Biblical literalist chronology

Background

A Biblical literalist chronology is a tabulation or reckoning of dates applied to events in the Bible according to the hermeneutical method of Biblical literalism. This method has been in use since the time of Jose ben Halafta ("Seder Olam Rabbah" 2nd century CE). Succeeding centuries saw its application by Jerome ("Chronicon" c. 380 CE), Bede ("De temporibus" 703 CE, "De temporum ratione" 725 CE), Scaliger ("Thesaurus temporum" 1606), Kepler ("Rudolphine Tables" 1627), John Lightfoot (chronology published 1642–1644), James Ussher ("Annales veteris testamenti, a prima mundi origine deducti" 1650), and Martin Anstey ("The Romance of Bible Chronology" 1913).

Some 20th–21st century commentators have noted what they consider a disturbing trend in application of the method since 1878. Modern Biblical literalism has been seen by some observers, such as Karen Armstrong, as largely the product of 19th- and 20th-century Protestant theology, though its roots are considered by others to go further back, at least to 17th- and 18th-century Bible commentaries by Laurence Tomson (Geneva Bible 1560, 1599), Matthew Henry 1708-1710, John Gill 1746-63, John Wesley 1754-65, followed by Adam Clarke 1831, Albert Barnes 1834, R. A. Torrey 1880, David Brown 1882, Marvin R. Vincent 1886, and B. W. Johnson 1891. The 1878 Niagara Bible Conference statement of faith established as the first of its Fourteen Points, "The verbal, plenary inspiration of the Scriptures in the original manuscripts". The 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy in "A Short Statement" established as its fourth point: "Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching."

The method is controversial. Assertions that scientifically verifiable, accurate historical datings are obtainable by using this approach as a guide are firmly disputed by researchers such as Kathleen Kenyon, William G. Dever and Thomas L. Thompson, but are supported by researchers such as Bryant G. Wood and Norman L. Geisler.

A timeline or chart of biblical dates is erected according to the "plain meaning" of the numbers of the years as found in the text (see Clarity of scripture). Researchers have pointed out that Biblical chronology largely uses numbers which were significant to the biblical authors: the basic numbers are 12, 40 (a "generation"), and 480 (12 generations of 40 years); other significant numbers include 10, 20, 60, and 100. (See Biblical numerology and Significance of numbers in Judaism.)

An historically established date in the common calendar which corresponds to the occurrence of a key biblical event known to history is required as a starting point, drawn from reliable sources outside the Bible. (See extra-biblical sources.) Then an exhaustive knowledge of the numbers of years explicitly stated in the Scriptures and a calculator provide the detailed data. With 587 BCE as an historically established base date and counting back, a chronology of the dates of the reigns of the kings and the judges, of the date of the Exodus, the dates of all the patriarchs back to the Flood, the dates of the antediluvian patriarchs and the date of the formation of Adam in the Garden of Eden, can be stated as a literal interpretation.

While biblical literalists can set out charts and timetables dating events in the Bible, different methods of harmonizing the dates of those events yield differing results, even while they generally agree on the relative order of most events. Even some who accept biblical authority nevertheless argue that many numbers in the Bible are figurative, especially "40" and its multiples—thus, 480 years before the 4th year of the reign of Solomon (12 × 40 years = 480 years) is not necessarily regarded by them as a literal number having historical value. Numerical inconsistencies of dates appear between Kings and Chronicles, and attempts by both scholars and literalists to precisely date events before the reign of Solomon have not been successful. Many biblical scholars discount the Bible's chronological data entirely (Biblical Minimalism), preferring to give priority to archaeological clues in establishing biblical chronology. But even they do not agree in their conclusions. Biblical literalists who reject figurative and symbolic readings prefer to take each biblical number literally, as an expression of their belief in the Bible as the word of truth from God.

Difficulties attending any literal interpretation of the chronology of the Bible can be resolved, according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church: "The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation." Currently there is no absolute consensus on a definitive literal tabulation of dates in Biblical chronology.

Literal interpretation

Biblical literalism is a term used differently by different authors concerning Bible interpretation. It can have one of two possible meanings. It can equate to the dictionary definition of literalism: "adherence to the exact letter or the literal sense". Alternatively, the term can refer to the historical-grammatical method used extensively by fundamentalist Christians. Those who relate Biblical literalism to the historical-grammatical method, use the word "letterism" to cover interpreting the Bible according to the dictionary definition of literalism and it shall be used here to distinguish the two approaches.

Fundamentalists and evangelicals sometimes refer to themselves as "literalists" or Biblical literalists. Sociologists also use the term in reference to conservative Christian beliefs which include not only literalism but also inerrancy.

There are several aspects to literalism, including choice and integrity of Biblical manuscripts, literal translation, dynamic and formal equivalence, and literal interpretation.

Letterism

Letterism is an hermeneutical method that derives its understanding of a text by rigorous literal analysis of words, emphasizing the "plain, explicit meaning of the biblical text". Given that letterism arrives at its understandings by asserting the inerrant divine authority of the Biblical text, letterism sets aside potential discrepancies with external sources and looks instead only at what the Bible itself says. As such, its derivation of a Biblical chronology relies only on the number of years explicitly stated in the Scriptures along with accurate calculations.

The basic premises are:
• that God exists (Hebrews 11:6 and Psalms 14:1),
• that God cannot lie (Titus 1:2),
• that God is the author of the Bible (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20-21),
• that God's word is truth (John 17:17),
• that the word of God abides (remains) forever (John 14:16-17 and 16:13-14; 1 Peter 1:23-25)
• that scripture cannot be broken, annulled, set aside, or destroyed (Greek λυω John 10:35).
From the perspective of letterism, looking to Romans 3:4,

"Let God be true though every man be false, as it is written, 'That thou mayest be justified in thy words, and prevail when thou art judged'", (citing Psalms 51:4)

and 1 John 5:10,

"He who does not believe God has made him a liar".

A coherent literalist viewpoint methodologically rejects any findings and conclusions of scholars and archaeologists that do not agree with the plain, explicit meaning of the biblical text. In response to the controversy, J. Philip Hyatt, a scholar in the field of biblical studies and Professor of Old Testament at Vanderbilt University, and for 20 years Director of Graduate Studies in Religion, wrote:

"The modern Bible reader who consults books about the Bible can profit from paying attention to archaeological discoveries. Yet, he should always remember that an archaeological fact—that is, a specific item discovered by the archaeologist—is sometimes subject to widely varying interpretations. In no other area of biblical study is it so important to seek out the mature, experienced interpreters. Field archaeologists, who do the work of exploration and digging, are sometimes good interpreters of what they and others discover, but sometimes they are not. In some cases experienced 'arm-chair archaeologists,' who study carefully the results of many field archaeologists, are the best interpreters."

Methodological problems

Several problems arise in deriving a letterist chronology.

Translations and versions

The text of the specific manuscript or translation version of the Bible that is consulted can affect the calculation and tabulation of the resulting numbers of the years in a literalist chronology. For example, see the following for textual comparison of the number of years of the reign of Saul:

Several literalist translations state that Saul was one (1) year old when he was anointed king: Jubilee Bible 2000, Douay-Rheims Bible, Wycliffe Bible, Young's Literal Translation—see 1 Samuel 13:1 multiple translations.

Archaeological dates

The numerical and chronological notes in various annotated editions of the Bible and Bible commentaries are dissimilar. For example, archaeological datings of the site of Jericho by John Garstang and Kathleen Kenyon do not agree. Historical and archaeological datings of the whole of the ancient biblical period in chronologies by William F. Albright and Edwin R. Thiele do not agree. William G. Dever challenges both of these datings. Conservative literalist Bryant G. Wood argues for the historicity of the Biblical account in support of Garstang's findings, and Woods' researches have in turn been criticised. Differing key base historical dates affect the calculation and tabulation of the resulting numbers of the years in a literalist chronology. The key base historical date for the 11th year of Zedekiah and the destruction of the Temple varies according to different historians: 587 BCE (William F. Albright); 586 BCE (Edwin R. Thiele); or 581 BCE (Bernard Grun). Advances in archaeological methods and theories have prompted scholars to modify particular biblical chronologies, such as the Ussher chronology. Examples are noted below in the Biblical literalist table. (See 1537–1505 Conquest of Canaan in the Table.)

Annotations

The dates assigned to biblical events in annotated Bibles do not always correspond to the arithmetical reckoning found in the text of the Bible. The dates which follow are taken from annotations to the Douay-Rheims Bible (1899 American edition) and the Scofield Reference Bible (1917). "Ante C" is an abbreviation of Latin "Ante Christi", meaning, "Before Christ", "B.C.". "A.M." is an abbreviation of Latin "Anno Mundi", meaning, "Year of the World". Several examples of apparent discrepancies between calculations based on the annotations and those based on the text are observed:

The year Joseph was born (Genesis 30:23-25) is annotated a as Ante C. 1746 (1746 BC). The year Joseph was 16 years old (Genesis 37:1-2) is annotated x and y as Ante C. 1728 (1728 BC). This is an interval of 18 years. The Douay-Rheims Bible says 16 years old, the King James Version says 17 years old (Genesis 37:2). The year Gideon delivered Israel (Judges 6:11-14) is annotated k as Ante C. 1245 (1245 BC). The land had rest 40 years (Judges 8:28), and then Abimelech began to rule over Israel (Judges 9:1-6 and 9:22). The year Abimelech began to rule (Judges 9:6) is annotated u as Ante C. 1235 (1235 BC). This is an interval of 10 years. The Bible says 40. The year the Ark of the Covenant was captured (1 Samuel 4:1) is annotated b as Ante C. 1116. It was in the land of the Philistines 7 months, was returned to Israel, and placed in the house of Abinadab at Kiriath-jearim for 20 years (1 Samuel 7:1-2). The year the ark was brought up out of the house of Abinadab by David after 20 years (2 Samuel 6:2-4) is annotated t as A.M. 2959, in the same year annotated y as A.M. 2960, Ante C. 1044 (2 Samuel 7:1). This is an interval of 72 years (1116 – 1044 = 72). The Bible says 20. King David reigned 33 years over all Israel and Judah, beginning with the annotated date Ante C. 1044. The year King David died (1 Kings 2:1-2 and 2:10-12) is annotated p as A.M. 2990, Ante C. 1014 (1014 BC). This is an interval of 30 years. The Bible says 33. The 4th year of the reign of King Solomon, after David died, (1 Kings 6:1) is annotated k as A.M. 2992, Ante C. 1012 (1012 BC) —"the 480th year after the children of Israel came out of the land of Egypt". The year of the Exodus (Exodus 12:37-40) is annotated g as A.M. 2513, Ante C. 1491 (1491 BC). This is an interval of 479 years (1491 – 1012 = 479). The Bible says 480 (1 Kings 6:1). The year the Temple was burned by Nebuzaradan (2 Kings 25:8-9) is annotated i as A.M. 3416, Ante C. 588 (588 BC). The interval between the annotated date of the 4th year of Solomon Ante C. 1012 and the annotated date of Nebuzaradan Ante C. 588 represents a period of 424 years (1012 – 588 = 424). The Bible gives a total count of 431 years (plus 4 to Solomon's 1st year = 435 years), from 2 Kings 25:2-9 back to 1 Kings 6:1 (1018 – 587 = 431).

Apparent textual inconsistencies

Letterism does not necessarily lead to complete agreement upon a single interpretation for a given passage. A generation, for example, can be 100 years, 80, 70, 60, 40, 35, and fewer than 20 years, although 40 years is the traditional meaning of a biblical "generation". Thus, for example, the number of years spanned by the two unspecified "generations" between the death of Joshua and the oppression of the people by Cushan-rishathaim in Judges 2:7-3:8 could be as many as 200 years, or 160, 140, 70, as few as 40 years, or less.

A literalist reading of the explicit text of the Bible presents the reader with difficulties that can only be resolved by a careful reading of various bible texts, collation of data from these texts, and by careful critique of the occasional slightly misleading translations of the original Hebrew (Historical-grammatical method). Martin Anstey provided an important literalist analysis of how apparent contradictions in the bible chronology can be resolved by correlating data from various Bible translations and texts. Edwin Thiele provided additional corroborating historical-cultural background on varying ancient methods of recording chronologies of kings and nations, co-regencies, overlapping reigns, differences in calendars, uses of "rounded numbers"—data vital for an undistorted understanding of the ancient authors' actual literal meaning (the true "literal sense"). At first reading, the Bible chronology has a number of apparent contradictions, such as:

According to 2 Kings Jehoiachin was 18 years old when he began to reign (2 Kings 24:8).
According to 2 Chronicles he was only 8 years old when he began to reign (2 Chronicles 36:9).

The text of 2 Kings 15:30 states that Hoshea slew Pekah the 20th year of the reign of Jotham son of Uzziah.
According to 2 Kings 15:32-33 Jotham son of Uzziah reigned 16 years.

In 1 Kings 15:27-28 and 15:33 Baasha of Israel reigned 24 years, beginning the 3rd year of Asa of Judah.
But according to 2 Chronicles 16:15 Baasha was still reigning the 36th year of Asa, giving Baasha a reign of (at least) 33 years.

Rehoboam king of Judah and Jeroboam king of Israel began to reign the same year (1 Kings 12:1-20).
The text plainly shows the reign of Jeroboam began a short time after Rehoboam began to reign.
According to the plain reading of 1 Kings, Rehoboam reigned 17 years (1 Kings 14:21).
According to the plain reading of 1 Kings, Rehoboam died the 18th year of King Jeroboam (1 Kings 14:29-15:1).

Moses states plainly (Deuteronomy 2:14) that the Israelites wandered 38 years in the wilderness until the whole generation of those (except Caleb and Joshua) who were 20 years old and upward had perished.
According to the Book of Numbers the people had been sentenced to wander 40 years after the spies had been sent out from the wilderness of Paran and had brought up an evil report to the people when they returned (Numbers 14:33-38). They then went from the wilderness of Paran to Kadesh (Numbers 12:15-13:3 through 20:1). The text does not state that the journey from the wilderness of Paran to Kadesh spanned 2 years.
The Book of Joshua states explicitly that Caleb and the spies were sent out from Kadesh-barnea to spy out the land and then the evil report was brought up to the people (Joshua 14:7).
But a literal reading of Numbers 12:15–13:3 and 20:1 places them in the wilderness of Paran at the time of the evil report, after which they came to Kadesh.

Using the known historical date of the destruction of the Temple in 587 BCE as a starting point and reckoning the literal number of years back in accordance with the literal numbers of the regnal years, ages of individuals, generations, events, stated in the numerous biblical passages pertaining to them (see table below), to the resulting literal reckoning of the 4th year of Solomon's reign ("1018"), and then calculating back 480 years (1 Kings 6:1) the date is 1498 BCE for the Exodus.
Reckoning no years (zero 0) between the year Eli began judging Israel (1 Samuel 4:18) and the year Samson died (Judges 16:29-31: Judges 17—1 Samuel 4), and reckoning no years (zero 0) between Cushan-Rishathaim and Joshua in the Book of Judges (Judges 2:8-3:8), and counting all the years explicitly stated in all the numerical texts from the First Book of Kings, chapter 5, back through the Book of Exodus, chapter 12—between Solomon's 4th year and the year the people of Israel came out from the land of Egypt—the minimum literal total count according to those texts is 559 years and the date is 1577 BCE for the Exodus (see table below).

Add an arbitrarily estimated 40 (?) years for the unknown generation after Joshua's death and the date is pushed back to 1617 BCE (?). Add another arbitrarily estimated 40 (?) years (total 80) for 2 unknown generations (Judges 2:10) and the date for the Exodus is pushed further back to 1657 BCE (?).
Add about 2 (?) years more (Judges 19–21) for the outrage at Gibeah (Judges 19:30), for the period of the calling out of the men of Israel for the war with Benjamin and the months that followed (Judges 20:8-11 and 20:46-48), for the smiting of Jabesh-gilead (Judges 21:5-12), for the subsequent taking of wives for the survivors during the yearly feast of the LORD at Shiloh and repair of the cities afterward (Judges 21:16-23)—about 2 (?) years between the death of Samson and the year when Eli began to judge Israel—and the date for the Exodus is pushed further back to about 1659 BCE (?).
None of these added years arbitrarily inserted into the period between Joshua and Eli can be drawn from the text of the Bible alone; they are purely speculative and have no historical value.
Add another 10 years, at minimum, to the same period, as represented in the Book of Ruth (1:4), and the date for the Exodus is pushed further back to 1669 BCE, or earlier.
This purely speculative total additional 82 (?) years moves the formation of Adam in the Garden of Eden back to 4328 BCE (see table below).

These apparent contradictions can only be resolved by careful collation and correlation of data from the various extant Bible texts by an historical-grammatical method of exegesis, adhering to the rules of sound interpretation.

Joshua and the period of the conquest

The age of Joshua in the wilderness of Paran when he was sent to spy out the land (Numbers 14:28-30) is determinative for the chronological date of the Exodus as reckoned by literal letterism. Taking the 1st year of Solomon as 1022 BCE and tabulating the numbers of years in the text back to 1505 BCE as the year Joshua died, and taking the age of Joshua when he died at the age of 110, and estimated as 40 (?) years old when he spied out the land of Canaan, and as 78 (?) years old (40 + 38) when he crossed over the Jordan River with the people, the conquest of Canaan under Joshua during his life would have occupied an estimated period of 32 (?) years. Such conclusions are purely speculative and arbitrary. The age of Joshua when he was sent with Caleb and 10 other leaders to spy out the land (Numbers 13:1-16) and when he crossed over the Jordan River (Joshua 1:1-2) cannot be drawn from the Bible alone; the biblical text only states that Joshua was 110 years old when he died. The Bible does not state the number of years of the conquest of Canaan, which according to the text was completed during the lifetime of Joshua "and the land was subdued before them" (Joshua 18:1-10; Judges 2:6).

According to Bob R. Ellis and E. Ray Clendenen, those who reckon the 4th year of Solomon as 966/5 BCE and accept the traditional date of the Exodus at about 1445 BCE, based on a literal interpretation of 1 Kings 6:1, place the conquest at about 1400–1350 BCE, over a period of about 50 years, but those who prefer archaeological data over biblical data commonly date the Exodus around 1286 BCE (understanding 1 Kings 6:1 and similar passages as figurative) and they place the conquest at about 1240–1190 BCE, again a period of about 50 years. A literal interpretation of the death of Joshua at the age of 110 at the end of the conquest about 1350 BCE as supposed, with the traditional date of the Exodus as 1445 BCE, makes Joshua ("a leader of a house in Israel") 15 years old at the time they spied out the land, 25 years younger than Caleb at age 40 (Joshua 14:6-7), and 53 years old when Israel crossed over the Jordan, making the period of the conquest 57 years; the ages of 15 and 53 for Joshua still obtain when the date of his death is 1190 BCE at the end of the conquest with the date of the Exodus as 1280 BCE. He would have been 50 years old when Caleb was 85 (Joshua 14:6-10).

According to Joel F. Drinkard, Jr. and E. Ray Clendenen, assuming a literal interpretation of 1 Kings 6:1, and taking 966 BCE as Solomon's 4th year, the Exodus occurred in 1446 BCE, "and the conquest lasted about seven years ending around 1400 BCE." If Joshua died 110 years old at the end of the conquest about 1400 BCE as supposed, that makes him about 66 years old in 1444 BCE, 2 years after the Exodus, when Caleb was 40 and they were sent to spy out the land. Age 66 plus 38 years (Deuteronomy 2:14) would make Joshua 104 years old when Israel crossed into Canaan, and the year would be 1406 BCE, at the beginning of the conquest. Joshua would then have died 6 years later 110 years old 1400 BCE. According to Joshua 13:1–14:11, Joshua was "old and advanced in years" seven (7) years after the beginning of the conquest, when Caleb was 85 years old. If Joshua was only 65 years old (20 years younger than Caleb) he would not be "old and advanced in years". After blessing Caleb, Joshua then apportioned the land to each of the tribes, and then came the subsequent controversy and threat of war over the "altar of great size" built afterward by the Reubenites, the Gadites and the half-tribe of Manasseh (Joshua 22:6-33). And then according to Joshua 23:1 Joshua was still alive "a long time afterward". The same term "old and well advanced in years" was used when he died at the age of 110. The phrase "old and advanced in years" is used in the Bible to describe Abraham over 100 years old and Sarah over 90 years old, also Job at 140, King David before he died at 70, and the elders among the people and among the priests of Israel.

Literalist difficulties in tabulating the chronology of the kings of Israel and Judah

The literal reading of the letter of the text of the Bible according to the method of letterism presents a particular difficulty when the comparative chronology of the kings is calculated, correlated and tabulated from the Bible alone.

Numerical totals of the reigns

Reference texts for Biblical data presented here are the RSVCE and KJV. Bible links are provided for verification and for multiple comparisons of different translations and versions of the Bible. All resulting figures are numerically derived from cited texts in published Bibles using plain arithmetic. The data presented here should not be regarded as definitive. This is not research, nor is this presented as research. This is an illustrative demonstration of simple mechanical arithmetic only, using known numbers in the Bible.

A literal count of the years of the chronology of the kings of Israel and Judah gives the following totals for the Divided Monarchy:

Kingdom of Judah: Rehoboam to Hezekiah

Rehoboam 17 years 1 Kings 14:21. ——Rehoboam 18 years 1 Kings 14:31-15:1
Abijam/Abijah 3 years 1 Kings 15:1-2
Asa 41 years 1 Kings 15:9-10
Jehoshaphat 25 years 1 Kings 22:41-42
Jehoram/Joram 8 years 2 Kings 8:16-17
Ahaziah 1 year 2 Kings 8:25-26
Athaliah 7 years 2 Kings 11:1-16
Jehoash/Joash 40 years 2 Kings 11:21-12:1
Amaziah 29 years 2 Kings 14:1. ——Amaziah 30 years 2 Kings 13:10; 14:7; 14:23
—(15th year + 15 years = 30 years)
Azariah/Uzziah 52 years 2 Kings 15:1-2
Jotham 16 years 2 Kings 15:32-33. ——Jotham 20 years 2 Kings 15:30
Ahaz 16 years 2 Kings 16:1-2
Hezekiah 29 years 2 Kings 18:1-2 The 12th year of the reign of Hezekiah of Judah saw the end of the Kingdom of Israel:

2 Kings 17:3-6; 18:10-11
12th year to the 29th year of Hezekiah = 29 – 12 = 17 years past the end of the Kingdom of Israel.

Reckoning 12 years of the reign of Hezekiah, and beginning with Rehoboam son of Solomon:
17 + 3 + 41 + 25 + 8 + 1 + 7 + 40 + 29 + 52 + 16 + 16 + 12 of Hezekiah = 267 years.
18 + 3 + 41 + 25 + 8 + 1 + 7 + 40 + 30 + 52 + 20 + 16 + 12 of Hezekiah = 273 years.

Kingdom of Israel: Jeroboam to Hoshea

Jeroboam son of Nebat 22 years 1 Kings 14:20
Nadab 2 years 1 Kings 14:20; 15:25
Baasha 24 years 1 Kings 15:27-28; 15:33. ——Baasha 33 years 2 Chronicles 16:1-5
—(3rd year to the 36th year = 36 – 3 = 33 years)
Elah 2 years 1 Kings 15:8; 15:16
Zimri, Tibni and Omri 12 years 1 Kings 16:10-29 verses 10, 15, 18, 21-23, 29. ——Zimri, Tibni and Omri 11 years
—(27th to the 31st year = 4 years, and 31st to the 39th year = 7 years: 4 + 7 = 11.)
Ahab 22 years 1 Kings 16:28-29
Ahaziah 2 years 1 Kings 22:48-51
Jehoram/Joram 12 years 2 Kings 1:17; 2 Kings 3:1
Jehu 28 years 2 Kings 10:36
Jehoahaz 17 years 2 Kings 13:1-2
Jehoash/Joash 16 years 2 Kings 13:10
Jeroboam II 41 years 2 Kings 14:16; 14:23
Zechariah 6 months 2 Kings 15:8.
Shallum 1 month 2 Kings 15:10; 15:30. ——Zechariah and Shallum 7 months, Zechariah and Shallum 1 year 2 Kings 15:8; 15:17
Menahem 10 years 2 Kings 15:14; 15:17.
Pekahiah 2 years 2 Kings 15:22-23
Pekah son of Remaliah 20 years 2 Kings 15:25-27
Hoshea son of Elah 9 years 2 Kings 15:30-32

22 + 2 + 24 + 2 + 12 + 22 + 2 + 12 + 28 + 17 + 16 + 41 + 6 months + 1 month + 10 + 2 + 20 + 9 = 241 years 7 months.
22 + 2 + 33 + 2 + 11 + 22 + 2 + 12 + 28 + 17 + 16 + 41 + 1 year of 12 months + 10 + 2 + 20 + 9 = 250 years.

Kingdom of Judah (to the 12th year of Hezekiah) 267/273 years.
Kingdom of Israel (to their exile) 241 years 7 months (242 years)/250 years.

By a literal count according to the Bible, the Kingdom of Israel was dissolved and the people taken into exile by Shalmaneser the 241st/242nd, 250th, 267th, 273rd year after Solomon 982 BCE.

982 BCE – 241/242 years = 741/740 BCE

982 BCE – 250 years = 732 BCE

982 BCE – 267 years = 715 BCE

982 BCE – 273 years = 709 BCE

For the period of the Divided Monarchy, most historians follow either of the older chronologies established by William F. Albright or Edwin R. Thiele, or the newer chronologies of Gershon Galil and Kenneth Kitchen. See Kingdom of Israel (Samaria).

Historical-grammatical method in Biblical literalist chronology

The apparent numerical inconsistencies highlighted by letterism can be harmonized and resolved by interpretation of the Biblical data according to the historical-grammatical method, which aims at discovering the sensus literalis historicus, or literal sense of the text.

Every person who approaches bible study, usually to learn about the historical events it relates, is heavily influenced by the hermeneutical theory, or interpretive understandings, he or she brings to the text, consciously or unconsciously. According to Dr. J. Philip Hyatt, very little of the Bible relates history for its own sake, or for the purposes that a modern historian would adopt. It is, therefore, history of a special order, designed not simply to inform the reader, but to awaken in the reader a response to what the Lord of history has done.

The aim of the historical-grammatical method is to strive to discover the Biblical author's original intended meaning in the text, to discover that meaning of the passage and that message which the original author would have intended and what the original hearers would have understood without adding to or taking away from the meaning of the message. Almost all of the books of the Old Testament were written to be read aloud to an assembly of persons. A fundamental principle of exegesis or exposition of the text is that the words and sentences can have but one significance in one and the same connection: a text has at least one meaning, and one's interpretations of that meaning will be right or wrong. The moment this principle is neglected the message of the author becomes obscured by uncertainty and conjecture, and exegesis becomes eisegesis. Eisegesis is severely condemned according to many literalist readings of the text of the Book of Deuteronomy and the Book of Revelation:

"Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish aught from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." KJV —Deuteronomy 4:2

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophesy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophesy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." KJV —Revelation 22:18-19

In an effort to avoid any deviation from the literal meaning of the text, Biblical literalist chronology draws data from the best available textual evidence. Using the best textual readings of letterism as a beginning, a literalist chronology can be established and sometimes also be corroborated by the most reliable extant extra-biblical findings of archæologists and textual historians (see Biblical manuscript). Where widely varying interpretations obtain, those most closely supporting the literal reading of the letter of the Biblical text are adopted by Biblical literalist researchers, such as Donald G. Bryant, Gershon Galil and Kenneth Kitchen. Apparent internal inconsistencies in the textual data can often be harmonized, not always to the satisfaction of everyone, by recognizing such common practices in antiquity as coregencies or overlapping reigns of a king and his successor, and rival kings contending for the rule of the kingdom and differences between the records of Israel and Judah in the manner of counting the years of a king's reign. Uncertainty remains at many points. Biblical chronology includes numbers which were significant to the biblical authors, and at times integral to their message. Differences between ancient and modern calendars often necessitates the giving of alternate dates, a resultant year both earlier and later by modern reckoning (such as 587/586 BCE). Furthermore, different methods of harmonizing the dates of Biblical kings yield slightly different results.

Moses Maimonides: figurative and literalist readings

Moses Maimonides wrote that passages in the Bible which, in their literal sense, contain statements that can be refuted with proof, must and can be interpreted other than literally in a figurative manner, but that a mere argument in favor of a certain proposed theory which rejects literal readings is not enough reason to reject the literal meaning of a Biblical text and interpret it figuratively when the literalist theory can be supported by an equally good argument in its favor. (Guide for the Perplexed, Chapter XXV.)

Lack of consensus

A comparison of literalist chronologies such as those listed in the External links below and those which have been established by William F. Albright, Edwin R. Thiele, Donald G. Bryant, Gershon Galil and Kenneth Kitchen present some apparent differences which to date have not been completely resolved, and research continues. See Biblical archaeology.

Given current difficulties of harmonizing the numerical dating of plainly stated numbers of years in the chronology of the Biblical text, together with a lack of precision due to unknown numbers of years not included by the Biblical authors, a self-consistent, textually-based Biblical literalist chronology leading to total and complete consensus on the fixing of precise historical dates in the Bible by the methods of literal letterism and historical-grammatical exegesis does not at present appear possible. Currently, Biblical literalists have agreed that more recent literalist chronologies constructed from data in the Bible together with historical-critical findings provide useful approximations of datings as they begin to converge. More recent scientific datings of historical archaeological findings are seen to be in closer harmony with the chronology of the Biblical text. What has been called an "unreasonable" insistence on only figurative meanings has begun to decline, yet the theory still remains influential. (B. Ramm, W. A. Elwell, J. P. Hyatt, Pontifical Biblical Commission, J. F. Drinkard, Jr., E. R. Clendenen). See Biblical Minimalism and Historicity of the Bible.