Page 10

testimony.doc

Nov. 16, 2005

How do you solve a logic puzzle like that of Figure 1? One way is to try various

combinations to see if they fit the clues given. However, even for a fairly simple logic

puzzle like this it soon becomes obvious that there are so many ways to combine things

that our patience gives out. In frustration, then, we take a bold step: make assumptions!

Surely no professor of philosophy would believe that gravity is a hoax, and any professor

of biology would know that dinosaurs evolved from frogs and after that they evolved into

birds and flew away. After a few more such bold assumptions, it will be possible to work

out a solution. When that solution conflicts with some of the clues originally given (and it

almost inevitably will), we can declare that these other clues are mistakes introduced by

an incompetent editor who did not know the facts of the case. This is similar to the

authors cited earlier who could not solve the chronological puzzle and who then declared

that the Scriptural texts contained numerous errors.

The other way to solve the puzzle is to use the inductive method. That is, start with the

clues given and see if they can be combined to give a reasonable solution, without

trampling on the clues or throwing out some of them, as in the deductive method. This

will be the more difficult way to proceed. But when in comes up with a solution, one that

is consistent with all the clues given, then who can doubt that it is the right method? And

who can doubt that the Thiele/McFall chronology of the divided kingdom that made

sense of all the date-formulas chosen in Kings and Chronicles is to be preferred over the

chronologies of those masters of the deductive method who introduced several

assumptions in order to justify their schemes? These were assumptions that Thiele and

McFall did not need to make, since they were basically constrained to only the

observations that were necessary for the inductive method.

Would not all calm and

rational minds conclude that a solution that is consistent with the data and which makes

the fewest assumptions is preferable to solutions that are not consistent with the data and

which make several unjustified assumptions?

There are some debatable assumptions that McFall made about side issues such as the figures for the age

of Ahaziah when he became king (Translation Guide 22), but these are not critical to the building of his
chronology.