It is our pleasure to welcome Mauro Biglino, author of Gods of the Bible as our featured author for April. Mauro, a biblical scholar and translator, has supervised the translation and publication of 17 books of the Old Testament for Edizioni San Paolo, Italy’s foremost Catholic publisher. In his book, Gods of the Bible, Mauro offers the reader a revolutionary rediscovery of biblical writings and the remarkable insights into the history of humanity these texts contain. In his article here, Mauro explores how his decades-long background as a biblical translator compelled him towards a new interpretation of the Bible, revealing ancient secrets that transform our traditional understanding of the past.
Interact with Mauro on our AoM forum here.
I can’t help but think of how it all began. As I write at my desk, I have in front of me the first printed copy of Gods of the Bible, first on top of a tall pile of books, block notes, and paper sheets. Such crumbling towers take up most of the desk. My books and those of others form a chaos of overlapping memories and voices while the rays of the afternoon sun filter through the window and light some of the covers up.
One of these volumes always holds special meaning for me — a pink notebook with my first interlinear translation of the Book of Genesis, written in pencil. Even today, every time I write, I can’t help but think of how it all began. It was more than twenty years ago, twenty-five, almost. I was just a lover of ancient languages, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. At this same desk, much emptier, I translated the Bible day and night. Then, as in all stories, adventure was born of a mistake, a small, insignificant typo. It was a rather trivial typo that I might have discovered in the edition of the Hebrew Interlinear Bible of the most famous Italian religious publisher: Edizioni San Paolo. That’s how it all started — with a mistake.
It’s worth telling the reader that Edizioni San Paolo is Italy’s most prominent Catholic publishing house. Its Vatican-approved publications are used in graduate and post-graduate Biblical Hebrew and Bible studies courses in Catholic universities and departments. I was just a self-taught translator of the Bible. And yet, it was I who caught an error. At first, I questioned my skills. I tend not to jump to conclusions too soon. I have a background in Classics, and my mindset is that of a philologist. I double-checked my grammar books and compared different translations; I read and reread many times the same passage until I was convinced I had found a mistake.
Finding errors, flaws, and typos in books is hardly surprising. In mine, they are there. And in the books of others, too. But we are human beings. The Bible, on the other hand, is a book “inspired by God.” That is what we have been taught. It contains the absolute truth — so say the theologians. More than half of humanity bases its existence and life values directly or indirectly on the Bible. As a result, the Bible has become the basis of an immense power structure. Any mistake could raise the suspicion that this monstrous giant was, in reality, a giant on clay feet.
And yet I was there looking at this mistake, like an engineer who finds a small crack in a dam. Little did I know then that that error was the first of many I was about to discover. But at that moment, I shrugged my shoulders without thinking much about it. I wrote a short note to the publisher saying, “Hey, I think I found a mistake; you might want to fix it.” A few weeks later, out of the blue, they contacted me and said: “May we see some of your translations?”. I sent them my Genesis, a copy of the pink block note I now observe from my chair. It was the turning point. A decade-long collaboration began. Following this partnership, I published seventeen books of the Old Testament in Edizioni San Paolo’s Hebrew Interlinear Bible.1
Since the beginning of my professional career as a Bible translator, I have never stopped finding errors in the Bible, particularly in the Old Testament. Not just minor typos and mistakes but downright forgeries and tendentious mistranslations. My last work, Gods of the Bible, just came from print and smells of glue and fresh paper. It’s my latest effort in this twenty-five years long research, but I still feel that the fil rouge with that first pink block note was never broken. The same spirit moved me. Understanding how such a fragile text as the biblical one could become the foundation of a monstrous power system and religions followed by billions of people. Few books in the history of humanity have been written, rewritten, added to, corrected, changed, and censored as often as the Bible. The text of the Bible, mainly fixed after the sixth century BC, but based on older oral and written traditions, is one of the most fragile, unreliable texts in human history. What should surprise us is not so much that someone is looking in it for traces of an ancient advanced civilization, but the fact that someone — theologians — could build absolute truths on such text, with a dogmatic approach that has often become in history and often still becomes fanaticism.
I may have anticipated a theme that could frighten more cautious readers. Still, there is no way to prepare a traditional readership for the hypothesis I seek to test in Gods of the Bible, starting precisely from the Hebrew translations and the demystification of theological, spiritualizing readings. But I have to start somewhere, and I have no better option than playing cards face up. Therefore, let me declare right off that the Bible is not a holy book. In antiquity, the term “holy” was understood as everything “reserved” for the deity. This term has by no means the spiritualistic value we ascribe to it today. The protagonists of the biblical accounts all move within a materialistic and immanentist horizon, very concrete and tangible.
The Old Testament is just the story of the alliance/relationship between Yahweh and the family of Jacob-Israel, and such a tale is deprived of any universalistic perspectives (a later invention of Christianity). This alliance, which did not even involve all the descendants of Abraham’s family but only one of its branches, that of Jacob-Israel, is not a universal but a particular account of events that happened at a specific time in history in a specific place: today we would perhaps label it as a local history book. Yahweh, the protagonist of the Old Testament, was just the leader of the family of Jacob.
Other families, peoples, and nations had their leaders; only they did not take the pain to write an accurate account of such relationships. Or maybe they did, and the books went lost. But the question is: who were these “leaders” that the ancient people considered “deities” and referred to by different but equivalent names? The Sumerians called them “Anunnaki,” the Egyptians called them “Neteru,” and the Babylonians called them “Ilanu.” The Bible calls them “Elohim.” Who were the Elohim, then?
Ten or so years ago, when I started voicing my doubts about the correctness of translating the term “Elohim” with “God,” Edizioni San Paolo’s bosses began to worry about my heterodox ideas, and our collaboration came to a halt after seventeen books were published together. What made them so mad? The extraterrestrial hypothesis, to be fair, was not the main problem, as the Catholic Church does admit the possibility of extraterrestrial intelligence. Rev. Jose Gabriel Funes, ex-Vatican’s chief astronomer, avers that there is no conflict between believing in God and the possibility of “extraterrestrial brothers,” perhaps more evolved than humans.2
The main problem was my methodology and its profound implications. To be clear, I propose a literal interpretation that allows me, and all those who adhere to it, to read the Bible, and particularly the Old Testament, from the advantage point of distancing myself from the theological filters that have buried the “sacred text” for thousands of years, making it unreachable and unusable.
Monotheistic theology has deprived us of the possibility of treating the Bible like any other ancient source to be studied objectively. If treated as any other ancient source, the Bible could say much about the history of humankind before saying anything about God. But here lies the problem. Nobody knows anything about God, yet priests and theologians claim the right to interpret the Bible according to their theological schemes. It is frankly unbelievable that the literal reading of the Bible could represent such a Copernican revolution in biblical and anthropological studies. This circumstance says much about theology’s deforming, obscurantist power when applied to an ancient book.
As is well known, at least until the 16th century, the Catholic Church forbade reading the Bible without the mediation of an official interpreter. The reason behind this prohibition is apparent today to anyone. If you read what is written without interpretative filters, without theological lenses on your nose, the Bible becomes an exciting source of knowledge, not about God, but about human history. The readers of the Bible will experiment with the regenerating feeling of discovering something left unseen in plain sight. This is what I experienced when I started translating the Bible. The literal reading is as subversive as it is simple. A new reality, at the same time revolutionary and familiar, materializes in front of the reader in the same way a small child discovers a unique gelato flavor and realizes that the world is an inexhaustible source of surprises.
I certainly am not the first one to endorse such methods. With appropriate differences, this is the same methodological approach that Heinrich Schliemann (1822-1890) successfully adopted. The history of archeology has taught us that much good can come from questions asked by independent researchers who view reality with a divergent thinking approach. One must ask how Schliemann, who was not a professional archaeologist, succeeded in finding the lost city of Troy, whereas professional archeologists, firmly entrenched in academic circles, failed in the task. Free of preconceived notions, Schliemann believed that the story of the Trojan War, as told in the Iliad, was true, or at least contained much truth, and was not merely a product of Homer’s imagination. Schliemann decided to believe the ancient sources. The groundbreaking premise of his work was to “pretend” that the Iliad contained actual historical events. He took Homer’s account as a starting point for his research. Accompanied by sarcastic ridicule from the academic world, he pursued his research with extraordinary tenacity and eventually found Troy on Hissarlik Hill in western Turkey.3
Using this method, Schliemann made some of the most significant discoveries in the history of archeology. For any unbiased observer, this method is logical; still, the archeologists of his time amazingly could not see its value. Not because their eyesight was weak but because they wore blinders and did not even know it.
I pretend that the Bible is true in its literal sense. I say, “Let us pretend that the Bible is true.” Opinable as it can be, this methodology has the advantage of not arbitrarily resorting to hermeneutical categories (allegories, symbols, metaphors, and so forth) to explain “difficult” passages. The Bible is straightforward and can be understood easily through literal reading. When I see theologians and biblical exegetes swim in a sea of confused and confusing interpretative devices, to which they inevitably must resort to making sense of problematic passages, I wonder how they could reconcile their arbitrary interpretative method with the claim that the Bible is “word of God.” However, I know the answer. How can you explain Yahweh’s craving for the smell of burnt flesh, if not allegorically?
If you read the Bible, literally everything becomes understandable and plain because the biblical authors did not feel the need, as we do, to advocate for a precise monotheistic theological perspective or a moral authority of religious order. The biblical authors wrote what they experienced, saw with their eyes, or heard with their ears, even when the image of Yahweh from those reports was all but flattering. As a theologian of a loving God, how do you explain that Yahweh orders the extermination of men, women, and children and claims for himself 675 sheep, 72 oxen, 61 donkeys, and 32 virgins after a battle against the Midianites (Numbers 31:32-40)? This portion of the spoils was not for the service of the tabernacle, as Numbers 31 explains: it was for Yahweh’s personal use. One only wonders why a spiritual and transcendent “God” would need 32 virgins — or 61 donkeys, for that matter.
Such disturbing passages were not intended as metaphors or allegories to be interpreted 2,000 years later by some theologians in their Vatican libraries but reflected what the writer had heard or seen. Similar examples are found throughout the Bible, and I don’t want to assume that the authors of the biblical text misrepresented their ideas or the facts they wanted to convey and describe. I take the text seriously.
From the necessity of harmonizing the biblical text with the theological and monotheistic conception of God of Western culture arises a whole series of falsifications and mistranslations, in view of which that first innocent printing typo I had discovered twenty-five years ago really seems like a “speck in the eye of the brother.” Instead, here we talk about massive logs that have remained in our eyes for hundreds and thousands of years, so long that we even ignore our blindness. In Gods of the Bible, I have tried to remove at least some of these logs, addressing subjects such as the story of creation, the origins, and evolution of humankind, the existence of angels, the nature of cherubim, the identity of Satan, the meaning of the name of Yahweh and many more.
Mainly I focused on the identity and character of Yahweh and the meaning of the term “Elohim.” To make a long story short, when we read the term “God” in the Bible, this usually comes from the Hebrew term “Elohim.” However, at least when I worked for Edizioni San Paolo, the term “Elohim” was left untranslated into the interlinear edition of the Bible that we prepared for scholars and academia. In the Bibles available to the public, the same term was translated as “God.” Therefore, where people read “God” and believe that the biblical authors wrote the equivalent of the word “God,” scholars read the term “Elohim.” This was to alert them that this word is problematic, to say the least, for the unbiased translator.
Furthermore, Yahweh is just one of the many individuals who comprise the group of the “Elohim.” As shown, this term is the equivalent of the Sumerian “Anunnaki” or the Egyptian “Neteru,” which described a pantheon of a multiplicity of deities. Monotheism arose quite late on the roots of a previously widespread polytheism that affected all the peoples of the ancient Near East, including the Israelites. This fact is now recognized even in Bible study circles. Professor Mark Smith of Princeton Theological Seminary has written extensively on the polytheistic roots of the Bible and the long development of monotheism from an earlier polytheism.4
Often, however, these findings remain isolated. They certainly do not penetrate the realm of doctrine, except in a form purified of its most radical consequences, and therefore do not influence popular piety and practiced religion. Scholars in this field tend to defuse their most controversial results to avoid conflicts between theology and biblical scholarship. On the contrary, I think one of the greatest hindrances to reading the Bible is theology. In 2016, I held a conference in Milan with four theologians of different backgrounds: Ariel Di Porto, Chief Rabbi of the Jewish Community of Turin; Mons. Avondios, Archbishop of the Orthodox Church of Milan; Daniele Garrone, Biblical scholar, and Protestant pastor, Old Testament expert; Don Ermis Segatti, priest and professor of Theology and History of Christianity at the Theological Faculty of Northern Italy — this was at times a very heated meeting.5
At any rate, nobody who is intellectually honest can be sure of what “Elohim” means, but there is substantial evidence that “Elohim” does not mean “God” at all. Our very idea of God as a transcendental, omniscient, omnipotent being has nothing to do with the idea the ancient Biblical authors had in mind when employing the term “Elohim.” The Bible mentions several other “Elohim” besides Yahweh, of whom we even know the names, such as Chamosh, Milcom, Astarte, Hadad, Melqart, and many others. The “Elohim” was thus a group.
We could also add that the Old Testament tells the story of how Elyon, the most powerful of the Elohim, the commander-in-chief, would divide the lands and peoples of the earth among all the various Elohim leaving some of them satisfied and others dissatisfied.6 Yahweh was one of them, and he received only the people of Israel, who were still landless. As the Bible says, “Yahweh alone led him; no foreign El was with him” (Deuteronomy 32:12). In a very significant passage, the Bible also describes an “assembly” of the “Elohim.” To be an assembly, they must have been more than one. Traditional translators argue that “Elohim” here means “judges,” but they are contradicted by the Bible itself, which always uses a different word for “judges.” Also, this is an entirely arbitrary affirmation. I wonder on what ground can we say that “Elohim” at times means “God” and at times mean “judges.” What criteria are we following? In Psalm 82, Elyon rebukes the assembly of the gathered “Elohim” and reminds them that although more powerful than humans, they also “die like Adam,” thus emphasizing a clear distinction between the “Adamites,” the descendants of Adam, and the group of the “Elohim.”
It won’t be surprising that the term “Elohim” has a grammatical plural ending. “Elohim” is a grammatical plural. Translating “Elohim” in the singular as “God” would be nothing more than a simplification of monotheistic theology. Therefore I think it should be left, to be safe, untranslated.
Yahweh’s character is also worth investigating. When not violent, Yahweh’s behavior often seems bizarre, extravagant, and arbitrary. Yahweh’s words demonstrate his eagerness for the smell of the smoke of burnt flesh, prescribing elaborate rituals for the holocausts and commanding that violation of pedantic rules for the sacrifices be punished by death. Yahweh also moves and intervenes in human businesses in peculiar ways; for example, at times, he literally arrives “flying riding on a cherub” (Psalm 18:10) or aboard flying machines called “ruach” or “kavod,” which I discuss extensively in Gods of the Bible. Yahweh destroys cities with terrifying weapons, crushes villages, and demands his share of the spoils.
In my view, biblical scholarship and theology hopelessly oppose each other. However, I don’t deny the existence of God in general; I only say that God is not present in the Bible. Luckily so! This supposedly loving God theologians have come up with shows himself in the Old Testament as a cruel, sadistic, manipulative, and narcissistic individual.
Yahweh was undoubtedly endowed with unique qualities that made him superior to man in power and knowledge, but he was not superior in morals and ethics. It is enough to remember Yahweh’s exterminations, cruel rules, and bizarre behaviors, like sniffing the smoke of burned flesh, which he needed to relax. This matter was so important that any violation of the ritual could result in the death of the sacrificer. I detail this in Gods of the Bible and propose my interpretation of the sacrificial rituals occurring in all ancient religions, including Greek and Roman cults.7
The Bible does not speak about the origin of the Elohim. There is no hard evidence about the provenance of this group. Still, the comparison with the Adamites points to their clear and overwhelming biological and technological superiority. I, however, suggest and discuss in my book the possibility that something like the “cargo cults” might have occurred in the ancient past, not only among the people of Israel but among all the peoples of the world, from the Middle East to the Far East and the Americas.
During World War II, the inhabitants of Melanesia in the Pacific Ocean first encountered the white man and saw airplanes. The U.S. Army occupied their islands scattered across the Pacific as logistical bases for war operations. The natives saw the American soldiers coming from the sky and taking off from the ground with their aircraft. They saw them equipped with powerful weapons, high-speed air vehicles, and means of communication that defied understanding. They thus started considering them as deities. The natives began to develop rituals, prayers, and cults in anticipation of the return of the American soldiers.
I use the paradigm of “cargo cults” to speculate on the arrival in antiquity of civilizations that were much more advanced than ours. Our ancestors would then develop rituals, myths, and narratives that today we consider fairy tales but perhaps hide a very different reality, the reality of an extraordinary encounter with a superior civilization.
All the people of the Earth tell us the same thing. They tell us about superior beings who came from the sky, who created humankind and gave them knowledge, teaching them how to grow crops, write, predict the course of the stars, build incredible structures, and work metals. Is it possible that all the peoples of the Earth, independently from each other, developed the same stories, the same narratives about their past?
Gods of the Bible is just my last attempt to bring some light to our ancient past through the narrative found in the Bible. I aim to narrate, understand, and describe in detail the reasons and habits of that group of individuals called “Elohim,” of whom Yahweh was part, one of many. Yahweh was the Elohim of the family of Israel — and only of them and their descendants. I deny the universality of the Bible. The Old Testament records Israel’s covenant and relationship with Yahweh. Other Elohim, as we have seen above, had inherited other peoples, families, and nations.
The Elohim of other peoples are mentioned and addressed several times in the Old Testament. These passages suggest that these “foreign Elohim” were similar to Yahweh and had identical abilities and habits. The Elohim had advanced technology unavailable to our ancestors; lived longer than humans but were mortal; had weapons and tools that could do wonders; they were more powerful and knowledgeable, and yet they could be abandoned, betrayed, and deceived, just like humans, because they knew a lot but were not omniscient.
The space of a short article would only allow for briefly summarizing some of the aspects of the Elohim that I have detailed in this new book and all my previous works.8
Still, perhaps it is not superfluous to end by mentioning something about the fascinating biblical term “ruach.” This term has always been translated as “spirit” through the influence of the Greek culture and the so-called Septuagint version of the Bible, which renders it with “pneuma.” The Ancient Hebrew term “ruach” actually had a very definite and concrete meaning as it stood for “wind,” “breath,” “moving air,” “storm wind,” and, in a broader sense, “that which moves quickly through the air space.” In modern biblical translations, the term “ruach” is always rendered as “spirit” because it responds to monotheistic theology’s spiritualist needs.
In the Old Testament, however, this “ruach” appears to be flying through the air, making noise, and taking people from one place to another, with a loud clangor and visible manifestations, taking off and landing in specific geographical locations — in very concrete ways.
The two following passages illustrate what has just been said.
“The [ruach] lifted me and brought me to the gate of the house of Yahweh that faces East. There at the entrance of the gate were twenty-five men, and I saw among them Jaazaniah, son of Azzur, and Pelatiah, son of Benaiah.” (Ezekiel 11:1)
“Look,” they said, “we, your servants, have fifty able men. Let them go and look for your master. Perhaps, the [ruach] of Yahweh has picked him up and set him down on some mountain or valley.” “No,” Elisha replied, “do not send them.” But they persisted until he was too embarrassed to refuse. So he said, “Send them.” And they sent fifty men, who searched for three days but did not find him. (2 Kings 2:16-17)
I left the word “ruach” untranslated, as the reader can see. If you follow monotheistic exegesis and replace “ruach” with “spirit,” the passages become incomprehensible. But it is difficult to interpret the term “ruach” spiritually without distorting the text’s meaning. I give countless similar examples about “ruach” and other words and biblical passages in Gods of the Bible, always underlining the concreteness and realism of the Ancient Hebrew language and the ancient Semitic culture, which was the culture of a pastoral people that Yahweh had found in the desert, landless.
I began and ended Gods of the Bible with the same spirit that moved me twenty-five years ago when I first picked up my pink notebook and then discovered the little mistake that began my professional career as a translator of the Old Testament with Edizioni San Paolo. Since then, I have found many more errors in the Bible — and not all were done in good faith. The list is long and cannot be continued here. But I hope at least to have been able to open a dialog with all those who, with an open mind, are interested in learning more about humankind.
I am not looking for absolute truths but for a glimmer of reality. As I gaze into the impending sunset, the peaks of the Alps, silhouetted against the evening sky, glow pink. A mountain peak is all I hope for. I leave the climb to heaven to others.
I take Gods of the Bible from its stack and open it in the last light of day. I find the best summary of what has been said on the page that opens before me. It is good never to ignore the authoritative voices of the past whose intentions are free from the controversies of the present. I find the voice of a great historian of antiquity who had no reason to lie or embellish. And I realize it is not for heretics like me to explain the meaning of such words, but for the “guardians of the discourse” that exclude apriori hypotheses they cannot accept. I pretend what I read is true.
“Armies clashed in the sky, swords blazed, and the temple shone with sudden flashes. The doors of the sanctuary were suddenly torn open, and a superhuman voice cried out that the gods were fleeing, and at the same time, there was a great uproar as if men were fleeing.” (C. Tacitus, Histories, V 13)
1 Biglino, Mauro. Cinque Meghillôt. Rut, Cantico Dei Cantici, Qohelet, Lamentazioni, Ester. Edited by Pier Carlo Beretta, Cinisello Balsamo (Milan), San Paolo Edizioni, 2008; See also Il Libro Dei Dodici, San Paolo Edizioni, 2009.
3 Cfr. Ceram, C. W., Gods, Graves and Scholars: The Story of Archaeology. Revised, Vintage, 2012. Ceram provides a brief but very clear account of how Scliemann came to the greatest archaeological discovery of the century.
4 Mark S. Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel’s Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts. Oxford University Press, 2003. Mark Smith’s presentation of his work can be found at: https://youtu.be/8FZ2BdHmCNw
5 The meeting between Mauro Biglino and the theologians can be found: https://youtu.be/nCEG9Znl6Lc
6 “When Elyon gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided all mankind, he set up boundaries for the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel. For Yahweh’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted inheritance. In a desert land he found him, in a barren and howling waste.” (Deuteronomy 32:8-9)
7 Cfr G. M. Corrias, Prima della fede. Antropologia e teologia del culto romano arcaico, Tuthi, 2022.
8 Many of Mauro Biglino’s conferences and videos can be found on his youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/@MauroBiglinoOfficialChannel. Available books in Italian and English are: Biglino, Mauro, and Lorena Forni. La Bibbia non l’ha mai detto. Mondadori, 2017. Biglino, Mauro, and Giorgio Cattaneo. La Bibbia nuda. Tuthi, 2021. Biglino, Mauro, and Giorgio Cattaneo. The Naked Bible. Tuthi, 2022. Biglino, Mauro. La Bibbia non parla di Dio. Uno studio rivoluzionario sull’Antico Testamento. Mondadori, 2016. Biglino, Mauro. Il Falso Testamento. Creazione, miracoli, patto d’allenza: l’altra verità dietro la Bibbia. Mondadori, 2017.
52 thoughts on “Gods of the Bible: A new interpretation of the Bible reveals the oldest secret in history”
I think that the last quote does not depict a real event. The sentence belongs to the description of the siege of Jerusalem by Titus. Here the normally sober Tacitus seems to brighten up the boring text. Flavius Josephus knows nothing of the same.
F. Josephus: “I believe that what I am about to recount might appear to be a fable, if it did not have the support of eyewitnesses on the one hand, and the confirmation of the misfortunes that followed on the other. Before the sun went down, war chariots and armies of soldiers could be seen in the sky over the entire region, emerging from the clouds and surrounding the cities. […] They first heard shaking and banging, and then a group of voices saying, “From this place we are leaving.” (F. Josephus, The Jewish War, VI 5, 297-299)
This is so wrong in so many ways. Just one example: It you actually read Numbers 35, you will find verses 32-40 do not even exist. Maybe if you looked in chapter 31 you would find what you are looking for. Even then, this article appears to be written by just another man too proud to accept what the Bible actually does say.
Hi Wayne, it was a typo of course, Numbers 31:32-40 is the right chapter. Thank you and warm greetings from Italy. Mauro Biglino
I have been fascinated for some time with the historical reality of the Bible and view it as a history rather than a series of spiritual texts. I have just stumbled across this very interesting article by Mauro Biglino and devoured it. It ticked so many boxes that I have ticked but with only a tiny fraction of the research and understanding that Mauro has.
PS: My wife and stepdaughter have joined the Russian Orthodox Church so I have to keep my mouth shut about my opinions and interpretations. A like Adam must have said to Eve “That’s it for the nakedness, I’m fed up with being stung on the by those sodding bees. Get some decent sized leaves and we’ll be sorted!”. Now that’s history! 🙂
Thank you David, as I study the Old Testament in the Hebrew text, I am more and more convinced that it tells us a true story with very interesting information that can help us understand our origins.
Warm greetings from Italy!
I agree with his general idea. The entire bible has been turned into a giant allegory so that the general populace can essentially put into it any meaning they want. But if we don’t accept the writings from the past at face value there is no point in studying history at all. It can mean anything we want.
In very ancient times there were very few “men of letters”, perhaps found only in the palaces of kings. Almost no one could read or write so only the very most important things were recorded. They did not, for example, painstakingly press out a useless “myth” on a clay tablet just for fun.
Yet, it has never ceased to amaze me that scholars will simply throw out what they don’t like but accept anything they do like.
I asked this question on Youtube, but I would love to know if Mauro thinks Jesus could have been a Elohim?
Yes, Brendan I believe Jesus would fit in this general category. Trinity fanatics refuse to accept what Jesus said about himself: he is the Son of God. Nor is trinity doctrine necessary to the Gospel message. Jesus is the ONLY begotten of the father, there is no other.
There is such a crowd of trinity fanatics though that it’s almost impossible to have any rational discussion about this matter.
Hello Brendan Tourelle,
The accounts in the gospels and the studies of Jesuit Cardinal Jean Danielou lead us to believe that Jesus was the son of Mary and a Gavriel (an individual who acted by exercising the power of the Elohim – this is exactly the meaning of Gavriel).
best regards, thank you for your interest!
That’s a good question. Allow me to share a few thoughts…
According to the Bible, Jesus was at least half human, having a human mother, Mary.
Was he then half ‘Elohim’?
In 2009, the Vatican convened a colloquium to discuss the theological implications of contact with extra-terrestrials. One of the spokespeople, Rev. Dr. Guy Consolmagno stated that we shouldn’t be surprised to encounter E.T.s as they are in both the Old Testament and the New Testament of the Bible.
There are those that believe that the beings described as ‘Elohim’ in the Old Testament were (at least in part) ‘Pleiadians’, human looking extra-terrestrials from the Pleiades star cluster. Those who have had encounters with Peiadians describe them as looking like tall attractive humans with long blond hair that wear tight-fitting metallic suits. On top of speaking all human languages, they can read your thoughts and will sometimes answer your questions before you’ve asked them. They travel in flying saucers that the writers of the Old Testament would have descibed as ‘Kavod’ (a hard, heavy thing) and ‘Ruach’ (that flies through the air) as discussed by Mauro Biglino. This also matches the description of the beings that Admiral Byrd encountered on his ‘Operation Highjump’ mission to Antarctica, according to his diary. (The Pleiades stars are mentioned multiple times in the Bible).
While the Old Testament (that was written in Hebrew) talks of the ‘Elohim’, the New Testament (that was written in Greek) talks of the ‘Angelos’ at certain points, around Jesus.
Are the ‘Elohim’ and the ‘Angelos’ one and the same, and was Jesus (half) one of them?
As Mauro Biglino states, if the Elohim weren’t human, they were close enough to human to be able to interbreed.
The shroud of Turin has been used to create a 3D printout of Jesus. From this, researchers have said that Jesus was an attractive man, who was about 5 inches taller than the average man of his time and place.
A letter from Pilate to Caesar describes Jesus as having different colour hair; his hair was a lighter, golden brown, compared to the darker hair of the other Jews. This document is claimed to be fake, but doesn’t it seem to be a curious detail to add to a forged document that you’re trying to pass off as genuine?
Could Jesus read peoples thoughts?
Mathew 9:4 “And Jesus knowing their thoughts said…”
Mathew 12:25 “Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said to them…”
Mark 2:8 “Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, “Why are you thinking these things?””
Luke 5:22 “Jesus knew what they were thinking and asked…”
Luke 6:8 “But Jesus knew their thoughts…”
Luke 9:47 “But Jesus, knowing the thoughts of their hearts…”
Like 11:17 “Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them…”
The Gospel of Mathew describes the beings that Mary Magdalene and her friend saw at the tomb as ‘Angelos’, whereas the Gospels of Mark and Luke describe them as simply as men:
Luke 24:1-4 “On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them.”
Sindologists (people who study the shroud of Turin) claim that the image of Jesus on the shroud was created by a very high burst of radiation. While people who have had extra-terrestrial encounters have sometimes suffered from radiation burns, I have yet to hear of this being caused by spiritual experiences. It would seem that Jesus being brought back to life was more to do with physical technology than a purely spiritual cause.
The word ‘Elohim’ found in the Hebrew Old Testament text is a plural word, coming from the root word meaning ‘power’. While Mauro argues that it’s best to leave it untranslated, as we can’t be certain what exactly it’s referring to, there isn’t another word that means ‘gods’ in the Old Testament, in fact the Egyptian gods are referred to in the Bible using the word ‘Elohim’, so ‘gods’ is a possible translation.
In that case, if Jesus was indeed half ‘Elohim’, this would mean that he was both man and… ‘god’.
Warm greetings from France!
I started listening to this, and realized that although Mauro Biglino is saying things that are true, **we’re missing a lot of context** that helps to explain why he’s arriving at his conclusions. And they’re not necessarily correct.
For instance, the word “Shaddai” in Hebrew CAN be translated as “lord of the mountains,” that’s true! But WHY did the translators render it as Almighty?
That’s because of the symbolic meaning of “mountains” to ancient peoples. A “mountain” could symbolize the entire world – hence the concept of a ziggurat as a “world-mountain.” We’re told in the Sumerian King List that the “kingship was lowered from heaven” – and the way that this was symbolically represented on earth was through a ziggurat. So mountains ALSO represented divine kingship.
That’s why, even though “Shaddai” CAN be translated as “lord of the mountains,” it ALSO poetically means “Almighty” – because this same “lord of the mountains” is symbolically the king of the entire world.
Now, as far as the meaning of the term “Elohim,” we CAN derive exactly what it means…but it’s a rather roundabout path to get there. Firstly, we need to establish what language the book of Genesis was originally written in – and it wasn’t written in Hebrew!
The book of Genesis contains what are called “toledoth” phrases – such as the one found in Gen. 2:4: “These are the generations (toledoth) of the heavens and the earth, in the day they were created.” These phrases are distinctly reminiscent of colophons found on clay tablets in archives discovered at Mesopotamian sites such as Mari, Nuzi and Ebla. These tablets happened to be written *in Akkadian cuneiform*.
Now, imagine you’re in a library, and you want to search for a specific book on a shelf. You don’t have to pull out all of the books on that shelf to see what’s in them, because you can just read the titles on the book spines, right? The ancient peoples at Mari, Nuzi and Ebla used the exact same concept in labeling **the ends of the clay tablets** with phrases of the general form, “These are the generations of X” or, more poetically (because the Semitic languages are all highly poetic, with one word having many different possible meanings) “This is the history of X.”
That means that Genesis **was likely originally composed on clay tablets, and written in Akkadian cuneiform**. And when the text was copied into a scroll, the “colophons” were preserved **at the ends of their respective sections**. In other words, the “toledoth” phrase in Gen. 2:4 marks the END of the first tablet, spanning Gen. 1:1-2:4.
Now, here’s the next important point. The ancient Sumerians and Akkadians lived right next to each other, and they shared a common method of astrologically “reading” the constellations. Each constellation was represented by a specific Sumerian logogram (pictograph), which could be translated into one of a number of different equivalent Akkadian words, each of which could have multiple meanings. An astrologer would “read” a constellation by interpreting it first one way, then another, then another, stringing together successive interpretations to form a complete reading. This belief in heavenly interpretations of constellations was known as “lumashi” writing.
But why should this erstwhile pagan practice be of any concern to Biblical scholars? BECAUSE IT’S USED WITHIN THE PAGES OF THE BIBLE TOO – INCLUDING IN GENESIS 1-3!!!
The whole story of the Garden of Eden **was interpreted from specific constellations**! For instance, the Garden itself was represented by the Pegasus Square. The Tigris and Euphrates (two of the four rivers of Eden) were represented by the constellation of Pisces. The other two rivers were derived from word-plays on the Pegasus Square constellation. And finally, God Himself was represented by the constellation of Aquarius, the “water-bearer.”
In Sumerian, the constellation of Aquarius was known as EN.KI, while in Akkadian, it was known as Ea. This would have been pronounced as “Ee-ah” or as rendered later on in Hebrew, “YAH.”
Interestingly enough, David Rohl, a scholar and Egyptologist who claims to have found many Biblical synchronisms by fixing a chronological problem with the Third Intermediate Period of Egypt, has claimed that the name “I AM THAT I AM” in Ex. 3:14 should more properly be rendered, “I am the one known as Ea.” So, he arrived at the same exact conclusion that Yahweh in the Bible is a Hebrew derivation of the Akkadian god Ea, through completely different means. That should tell you that this is VERY likely to be an accurate conclusion!
Now, we know from Egyptian mythology that the various gods of Egypt were represented by different constellations or astronomical objects. For instance, Ra was the sun. Horus, on the other hand, was Aquila, which we know of today as the Eagle. But during Egypt’s history, through a process we call “syncretism,” they associated one god with the roles or features of another. Ra and Horus together became known as Ra-Horakhty, or “Horus of the Horizon.”
Instead of viewing this process of syncretism as a purely political affair, with one god subsuming another and taking over that secondary god’s roles and functions, this process **came from spiritual intuition, that these seemingly distinct gods were in reality different manifestations or roles of the same deity**!!!
With that in mind, I’d like to direct your attention to the Hebrew name “Elijah.” Elijah simply means El is Yah. In other words, this is a HEBREW SYNCRETISM of El and Yah, claiming that the roles of El and Yah are simply two different manifestations of the same deity!
Question. What, then, is the astronomical representation of El – the singular form of “Elohim” in the Bible?
It’s the constellation of Orion, which represents divine kingship (or shepherd-ship). Hence the raised arm in the form of the Egyptian mace-head motif which represents divine kingship.
Now, in Hebrew, the word “el” can have many different meanings. One of those possible meanings is “god,” but another one is “judge.” BOTH TRANSLATIONS ARE CORRECT, but we must depend on the context to know which one is appropriate!
And yes, the Sumerian Anunnaki and Egyptian Neteru do speak of multiple gods. SO DOES THE BIBLE, if you know what you’re looking for.
In Deuteronomy 32:8-9, we read:
When the Most High divided their inheritance to the nations, When He separated the sons of Adam, He set the boundaries of the peoples According to the number of the sons of God (marginal rendering). For the Lord’s portion is His people; Jacob is the place of His inheritance.
Although this passage appears rather odd at first glance, in reality it’s referring to the 70 sons of Noah from Genesis 10 – each son for a Gentile nation. But it’s ALSO referring to 70 divine beings (sons of God) who are over those same Gentile nations, PLUS the God of Jacob, who is over the nation of Israel.
God’s “divine council” of 70 elders (see Psalm 82) is basically the exact same thing. What the Bible is claiming is that the God of Jacob is the ruler of that group of Elohim. You can believe that or not, that’s not the point. The point is, that’s what this ancient text is claiming, in its original context.
When Biglino says that the four academics he spoke with, admitted that “there is no concept of creation out of nothing, there is no concept of spirituality, etc.,” we once again run into the same issue – THESE PEOPLE AREN’T BASING THEIR CONCLUSIONS ON A PROPER UNDERSTANDING OF THE BIBLICAL TEXT IN ITS ANCIENT, CULTURAL CONTEXT!!!
It’s true that the Bible doesn’t have the concept of creation out of nothing. Genesis 1-3 represents **establishing an orderly pattern out of chaotic origins**. As we read in Isaiah 45:18, God did not create the world in a state of chaos…so **something happened that caused it to become that way**.
That something was an ancient cataclysm. And that’s precisely what Graham has been researching!
As far as whether Hebrew as a language existed in the time of Moses, it existed before that, according to David Rohl. We have what are called the proto-Sinaitic inscriptions – which are inscriptions found in the Egyptian Sinai that use Egyptian hieroglyphs to represent alphabetic letters, with the words being **actual Hebrew words**. These proto-Sinaitic inscriptions date to the mid 12th dynasty of Egypt – which is when Jacob and his family entered Egypt, according to Rohl. Hebrew later evolved into the form of paleo-Hebrew, with actual letters instead of hieroglyphs, and then even later evolved into the square letters that Hebrew is written in today.
The problem that alternative researchers like Graham have is that they run into your usual theologians and academics who really aren’t grounded in the ancient cultural context of the Bible, and can’t give good explanations for what it really means. Then you have alternative researchers who try to find UFOs, ancient technology, etc., in the Bible – and I’m not denying that those things are there, but trying to interpret the Bible piecemeal, without a proper approach through literary analysis – is doomed to failure. Again, not because these things aren’t in there, but you can’t properly understand what’s being said without that cultural context, and without that proper literary analysis.
I’m an expert in literary analysis of ancient texts, both Biblical and non-Biblical (such as the book of Enoch) so I know what I’m talking about.
Thanks Mr. Castle.
Hallo Damon Casale,
I read your remarks carefully, and while I disagree with most of them in terms of the method by which the analysis is conducted and the assertiveness of certain statements that are not supported by the literalness of the text and the biblical context, I sincerely thank you for sharing them. The answer would require a real long and articulate counter-analysis, conducted point by point. In an article presenting a text, it is impossible to delve into the individual issues, which I do in the books in which I report the Hebrew expressions with their literal translation and to which I am obliged to refer those interested in these issues. Thank you again and best regards.
This writer is just another attacker of the Bible.
In most Biblical verses, Elohim can only be understood by the reader to be the Most High God, consisting of 3 persons, the Trinity.
The word Elohim is well-researched, understood, and examined at length, for example, by Dr. Michael Heiser.
Elohim is defined by some scholars as a general term for a spirit without a body.
However, it appears clear in other places in the Biblical texts, that the term is referring to other beings, who have are spirit beings.
The Bible is a library of ancient writings that have been commonly accepted as accurate and authoritative.
Promoting aliens, in the name of gods/elohim/extraterrestrial, is now the new popular trend in the world religious movement.
That’s not true though is it .
In his previous conversation with Paul Wallis he shows the best translation of elohim taking the context into consideration is “The powerfull ones”
nothing to do with the trinity at all did you even bother to watch the video he clearly explains that even after narrowing it all down he still comes up with 23 different people in the elohim group . Yhwh or God is only one of many .
Imagine a sentient being that is not human and is not from earth. Angels are aliens by definition.
No one knows for sure the origin or provenance of the Elohim; it is clear from reading the Bible that they were flesh-and-blood individuals. They walked, ate, drank, grew tired, got dirty, washed, and died like other humans. They also loved to drink alcoholic substances and calmed themselves by smelling the smoke of burning animal fat.
The supreme commander was named Elyon, all others named in the Bible (including Yahweh) were subservient to him and ruled over peoples Elyon had assigned to them. This is the factual information derived from reading the Bible. As the prominent Jewish exegete Gershom Scholem writes: there is nothing spiritual in the Torah.
Thank you for reading my article and for your comment, kind regards
Sorry, but this chapter is not really to be taken as historically serious, besides parts of it are suspected to have been inserted later to let a historic ‘Jesus’ exist at all. In any case, this would be the only testimony of the life of a Jesus apart from the gospels.
The chapter contains at least in part with superstitious nonsense: „At the same festival also an heifer, as she was led by the High-priest to be sacrificed, brought forth a lamb, ..“
As a bonus, the stammering of a confused man:
“A voice from the east; a voice from the west; a voice from the four winds; a voice against Jerusalem, and the holy house; a voice against the bridegrooms, and the brides; and a voice against this whole people. This was his cry, as he went about by day and by night, in all the lanes of the city. However certain of the most eminent among the populace had great indignation at this dire cry of his; and took up the man, and gave him a great number of severe stripes…“
I confess, whenever it comes to miracles, I have scepticism. Perhaps because I have never experienced one and also know no proven. At least many of them were simply fraud – and this is for sure.
But I do not want to deny anyone to believe in God and miracles.
Mauro’s book ‘The Naked Bible’ is awful! It’s presented as an interview with a journalist who’s a complete idiot. It’s a shame they released it. I’m interested in hearing more from Mauro but reluctant to read anything from him after this disaster of a presentation of his findings. Truly terrible!!
The bible was not written for theologians, translaters or laypeople or even the supposed priests who claimed to have authority on it’s interpretation and made errors in the process – some deliberate.
The text was written for a select few, who after initiation earned the ability to understand it’s true meaning. The true meaning is never found in a literal interpretation. If one is interested in the real meaning of scripture, there is a rich history of the esoteric traditions of ancient faiths.
The “Elohim” ARE the fallen angels.
Or, more likely, the persecutors of the fallen angels.
No use in arguing with people like this. They think they found a “secret” translation that destroys the Bible. Not falling for it. There is so much historical proof for exactly what is contained in the Bible.
Thank you Mauro, for a a most interesting article. I look forward to reading your book.
I wish you a good reading, I am at your disposal if you require further clarification from me.
Hello, by reading the bible and the Torah, Yahweh is actually described as a god, owner of the cosmos and all its parts and he is also described as if he was a conscious light. This means Yahweh is pure creative consciousness, and that makes sense because energy never dies but can be constantly transformed. We can not say the same as a body made of flesh and bones, because the body has an expiry date.
Yahweh is an energy that has wisdom, it is pure energy, Yahweh is light with a conscience. The language spoken by Yahweh to Moses could of been Egyptian or Aramaic, or old Hebrew or whatever; the truth is that the language chosen by Yahweh does not matter because the communication seemed to be as telepathic. If we think Yahweh as a being of conscious energy, then Yahweh can connect to anyone at any level of consciousness, because he is consciousness. Language at telepathic level has been proved that are words inside your mind, charged with knowledge and emotion at the same time, so when Yahweh ‘speaks’, he is absolutely understood by the one who can hear him at any language using only the mind. I beleive the Elohim are a a group of other elders/sages who performed physical actions on Earth, in many places mandated by Yahweh.
Mauro Biglino, why don’t you talk about other prophets? For example, what about the prophet Jonah? I believe he made an impact to understand the nature of who is Yahweh and his behavior as a god. This prophet actually ties Jews, Christians and Muslims on a similar way in many sacred scriptures. It is interesting that Jonah acts as a 100% in a rational way. He defies Yahweh. Jonah seems that he can’t trust Yahweh’s voice. So Jonah, instead of accomplish Yahweh’s command and spread the word to Nineveh, he runs to the other way, and tries to escape Yahweh’s voice. This action proves that Jonah was an unbeliever, Jonah in reality did not know who was talking to him. He acted scared and doubtful, he had no trust in Yahweh’s words.
Also, at the end of Jonah’s account, it is shown that Yahweh is a God with consciousness of mercy and he has no favorites. Yahweh said that he created everyone the same and displays a consciousness with a sense of mercy, power and justice. Just like Moses, Jonah hears the voice but can not see Yahweh.
What do you think about the prophet Jonah?
Now, based on this account, in my opinion, Yahweh could of asked anything to do to an Hebrew, in the same way he could of asked a task to an Egyptian or to a Sumerian, or to any another person of another tribe. But it is my understanding that by asking someone to do a task you automatically are not above the rest of the people who was not asked. Funny that for a moment, the prophet Jonah felt chosen by God (like when the plant covered his head from the Sun). Then Yahweh showed equal mercy to all.
What can you tell us about the translation of the book of Jonah? Thank you.
With all the new information coming to lite from the Kings list and other tables , everything prior to the Great Flood is void! This is A mystery in itself! Where did all the Monolithic Marshmallow pure granite walls and structures come from? Highly interested myself, thanks
If you believe in Genesis 1 v 1, all will fall into place, God is sovereign, He can create something out of nothing, choose whom He likes for His purposes He has order Over the complete universe, open your eyes and have a look into the awesomeness and extensive display of trees for example, grown from a tiny seed, all living in their perfect climate reproducing and creating the perfect ecosystem, but not all trees are good or useful in our opinion does not make them less needed useful or important in their environment, man cannot create anything even close to this, the Bible is similar to this crude analogy, to have you doubt or question Gods handiwork seems absurd to me, do you desire to challenge God? Be like God or have the knowledge of God? I have witnessed many miracles in the name of the God of the Bible, I cannot explain how or why that is not my job and I believe yours also, the Bible is the living word of God written by man inspired by Holy Spirit, received by faith, we all must check what spirit we are operating in not all are Godly, I pray for you and your readers the Holy Spirit will reveal and show you the truth behind your doubts, remember God is sovereign, God bless and fill you and your readers.
Kind regards Craig.
First of all, thank you Graham and Mauro for bringing us this new interesting brainstorming.
Really a pleasure to see that there are still people capable of seeking the truth even though it is easier to close your eyes and just follow.
I can’t wait for your new books and hopefully Graham’s TV series has more sponsors soon!
I have read almost all of Graham and Mauro’s books and have found them a source of learning.
Finally, a scientific method applied to archeology and ancient texts.
Crazy that we are so careful in choosing our favorite news channel to avoid bias, but we are so blind to accepting studies that haven’t gone on since 1900 or texts that are translations of translations of translations… :-0
Reading the comments on this forum, so far, I’m a little disappointed with the audience, people talk about “Trinity” to explain the plural of Elohim in the Old Testament, when the very concept of it is purely a Christian concept, added much later… in 325 CE (you can check it on Wikipedia :-0 ).
I would suggest to those who have found themselves burned by these concepts, that they would probably benefit from a good old ‘read more attitude’, because some of these facts (and not opinions) are around since very long, and when they are touched by the main stream media, they are presented in a very diluted version.
An example for all: “The Flood”.
Beginning in the 1880s, the Gilgamesh saga became increasingly accessible to scholars around the world (ancient tablets found with cuneiform writings).
A section of this saga contains the story of the Flood and the story overlaps with that written in the Bible (the biblical one is a subset).
The differences between the two texts are minimal and the Gilgamesh texts appear to be more complete, descriptive. Furthermore the gods are always mentioned in the plural form and many times even with their names. If you read Gilgamesh’s flood and then the one in the Bible, you clearly see that the latter looks like a simplified version.
Now, how do these stories are presented to you in school, in books, in media?
The flood in the Bible is a very ancient story and, Gilgamesh’s is mythology, just a fairy tale… well, the “mythology” one was probably written (at least) 2000 years before anyone decided to write any of the texts of the Old Testament. Most likely the Gilgamesh’s flood story was already very old at the time it was put on tablets.
Just “few” thoughts and a final pearl of wisdom… :-p
– Any system that requires you to blindly accept a concept is not working in your best interests. Because it doesn’t want you to learn and grow. Just be curious. –
At around 1 hour you discuss Palsm 24 – passages through the gates.
In the 1600’s Jesuit priests were sent to China to try to spread Christianity to the Chinese who initially laughed at them – explaining that their stories were simply ancient Chinese stories mixed up. This is well documented – Confucius Sinarum Philosophus, sive, Scientia Sinensis Latine Exposita [Confucius, Philosopher of the Chinese, or, Chinese Knowledge Explained in Latin].
Bable – refers to the period when during the Qin [after the Zhou] when the Chinese changed the meaning of words – this was to protect the true meaning of certain classics promulgated to western nobility along the Silk Road.
Passing through the Gates – is the ability to transliterate and open the radical pair that makes up an ancient Chinese pictogram to understand the meaning.
For example, Olam 奧蘭
Judaism is quite new – as you discuss – no mention of Jews in Herodotus.
Have a proper look at the Qing Ming Festival Scroll – see if you can work out the Jewish bank beside the pharmacy, the hall of ancestors etc … Then think about Kaballah – it originates from China… and many of the words you discuss transliterate to Chinese.
Also consider the Amen – the Egyptian God of the Eight Gods and I Ching and the Eight Trigrams ae the same thing… then you will start to make some progress…
Thank you for this article and also for doing the interview with Graham Hancock which I have watched twice, taking notes!
I apologize for bombarding you with questions but I am finding this to be a fascinating subject. Thank you in advance for any light you are able to shed on my many questions:
I was under the impression that ‘Eloah’ was the singular of ‘Elohim’, which are a type of being, but that ‘El’ was the name of a specific individual Semitic deity, the father god, who, along with the mother goddess, Ashera, gave birth to the other deities; Yahweh, Baal, etc (before Judaism became monotheistic). Is this not correct?
Psalm 89:6 – “For who in the heavens can be compared to Yahweh? Who can be likened to Yahweh among the sons of El?”
How can ‘Elyon’ be the name of the commander-in-chief when the word ‘Elyon’ itself means ‘the most high’ or ‘the commander-in-chief’? When we read ‘El Elyon’, doesn’t this mean ‘El, the commander-in-chief’?
During the interview with Graham Hancock, you say that ‘El’ could be the singular of ‘Elohim’.
Could ‘El’ be a word that refers to both a type of being, as well as a specific being, such as the word ‘god’ or ‘God’?
When ‘El Shadday’ introduces himself in Genesis, you say that ‘Shadday’ probably refers to a geographic location; ‘El of the mountain’. Is this being describing what he is, such as ‘I am the Prince of Wales’, or could he be giving his name, such as ‘I am Joan of Arc’?
I read in ‘The Naked Bible’ that ‘Mi-ka-El’ means ‘He who is like an El’. Could it also mean ‘He who is like El’?
Given how the word ‘El’ is used at different points of the Bible, ‘El Elyon’, ‘El Shadday’, ‘Beth-El’, ‘Mi-ka-El’ etc., could it always be referring to the same specific being?
Is it correct that ‘Israel’ (Yisra’El) means ‘may El persevere’?
– ‘Bene Elohim’
I have heard this translated as ‘The sons of the Elohim’ and ‘Those who are like the Elohim’. What would be the best translation?
– ‘Nephilim’, ‘Anakim’ and ‘Rephaim’?
There is much speculation about these words mentioned in the Bible, starting at Genesis 6:4. What is your understanding of these beings?
– ‘Seraphim’ and ‘Cherubim’
I’ve heard that Seraphim are winged serpents. You mention ‘Yahweh’ flying on a ‘Cherub’ in Psalm 18. What information is given in the Bible about ‘Seraphim’ and ‘Cherubim’?
– ‘Erek Apayim’?
The words ‘erek apayim’ appear in a description of Yahweh. I’ve heard that the correct translation is ‘long nostrils’. Is this correct?
– Which books do you recommend?
I am waiting eagerly for ‘Gods of the Bible’ to be released in Kindle format. Do you know when this be? Which other authors on this topic do you recommend? Rev. Barry Downing (who you mentioned in the interview)?, Erich von Däniken? Paul Wallis? Have you found any mistranslations by these authors?
Warm greetings from France!
I have read your questions very carefully, and I can tell you that the answers would require a section of many pages, in fact many of the answers can be found in my books since they require exhaustive argumentative development with relevant bibliographical notes. I therefore invite you to read Gods of the Bible, the first in a series of books that I will translate into English.
Thank you for your kind interest in my work
Regardless as to the absolute veracity of the Bible. We exist on a created plane and We are created as evidenced in the fact that in the nucleus of our cells, all the components MUST be there at the same time for it to function. It could not have “evolved” into existence.
Thus there is a Creator, and as too “following the path” of Christ there are worse ways to live.
Hello, regarding the origin of the Elohim, is it possible that, rather than extraterrestrials, it could be a group of time travelers? I have had that idea for several decades, especially if we take the commandments about the “purification” of the hands and the utensils used to eat, to which even the Gospels refer, as in Mark 7: 1-5. Reflecting on such commandments, logic dictates that they sound like our hygiene measures that we learn as children in our present culture, so it may be that the Elohim may have originated from some time in the future of mankind that, for some reason, arrived in past ages of our species.
Furthermore, I believe this proposal would also shed light on the very controversial passage in Genesis 6, the one about the mating between the Sons of God and the Daughters of Men.
Thank you for such a lucid article, especially a breath of fresh air for those of us who have been searching for decades for the truth about the origin and future of our species.
No one can claim to know exactly where the Elohim came from, so I think we have to remain open to any hypothesis, as well as yours. The idea is very fascinating and also supported by studies of Central American shamanic experiences. This could also be an explanation for the presence of more technologically advanced beings on earth, let us keep our minds open and continue our studies, in parallel with Graham Hancock’s enlightening research.
Thank you thank you for reading the article and for your feedback,
Secret Societies of All Ages and Countries, suggests that Cain was the son of the gods (Elohim) and this was the line from which Hiram Abiff decended. These were the “fire people” to whom are attributed all the sciences and the secrets contained in their use.
This superior race was supposedly destroyed by the flood with only two exceptions: Tubal-Cain and his son, from whom was decended Nimrod, The mighty Hunter and in turn Hiram Abiff.
“So mote it be.”
Most interesting and compelling. If you are aware of the work by Joseph Atwill, “Caesar’s Messiah,” I would welcome your thoughts on his thesis – that Jesus was an invention of the Flavian emperors’ writing staffs to pacify rebellious Jews…that much of the content of the synoptic gospels was a flattering re-writing of Titus Flavius’ military exploits told in such a way that only those with “inside information” wouldn’t take it as “gospel,” but those who were duped would become docile sheep, easily controlled … pacified. Best regards to you and Mr. Hancock, whose work I most highly esteem.
Hope Im still here when the religious realise theye been worshipping a Denisovan/Neanderthal/Human Hybrid 😉
Maybe not Wendy, they may be worshiping one of those superior beings that created the Neanderthal hybrid using their own DNA. Even the bible admits there were other beings or gods around thousands of years ago but the original writers were trying to put down on paper something that had been passed down by word of mouth for hundreds of years and it is a case of Chinese Whispers. Might I suggest you read Zecharia Sitchin, as he explores links between what is in the early books of the old testament and writings from Sumeria, Akkadia and Babylon.
I would like to know your thoughts about Jesus dying on the cross and being raised to heaven as I learned in my youth. Personally I think He survived because his apostles saw him after “death on the cross”. Thank you.
Hi Mauro, I read your article with great interest. You are discussing the Elohim from a purely biblical perspective but the early chapters in the bible may have been a collection of stories passed down by word of mouth. As you say, there were many gods worshipped by the people that existed in ancient times and those who were in captivity in Egypt adopted Yahwey, but even they strayed when Moses was away from them. I have read Zecharia Sitchin’s books on the Sumerian “mythologies” (I realise he is not considered to be a serious scholar) and a lot of what he writes about the Elohim and the Annunaki is similar to what you mention. Have you considered that Yahwey might have been the “El” of Abraham and of his father, Tebay, who was a priest, before the Hebrews escaped their captivity? The Sumerians, Akkadians and Babylonians (as translated by Sitchin) all talk of beings that had flying machines and weapons of terrifying destructive power. They also mention a great deluge, possibly caused by the proximity of another planet, that caused the Annunaki to take to their flying machines and leave until the disaster was over. These things are all touched on in the Bible but it is a bit like Chinese Whispers, where some of the information has been lost in the telling. I definitely agree with you that translation of the Bible can only be achieved if it is taken as what was believed to be the truth at the time but I also believe that this way of thinking should also be applied to the Sumerian “mythology”. What if it is a true account of what occurred at the dawn of man’s civilisation as told by Zacharia Sitchin, a self taught Sumerian, Akkadian and Baylonian researcher and cuneiform translator.
It is interesting that similar themes are noted in so many of the ancient stories of different peoples around the world. They appear to share similar descriptions of crucial knowledge being conveyed to the people by visitors with superior abilities. This seems to indicate some type of common origins.
If we combine these observations with the unexplained origins of many ancient sites and megalithic constructions, it provides fertile ground for all manner of speculation. We must be thankful for the diligence and integrity applied in the work of people like Mauro Biglino, Graham Hancock and Paul Wallis. I think it will inspire a new generation of researchers and investigators who will pursue the truth of human origins and ancient history.
I believe it is critical that other cultural perspectives are brought to bear in addressing these questions. Like the reference to ancient Chinese knowledge mentioned above, the ancient Indian Sanskrit Epics may provide important links to understanding later works like the Bible.
While there are too many contributors to advancing our understanding to mention, I would point to the work of Michael Cremo, who helped produce the book ‘Forbidden Archeology’, helping to expose the institutional bias and filtering process applied by academic archeology. Cremo also described what he calls “human devolution”, as so many suppressed findings reveal more advanced technology and unexplained artifacts from the distant past.
The little known findings of ancient sites throughout the Americas also hints at an unknown past. Now that pyramid like structures found around Caral Supe in the Peruvian Andes have been dated as far back as 3000 BCE, we should realize there is so much more to human history that we do not know. Human history is not simply the rise of civilizations in Mesopotamia and Egypt, as many in the West believe.
New sites and findings throughut almost every region of the world raise many more questions and reveal more clues that are helping us develop a more accurate picture of the past experience of humanity.
Obviously, ground-breaking work like what Mauro is sharing will be criticized and resisted by those defending the status quo, but the truth must ultimately prevail. I believe those that believe in the dominant Christian theocracy and think magical solutions will prevail will eventually fade into obscurity, as more facts and evidence are revealed.
While we must respect the spiritual beliefs of all peoples, their beliefs should no longer obscure building on the collective knowledge of humanity. It is a common heritage that the hard work of innovative thinkers and brave people are only now helping to reveal.
Thank you for your efforts to expose the truth, Mauro Biglino.
Por que não tem tradução em Português? Puxa nós do Brasil queríamos conhecer estes livros. Pelo m nós em Espanhol. Sai muito caro comprar pela Amazon internacional. Eu pelo menos tenho muito interesse de ler seus livros. O que podemos fazer Mauro Biglino.
I usually find that highly intellectual people struggle and usually cannot understand the “spiritual” realms and tend to try to grasp it and bring it down to a logical mind level. When we have done that then one walks in outer darkness. They are no more enlightened than your standard atheist who usually has issues with a higher moral authority or “oppositional defiant disorder”. Your comment; “Nobody knows anything about God, yet priests and theologians claim the right to interpret the Bible according to their theological schemes.” is just one example of ones logical mind trying to understand and control peoples spirituality, something you clearly struggle with and have no conception of. So you choose to sneer, tear it apart with human logic and try to explain it away. Humans attempts to bring down the heavenly things to this linear plane of existence and explain them are very cerebral and empty. Spirituality is about faith and yes people DO know God. Many speak with Him, He speaks with them, performs miracles, directs our paths. I have heard His voice audibly warn me of events and speak encouragement to me. Thousands if not millions have. He is a personal God to all but you must enter into a personal relationship with Him to even begin to understand. Of course there are issues with the translations but if you are walking and listening to God yourself then He will clarify His deeper truths without the help of a mere human. I’ve always felt such logical people that cannot fathom God are so limited by their “head knowledge” that they are afraid of what they cannot grasp and sometimes seem to desperately want to understand SO much they will seek to destroy or undermine what they don’t understand. Our logical mind will never and cannot ever understand the things of God so please don’t even try. I encourage you to listen to and read the works of Preston Eby, Robert Torango, Gary Gatlin and Dennis James (just to name a few of the more modern contemporaries). They can be found on YouTube teaching or via links on Elwin Roach’s Godfire.net. If you truly want enlightenment and to be set free of the religious dogma that has set you on this course…which is what I feel is at the root of your research. If you seek more historical understandings then read George MacDonald, Jeanne Guyan etc…and be set free!
Here is something for you to contemplate Sebrina, I am sure you will not disagree that Yahwey, the god of the Bible, was the god of Abraham? Abraham was a Babylonian and his father was a priest, probably in the temple of the god Yahwey. Ergo Yahwey was one of the Babylonian pantheon. These gods were well documented by the Babylonians and the Akkadians and Sumerians before them. They were also the same gods as revered by the Egyptians, the Greeks, the Romans and the Norse. Only the names were changed but they can be identified by their roles within the pantheon. So, there is more to our past than is documented in the old testament bible and in fact the bible is only really an historical record of the Hebrews post the Exodus.
Hey Archie, the Bible says Abraham’s father served other gods, it doesn’t say he was a priest to Yahweh, and Yahweh was not one of the Babylonian pantheon. Yahweh or Jah or Jehovah means self Existent or Eternal. None of the pantheon gods are called that. So what you are saying is not true.
The more rejection and skepticism traditional spiritualist and dogmatic theology produces in me, the more “true” the Bible seems to me when I return to it with a perspective without blinders.
Bravo! Bravo! I wholeheartedly agree with much of what you have said. However, there are a couple of areas where I must respectfully disagree.
First of all, the King James Version of the Bible, imperfect though it may be, was actually carefully assembled to fulfill a particular purpose. It is our “owner’s manual.” It is a science textbook teaching us the great secrets of our existence utilizing metaphor and allegory. Essentially, it is using the same techniques employed by Christ when he taught using parables. At the most basic, the Bible seeks to fulfill the curse in Eden – that the three beings produced from the division of “The Adam” (Adam, Eve, and, yes, that includes the serpent) were to learn the secrets of Good and Evil. Symbolically, this refers to the dichotomous opposites that power what I have dubbed “The Mirror.”
The other area of which I disagree is your attempt to link the ancients to “cargo cults.” On this, I believe that you were totally in error. I specifically use the example of the plight of the Israelites, in which all but two of the males alive at the time of their “rescue” from Egypt were sadistically murdered during the 40 years of wandering – including Moses. Even though the “god of the Old Testament,” which I call the GOaT, brutally tortured (as with the repeated application of plagues) and murdered the Israelites (including priests), they never gave in (which is why the GOaT continually applied its wrath). Their plight represents one of the few times that humans actually beheld their so-called “gods” face-to-face. And yet, they still resisted. They knew that the gods were not God.
Sadly, and please do not take this the wrong way, in the grand scheme of things, this is merely your Kindergarten thesis. What I mean by that is that you have finally learned the basics. You have stepped beyond the dogma and applied logic to what was written. Now, you need to apply that information to the bigger picture – to what the Bible is truly trying to reveal and the associated relevance of current events to that understanding.
Please believe, I have nothing but the greatest respect for your knowledge. You are undoubtedly much smarter than I am. However, as you said, we need to distance ourselves from the “theological filters” – the programmed biases and brainwashing that most of us have endured throughout our lives – and learn to view the Bible from the position of a newborn baby. I believe that I was able to do just that. For the past 13 years, I have been on a quest akin to that of the Preacher in the book of Ecclesiastes. What I have discovered is simply astounding – like something out of a science fiction novel.
I would humbly request that you read my 6th book, The Masters of the Mirror – Return to Eden. I believe that I can take you to the next level and, perchance, fill in some of the blanks, so to speak. And as is the case in this world of mirrors, you will either love it or hate it. If you are interested, go here https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0C12D1TYV or here http://mastersofthemirror.com/returntoeden.html. Maybe together we can graduate the 1st Grade…
Hey Mauro, thank you for sharing this topic on Elohim. I believe Elohim is God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit and the Three are One(Deut. 6:4). Three separate Deities having the same essence or character. They are all Sovereign, Righteousness, Justice, Love, Eternal Life, Omnipotent, Omniscience, Omnipresence, Immutability, and Veracity. Elohim being plural speaks of the Three in One and Their character. There are many scriptures to back this up.
I did want to say that I agree with the idea that there was a time when the earth was inhabited by other beings before this earth age. Before the ice age . Before Genesis 1:1. Genesis 1:2 says “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” The word “was” actually means “became” without form( tohu – waste), and void. In other words something happened for the earth to become without form, and void because, Isaiah 45:18 says
” For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God Himself that formed the earth and made it; He hath established it, He created it not in vain, He formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else.” It says He created it not in “vain”(tohu – waste), so something happened for it to become tohu. It was when satan rebelled and deceived a third of the angels to follow him. The angelic conflict.
There is a lot to say on this subject and there is scripture to back it up. Maybe we can continue this discussion at a later date, it’s a little past my bedtime. Thanks again Mauro.
Thank you for your work.