in Area M during the 2001 season, still clearly observable as of the summer of 2007,[89] measures approximately 1.5 m. from the pavement of the later

time.[91] In addition, since the Israelites remained semi-nomadic residents in Canaan immediately after the conquest, they did not rebuild the city either, and thus cannot be expected to have occupied Hazor.The second clue to substantiate the plausibility of Joshua’s being the destroyer of Late Bronze I Hazor is how this view allows for the veracity of the long period of time implied between the conquest of the city in ca. 1400 BC and the later defeat of the future Canaanite overlord, who is the second jabin of Hazor recorded in the Bible, during the judgeships of Deborah and Barak. The currently-popular solution advocated by Yadin and Ben-Tor, namely that Joshua destroyed and burned down Hazor in the middle or middle third of the 13th century BC, can neither account for all of the historical elements in Joshua 11 and Judges 4, nor satisfy the correlation between the archaeological record and the Bible. The usual solution is either to debunk one of the two biblical accounts as non-historical or to change the order of events through interpolation, as did Yadin.However, the view that Joshua burned down Hazor in ca. 1400 BC naturally accounts for the subsequent yet delayed Canaanite occupation of Hazor (during Late Bronze IIA-IIB/III), as the Israelites—who should not be expected to have inhabited the city anytime soon after its destruction—did not settle in cities such as Hazor. The post-conquest Israelites are well known for their semi-nomadic lifestyle,[92] ingrained in them by 40 years of wandering in the desert (Num 32:13), and for their fear of possessing the territories of their tribal allotments that were administered by Joshua (Josh 17:12; Judg 1:27–2:6; 18:1–31). In contrast to what followed at Hazor after the destruction of the Late Bronze I city, the destruction of Late Bronze IIB/III Hazor was followed by an Israelite occupation during the Iron IA Age (ca. 1200–1150 BC).[93] This archaeologically verifiable fact renders a Late Bronze IIB conflagration under Joshua inconsistent with the subsequent historical information in the Bible, which reveals that another Canaanite city succeeded the one that was destroyed in Joshua’s day.[94]VII. CONCLUSIONAn examination was made of the destruction of 13th century BC Hazor, which has become the trendy era of choice for the conquest of the city described in Joshua 11. The material evidence for the destruction of the Hazor of this period clearly points to the Israelites as the culprits, due in part to the distinct, ritualistic desecration of religious and cultic objects. However, chronologically this destruction fits into the era of the judges, and the context of Judges 4 bears out that not only was the king of Hazor killed, but the city was destroyed and, in large part, burned down by the persistent Israelites. Moreover, the narratives of Joshua 11 and Judges 4 were seen to describe two different encounters, both since their respective episodes were separated in time by over 150 years, and since “jabin” is actually a dynastic title (i.e. loan-word) meaning “king,” implying that these accounts refer to two different monarchs,



And thus two completely independent reigns.
If Hoffmeier is correct that Hazor provides the only possible evidence for a conquest in the 13th century BC, then late-exodus proponents are officially left without any conflagrated cities that lend support to their view.With all of this established, an examination of the archaeological record of the Hazor of the 15th century BC was made, in order to determine whether evidence exists for a fiery destruction that can be harmonized with the date of the Exodus and Conquest as determined by a literal interpretation of 1 Kgs 6:1. Evidence of such a great conflagration was found by Yadin in the lower city, and by Ben-Tor in the upper city, the latter of which occurred during the seasons of 2000 and 2001. Ben-Tor attributes this destruction to Thutmose III, but for several reasons this pharaoh effectively can be eliminated from contention as the actual destroyer: the epigraphical evidence both of conquests under Thutmose III and his son Amenhotep II, and of the subsistence of Hazor nine years after Amenhotep II’s final Asiatic campaign, along with the archaeological evidence both of a large gap in time between the destruction of Hazor at the end of Late Bronze I and the next occupational phase, and of Hazor’s subsistence during the short reign of Amenhotep II’s son and successor, Thutmose IV.No other rivaling nations or Canaanite city-states are legitimate possibilities for the attackers who decimated Late Bronze I Hazor, so ANE history can judge the Israelites only as a perfectly plausible option. In fact, their nomination is supported both by the chronological data in the biblical text, the post-destruction occupational gap, and the long period of time implied between this city’s destruction and the later defeat of the subsequent jabin during the judgeships of Deborah and Barak. Therefore, the only tenable solution for dating the destruction of the Hazor of Joshua 11 is to place it firmly at the close of Late Bronze I, as the biblical narrative matches perfectly with the archaeological evidence that relates both to Late Bronze I and the transition into Late Bronze II. The Israelites were the first occupants of the city after the close of the Late Bronze Age, so the destruction of the final Late Bronze Age city cannot be associated with the destruction of Joshua 11, as another Canaanite occupation and destruction followed that of Joshua’s day, which is made abundantly clear by the narrative in Judges 4. As Wood put it, “The simple (and biblical) solution is that Joshua destroyed an earlier city at Hazor in ca. 1400 BC, while Deborah and Barak administered the coup de grâce in ca. 1230 BC.”[95]This conclusion, borne out by the evidence presented in the preceding discussion, strongly supports the chronological framework of the early-Exodus position, and thus the literal interpretation of numbers such as “480th” in 1 Kgs 6:1. Biblical scholars and teachers would do well to give the biblical text its full day in court before acquiescing to the interpretations of archaeologists or other scholars who use arguments from silence (e.g. the complete lack of material evidence for the Israelite inhabitation of Canaan from 1400–1200 BC) to make claims such as the Israelites’ inability to have occupied the Promised Land before the 13th century BC, especially since such conclusions fan the flames of non-inerrantist, liberal scholars determined to undermine the historicity of the Bible. As Aharoni warned, “Don’t reject the historicity of the Biblical text so easily.”[96] The Bible should be interpreted literally, whenever possible, even though popular scholarship may tempt biblical scholars to take the easy road by reverting to allegorism when interpretive difficulties are encountered or when the pressure to fall in line with the consensus of the scholarly world seems too daunting to overcome.No cuneiform tablet has yet emerged at Hazor—nor may one ever surface, even if an archive is found—that reads, “Joshua has arrived!” But relanguage software

According to Aharoni,The failure of the first campaign

may be inferred by Amenhotep II’s setting out two years later on a second campaign in order to put down revolts in the Sharon and in the Jezreel Valley.”109 Aharoni sees in A1 an excursion that never accomplished its primary mission: the conquest of Mitanni. Grimal concurs, noting that “these two campaigns were the last to pit Egypt against Mitanni.”110The first problem with this view is its dependence on the three-campaign theory, since Aharoni assumes that a Year-7 campaign was fought two years prior to the Year-9 campaign. However, there was no Year-7 campaign, as the “first campaign” of the Memphis Stele actually occurred in Year 3. Given the six-year gap between the two campaigns, the theory that A2 was launched to rectify the failures of A1 crumbles from within, due to the longevity of the interval. Of even greater weight, the failure of A1 would have resulted in another campaign directed principally into Syria, if not into Mitannian territory further to the north, not simply a brief raid into southern Palestine that accomplished little more than the acquisition of slaves and booty.b. The Second Asiatic Campaign Launched to Replenish Egypt after Their Losses.The second theory for the motive of A2 is that it was launched to replenish the Egyptian slave base and many of the valuable commodities that were lost when the Israelites plundered and fled Egypt. According to this theory, pharaoh’s motive is related to the exodus. If the exodus and Amenhotep II’s Year-9 campaign transpired in the same year, which is highly possible given the chronological harmonization demonstrated earlier, a brief campaign into southern Palestine to recover some of his critical losses would be both logical and expected. The feasibility of this theory will be determined by a study of the details related to A2.6. The Unique, Pre-Winter Launching of the Second Asiatic Campaign.The date of Year 9, Month 3, Season 1, Day 25 (or ca. 16 November 1446 BC) recorded on the Memphis Stele represents either the Egyptian army’s launching date from Memphis or the arrival date at their first destination, though more likely the latter. Either way, in antiquity a November date represents an extremely odd time for a military campaign. “The present date would fall in the early part of November, an unusual season for an Egyptian campaign in Asia.”111 The reason for November being an unusual launch-time is that the campaign would be fought throughout the cold, rainy winter, when ancient monarchs typically remained within their borders, dealt with internal affairs, and planned for springtime military campaigns.112 The Biblical text confirms the normalcy of springtime launchings: “Then it happened in the spring, at the time when kings go out to battle, that Joab led out the army and ravaged the land of the sons of Ammon, and he came and besieged Rabbah” (1 Chr 20:1).Der Manuelian comments on A1, “Hardly one to break with the blossoming military tradition of the early New Kingdom, Amenophis set out in April of his seventh year, the preferred season for embarking on such ventures.”113 Vandersleyen contrasts this with the unprecedented timing of A2: “The second Asiatic campaign began on the 25th day of the 3rd month (akhet) of the 9th year, during an unusual season for military campaigns. It was probably induced by the necessity of urgent intervention.”114 Amenhotep II’s decision to lead an attack force into Palestine in November was extremely unorthodox, so obviously the situation did require urgent Egyptian intervention, which Vandersleyen perceptively notes. But in what did Amenhotep II need to intervene? Unlike A1, which was launched to quell a rebellion, A2 had no obvious occasion.7. The Contrast between the Two Asiatic Campaigns Launched by Amenhotep II.Marked differences exist between A1 and A2. The names of the geographical sites on A1 are mostly unknown, and those that are considered known are too far apart to belong to one region. In contrast, the sites mentioned on A2 are located only in Central Palestine, between Aphek and Anaharath. When comparing the courses of both campaigns, the disproportionate nature of the two routes is striking, as the locations on A1 are distant and scattered, while the sites on A2 are nearby and closely positioned in relation to one another.115 Moreover, every early campaign of Thutmose III through his illustrious eighth campaign into Mesopotamia, which represents the maximum extent of Egypt’s expansionism, pushed further into foreign territory. In contrast, A1 and A2 followed exactly the opposite trend, going from an itinerary further away from to closer to Egypt.8. The Drastic Change in Foreign-Policy after the Second Asiatic Campaign of Amenhotep II.Another oddity of A2 is that after its conclusion, the Egyptian army—established by Thutmose III as the 15th century BC’s most elite fighting force—went into virtual hibernation. Their previous policy of unwavering aggressiveness toward Mitanni became one of passivity and the signing of peace treaties. The reason for this new policy is missing from the historical record, but Amenhotep II evidently was the pharaoh who first signed a treaty with Mitanni, subsequent to A2.116 Redford connects this event to “the arrival (after year 10, we may be sure) of a Mitannian embassy sent by [Mitanni’s King] Saussatar with proposals of ‘brotherhood’ (i.e., a fraternal alliance and renunciation of hostilities).”117 Redford adds that “Amenophis II seemed susceptible to negotiations,” and that he “was apparently charmed and disarmed by the embassy from ‘Naharin,’ and perhaps even signed a treaty.”118 Yet such a treaty is completely out of character for imperial Egypt and this prideful monarch, especially since “the pharaonic state of the Eighteenth Dynasty could, more easily than Mitanni, sustain the expense of periodic military incursions 800 km into Asia.”119 Support for Amenhotep II being the first to sign a pact with Mitanni is found in the actions of Thutmose IV: “Only by postulating a change of reign can we explain a situation in which the new pharaoh, Thutmose IV, can feel free to attack Mitannian holdings with impunity.”120 Why would Amenhotep II do the unthinkable, and opt to make a treaty with Mitanni?This mysterious reversal in foreign policy would remain unexplainable and unthinkable if not for the possibility of a single, cataclysmic event. If the Egyptians lost virtually their entire army in the springtime disaster at the Red Sea in Year 9, a desperate reconnaissance campaign designed to “save face” with the rest of the ancient world and to replenish their Israelite slave-base would be paramount. Certainly the Egyptians would have needed time to rally their remaining forces together, however small and/or in shambles their army may have been, and it would explain a November campaign that was nothing more than a slave-raid into Palestine as a show of force. The Egyptians could not afford to live through the winter without the production that was provided by the Hebrew workforce, and they could not allow Mitanni or any other ancient power to consider using the winter to plan an attack on Egyptian territories, which would seem vulnerable. If this scenario represents what actually transpired in ANE history, however, tangible proof is needed to verify its veracity.VII. THE LOSS OF THE EGYPTIAN SLAVE-BASEAccording to Num 1:45–46, the Israelites’ post-exodus, male population over 20 years old totaled 603,550, which does not include the 22,000 Levite males of Num 3:39. When women and children are added, they well would have exceeded 2,000,000 people.121 A populace of this magnitude must have provided the backbone of the Egyptian slave-force, given both their vast numbers and rigorous labors (Exod 1:11–14). To most Egyptology students, however, the exodus-narrative is considered little more than a fanciful folktale designed to impress Jewish children with grand illusions of a glorious, ethnic past. The virtual absence of historical and archaeological evidence to verify the Israelite



language learning

occupation and mass exodus from Egypt serves only to bolster this skepticism.

One prominent Egyptologist suggests that to the historian, [the exodus] remains the most elusive of all the salient events of Israelite history. The event is supposed to have taken place in Egypt, yet Egyptian sources know it not. . . . The effect on Egypt must have been cataclysmic—loss of a servile population, pillaging of gold and silver (Exod. 3:21–22, 12:31–36), destruction of an army—yet at no point in the history of the country during the New Kingdom is there the slightest hint of the traumatic impact such an event would have had on economics or society.122 But is there truly no hint of a traumatic impact on Egypt?1. The Absence of an Exodus-Account in the Egyptian Records. Redford alludes to the most popular reason for rejecting the veracity of the exodus, namely that nowhere in Egypt’s vast records is there any documentation of it. However, this dearth can be explained by the lack of Egyptian censuses and the tendency to write comparatively little about foreigners, especially slaves.123 Nonetheless, the Hebrew slaves not only exited Egypt en masse, but they were responsible for the extermination of pharaoh’s vast army, the mightiest military force on earth at the time. Yet the proud Egyptians should not be expected to have documented their own humiliating defeat, which would smear their records and tarnish the glorious legacy left behind by Thutmose III. Kitchen articulates this principle with an example from a later pharaoh: “No pharaoh ever celebrates a defeat! So, if Osorkon [I] had ever sent out a Zerah [the Cushite], with resulting defeat, no Egyptian source would ever report on such an incident, particularly publicly. The lack (to date) of external corroboration in such a case is itself worth nothing, in terms of judging history.”124Such a non-reporting of personal defeat would be standard practice for Amenhotep II. Aharoni observes, “Amenhotep [II]—more than any other pharaoh—set up monuments to glorify his personal valor, passing over, however, some of the major but less complementary events of his campaigns, especially his defeats.”125 Amenhotep II spared no effort to portray himself as a great warrior who could pierce metal targets with his bow and arrow during shooting practice.126 He combined strength with a cruelty intended to demoralize his enemies,127 which the Amada Stele affirms: “His strength is so much greater than (that of) any king who has ever existed, raging like a panther when he courses through the battlefield; there is none fighting before him; . . . trampling down those who rebel against him, instantly prevailing against all the barbarians with people and horses.”128 A king with such enormous pride cannot be expected to have commissioned his scribes to preserve the exodus-tragedy in the annals of Egyptian history for subsequent generations to read and memorialize.2. The Booty Lists from the Asiatic Campaigns of Amenhotep II and Thutmose III.Redford declares that “at no point in the history of the country during the New Kingdom is there the slightest hint of the traumatic impact [that] such an event” as the “loss of a servile population” must have had upon Egypt.129 This bold declaration must be strongly contested. At the conclusion of both campaign narratives recorded on the Memphis Stele, the scribe meticulously listed the spoils, with their quantities, that were taken as plunder. By comparing the booty lists recorded after the conquests of Amenhotep II and Thutmose III, it will be seen whether A2 is distinguished among these campaigns, and if it might attest to the exodus or the post-exodus events. The focus of A2 was upon the spoils that Amenhotep II reaped. “A record of the plunder that his majesty carried off: 127 princes of Retenu; 179 brothers of princes; 3,600 Apiru; 15,200 Shasu; 36,300 Kharu; 15,070 Nagasuites/Neges; 30,652 of their family members; total: 89,600 people, and their endless property likewise; all their cattle and endless herds; 60 chariots of silver and gold; 1,032 painted chariots of wood; 13,500 weapons for warfare.”130 Regarding the “89,600” total prisoners, the sum is actually 101,128 when the numbers are added.131 The error may be a mere mistake in addition, as the individual numbers are probably more reliable than the recorded sum.132 Therefore, a final tally of 101,128 is preferred over 89,600 for the total number of prisoners. Before contrasting A2 with other contemporary campaigns, it should be noted that the Egyptians confiscated 1,082 chariots, which, along with the 13,500 weapons, would be critical for replacing the “600 select chariots and all the other chariots of Egypt” that were lost in the Red Sea (Exod 14:7).The military campaigns of Thutmose III, which derive from The Annals of Thutmose III, also will be abbreviated: his first Asiatic campaign (T1), sixth (T6), and seventh (T7). The prisoners taken on the various campaigns are compiled as follows: T1 = 5,903 captives; T6 = 217 captives; T7 = 494 captives; A1 = 2,214 captives; and A2 = 101,128 captives.133 The most glaring detail is obviously the disparity between the number of captives taken during A2 versus the other four campaigns, which together averaged 2,207 prisoners, or 2.2% of the prisoners taken during A2. Put differently, A2 yielded 46-times more prisoners than all of the other campaigns combined! Why is there such a tremendous disparity? Is it merely coincidental that such a vast number of prisoners was taken during the last Asiatic campaign of the 18th Dynasty? If the exodus and A2 occurred in the same year, Amenhotep II would have had just cause to launch a November campaign, as he desperately would need to fill the enormous void left behind by the evacuation of the Hebrew slaves.1343. The Goal of Amenhotep II to Impress the Kings of Egypt’s Rival Empires.Other information on the booty lists may attest to the connection betweenA2 and the events of theexodus. Now when the Prince of Naharin, the Prince of Hatti, and the Prince of Shanhar heard of the great victories that I had made, each one tried to outdo his competitor in offering gifts, from every foreign land. They thought on account of their grandfathers to beg his majesty for the breath of life to be given to them: ‘We will carry our taxes to your palace, son of Re, Amenhotep (II), divine ruler of Heliopolis, ruler of rulers, a panther who rages in every foreign land and in this land forever.’135 Amenhotep II makes the fascinating statement that the King of Mitanni, the King of the Hittites, and the King of Babylon all “heard of the victories” that he had accomplished in southern Palestine. This reference to the affect of a military campaign upon kings of distant nations, all of whom ruled empires in their own right, is unique among contemporary Egyptian booty lists and annals.Why was Amenhotep II so concerned with how these kings viewed his Year-9 conquests? Not many propositions suffice, especially considering the exceedingly limited scope of A2. Yet if he needed to save face after the devastating loss of his army, a victorious campaign could convince his rivals of his continued ability to wage war successfully. Joshua notes that the Lord “dried up the waters” of the Red Sea expressly so that “all the peoples of the earth may know that the hand of the Lord is mighty” (Josh 4:23, 24). This goal was realized even 40 years after the exodus, as Rahab of Jericho testified that “all the inhabitants of the land . . . have heard how the Lord dried up the water of the Red Sea” (Josh 2:9, 10), and as the Hivites of Gibeon told Israel of “the fame of the Lord your God,” since they “heard the report of Him and all that He did in Egypt” (Josh 9:9). Thus news of the exodus also would have spread to the distant empires that posed a threat to Egypt’s expanded domain.4. A Summary of Egypt’s Losses after the Exodus. Thus Amenhotep II’s boasting to his rival kings, the weapons and chariots taken as booty, and the disproportion of slaves taken during A2, when considered together,


Rosetta Stone Spanish

r. Luke links the birth of the Lord Jesus with the reign of Caesar Augustus (Luke 2:1). Unbeknownst to Caesar Augustus, the decree that he made for th

swaddling cloth, lying in a manger! Hardly the sign one would expect for the birth of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords who would one day rule the world. There was an interesting Greek inscription found in Priene in western Asia Minor (modern day Turkey). Part of this lengthy 84 line inscription said: Since the Providence which has ordered all things and is deeply interested in our life has set in most perfect order by giving us Augustus, whom she filled with virtue [divine power] that he might benefit mankind, sending him as a savior, both for us and for our descendents, that he might end war and arrange all things, and since he, Caesar, by his appearance [“epiphany,” often used of Hellenistic rulers] (excelled even our anticipations), surpassing all previous benefactors, and not even leaving to posterity any hope of surpassing what he has done, and since the birthday of the god Augustus was the beginning for the world of the good tidings [gospel] that came by reason of him (Boring, Berger, and Colpe 1995: para. 225). The Greek transcript of the whole inscription can be found in Dittenberger 1905:48-60; Inscription 458. The original is on display in the Berlin Museum and consists of two blocks of different types of stone. The upper block is blue limestone, while the lower one is while marble (Sherk 1969:329; For photographs, see Deissmann 1995; Figs. 70 and 71, between pages 366 and 367). This inscription was executed in 9 BC after “Paullus Fabius Maximus, proconsul of Asia, wrote to the provincial assembly urging the council to adopt the natal day of Augustus as the beginning of the official year in the province, and to change from the lunar to the solar reckoning of the Julian calendar. The assembly adopted the recommendation enthusiastically as a means of conferring honor upon the deified emperor. Copies of the decree were ordered to be engraved and set up in different cities” (Abbott and Johnson 1968: 331). Fragments of this inscription have also been found in Apamea (Latin fragments), Dorylaeum, Eumenia and Maeonia. My sanctified imagination chuckles at the thought of this Angel of the Lord watching the workmen at Priene chisel this inscription in the white marble and saying to himself: “You just wait! Three more years and the real epiphany will take place and good tidings will be given because Jesus will be born. He will be the true Savior of the World and also the Messiah and Lord, not Caesar Augustus!” After the shepherds were instructed as to where to find the Messiah, a multitude of the heavenly host appeared praising God and saying, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, goodwill toward men!” (Luke 2:14). The peace that the angels spoke about was not the Pax Romana, but a peace that only God could give. Today we hear much about the “separation of church and state” in the news, but believe it or not, this so-called separation is not found in the Constitution! The angelic announcement demonstrates that God is blatantly involved in the political affairs of the Roman Empire.



These statements by the angels are a polemic against Caesar Augustus,
and his foreign policies. Jesus is LORD and one day He will rule the world with justice and righteousness and only then will true peace prevail. Almost 12 years after the death of Caesar Augustus in AD 14, the Lord Jesus identified with His Covenant People, Israel, when He went to the Jordan River and was immersed into the water by John the Baptizer (Luke 3:21, 22). [Remember this: John was not a Baptist, he was a Jew!] The Spirit of God led the Lord Jesus into the Wilderness in order for Him to be tested (Luke 4:1). Satan picked up a rock and said: “If You are the Son of God, command this stone to become bread” (Luke 3:3). Here is a hint at what Caesar Augustus did for the people of Rome. He gave them bread and games. His policy was to feed and entertain the people so that they would like him. Jesus rebuked Satan by saying: “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God” (Luke 3:4). Jesus points out to Satan that there is more to life than just food and entertainment. One must be obedient to the Word of God. When Jesus delivered His “Sermon on the Mount” He taught His disciples to pray, “Give us this day, our daily bread” (Matt. 6:11). He then goes on to give a commentary on what we commonly call the “Lord’s prayer” (Matt. 6:14-7:6). His commentary on the daily bread concept is found in Matt. 6:25-34. Jesus said not to be anxious, like the Gentiles, about what they are going to eat, drink or wear, but if they would seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness, then all these things (food, clothing and drink) will be added to them (Matt. 6:31-33). For the believer in the Lord Jesus, we should be seeking God in our daily life and living for Him. Jesus is again tested by Satan when He is taken to a high mountain and shown all the kingdoms of the world (Luke 4:5). Satan again tempts Jesus by saying, “All this authority I will give You, and their glory; for this has been delivered to me, and I give it to whomevRosetta Stone

mystery man who informed him of a fifth anchor

And a sixth anchor found off the Munxar Reef.After his investigations, the author had a problem. He had no tangible proof of the anchor stocks to show the world. The first of the anchor stocks was melted down; the second, third and fourth were in private collections; and the fifth and six had been sold. According to the Maltese antiquities law, it was illegal for the private citizens to have the anchor stocks in their possession, a fear expressed by each diver/family that told their stories about the anchor stocks in his or its possession (Cornuke 2003: 108, 112, 126). A strategy, however, was devised that would get those who possessed the anchor stocks to reveal them to the public. The aid of the US ambassador to Malta, Kathy Proffitt, was enlisted to convince the President and Prime Minister of Malta to offer an amnesty to anyone who would turn over antiquities found off the Munxar Reef (2003: 221-223). The pardons were issued on September 23, 2002. This resulted in two anchor stocks being turned over to the authorities. Now the book could be written. Thorough Research?When I first read the book, I was disappointed to find that Mr. Cornuke does not interact with, or mention, some very important works on the subject of Paul’s shipwreck; nor are they listed in his bibliography. The classic work on this subject is James Smith’s The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul. In fact, the noted New Testament and classical scholar, F. F. Bruce said this book was "an indispensable handbook to the study of this chapter [Acts 27]" (1981: 499), and elsewhere, "This work remains of unsurpassed value for its stage-by-stage annotation of the narrative of the voyage" (1995: 370, footnote 9). Yet nowhere in his book does Mr. Cornuke mention Smith’s work or even discuss the information contained therein. Nor is there any mention of George Musgrave’s, Friendly Refuge (1979), or W. Burridge’s, Seeking the Site of St. Paul’s Shipwreck (1952). There are some scholars who do not believe Paul even was shipwrecked on the island of Malta. Nowhere in Mr. Cornukes’ "Lost Shipwreck" is there an acknowledgment or even a discussion of the Dalmatia or Greek sites.James Smith identifies the place of landing as St. Paul’s Bay, others suggest different beaches within the bay. Musgrave suggested the landing was at Qawra Point at the entrance to Salina Bay. Burridge places the shipwreck in Mellieha Bay. Those who reject the island of Malta as the place of the shipwreck point out that the Book of Acts uses the Greek word "Melite" (Acts 28:1). There were two "Melite’s" in the Roman world: Melite Africana, the modern island of Malta, and Melite Illyrica, an island in the Adriatic Sea called Mljet in Dalmatia (Meinardus 1976: 145-147). A recent suggestion for the shipwreck was the island of Cephallenia in Greece (Warnecke and Schirrmacher 1992).Did the sea captain and crew recognize the land? (Acts 27:39)Luke states, "When it was day, they did not recognize the land; but they observed a bay with a beach" (Acts 27:39a). The sea captain and the sailors could see the shoreline, but did not recognize the shoreline and where they were. It was only after they had gotten to land that they found out they were on the island of Malta (Acts 28:1).Lionel Casson, one of the world’s leading experts on ancient nautical archaeology and seafaring, describes the route of the Alexandrian grain ships from Alexandria in Egypt to Rome. In a careful study of the wind patterns on the Mediterranean Sea and the account of Lucian’s Navigation that gives the account of the voyage of the grain ship Isis, he has demonstrated that the ship left Alexandria and headed in a northward direction. It went to the west of Cyprus and then along the southern coast of Asia Minor (modern day Turkey) and headed for Knidos or Rhodes. The normal route was under (south of) the island of Crete and then west toward Malta. Thus the eastern shoreline of Malta was the recognizable landmark for them to turn north and head for Syracuse, Sicily and on to Puteoli or Rome (1950: 43-51; Lucian, The Ship or the Wishes; LCL 6: 431-487).Mr. Cornuke correctly states: "Malta itself was well visited as a hub of trade during the time of the Roman occupation and would have been known to any seasoned sailor plying the Mediterranean" (2003: 31). Any seasoned sailor coming from Alexandria would clearly recognize the eastern shoreline of Malta.He also properly identified two of the many ancient harbors on Malta as being at Valletta and Salina Bay (2003: 32). The ancient Valletta harbor was much further inland in antiquity and is called Marsa today, and is at the foot of Corradino Hill (Bonanno 1992: 25). Roman storehouses with amphorae were discovered in this region in 1766-68 (Ashby 1915: 27-30). When Alexandrian grain ships could not make it to Rome before the sea-lanes closed for the winter, they wintered on Malta (see Acts 28:11). They would off load their grain and store them in the storehouses of Marsa (Gambin 2005). Sea captains coming from Alexandria would be very familiar with the eastern shoreline of Malta before they entered the harbor of Valletta.The city of Melite was the only major city on Roman Malta, there were however, villas and temples scattered throughout the countryside. Today Melite lies under the modern city of Mdina / Rabat. The main harbor for Melite was Marsa, not Salina Bay (Said-Zammit 1997: 43,44,132; Said 1992: 1-22).Diodorus Siculus, a Greek historian who lived in the First Century BC, states regarding Malta: "For off the south of Sicily three islands lie out in the sea, and each of them possesses a city and harbours which can offer safety to ships which are in stress of weather. The first one is that called Melite [Malta], which lies about eight hundred stades from Syracuse, and it possesses many harbours which offer exceptional advantages." (Library of History 5:12:1-2; LCL 3: 129). Note his description, "many harbors." Many includes more than just two; so where are the rest?Knowledge of Arabic can give us a clue. The word "marsa" is the Arabic word for harbor (Busuttil 1971: 305-307). There are at least three more harbors that can be added to the list. The Marsamxett harbor within the Grand Harbor of Valletta; Marsascala Bay just north of St. Thomas Bay; and Marsaxlokk Bay in the southeast portion of Malta all would be Roman harbors. The last bay was a major Roman harbor / port that served the famous Temple of Juno on the hill above it and was also a place for ships to winter.Any ancient Mediterranean Sea captain, or seasoned sailor on the deck of a ship anchored off the Munxar Reef, immediately would recognize the eastern shoreline of Malta with these Roman harbors and anchorages. Malta was the landmark for sailors traveling from Crete and about to turn north to Sicily. The eastern end of the island would be what they saw first and it would be a welcome sight.There are at least four recognizable points that could be seen from the outer Munxar Reef had this been the exact spot of the shipwreck of Paul as Mr. Cornuke argues. The first was the entrance to Marsaxlokk Bay where a Roman harbor / port was, the second, the entrance to Marsascala Bay where another Roman harbor was located. The third point would be the dangerous Munxar Reef (or small islands or peninsula in the 1st century AD) that any sea captain worth his salt would recognize because of its inherent danger. The final point, and most important, was the site known today as Tas-Silg. This was a famous temple from the Punic / Roman period dedicated to one goddess known by different names by the various ethnic groups visiting the island. She was Tanit to the Phoenicians, Hera to the Greeks, Juno to the Romans, and Isis to the Egyptians (Trump 1997: 80, 81; Bonanno 1992: Plate 2 with a view of St. Thomas Bay in the background).In preparation for my January 2005 trip to Malta I studied this important temple. It was a landmark for sailors coming from the east. Could this temple be seen from the outer Munxar Reef? On the first day I arrived in Malta, Tuesday, January 11, a fellow traveler and I went to visit the excavations.

Rosetta Stone Greek

10 Mar 11 Two Excellent Films With Oscar Nominations

Two Excellent Films With Oscar NominationsBy: Ed Bagley .... Click author's name to view profile and articles!!!Retargeting by ChangoTweet A Man for All Seasons poses the question: What would a man sacrifice for his principles?When Henry VIII seeks approval to divorce his wife Catherine of Aragon and marry Anne Boleyn, the Pope stands in his way, and his new Chancellor and Cardinal--Sir Thomas More--stands in his way as well, leading to England's split from the Roman Catholic Church and the creation of the Anglican Church, the Church of England.Henry VIII wants Sir Thomas More's blessing in his action, but does not get it as Sir Thomas feels pelled to stand upon his principles and do the right thing.Henry VIII gets every person of any consequence in England to sign an oath (the Act of Supremacy), endorsing his action, except Sir Thomas, who will not sign, and remains silent as to the reason why he will not sign.This movie (made in 1966, the year I graduated from Michigan State University) won 6 Oscars in 1967, among them Best Picture, Best Actor and Best Director. A Man for All Seasons is a period piece with exacting details of the day and time. Sir Thomas More is a scholar and statesman who bees the leading humanist of the Renaissance Era.A Man for All Seasons is a story about everything that is right in England and life (Sir Thomas More's integrity to his principles) and everything that is wrong in England and life (greed, avarice, lust, lying, cheating, stealing, the corruption of power, and the corruption of religious leaders).In the end, Sir Thomas is the only person in England who will die for his principles, and mit himself to God's hands for judgment. He is betrayed by an ambitious, lower level appointed attorney general, Richard, whose outright lie condemns Sir Thomas to be beheaded.Sir Thomas More loses his head (no pun intended) but most importantly, not his soul. Sir Thomas is later canonized as Saint Thomas More by the Roman Catholic Church. Henry VIII subsequently dies of syphilis, and the evil Thomas Cromwell (who orchestrates Thomas' demise) is himself judged a traitor to England 5 years later and is beheaded.This movie does not deviate from the truth of Sir Thomas More's stance, and as such provides a role model for acting with right thinking and right motives, even at the cost of one's life.The Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl has to be the best pirate movie ever made, earning 5 Oscar nominations, and Johnny Depp (as Captain Jack Sparrow) delivered the best pirate performance ever.Depp earned a Best Actor nomination following release of the film in 2003, but did not win, of course, because he chooses not to live in Hollywood and practice the art of kissing up, sucking up, and putting on a public display of importance, like I care what actors think about politics.Johnny Depp looks and acts like a pirate you could like, and his wearing of the costume and persona is second to none (Savvy, Mate).This story is really about Captain Jack Sparrow losing his ship (The Black Pearl), and then embarking on a quest to find and win The Black Pearl back from his rival Barbossa (played by Geoffrey Rush) while helping save the governor's daughter Elizabeth Swan (Keira Knightly) from fellow pirates along the way.Also chasing Elizabeth is the dashing Will Turner (Orlando Bloom), who enlists the aid of Captain Jack Sparrow to find her kidnappers.This film is littered with interesting characters who collectively help make this film great entertainment under the direction of Gore Verbinski. The Curse of the Black Pearl has great writing, directing, acting, photography, suspense, action, surprise and a musical score to match.And the end? A man finding his freedom with the ship he loves. What could be better?The Curse of the Black Pearl became the 22nd highest grossing film in USA film history, pretty improbable for a pirate flick, but then there is Johnny Depp as Captain Jack Sparrow. I have seen this film three times and would see it a fourth, which is really saying something for me.Article Source: abcarticledirectoryEd Bagley is the Author of Ed Bagley's Blog, which he Publishes Daily with Fresh, Original Articles on Internet Marketing, Jobs and Careers, Movie Reviews, Sports and Recreation, and Lessons in Life intended to Delight, Inform, Educate and Motivate Readers. Visit Ed at . . .edbagleyblogMovieReviewArticles.htmledbagleyblogLessonsinLifeArticles.htmledbagleyblogInternetMarketingArticles.htmlNote: The content of this article solely conveys the opinion of its author, Ed BagleyRetargeting 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 Movies Film via RSS!Additional Articles From - Home Arts Movies FilmWhy Calibrate your High Definition TV?- By : Robert ShefferSweet Phone - By : Tim Webb.Find out Home Theater Methods! What You have Been Missing in Your TV and Movie Encounter.- By : Joesph MellbergPreparing and Setting up a Home Theater system is Easier Than you Think!- By : Zachariah DivensGrown Ups 2010 Movie In Review- By : Elenor CherryCamera Crew Hire- By : Mark A. WilsonReview of Drive Angry Movie- By : Gursel BatmazReturn Of The Horror Legend: Scream 4- By : Gursel BatmazMovie Review: Clash Of The Titans Leaves Audiences Wanting- By : Elenor CherryRed Riding Hood The Movie- By : Gursel Batmaz Still Searching? Last Chance to find what you're looking for. Try using Bing Search!

5 Mar 11 How Being Nice To Customers Will Boost Your Business Sales

How Being Nice To Customers Will Boost Your Business SalesBy: Brian Wynn .... Click author's name to view profile and articles!!!Retargeting by ChangoTweet As with running any business, you have to treat the customer with respect in order to maintain a solid business relationship. Even though you are running anNHL Jersey
internet home business, you will still need to take care of your customers so that they will return again and again. Show excellent customer service and you will find that loyal customers will tell their friends and family about your web site, which could mean even more sales. But how to do you interact with customers online? Start with an email list and work from there.Once your email list has grown, you should begin by sending everyone on the list a 'thank-you' email. This will not only remind people that they signed up on your list, it will also make them feel appreciated and cause them to visit your web site again. Acknowledging people is a good selling tool. You can do this by simply sending a short email using the customer's first name and signing it with your name, company name, and web site address.In order to make money online, you will have to connect with those who are visiting your web site. Newsletters or a short email that lists what's new on your web site is usually enough to generate more traffic. By sending your customers free information that they can use is a way of promoting your web site without being rude or obnoxious. If your email list is small, you could send personalized product lists to your customers that highlight products that are the same or similar to what they have purchased before. This is another way that you can provide good customer service online.But what if you want to reach those who have not signed-up for your emailing list? The answer is to create web content that is informative and interesting to those visiting the web site. If you provide good content with pictures in a way that is logical and easy to follow, you will create customer loyalty. You have the ability to make customers feel comfortable by providing them with a web site that is easy to navigate, easy on the eyes, and updated often. Neglect your web site and you will be neglecting your customers.If you provide a page where customers can ask questions, another way to improve customer service is to answer all questions within a day. Quick Washington Capitals jersey
responses will tell customers that you are interested in their business and that you want to make them comfortable when buying from the web site. Even if the question can be answered by looking on the web site, you should still take the time to answer it in a professional and casual manner.Customer service is one of the best ways to stand out from your competition and create an internet home business that you can be proud of. Catering to your customers will improve sales and increase return business. Even though you cannot stand face to face with your customers, you can still make them feel comfortable and safe buying goods and services from your web site.Article Source: http://www.shop-on-sale.com The Millionaire League, founded by Brian Wynn, is the only millionaire's club that shows you how to become one! Just imagine waking up to $1,000+ every morning! Stop dreaming about making money and make money while you sleep instead! Visit www.TheMillionaireLeague.comNote: The content of this article solely conveys the opinion of its author, Brian WynnRetargeting 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 Capitals jersey
Tips For Individuals 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!