admonished His disciples to, “lay up for themselves treasures in heaven” (Mt. 6:19–21).The Lion Hunt (Na 2:11–13)David Dorsey,

also depicts the Assyrian warriors as roaring lions (Is 5:29) and Yahweh as a lion who will tear up His prey and carry it off to His lair (Hos 5:14, 15; 13:7, 8; Johnston 2001:294, 295).Ashurbanipal pouring out a libation on the lions (left) and Ashurbanipal holding a lion by the tail during a lion hunt. Note the defacement of the tail on the right.From the palace of Ashurbanipal at Nineveh, now in the British Museum.According to Ashurbanipal’s annals, at the beginning of his reign, two deities, Adad and Ea, blessed the land of Assyria with plenty of rain. This rain caused the forests to thrive and the reeds in the marshes to flourish. This blessing resulted in a population explosion among the lions. They exerted their influence in the hills and on the plain by attacking herds of cattle, flocks of sheep and people. Many were killed (Luckenbill 1989, 2:363, ¶ 935). Ashurbanipal II, following in the footsteps of his predecessors, took charge of the lion hunts in order to control the lion population (Luckenbill 1989, 2:392, ¶ 1025).Ashurbanipal also engaged in lion hunting as a sport. Apparently lions were captured alive and put in cages in the king’s garden in Nineveh and used for staged lion hunts (Weissert 1997:339–58). One relief that was found in Ashurbanipal’s palace at Nineveh, apparently from a second floor, had three panels depicting a lion hunt. On the top panel, a lion is released from a cage and Ashurbanipal is shooting him with arrows. The central panel is interesting because it shows the bravery of the king. On the right side of the panel, soldiers are distracting a lion. On the left side, Ashurbanipal sneaks up and grabs the lion by the tail as he rears to his hind legs. The inscription above says,I, Ashurbanipal, king of the universe, king of Assyria, in my lordly sport, I seized a lion of the plain by his tail and at the command of Urta, Nergal, the gods, my allies, I smashed his skull with the club of my hand (Luckenbill 1989, 2:391, ¶ 1023).The king attributes his bravery to the deities. Dr. J. E. Reade, one of the keepers of the Western Asiatic Antiquities at the British Museum, has observed,It is notable that much of the lion’s tail has been chipped away, so that the lion had been, as it were, set loose; this defacement was probably the action, at once humorous and symbolic, of some enemy soldier busy ransacking the palace in 612 B.C. (Curtis and Reade 1995:87).On the lower panel, Ashurbanipal is pouring out a wine libation over the carcasses of four lions. In the inscription above, the king boasts of his power by saying,I, Ashurbanipal, king of the universe, king of Assyria, whom Assur and Ninlil have endowed with surpassing might. The lions which I slew, the terrible bow of Ishtar, lady of battle, I aimed at them. I brought an offering, I poured out wine over them (Luckenbill 1989, 2:392, ¶ 1021).Once again the king attributes his mighty power to the gods, in this case Assur and Ninlil.In contrast, Ashurbanipal boasts that kings and lions are powerless before him. At the beginning of one of his annals (Cylinder F) he states,Among men, kings, and among the beasts, lions (?)



were powerless before my bow, I know (the art) of waging battle and combat...
A valiant hero, beloved of Assur and Ishtar, of royal lineage, am I (Luckenbill 1989, 2:347, ¶ 896).Dead bodies of the Assyrian enemies (left).The top body has its eyes being plucked out by a vulture, while the bottom body is beheaded. Assyrians forcing their enemies to grind the bones of their dead ancestors (right).Ashurbanipal has tied his lion hunting and military conquests together in one statement.In the vision of Nahum concerning Nineveh, Nahum asks a rhetorical question,Where is the dwelling of the lions, and the feeding place of the young lions, where the lion walked, the lioness and lion’s cub, and no one made them afraid? (2:11).He sees Nineveh as a lions’ den that has been destroyed and the lions are gone. The “prey” in verse 12 is apparently the booty that the Assyrians have taken from all the cities they conquered in recent memory.In verse 13, the LORD states directly,Behold, I am against you. I will burn your chariots in smoke, and the sword shall devour your young lions; I will cut off your prey from the earth, and the voice of your messenger shall be heard no more.The phrase “the sword shall devour your young lions” draws our attention to another relief showing Ashurbanipal thrusting a sword through a lion. The inscription associated with this relief says,I, Ashurbanipal, king of the universe, king of Assyria, in my lordly sport, they let a fierce lion of the plain out of the cage and on foot...I stabbed him later with my iron girdle dagger and he died (Luckenbill 1989, 2:392, ¶ 1024).The book of Nahum sets forth an ironic reversal of the Assyrian usage of the lion motif. Gordon Johnston has observed.The extended lion metaphor in Nahum 2:11–13 includes the two major varieties of the Neo-Assyrian lion motif: the depiction of the Assyrian king and his warriors as mighty lions, and the royal lion hunt theme. While the Assyrians kept these two motifs separate, Nahum dovetailed the two, but in doing so he also reversed their original significance. While the Assyrian warriors loved to depict themselves as mighty lions hunting their prey, Nahum pictured them as lions that would be hunted down. The Assyrian kings also boasted that they were mighty hunters in royal lion hunts; Nahum pictured them as the lions being hunted in the lion hunt. By these reversals Nahum created an unexpected twist on Assyrian usage. According to Nahum the Assyrians were like lions, to be sure; however, not in the way that they depicted themselves; rather than being like lions on the prowl for prey, the hunters would become the hunted! (2001:304).Ashurbanipal stabbing a lion with his sword.Nahum was keenly aware of the culture that he was writing to and was able to effectively use it to convey a powerful message from the LORD.Nineveh, a Bloody City (Na 3:1)Nahum pronounces: “woe to the bloody city (of Nineveh)” (3:1). The city and the Assyrian Empire had a well-earned reputation for being bloody. Just a casual glance at the reliefs from the palaces of Sennacherib and Ashurbanipal shows the “gory and bloodcurdling history as we know it” (Bleibtreu. 1991:52). There are reliefs with people being impaled, decapitated, flayed, and tongues pulled out. Other reliefs show the Assyrians making people grind the bones of their dead ancestors, and even vultures plucking out the eyes of the dead!One panel graphically shows their disrespect for human life. On it, a commander is presenting a bracelet to an Assyrian soldier who had decapitated the five or six heads at his feet. There are two scribes behind him recording the event. This bracelet, perhaps a medal of valor, is worth five or six lives! In Assyrian thinking, life was cheap.Countless Corpses (Na 3:3)There is an old adage that says, “What goes around, comes around.” The Bible would use an agricultural metaphor, “You reap what you sow” (cf. Gal 6:7). This is true in the geo-political realm as well as the personal realm. The Assyrians, over their long history, were brutal and barbaric people. Yet learn french

narratives of Joshua and Judges: the defeat of cities (Josh 11:12; Judg 11:33), the extermination of peoples (Josh 11:20), and the acquisition of land

the service of Moses and Joshua. In the introduction to the king list, a common type of record kept by Ancient Near Eastern (hereafter ANE) conquerors, the text notes that “these are the kings of the land, whom the sons of Israel killed, and whose land they possessed” (Josh 12:1). For the biblical writer of Joshua, the smiting of a king is inextricably bound to the acquisition and possession of his land. Should the writer of Judges be expected to depart from this standard? Surely the territorial land controlled by Hazor was the prize that Israel won, and it could not have been acquired without “military action against Hazor itself.”Thus Wood is exactly correct when stating, “The destruction of Jabin implies the destruction of his capital city Hazor,”[22] unless one were to theorize that the Israelites somehow frightened the entire city’s population into fleeing in panic, never to return. Undoubtedly, Hoffmeier’s aversion to this reality is due to his need to reconcile the archaeological remains at Hazor with the late-Exodus theory, since a destruction under Deborah and Barak would require the archaeology of Hazor to reveal two later destructions—one at the end of the Late Bronze Age, and a subsequent one before the first Israelite occupation—if this theory were to remain credible. Yet as the spade has shown, Hazor—after the destruction of the final Bronze Age city in a massive conflagration—remained completely abandoned until the initial Israelite settlement of the 12th century BC.As for the destruction under Joshua, Josh 11:11 clearly states that “he [Joshua] burned the city [of Hazor] with fire.” Most archaeologists who accept the historicity of the biblical account thus link the massive conflagration of the final Late Bronze Age city of Hazor to the fiery destruction accomplished under Joshua. Moreover, they commonly connect the later story of the seemingly independent defeat of Hazor’s King Jabin, which is recorded in Judges 4, to the destruction described in Joshua 11. Yadin betrays his commitment to this conclusion when he notes that “[t]he narrative in the Book of Joshua is therefore the true historical nucleus, while the mention of Jabin in Judges 4 must have been a later editorial interpolation.”[23] Therefore, at least according to Hazor’s principal excavator, only one Israelite destruction by fire is commonly theorized.[24]However, the picture painted in the biblical text does not allow for such a link between the great conflagration described in Joshua 11 and the destruction of the Late Bronze IIB (ca. 1300–1200 BC) city of Hazor. As biblical chronologist Rodger Young firmly established, 1446 BC is the correct year of the Exodus,[25] and as the present writer demonstrated elsewhere, the Exodus can be dated even more precisely to 25 April, 1446 BC.[26] Thus, the conquest of the Promised Land began in 1406 BC, 40 years after the Exodus (Num 32:13).III. TEXTUAL OBJECTIONS TO JOSHUA 11 AND JUDGES 4 DESCRIBING THE SAME ATTACK1. The Lengthy Gap between Narratives. The first textual objection to the theory that Joshua 11 and Judges 4 describe the same attack is that a large and undeniable gap in time separates the two narratives. The destruction of Hazor under Joshua transpired in ca. 1400 BC, given that the conquest of Canaan—to the extent that it actually was carried out as divinely outlined—required six years to complete.[27] With this date secured, the account of Hazor’s demise in Judges 4 must be dated, even if only approximately, because unquestionably the dating of the period of the judges is one of the most intriguing challenges related to biblical chronology.To begin the determination of the dating, Joshua seemingly died in ca. 1384 BC, and the Israelites’ faithfulness to God extended only to the time of the deaths of the elders who survived him (Josh 24:29, 31).[28] Given that the exact survival-span of these faithful elders cannot be quantified precisely, this period will not be included in the measurement of time between Joshua’s death and the victory over Hazor’s king during the days of Deborah and Barak (Judg 4:24).[29] Assuming that the unfaithful, subsequent generation began immediately after the deaths of the elders of Joshua’s generation who outlived him, the first chronological reference is to eight years of oppression (Judg 3:8), followed by 40 years of rest (Judg 3:11).A second oppression, this one of 18 years (Judg 3:14), was followed by 80 years of rest (Judg 3:30). A third oppression and period of rest, related to Shamgar (Judg 3:31), is not documented as to its duration. This undefined number also may be ignored safely for the purpose of the present study. The final number necessary is 20 years (Judg 4:3) for the period of oppression under “Jabin, King of Canaan, who reigned in Hazor” (Judg 4:1). When all of these numbers are added, the total comes to 166 years. The imprecision of this length of time, already obvious from the above discussion, is further complicated by how the required length of the period of the judges—which totals 341 years, if using Joshua’s death (ca. 1384 BC) for its inception, and the conservative date of ca. 1043 BC for the start of Saul’s reign—does not match evenly with the 410 years derived when adding together all of the years of oppression and rest that transpired throughout the narrative of Judges.[30]This apparent contradiction is resolved simply by understanding that the oppressions and periods of rest, which transpired throughout Israel and at various times, did not run consecutively but concurrently (i.e. with unspecified overlaps).[31] However, another problem arises: the 166 years must be both lengthened by the undefined years of the faithful generation that survived Joshua and by Shamgar’s judgeship, and shortened by the unspecified overlapping of the judgeships. Assuming that the adjustment for the overlapping of the judgeships is somewhat lengthier, 150 years may be used as a rough number for the time between Joshua’s death and the events of Judges 4. This would mean that the latter event occurred in ca. 1234 BC, which matches well with Yadin’s dating of the destruction of the final Bronze Age city. Because the Hazor of Joshua 11 was destroyed in ca. 1400 BC, in this scenario the difference between the two destructions of Hazor would be ca. 166 years.[32] Thus with such a lengthy interval between the events of these two narratives, the demises of Hazor in Joshua 11 and Judges 4 are chronologically far too distant from one another to be fused into a single event.2. The Identification of “Jabin” as a Dynastic Title. The second textual objection to the theory that Joshua 11 and Judges 4 record the same attack on Hazor is that the name “Jabin, King of Hazor” in these independent narratives does not refer to the same king. Yadin asks, “If Joshua, who lived before Deborah, had already destroyed Hazor and killed Jabin, how is it possible that (at least) several decades later, Jabin was still alive and his commander in chief engaged in battle as far away from



Hazor as the valley of Megiddo?
Rosetta Stone Chinese

The Tablet Theory of Genesis Authorship

Tags: JEDP, Genesis, Moses, Tablet Theory, Toledot, Pentateuch, PJ Wiseman--> This article was published in the Winter 1994 issue of Bible and Spade.Many pastors, writers, and even seminary professors rely on the “JEDP Documentary Hypothesis” to explain how the book of Genesis was originally written. This concept says that for many centuries the stories were passed down orally, usually with embellishments or deletions, and were not committed to writing until much later than the events they describe. Naturally, this idea doesn’t tend to inspire confidence in the literal accuracy of the account. Thus it’s favored by theologians of a liberal bent.In contrast, the “Tablet Theory” suggests that portions of Genesis were originally written on clay tablets by men who personally experienced the events described. The tablets were later compiled by Moses. Since the original writers were said to be eye-witnesses, their accounts should be historically accurate. This article briefly describes the development and implications of these two theories.Who Wrote Genesis?We’ll assume that most “good conservative Christians” probably agree that the Bible, at least in its original manuscript, was inspired by God, and is truth. The mechanics of this inspiration have been debated by many scholars, and we won’t go into them in this chapter, except to say that the basis for our belief that the Bible is the true and inspired Word of God lies in this work of the Holy Spirit of God, not the personal knowledge of the human writers. The Bible is not just an ancient piece of human literature.Having said that, the question that remains is “Who were the human authors? How did they know what to write? How did the little historical details get preserved?” Here we’ll restrict our discussion to the book of Genesis, which is the one most often criticised.The first five books of the Bible (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy) are collectively called the Books of the Law, or the Torah, or the Books of Moses. Those last four books have many verses that attribute them directly to Moses. But he’s not even mentioned anywhere in the book of Genesis. Why is this?We’ll try to show in this little chapter that there’s considerable internal evidence, and some archaeological evidence, that Genesis was actually first written in sections, most likely on clay tablets, by a number of different men who were eye-witnesses to the actions described. These men signed their names at the bottom of their respective tablets, and later Moses compiled these tablets into what we call the “book of Genesis.”Why Religious Liberalism?Why did so many theologians become critical of Biblical truth? Do they have any scientific basis for their doubts? Not really. Doubting criticism started on a large scale with G.W.F. Hegel (1770-1831), a German philosopher who taught that religion, like the rest of civilization, developed gradually. He said that primitive “cave-men” began a polytheistic worship of the things around them. Later, he said, higher concepts such as a supreme God evolved in people’s minds.A quasi-scientific basis for retreat from Biblical authority took root when, in 1830, Charles Lyell published “Principles of Geology,” which first described the so-called “Geologic Column.” Here the age of a rock stratum was supposedly given by the types of fossils which it contains. This idea set the stage for Charles Darwin’s publication, in 1859, of his famous “Origin of Species.” His organic evolution theory captured the imagination of most scientists.There is no real technical basis for not believing the Bible as it was written. Nowhere does the Biblical text mention anything that implies evolution, nor is there any Biblical incident that’s been proven definitely wrong. The only reason to doubt the clear text of the Bible is an attempt to compromise with secularism, and its rejection of God. But most evolutionist scientists object just as much to theistic evolution as they do to miraculous creation. And most theologians don’t really understand the principles of evolution—they don’t realize that you can’t just shove God into the secular theory. This compromise attempt doesn’t really work, and it’s a dangerous path to follow.The Documentary HypothesisThese theories all influenced Hegel’s student, the theologian K.H. Graf (1815-1868), and his student Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918). From an idea first proposed by Jean Astruc (1684-1766) they developed the “JEDP Documentary Hypothesis” of higher criticism, which said that the early parts of the Old Testament couldn’t have been written during the times they described.They based this on the belief that writing had not evolved until about 1000 BC.Therefore they assumed wrongly that sagas, epics, poetry etc. which were later used to compile the Bible were passed down orally for millenia.The result was that the early books of the Bible were said to have been written by various unknown teachers during the Divided Kingdom era, beginning about 800 BC, and continued until after the Babylonian Exile.These books are said to have been compiled or redacted from several stories, or documents, each of which could be distinguished by the name used for God. The J-Document used the name Jehovah, the E-Document used Elohim, while the D and P documents were named for Deuteronomic and Priestly. This teaching led many people to lose confidence in the Bible’s authenticity.Archaeological DiscoveriesDid Hegel, Graf, Wellhausen, etc. have any good basis for their JEDP theory? No, there has never been any trace of the “documents” they refer to (Jehovist, Elohist, Deuteronomic, and Priestly), and even in their day there had been some good archaeological finds that contradicted the very basis of their theory— that early writing was unknown. More recently, scholars and archaeologists have uncovered excellent proofs of the truth of the Bible’s historicity.There have been complete libraries uncovered, and enough translations made to confirm Biblical events described in the lives of the patriarchs. Several of these libraries date from long before Abraham’s time. Excavations at Ebla, Mari, and Nuzi have all yielded much confirmation of Old Testament history. The Mari archives contained actual names used in the Bible—Peleg, Terah, Abram, Jacob, Laban, and others. These cannot be linked directly with Biblical characters, but they do show that these names were in use in those early days. The Nuzi archive had some 20,000 clay tablets; many were legal documents describing laws and customs of the land. These explain a number of Biblical incidents that used to seem strange to us, but they were simply the normal customs of that era.The Tablet TheoryDuring his tour of duty in Mesopotamia, where much of the earliest Bible activity took place, Air Commodore P.J. Wiseman became interested in the archaeology of that area, and especially in the many ancient clay tablets that had been dated to long before the time of Abraham. He recognized that they held the key to the original writings of the early Bible, and especially to the Book of Genesis. He published his book in 1936. More recently his son, Professor of Assyriology D.J. Wiseman, updated and revised his father’s book: P.J. Wiseman, “Ancient Records and the Structure of Genesis” (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1985)He found that most of the old clay tablets had “colophon phrases” at the end; these named the writer or owner of the tablet; they had words to identify the subject, and often some sort of dating phrase. If multiple tablets were involved, there were also “catch-lines” to connect a tablet to its next in sequence. Many of these old records related to family histories and origins, which were evidently highly important to those ancient people. Wiseman noticed the similarity of many of these to the sections of the book of Genesis.Many scholars have noticed that Genesis is divided into sections, separated by phrases that are translated &ldquo.

Rosetta Stone Spanish

10 Mar 11 Tax Continuing Education And The New Healthcare Rules

Tax Continuing Education And The New Healthcare RulesBy: Sawyer Adams .... Click author's name to view profile and articles!!!Retargeting by ChangoTweet The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act includes changes in the delivery of health insurance and several new ine tax provisions. The implementation of these new rules over several years is a major focus oftax continuing education for Enrolled Agents and other tax professionals.Coverage ChangesStarting in 2010, an adult child up to age 26 who is unable to obtain health insurance from an employer may remain covered by the employer plan of a parent. This replaces the mon insurance pany provision of not covering any child who reaches age 19 and is not a full time student.Tax CPE courses address how this provision may affect claiming older children as dependents.Also new for 2010 is a provision that health insurance coverage for children cannot be denied solely because of pre-existing health conditions. In addition, health insurance coverage for anyone can no longer be terminated as a consequence of illness.Policy maximums have also been eliminated beginning in 2010. Insurance panies are barred from instituting lifetime caps on coverage.Starting in 2014, insurance panies cannot deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. This provision requires a pooling of risk involving mandatory coverage for everyone. Failure to obtain coverage beginning in 2014 will incur fines based upon individual ines. Financial assistance will bee available for families earning up to $88,200 per year. State operated insurance exchanges in 2014 will provide coverage options in addition to private insurers.For those who have been denied coverage in 2010 due to pre-existing conditions, coverage is available through state-operated high-risk pools. The maximum out-of-pocket cost under this coverage is $5,950 for individuals and $11,900 for families.Starting in 2010, Medicare beneficiaries no longer have out-of-pocket cost for preventative care such as physical exams, testing for treatable conditions, and laboratory work. In addition, the federal government will send $250 to those covered by Medicare to cover prescription drug costs not currently covered by Medicare Part D.However, those with annual ines of $85,000 ($170,000 on joint returns) incur a reduced prescription drug subsidy in 2010. In addition, government subsidies for Medicare Advantage plans are being reduced so those covered by such programs face higher premiums. To assist in tax return preparation, aregistered tax agent must inquire about whether clients received their $250 checks.Tax ProvisionsContinuing professional education (CPE) has several areas to address relating to changing health care rules.Tax CPE courses include information on the new tax credits and additional tax assessments.Tax credits are available for individuals who purchase health insurance through a state-operated exchange. The tax credit program begins in 2014, when each state is required to have established an exchange. The premium assistance credit is available for households with ines between 100 percent and 400 percent of the annual poverty level. Upon enrollment, individuals will report ine to the exchange. A premium assistance credit is then calculated and paid by the federal government to the state. The insured individual then pays the difference between the premium and the credit.Individuals who fail to maintain health insurance coverage in 2014 will be subject to tax penalties. Tax professionals will learn in their CPEethics course that, beginning in 2014, an employer with at least 50 full-time employees during the preceding year must offer all full-time employees and their dependents minimum essential coverage under an employer-sponsored plan. Failure to meet this requirement results in a fine for the employer if any eligible employee enrolls in coverage under a state exchange for which a premium tax credit is allowed to the employee.To assure coverage exists from employer-provided plans, annual W-2 reporting beginning for the 2011 tax year requires disclosure of the value of each employee's health insurance provided by the employer.Small businesses with fewer than 25 employees and average wages of less than $40,000 are eligible for tax credits beginning in 2010. The credit is up to 50 percent of employer contributions for health insurance premiums. Employers with fewer than 10 employees and average wages of less than $20,000 receive a 100 percent credit. Wages paid to five-percent owners of a business (or 2 percent of S corporation shareholders) are excluded from the average calculation.In addition, business are required beginning in 2012 to report on Form 1099 all payments aggregating $600 or more in a calendar year to a single payee, including corporations (other than a payee that is a tax-exempt corporation).For 2010, the maximum adoption credit is increased to $13,170 per eligible child. This increase applies to both non-special needs adoptions and special needs adoptions. Also, the adoption credit is made refundable. The new dollar limit and phase-out of the adoption credit are adjusted for inflation in tax years beginning in 2011.The tax on distributions from a health savings account (HSA) or an Archer medical savings account (MSA) that are not used for qualified medical expenses is increased to 20 percent, effective in 2011.Continuing education tax deductible topics include a new threshold for itemized medical expenses. Beginning in 2013, the threshold is increased to 10 percent of adjusted gross ine. The present threshold is 7.5 percent of AGI.Also beginning in 2013, a new Medicare tax is effective for taxpayers with ine of $200,000 or more ($250,000 for joint tax returns). This is a major change that is being addressed intax continuing education. The tax is 3.8 percent of the lesser of investment ine or a modified adjusted gross ine calculation. For self-employed taxpayers, the same additional Medicare contribution applies to the Medicare ponent of the self-employment tax on ine in excess of the threshold amount.In 2014, flexible spending accounts (FSAs) will have lower contribution limits. The new maximum amount allowed will be $2,500. In addition, fewer expenses will qualify for FSA spending. For example, an FSA withdrawal will no longer be available to cover the cost of over-the-counter drugs.However, employees may use a cafeteria plan for paying premiums under a health care plan offered through a state-operated exchange. This affects employees who receive group coverage through an exchange option provided by their employer plus have cafeteria plans. This provision is also effective beginning in 2014.Article Source: abcarticledirectoryFast Forward Academy is a leading publisher of enrolled agent cpe and continuing education for tax professionals. Access to free ea cpe 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 Using Traffic Exchanges To Promote Affiliate Programs

Using Traffic Exchanges To Promote Affiliate ProgramsBy: Daniel Alan .... Click author's name to view profile and articles!!!Retargeting by ChangoTweet If you're unfamiliar with exchanges, you will want to read this over carefully and consider printing it out.One of the best ways in which you can promote affiliate programs is through various traffic exchanges. Almost all well-defined, robust niches on the Internet have some form of traffic exchange. For instance, casinos, gaming sites, niche forums, and Internet marketing sites all have some form of traffic exchangeHockey Jersey
system. IM, in particular, has dozens of exchanges.A traffic exchange can serve multiple functions; however, in most cases, it does two important things:1) It allows you to surf sites, gain credits, and then cash in those credits; and2) It allows you to put banners or dynamically-generated link boxes on your site that will generate credits, which you can then cash in. Cashing in credits, with most exchanges, results in a certain amount of traffic being drive to your site via the exchange site or via banners on other sites that are members of the exchange.A good place to start when working with traffic exchanges is to determine which ones are most reputable and which ones have reasonable point systems. For instance, some traffic exchanges allow users to cheat and some have bad systems of exchange, which heavily favor paying members over non-members. You will want to find the best possible exchange given the amount of money you are willing to spend and the product you are marketing.Once you have selected an optimal exchange, you will want to determine the best way in which you can use it to maximize the amount of high-quality traffic you extract from it.You will want to answer the following questions to aid yourself in determining this: do I earn credits from impressions or clicks? And do I lose credits based on impressions or clicks?This is important to ask, as different exchanges have different policies on this issue. If you lose credits based on impressions, you will want to make sure that you get the absolute largest amount of clicks per impressions. This will involve over-hyping your ads and creating flashy banners (if they allow them).In contrast, if you are getting charged per click, you will want to make sure your ads ONLY appeal to the most interested buyers. Whichever route you take, make sure that it is matched up with a model for maximum revenue generation.The last thing you will want to consider when using a traffic exchange is precisely what you should promote.You already have a product in mind, probably an affiliate product, but how Pittsburgh Penguins jersey
will you promote it?Will you direct visitors to the affiliate page?Will you direct them to a page on your site, which features the product?Or will you direct them to an opt-in form, which will capture their information and then coax them into buying over a period of time?I personally suggest doing the last or the second and avoiding the first whenever possible.Article Source: http://www.shop-on-sale.com Daniel Alan is the creator of the Perfect Path To Wealth system and an expert at making money online.The Perfect Path To Wealth Affiliate Program is one of the best choices for affiliate marketing offering $33.90 per sale, which is a 75% commission. It is one of the best converting programs around and is free to join.Note: The content of this article solely conveys the opinion of its author, Daniel AlanRetargeting 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 Penguins jersey
Involved In An Online Affiliate Marketing Home Business- By : 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 Washington State-UCLA: Bruins to Win Big After Last Week's Upset

Ronald Martinez/Getty ImagesThis Saturday the UCLA Bruins will try to avoid a major letdown when they host the Washington State Cougars.After starting the season 0-2, the Bruins have knocked off two Top 25 teams, including a major upset over then-No. 7 Texas last week.The Cougars come in on a Reebok New Orleans Saints #9 Drew Brees Realtree camo Jersey
two-game losing streak and were crushed last week at home by USC 50-16.If you are thinking about betting on the game this weekend, the current college football odds have the Bruins favored by 27 points over the Cougars at home.Washington State (1-3, 0-1 Pac-10)The Cougars have not looked good at all to start the season. Outside of a 23-22 win over Montana State, the Cougars haveneven came close to pulling out a win. Last week against the Trojans the Cougars fell behind 28-13 by the end of the first half, and the game was all but over.Quarterback Jake Tuel is pretty much all the offense the Cougars have, as he threw for 222 yards and a touchdown and led the Cougars with 26 yards on the ground. Tuel, however, did have three interceptions in the game, including one that was returned 25 yards for a score.As bad as the offense has been this season, the defense has been even worse, as they canstop anyone from moving the football on them. Last week the Trojans piled up 613 yards of total offense and were an impressive 8-for-12 on third down conversions. The Cougars are allowing 43 points a game this season, and I think they are going to have a hard time keeping the Bruins offense under that this week.UCLA (2-2, 0-1 Pac-10)I am really impressed with the way head coach Rick Neuheisel has gotten his team to respond after a tough loss to open the season on the road against Kansas State and then being absolutely dominated by Stanford in Week 2, 35-0.The Bruins came back with an impressive 31-13 Reebok New York Giants #27 Brandon Jacobs Realtree camo Jersey
win over a very good Houston team, and then last week they stunned everyone by going on the road and beating up on Texas 34-12.The Bruins look like they have the pistol formation all figured out, as they ran all over the Longhorns last week for 264 yards. Johnathan Franklin ran for 118 yards and a touchdown on 19 carries, Derrick Coleman added another 94 yards and a touchdown on 16 carries, and quarterback Kevin Prince added 50 yards and a touchdown on 13 carries.Price attempted just eight passes all game but completed five of them, including a one-yard pass to Ricky Marvray for the Bruins' first score of the game.The defense played lights out against the Longhorns, as they allowed just one touchdown late in the fourth quarter when the game was all but over. Reebok New York Jets #6 Mark Sanchez Realtree camo Jersey
The defense also forced five turnovers against Texas, and that proved to be the deciding factor in this game.Looking at the OddsNo question that 27 points is a lot to ask a team to cover, but as bad as Washington State is this season, I think the Bruins have no trouble winning this game by more than 30. Last year the Bruins went to Washington State and beat the Cougars 43-7, and I see no reason why they cando the same thing at home this weekend. My final score prediction is UCLA 44, Washington State 13.Interested in making some money this college football season? Check out what our expert college football handicappers have to offer in their weekly college football picks.