:4; Am 9:7), identified as the island of Crete (Hess 1992). But what about the mention of Philistines in the book of Genesis some 900 years earlier? S

a spiral from the outer edge toward the center, were impressed in the wet clay with a punch or stamp, resulting in the world’s first typewritten document. No other texts in this script have since been found. The Phaistos DiskThe significance of the Phaistos Disk for our purposes is that it connects the Philistines with the island of Crete and places them there at a period far earlier than the 12th century BC. One of characters on the disk, in fact, the one that occurs most frequently, is a warrior with a feathered headdress. It is very similar to the depiction of the later Philistines in reliefs on the walls of Rameses III’s mortuary temple in Medinet Habu, Egypt (T. Dothan 1982: 22; T. and M. Dothan 1992: 35–36). This is not an isolated find, as identical signs, including frontal views of the feathered warrior, have been found inscribed on an axe found in a cave in Crete (Robinson 2002: 306–307).The name “Philistine,” therefore, may simply be the Biblical term for Aegean peoples from Crete, from any time period. Another name used in the Bible for the people from Crete is “Caphtorites.” Deuteronomy 2:23 states, “as for the Avvites who lived in villages as far as Gaza, the Caphtorites coming out from Caphtor destroyed them and settled in their place.” According to the Bible, then, peoples from Crete took over the southwest coastal area of Canaan prior to the time of Moses. That is precisely the area where Abraham and Isaac encountered “Abimelech king of the Philistines.” The Minoans The scholarly label for the ancient inhabitants of Crete is “Minoans.” This artificial appellation was coined by Arthur Evans, excavator of Knossos, a major site on Crete, based on Minos, an ancient ruler of Crete known from Greek mythology. We do not know what the ancient inhabitants of Crete called themselves. Archaeological evidence indicates that the Minoans were engaged in maritime trade throughout the Levant in the Middle Bronze period (ca. 2000–1500 BC). Some of this evidence suggests that they established trading colonies in Syria, Canaan and Egypt. A small, but growing, number of finds in Palestine provide tangible evidence for contacts between Canaan and Crete long before the 12th–11th century Philistines. Gerar (Tel Haror)Abimelech, the Philistine king or kings Abraham and Isaac had dealings with, ruled at Gerar (Gn 26:1). Ancient Gerar has been identified as Tel Haror, 17 miles east of Gaza in the western Negev (Oren 1992: 989). The Middle Bronze urban settlement there is one of the largest in southern Canaan, occupying an area of about 38 acres. It was enclosed by an elaborate system of earthen ramparts fronted by a deep ditch (Klenck 2002: 30; Oren et al. 1996: 91). Within the city a sacred precinct was excavated, including a “migdol temple,” remains of animal sacrifice, and cultic and imported pottery (Klenck 2002; Oren et al. 1996: 91–92). Also found within the fortified enclosure was a 10 foot diameter well, excavated to a depth of 38 feet (Klenck 2002: 34; Oren 1993: 581). The wells of Gerar were a major issue between both Abraham (Gn 21:25) and Isaac (Gn 26:17–22), and the Philistines.Of particular interest is a Minoan graffito found in the sacred precinct dating to ca. 1600 BC. Analyses of the sherd determined that it originated in Crete, most likely the south coast (Day et al. 1999; Oren et al. 1996). There are four Minoan signs on the graffito, inscribed prior to firing, which represent a bull’s head, cloth, branch and figs (Oren et al. 1996: 99–109). In addition to the graffito, an unusual chalice of Canaanite shape and fabric was found in a room on the east side of the sacred area. What makes the chalice unusual is its high arching handles, a well-known feature of Minoan chalices, but not of Canaanite (Oren et al. 1996: 95, 96; Oren 1993: 581).Maritime Trade Between Crete and the LevantThe similarity of harbors in Crete and the Levant in the Middle Bronze I (=IIA), period, ca. 2000–1750 BC, strongly suggests contact between the two areas: the sea crossing between Crete, Egypt and the Levant was not only theoretically easy and simple, but had been used as such since early days…The data…suggest a close technical and conceptual resemblance for the type of siting and the layout of the portal installations in the Aegean, Crete and the Levant…the soaring demand for maritime facilities which [was] instigated by the rapid urbanism of the Levantine coast and the palatial economy of Crete…had brought about the new type of estuarian harbours, the extensive artificial remodification of coastal topography and the introduction of stone blocks [sic] quays in Crete and in the Levant (Raban 1991: 145). There were harbors all along the Canaanite coast in Middle Bronze I and it is highly likely that it was commerce that brought the Minoans to Canaan. The harbors of Tel Ridan, 12 miles southwest of Gaza, and Ashkelon, 12 miles north-northeast of Gaza, would have served Gerar, which, in turn, acted as a gateway for transshipping goods throughout southern Canaan (Marcus 2002: 248). At Ashkelon, a sherd of a decorated Minoan cup from ca. 1800 BC was found (Merrillees 2003: 136).Harbors at Yavneh Yam, 10 miles south of Tel Aviv, and Tel Gerisa, 2 miles east of Tel Aviv, provided anchorages for central Canaan. Further north, Dor, 14 miles south of Haifa; Tel Nami, 9 miles south of Haifa; Acco 8 miles north of Haifa; and Achziv, 17 miles north of Haifa, met the maritime needs of the northern sector.At Tel Nami, excavators found 259 charred seeds of the legume Lathyrus clymenum in four storage jars and on the floors of two storerooms dated to the Middle Bronze I period (Kislev, Artzy and Marcus 1993). The seeds are exotic on two counts. First, they are not native to the Near East, but to the Aegean and regions further west, and thus were imported. The Tel Nami seeds most closely resemble samples from Crete (Kislev, Artzy and Marcus 1993: 148). Secondly, the seeds contain a toxic substance that causes permanent paralysis of the lower limbs if consumed in large quantities.


Creation or the Flood? A Study of Several Passages of Scripture
The Importance of Biblical InterpretationOne recent discussion I took part in examined how to understand Psalm 104:5–9. This passage reads (all Scripture quotations from the NASB, except as noted):5 He established the earth upon its foundations, So that it will not totter forever and ever.6 You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains.7 At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away.8 The mountains rose; the valleys sank down To the place which You established for them.9 You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth.The focus of discussion was whether or not these and similar verses refer to the Flood of Noah. At stake is whether certain creationary models of the formation of the Earth are biblically valid. How so? If the “boundary” spoken of in 104:9 was set up after the Flood as part of God’s promise never to send a worldwide flood again, this passage allows for a number of possible scientific models involving a complete restructuring of the surface of the Earth during the Flood. However, if the boundary was an unalterable one God established for the seas at Creation, then the Flood was just a temporary suspension of that boundary for the purpose of executing judgment on a sinful world, with an eventual return to the previously-ordained boundaries after the judgment was over.Key creationist models impacted by this exegetical question include the Hydroplate Theory and Catastrophic Plate Tectonics. Completely apart from the scientific plausibility of these two models is the question of whether their scriptural justification is solid. So it is crucial that Ps. 104:5–9 and similar passages first be carefully examined as to their grammar and context, or else we are in danger of starting with a scientific model and then hunting for shaky proof texts to support it. Our search for truth must start first with an accurate understanding of Scripture.God is the ultimate AuRosetta Stone Japanese

Historical Synchronisms and the Date of the Exodus

This article was first published in the Spring 2004 issue of Bible Spade. For those that hold a high view of Scripture and believe the Hebrew Exodus from Egypt actually happened, there are two major positions today regarding when that event occurred: the so-called Early Date, which places the Exodus in the mid-15th century BC, most probably during the reign of Amenhotep II, and the so-called Late Date, which posits Rameses II (ca. 1279–1212 BC) as the Pharaoh confronted by Moses. Much has been written in defense of both these views. It is the purpose of this article to take a fresh look at Rameses II as Pharaoh of the Exodus in light of both Biblical and Assyrian chronologies. Is it likely, or even possible, that Rameses II could have been the Pharaoh of the Exodus? First, let us observe Biblical events and personages between the Exodus and a known date in Near Eastern history, the date of the famous Battle of Qarqar, where a coalition of western kings defeated Shalmaneser III of Assyria. It is accepted, thanks to astronomical data and our solid knowledge of Assyrian chronology, that the battle took place in 853 BC. It is also known that Ahab, king of Israel, was a participant in the battle. Shalmaneser III tells us so in his records regarding Qarqar. Ahab almost certainly died later that same year.1 How long a period of time does the Bible demand between the Exodus and the death of King Ahab of Israel? If we take the Biblical year totals seriously, quite a lengthy period is required. The Exodus was followed by 40 years of wandering in the wilderness, and then by a long but not absolutely calculatable period for the Conquest and the period of the Judges. While it is likely that there is some overlap among the judges, it still seems necessary to allot between 300 and 400 years for the wanderings, conquest, and days of the judges. Rameses II, ruler of Egypt for 67 years, ca. 1279–1212 BC. Called “the Great” because of his military exploits and construction projects, his statues and buildings can still be seen in Egypt today. Even his mummy is on display at the Egyptian Museum in Cairo. He also had a great family by his several wives—at least 45 sons and 40 daughters! The tomb of his sons has recently been found in the Valley of the Kings in Thebes. According to the popular, but anti-Biblical, theory of a 13th century Exodus, Rameses II is thought to be the Pharaoh of the Exodus. Statue from Thebes, now in the British Museum. Credit: Bryant Wood After the judges, the period of the United Monarchy lasted ca. 120 years (according to the Bible, 40 years each for Saul, David, and Solomon). After the death of Solomon, the kingdom of Israel divided into northern and southern kingdoms, Israel and Judah. From this division to the death of Ahab, using the most probable calculations on divided monarchy chronology, was just short of 80 years. Combining all of these numbers and assuming only 300 years for the time before the United Monarchy, we see that, if we take the Biblical numbers as realistic, the time between the Exodus and the battle of Qarqar was approximately 500 years. But if we expand the period of the wanderings, conquest, and judges to 400 years, we would need 600 years. The point is this: if Rameses II reigned from 1279 to 1212 BC, as most Egyptologist now believe, there are not enough years for all of the periods mentioned above. If the Exodus occurred about 1250 BC, in the middle of the reign of Rameses II, there would be about 400 years between him and the Battle of Qarqar. This is at least a full century too little, and perhaps twofull centuries if we use 400 years for the ages between the Exodus and the United Monarchy. Either way, Rameses II is unacceptable. When calculations of this kind are undertaken, it is a good thing to check our work from a different angle. Today there are those who would abandon orthodox Egyptian chronology and replace it with one of a number of radical reconstructions. While these reconstructions seem totally without merit, it is still worth our while to examine the possibility that Rameses II did not really live in the 13th century BC at all. Kurkh Stela depicting Shalmaneser III king of Assyria. Found in Kurkh, Turkey, now on display in the British Museum this stone monument records campaigns against the Arameans in Syria. The campaign of year six, 853 BC mentions Ahab, king of Israel, as being a member of an anti-Assyrian coalition that confronted the Assyrians at Qarqar in western Syria. The section referring to Ahab reads, “I approached the city of Qarqar. I razed, destroyed and burned the city of Qarqar, his [Irhulēni the Hamathite’s] royal city. 1,200 chariots, 1,200 cavalry, (and) 20,000 troops of Hadad-ezer (Adadidri) of Damascus; 700 chariots, 700 cavalry, (and) 10,000 troops of Irhulēni, the Hamathite; 2,000 chariots, (and) 10,000 troops of Ahab, the Israelite...” (Younger 2000:263). There is a way to verify the century of Rameses II using the well-know and well-accepted Assyrian chronology.2 This involves the use of synchronisms, or established contacts between rulers of different nations that prove they were contemporaries. Using the modern world as an example, we know that Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany was a contemporary of Woodrow Wilson, the President of the United Sates. We know that because they fought each other in World War I. Similarly, Robert E. Lee was a contemporary of Abraham Lincoln, for the same reason. They fought each other in a war. Another form of proof that two rulers were contemporary comes from correspondence. If two men wrote letters to each other, or concluded treaties, they must live at the same time. Or, if they both correspond with a third party, all three must live at the same time. Let us take these principles back to the time of Rameses II. Rameses II was a great Egyptian king who ruled 67 years, built lavishly, fought wars with the Hittites and other nations, and concluded international treaties. His reign is well known. One of his major accomplishments was a major treaty with the great Hittite king Hattusilis III. We have both the Egyptian and the Hittite versions of this famous document. Closeup of Shalmaneser III, on the famous Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser found at Nimrud, ancient Calah, Iraq, in 1846. This 2m (6 ½ ft) tall, four-sided polished black stone monument is now on display in the British Museum. Although not mentioning Ahab, the obelisk’s cuneiform text does mention another king of Israel. On one side, the second register from the top depicts a man kneeling before Shalmaneser with the inscription, “Tribute of Jehu son of Omri.” Jehu ruled ca. 841–814 BC and he probably paid tribute to Shalmaneser in the first year of his reign. Note that in order to formulate such a treaty, both of these kings would have to have ruled at the same time. But the interesting part of all this is the following: Hattusilis III also corresponded with the Assyrian king Shalmaneser I (ca. 1275–1245 BC). Consequently, Shalmaneser I must have been a contemporary of Rameses II as well. And we know roughly how many years there are between Shalmaneser I and his namesake Shalmaneser III: slightly over 400. Since we know that Shalmaneser III lived in the 800’s, Shalmaneser I and hence Rameses II must have lived in the 1200’s. One of the Egyptian copies of the treaty between Rameses II and the Hittites carved into a wall of the Temple of Amun at Karnak. After 20 years of fighting, the treaty was concluded in Rameses II’s 21st year, ca. 1258 BC, corresponding to the later part of the period of Judges in Biblical history. Thirteen years later the treaty was further cemented by the marriage of a Hittite princess to Rameses II. A Hittite copy of the treaty was discovered on two clay tablets written in Babylonian cuneiform found at the Hittite capital of Boghazköy in Turkey. In conclusion, it seems nearly impossible to date the Exodus in the times of Rameses II. There is simply not enough time for all the periods of Biblical history between that seminal event and the last years of Ahab, King of Israel. (Reprinted, with permission, from Artifax 17.2 [2002]:19) Recommended Resources for Further StudyBible and SpadeCD-ROM Archaeology andthe Old Testament Moses andthe Gods of EgyptEndnotes1. For evidence and details for all this, see any standard history of Israel, or a good history of Assyria, such as Saggs, 1990. 2. There are some possible revisions in middle Assyrian chronology, but none of the propose changes extend about a decade. Bibliography Saggs, Henry W.F.1990 The Might That Was Assyria. New York: St. Martins. Younger, K. Lawson, Jr.2000 Neo-Assyrian Inscriptions: Shalmaneser III (2.113), Kurkh Monolith (2.113A). Pp. 261–264 in The Context of Scripture 2, ed. William W. Hallo. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.Please help ABR continue to post these freearticles by making a donation of any size today. Donate



learn french

the southeast slope, the focus of the ABR expeditionIron Age I, ca. 1100 B.C.—squatter occupation on the southeast slopeHasmonean, ca. 167&ndas

el (Jos 7:2)Joshua further told the spies that Ai was “to the east of Bethel.” The best candidate for Bethel is el-Bireh (Livingston 1998); Kh. el-Maqatir is east of el-Bireh.Near Bethel (Jos 12:9)In the list of defeated kings in Joshua 12, Ai is described as being “missad Bethel,” meaning “in the vicinity of” Bethel. Kh. el-Maqatir is 2 mi east of el-Bireh. Bethel was aligned with Ai, as the men of Bethel joined forces with the men of Ai in fighting the Israelites (Jos 8:17).An Ambush Site West of Ai (Jos 8:9, 12)Joshua placed an ambush force (or forces) “between Bethel and Ai, to the west of Ai” (Jos 8:9, 12). This requirement is met by the Wadi Sheban between el-Bireh and Kh. el-Maqatir. It is a very deep valley, hidden from view from both Kh. el-Maqatir and el-Bireh.A Militarily Significant Hill North of Ai (Jos 8:11, 13)When the Israelite army arrived at Ai, Joshua and his generals “set up camp north of Ai, with a valley between them and the city…they had the soldiers take up their positions—all those in the camp to the north of the city and the ambush to the west of it” (Jos 8:11, 13). Jebel Abu Ammar, 1 mi north of Kh. el-Maqatir, is the highest hill in the region and would have been an excellent command post from which Joshua’s generals could have viewed the entire battle field.A Shallow Valley North of Ai (Jos 8:13–14)Joshua did not remain with the main army, but rather took a small diversionary force and spent the night in the valley between the camp and Ai (Jos 8:13). This mimicked the small force that initially attacked Ai and was defeated (Jos 7:4–5). “When the king of Ai saw this, he and all the men of the city hurried out early in the morning to meet Israel in battle” (Jos 8:14). The valley north of Ai must have been a shallow valley in order for the king of Ai to observe Joshua and his men. The Wadi el-Gayeh between Kh. el-Maqatir and Jebel Abu Ammar is just such a valley.Archaeological Correspondences between Joshua’s Ai and Kh. el-MaqatirFortified at the Time of the ConquestSince a gate figures prominently in the account of the capture of Ai (Jos 7:5; 8:29), it can be assumed that the site was fortified. Already in the first exploratory season in 1995, a large lower gate socket stone was discovered. Subsequent seasons revealed the west chamber of a two-chambered gate, as well as an additional lower gate socket stone and an upper gate socket stone (Wood 1999c: 28). Pottery found in conjunction with the gate dates to the Late Bronze I period (ca. 1500–1400 B.C.; Wood 2008: 231–36), the time of the Conquest. The east chamber of the gate has not survived as the stones were robbed out by later occupants, probably during the Hasmonean period (167–37 B.C.) when another fortress was built over the east half of the Late Bronze I citadel. Excavations from 1996 to 2000 uncovered sections of the Late Bronze I fortress wall 12–13 ft wide on the north, west and south sides of the enclosure.Gate on the North Side of the Fortress (Jos 8:11)When Joshua arrived at Ai with the “whole army” (Jos 8:1, 3), he was “in front of” Ai on its north side (Jos 8:11). The “front” of the fortress would have been the side where the gate was placed. Therefore, an important archaeological requirement for any contender for Ai is that it has a gate on its north side. The gate at Kh. el-Maqatir is on the north side of the fortress.Smaller than Gibeon (Jos 7:3; 10:2)When the spies came back from Ai they reported to Joshua that “only a few men are there” (Jos 7:3), indicating that Ai was a small place. This is further quantified in Joshua 10:2 where it is recorded that “Gibeon…was larger than Ai.” In the Middle Bronze Age period (ca. 1800–1500 B.C.) Gibeon was ca. 7 acres in size (Broshi and Gophna 1986: 74, 82). We can assume that it was about the same size in Joshua’s day. The Late Bronze I fortress at Kh. el-Maqatir is much smaller than Gibeon as it occupies an area less than 3 acres.



Abimelech at Shechem
内容: Tags: shechem, abimelech, judges 9, baal-berith--> This article was first published in the Spring 2005 issue of Bible and Spade.For some 800 years, from the time of Jacob until the time of Gideon, Shechem was an important highland urban center controlling the area from Megiddo to Jerusalem (Wood 1997). It is no surprise, then, that Gideon’s son Abimelech went to the leaders of Shechem (1) to gain support for his failed attempt to become king of the Israelite tribes. Three archaeological discoveries at Shechem relate to the narrative of Judges 9.Temple of Baal-berith References to the “temple of Baal-Berith” (v. 4), “Beth-Millo” (vv. 6, 20), “temple of their god” (v. 27), “tower of Shechem” (vv.46, 49) and “temple of El-Berith” (v. 46) all appear to be the same structure at Shechem (Stager 2003; 1999: 242, 245; Toombs 1992:1184; Campbell 1983: 269; Campbell and Ross 1963: 16). Berith is the Hebrew word for covenant, so the temple was for &ldqRosetta Stone

10 Mar 11 Enrolled Agents Help Settle Your Tax Debts With The IRS

Enrolled Agents Help Settle Your Tax Debts With The IRSBy: Sawyer Adams .... Click author's name to view profile and articles!!!Retargeting by ChangoTweet The Offer in promise (OIC) program in the United States is an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) program that represents an agreement between the taxpayer and the IRS that settles the taxpayer's liabilities for less than the amount owed. You, usually use the checklist in the Form 656 to determine if you are eligible for this program. If you believe you are eligible to file an OIC you should seek out representation from either attorneys, Certified Public Accountants (CPA) or Enrolled Agents who can represent taxpayers in front of the IRS.Enrolled Agentsare great representatives when filing an OIC. Enrolled Agentsare admitted to practice by the IRS and can do so nationwide, unlike attorneys and CPAs. In order to bee an Enrolled Agent, one must pass theSpecial Enrollment Examination, also referred to as the EA Exam. TheEA Exam is tax specific and covers tax law more in depth than the BAR or CPA Exam.In most cases, the IRS rejects an OIC unless you offer an amount that is equal to or greater than the Reasonable Collection Potential (RCP). The RCP is what the IRS uses to measure your ability to pay, and includes the value attached to your assets like bank accounts, properties, automobiles, etc. Additionally, the RCP also takes into account your anticipated future earnings, and adjusts them accordingly for basic living expenses using set standards. AnEnrolled Agent with OIC experience will know how to calculate the RCP and can help determine a reasonable offer amount to help prevent rejection.Offer in promise: ConsiderationsAn OIC can be requested based on the following conditions:Doubt as to Collectibility: You show a reason for doubt that you can repay the full amount of the tax liability you owe to the IRS within the stipulated time for repayment. For instance, if you owe $20,000 in unpaid tax liabilities, you agree to what you owe is correct and accurate. Also, you show that your monthly ine does not meet your living expenses, you do not own any property, and you are unable to pay off your liabilities in a lump sum or through installments.Doubt as to Liability: You show a reason for doubt that your assessed tax liability is accurate and correct. Possible reasons for this doubt include mistakes by the tax examiner, failure of the examiner to consider your evidence, or you have new evidence.Effective Tax Administration: To be eligible for an OIC under these grounds, you must show the IRS and the tax collectors that paying off your liabilities would create a situation of economic hardship for you. For instance, you may have enough funds to pay off your taxes within the specified time, but due to some unforeseen reasons, paying the taxes would worsen your economic situation beyond repair.Offer in promise: Payment OptionsIdeally, you are required to submit a $150 application fee along with Form 656 - Offer in promise. However, certain low ine taxpayers may qualify to waive the application fee. You may choose to pay the OIC using one of the following options:Lump Sum Cash Offer: The amount due must be paid within five or less non-refundable installments upon notice of acceptance. When filing your Form 656, you are required to pay 20% of the offer amount. A Lump Sum Cash Offer is calculated as follows:If the offer will be paid in 5 or fewer installments in 5 months or less, the offer amount must include the net value of your assets and the monthly anticipated future earnings amount multiplied by 48 months.If the offer will be paid in 5 or fewer installments in more than 5 months but less than 24 months, the offer amount must include the net value of your assets and the monthly anticipated future earnings amount multiplied by 60 months.If the offer will be paid in 5 or fewer installments in more than 24 months, the offer amount must include the value of your assets and the anticipated future earnings amount spread over the remainder of the statute.Short Term Periodic Payment Offer: You must pay the offer amount within 24 months of the date the IRS received the offer. The first payment is made along with the $150 application fee when Form 656 is submitted. The monthly installments must continue to be paid while the OIC is under review and are non-refundable if the OIC is rejected.If the offer will be paid in 5 or more installments within 24 months, the offer amount must include the net value of your assets and the monthly anticipated future earnings amount multiplied by 60 months.Deferred Periodic Payment Offer: You must pay the offer amount over the remaining statutory period for collecting the tax liabilities incurred by you.If the offer amount must include the net value of your assets and the monthly anticipated future earnings amount spread over the remainder of the collection statute.The IRS officials are not bound to offer you terms as proposed by you. The OIC investigator may propose a different plan after assessing your financial condition and ability to pay off your taxes.IRS Circular 230 DisclosurePursuant to the requirements of the Internal Revenue Service Circular 230, we inform you that, to the extent any advice relating to a Federal tax issue is contained in this munication, including in any attachments, it was not written or intended to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (a) avoiding any tax related penalties that may be imposed on you or any other person under the Internal Revenue Code, or (b) promoting, marketing or remending to another person any transaction or matter addressed in this munication.Article Source: abcarticledirectoryFast Forward Academy is a leading publisher of education for enrolled agents and tax professionals. Access to free questions for the enrolled agent exam is available on their website.Note: The content of this article solely conveys the opinion of its author, Sawyer AdamsRetargeting by ChangoDid You Like This Article? Share It With YourFriends!Please Rate this Article 5 out of 54 out of 53 out of 52 out of 51 out of 5 Not yet Rated Click the XML Icon to Receive Free Articles About Auditing via RSS!Additional Articles From - Home Accounting AuditingWhat you need to know about Auditing from the experts.- By : john newportCulture and business proposition- By : foxhatsNavigating Miscellaneous Itemized Deductions- By : Sawyer AdamsAbout The National Association Of Enrolled Agents (NAEA)- By : Sawyer AdamsThe History Of Enrolled Agents- By : Sawyer AdamsThe Canon Sd780is Black Silver Gold Red - Very Nice Christmas Gift- By : ArticleSubmit AutoIRS Increasing Enforcement Activity- By : Sawyer AdamsDestination Military Surplus Products- By : Ali Khan5 Tips For Getting The Right Health Insurance For Your Needs- By : danica12 Quick Tips For Eye Shadow- By : Ali Khan Still Searching? Last Chance to find what you're looking for. Try using Bing Search!

5 Mar 11 Affiliate Marketing is Today's Top Internet Business Tool

Affiliate Marketing is Today's Top Internet Business ToolBy: Tom Sample .... Click author's name to view profile and articles!!!Retargeting by ChangoTweet You may have all heard of affiliate selling as a good way to make money online. But how is it supposed to work and how effective is it as an internet marketing tool? NHL Shop
Before we talk about that, you need to ask yourself a simple question: in your day by day life, haven't you sometimes recommended a product to someone? Something like, "I got that blender and it's working very well. And the price is good too." Not necessarily because you wanted to make publicity to the blender, but because you honestly believed it was a good deal and you wanted your friend to know about it.Now image the whole internet surfers as potential "friends" to whom you recommend a product or another. What's the best part, if you manage to convince them to buy, you get a commission for every product they purchase. You don't need to have a product of your own. This is called affiliate marketing, and it can be a very successful internet marketing business.If I were to give a definition, it would sound something like this: affiliate marketing is the action of referring your site's visitors to a merchant's site. Usually, if they make a purchase at the respective merchant's site, you get a commission, which is a percentage out of the amount of money your visitor spent on your partner's products.Can this really be a home based internet marketing business? The answer is a resounding yes. Not only that, but it can bring you incomes which a typical job wouldn't. Still, you have to bear in mind that although it can go on auto-pilot, you really have to put a lot of effort into this business and treat it like any other. It won't make you an overnight millionaire, but it can certainly support you financially.Now let's talk about your line of business. What do you specifically want to do? What do you want to market? Remember one thing: there is a lot of competition in the internet world today, but a problem can't exist without its solution, right? The answer to all the fierce competition as an easy one: specialization. I want to stretch out thePhiladelphia Flyers jersey
importance of this term because it can be your key to success.You need to find a niche market and then promote it. You will need a website for that, because that's what internet is all about right? You must look at your site as an advertising tool, which will work for the merchants whom you are trying to represent. Still, you need to use this tool cautiously, as you don't want your customers to flee once they see your website.You don't want to aggressively promote other merchants' products, you need to pre-sell. To do that, you need to look like an expert in the eyes of your visitors, and they must see your affiliate links as simple recommendations from an expert, and they will much easily click it. They won't be forced to do it, they will be RECOMMENDED to do it. That is a big difference, a difference that could change the course of your online business.Article Source: http://www.shop-on-sale.com Pro affiliate selling strategiesAffiliate selling. The content of this article solely conveys the opinion of its author, Tom SampleRetargeting by ChangoDid You Like This Article? Share It With YourFriends!Please Rate this Article 5 out of 54 out of 53 out of 52 out of 51 out of 5 Not yet Rated Click the XML Icon to Receive Free Articles About Affiliate Programs What Cloth Diaper Provides The Top Match For Newborns?- By : mirtagaylWhat is Affiliate Marketing and Why You Should Do It?- By : James A AndersonEarning Money Quickly With Email Marketing - True or False?- By : chad buistMoney Creating Tips For Individuals Involved In An Online Affiliate Marketing Home Business- By : Flyers jersey
Johnny BarrellGlobal Success Club And How To Make Money Online- By : Don SeanMake Cash Over The Internet With Affiliate Marketing- By : Leroy WheelerWhich Affiliate Networks To Look Out For When Promoting ?- By : Elsa Braxton Still Searching? Last Chance to find what you're looking for. Try using Bing Search!

24 Jan 11 Take Michigan Over Indiana on Saturday

Jonathan Daniel/Getty ImagesThe No. 19-ranked Michigan Wolverines will open conference play on Saturday at Indiana. The Hoosiers have started the season 3-0 behind the strong play of quarterback Ben Chappell. Their non-conference schedule was a bit of a joke and now the competition level amps up with a ranked foe coming to town. Michigan has won their first four games of the season and feature one of the most exciting players in Denard Robinson. The college football lines show the Wolverines are a 10.5-point favorite.This is the second straightDenver Broncos jersey
year Rich Rodriguez has led the Wolverines to a 4-0 start. There is a different feeling with this team, however, as Denard Robinson has rejuvenated a passionate fan base with his play through four games. Robinson suffered a knee injury last week against Bowling Green that had a stadium of over 100,000 fans holding their breath, but he is expected to play this week versus Indiana. The dual threat quarterback has thrown for 731 yards and four touchdowns with one interception. Where Robinson is really hurting opposing defenses is with his feet. He has gained 688 yards on 79 carries and scored six touchdowns. Michael Shaw is second on the team in rushing with 44 carries for 245 yards. He has scored five touchdowns, but is day to day with a sprained knee that could keep him out of action this weekend. The Wolverines feature the second-ranked rushing attack in the nation at 331 yards per game. Darryl Stonum is Robinsonfavorite target through the air, catching 15 passes for 226 yards and two scores. Roy Roundtree leads in receptions with 20 for 211 yards and a touchdown. Michigandefense does have room for improvement. They are giving up 400 total yards per game, which ranks 93rd in the country.Indiana is off to a hot start thanks to a soft schedule and an aerial Detroit Lions
assault on their opponents. Head coach Bill Lynch knows that the Hoosiers will need to have their A-game on Saturday if they want to pull off the upset over Michigan. Ben Chappell has been nearly perfect under center, completing 72 percent of his passes for 890 yards and nine touchdowns. He was a Honorable All-Big Ten mention a year ago and is producing at a very high rate early on. IU ranks 11th in passing yards per game, averaging over 304 yards. Running the ball has been a little more difficult for this team. Darius Willis leads the team with 219 yards on 46 carries and two touchdowns. He is averaging nearly five yards per carry. The Hoosiers donhave much depth behind Willis so expect to see him on every possession Saturday. Junior Damarlo Belcher has caught 21 passes for 284 yards and two scores. Ted Bolser leads the Hoosiers in touchdown receptions with four. Terrance Turner is a big target that has 17 receptions for 190 yards. Indiana does a good job in the spread system utilizing all sorts of receivers. Their defense has yet to face a player as good as Denard Robinson. They only return four starters from a squad that gave up nearly 30 points per game last year.Michigan has had Indiananumber for quite some time now, winning the past 16 games by an average of 21.5 points. Last year Michigan needed a late touchdown pass to hold onto a 36-33 victory over the Hoosiers. Indiana ranks near the bottom in rushing yards allowed per game and now go up against the top running game in the Green Bay Packers jersey
Big Ten. That could spell big time trouble for this team. I think they will be able to put some points on the board against a suspect Wolverine defense, but Michigan should score at will covering the spread.Play: Michigan -10.5 Get all of your expert football picks from the team at Locksmith. No site provides more winners than Jimmy Boyd and company.

22 Jan 11 South Carolina's Win Over Furman Produces More Questions Than Answers

Mike Zarrilli/Getty ImagesAs I sat in the stands watching this football game, I caught myself (a very optimistic fan) asking, is this really the 13th-ranked team in the country?My answer was a very cautious yes.Furman is no regular small school team. They have history and on the field look very large. They also had one Reebok Oakland Raiders #21 Nnamdi Asomugha Realtree camo Jersey
of the fastest receivers I have seen this year (other than Carolina's own Ace Sanders).After the game, Steve Spurrier had positive comments, which I didn't expect. I trust the Ol' Ball Coach, but I was expecting him to lash out about a game that was much closer than the score indicated.Here are some musings from the game.1. If South Carolina wants to win the East, Stephen Garcia must wake up and play better.Garcia missed wide-open receivers and had two interceptions. One of the interceptions was the result of a bad play call mixed with a bad decision. The other was just a bad throw. With Garcia struggling to get the ball out of his hands and to his playmakers, the passing game has looked bad.Connor Shaw may have to get a look soon if Garcia struggles more.2. Marcus Lattimore's Heisman hype will be all but gone after this game.Which I am glad about...he is too young to bear that sort of burden. He is a great back, but these games against teams like Furman are the games where Heisman hopeful backs are supposed to get a couple hundred yards. Latti didn't even break Reebok Pittsburgh Steelers #86 Hines Ward Realtree camo Jersey
70.The line struggled to get any sort of push against this Furman team. That doesn't bode well for the future.3. Ace Sanders is now officially M.I.A.After having a huge opening game against Southern Mississippi, Sanders has sort of disappeared. He had a couple of catches against Furman, but none of the big play variety it looked as if he would be contributing on a regular basis. One good-looking play got called back on a hold.What happened to the idea of getting the ball in Ace's hands more?4. There is nothing wrong with the pass rush.There were seven sacks in this game by the South Carolina defense. Enough said.Devin Taylor and Cliff Matthews are still two of the SEC's best ends. The tackles have played well, and the linebackers have looked better than anyone would have originally thought.5. What happened to the insanely deep defensive back corps?At the beginning of the season, South Carolina's defensive backs were considered by many to be the BEST in the country. Now, after being torched for over 200 yards by ONE RECEIVER, one has to wonder if a lack of focus is in play.Stephon Gilmore played well. Beyond that, there were way too many busted coverages in the middle of the field.6. The special teams woes are officially gone.South Carolina's special teams have looked good. The coverage has Reebok Pittsburgh Steelers James Harrison Realtree camo Jersey
been good, and the kicking has been phenomenal.This seems like the biggest improvement from last year.Overall, this isn't what anyone expected, but a win is a win. Next week is a benchmark game that will truly show where this South Carolina team ranks. A win over Auburn, and South Carolina should hop into the Top 10 for a big time showdown against Alabama.