Here I wish to tell you about teachings I have that are seldom heard, and want to give you the chance to decide if I am an heretic for believing them. The teachings that characterize my Christian teaching ministry

1) Killing in a war and capital punishment are heresy.

2) Christian Marriage is for life, without the exception of adultery.

3) Defending the Greek of the KJV Bible, and opposing the modern versions as fake bibles.

4) Anti Ecumenical, including the grouping together in fellowship of heretical Protestant churches.


Are all often seen doctrines that other people frequently hold. However the following persuasions, that I feel about 99% certain are true, are very seldom ever seen or heard, and I think I should go to the trouble to group them together for you to decide if they in themselves make me a heretic.



I have a belief seldom heard. I do not believe all dead babies and children just "go to heaven" or those who died mentally challenged. That would go against my belief that Planet Earth is the free will testing ground of the human soul.

I believe children and babies will be resurrected into the 1,000 year reign (called The Millennium Kingdom in theology) of Jesus on Earth when he returns, and the people who will reign with him are the Christians who do not take the mark of the beast, who are either made martyrs (it specifically says by beheading) or make it all the way through to the Rapture without being found by the forces of the antichrist.


People in the Millenium will have a very long lifespan in a similar way to Methuselah. Other miraculous changes will occur at this time in the animal kingdom: "The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, The lion shall eat straw like the ox," I think it is possible the destroyed remnants of cities may be no go zones, that some people disobey Christ, become corrupted and this leads them to later follow Satan (pure speculation that on my part),

Some of the dead children and babies I believe may be risen from the dead in the same kind of form of Adam and Eve, innocent minded adults. They will be ruler over for 1,000 years by Jesus and the saints, then tested by the releasing of Satan from the pit Michael the Angel threw him into. Satan then leads some of those raised in Millenium to break the "Peace and Love" teachings of Jesus in order to mount an attack on Jerusalem.


1) I think Milton may have it correct in Paradise Lost, Book 1, when he extrapolates from holy scripture that Satan and his angels were cast into a place quote "Fitliest called Chaos" and he escaped or wandered from there to attack Adam and Eve, perhaps under threat of Hell if he ever tried it.


2) Hades certainly contains these places

a) Abraham's Bosom

b) The waiting place of the damned.


3) A Dungeon of Chains. That some of the devils angels who were particularly intelligent or evil were kept in chains by God, unable to attack Earth with Satan. Thus is described in the Epistle of Jude. This may be also in "Chaos", another special place, or Hades, it is not made clear.


4) Hades is not the Lake of Fire. Hell is the Lake of Fire. Hades is cast into the Lake of Fire, thus proving it is not Hell. Hades is loosely to be thought of as "The Underworld" (the actual original Greek concept of it) where dead souls reside before the Day of Judgement.

5) Therefore amalgamating these things Hades might be split into 4 places:


a) Abraham's Bosom

b) The waiting place of the damned.

c) A place Milton called Chaos, where Satan and his angels were thrown (he extrapolates even further with a place called "Pandemonium". which I think goes too far in biblical extrapolation,)

d) A Dungeon of demons in chains, demons God decided to edit out of Satan's army. so his attack on Planet Earth was not as bad. This is described in the Epistle of Jude. It is further supported by the fact that God seems to have confined other demons in the River Euphrates, only allowing them to escape at the End of the Age, just before Armageddon. 


The problem with extrapolating from the bible in this way is I can be accused of creating "traditions of men" in my teachings, or rather strong persuasions. (in progress..... )


The following area of new covenant law is the most stratospherically difficult, serious, and worrying I have ever dealt with. However as I believe we are entering a unique phase of history, The End Times, where Christians will be hunted to be killed for not taking the 666 mark, and will be "hated by all men for the Son of Man's sake" I feel it might be good to tackle it. One of my concerns is, my enemies may deliberately decontextualise and over simplify what I write here, simply because they have their own warped religious agenda, on this site meaning their Orthodox church beliefs. That may mean me tackling these stratospheric areas of law becomes counterproductive. It is a real dilemma.


Jesus was the supreme teacher of new covenant law (as God in the flesh, only Head of the church, King of Kings and Lord of Lords you would expect him to be!) and thus I believe he dealt with these stratospheric areas of law in his teachings.


"But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him; how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless? But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple." Matthew 12:3-6 .

1) Stratospheric theology question 1:

Can things be done by Christians that would usually be viewed as sin, if a complete breakdown in law and order happens, a World War, or they are being unjustly hunted to be imprisoned or executed? 

example 1: Trespassing. If an angry mob of murderers is chasing you, and you run across a person's land, and hide on it (normally trespassing and sin) is this permitted in new covenant law? My answer is YES.

example 1: Taking food from a field. If the 666 police hunters is chasing you, to catch and execute you and your family for not taking the mark of the beast, and you run across a person's land, and hide on it, is it permitted in God's law under these circumstance to take apples, potatoes and the like, and fish from the farmer's stream (normally considered poaching and stealing). If you are starving can you do this?


My answer is YES. My justification is 3 fold

1) Jesus said it was lawful for David, when Saul was chasing him to unjustly murder him, under of covenant law, to eat bread forbidden to the public in God's law. This was a special circumstance.

2) Again under old covenant law it was a law of Hod that a farmer "When thou comest into the standing corn of thy neighbour, then thou mayest pluck the ears with thine hand; but thou shalt not move a sickle unto thy neighbour's standing corn." Deut 23:25. Thus the farmer had to allow poor people to eat his crops. by law of God, indeed the disciples did this (Matthew 12:1, Mark 2:23) in the new testament.

3) "The earth is the LORD'S, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein." Psalm 24:1.

4) The new covenant law I believe reflects this in "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." The circumstances I am talking about here is very specific. Someone is trying to unjustly kill you and your family, you are hiding, can you fish from the stream? I say YES. The thing is, if you were starving, next to an apple tree, could you really resist eating them? And just how much do you think God would condemn you for it?

There are Christians who would emphatically say they would give themselves up to die before taking a potato from a field, an apple off a farmer's tree, or a fish from a stream. So answering this question probably YES is very irksome to me, and for the first time in all of my theology it bothers me to try to be real about this. The Eastern Orthodox believers would find it amazing I have no qualms whatsoever in calling their rites and rituals sorcery, but I feel uneasy saying you can eat a farmers apples from his tree, or from public land where they now forbid you, if being hunted by murderers.


Where I divide teaching into

1) Doctrine, a 100% definite teaching, for which one must answer to God.

2) Persuasions, not a doctrine, but something you believe is perhaps true to % of persuasion less that 100% (and it is best you quantify your degree of certainty where possible).

3) Extrapolations - logical deductions, but not doctrine, such as Milton saying "If Satan's angels were cast from heaven, they must have been cast into another place, what is that place, and should we give it a name."

The orthodox think along the lines of church doctrine, and traditions, established outside of scripture by their bishops, and something they call Theologoumena: / a theologoumenon  : a theological statement or concept in the area of individual opinion rather than of authoritative doctrine.