Less Than $13k To Go!!
Just A Reminder
Please Don't Forget
To Donate To FR
Posted on 05/07/2011 9:27:55 PM PDT by tlb
INDEED.
THX.
How’s things there?
I haven’t had NHK on for several days.
Is there still talk of moving the capital?
Lots of folks are saying the top 1/3 of that island should really be declared uninhabitable.
I detect some sarcasm here.
I thought you were aware that we’ve traced our dispy perspective back to the early church era . . . and certainly many hundreds of years before Darby, Scholfield et al.
Such documentation has been posted on FR several times.
I think Giovanna keeps much better track of that than I do.
It still boggles my mind that anyone thinks that the Olivet discourse was fulfilled in AD70.
What nonsense.
So have I.
Origins of Millennial Heresy
The Millennium doctrine started in an ungodly heretic by the name of Cerinthus, who lived in the first century. It is true that the Jews generally believed that the Messiah would establish a literal or earthly kingdom. And even some of them believed that Messiah's reign would last a thousand years. We here give an extract from Neander's History of Christian Dogmas, Vol. 1, Page 248.
"The idea of a Millennial reign proceeded from Judaism; for among the Jews the representation was current that the Messiah would reign a thousand years upon earth. . . . Such products of Jewish imagination passed over into Christianity."
As before stated, Cerinthus was the first to attempt to introduce this doctrine under Christianity. Let history speak. In Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History, Book III, Chapter 28, is preserved a fragment from the writings of Caius, who lived about the close of the second century, which gives us the following account of Cerinthus's heresy:
"But Cerinthus, too, through revelations written, as he would have us believe, by a great apostle, brings before us marvelous things, which he pretends were shown him by angels; alleging that after the resurrection the kingdom of Christ is to be on earth, and that the flesh dwelling in Jerusalem is again to be subject to desires and pleasures. And being an enemy to the scriptures of God, wishing to deceive men, he says that there is to be space of a thousand years for marriage festivities." "One of the doctrines he taught was, that Christ would have an earthly kingdom."
This is the true origin of the Millennium theory. The reader will observe how lightly our author speaks of Cerinthus's idea of the kingdom of Christ being set up on earth after the resurrection. He says this doctrine was "something which he [Cerinthus] pretends was shown to him by angels." Caius must therefore have believed the orthodox teachings of the scriptures, that Christ's kingdom was set up at his first coming. Observe also that Caius calls Cerinthus "an enemy to the scriptures of God," and one who was "wishing to deceive men." This language he uses with special reference to the one thousand years Cerinthus claimed would be spent in sensuality. Notice also that Cerinthus believed in an earthly kingdom.
Cerinthus lived in the days of the apostle John. We will now call your attention to the attitude of the beloved apostle toward this Millennial teacher. Irenaeus, who was born about 120 A. D. and was acquainted with Polycarp, the disciple of John, [Eusebius's Eccl. Hist., V. 24], states that while John was at Ephesus, he entered a bath to wash and found that Cerinthus was within, and refused to bathe in the same bath house, but left the building, and exhorted those with him to do the same, saying, "Let us flee, lest the bath fall in, as long as Cerinthus, that enemy of the truth, is within." (Eusebius's Eccl. Hist., III. 28).
Let this be a rebuke to modern Millennial advocates. They claim their doctrine is well founded in the Apocalypse of John. But John called the founder of their theory "that enemy of the truth."
"Cerinthus required his followers to worship the supreme God.... He promised them a resurrection of their bodies, which would be succeeded by exquisite delights in the Millenary reign of Christ.... For Cerinthus supposed that Christ would hereafter return . . . and would reign with his followers a thousand years in Palestine." (Mosheim's Eccl. Hist., Page 50)
"Cerinthus required his followers to retain part of the Mosaical law, but to regulate their lives by the example of Christ: and taught that after the resurrection Christ would reign upon earth, with his faithful disciples, a thousand years, which would be spent in the highest sensual indulgences. This mixture of Judaism and Oriental philosophy was calculated to make many converts, and this sect soon became very numerous. They admitted a part of St. Matthew's Gospel but rejected the rest, and held the epistles of St. Paul in great abhorrence." (Gregory and Ruter's Church History., Page 30)
"Even though the floods of the nations and the vain superstitions of heretics should revolt against their true faith, they are overcome, and shall be dissolved as the foam, because Christ is the rock by which, and on which, the church is founded. And thus it is overcome by no [16] traces of maddened men. Therefore they are not to be heard who assure themselves that there is to be an earthly reign of a thousand years; who think, that is to say, with the heretic Cerinthus. For the kingdom of Christ is now eternal in his saints." (From a commentary on the Apocalypse, by Victorinus, Ante-Nicene Fathers)
Thank God for the united testimony of history. Observe how closely the modern Millennium teachers cling to the doctrines of their founder. Cerinthus taught that "Christ will have an earthly kingdom." "After the resurrection the kingdom of Christ is to be on earth." "The resurrection would be followed by exquisite delights in the Millenary reign of Christ." " That Christ would hereafter return, and would reign with his followers a thousand years in Palestine." The only difference is that his modern followers have dropped the idea of sensuality. But how did the early church regard the doctrine of Cerinthus? The apostle John called Cerinthus "that enemy of the truth." They taught that "they are not to be heard who assure themselves that there is to be an earthly reign of a thousand years."
What was the doctrine of the early church according to history? "Christ is the rock on which, and by which the church is founded." "The kingdom of Christ is now eternal in his saints." "It was the universal feeling among primitive Christians that they were living in the last period of the world's history." (Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. VIII.. Page 534). The reason they believed this was because the New Testament was their faith, and this is the doctrine of the New Testament throughout. No wonder Cerinthus and his followers "rejected part of St. Matthew's Gospel, and held the epistles of Paul in great abhorrence." Just so do modern Millennium teachers dwell very little in the plain Gospels and Epistles to prove their doctrines, but speculate in prophecy and revelation.
Having seen that Cerinthus and his false doctrine were rejected by God's church we will now come to its next chief advocate, Papias, who lived in the first half of the second century. Eusebius, under the heading "The Writings of Papias," says of him:
"The same historian also gives other accounts, which he says he adds as received by him from unwritten tradition, likewise some strange parables of our Lord, and of his doctrine, and some other matters rather too fabulous. In these he says there would be a certain Millennium after the resurrection, and that there would be a corporeal reign of Christ on this very earth; which things he appears to have imagined, as if they were authorized by the apostolic narrations, not understanding correctly those matters which they propounded mystically in their representations. For he was very limited in his comprehension, as is evident from his discourses." (Eusebius's Eccl. Hist., Book m, Chap. 39, Page 115).
Historians generally tell us that Papias was a very zealous advocate of this imaginary reign of Christ on earth. "The first distinguished opponent of this doctrine was Origen, who attacked it with great earnestness and ingenuity, and seems, in spite of some opposition to have thrown it into general discredit." (Wadington's History, Page 56).
"This obscure doctrine was probably known to but very few except the Fathers of the church, and is very sparingly mentioned by them during the first two centuries; and there is reason to believe that it scarcely attained much notoriety even among the learned Christians, until it was made a matter of controversy by Origen, and then rejected by the great majority. In fact we find Origen himself asserting that it was confined to those of the simpler sort."(Wadington's History, Page 56).
Next among the advocates of this doctrine was Nepos, a bishop in Egypt. He advocated the doctrine about A. D. 255. We here insert the following from Eusebius's History, Book VII, Chapter 23, under the heading "Nepos, and His Schism."
"He taught that the promises given to holy men in the scriptures should be understood more as the Jews understood them, and supposed that there would be a certain Millennium of sensual luxury on this earth: thinking, therefore, that he could establish his own opinion by the Revelation of John . . . He (Nepos) asserts that there will be an earthly reign of Christ." "Though Millennialism had been suppressed by the early church, it was nevertheless from time to time revived by heretical sects." (Dr. Schaff's History, Page 299).
"Nowhere in the discourses of Jesus is there a hint of a limited duration of the Messianic kingdom. The apostolic epistles are equally free from any trace of Chiliasm."(Encyclopedia Brittanica--Articles on Millennium).
To sum up the uniform voice of history, the theory of a literal kingdom and reign on the earth was gathered from Jewish fabulous "apocalypse," "unwritten tradition," "carnal misapprehensions," "pretended visions," "suppositions," and "superstitious imaginations."
Its advocates were said to be "very limited in their understanding," and "of the simple sort." Millennialism had the worst heretic in the first century for its founder, and its chief advocates thereafter were rejected by the early church.
From time to time it was revived by "heretical sects."
The vain worldly expectation that the Messiah would establish a literal kingdom caused the Jews to reject him, and his spiritual kingdom. They only wanted an earthly kingdom; hence rejected and crucified the Son of God. As soon as the church began to apostatize, and lost the glory of his spiritual kingdom, vain ambitions awakened the old Jewish desire for a literal kingdom.
And so it has come to pass that we have at this time of dead formality a multitude of men teaching the same abominable lie and false hope which crucified Christ nearly nineteen hundred years ago; namely, a literal kingdom of Christ.
Source: H. M. Riggle, "History of the Millennium," The Kingdom of God, 1899. *
Justin Martyr (A.D.150) CHAP. XI.--WHAT KINGDOM CHRISTIANS LOOK FOR.: "And when you hear that we look for a kingdom, you suppose, without making any inquiry, that we speak of a human kingdom; whereas we speak of that which is with God, as appears also from the confession of their faith made by those who are charged with being Christians, though they know that death is the punishment awarded to him who so confesses. Forif we looked for a human kingdom, we should also deny our Christ, that we might not be slain; and we should strive to escape detection, that we might obtain what we expect. But since our thoughts are not fixed on the present, we are not concerned when men cut us off; since also death is a debt which must at all events be paid."(First Apology of Justin Martyr, ch. 11)
Epiphanes (315-403): "There is indeed a millennium mentioned by St.John; but the most, and those pious men, look upon those words as true indeed, but to be taken in a spiritual sense." (Heresies, 77:26.)
Robert G. Clouse: "At the Council of Ephesus in 431, belief in the millennium was condemned as superstitious." (Clouse, The Meaning of the Millennium, p. 9.) J.A.W. Neander (1837): "Among the Jews the representation was growing that the messiah would reign 1000 years upon the earth. Such products of Jewish imagination passed over into Christianity. " (History of Christian Dogmas, Vol. I, pg. 248)
Richard Erdoes: "On the last day of the year 999, according to an ancient chronicle, the old basilica of St. Peter's at Rome was thronged with a mass of weeping and trembling worshippers awaiting the end of the world. This was the dreaded eve of the millennium, the Day of Wrath when the earth would dissolve into ashes. Many of those present had fiven away all of their possessions to the poor - lands, homes, and household goods - in order to assure for themselves forgiveness for their trespasses at the Last Judgment and a good place in heaven near the footstool of the Almighty. Many poor sinners - and who among them was not without sin? had entered the church in sackcloth and ashes, having already spent weeks and months doing penance and mortifying the flesh ... the last day of the year 999 and the first day of the year 1000 had come and gone. Yet still the earth stood still and people still lived." (A.D.2000: Living on the Brink of Apocalypse, 1,194.)
Joseph Hall (1574-1656): "The main grounde of all their Heterodoxie in this point, is that they put a meerly-literall construction upon the prophesies and promies of Scripture which the Holy Ghost intended onely to be spiritually understood..." (Anonymously published The Revelation Unrevealed concerning the Thousand-Yeares Reigne of the Saints with Christ upon Earth (1650)
Robert Baillie (1645): "AMONG all the Sparkles of new light wherewith our Brethren do entertain their own and the people’s fancy, there is none more pleasant than that of the thousand years; a conceit of the most Ancient and gross Heretic Cerinthus, a little purged by Papias, and by him transmitted to some of the Greek and Latin Fathers, but quickly declared, both by the Greek and Latin Church to be a great errour, if not an heresy. Since the days of Augustine unto our time, it went under no other notion, and was embraced by no Christian we hear of, till some of the Anabaptists did draw it out of its grave" (Source: A Dissuasive From the Errors of the Time - The thousand years of Christ his visible Reign upon earth, is against Scripture)
Christianity Today: "In City of God, Augustine (354-430) viewed the thousand years of Revelation 20 not as some special future time but "the period beginning with Christ's first coming," that is, the age of the Christian church. Throughout this age, the saints reign with Christnot in the fullness of the coming kingdom prepared for those blessed by God the Father, but "in some other and far inferior way." This position, often called "amillennial," became the view of most Christians in the West, including the Reformers, for almost 1,500 years."
Lorraine Boettner (1957): "So dependent is Premillennialism of the first 10 verses in Revelation 20, which it takes literally and then relies primarily on Old Testament kingdom prophecies for proof, that had it not been for this misinterpretation, the system as such probably never would have arisen." (The Millennium, rev. ed, Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, [1957] 1984, p. 11)
"We call attention also to the completely disproportionate emphasis that the premillennial system places on the Book of Revelation. For according to that interpretation chapters 4 through 19, a total of 16 chapters, are used to describe the comparatively short seven year Tribulation, while only six verses in chapter 20 are used to describe the glorious one thousand year reign of Christ upon the earth, with all the great and mighty events that undoubtedly would happen during that time. Such a method of interpretation is absurd on the face of it. The order should at least be reversed." (The Millennium, rev. ed, Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, [1957] 1984, p. 202)
James M. Efird (1989): "If one examines the texts carefully, however, it becomes rather obvious that John is not talking about the earth but is describing a scene in heaven. The martyrs are in heaven here and in every other place in Revelation (cf. 6:9-10). These martyrs are reigning with Christ in heaven, not for one thousand literal years but completely, totally." (Revelation for Today: An Apocalyptic Approach, Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1989, p. 115)
David Chilton (1985): "One of the antichrists who afflicted the early church was Cerinthus, the leader of a first-century Judaistic cult. Regarded by the Church Fathers as "the Arch-heretic," and identified as one of the "false apostles" who opposed Paul, Cerinthus was a Jew who joined the Church and began drawing Christians away from the orthodox faith. He taught that a lesser deity, and not the true God, had created the world (holding, with the Gnostics, that God was much too "spiritual" to be concerned with material reality). Logically, this meant also a denial of the Incarnation, since God would not take to Himself a physical body and truly human personality. And Cerinthus was consistent: he declared that Jesus had merely been an ordinary man, not born of a virgin; that "the Christ" (a heavenly spirit) had descended upon the man Jesus at His baptism (enabling Him to perform miracles), but then left Him again at the crucifixion. Cerinthus also advocated a doctrine of justification by works in particular, the absolute necessity of observing the ceremonial ordinances of the Old Covenant in order to be saved."
Etc., etc., ad infinitum. bttt
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 676, follows a discussion of the church’s ultimate trial. “The Antichrist’s deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgement. The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism [underline added], especially the ‘intrinsically perverse’ political form of a secular messianism.” http://www.catholicdoors.com/faq/qu29.htm
That must be Malaysia you are referring to?
LOL.
Nope.
Evidently you are well, then, and life goes on more or less as usual for y’all in Tokyo?
Peace, health and safety to you and those you love.
The Athanasian Creed and the Early Church: Clearly Amillennial
http://members.aol.com/twarren19/athacreed.html
By Martin R. Bachicha
Weren’t the Early Church Fathers Premillennialists?
In 1976 Alan Patrick Boyd, a graduate student at Dallas Theological Seminary began a challenging undertaking, writing a masters thesis whose goal was to establish the prophetic faith of the early church fathers. His professor, Dr. Charles Ryrie of Dallas Seminary fame had boldly written “Premillennialism is the historic faith of the Church.” But upon completing his thesis, Boyd concluded the following in response, “It is the conclusion of this thesis that Dr. Ryrie’s statement is historically invalid within the chronological framework of this thesis [apostolic age through Justin Martyr].” [ 1] (Quoted by Bahnsen and Gentry, p. 235. [ 2] )
Thomas Albrecht, who has done additional research on this topic, also writes, “some premillennialists had attempted to show that premillennialism was the ‘pervasive view of the earliest orthodox fathers’ (House and Ice, Dominion Theology, p.202). But many additional scholars have shown this to be false, including Boyd, D.H. Kromminga, Ned Stonehouse, W.G.T. Shedd, Louis Berkhof, and Philip Schaff. According to Boyd, the best that can be said of the early Church father is that they were ‘seminal amillennialists’ (cf. Bahnsen and Gentry, p. 239). The early Church fathers … Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Papius, admitted that there were many other Christians who were quite orthodox and not premillennial.” [ 3]
The following quote by the early church historian Eusebius from his classic work The History of the Church clearly demonstrates the amillennial, consummationist outlook held by the early church. Speaking of the grandsons of Jude, he writes: “the grandsons of Jude.... When asked [by the Emperor Domitian] about Christ and his kingdom—what it was like, and where it would appear—they explained that it was not of this world or anywhere on earth but angelic and in heaven, and would be established at the end of the world, when he would come in glory to judge the quick and the dead ....” [The History of the Church by Eusebius] from Charles Ludwig, Ludwig’s Handbook of New Testament Rulers and Cities. [ 4]
Eusebius is one of the early church fathers who most clearly denounces “chiliasm,” as premillennialism was then called. In the same work he writes, “About the same time … appeared Cerinthus, the leader of another Heresy. Caius, in The Disputation attributed to him, writes respection him: ‘But Cerinthus, by means of revelations which he pretended as if they were showed him by angels, asserting, that after the resurrection there would be an earthly kingdom of Christ, and that flesh, i.e. men, again inhabiting Jerusalem, would be subject to desires and pleasures. Being also an enemy to the divine scriptures, with a view to deceive men, he said that there would be a space of a thousand years for celebrating nuptial festivals.’” Eusebius also writes of a tradition passed down by Polycarp regarding an encounter between the Apostle John and Cerinthus in a public bath, “He [Polycarp] says that John the Apostle once entered a bath to wash; but ascertaining that Cerinthus was within, he leaped out of the place and fled from the door, not enduring to enter under the same roof with him, and exhorting those with him to do the same, saying, ‘Let us flee, lest the bath fall in, as long as Cerinthus, that enemy of the truth is within.’”[ 5] Tertullianus is another early church father who attributes chiliasm’s birth to Cerinthus. He writes: “They are not to be heard who assure themselves that there is to be an earthly reign of a thousand years, who think with the heretic Cerinthus. For the Kingdom of Christ is now eternal in the saints, although the glory of the saints shall be manifested after the resurrection.” [ 6]
Two of the preeminent creeds of the early church that contain verses that clearly lean towards an amillennial belief are the Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed. The Apostles’ Creed contains the words “He [Christ] shall come again to judge the quick and the dead,” implying that both judgement and the resurrection will take place at His coming. The Nicene Creed states that Christ “shall come again with glory to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.” Note that Christ’s kingdom is viewed here as eternal, not as a temporal reign of 1000 years.
By far the early church statement of faith that most vividly presents the early church’s belief in an amillennial, “consummationist” eschatology is The Athanasian Creed. Attributed to Athanasius, the Bishop of Alexandria and the champion of the Council of Nicaea, around 325 A.D., the creed ends with these words: “He shall come again to judge the living and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life eternal, and they who indeed have done evil into eternal fire. This is the catholic faith, which except a man have believed faithfully and firmly he cannot be in a state of salvation.” Let us analyze these closing verses more carefully to see how they align with the belief system we know today as amillennialism, and how they oppose any belief in an earthly 1000 year reign of Christ.
“He shall come again to judge the living and the dead.” This simply means that there will be those who are alive as well as those who are dead when He comes (1 Thess. 4:15). Notice that judgement of the living and the dead occurs at His coming (cf. Matt. 25:31-46), not a thousand years after His coming.
“At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies ....” Thus, at Christ’s coming all rise, the good and the evil alike (cf. John 5:28,29, Matt. 12:41,42). Not just the good, and then a thousand years later the wicked.
“... and shall give account for their own works. And they that have done good shall go into life eternal, and they who indeed have done evil into eternal fire.” This is a clear reference to Matt. 25:31-46. Athanasius views this as taking place after the resurrection (or translation), making it a post-resurrection judgement. This is in sharp contrast to the dispensational view that Matthew 25:31-46 is only a judgement of “living, mortal Gentiles” who survived the tribulation. Note again that it (i.e. Matt. 25:31-46) is viewed as a judgement of all men, the Jew and the Gentile, the wicked as well as the good.
We must ask, why were the early church fathers so solidly amillennial? The first most obvious answer is that it reflected apostolic teaching, which means they were being obedient to God’s word (Acts 2:42, Ephesians 2:20). Most importantly, it is what the scriptures clearly teach, and being faithful students of the scriptures, they came to this rightful conclusion. Even the late Dr. George Eldon Ladd, a premillennialist, wrote “I admit that the greatest difficulty to any premillennialism is the fact that most of the New Testament pictures the consummation as occurring at Jesus’ parousia.” [ 7]
Lastly, amillennialism is the single view that most highly glorifies our Lord Jesus and His Second Coming. To demonstrate this point I will ask these questions. Which view glorifies our Lord Jesus more? A view that has the glorified Christ reigning eternally immediately after His advent from the New Heavenly Jerusalem in the glory of His Father (amillennial); or a view that has Jesus reigning temporally (i.e. for 1000 years) from an earthly Jerusalem, surrounded by mortal men, sinners (premillennial)? Which view magnifies His Second Coming more? A view where at His parousia He eternally judges all of mankind, the living and the dead (amillennial), or a view where this judgement doesn’t take place until a 1000 years after His coming (premillennial)? Which is more monumental an advent? A Second Coming where sin is utterly effaced and death is completely destroyed (amillennial)? Or a second coming where sin is not effaced and death is not destroyed until a 1000 years later (premillennial)? The answer is obvious. Let us give glory to our Lord Jesus and believe the true prophetic faith: Amillennialism, the one and only true Christian eschatology.
Footnotes
[1] “A Dispensational Premillennial Analysis of the Eschatology of the Post-Apostolic Fathers [Until the Death of Justin Martyr],” unpublished master’s thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1977, p. 47), quoted in the web article, “Some Questions and Answers on Eschatology,” by Thomas Albrecht. [Back]
[2] House Divided: The Breakup of Dispensational Theology, by Greg L. Bahnsen and Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. [Back]
[3] Tom Albrecht, “Some Questions and Answers on Eschatology,” World Wide Web article. [Back]
[4] Quoted in the article “The Return of Nero” by Gary Stearman, Prophecy in the News, Vol. 16, No. 5, May 1996, p. 6. [Back]
[5] From Eusebius’ Eccleslastical History, Book 3, Chapter 23. Circa A.D. 324. [Back]
[6] From Tertullianus, The Writings of Tertullianus, Vol. 3, p. 433. [Back]
[7] George Eldon Ladd, The Meaning of the Millennium, (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1977) edited by Robert G. Clouse, pp. 189, 190. [Back] bttt
So Partial preterists, like you, are sort of amill and believe in a future bodily resurrection on judgment day like mainline amill protestants and roman catholics, while full preterists believe the resurrection already occurred in AD 70?
Is Gagdad Bob partial preterist?
Answer to question #1: Yes.
Answer to question #2: I don’t know.
Hebrews 4:12 (New International Version, ©2011) 12 For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.
Revelation 1:16 (New International Version, ©2011) 16 In his right hand he held seven stars, and coming out of his mouth was a sharp, double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.
Ephesians 6:17 (New International Version, ©2011) 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.
I would like to explore something. Does the sword divide the Word of God into Law and Gospel? Is one reason God wants Israel to exist today to maintain light on the Law? Is the Gospel for the Church and remnant Israel? If you are a remnant Messianic Jew should you follow the Law like Passover and circumcision yet by Grace through Faith as always for all believers and true descendants of Abraham? Does the sword also divide Jew and Gentile? Does not God want this separation in love?
I guess that includes me, oh well.
And even after being asekd at least a dozen times you have failed to provide a single example of real inconsitency... go figure
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.