap in the chronology that cannot be filled without guesswork.
This part of the chronology is calculated by seeing how old someone was at the birth of their son. That works well until we reach Abram and his father Terah. For some unknown reason, the Bible doesn’t specify how old Abram’s father Terah was at Abram’s birth.
This is an odd omission.
It only says that Terah was 70 when he started having children, and the sons are listed by prominence, not birth order.
One common way to solving this problem (the one used in the Witnesses’ 1975 calculation) involves using a completely different approach. You see, the Bible tells us that Abram was 75 when he left Haran, and in Acts 7:4, Stephen states that Abram only left Haran after his father died.
Since we know how old Terah was when he died, and it says how old Abram was when he left, we appear to have all the numbers we need.
Or do we? No, we don’t.
It only works if Abram left Haran immediately after his dad died. Sure, if that’s what happened, then Terah would have been, at most, 130 years old when Abram was born (205 - 75 = 130). That allows us to continue the timeline from there.
However, the assumption that Abram left immediately is just that — an assumption!
What if Abram waited a year or more after his father’s death before departing for Canaan? If he waited, say, 5 years, then that would push the timeline back by 5 years too. Even if he just waited 6 months, that would spoil the timeline too.
So it could be right. But we don’t know. This introduces a significant unknown.
Error 6: Relying on Shorter Lifespans
The most significant divergence comes from the ages of the patriarchs after the Flood.
The chronology leading to 1975 is based on the Hebrew Masoretic Text. However, the Septuagint consistently gives longer lifespans for these patriarchs before they fathered their named sons – typically adding 100 years for each generation from Arphaxad to Terah.
This means the Hebrew text, which the 1975 calculation uses, has a timeline from the Flood to Abraham that is approximately 700 years shorter than what’s found in the Greek Septuagint. We believe that the Septuagint’s figures are more authentic, and if this is the case, it suggests the Masoretic figures were deliberately altered around the 1st century AD. There is even a theory as to why this happened.
Even if we don’t accept that’s what happened, it still adds a very large uncertainty to the timeline: there are two competing chronologies!
- Learn more: Why the Septuagint?
Error 7: Rounded Numbers Before the Great Downpour
Further, the lifespans given of the patriarchs appear to be rounded numbers, not exact.
This observation stems from patterns in the numbers themselves; for example, many of the ages at which patriarchs fathered their first-named son, and even their total lifespans, frequently do this:
- They are multiples of 5 too often (ending in 0 or 5),
- They also end in common terminal digits such as 2, 7, and 9 too often.
Now, what’s the likelihood of this happening by chance?
Oh, only about… One in one billion!
So these must be rounded or symbolic numbers; and that’s okay! After all, who knows what customs existed for counting years back before Noah’s day? The culture could have been very different indeed.
However, if you’re trying to pinpoint the specific year that Adam was created, then this is very annoying! It introduces another layer of uncertainty, putting the calculation off by several years at least.
Error 8: Did this Man Exist?
An additional complication is the figure of Kainan, son of Arphaxad. He’s sometimes spelled as Cainan, but we call him Kainan to avoid confusing him with several other people named Cain.
Who is he?
Kainan, son of Arphaxad, is mentioned in:
- The Greek Septuagint text of Genesis (Genesis 11:12-13)
- In Luke’s genealogy of Jesus (Luke 3:36)
These mention him as living for 130 or 135 years before fathering Sala. However, Kainan is nowhere to be found in the Hebrew Masoretic Text.
Some say he was accidentally added to the Greek text by a scribal error, while others say he was accidentally lost in the Hebrew version. The truth is, nobody knows.
Confusingly, the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ own New World Translation Bible says two different things on this point. On the one hand, it includes Kainan in Luke, but on the other hand, it omits him from Genesis.
Since he’s not listed in Genesis, the Witnesses didn’t include him in their 1975 calculation, but if they had included Kainan, then it would have added another 130 years to the timeline, meaning 6,000 years of history would have ended in AD 1845. So it’s not surprising that he, and the problem of his existence, was ignored.
By the way, by this point, if we add up all the problems we’ve discussed so far, we have a timeline that may be off by as much as 1,600 years.
- Learn more: Kainan — did he exist?
Error 9: Assuming Adam’s Creation Month
Finally, to pinpoint the autumn of 1975, a specific assumption was made about the season in which Adam was created. The 1968 Watchtower article argued that:
‘man’s most ancient calendars started each year in the autumn, it is reasonable to assume that the first man Adam was created in the fall of the year.’
This claim about ancient calendars is simply wrong.
The most ancient civilizations we know of, including the Egyptians, Sumerians, Babylonians, Persians, Athenians, Chinese, and ancient Indians, put their new years in wildly different months across the entire calendar (often related to agricultural cycles or solstices).
The Jewish calendar, which has its New Year in the fall (Rosh Hashanah), is actually an exception. Franz obviously could not have got the idea from looking at ‘man’s most ancient calendars’; no, he must have got it from the traditional Jewish belief that Adam was created on Rosh Hashanah. Yet that’s just a tradition, it’s not in the Bible.
His nephew later reported that Franz gave a speech in which he remarked that the 6,000 year mark would come on September 5th/6th, 1975, the date of Rosh Hashanah that year, and that 1975 would be:
‘[a] year of great possibilities, tremendous possibilities.’
A Cascade of Errors and Assumptions
So to recap, we have:
- A 2 year error in calculating the 70 years
- An assumption that the 390 years of Ezekiel is exact
- A miscalculation of the Exodus date by a few years
- An impossible 215-year stay in Egypt
- A guess for how long Abram waited in Haran
- Possibly incorrect lifespans for the patriarchs
- Earlier patriarchs very likely having rounded numbers for lifespans
- A possible extra patriarch (Kainan) that was not included
- An assumption about the month of Adam’s creation, supposedly based on wrong information about ancient calendars
Do you think it’s possible to pinpoint a single year from all this? Down to the month? The day?
The Aftermath: When 1975 Passed
As 1975 arrived and then faded into 1976, the anticipated dramatic end did not materialize. For many Jehovah’s Witnesses who had invested so much hope (and in some cases made significant life changes) the non-event was a profound disappointment.
The reactions varied. Some simply shrugged their shoulders and concluded that one should serve God regardless of any date, and moved on.
However, for others, the impact was more severe.
A significant number of adherents left the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization in the years following 1975, a period sometimes referred to as an exodus. Although the numbers eventually recovered, the event left a lasting mark on the movement and its members.
Conclusion: The Crucial Choice of Manuscripts
The story of 1975 isn’t just a historical curiosity, it’s an example of how using the wrong manuscripts can have far-reaching consequences. As we’ve seen, the chronological framework that led to the hype around 1975 was built upon a series of interpretations, assumptions, and calculations based on the Hebrew Masoretic Text.
The Septuagint, the scripture familiar to first-century Christians, presents a timeline that places the Adam’s creation much further in the past, likely around 7,500 years ago.
Had this older, and arguably more reliable chronology been used and appreciated, Miller wouldn’t have promoted the 6,000 year theory, and the 1975 fiasco it spawned would have never happened.
However, ultimately, it should not matter what manuscripts someone uses. At Acts 1:7, when Jesus was asked by his followers:
‘Lord, are you going to restore the Kingdom to IsraEl now?’
He replied:
‘It’s none of your business to know the times and periods that the Father has is in charge!’
And the Septuagint’s wording of Deuteronomy 18:20-22 is rather stark:
‘But, any prophet that uses My Name in an irreverent way by saying things that I didn’t tell him to say, or speaks in the name of other gods, must die!
‘Now, if you ever start wondering in your hearts which words weren’t said by [Jehovah], [remember that] anything a prophet says in the Name of the Lord that doesn’t come true, is something that wasn’t said by [Jehovah]…’
‘So that prophet has spoken wickedly! Don’t have anything to do with him!’
Biblical Chronology
-
-
-
-
-
Also see our Articles index and our About section.