۱۳۹۰ آذر ۵, شنبه

"The Archaeological Evidence for the Bible is Non-Existent!"




By James F. Williams

The archaeological evidence of the Bible is scarce. In fact, it is non-existent. After 200 years of Christian archaeologists digging up the whole Middle East, they haven't found any proof of the Exodus of the Jews from Egypt, Hebrew Slaves or the Ten Plagues. NONE!!! And this from a nation of people who wrote EVERYTHING down in stone!! And Sinai has no proof of any large group of people travelling through it EVER!!! The first evidence correlating to the biblical story doesn't appear in Canaan archaeology until around 100 years before the Babylonian Captivity (around 600 BC).
This lack of evidence includes persons such as David and Solomon who should be recorded in other nations and supposedly lived relatively close to those who wrote the Bible in the Babylonian Captivity around 500 B.C.

In the words of Shakespeare, "Methinks thou dost protest too much." It is true that we would like to have more archaeological evidence than we now have. But of course, from an archaeologist's perspective, this is always the case. Further, your assertion that no evidence exists, is an overstatement which cannot be substantiated. And it is not accepted by the majority of those scholars who are active in the Levant. I would suspect that you are reading a narrow spectrum of archaeologists who support your desired conclusions. And there are many European and Israeli archaeologists along with Christian ones who do not share your opinion nor that of those you apparently are reading. Let me give you some examples from these scholars who feel there is substantial evidence mitigating against such a pessimistic stand.

Egypt
I will start here, because there is no doubt that we see clear evidence of Egyptian culture, language, etc., imbedded in both the Old Testament and archaeology. As you may know, the lingua franca (official language) used by Heads of State and commerce was Akkadian cuneiform. Assyria, Babylon, and Egypt all conversed with each other in this language. It is a northern Semitic language. If the Israelites actually spent 400 years as slaves in Egypt, we would expect this familiarity of Egyptian language and culture among the Israelites. And if Moses was a real person--a Hebrew brought up in the Royal Egyptian family--he would have probably been tri-lingual, and able to converse in Hebrew, Egyptian and Akkadian.

Exodus, Sinai
We find abundant evidence of an Egyptian heritage and influence throughout the Pentateuch, Joshua, and Judges. As stated above, we would like more archaeological corroboration to clearly identify Biblical names, places, events, etc. For some areas the evidence is strong. For others, it is either sparse, or nonexistent. I will elaborate on this later in considering Jerusalem, but will state here the premise that an absence of archaeological data does not necessarily mean there is none. Perhaps we have thewrong site (historical Mt. Sinai is an example). Or perhaps we just haven't dug in theright place. To argue vigorously from "silence" is not strong proof.
We do have some indications of Egyptian influence on two biblical elements: the Tabernacle/construction described in Exodus 25-27; 36-38, and the arrangement of the Israelite travel/military camp. The order of the camp and the order of the march are laid out in great detail in Numbers 2. Much of what Egyptian archaeologists have discovered pertaining to the above find many similarities in the structures/construction/arrangement of the various war camps of the Pharaohs.
The desert Tabernacle of the Bible (Exodus 26) is described as one of elaborate design of gold, silver, bronze, wood, linen, goats' hair and leather. It so happens that this desert tent is also the centerpiece of every Egyptian war camp, but it serves as Pharaoh's personal, special tent, not a religious shrine.
The best example comes from a famous battle (at Kadesh) between Ramesses II and the Hittite nation around 1275 B.C. This is one of the most momentous battles in antiquity and the best documented...at Thebes, Karnak, Luxor, Abydos and Abu Simbel--on papyrus and stone, in both poetic and prose forms. The best pictorial is found at Abu Simbel. The parallels between Ramesses' camp and the biblical Tabernacle, beginning with the dimensions, are striking.


  The camp forms a rectangular courtyard twice as long as it is wide.

  The main entrance is located in the middle of the short walls.

  A road from the entrance leads directly to a two chamber tent: a reception compartment and directly behind it Pharaoh's chamber. It too has a 2:1 ratio.

  The tent and camp lie on an east/west axis with the entrance on the east.

  In pharaoh's inner tent is representation on each side of the winged falcon god Horus.

  Their wings cover the pharaoh's golden throne in the same manner that the wings of the Cherubim covered Yahweh's golden throne/ark (Exodus 35:18-22).

Given your assumption that the Old Testament didn't materialize until the Persian period (fifth century B.C.), we would expect Mesopotamian influence, but we do know from several palatial reliefs found at Nineveh that the Assyrians had a very differentform of military camp. The camp's perimeter is always oval in shape and the form of the king's tent bears little resemblance to the Tabernacle. Where would these sixth century B.C. "authors" come up with this accurate, Egyptian-oriented detail/description seven centuries removed?
I won't elaborate on this (unless you want documentation), but the Ark of the Covenant in the Holy of Holies, its design, materials, and portability, so graphically designed in Exodus 25:19-22, is also mirrored in Egyptian funerary structures to a high degree of detail.
Another remarkable example is to compare three cities mentioned in Numbers 22 (Dibon); Numbers 13:22; Joshua 10:36,37; Judges 1:10 (Hebron); and Judges 4-5 (Qishon). These passages all describe a well-known, well-traveled road (the Arabah) in the Transjordan from the southern tip of the Dead Sea to the plains of Moab (opposite Jericho). This is not to be confused with the great north-south Kings Highway (also mentioned in the Bible) which stretched from northern Arabia to Syria.
Although Thomas Thompson and other "Rejectionists" claim these cities didn't exist in the late Bronze Age II (1400-1200 B.C.), we have extra-biblical evidence that they did. You may know that the Pharoahs recorded, along with their achievements and military exploits, maps and the names of roads, geographical data, etc. We get a rather full picture of this road over time by several pharaohs who mention/describe this specific road on their victory monuments.
The first comes from Thutmosis III (1504-1450 B.C)., who mentions four towns/cities along this road which are also found in the Bible: Iyyim, Dibon, Abel, and Jordan. The second and third come from Amenophis III (1387-1350 B.C.) and Ramesses II (c. 1379-1212 B.C.)--found on the west side of the great hall at Karnak. He mentions two of the names found in the Bible. Further evidence comes from the Moabite stone (ninth century B.C.).
I could go into more detail about this if you are interested, but to summarize what I'm saying, there is evidence from independent and varied sources that such places existed several centuries before the proposed dates of the Exodus. Consider this comparison:

Late Bronze Egyptian Name
Biblical Name
Modern Name
(Yamm) ha-Malach
Melah ("Salt")
Yam ha-Melach
Iyyin
Iyyin
Ay
Heres/Hareseth
Heres/Hareseth
Kerak (CH = K)
Aqrabat

al-Aqraba
Dibon/Oartho
Dibon
Dhiban
Iktanu

Tell Iktanu
Abel
Abel-shittim
Tell Hammam
Jordan
Jordan
Jordan (River)

If you will look at Numbers 33:45-50, you would have to say in light of the above that this is a pretty impressive and credible piece of ancient historical writing, and most Bible scholars still consider it so. Its exacting specificity and precision of detail strongly indicates that the ancient historian who wrote it had at least had sources that accurately preserved the memory of a road (and cities along its route) used in very early times dating clear back to Late Bronze Age II.
On the face of it, we would have to reject Thomas Thompson (et al.)'s conclusion thatno such cities existed at the proposed time of the Exodus. The places mentioned in the Biblical accounts did in fact exist at the time. None of these pieces of information were fabricated centuries later. There would be no purpose to include them (or make them up).

Israelites
I am not going to spend any time trying to convince you that Moses was an historical person, but I would like to refer you to an Egyptian stele in the temple at Thebes which gives us the earliest known mention of Israel. It is a 7.5 foot high funerary monument of Pharaoh Merneptah, who ruled from 1213 to 1203 B.C. As you may know, these monuments outlined a Pharaoh's lifetime accomplishments and were written (or dictated) by him for his tombstone prior to his death. He refers to conquering Israel (among others) and says, "Israel is laid waste, his seed (people) is not." Israel is referred to as "a people," that is, they were already known and acknowledged as a distinct ethnic group at that time! In my mind, this reference provides persuasive, early evidence against those who argue that there was not a distinct people called the Israelites until after the Babylonian Captivity in the sixth century B.C. (600 years later--ridiculous!)
I will be discussing the Amarna Letters (14th century B.C.) in another context later, but will here state that a people designated as the "Hab(or p)iru" (i.e., Habiru) in the Amarna Letters (14th Century B.C.) is still considered by many scholars to be a possible, additional mention of the Hebrews.
Another substantial line of evidence comes from discoveries of a new community in the central hill country of Canaan which sprang up late in the 13th to the 11th centuries B.C. Some 300 small, agricultural villages are now known. They are new in the archaeological record and have certain identifying characteristics which include the layout of the village and the signature (Israel: four-room houses, pottery, and the absence of pig bones, which are numerous at other sites in trans-Jordan, and the coastal towns [Philistines, Phoenicians]). The above layouts of village and town fit exactly the biblical descriptions found in Joshua, Judges, and Samuel. These newcomers also brought with them new agricultural technology not evidently known heretofore by the Canaanites living there when the Israelites arrived. And it has been pointed out that this new community did not evolve over time (natural, gradual population increase), but rather, migrated into the area more rapidly, and they almost exclusively chose new sites to build, instead of taking over existing Canaanite dwellings, and well away from their urban areas.
This new people introduced the terracing of hills for their agricultural needs, which were carefully designed with retaining walls (rock) to take advantage of all rainfall (as well as available springs) coming down to these areas of rocky, sloping terrain. These villages stretch all the way from the hills of the lower Galilee in the north to the Negev in the south. Population estimates at the end of the Bronze age in this area numbered 12,000 (13th century) but grew rapidly to about 55,000 in the 12th century B.C., and then to about 75,000 in the 11th century B.C.
As I mentioned above, another uniqueness in these settlements is that their food system was found by archaeologists to be void of pig bones in excavated remains. This is another indication of a particular, ethnic/religious community. And religiously, there is also a complete absence of any kind of temple, sanctuary, or shrine, and also of any stone idols (deities). This assemblage is sufficiently homogeneous and distinctive to warrant some kind of designation, or label. If not IsraelWHO?Archaeologist William Dever has suggested naming this 12th to 11th century assemblage of individuals as "proto-Israelites."

David, Solomon, and Jerusalem
As you may know, there is a hot debate going on among archaeologists concerning the tenth century B.C., the purported time of the United Kingdom under David and his son, Solomon. Are they historical figures, or did some author(s) invent these mythical persons centuries later? And what can be said about Jerusalem? There is very little archaeological evidence to substantiate that it existed in the tenth century B.C. as described in the Bible. This has led a small group of archaeologists to conclude David and Solomon never existed, and Jerusalem was not the thriving royal capital of the Israelites. I will develop this in more detail later, but I first want to say again that anabsence of evidence does not necessarily and automatically bring us to concludenothing was going on in the tenth century B.C. at Jerusalem. This is an argument from silence. There are alternative explanations. First of all, the most likely place where Jerusalem's public buildings and important monuments would be located is on the Temple Mount, which for obvious reasons (Arab occupation), cannot be excavated. Thus, the most important area for investigation to uncover possible confirmation for David and Solomon is off limits to us.
Secondly, even those areas which are partially available to excavate--the ridge known as the City of David, for example--was continuously settled from the tenth to the sixth centuries B.C. Destructions leave a distinct mark in the archaeological record. But where there is continuous occupation (i.e. conqueror after conqueror) we would not expect to find remains of earlier building activity for the simple reason that Jerusalem was built on terraces and bedrock. Each new conqueror destroyed what was underneath, robbed and reused stones from earlier structures, and set its foundations again on solid rock.
We mostly have Herod to thank for our present inaccessibility to what lies underneath the flat, massive platform of today's Temple Mount when he began construction in 20/19 B.C. To accomplish this task of leveling, it is estimated that roughly 1.1 million cubic feet of rock was removed from the northeast corner and was used in the southeastern corner to first fill in a portion of the Kidron Valley and then raise up 150 feet from bedrock with fill to level that side!
So we would not expect to find abundant remains of earlier strata (though there are a few indications [capitals, columns, masonry] of Herod's Temple). For these reasons it is dangerous and misleading to draw negative inferences from the lack of archaeological evidence.
Fortunately, however, we do have another means of testing what was happening in Jerusalem even before the tenth century B.C. It comes from the Amarna Letters (14th century B.C.) where Jerusalem (referred to as "Urusalim") is specifically mentioned. These 300 documents, written in Akkadian cuneiform, are mostly diplomatic correspondence from local rulers in Canaan to two Pharoahs--Amenophis III [1391-1353] and Amenophis IV (also known as Akhenaten) [1353-1337]. At this time Canaan was under Egyptian hegemony, and Jerusalem was ruled by a local king, or vassal.
It is clear from these documents that 400 years before our century in question (tenth century B.C.), Jerusalem was a capital city over a considerable area, and we are told it had a palace, a court with attendants and servants, a temple, and scribes who had charge of diplomatic correspondence with Egyptian authorities. Six letters were sent by the king of Jerusalem to the pharaohs, which confirm a diplomatic sophistication of his court and the quality of his scribe.
Apart from these crucial letters, we find the archaeological evidence to confirm this history both opaque and nil. Scholars would never have guessed from their excavations of Jerusalem that any scribal activity took place there in Late Bronze Age II. We should not be surprised at this, however. From the standpoint of location, elevation, climate, water sources, and defense, Jerusalem is, and always has been, by far the most choice and desirable place for occupation and settlement. That being the case, we should be surprised if we found no indication of ancient activity there.
The truth of the matter is we must realize how little has been recovered; and perhaps how little can ever be recovered from ancient Jerusalem. There is very little from the 17th century, the 16th century, 15th, 14th, 13th, 12th, 11th, 10th, or the 9th century B.C.! Or to put it in other terms, we have little archaeological evidence of Jerusalem for the Late Bronze Age or Iron Age I or from the first couple of centuries of Iron Age II--a period of a thousand years!
But it isn't totally void of evidence. The "Stepped Stone" Structure on the eastern ridge of the city of David, the oldest part of Jerusalem, is a mammoth, five-story support for some unknown structure above it. It measures 90 feet high and 130 feet long. The dates given to it by archaeologists range from the late 13th to the late 10th centuries. But whatever the exact date will turn out to be within these centuries, this structure shows that Jerusalem could boast of an impressive architectural achievement(s) and had a population large enough to engage in such huge public works projects. This structure dates to David's time, or earlier. Contrary to some archaeologists who claim "no evidence," some 10th century pottery has been found, though not in great abundance (which holds true for all the other centuries at Jerusalem). Milat Ezar also dates a black juglet found which dates to the tenth century. Ezar also dates the fortifications and gate just above its location as also tenth century B.C.
Granted, the Jerusalem of the United Monarchy was not as grand or glorious as Herod's Jerusalem, but the alternative conclusion that the city was abandoned for a thousand years on the basis of the paucity of archaeological evidence, seems to me to be very improbable. And I reach this conclusion, not on any Biblical evidence, but quite apart from it.
A further example comes from the fifth century B.C., and specifically the rebuilding of the Temple and walls of Jerusalem by Ezra and Nehemiah after the Babylonian captivity (when the Persians allowed the Jews to return). The Temple is assumed not to have been anything beyond a very modest structure. In fact, it was never even referred to by the Jews as the "Second Temple" and was demolished when Herod began his project in the first century B.C. But there is little doubt that Nehemiah's wallwas constructed, even though almost no trace of it has been found in excavations. Jerusalem of the Persian period is known only from fills and building fragments and is mainly identified because it is sandwiched between the debris from the Iron Age and the Hellenistic periods. This is another example of the difficulty in recovering strata that developed peacefully and did not end with some catastrophic construction, and thus another caution against drawing negative conclusions from negative archaeological evidence. I will come back to this with some conclusions after we have considered David and Solomon.

David and Solomon
With respect to David, until recently no historical, archaeological evidence has been available to deny or confirm if he lived. But in 1993, the discovery by excavator Avraham Biran of a stone slab (and two additional fragments of same) at the ancient Tel Dan near Mt. Hermon contains an extra-biblical reference to David. The specific words are "Beth David," or, "House of David." This is a formulaic term frequently used, not just by Israel, but by all peoples throughout the Levant to describe a particular dynasty--their own, or other States (political entities). A small group of archaeologists have rejected it out of hand, and some have even suggested that it is probably a forgery planted by Avraham Biran himself! In reality, the inscription was found, in situ, in secondary use, that is, reused and inserted into the outer wall of a gate that was destroyed in the eighth century B.C. by the Assyrians. Paleographically, experts date it to the ninth century B.C.
The discovery of this artifact presents a terrible problem for the archaeologists you appear to have been reading, because this is a non-Israelite source, outside the Bible, that refers to the dynasty, or "House" of David.
There are two other possible indications (not yet conclusive) which mention David. Kenneth Kitchen (University of Liverpool) makes a strong case for a mention of David by pharaoh Sheshonq I in the tenth century B.C. It is in the temple of Amun at Karnak. This pharaoh is mentioned in I Kings 14:25 (Hebrew: Shishak). The exact letters aredvt. In the transliteration of words from one Semitic language to another, d and t are often used interchangeably. We have a clear example of this from the sixth century B.C. in a victory inscription of an Ethiopic ruler who is celebrating his triumphs. He quotes two of David's Psalms (19 and 65), and the reference is unmistakably to the Biblical king David. Here too the t is used rather than the d. Granted, this is sixth century, but it shows an Ethiopic king was aware of and refers to David as a real person and two of his literary efforts.
An additional reference comes from the Moabite Stone (which is not yet completely deciphered). It is also called the Mesha Stele, which is contemporaneous with the Tel Dan inscription (ninth century B.C.) Andre Lemaire, the eminent French paleographer, believes he has detected a reference to the House of David on the Mesha Stele.
With respect to Solomon, we can pretty well document when he ruled (and) died by comparing the King Lists of the Assyrians and the Egyptians with each other as well as with various kings of Judah, of Israel, of Egypt, and Assyria mentioned in Kings, Chronicles, and the Prophets of the O.T.
Astronomy helps us here. The Assyrians recorded a solar eclipse during the reign of Assur-dan III, and modern astronomers have calculated a firm date that it occurred in 763 B.C. We have from Assyria a record of 261 continuous years, with names and dates of kings as well as the noting of any important events which occurred during each year. We thus have a "peg" for a long line of Assyrian rulers from 910 to 649 B.C.
There is no controversy about the Divided kingdom. At some historical time (Solomon's death--930 B.C.) the United Kingdom split, with Reheboam, Solomon's son, ruling as king of Judah in the south, and simultaneously, Jeroboam I assumed rule of northern Palestine and became the first king of Israel.
Solomon's son, Rehoboam (his reign: 931-913 B.C.) is not mentioned by name in Egyptian or Assyrian records (like Ahab Jehu, and Jereboam, etc), but we have a very clear and accurate Egyptian chronology of the ten kings of the XXII Dynasty, beginning with Shoshenq I (Shisack in Hebrew)'s invasion of Israel (926,925 B.C.) during the time of Reheboam's reign. (Cf. I Kings 14:35,36; II Chronicles 12:1-9 where this king and this event are recorded.) Both Egyptian and Bible chronologies mirror one another!
We are talking history here. The Bible records this invasion during Rehoboam's reign. Shoshenq chronology confirms the event. And if we can point with accuracy to an event which occurred at the very time the Bible designates Reheboam and his reign, what assumptions should we come to about the history immediately preceding it? If Rehoboam is an historical figure, why do we assume arbitrarily that his father (Solomon) is a fictitious/mythical character just because we haven't yet been fortunate enough to find archaeological confirmation? Until recently we have said the same thing for a time about many of the items/people/places mentioned above. Again, lack of evidence does not equal "myth."
In the ninth century B.C., Shalmaneser III (859-824 B.C.) mentions two kings of Israel: Ahab (872-853 B.C.) in 853 B.C.and Jehu (841-818 B.C.) in 841 B.C. Using the Assyrian dates, we can count back the years from 853 B.C. 78 years and arrive at the year of Solomon's death and the beginning of the reigns of both Reheboam and and Jeroboam I (931/930 B.C.) The Biblical chronology mirrors these dates. Now, without written records of some kind, how could this clever author(s) of the fifth century B.C., who purportedly conjured up all of this, create such a detailed chronology with such accuracy?
I am not going to go into more detail about Solomon which ties into the hot debate over the tenth century B.C. These involve for example Megiddo, Gezer, and Hazor which the Bible attributes to Solomon with their impressive renovations during this century. We are told in the Bible that Solomon married pharaoh's daughter and gave Gezer to him as her dowry (1 Kings 3:1; 7:8; 9:16,24; 11:1). This Pharaoh was probably Siamun (979-960 B.C.).
In summary, all indications are that Solomon's life took place in the middle of the tenth century B.C. (970-930). Using the Egyptian and Assyrian king lists, which agree with the Biblical royal chronologies, we can pinpoint Solomon's death: 930/931 B.C. We find at this time that the pharaohs were marrying their daughters to various foreign rulers. There is no reason to reject the premise that mini-empires such as David's and Solomon's could flourish in the centuries between 1200-900 B.C. when the power of the two great empires (Egypt and Assyria) began to and did wane.
I do not think one can make a good case that some Hellenistic writer from 300 B.C. would possess the resources/information at that late date to write with such accuracy of the United Kingdom as we find from the biblical sources.
I have borrowed liberally from a host of archaeologists to respond to your question. I have not taken the time to document/footnote all this material which has come from numerous, well-known archaeologists from Europe, Israel, and the U.S.A.
If you would read a wider spectrum of scholars you will find the vast majority reject your major premise on these areas. I can document all of this if necessary.
Jimmy Williams
Probe Ministries


About the Author



James F. Williams is the founder and past president of Probe Ministries International, and currently serves as Minister at Large. He holds degrees from Southern Methodist University (B.A.) and Dallas Theological Seminary (Th.M.). He also has pursued inter-disciplinary doctoral studies (a.b.d.) in the humanities at the University of Texas at Dallas. Over a thirty-five year period, he visited, lectured, and counseled on more than 180 university campuses in the United States, Canada, Europe, and the former Soviet Union. He also served on the faculties of the American, Latin American, and European Institutes of Biblical Studies.

What is Probe?

Probe Ministries is a non-profit ministry whose mission is to assist the church in renewing the minds of believers with a Christian worldview and to equip the church to engage the world for Christ. Probe fulfills this mission through our Mind Games conferences for youth and adults, our 3-minute daily radio program, and our extensive Web site at www.probe.org.
Further information about Probe's materials and ministry may be obtained by contacting us at:
Probe Ministries
2001 W.
Plano Parkway, Suite 2000
Plano TX 75075
(972) 941-4565
info@probe.org
www.probe.org
Copyright information

 http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4219999/k.A54E/The_Archaeological_Evidence_for_the_Bible_is_NonExistent.htm

۵۱ نظر:

  1. Hello there! I know this is somewhat off topic but I was wondering if you knew where I could locate
    a captcha plugin for my comment form? I'm using the same blog platform as yours and I'm having trouble finding one?

    Thanks a lot!
    Look at my web page :: direct download movies

    پاسخحذف
  2. It's nearly impossible to find experienced people for this topic, however, you sound like you know what you're talking about!
    Thanks
    Here is my webpage - mac baren

    پاسخحذف
  3. Hi! Do you know if they make any plugins to assist with Search Engine Optimization?

    I'm trying to get my blog to rank for some targeted keywords but I'm not
    seeing very good gains. If you know of any please share.
    Kudos!
    Take a look at my blog ; Feriehus Alanya

    پاسخحذف
  4. Hi! I've been reading your site for a long time now and finally got the courage to go ahead and give you a shout out from Houston Texas! Just wanted to tell you keep up the fantastic work!
    Also see my web site > Leilighet i Antalya

    پاسخحذف
  5. Hello friends, fastidious paragraph and good arguments commented here,
    I am truly enjoying by these.
    My blog post :: Osta Asunto Turkista

    پاسخحذف
  6. I am in fact grateful to the holder of this web page who has shared this fantastic article at here.
    Also see my page: Huoneisto Bodrumista

    پاسخحذف
  7. Hi to all, as I am really eager of reading this web site's post to be updated daily. It carries fastidious data.
    Also visit my webpage ... immobilien in Antalya

    پاسخحذف
  8. Hi there mates, its wonderful article on the topic of teachingand fully explained, keep it up all the time.
    My homepage ... http://asuntoturkista.net/kiinteistot-antalya

    پاسخحذف
  9. Excellent pieces. Keep writing such kind of info on your blog.
    Im really impressed by your site.
    Hi there, You've performed a great job. I will certainly digg it and individually suggest to my friends. I'm
    sure they'll be benefited from this website.
    Feel free to visit my website ... Property Alanya

    پاسخحذف
  10. Hi there, this weekend is good designed for me, because this point in time i
    am reading this wonderful informative piece of writing here at my house.
    Feel free to surf my page ... diablo 3 guide

    پاسخحذف
  11. If you are going for best contents like I do,
    just go to see this website all the time since it offers quality contents,
    thanks
    Review my website ... even skin tone

    پاسخحذف
  12. Post writing is also a excitement, if you be acquainted with then you can write or else it is complex to write.
    My homepage ... captain black tobacco

    پاسخحذف
  13. Appreciation to my father who told me about this webpage, this blog is actually amazing.
    My website > samson tobacco

    پاسخحذف
  14. Very descriptive article, I enjoyed that bit. Will there be a part 2?
    my web page: get rid of acne naturally

    پاسخحذف
  15. Awesome! Its in fact amazing article, I have got much
    clear idea about from this post.
    Here is my page ... getting rid of acne scars

    پاسخحذف
  16. My brother suggested I might like this blog.

    He was totally right. This post truly made my day.
    You cann't imagine just how much time I had spent for this info! Thanks!
    Also visit my webpage :: diablo 3 guide

    پاسخحذف
  17. This is a topic which is close to my heart... Cheers!

    Where are your contact details though?
    Also see my website - best acne treatment in the world

    پاسخحذف
  18. As quickly as the fact is serious estate, you will understand
    what you need. Thanks to the obvious edge, skyline is also fit
    for the day by day use. They therefore develop athletic sneakers, boots, cleats, informal sneakers, spikes and sandals.
    Get in touch with for availability in your place.
    http://airmax90s2013.Co.uk/
    My web page: cheap nike air max 90

    پاسخحذف
  19. Of class, perhaps there are any other varieties of price reduction sneakers you are searching.
    Implement these suggestions and tricks to essentially get
    good outcomes. The first Oxygen Ideal product which has been generated had been
    the setting Utmost 1. You can also fork out more focus to the lower price on-line news.
    http://www.wheretobuyairmax.co.uk/

    پاسخحذف
  20. In this article comes our topic: What sets Nike sneakers apart from levels of
    competition? It is extremely deserving for us to possess such a fragile footwear.
    Really don't permit the burdens of buying actual estate get you straight down. In this article are various suggestions to get hold of began off. http://www.airmaxcheapest.co.uk/

    پاسخحذف
  21. Hi there would you mind letting me know which webhost you're utilizing? I've loaded your
    blog in 3 different browsers and I must say this blog loads a lot faster
    then most. Can you suggest a good internet hosting provider at a reasonable price?
    Many thanks, I appreciate it!

    Also visit my homepage: christian louboutin outlet

    پاسخحذف
  22. Good post. I will be dealing with a few of these issues as well.
    .

    Here is my web page ロレックスレプリカ

    پاسخحذف
  23. Currently it seems like Movable Type is the best blogging platform out there right now.
    (from what I've read) Is that what you're using on your blog?


    Check out my homepage: ロレックスレプリカ

    پاسخحذف
  24. Hello There. I discovered your blog the usage of msn.
    This is a really smartly written article. I will
    be sure to bookmark it and return to read more of your useful info.
    Thank you for the post. I will certainly return.

    Feel free to visit my weblog :: 激安プラダ バッグ

    پاسخحذف
  25. Do you mind if I quote a few of your articles as long as I provide credit and sources back to
    your blog? My blog site is in the exact same niche as yours and my visitors would definitely benefit from some of the information you present here.
    Please let me know if this alright with you. Thanks a lot!


    Also visit my blog post; www.rolexoutletfreeshipping.com

    پاسخحذف
  26. What's up, I read your blogs daily. Your story-telling style is witty, keep doing what you're doing!


    Also visit my weblog :: rolexコピー

    پاسخحذف
  27. Wow, awesome blog structure! How long have you ever been blogging for?
    you make running a blog glance easy. The overall look
    of your website is fantastic, let alone the content material!



    Here is my blog; stuffconqueso.blogspot.com

    پاسخحذف
  28. Howdy! I know this is somewhat off topic but I was wondering
    if you knew where I could locate a captcha plugin for my comment form?

    I'm using the same blog platform as yours and I'm having problems finding one?

    Thanks a lot!

    Here is my weblog ... jeremy scott shoes
    my website: jeremy scott adidas

    پاسخحذف
  29. I love looking through a post that can make men and women think.
    Also, thank you for allowing for me to comment!

    my web blog :: air max 2012

    پاسخحذف
  30. This article is really a pleasant one it assists new net users, who are wishing
    for blogging.

    Here is my blog post: cheap air max shoes

    پاسخحذف
  31. Good day! I could have sworn I've been to this web site before but after going through some of the articles I realized it's new to me.
    Anyhow, I'm definitely delighted I discovered it and I'll be bookmarking it and checking back often!


    My page; nike air max 95

    پاسخحذف
  32. Hi, I do believe this is a great web site. I stumbledupon it ;) I am
    going to revisit yet again since I book-marked it.
    Money and freedom is the best way to change, may
    you be rich and continue to guide other people.

    Feel free to visit my web page ... クロエ財布

    پاسخحذف
  33. This is my first time pay a visit at here and i am genuinely pleassant to read all at single place.


    Also visit my web blog :: http://ambertourism-dubai.com

    پاسخحذف
  34. It's awesome to pay a quick visit this web page and reading the views of all mates on the topic of this piece of writing, while I am also keen of getting knowledge.

    My webpage; レイバン

    پاسخحذف
  35. Wow, incredible blog layout! How long have you been blogging for?
    you made blogging look easy. The overall look of your site is excellent,
    let alone the content!

    My webpage: オークリー

    پاسخحذف
  36. You can get caught up in a unique layout for the product stickers.

    Apart from displaying your personality, custom t-shirts are also an important
    aspect to consider in choosing a bundle, like for example, placing
    it on the cartridges inks and powder etc. How would he have fought the
    deflation threat? Yes, you can skip the designing steps and
    move straight to the point.

    Here is my weblog - create stickers

    پاسخحذف
  37. Hello would you mind stating which blog platform you're working with? I'm looking to start my
    own blog soon but I'm having a difficult time deciding between BlogEngine/Wordpress/B2evolution and Drupal. The reason I ask is because your design seems different then most blogs and I'm looking for something completely unique.
    P.S My apologies for being off-topic but I had to ask!


    Here is my web-site: www.monsterbeatsphones-vip.com

    پاسخحذف
  38. Hey there! I could have sworn I've been to this blog before but after reading through some of the post I realized it's new to me.
    Anyways, I'm definitely glad I found it and I'll be bookmarking and checking back often!


    My web page アバクロンビーフィッチレディース

    پاسخحذف
  39. I think the admin of this web page is genuinely working hard in favor of
    his site, for the reason that here every data is
    quality based information.

    Look at my web-site: http://www.venusgallery.ca

    پاسخحذف
  40. This web site certainly has all the info I needed about this subject and
    didn't know who to ask.

    Visit my blog ... Tedxyse.Com

    پاسخحذف
  41. I am sure this article has touched all the internet users,
    its really really fastidious paragraph on building up new blog.



    My web blog ... Replica Rolex Watches

    پاسخحذف
  42. Hello every one, here every one is sharing these know-how,
    so it's good to read this blog, and I used to go to see this weblog everyday.

    Have a look at my webpage Replica Watches

    پاسخحذف
  43. Hello there, just became aware of your blog through Google, and
    found that it's truly informative. I'm going to watch out for brussels.

    I will appreciate if you continue this in future.
    A lot of people will be benefited from your writing.
    Cheers!

    My web page; Replica Rolex Watches

    پاسخحذف
  44. I've been browsing online more than 4 hours today, yet I never found any interesting article like yours. It's pretty worth
    enough for me. Personally, if all site owners and bloggers made good content as
    you did, the web will be a lot more useful than ever before.


    Here is my web site - http://www.palangosgydyklos.lt/

    پاسخحذف
  45. Hey there! I just wanted to ask if you ever have any issues
    with hackers? My last blog (wordpress) was hacked and I ended up
    losing months of hard work due to no back up.
    Do you have any methods to prevent hackers?

    Also visit my blog ... Replica Watches

    پاسخحذف
  46. Your means of explaining the whole thing in this piece
    of writing is actually good, all be able to effortlessly understand it, Thanks a lot.


    my weblog Replica Watches

    پاسخحذف
  47. Do you have any video of that? I'd love to find out some additional information.

    Here is my web blog - Replica Watches

    پاسخحذف
  48. Hello are using Wordpress for your site platform? I'm new to the blog world but I'm trying to get started and set up my own.
    Do you require any coding expertise to make your own blog?
    Any help would be greatly appreciated!

    My blog polo outlet

    پاسخحذف