Social media fights of the 1600s

(written by lawrence krubner, however indented passages are often quotes). You can contact lawrence at:

I recently read “The World Turned Upside Down” and I was surprised by the parallels:

During the English revolt, the censorship of the press was suspended, and people could publish anything. And they did. And the number of inaccuracies spread rapidly.

It became common to argue that England had once enjoyed a rough democracy during the Anglo Saxon days, even though there is no evidence of that.

It became common to argue that studying the Bible was unimportant, compared to the importance of being moved to speak by the Holy Spirit.

A number of establishment figures thought they could stop the spread of error simply by writing books pointing out the errors — which seems very similar to what is happening now.

After the King was killed, and the official Church limited in its legitimacy, a problem arose that no one had the legitimate authority to determine if someone was the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, so more and more people began to claim that they were, in fact, the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. And the competition among these so-called Second Christs somewhat resembles fights among modern day influencers on YouTube.

In the end, the public became exhausted with the way nothing seemed to have any legitimacy, and which point the public became nostalgic about having a King. And this made it inevitable that eventually the monarchy would be restored.