Posted on 04/10/2009 10:32:45 AM PDT by DouglasKC
Consider these important facts. First, Easter Sunday is traditionally revered as the day of Jesus' resurrection—although the Bible clearly states that He had already risen before Sunday dawned in the city of Jerusalem.
Second, even though Good Friday is generally observed as the traditional day of His crucifixion, Christ Himself told the disciples that He would be in the grave for all of three days and three nights. How can three days and three nights possibly fit between a Friday-afternoon crucifixion and a Sunday-morning resurrection?
Third, the word Easter is not found in the Greek New Testament. Nor is there biblical mention of or instruction to observe Lent.
Finally, unlike the specific instruction to commemorate Christ's death, there is absolutely no commandment in the New Testament to observe the date of Jesus' resurrection. Yet today's religious customs are so ingrained in the church calendar that many would consider it heretical to question them.
Most of the world is scarcely aware that the original apostles did not institute or keep these customs, nor were they observed by the early Christian Church. Try as you might to find them, Lent, Good Friday and Easter are not so much as mentioned in the original Greek wording of the New Testament. (The word Easter appears only once in the King James Version of the Bible—in Acts 12:4—where it is flagrantly mistranslated from the Greek word pascha, which should be translated "Passover," as most versions render it.)
The justification for the Lenten 40-day preparation for Easter is traditionally based on Jesus' 40-day wilderness fast before His temptation by Satan (Harper's Bible Dictionary, "Lent"; Matthew 4:1-2; Mark 1:13). The problem with this explanation is that this incident is not connected in any way with Jesus' supposed observance of Easter. The 40-day pre-Easter practice of fasting and penance did not originate in the Bible.
Many people still follow such practices, assuming that such activities honor God and are approved by Him. But, we should ask, how does God regard such extrabiblical customs? Consider God's instructions to those who would worship Him:
"Take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, 'How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.' You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way; for every abomination to the LORD which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods. Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it" (Deuteronomy 12:30-32, emphasis added throughout).
The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia notes: "The term Easter was derived from the Anglo-Saxon 'Eostre,' the name of the goddess of spring. In her honor sacrifices were offered at the time of the vernal [spring] equinox" (1982, Vol. 2, "Easter").
Many battles were fought over its observance date, but the Council of Nicea finally fixed the date of Easter in A.D. 325 to fall on the first Sunday after the full moon on or after the vernal equinox (March 21).
Not generally known is that "the preparation for Easter season, beginning on Ash Wednesday and continuing for a week after Easter Day, was filled with pagan customs that had been revised in the light
of Christianity. Germanic nations, for example, set bonfires in spring. This custom was frowned on by the Church, which tried to suppress it . . . In the sixth and seventh centuries [monks] came to Germany, [bringing] their earlier pagan rites[,] and would bless bonfires outside the church building on Holy Saturday. The custom spread to France, and eventually it was incorporated into the Easter liturgy of Rome in the ninth century. Even today the blessing of the new fire is part of the Vigil of Easter.
"Medieval celebrations of Easter began at dawn. According to one old legend, the sun dances on Easter morning, or makes three jumps at the moment of its rising, in honor of Christ's resurrection. The rays of light penetrating the clouds were believed to be angels dancing for joy.
"Some Easter folk traditions that have survived today are the Easter egg, rabbit and lamb. During medieval times it was a tradition to give eggs at Easter to servants. King Edward I of England had 450 eggs boiled before Easter and dyed or covered with gold leaf. He then gave them to members of the royal household on Easter day. The egg was an earlier pagan symbol of rebirth and was presented at the spring equinox, the beginning of the pagan new year.
"The Easter rabbit is mentioned in a German book of 1572 and also was a pagan fertility symbol. The Easter lamb goes back to the Middle Ages; the lamb, holding a flag with a red cross on a white field, represented the resurrected Christ [rather than the sacrifice of His life, as a fulfillment of the Passover lamb, that paid for the sins of the world (John 1:29)]" (Anthony Mercatante, Facts on File Encyclopedia of World Mythology and Legend, 1988, "Easter").
Easter traditions are embraced by many who profess Christianity. Yet none of these practices are found in the Bible or the customs of the early Church. Jesus and His apostles did not establish or perpetuate such practices, which obscure the true biblical meanings and observances of this time of year. In fact, a fourth-century church historian, Socrates Scholasticus, wrote in his Ecclesiastical History that neither the apostles nor the Gospels taught the observance of Easter, nor did they or Jesus give a law requiring the keeping of this feast. Instead, "the observance originated not by legislation, but as a custom" (chapter 22, emphasis added).
Even as early as the close of the second century, the theologian Irenaeus bore witness in his letter to Victor, bishop of Rome, that some early Roman bishops forbade the observance of Passover on the 14th of Nisan. This was the date of the biblical observance practiced each spring by Jesus and the apostles. At the time that the Nisan 14 Passover observance was banned, ecclesiastical authorities introduced Lent and Easter into Christian practice.
A century later the Syriac Didascalia recorded the attempts of teachers in Rome to reconcile Jesus' words that He would be entombed "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matthew 12:40) with a Friday-afternoon crucifixion and a Sunday-morning resurrection. According to their reasoning, Jesus' sufferings were part of the three days and three nights of Scripture. Friday morning from 9 to noon was counted as the first day, and noon to 3 p.m. (which was darkened) was considered the first night. Three in the afternoon to sunset was reckoned as the second day, whereas Friday night to Saturday morning constituted the second night. The daylight part of Saturday was the third day, and the night portion to Sunday morning was the third night.
In other words, the three days and three nights in the grave that Jesus said would be the sign that He was indeed sent from God were transformed into a period of two days and two nights, or a total of no more than 48 hours. This has subsequently been reduced even further in modern times by figuring from late afternoon Friday to early Sunday morning, which takes away another 12 hours or more. Such reasoning has to discount or somehow explain away Jesus' clear promise that He would be entombed three days and three nights.
Easter and Lent are nonbiblical and were not observed by the apostles or the first-century Church. The biblical record shows, however, that the early Church diligently kept other observances, the New Testament Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread, just as Jesus and the apostles had done (Matthew 26:17-19; Acts 20:6; 1 Corinthians 5:8; 11:23-26). These were supplanted in later years by the customs and practices of Easter and Lent.
Passover is an annual reminder of Jesus' sacrificial death to pay the penalty for our sins (Matthew 26:26-28). The Feast of Unleavened Bread is a celebration that focuses on a Christian's need to live in sincerity, truth and purity (1 Corinthians 5:8). The nonbiblical festivals of Lent and Easter, added decades after the time of Jesus Christ and the apostles, only cloud the true significance of Christ's life, death and resurrection and the purpose of His coming.
The Passover, instituted in Exodus 12, continues by Jesus Christ's example and command—but with a change of symbols. Jesus' death fulfilled the symbolism of the sacrificial Passover lamb (Matthew 26:17-28; John 1:29). However, the New Testament Passover has been improperly replaced as an annual memorial of the death of Christ by Easter. We are commanded to commemorate Christ's death, not His resurrection (1 Corinthians 11:23-28).
Jesus Christ's promise was fulfilled exactly as He said, a fact that is made clear when we study and compare the Gospel accounts. These records give a clear, logical explanation that is perfectly consistent with Christ's words. Let's focus on Jesus' last days on earth to gain the proper perspective and understanding of how and when these events occurred.
Jesus said that, like the prophet Jonah, He would be entombed three days and three nights and that He would be raised up the third day after His crucifixion and death (Matthew 12:39-40; 17:23; 20:19). Putting these scriptures together, we see that He was resurrected at the end of the third day after His death. Luke 23:44 shows that He died around the ninth hour (Jewish reckoning), or 3 p.m. He would have been buried within the next few hours so that His body could be entombed before the approaching Sabbath (John 19:31).
Jesus' resurrection could not have been
on a Sunday morning because John 20:1-2 shows that He had already risen before Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early in the morning, arriving "while it was still dark." Therefore, neither could His death have occurred Friday afternoon, since that would not allow for His body to be in the grave three days and three nights. Clearly, the Good Friday-Easter Sunday explanation and tradition is without scriptural foundation.
Notice also that John 19:31 mentions that the Sabbath immediately after Jesus' death was "a high day"—not the weekly seventh-day Sabbath (from Friday evening to Saturday evening), but one of the annual Sabbaths, the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread (see Leviticus 23:6-7), which can fall on any day of the week.
In fact, two Sabbaths—first an annual Holy Day and then the regular weekly Sabbath—are mentioned in the Gospel accounts, a detail overlooked by most people. This can be proven by comparing Mark 16:1 with Luke 23:56.
Mark's account tells us, "Now when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, that they might come and anoint Him" (Mark 16:1). However, Luke's account describes how the women who followed Jesus saw how His body was laid in the tomb. "Then they returned and prepared spices and fragrant oils" for the final preparation of the body. And they rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment" (Luke 23:56).
Mark tells us that the women bought the spices after the Sabbath, "when the Sabbath was past." Luke, however, tells us that they prepared the spices and oils, "and they rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment." How could the women have bought spices after the Sabbath, yet then prepared them and rested on the same Sabbath?
That is obviously impossible—unless two Sabbaths are involved, with a day between them. Once we realize this, the two accounts become clear (see "The Chronology of Christ's Crucifixion and Resurrection," p. 18). Christ died near 3 p.m. and was placed in the tomb near sunset that day—a Wednesday in the year 31. That evening began the "high day" Sabbath, the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which fell on Thursday that year. The women rested on that day, then on Friday purchased and prepared the spices and oils for Jesus' body, which could not be done on either the Holy Day or the weekly Sabbath. They then rested again on the weekly Sabbath before going to the tomb before daybreak on Sunday morning, at which time they discovered that Christ had already been resurrected.
The fact that two Sabbaths are involved is confirmed by Matthew 28:1, where the women went to the tomb "after the Sabbath." The Sabbath mentioned here is actually plural in the original Greek and should be translated "Sabbaths." Some Bible versions, including Alfred Marshall's Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, Ferrar Fenton's translation, Green's Literal Translation and Young's Literal Translation, make this clear.
Once we realize that two Sabbaths were involved—first an annual Holy Day, which was observed from Wednesday evening until Thursday evening, and the normal weekly Sabbath from Friday evening to Saturday evening, the fulfillment of Christ's words becomes clear.
The Savior of all humanity died near 3 p.m. on Wednesday and was buried shortly before sunset that day. From Wednesday sunset to Thursday sunset is one day and one night; from then until Friday sunset is two days and two nights; and from then until Saturday sunset is three days and three nights. Jesus Christ was resurrected at the end of this three-day and three-night period, near sunset on Saturday. Thus He was already risen long before the women came to the tomb before daylight on Sunday morning.
Jesus Christ's words were thus perfectly fulfilled, as verified by the Gospel accounts. He was not crucified on Friday afternoon, nor was He resurrected on a Sunday morning. The biblical evidence shows the Good Friday-Easter Sunday tradition to be a fabrication.
A correct harmonization of all the facts demonstrates that Jesus died near 3 p.m. that Wednesday afternoon, was entombed near sunset and was resurrected near sunset on Saturday, exactly three days and three nights later—just as He had stated. These are the facts, the correct biblical chronology that verifies the identity of Jesus Christ as the Son of God.
The chart on page 18 gives a day-by-day chronology of these events as described in the Gospel accounts.
Actually, the principal festivals and holidays observed by mainstream Christendom are a poor and pale reflection of true biblical teachings. Easter and Lent are a poor substitute for the wondrous truths revealed by keeping God's feasts.
The New Testament Church continued to observe the annual Passover to commemorate the death of Jesus Christ, but used the new symbols of bread and wine that He instituted (1 Corinthians 11:23-28). Today the members of the United Church of God commemorate this eminently important event in the same manner, in accordance with Christ's instructions. Again, the Bible contains no record of the Church observing Easter or Lent during the time of the apostles, nor any biblical command to observe Good Friday or Easter Sunday, especially since Christ did not die on Good Friday and was not resurrected on Easter Sunday. Instead, the apostles faithfully followed Christ's instructions to observe the biblical Passover "in remembrance" of Him (Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24-25). GN
I do not doubt any of your comments here; but there STILL has been no SCRIPTURE presented that shows any change, merely ancedotes about what was or was not observed.
I’m not even sure what you are trying to get at. Do you not believe we should observe the Lord’s Supper, we should only observe once a year or what?
Why the second; of course!
Just like it ALWAYS was!
I'd think that this would appeal to you as well; considering how that you are seemingly a bit paranoid about Christian 'rituals' that are NOT in Scripture.
"As oft as ye do it..." indicates ONCE a year to me!
Quite honestly I had not considered, or heard of, that perspective. I’ll have to do more study on that. From the writings of the Apostles it would “seem” that the Lord’s Supper was observed on every weekly meeting of the church in different areas.
20 So then, when you come together, it is not the Lord’s Supper you eat, 21 for when you are eating, some of you go ahead with your own private suppers. As a result, one person remains hungry and another gets drunk. 22 Don’t you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God by humiliating those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you? Certainly not in this matter!
23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves.
Discerning the body... HMmm....
One must realize that the LAMB that they are eating represents WHAT???
THIS drink and THIS bread.
When you come together... HMmm...
It is obvious that what was being eaten here is a full meal; is it not?
How has it been so diminished to be a sip of wine/grape juice/water and a scrap of bread?
It’s my opinion that ‘communion’ has been ‘received’ WAY too often and that the mere familiarity of it has reduced it to a ritual.
A ritual that is used to even ‘bash’ some of the partakers of it with feelings of ‘unworthiness’, without even explaining what it is that would MAKE a person unworthy!
Matthew 5:23-24 (King James Version)
Matthew 5:23-24
Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;
Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.
How many folks toss their tithe, offering, gift into the plate, box, or basket without thinking, every week, and still are ticked because Sister Mary failed to say how good the cassarole was that they brought to the last pitchin.
You know.....I hear this silliness a couple of times a year and have yet to have a legitimate explanation of this.
The command from James was [Acts 15:18-21] Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. 19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. 21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
Where does this say the Dietary Laws were done away with? I go nuts trying to see the connection. Can someone explain it to me?
Then they use this: [Acts 15:28-29] 28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; 29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
What in the world does this have to do with [Leviticus 11]......God's Dietary Laws? James is speaking of the Halakha Laws found in [Leviticus 17 and 18]. James is telling the Gentile converts to do the same thing that Moses told the Israelites to do. How is this doing away with anything?
Acts 10. It may not be in your Seventh Day Adventist Bible.
Sorry....no cigar. Acts 10 does not even remotely suggest such a thing.
Revelation 18:2] And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
This is sixty years after the resurrection and at least fifty years after Peter's visit to Cornelius. Why on Earth would John be referring to an "edible bird" (in your opinion) as unclean?
I'm not a Seventh Day Adventist......and as far as I know, they do not observe the Dietary Regulations of [Leviticus 11].
You're batting "0"!
Oh....by the way. It wasn't against the law to heal on the Sabbath.....either. [Mark 7:1-13] It was against the traditions of men (Pharisee's)(verse 8).
You're really batting "0" now!
I didn’t write the Bible. I’m just telling you what it says.
9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. 13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”
14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”
15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”
16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.
I know that. You didn't have to tell me you didn't write the Bible.
Many folks, like you.....have misconstrued what is actually being said here. Did Yahweh actually command Peter to eat any kind of meat he desired? No! Yahweh was illustrating Peter's attitude toward his fellow man.
The sheet being lowered had all kinds of unclean and "common" meat (meat that had become ceremonially defiled). Peter had never eaten this type of meat and was very aware that he shouldn't eat it now. The passage, indeed....shows Peter not eating any of this "Unclean" meat. He couldn't have anyway...... since it was a vision.
Jump to verse 17: Peter is still in doubt, wondering what the meaning of the vision was. Verse 19 tells us his mind was still thinking about it when the Spirit told him three men were looking for him with a message from Cornelius.
Peter finally realizes what it was all about and tells everyone else what happened. He says, "Yahweh has shown me that I should not call any man (not meat) common or unclean (verse 28). The vision was a means for Peter to see his own hypocrisy in dealing with his fellow man....especially Gentiles and had it then revealed they were eligible for salvation as well (verses 34-35).
Here are the major points for [Acts 10]:
1. Even in a vision Peter still refused to eat common or unclean meat.
2. He said he had never done so which proves that Yeshua certainly did not teach the Apostles to do this. It was now about ten years after the resurrection.
3. Peter was told not to call any man unclean....because of this vision.
4. He was not told to quit calling certain types of meat unclean!
5. Peter learned here that Yahweh is not a respecter of persons and nothing was said in regards to changing the Dietary Laws.
I’m just telling you what it says. Argue with the Bible, not me.
15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”
Now my friend. We know that Yeshua didn't tell the Apostles it was O.K. now to eat buzzards, swine and shrimp because we never see Him do that. Yahweh never says it in scripture as well....but you insist that the Spirit told Peter these animals were no longer unclean (verse 15).
Do I have your story right?
O.K. Let's go see John again. [Revelation 18:2] And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
Here's the Greek: kai ekraxen en iscui fwnh megalh legwn epesen epesen babulwn h megalh kai egeneto katoikhthrion daimonwn kai fulakh pantoV pneumatoV akaqartou kai fulakh pantoV orneou akaqartou kai memishmenou
#169. akathartos (ak-ath'-ar-tos)impure (ceremonially, morally (lewd) or specially, (demonic)) foul, unclean.
Now let's take a look at [Leviticus 11] from the Greek Septuagint:
1 kai elalhsen kurios pros mwushn kai aarwn legwn 2 lalhsate tois uiois israhl legontes tauta ta kthnh a fagesqe apo pantwn twn kthnwn twn epi ths ghs 3 pan kthnos dichloun oplhn kai onucisthras onucizon duo chlwn kai anagon mhrukismon en tois kthnesin tauta fagesqe 4 plhn apo toutwn ou fagesqe apo twn anagontwn mhrukismon kai apo twn dichlountwn tas oplas kai onucizontwn onucisthras ton kamhlon oti anagei mhrukismon touto oplhn de ou dichlei akaqarton touto umin 5 kai ton dasupoda oti anagei mhrukismon touto kai oplhn ou dichlei akaqarton touto umin 6 kai ton coirogrullion oti anagei mhrukismon touto kai oplhn ou dichlei akaqarton touto umin 7 kai ton un oti dichlei oplhn touto kai onucizei onucas oplhs kai touto ouk anagei mhrukismon akaqarton touto umin
Here's the English for the first seven verses:
1And the LORD spake unto Moses and to Aaron, saying unto them, 2Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, These are the beasts which ye shall eat among all the beasts that are on the earth. 3Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is clovenfooted, and cheweth the cud, among the beasts, that shall ye eat. 4Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. 5And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. 6And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. 7And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you.
Come let us reason together. Why would the spirit inspire John (60 years later) to write this word (the same word he inspired Moses to write) if he had told Peter that these animals were no longer unclean?
Here is the eighth verse: 8 Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you.
Nothing changed from the Old Testament to the New regarding the Dietary Laws. Only the traditions of men changed!
“the same word he inspired Moses to write”
It’s not the same word. One is on Greek and the other on Hebrew.
I’m just telling you what it said, that’s all. God told him he could eat the unclean things.
Then....why didn't Peter eat? Why did he question this command? Why did he continue to think on it until he was contacted by the agents of Cornelius?
It is the same word. The authors of the Septuagint called it the same as the Apostle John. The word is AKATHARTOS. It means unclean!
Tell me...."Appy"......do you think it would be alright for John to be sitting on the beach at Patmos....cooking this buzzard for lunch [Revelation 18:2]? This unclean bird? Do you think Yeshua would agree with you on this matter?
C'mon....all you need to say is....."you were right and I was wrong". It will do wonders for your peace of mind.
The Dietary Laws of [Leviticus 11] are still in force. As I said....the only thing that has changed is the "Traditions of Men"! You can have the last word.
Let’s let the Bible have the last word:
Act 10:14-16 MKJV
(14) But Peter said, Not so, Lord, for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.
(15) And the voice spoke to him again the second time, What God has made clean, you do not call common.
(16) This happened three times, and the vessel was received up again into the heaven.
We already agree that our calendar is wrong, off by anywhere from 2 to 16 years, depending on who's doing the reckoning, and further in error because of the absence of a year zero.
The more fundamental point is that God did not intend us to mark His years by the birth of Jesus.
If He had intended this we would have a Biblical fixing of the date.
Further, the day of Jesus' birth is unremarkable as all men are born.
However, very few return from the dead, that event is remarkable, and it is the defining moment of Christianity, the very moment of proof that his sacrifice was not in vain. And the Bible gives a precise reference for when this happened!
Clearly this was the date the calender was supposed to start!
For extra points, this makes our calender off by anywhere from 17 to 33 years. That makes this something like Holy Year 2000 to Holy Year 1983, giving us anywhere from 1 to 17 years to get our affairs in order before the real end of the millennium...
Yes, that's my theory too...if there's 2000 years allowed for man and if it starts as the death of Christ then you're right, there's not much time left. Because of calendar changes I personally believe he was born in 4 BC. If he died at 33 years old then we have until the year 2029 or thereabouts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.