As another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter.
By the Holy Ghost's Inspiration, the Lame Cherry is going to address something which is important as it will explain the lies the Vatican has expounded upon in their church being founded by St. Peter, who never went to Rome, and it will explain about the Gospel of Mark and the letters which St. Peter calls Mark his spiritual son.
The short version is there were two Marks. John Mark who wrote the Gospel was an Apostle of St. Paul.
John Mark is interesting in he was the nephew of Barnabas, who was the associate St. Paul. These two Church leaders in Paul and Barnabas had assistants in Silas and John Mark. In what was never explained, but was only referred to as John Mark had abandoned the ministry when Paul and Barnabas were on the first mission, left such a schism in St. Paul that he did not want this man along.
A severe breach occurred between Barnabas and Paul over this, and the separated in Barnabas taking his nephew with him, and Paul taking Silas.
This breach did not last though, and was never explained nor referred to. All that was stated was that when St. Paul was in Rome, in prison, one of his chief supporters and assistants.
Mark, the spiritual son of Peter, was a different man, and this is where the Vatican dogma in error begins to take place.
Peter states he did minister to the Gentiles. This work he did accomplish, but he never ventured to Rome as the Vatican states. The Simon who did venture to Rome was the sorcerror of The Acts, who tried to buy the power of the Holy Ghost from the Apostles.
It was he who founded the universal or catholic religion on the pagan hills, chief of which was Vaticanus.
One must remember now history and associate the two Marks. St. Paul was sent to Rome before Jerusalem's destruction. Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD, and the Christians were already under persecution and the Church had fled.
St. Peter had been martyred and that left Mark unattached. There was in the great Christian diaspora, a movement west. The same direction the Northern 10 Tribes had been move to centuries before. That is why James notes his message is to those lost tribes. Those peoples were in northwestern Europe at the time. Joseph was two tribes, and were dispersed throughout these peoples. The major population of Ephraim was in England and Northern Germany. The major population of Manneseh was in those areas who would later be planted by God in America.
The reason this is brought up, is the Davinci Codes spreads a lie in this, as Jesus never had children. The Christians who settled in France in the diaspora were Church Elders, led by Jesus brothers and sister. This is the Holy Grail bloodline of much of the royals of Europe. These Church Elders settled in Reuben or the Gauls of Roman protection.
To the point in this, Mark ventured to Rome. He was pressed ernestly by the Christians to write down the Gospel or Good News which he had learned directly from St. Peter. He did this after Peter and Paul had been executed.
The Gospel of St. Mark, or the spritual son of St. Peter, is the source of this book, and it is how in history the shades of grey melded Simon Pater of the Acts, seeking power in a religion which incorporated paganism, with St. Mark who was in Rome, providing the Spiritual foundation in a Testament to the Christians there.
This is what has been lost in all of this. The Christians in Rome were converted by St. Paul and St. Mark. The St. Mark of Peter's sphere, was in Rome too, and provided the Peter foundation to the early Christians there in the Gospel he was Inspired to record.
So the Church in Rome, was evanglized by Paul and Mark. Simon Pater the sorcerror, appeared there too, looking for power and started melding the pagans into Christianity as the Vatican still does in the Jesuits. Simon Pater had the affections of Rome as he was enabling their satanism. Into this, St. Mark of Peter, wrote the Gospel of his name, and this was the written foundation of the Church of Christ with St. Paul's work being the theology.
There were two Christian groups then in Peter and Paul's followers in Chirst. Does it make more sense now that it was in someone's interest who was allied with powerful Romans named Simon Pater who found it better to feed his competitors to the lions, because these real Christians were pointing out the sins of Rome?
That is how this transpired then, in the murder of many Christians, until a time when Rome accepted a form of Christianity, and by that age of universal religion, the history melded into one St. Peter, leaving his St. Mark and Paul's St. Mark out of the picture, and allowing St. Paul to exist, for the reason that he was ministering to the out empire Christians, and had been executed in Rome as an enemy of the state.
This is the history of the Two Marks of the Bible. Mark was a common Roman name, and many Christians had this name. These two were at the crux of the intrigue in what became the True Church and the supplanter religion which melded them as it did St. Peter while marginalizing St. Paul's work in Rome being imprisoned there.
That is enough of this lesson.
agtG
