Who was Richard Cocke the Younger?

I have noticed that there has been a lot written regarding Lt. Col. Richard Cocke and his two sons named Richard Cocke. It has been written that Richrd Cocke the son of Lt. Col. Cocke’s first wife was known as the Elder and Richard Cocke born of the second wife was known as the Younger. This, we are told, was to easily identify the two half brothers. But instead of making things easier it has made things more confusing. The reason I say this is because a grave turned up for Anne Bowler the daughter of Capt. Thomas Bowler who was married to Richard Cocke the Younger of Bremo. Okay, so this must be the second son of Lt. Col. Richard Cocke right? The Younger. However, most of the early Cocke genealogies of the late 19th Century and early 20th Century claim that this Richard Cocke the Younger is actually the son of Richard Cocke the Elder!? Huh? One modern-day researcher was very adamant, although she gave no proof for this accept that some other researcher, who’s now dead, had posted it on his website. She claimed that instead of Richard the Elder calling his son named Richard, "junior," he called him "the Younger." Why would this be? The only Richard Cocke the Younger I had ever heard of was the second son of Lt. Col. Richard Cocke. How could there be two “the Youngers” running around that section of Virginia? This wouldn’t have made things easier at all! Just the opposite, in fact, it would have made things a heck of a lot more confusing. Some may argue that the grave for Anne (Bowler) Cocke stated that she was married to Richard Cocke the Younger of Bremo! So, since he’s of Bremo and Richard Cocke the Elder inherited the Bremo plantation from his father the Lt. Col. It must be the Elder’s son. But I would counter that both the Richard Cocke brothers were “of Bremo,” since both of them appear to have born there. Therefore, this would not have made things any clearer by stating, “of Bremo.” So what’s going on? Who is Richard Cocke the Younger? I didn’t just accept the, two Richard Cocke the Younger theory, because it didn’t make sense to me. Having two individuals called the Younger with the exact same name would be just as confusing as two brothers named Richard Cocke. But what if there was only one Richard Cocke the Younger? And could this be the case? I decided to try and find references to “Richard Cocke the Younger” from original sources. I first looked at the will of Lt. Col. Richard Cocke (dated 04 Oct 1665) and although “Richard Cocke the elder,” is mentioned; the phrase, “Richard Cocke the younger,” is not. Could Richard Cocke the Elder have been the only son of the Lt. Col. given an additional name? When Richard Cocke the father died in 1665 his second son named Richard Cocke may have been a child. Since this appears to be the case isn’t it possible that the older Richard was referred to as “elder” to differenciate him from his much younger brother Richard. To my knowledge there isn’t any document that lists the second son named Richard as “the younger.” That being said maybe Anne Bowler’s grave listing her as the wife of “Richard Cocke the Younger of Bremo,” is referring to Richard Cocke the Elder’s son, like some annoying researches have stated. Of course, the researchers always implied that the second son of Lt. Col. Cocke was “the Younger” too. It would make much more sense then that there was only one Richard Cocke the Younger because two alive at the same time would be stupid and confusing. If there was just one in history named the Younger, it would make more sense and he could logically be the son of the Richard called the Elder, because the Elder may have stuck when referring to the Cocke brothers. So instead of his son being called junior the son could very well have been called the younger instead. Later, researchers to differentiate the brother, started using "the Younger" when referring to the younger brother, who may never have been called that in life. Please let me know if there are in fact original documents that call the younger Richard Cocke brother, “the Younger.”

Sorry, Spirit Guides Are Demons!

Too many people nowadays take for granted that "dead people," “spirits,” or “angels” can communicate with “special” people and give them insight or hidden information. Blame the New Age movement or the modern obsession with the occult, but whatever the reason, the “spiritual” people who believe this, are all wrong! These “spiritual” people who reject religion or more specifically who reject Christianity have no idea what they are talking about. Don’t buy into their mumbo jumbo because it can have very serious consequences for you.

These so-called "guides" that communicate with so-called psychics are just demons posing as the spirit of a dead human being or an angel. People who automatically jump on the fact that I, as a Christian, am simply just stating what’s said in the “Christian” Bible and am using that to suggest that these spirits are demons, will say I’m all wet! What is so interesting, however, is that the Bible does talk about this phenomenon and actually explains it. We can read about the so-called psychic girl who can tell people’s futures for a price in the New Testament. One of the Disciples casts out the demon that was making this possible and the slave girl’s owner sues the Disciple.

The fact, that these spirits are referred to and explained as to what they actually are is important. People today, have given testimony as to spiritual problems they have had with demons and how they have had to pray to Jesus Christ for their freedom from these creatures.

Sure, they are spirits, they were angels, but most importantly they are evil. Don’t mess with them. Don’t have an inordinate amount of interest in them. Don’t hold séances, don’t “play” with Ouija boards, don’t try to explore “haunted houses.” Everybody thinks it would be so cool to be psychic! Wow. Impress your friends, scare your enemies, use it like a parlor trick! Awesome… NOT!

These “friendly” spirits that influence you and can give you “insights” or even just plain speak to you in your head, are not really there to “help” you. They are working with their own agenda. They are working for their boss ultimately to get your soul, but can use you to cause others to go down the wrong path as well. Once they are done with you, they don’t care what happens to you. If you decide that you don’t want to follow their advice or worse yet, you try to get rid of them or start attending church, watch out! You will see their wrath!

These devils will lie to you. They will pose as a dead relative - Nana or Uncle Ted, but they are not. They will start feeding you all the occult lies about re-incarnation and the afterlife. They will want to lure you away from your Christian religion, if you believe, and will want to get you involved in paganism and other occult practices. Of course, when they make out that you have been “chosen” or are “special,” who wouldn’t want to hear that, they must be telling the truth! Right? Many people don’t even doubt what they are told.

One might argue that children, who must be innocent, have these psychic experiences and so they must be special, because why else would it happen. Some people that it happens to, are nominally religious even! Unfortunately, the sins of the ancestors can affect you. If some great-grandfather was a Freemason he could have professed his way into giving his family over to these demons. Someone in your family or ancestry who fooled around with witchcraft, made pacts with the devil, made wishes for riches or fame, or held séances can actually affect you! Being immoral and hanging around with the “wrong people,“ like wiccans, satanists, or occultists; not being baptized even, all these things, can be inviting “spirit guides,” or “angels,” into your life. Of course, these things are guides only on how to get you to Hell and how to take others with you. They are angels, only in the sense that that is what they originally were and are now sometimes referred to as dark angels. They are spirits only in the sense that they have no bodies, but they are actually unclean spirits, which are demons.

The Judeo-Christian Bibles do talk about these creatures. Yes, absolutely. They expose them for what they are! These evil things quake at the name of Jesus Christ. It has been shown time and time again through deliverances and Exorcisms! They are not all knowing; all seeing spirit guides. No, they are lying, cowering, thugs, that will trick and fool unsuspecting and unprepared people into Hell.