Cromwell was good enough for Patrick Henry to cite---will you revise that too?
Dec 13, 2009 Rating
Patrick Henry by: Anonymous
Patrick Henry may not have had the information that we have today.
Dec 13, 2009 Rating
Was Cromwell In Bed With International Bankers? by: Dennis
Can somebody please explain the alleged connection between Cromwell and the International Bankers, since the Bank of England was not created until 1694 almost half a century after Cromwell died?
Dec 14, 2009 Rating
There's Conspiracy, And Then -- There's Conspiracy by: Jim Harrison
Actually, some of Cromwell's tolerance was tantamount to pluralism. He was among the many voices who in overreaction to the divine right of kings and other forms of tyranny found themselves promoting democracy. You have noted this in Keys to the Classics. Some of the finest men can do some of the craziest things!
As far as the international bankers are concerned, it may have something to do with Cromwell's encouraging the Jews to come back to England from Holland. Calvinists generally have been kind to the Jews. This is unacceptable to conspiracy freaks who tie anything Jewish to a Zionist conspiracy to take over the world.
For example, a friend of mine whom I had not been in contact with for years recently told me about the Jesuit conspiracy. The Jesuits created Communism. Stalin and Lennon were really secret Jesuits sent to kill 20 million Eastern Orthodox for breaking with the Roman Catholic Church.
Others have warned about the "Masonic Empire." It goes on and on. The real problem with these wacko conspiracy theories is that they discredit all conspiracy assertions.
There are real conspiracies. They can be traced historically and accurately. John Robinson wrote Proofs of a Conspiracy in 1797. Robinson, himself a Mason, wrote about how certain lodges had been used by some infiltrating groups, such as the Jesuits and the Order of the Illuminati, who also hated one another.
Two men can plan to rob a stagecoach. Bingo! A conspiracy! if they can create conspiracies on a small scale, there is no reason to think they can't do it on a large scale. Small bankers buy and sell cars and houses. International bankers buy and sell politicians and whole countries. Such conspiracies do exist. The Bank of England was founded in 1694, long after Cromwell was dead (twice, thanks to Charles II). Wow! It must have been those Jews he brought back from Holland! They started it.
God bless!
Jim Harrison
Dec 15, 2009 Rating
Specifics Please, Beyond Vague Accusations by: Dennis
OK, that sounds pretty good on the face of it, but I really would like to hear from someone on the other side of the issue beyond just 1 or 2 line assertions. Was there something specific about Cromwell's inviting the Jews back into England that led inexorably to the Bank of England in 1694? Some specific chain of causation?
Also, can we put some specifics on Cromwell's "pluralism" that produced some specific evil effect? It is clear that the Bible does not allow for the propagation of false doctrine, which is tantamount to worshiping an idol in violation of the First Commandment. For example, Elijah slaughtered the prophets of Baal, without much regard for their "freedom of religion."
On the other hand, the Bible does allow for "pluralism" when it comes to individual belief, does it not? The "stranger", or resident alien within Israel was given special protection along with the widow and orphan. Moreover, God Himself promised very harsh measures for any Jew that persecuted the "resident unbeliever." There was to be "one law" for the stranger and the home-born citizen of Israel. Coercion of individual belief, or "conscience" was strictly forbidden at the same time public propagation of that belief was outlawed.
The state church of England, as well as the state churches of the American colonies were in violation of this principle when they taxed people to support denominational principles in which they did not believe. Church and state are to remain institutionally separate, at the same time both are bound by oath to God and the Bible.
So was Cromwell not honoring that principle when he refused to favor the Presbyterian denomination by making it the state church? Did he not otherwise try to govern according to the Bible in his capacity as head of state?
If I'm wrong, please set me straight on this because it is extremely important that we get this right. I believe it was violation of this principle that led to the covenant-breaking constitution of 1787. Madison, Washington, et. al., threw the baby out with the bath water in reaction against the threat to liberty inherent in the colonial denominational establishments.
The American framers threw God out along with the idea of a state church. We have to get this right next time around -- next time God gives us an opportunity to set up a Biblical government. So please provide some specifics on why Cromwell was wrong beyond vague accusations.
