Definition of simoneyak and background

Simoneyak is made up of three words, well a name and two words.

1. Simon, who for a while was Peter but was demoted back to simon in John chapter 21, (per the authoress of the fourth gospel evidenced as Mary Magdalene, as the disciple whom Jesus loved), after being found in a fishing boat, having done no fish catching all night when Jesus showed there were plenty of fish there just waiting to be caught, in the nude with Mary Magdelene, the disciple whom Jesus love. The term “the disciple whom Jesus loved” signifying Mary Magdalene, clearly a romantic term, as to say otherwise is to say Jesus only loved one disciple and that was a man and didn’t n much care for the rest, and by showing simon was caught in the boat in the nude with Mary catching no fish all night, simon gave his meaning to the term, having heard it in the upper room days before and taking it to heart, “as I have loved you” which the said disciple whom Jesus loved, Herself the high priestess of Asherah, the Goddess of Love in the temple and acceptant of love worship for tribute which Jesus came to the party to provide in the form of 153 fishes (3 x 3 x 17) to settle simon’s dues, wrote down in the fourth gospel that couldn’t be named after a woman or it might not get included in the canon which She heard Jesus say to her a few times so she wrote it down a few times. Hence simon peter was demoted back to plain simon according to Mary M and pissed off with the job of looking after some sheep and lambs and he had the temerity to quiz Jesus as to what was going to happen with Mary M and he was told basically she, as High priestess of Asherah and the one who co-anointed him, was off limits and Jesus had higher plans for her but simon had higher aspirations like heading up a church based on Jesus having been killed off and run by men and being married himself promoting marriage etc to the exclusion of the recently delivered new commandment to love one another, not one other, as Jesus had loved Mary M, making money out of it, even to the point of death as a good moneyspinner.

2. money

3. yak

So simoneyaks are people, clerics, families, who are in religion just for the money, not believing any of it, hypocrites, with whom one should not be unequally yoked, 2 Cor 6:14 and they are to be found in all religions even long before the time of Jesus and generally seek with their rules and regulations to control to preserve assets and the status quo and the social heirarchies of the day, push guilt and expiation through them alone as a monopoly, suppression, meaningless ritual to make some use of the real estate, do not encourage the making and expressing of love as between mutually acceptable true believers, as only the highest religions promote loving between believers and lower religions populated by devils and demons or the blind leading the blind do not. The highest religion is love and the true worship is eternal ongoing making of love as between mutually responsive obedient believers, preferably involved in joint ventures. Simoneyaks denigrate this true worship as lust but as Jesus pointed out lust is fine if on the part of a woman lusting for a man. Remember Jesus and Mary, him being a nazarite and she being a high priestess of Asherah never advocated, let alone participated, in marriage and Jesus and Paul recommended against such man made yoking traditions but the simoneyaks promote it as a central church function, sacrament even, because of the money it makes using women, and men, as bargaining chips, pawns, in deals on land and business. In these modern days marriage figures as an investment gamble of time, emotion and money where in half of all cases someone, if not to a degree both, lose out so such an investment, being not of scriptural origin, should not be promoted and is abandoning the faith and diminishing one’s primary spiritual loyalties, apostasy even. Marriage is not a Christian tradition or teaching nor did it arise from the law of Moses.. It’s earliest mention is Lamech who used it as a custom, a pretext, to have two wives to make the having of two and maybe more wives acceptable – so why otherwise promote marriage if not for the money when the standard, under say Asherity-Magdelinity, is six major and six minor foldmates for purposes of whoreship, joint blessing generation, worthship, and joint venturing and sharefare/wharefare, spiritual whorefare: all basic fellowship?

So since all the denominations from about the Sunday of the resurrection are based upon a fraud, still honoured to this day, being the deofficing of Mary Magdelene, doctrinal and published High Priestess of Asherah, who had been accorded the double entendre “best part” (best rapt), i.e. the leadership of the fledgling church by way of consequent co anointment, it is the case that the Asherites, disciples of Asherah the Blessed, Goddess of Love and Wisdom, consort of El, the God of law and creation, would thereby be dominant, thus riling the simoneyak male disciples headed by Judas who thought the cost expended in the co-anointment to be a waste of money (so a peeved MM commented). These denominations have dephysicalized, vitiated and deloved the new commandment substituting it with pretend love traditions and ordinances so one should not be yoked with them as they are simoneyak adn apostate as the true worshippers are magdelene asherite who whoreship in spirit and in truth in house churches by committedly making love as acts of whoreship between mutually turned on infilled believers to generate blessings for them and theirs and the world. As Jesus said “By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples if ye have love one to another, i.e making love one to another, not being married, so that all would comment and know that these are Jesus’ disciples – and that is not being said of any group at the moment based upon their coming together in love for one another, having scriptural foldmates as true believers have. Whoreshipping in spirit and in truth, Coming together in remembrance of him which costs nothing. True believers show their real commitment to Jesus and one another by making love, one to another, not one other, as commanded by being hospitable and loving, girl to guy, as we are designed, created, equipped, commended, commanded and of course made to quite like to do in all honesty one with one another, not one other, not holding back with our foldmates either as fellowship or outreach evaginalization. Making love ongoingly, one to another, as between believers is true and very real commitment, the rest is avoidance of committing to love and and falling short of the glory of God and all have fallen short and gone their own way and so are in sin. Simoneyak surrogate sacraments are avoidant and just something to do with the real estate bought with the money from bequests. Jesus’ movement was the Way, the love movement based upon his living waters of spiritual enrichment, not unscriptural marriage which is unequal yoking and apostasy. True believers make unrestrained love, one with and to another, not one other, which is idolatry, which Mary M said to avoid, the idol being worshipped being a captive man or woman worshipped laterally and not apexually. They make love but to generate blessings as orgasms, orbgasms, sensations and excitations to accumulatively bless each other and the world and they also make love for spiritual warfare by whorefare.

Those in religion just or primarily or secretly for the money economy and not for God’s blessing economy, run by God’s admin, disconnected from the money economy.

Hi B

Have not heard back from from Jeanne yet in reply to my challenge.

I take it she concedes that Simon, for a while called Peter by Jesus, who stood for no election was not the first bishop of the Church of Rome and so not a pope.

Hence any claim to authority based upon Simon being first pope fails and if authority fails then all sacraments such as marriage are without authority and not binding and all are released from their marriage vows and all lands and property holdings revert to the Crown of the line of David.

If she feels fairly certain I would be prepared to put money on it and so can she.

Otherwise she concedes as someone made it up and told her and she believed it and so is gullible as only gullible people would believe that Simon, father of Judas, both of the Iscariot clan (John 13:2, 26) and opposed to Jesus, was first or any pope. The suggestion is ludicrous. People who think the father of Judas was the first pope of the Church do not read the Bible. Judas as thieving bishop (acts 1:20) sought to undermine the fledgling Magdeline Jesus church by issuing an oral judgment (John 12:4-5) denouncing the joint anointment symbolizing a passing of authority and union (Luke 10:42) (MM defended and undercut his defective authority well and vitiated his judgement in John 12:6), typically tried to confiscate the temple sized jar of expensive consecrational spikenard ointment and also undertook to do the betrayal at the first Jesus/MM upper room service at which they announced their new commandment so as to put a stop to the new movement which threatened to derail their male disciple movement to stage manage and make money out of Jesus performances and marriage etc. Simon for his part as father of the Judatholic faction performed the on cue triple denial and the tactfully described (implicit in John 21) rape of Mary Magdelene which Jesus masterfully, by supplying 153 fish to pay the tribute, turned into an act of submissional whoreship to priestess MM and their new movement: the Way: love one another, not one other. Shortly thereafter Simon was demoted from Simon Peter back to plain Simon. For our enlightenment (and that of all judatholics) Simon let us in on what he interpreted the theme of loving one another to mean: in the nude (John 21:7), which it does so as to generate blessings by making love between believers (John 13:34-35, 1 Cor 6:20, Rom 12:1). His simoneyak judatholic take on that was to, with Jesus not around, rape high priestess of Asherah, Mary Magdelene, for no tribute.   

Like the word catholic, the word pope is not even mentioned in the bible and means nothing. The reason why catholics refer to priests as father (contrary to Jesus command in Matt 23:9) is because Simon was the father of Judas so it is part of the tradition of the Iscariot clan religion where the line of bishops to this day descend from bishop Judas and is a declaration of defiance in not obeying the commandments of Jesus (John 14:15). Hence the proper name of the catholic church is the Judatholic church or Judas church for short.  

Obviously the leader of the Church is Mary Magdelene as the scriptures lead us to believe (Luke 10:42) and her followers may be called cataholics.  

I appear to have won hands down as the 14 days allowed under due process for reply has elapsed and by default Jeanne has admitted defeat in deference to the obvious.

Thanks to Jeanne for an easy win.

In relation to Cynthia there has been no I response so and I take it that she is dyslexic (sex daily) and still unable to comprehend the message on the card and so not is a position to advance a point of view. Her inability to respond likewise within the 14 day period tends to support my conclusion.  


On Tue, 2013-04-02 at 08:00 +1100, David Gregory Murphy wrote:

Hi B

Thank you for coming along recently and telling me that you have a friend who was told by someone that Simon, formerly Peter, was the first bishop of Rome and hence first Pope of the Roman Catholic Church.

I don't think this is correct but would be happy to investigate further. I am fairly sure it is not the case but if she proves to be correct I would be happy to make a further donation.

I have already donated money to the Catholic church before and it was greatly acknowledged in one case last year by an angel in blue and white coming up the steps of St Mary's Cathedral and in another case also last year by a green ray of light beamed at me from the right eye of the statue on the right at St Patrick's catholic church Wynyard after I had attended my first Mass to which a special catholic friend invited me. Hence I was given two special dispensations calling for my attentions to be turned upon the church. 

I would like to advise that I first attended a catholic church when I attended St Dominic's in Flemington when I was about 9 or 10. I grew up in Flemington. My grandfather, or maybe it was great grandfather, was a catholic and, of course, I have a good catholic surname Murphy (myrrh fee) and my middle name is named after Pope Gregory who gave the great homily in 591. My sister thinks my father named me after Gregory Peck but I would prefer to think it was after Pope Gregory the Great, greatest of the early popes,  just as my mother, being of the female line of descent and thus by tradition, named me after King David. Being the female of the line of descent and my being the first known male in the line for generations she won out over my father, who had little say, and my first name is David despite the fact that I was a total surprise and never meant to be born and my mother has no recollection or accounting for my conception. That would suggest from either side's attestation  I am of royal extraction, each line acknowledging the other line. Even the home in which I grew up was called Glenroyal referring to some Scottish royalty way back somewhere lost in time. My mother's maiden name was Johnston which means, I guess, stone of John (stone of Scone?) compared to Peter/rock so I guess I have a different view. Recently my sister Judith Elizabeth tracked down an active genealogy group on my mother's side in northern NSW and with all their research they did not even know we existed so obscure and lost were we. Consequently having no relatives around that I know and the fact that women generally never ask me out I started a dinner club for lonely singles etc as there were never ever any family type events apart from going to court and women aren't interested in you if you are not well connected and don't seem to have family and a job. (Even if they do show an apparent interest it is only using me as they don't do anything demonstratively scriptural - it is cheat love). I have means. Leaves me time to do a lot of research.

I look at references in the Douay Rheims sometimes but I don't have as easy access to the New Jerusalem Bible.

I understand your friend is Maronite. I first encountered Maronites at Goulburn Teachers College when studying to become a primary teacher before going into business and some of them seem to know their stuff. I must confess that years ago one girl who once picked me up at a party was Maronite. I learned recently they find St Augustine and his writings and St Mary Magdelene and her writings offensive and one or two prominent high up Maronites recently publically declared on oath that they threw their writings and documents revering them in the bin regarding such as rubbish all for a few dollars. Simoneyaks. 

I think there may be blessings far and wide and all round in this so I hope your friend is confident that her stance is the case and is prepared to defend her position and is similarly minded to proceed.

Please bounce this email on to her for response.

PS: I note your other friend Cynthia has not yet read the card. Please have her furnish her remarks after she has read the card and tested the therapy and can talk first hand. I have little time for inexperienced academics or toffee nosed unbelievers who sound like they are really the ones who need the cathartic therapy. She is welcome to visit and have a free trial in the interests of pure research so she can write a paper and get published.


Related words

simoneyakkers – simoneyakurse – simoneyaknurse – simoneyakourse – simoneysayers – simonk – simoney – simonkey – simonkeyak – simonkayak –

simoneyak (annagrammed) = is a monkey

For more reading see:

Orgasmic Internet Church of Mary Magdalene and Jesus the Christ

About Mary Magdalene

Inner temple pussy blessings, doctrine section

Rules of the temple

For comments and dialogue you may respond to me at

stats counter