Vatican biblical scholar Mauro Biglino, his video lectures with subtitles

Lecture 2013

https://youtu.be/1j_dTCKImzM

Okay.
So, is anyone here?
as it is fine for it to be so
who never…
who doesn't know what I'm talking about
Besides the fact that I'm talking about the Bible…
but haven't you heard anything about it yet?
almost nothing
Where is it almost nothing?
Yeah, there, okay.
almost nothing else
So only two people.
unbelievable
Okay.
So
we will talk about the Bible
and in a somewhat specific way
That's clear.
we will talk about it from the point of view of a literal reading
I am doing this literal reading because
that
I'm saying this for these two people.
that I translated Hebrew for the San Paolo publishing house for many years
which was issued
17 books of the Old Testament
in my translation
and then, from 2010, I started telling those things in my own way
At that moment, my employment was, of course, terminated.
So I'm lucky that I have nothing left to lose.
except for your face…
But I don't care about that.
I know I won't lose her.
and
a little bit of smugness, forgive me, but…
and therefore
I can speak freely, write freely.
because I am no longer conditioned by anything
So Bigli is coming.
a, Bigli is coming
everything I'm explaining
is of course not considered acceptable
is not considered acceptable by so-called tradition
or the so-called doctrine
this afternoon, when I arrived here
one person gave me an email
which she received
a mail that talks about me
I'll read you the last lines.
that when a person has no faith
necessarily becomes naive
and therefore, that for the undersigned
only two hypotheses remain
who behaves like this
chili, as I do it
and he is a trap-maker
exploiting people's ignorance
either he is an arrogant person
which, instead of spreading culture
and did a noble and highly philanthropic service
spreads ignorance
and wants to assert himself
enslaving people
or he is an uneducated person himself
Okay? I'm reading this completely fresh, I got it 45 minutes ago.
It's one of the more polite things they say to me…
chili, basically it's about this:
either I enslave people, or I am an uneducated person
So you… but that's what others wrote about me…
so I present to you the reading of the uneducated
I have a third hypothesis.
between enslavement… at least this is how I will give a public answer
…between enslaving people and being an uneducated person
the third hypothesis is that
…on the seventh bite, I too realize that it's polenta
in this sense
I am invited to dinner.
I get polenta on my plate, which I like.
but
this polenta is presented to me
as if it were the most refined dish
prepared according to a recipe that only a few people know
who share it with only a few others
to persons who
they consider themselves worthy of receiving this knowledge and information
and so they tell it to me sweetly, they flavor it nicely for me
and I'll have one bite
Okay, I believe it.
then I'll have a second one, then a third one
but then, starting from the fourth, fifth, I start to suspect something
and when I take the seventh bite, I say: no, look
This is polenta.
chili flour cooked in water
chili, food, in quotation marks
and I say that without contempt, because I like it
food of the uneducated
because you just need to boil water and pour flour into it
he doesn't have to do much…
So I say, if someone offers me polenta
So I'll have it very, very gladly.
I just want to be told that I am being served a plate of polenta.
and this is the third hypothesis to the other two
between whether I am someone who deceives people or whether I am an uneducated person
I say no, so at a certain point
I understand that certain things… let's say, I feel like I'm starting to understand.
that certain things are presented to me in a certain way
it seems to me that they are no longer such
Okay?
Let's say that over the years, while working on translations, I've reached the seventh bite.
and so I'm putting down the seventh bite
then everyone has to do what they want with it, including saying: I don't like polenta, I'll have something else
That's fine.
you know well, that is, almost all of you, except for two
you know very well that I have no groups, followers, sects, nothing
I'm making my things available, and everyone can do with them what they want.
including the fact that someone will immediately throw it away if they don't like it, and that's that
I only do conferences where I am invited.
in the sense that I am not a preacher by profession, and I have no truths to distribute
it is not my intention to go around and tell those things
I go where people call me.
If people stop calling me, I'll stop driving.
that's no problem, because I repeat, I don't need any follower or henchman
But, two things…
Yeah, and as I always say, ask me whenever you want, of course.
So don't wait until the end, and let the organizers tell me when to take a break.
Because I don't keep track of time, I don't even have a watch, you tell me…
So
two things that are pivotal… …when it comes to the Bible
the Bible, regardless of translations, is not what we think it is
is not what we are told
in the sense that it's not a book that was written like this…
thousands of years ago
that she was inspired by God
and that no one had interfered with it since then
and that it has been gradually passed down by tradition, for centuries, always with respect, etc., etc.
the truth is the exact opposite
The Bible is a collection of books that are among the most
revised, rewritten, rearranged, deleted, supplemented, amended
hidden, discovered, reworked, deleted
edited books on planet Earth
and it has always been like that
until the time between the 6th and 9th centuries AD
let's say Jewish theology
she felt the need to stabilize the situation
we will say stop, we will do it in such a way that the Bible can no longer be manipulated
and so they defined, let's say, a code
This is what we know as the Masoretic Codex.
because this work was done by the Masoretes
i.e. guardians of tradition
and by the way, there were several schools that also competed with each other
so it's not like they agree on everything
and let's say that this Tiberian school prevailed
and so, basically, all the Bibles we have at home are based on this codex
from the so-called Masoretic Codex
which is one of the possible codes, then I'll give you an example…
So we'll start by saying that we have one of the possible Bibles.
And I'll say something very clear now, so that we understand each other well.
traditions, that is, so-called traditions
not only is it not a guarantee of truth, but it is a certainty of manipulation
So when we hear people say, but this is according to tradition… okay…
Okay, if one tradition says so, we're starting to doubt it.
Such is the approach.
That's why I say
I don't have the calling of a preacher, because for that I would have to possess the truth.
No? Someone says: I know how things are, so I'll tell you about them.
I don't know how things are.
I just know that we have one of the possible Bibles.
I know there are others
As I said, I'll make an example later.
I work with this one, because let's say
that the holders of power, knowledge, say about it that it is the one that is inspired by God
So I work with her not because I chose her, but because they chose her.
and I don't know if she's the right one
I don't know, nobody knows.
because everyone says that the right one is theirs
so everyone is convinced that they have the right one
We have the Masoretic codex, the Samaritans have a different codex.
it is the Samaritan Torah
The Torah, as you know, is the first 5 books of the Old Testament.
what we know as the Pentateuch
that is the core of the Bible
between the Samaritan Torah and the Masoretic Torah there are 2000 deviations, 2000!
There are Bibles… there is Targumim, which is the Bible written in Aramaic.
and there are those deviations…
then we'll take a look at one… the deviations there are really huge
it's just a completely different text
but really completely different
and this is not a matter of translations
these are the individual biblical codices
when we put them side by side and compare them
between the Masoretic codex, which is a very young codex
because, as I said, this work was done between the 6th and 9th centuries AD
so it was completed, let's say, in the time of Charlemagne
so not millennia ago, in the time of Charlemagne
when we compare the Masoretic codex with parallel texts found in Qumran
Someone has probably heard of them, and they are much older.
there are deviations that are really fundamental
fundamental
and what the Masoretes did, they defined
let's say… the meaning of the Bible
because Semitic languages are written only with consonants
so the meaning of the word remains unclear until the vowels are inserted
these Masoretes inserted vowels there
Let's do an example.
Let's take an example from the Bible, it says LVT here.
it is written from right to left,
when I insert "e" here… vowels do not exist here, dots and commas are used to indicate the sound of vowels
this word written like this is "tevel"
and means earth, world, universe
when I make another "e" out of this "e"
it is still read as "tevel"
but this means sexual intercourse between a woman and an animal
This is how it is: the Earth, the universe, the world.
this is how sexual intercourse between a woman and an animal
or sexual intercourse between a father-in-law and daughter-in-law
These are biblical examples, not fantasy, right? Leviticus 18, Leviticus 20
So the Masoretes did this work, they inserted these marks here.
As for these signs, there are still certain exegetical currents today.
mainly Jewish interpreters, who alter them
chili removes these vowel sounds and inserts others
and thus also significantly changes the meaning of the stories
I don't do that.
because if I did, they would massacre me, besides everything else…
I respect every dot of the Masoretes
I respect every dot of the Masoretes
I'm not changing anything, not even a single dot.
I was told that this is a text inspired by God.
Okay, so I'm doing a reading of a text inspired by God.
dot. I don't interfere with anything
and I do it by pretending
with the understanding of the things I have just said
with an awareness of how the Bible was formed
I do it by "pretending" that when
when the biblical authors wrote something, that's exactly what they wanted to say
so I pretend that the language has some meaning
here, in that email, which I just read to you
it is said that…
that key to reading, this key, is wrong,
because there are other keys for reading
These are theological, spiritual, esoteric-initiatory keys, that's fine.
I have no problem with that.
I know these things very well from high school.
that all these keys to reading exist
all of them, we know them, don't we? these are the keys that theology uses
we've known it since childhood
because more or less everyone
Right? Because we've all been through some kind of upbringing.
Okay, they all exist.
Great, no problem.
I say, let me present my key to reading the uneducated.
and that is literal reading
Let me put it next to the others.
and instead, I am told in every way that I must not do it
Of course, I'm still doing it.
I am told in every way that I must not do it.
if there is a reason
because when using this key to read, meanings emerge
which are
may be wrong
Really? Because it's possible that someone told us a bunch of nonsense, the truth is something else.
But I'm talking about the text.
meanings emerge that have logic and coherence
and intelligibility, which does not even require interpretation
just read them
just read them
By the way, some of these meanings are also found in the Bibles we have at home.
then we'll read something…
because those meanings are already there
Since September last year, I have only been reading from the Bibles that you have at home at conferences.
I don't even read my translations.
because everything is already written there
you just have to read the bible here, which is of course something we don't do
to the happiness of the holders of power
to the happiness of those who write such emails
because when you read carefully, you get to the seventh bite
because everyone gets to the seventh bite when reading carefully
So… I was saying…
we have one of the possible bibles
Considering all the adjustments that have been made over time, we can only pretend that…
In my opinion, this is the only correct, coherent approach to the text that was created in this way.
but I'm not the only one saying that
Okay, if you want, I'll say it a little more clearly.
maybe a little too much
in 1958 at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem
one project was launched, the Bible project
which is run by university professors, Jewish biblical scholars
So they, only they.
and the aim of the project is
reconstruct the Bible to be as close as possible
the original Bible, of which no one knows what it was like
they reserved two centuries for it
So they have been working on it for 60 years, and they will be working on it for another 140 years.
for the next 140 years they will have the Bible
resembling
the original Bible, of which we do not know what it was like
certainly no one will know what the vocals were in the original
No one will ever find out.
because they were never written down
we only know the vowels written by the Masoretes
chili written by those who found a certain meaning in it
we will never know anything about all the others
It is said that tradition is the guarantee of truth.
and on the basis of this
there are people who distinguish between orthodoxy and heterodoxy
what is right to say about the Bible and what is not right to say
among the coordinators of the project of the Jewish University in Jerusalem
For example, Prof. Rofe says:
He has been teaching at that university for 40 years, okay?
A Jew, a biblical scholar…
It is known that every biblical text transmitted in writing or orally is never the same.
texts from the 4th century BC were like an inverted funnel, from 1 word at the input, several words came out
Why?
because in the 4th century BC we are in the period of return from the so-called Babylonian exile
The Jerusalem priesthood seized power.
and said: from now on, we, in principle
we are the custodians of this knowledge
and so they decided what
the doctrine is to be passed on
and from that moment on, they basically began to form a monotheistic doctrine that is not in the Bible
texts from the 4th century BC were like an inverted funnel
from 1 word at the input, several came out, in the sense of what emerged from it
2.5 centuries later, however, the opposite happened, the funnel was turned upside down
and in the Temple of Jerusalem someone said: this is the official text
from that moment on, all books were edited
and when a book was very different
as if they couldn't adjust it because it was too different
So because they couldn't destroy it, they buried it.
They deleted what did not serve their doctrine, they made it disappear.
The Bible you have at home cites 11 books.
which no longer exist, officially
maybe they are in some Roman or Jerusalem library
but they are not officially available
they were made to disappear because they were too explicit
they couldn't adjust them
and because they couldn't normally destroy them
because, after all, they were written by their ancestors
so they just intervened in such a way that they were not available
THIS IS THE OLD LAW
anything but inspired by God
or if he inspired him at the beginning, then he completely lost interest in him, there is no doubt about that
So I can say
which I was just pointing out to an acquaintance
something I always repeat, but…
I say: THE BIBLE DOES NOT SPEAK OF GOD
I'm not saying God doesn't exist, because I don't know anything about God.
So for people of faith, God exists, he exists, no problem.
I don't care about it.
I say that the book does not talk about God
which is something completely different from saying that God does not exist
I am not interested in spiritual worlds because I know nothing about spiritual worlds.
There are plenty of masters who know everything, ok.
if someone wants the truth about the spiritual worlds
it has hundreds of doors where he can ring the doorbell
but don't ring my doorbell
Is that clear? Because I have no truth about the spiritual worlds, not even for myself, let alone for others.
I live happily in uncertainty.
and I'm actually swimming in it wonderfully
so I can't even tell someone to follow me
because I wouldn't be able to tell the person who would want to follow me why we're going there, but I don't know where I'm going
But I don't know how to be clearer.
and I already know that… ok…
nothing
So
one of the things…
I'll give you an example of the adjustments…
performed by the Masoretes or other traditions
we know that Moses
that's what the Masoretes tell us, and we pretend it's true
that Moses was a descendant of the Ivrim
chilean descendant of Hebrews
when we read the Bible written in Aramaic
it says there that Moses was a descendant of the Yahudis
the Egyptian priests of Pharaoh Akhenaten
So, according to the Aramaic Bible, Moses was an Egyptian.
According to the Masoretic Bible, Moses was a Jew.
plus or minus
because the Bibles you have at home also say so
that when Moses has to flee from Egypt
because he killed a person and wants to avoid conviction
so he goes to the so-called land… to Sinai, to simplify it
and there he comes to a spring where some guys are bothering a girl
which tries to connect the cattle, will protect it
she will become his wife
The girl returns home and tells her father what happened.
and her father says: and who is the one who helped you?
and she, while Moses is coming, says, in the Bibles you have at home: there's that Egyptian
So in the Bibles we have at home, there is a trace of the fact that Moses was probably an Egyptian.
So here we have a tradition that says that Moses was a descendant of the Hebrews.
and the second tradition, which says that he was a descendant of the Yahudis
Don't ask me which one is the right one, because I don't know.
Of course.
Nobody knows, everyone has their own truth.
It's okay, everyone should have their own faith, great, no problem.
we know
tetragram
JHVH
which is supposed to be Yahweh, or the name of God
in Bibles written in Aramaic
The name of this one is not here.
but it is written 2 jody
it's two "i"s, and it's read as "ay"
So in the Masoretic Bible we have JHVH
in the Aramaic Bibles Targumim we have JOD JOD
Which name is the real one? Who knows…
Tradition is the certainty of a mini-manipulation.
and here, as you can see… we're not talking about translations, are we? We're talking about how the Bible is written.
even before we think about its translation, this is written
we know that Jews cannot pronounce the name of Yahweh
No? Because…
because it is an ineffable name, it is an extension of one
the exact instruction that he, whatever his name was, gave
He said: don't call me unnecessarily
but don't call me unnecessarily doesn't mean don't name me
it means: don't call me about all your bullshit
you, because then we'll see who it is
you solve all your affairs yourselves
and if there are really any problems
serious, so you'll come to me with that
First, however, follow the hierarchy of your bosses, whom you have as intermediaries.
so the Jews… to be sure
that they do not violate this rule
they decided that they would never name him
and so instead of JHVH, Yahweh, they say Adonai
which in the language of the Masoretes means My Adon
So that ending is a possessive suffix.
first person singular
according to the Targumim, however, Adonai does not mean My Lord
but it means Adon by the name of Aj
who was an Egyptian commander
Which tradition is the right one? I don't know…
but we must know that they exist
because otherwise we expose ourselves to risk
we know about these things because we conduct readings of the uneducated
that's why I keep doing it… the reading of the uneducated
that's why I keep doing it
otherwise, we expose ourselves to the risk of avoiding reading the uneducated, of closing our eyes
and that we will be told that the Bible actually says… no, no, no…
one Bible says some things, another Bible says others
then we are free and should be free to choose the one we like more
we, here in Italy, or simply in the Catholic West
we are to believe that the Old Testament consists of 46 books
right-wing
i.e. canonical, inspired
for Jerusalem, for the Jewish canon, there are only 39 true books
7 of them are true for us, but they are not true for them.
for Protestants…. Protestants basically follow the Jewish canon
So even when it comes to Protestants, the 7 books that are true for Catholics are not true for them.
if we were born among Coptic Christians
chili in Africa
we were told that there are basically 39 of them
the Jewish canon, plus other books that are not authentic for either Jews or Catholics
Which Bible is the right one? Who is right? No one can say, no one can say.
because for the Copts it is clear that the books there are genuine
and for us, on the contrary, they are fake
because there is someone here who decides from the table which books we should believe and which books we should not believe
and I haven't even mentioned the translations
only about the Bible as such
between the Masoretic Book of Isaiah
and the book of Isaiah found in Qumran, practically in its entirety
there are more than 250 deviations, including whole words
which are in one and not in the other
each group wrote its own book and adapted it
each group
then there is one dominant group that says: now I will tell you, we will tell you which books are the right ones
and it's from the dominant group, from which, of course, these emails are coming
because this is a Dominican priest
and it is from the dominant group from which these emails are coming, because it is not possible to accept
that these things should be interpreted, but these are independent of translations
I haven't started talking about translations yet.
but this is the Bible, this is how it is for everyone to see
and that's something you can understand for yourself, by yourself
you just have to want to study these things…
but these things are obviously like this
The interpretations are not related to this in any way.
whether it says JOD JOD here and JHVH here, it has nothing to do with translations, it's just written that way
Then let everyone choose their own version.
American rabbis, who are very open and of the studious type, write.
one of them is… I asked him a few questions about Abraham… a few such curiosities… and…
I just wanted something from him… in my opinion, Abraham was a Sumerian.
he was a Sumerian
that was his country of origin, he lived there for some time, etc. etc. etc.
and this man, Dr. Robert Wexler, who is the president of the American Jewish University in Los Angeles
teacher, Jew
from the American Jewish University in Los Angeles
he writes to me that most modern Bible scholars
…they believe that Abraham never existed.
Abraham, probably, never…
most modern biblical scholars, "scholar" means a scholar, not a schoolboy, right? in English
"most" means většina
their modern biblical scholars believe that Abraham never existed
Well, not everyone accepts that Moses was historical.
not everyone accepts that Moses existed
they write it with complete calm
with the Bible, it's much better to pretend, to act as if
Then, God exists, exists, great.
Fortunately, they don't need this book.
because if he needed this book, he would be in a really bad way
God exists, for people of faith, great, I have nothing to say about that.
I have something to say when someone tells me that God is in the Old Testament…
So… no questions?
As for God, something about Allah?
No, nothing… nothing, because in order to talk about the Quran, we would first need to talk about the New Testament.
I have to stick to my path… now I'm not even talking about the new law
So… this one here
Who was this one? Because this is
the essence of the matter, because, look, the whole rest
I… look, today my latest book is here.
the latest book I've written
Consciously: THE BIBLE IS NOT A HOLY BOOK
The Bible is not a holy book because, I repeat, the Bible does not speak of God.
The Bible tells us a different story.
The Bible tells us the story of the relationship between one nation.
and one individual, about whom the Masoretic Bible tells us
that he has this name here
and it is an everyday, concrete relationship
Sure, among flesh-and-blood individuals.
including him
i.e. it is not a relationship between one nation and some spiritual entity
Another of my books is titled: THERE IS NO CREATION IN THE BIBLE
because just like the Bible, it doesn't speak of God
The Bible does not even speak of creation.
It doesn't talk about the creation of heaven and earth, the universe… no.
no
the Bible tells us, I repeat, from the first verse of Genesis
what is commonly translated… here we are already entering the field of translations… what is translated
with the words "In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth"
Hebrew tells us that in the beginning, the Elohim did a series of things in one place where there was water and soil.
not that they created the heavens and the Earth
the Hebrew term "bara", which is translated as "to create"
is a term that never means "to create", not even once in the Old Testament
not only that Semitic root
does not mean "to create" in any Semitic language
never… that is, the concept of creation, and even less the concept of creation from nothing
is not present in the Old Testament
I repeat here
I don't know how the universe came into being.
For people of faith, the universe was created by God, that's fine.
No problem, as far as I'm concerned, I don't know, so I can neither object nor agree, and I'm not interested in it because…
that's one of the things I know I won't get an answer to
so I don't spend a single minute on it… then, if science one day tells us how the universe came into being, ok
We'll take that into account… I'm dedicated to the Bible, and the Bible doesn't talk about creation.
just that
it tells us the story of a specific relationship between individuals
among the individuals that the Bible accurately names
Elion
ELION, ELOHIM, YAHWEH
These are three names that are used to speak.
about what in translations… and here we get to the heart of the matter
is usually served as "bůh"
So, Elion is a Hebrew term that is usually translated as the Most High.
So every time you read Most High in the Bibles you have at home, in Hebrew it is elion.
but Elion is not a name
but it is, as they say, a determinative, i.e.
it is actually an adjective that denotes a quality of someone
and elion means, that/the one that is above
e.g. it is used several times in the Bible as an adjective
e.g. when talking about one building
For example, in Ezekiel it is said that he had rooms downstairs, and then he had one room that was "eliona"
So the upper room, which is upstairs, so this is someone who is upstairs.
then this name is used… so translating //the first one// as Supreme is, all in all, almost correct
it is not correct to translate it with an absolute superlative, but that is not important, we can use it that way
Another word is Elohim, Elohim is a Hebrew term that corresponds to the Italian term "God".
this term is in the plural
which is translated into the singular in Italian
and translating Elohim as God is a work of pure, absolute, unambiguous fantasy
because no one in the world knows what the term "elohim" means
No serious scholar of Semitic languages says that elohim means "god"
they are theologians, philologist-theologians, who translate it as God… because it doesn't mean God
It is not known what it means.
so we should at least have common sense, be correct and not translate it
and say Elohim, wherever Elohim is, let's say Elohim
and remember that it is a plural
which is acknowledged, because it cannot be otherwise, here it is the designation of the plural
but then someone tries to teach in every way that it is a special plural, abstract, denoting dignity
majestic plural, because it actually means God, so even though it is plural, it refers to only one
then there is this: Yahweh
which is a name that appears in the Old Testament at one point, when Moses
who has a direct relationship with this, and is actually his field commander, working for this one here
He says to him: but who are you?
because Moses basically says: I have to convince others to follow you, but I have to say who you are
because… Moses asks him: who are you? because he knew very well that it was not God, because such a question is not asked to God
and he answers him and says to him: "ehieh ašer ehieh"
this is again a phrase that is usually translated as: "I am what I am", "I will be what I will be", "I was what I was", "I will be what I was"…
I've been saying for three years that… and then she says to him: you will remember me by this name
not like Yahweh
because we don't know what the sounds of the vowels he pronounced were, we will never know
one thing is certain, when He said, you will remember me by this JHVH, the Hebrew language did not exist
so we don't even know what language he said it in, the Hebrew language began to exist about 4 centuries later
So, in what language were these sounds uttered? We don't know.
we know that these four consonants were written approximately
we know that these four consonants were written down approximately 4 centuries after they were pronounced
So how were they passed on during those 4 centuries?
you can imagine that for yourself
vowels were added to them 1600 years later
This is what we know about the name Yahweh.
in the name of the alleged god
We know this, nothing…
nothing… not even what language it was spoken in
So, to get back to that email, who is the one who is lying?
Who says they know nothing? Or who says they know everything about that name?
when we don't even know what language it was spoken in
Who is the one who lies?
Hmm?
That worked out with the email, I like it.
So
because the only thing we can say is that this name is not of Hebrew origin
because others knew him even before the Jews
they knew him as JH or JHV
and on Ugaritic tablets, or
let's say the ancient Phoenicians, present-day Lebanon
chili one of these… the singular of these is "el"
basically, or "eloha"
one of the tablets says: my son's name is JHV
this one here was the son of one of these here
and it is written
one member of the Roman Jewish community wrote to me more than a year ago
that this one here
was probably the younger son of one of the bosses
and he was supposed to become independent and show what he could do, and he was given a certain task
on the Ugaritic tablets it is written that one El says: the name of my son is JHV
during the reading of the uneducated, a number of things come to the surface
So, we don't know when it was… what language it was spoken in, so we don't even really know how it was pronounced.
we certainly don't know what vowels, what vowel sounds were there, because there were none
what I can tell you is that in the Masoretic text
it could be said in most cases
it is not vocalized as Yahweh, but it is vocalized as Jehovah
Džeova
so it is vocalized JEHOVAH
because, after all, it is not known how it was originally vocalized
So we know that we don't know about the Bible.
and if we have no truths to pass on, we must not deceive people
because to lie… he is lying who says: I will tell you how it is
I don't know how it is.
I know it is not as we are told with certainty, there is no doubt about that
so it's not, I really don't know how it is
sure but, sure
I know that here he was not the one who said his name in Hebrew
in this way, with the exact meaning, because it simply isn't
just not
so, then it is said that elohim
is singular
and that Elion, Elohim, and Yahweh are three ways of referring to the same god
because, naturally, when there is a need to convey monotheistic doctrine
one can only say
that what is written in Hebrew using different determinations, terms
so it actually refers to one individual
Here is a Bible.
distributed by the weekly Christian family
or the Bible for families
and then we confront it with another Bible, Deuteronomy 32.8
the following is written in Deuteronomy 32.8:
when the Supreme
distributed to the nations their share
when he divided the human race and established the borders of the people
in Hebrew it is: when Elion
determined the allocations and borders of peoples and nations
says the Masoretic Bible, so it is translated correctly
he did it according to the number of the sons of Israel
but Elion did not assign the nations according to the number of the sons of Israel, and actually here it is a phrase that makes no sense
and it doesn't make sense because in the old codes, in all of them
it is written that Elion made this division and this allocation according to the number of the children of the elohim
not according to the children of Israel
this is one of the many changes that the masoretes made to give importance to their nation
but there it is said that Elion divided the nations, established borders, and allocated them, it is not said to whom, he simply allocated
and he did this division and allocation based on the number of children of the elohim
and says that on that occasion
ration, or portion… here it is written Pana
in Hebrew it is Yahweh, and in all cases where you find Lord or Eternal in your Bibles at home, in Hebrew it is Yahweh
so translate Yahweh as Lord or Eternal
knowing that we don't even know in what language it was pronounced
is it correct or is it not correct?
It's so obvious, so obvious.
okay
it's too obvious, that's why it shouldn't be read by uneducated people
because one gets to the seventh bite
So, the portion of Yahweh is his people, Jacob
Jacob and his descendants
by the way, be careful, Jacob is the son of Isaac, who is the son of Abraham
that is, the portion of Yahweh is not Abraham or Isaac, but from Jacob onwards
not Abraham, Jacob!
that could be elaborated more… so…
He, or Yahweh, found him in the wilderness
in the roaring confusion of solitude
took care of him, raised him, surrounded him, etc. and now watch out!
Jahve, here it is written Pan, he himself drove it
can we read verse 12 in the other bible?
The Lord led him alone, there was no foreign god with him
ok, thanks, none
and in Hebrew it is written: there was no foreign Elohim with him
so I ask you, if this is the only god, how could there be any foreign god with him?
How could he?
while for Jewish authors it was perfectly fine
it is said that when he divided the nations here, he allocated them
he did so after counting his own
and in that ration he got that piece, and with that piece he loaded himself and didn't let anyone help him
I am now reading the bible published by the Christian family, not my own translations, ok?
I read the Bible like an uneducated person.
which you have at home, the reading of uneducated people!
so… and what kind of bible is there? I don't know, however…
i downloaded it from… just some bible, ok
so
here we face a mystery
which, of course, requires interpretation, if we are to think that there is only one here
because, here it must be said: but God
calculates itself
god god god, she calculates herself
will divide and allocate the nations I don't know to whom
and in that allocation
He takes only one part
and says I'm not interested in the other parts
so if the only part when he budgeted himself
allocates and decides to be interested in her, that is, in Jacob's descendants
so all of us, now I don't know if there is any descendant of Jacob among us
If he is here, he is with him.
but we all have the right to say: ok, you didn't choose us, live your life, we'll live ours
you decided not to take care of us, not us
and that is quite a nice mystery, an inexplicable mystery in the mind of God
which takes care of defining borders, peoples and nations
their allocation is not known to whom
and he says I will only take care of you here
and the others are his slaves
this is what the bible you have at home says
and up to here we are in the sphere of the mystery of the impenetrable mind of God
but there is something else here that dramatizes the whole matter
the whole bible, the whole bible
which you have at home
is a narrative about how here the one
with their own
massacres hundreds of thousands of people
to take their territory, on which he wants to get his own
so we have to take note that here the one
he does not remember in the evening that He himself put those people there in the morning
and when he decides that those territories interest him
instead of assigning them to himself, if there is a god, with whom did he need to discuss? with no one
no, instead of assigning them to himself, he says to his own:
now we will go there, we will kill them all and we will take the territory
we are in a circle of absolute madness
simply if it is so, and I say that without fear of blasphemy
because it's not god, here it's a mental deviant
like if there's only one here, he's mentally ill
but He is not one, there is one boss, one group and one of that group
this is clearly what the bible tells us
everything else is theological fiction
there is no doubt about it
or here he is mentally ill
but not only Him
In the course of the events narrated in the Bible, he consistently says:
I am the Elohim of Israel, and he says so all the time
this is how he consistently refers to himself, no I am God, I am the Elohim of those here
and I am a jealous Elohim
and he says to his own: if you betray me with other elohohim who do not exist
so I will kill you
and he does it regularly, killing 40 thousand of them
who betrayed him with other elohim
it is written here in the Bibles you have at home
just read them like an uneducated person
just read them like an uneducated person, just read them!
without thinking too much, it's all written
so he is, apart from being affected by a certain disease
jealous of rivals who don't exist
and if He does not know that they do not exist, who is to know?
but the studs would be His followers
and if I belonged to the Jewish nation
so I would piss like an animal if I heard that my ancestors were so stupid
Why stupid?
because they did not recognize, based on everyday experience
the effectiveness of this story, they knew the true God, the one, all-powerful, all-knowing
transcendent, spiritual
they knew the true God, the one, all-powerful, all-knowing
transcendent, spiritual, creator of the heavens and the earth
and, read the bible, they kept leaving him
to put themselves in the service of Others who did not exist
can anyone be more stupid?
I would be upset if something like that was said about my ancestors
because I would consider it an insult
but they did it
they were abandoning him, theoretically god everything everything everything everything everything
and they turned to idols made of stone or pieces of wood
Didn't they understand the difference?
how were they not able to understand the difference?
when they had a relationship with it here for centuries, at least from Abraham onwards
they saw him and Moses dining together
they were preparing a bath for him, they were preparing food for him, that's it, then we'll see…
and yet above all
they were leaving him and turning to someone who did not exist… according to the doctrine
ie to the so-called pagan gods who do not exist, who are the bare invention of man
but can someone be like that? can't!
and they were not like that in reality
they turned to others because they knew well that the others existed and how
and you, by the way, were interested in the same territory
and there were rivals of this one, and that's why this one was terrorized by the idea that they would leave him and join the others
and he told them: if you do that, I will kill you
because the danger that he would be abandoned by his own, betrayed, was permanent
permanent, he was afraid of it
that is absolutely evident in the Bible! I repeat, not in my translations
in the Bibles you have at home
that is key
and it is clear that it must not be accepted here, because when this obviousness is accepted, everything falls
everything is falling
moment… everything that was built on the Bible is falling
because, I repeat, not that god does not exist, that is something else
the god who was invented on the basis of the bible falls, that's something else
blah blah blah
if we look at Genesis… blah blah blah
in one moment…
//there will be an expulsion of Adam and Eve from Eden…// blah blah blah
in the middle of flowers… blah blah blah … yes, I would place it in the region of Azerbaijan
please?
I would place it in the area of ​​today's Azerbaijan
that is, to the west of the Caspian Sea, in the area of ​​lakes Urmia and Van
where the so-called the mountains of Urartu, or Ararat
where, by the way, there were many archaeological discoveries, which are hardly talked about
a number of findings appear there
which gives the impression of a large presence of educated people, especially when it comes to astronomy
just in that territory, really big astronomical centers
and then he drives them out of that Eden and says:
then the Lord God said: look, that person has become like one of us
one of us
blah blah blah
He became like one of the elohim.
as for the knowledge of good and evil, let us see that he does not lift up his hand and taste the fruit of the tree of life, that he does not eat of it and live forever
blah blah blah
this is how I will drive out man and I will set up cherubim in the east of Eden
blah … to guard the tree of life
so
there is really a lot of information here
as for the tree of life, my hypothesis is in my book, which is back there
but here it is more necessary to talk about Adam and Eve
blah blah blah
//now he's like us//
exactly
anyway they say
we will, we will! Adam in our image and likeness, we will "make"
we will make Adam "in our image" but not "in our image"
and this is not even written in the Masoretic Bible
it says: "with something that contains our image", not "to our image", which is something completely different
this is one translation really intentionally wrong
because it is written
"with" the something that contains our image
and they will make this Adam here
they will make a man, not a woman, on this occasion
then the bible says that the elohim took adam
and placed him in Eden
that is, they did not create him in Eden, they created him elsewhere, then they took the man and placed him there
and they gave him… as the Bible says, because he was supposed to take care of that territory
and by man is meant a group of men, because "adam" is listed as a member
so it's not one individual, it's that group called "adam"
so here they were supposed to take care of the territory, i.e. they were supposed to cultivate the land and raise cattle, this is how the Bible clearly says
then the bible says that at one point the elohim realized
that for that man, for Adam, the company of animals is not enough
and they decide to make him a wife
which means that the Adams, they were males, lived alone with animals
holy shepherds…..but in the sense of their own isolation…
and so they still lived alone
That's the idea that comes to my mind, right? Because they were…
people living in isolation with animals, so they decide to get them a wife
And how did they do it here? According to the Bible.
put the man to sleep, actually put him into a deep sleep, so not only do they put him to sleep, they put him into a deep sleep
they will remove something from the curved side part
then they will close the meat where they took the sample
and with what they took, they will make a woman
So the way the woman was made shows us that these groups were not fertile with each other.
and actually, when the first son is born, whose name is Cain
Eva says she did it thanks to the help of one of the Elohim.
or the birth of the first son, the intervention of one of the Elohim was necessary
then they do another one
when they have their first son
one elohim says: these have become like us
because until then they had been taking care of the production of Adams
and they will say: now we will drive them out, because if these start drawing from the tree of life as well
then they will become too dangerous because they will be able to live "le olam"
"Le olam" is usually translated as "eternity", etc., but it doesn't actually mean that in Hebrew.
there is no concept of eternity, it means a long duration in the past or in the future
So, here you are.
they were afraid that those who had become fertile, i.e. capable of reproducing,
to gain access to practices
ensuring a long life
and that is contained in the story of the tree of life, and so they are sent away from there, or rather, they are driven out
they will have another son, who will… so the tree of life probably represents some practices guaranteeing a long life
and current genetics is beginning to implement practices that ensure a considerable extension of life
So when Cain… that's the story of Cain and Abel, Cain kills Abel.
Cain is driven out and says: but if you drive me out of here, whoever meets me will kill me.
but if Adam and Eve were the grandparents of humanity
and Abel was already dead, who was that anyone?
There was no one there.
According to the doctrine… according to the Bible, there were a lot of people there, so he's afraid he'll be killed by others.
reading for the uneducated… that's how it's written…
Cain is lucky, he is not killed, he finds a wife, has children, builds a city, etc., etc., and stands at the beginning of a great civilization.
endowed with a wealth of knowledge, from construction to cattle breeding,
after agriculture, writing, etc., etc.
So here we have a story about individuals.
who will form a group
men, they will put her in a certain situation to work there, to manage it there
this is what we know as earthly paradise
which, however, does not mean "earthly paradise" in Hebrew, in Hebrew it means "an enclosed and protected place"
located in Eden
So, we can say that it was their command center, an experimental laboratory, a greenhouse, or something like that.
they take these men and put them there, after a while they notice that they were obviously not completely satisfied with just the animals
and so they decide to make a woman
at the beginning, these are probably not fertile
and the curious thing here is that when he eats the so-called apple
So the two of them, it is said, realize that they are naked.
and it is said that they hid
and we all think that a feeling of shame appeared there
but it's not that the two of them hid from each other
it's not that the man was ashamed to be seen by the woman and vice versa
they both hide and cover their genitals from the Elohim
between each other
But can we think that the Elohim, who had seen them naked until just before, were suddenly offended?
No, because it's there.
a story about how they
they immediately understood that revealing their sexuality was something the bosses didn't want
so they are trying to hide the fact that they discovered it
but of course, that can't be hidden, so they drive them away
So in fact, as he says
biblical scholar, Jew, Amos Luzzatto
he says, there was no original sin and there was no punishment
there was a post-eventum judgment, so the boss of those in Gan Eden said, ok
you wanted this option, ok, now
Beware, the knowledge of good and evil, explains this biblical scholar, a Jew.
it is not the knowledge of good and evil as we understand it
chili as the knowledge of some ethical order, that someone is aware of what is right… no, no, no
says:
from this moment on, you will experience both the positive and negative aspects of the situation you have found yourself in
Well, you wanted this self-sufficiency? OK, go enjoy it somewhere else.
and says to Adam: now, when you want to eat, it will be up to you
because you'll have to earn it
because as long as they were in there with them, they had no problem with food
and says to Eva: now you will understand that making children causes pain
it's not a condemnation of someone
This is a post-eventum judgment, of the type: you wanted a bike? So now you have to pedal.
It can't be done any other way, you can't sit on a bike and not move, it's nice to ride a bike, but you also have to pedal.
Okay, so it says: now you'll understand that having children causes pain.
You wanted it? Ok, it's your thing.
so there is no original sin there
it's your business, so there's no original sin there
when there is no original sin, we are at peace, we are not tainted by anything
even if that were the case
If it is true that Cain found a lot of people out there, it means that these two are not the grandparents of humanity.
and if they are not the grandparents of humanity, then even if there was the stain of original sin, they did not pass it on to humanity
if anything, then to their own offspring, period. if anything
Seriously, no.
but if anything, they would pass it on to their offspring
so when the reading of the uneducated is done
only what you have in your Bibles at home is read
a lot will be understood
that's why there is a need to insert allegories, metaphors, etc. because otherwise it is clear that these things are not compatible
with a doctrine that is passed on
and it is clear that no religious doctrine can be created on these stories read by the uneducated
because these are very specific stories, very specific
then we can all agree that they were just writing here for no reason
So, if they wrote here just like that, if the Masoretes wrote just like that
If they made those things up, then all of us, all of us, all of us, all of us must accept it.
that nothing can be gained from the Bible, because the Bible contains no truth
unless we make it up
but it is they who need to invent it
because
Otherwise, what the Bible tells us is absolutely clear.
and also easy to understand, just read it carefully
I was talking about… before.
Can we take Judges 11:24?
Before that, I was talking about the Elohim, that's something that… look…
11.24
I think.
Yes, because in my books, over the years, I have written a whole range of unacceptable things, some of you may have read one of my books…
So I wrote that the Bible is not a religious book, that the Bible does not talk about God, that it does not talk about spiritual worlds, that the Bible does not talk about angels.
in the sense that biblical malakhim are individuals of flesh and bone, just as the individual of flesh and bone is here
…malakhim are not spiritual beings, you should know that angels have been defined
that the spirituality of angels was established at a council in the 4th century AD? around the 4th century AD
because before that they did not agree that they were spiritual
And actually, I'll give you an example.
in the Church Fathers, e.g. in Tertullian's De virginibus velandis
it is written that young girls
who attended the assemblies where the so-called angels were present
they had to cover their heads, long hair, with a veil
because long hair sexually aroused angels
so for their protection, it was better for them to cover up
this is in the Qumran texts, in the treatises on brachot
the same
at gatherings where angels are present, girls must have their heads covered
because it was dangerous for them, because they weren't such angels.
in the Letter to the Corinthians, the Apostle Paul
apostle…
Pavel
says:
at assemblies where "angeloi" are present, which is the Greek translation of the term "malachim"
girls, women must walk with their heads, with a sign of subordination on their heads
or let's say with a covered head
not at all out of respect for God
because of the angels
because of the angels
only with the passage of time did they become spiritual beings, before that they were not so much
then they were also given wings
I repeat
Are there angels? Okay, I'm not saying anything about that.
They are not the ones from the Old Testament.
Okay? Let's always make these distinctions, so we can all be at ease…
blah blah blah
In the Bible, there are several passages where it says: I met one of them, luckily I'm still alive.
It was better not to meet them… one was more at ease when not meeting them.
they were no quiet ones
So
So I said, these malakhims were individuals of flesh and blood.
cherubim… not only are they not angels, but unlike malakhim, they were not even persons, they were machines
Machines!
So those cherubim with fiery swords, were they machines? Exactly.
Do you know what part of Jewish exegesis writes?
the Jewish exegesis that is against me, ok? not some friends
cherubim… Jews have always known from the Talmud that they were mechanical objects
some kind of robots used for etc. etc. etc.
Thanks to the Talmud, Jews have always known that they were mechanical objects.
I deduced it from my uneducated reading of the Masoretic Bible.
that's why I continue with that uneducated reading
Malachim
The Hebrew term "malach", which is the singular of "malachim", translated into Italian as "angel", refers to ordinary human beings.
chili individuals of flesh and bone
In many ways, Mauro Biglino is right, the Bible, as he claims, is not a religious book.
I wrote, I documented
I tried to document that the Bible talks about genetic engineering.
how they made Adam and Eve, how they intervened in the case of Noah, etc.
It has been known since ancient times through the Talmud that the Bible speaks of genetic engineering.
It has been known to Jews since time immemorial, it is written on the internet.
I dedicated a whole chapter to Satan in one of my books.
to document that Satan does not exist in the Old Testament
Mauro Biglino has done a very good job with the chapter on Satan, and we really congratulate him on this.
all this just by reading an uneducated person
by mere reading of an uneducated person
that's why I keep doing it
So, the problem is this.
The problem is to determine whether this is God or not.
Judges 24… I said before that it is absolutely evident
that this is the boss, this is some group
he will count his own, establish the boundaries according to his own, and assign them
as part of this allocation, one piece was assigned to him
He doesn't like it, he's not happy with his piece, so he fights against his colleagues in an attempt to take more pieces from them.
Full stop.
because otherwise it would mean
that He decides, He still does not remember what decisions He made, and to correct those decisions, He massacres hundreds of thousands of people
That's the second option, there is no other one here.
But let's see what the Bible tells us next.. 11:24 Can we read it?
Don't you own what Kemosh, your God, has given you to own?
Thus we will also own the territory of those whom the Lord has driven out before us.
Okay, here we are in the Book of Judges.
Here one of the judges speaks, the Israelite judges were not the ones who ensured justice
but the field commanders, who before the kingdom was founded, the Kingdom of Judah, David's kingdom, then Solomon's, etc.
let's say, these individual figures emerged, who took the reins of power into their own hands
in moments when it was necessary to subdue something, in particularly dangerous situations, etc.
So these people took over the power, the one who is speaking here is a judge named Jephthah.
and he is dealing with a hostile people, the Ammonites
because they were at war with the Ammonites, Moabites, Edomites, etc.
because they were fighting and taking pieces of territory from each other
a little smaller than an Italian region, to give you an idea
So this Jephthah says to the king of the Ammonites:
you hold the territory that your Elohim Kemosh gave you
we hold the territory that our Elohim Yahweh gave us
there it is written with disarming clarity
that Jephthah, the Israelite commander
says: we are subordinate to Elohim by the name of Yahweh and we hold the territory that He gave us
your Elohim, whose name is Kemosh, gave you those territories and you hold them, absolutely equally
He doesn't say that God gave them to us, and therefore…
and Kemosh, who does not exist, gave them to you
because according to this document, he was not supposed to exist, of course
while it existed, and how… as they say, you have what yours gave you, we have what ours gave us
but even the wise Solomon knew that Chemosh existed
who had the cult sites built for him
because Solomon, who was wise, knew that Yahweh was here today, but might not be here tomorrow
so he maintained good relations with his other colleagues
who operated in the same territory
So Solomon had places of worship built for one named Chemosh
and he had cult sites built for one named Milkom //= Moloch//
said to another elohim who was in the area
actually, these lower elohim were fighting over small pieces of territory
while the great bosses who oversaw the great empires
Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Hittites
they were fighting over empires
the little ones were stealing small pieces of land from each other, or at least trying to.
This is what is written in the Bibles you have at home.
We're reading it there… here in this, how is it written?
the territory that your God, this is of course a translation, in Hebrew it is Elohim Kemosh, gave you ownership of, you hold it
Thus we also hold on to what the Lord, or Yahweh, our God, our Elohim, has given us to own.
Exactly the same… you have yours, we have ours.
Full stop.
then other elohim are also named
and then other elohim are named, I've already said, Milkom, Baldeor, Balzebub, Balzafon
there are a lot of others there, a lot, they are all named in the Bible
So, the attempt to transform this term into a single God is an attempt that really makes no sense, it makes no sense.
because the Bible consistently tells us about the plurality of these individuals
I think there should be no doubt about this.
Let's say.
We are cautious.
and this becomes apparent when reading the uneducated
Then there are all the other ways of reading, okay?
As I said.
I'm making mine available.
Everyone can do with it what they want.
there are many others here
mine is the lowest reading, absolutely
there are other readings here that are really at a high level
And sometimes I say, if we had a table… set… with a bunch of the most amazing, most refined dishes
prepared according to recipes, etc., etc., etc., so I only put boiled potatoes there
That's it, I just take the potatoes and throw them into boiling water, any klutz can do that.
But I say: let me put my boiled potatoes on the table.
then let everyone do what they want with them
Instead, I am constantly told…
then let everyone do what they want with them… instead, I'm constantly told that I can't put those boiled potatoes in there
But I keep putting them in… do you want to take a break?
blah blah blah
Here, one gentleman had a question.
Where? Blah blah blah
blah blah blah //Malachimites, why they terrorize and what their mission is//
OK, the mission is described by the name itself, which means "bearers of commands".
"executors of commands", from which the Greek angelos comes, which means the same thing
…so they were something like guards?
Yes, they were the ones who carried out the orders from these people.
After all, it can be understood from the Bible that when Yahweh was on the road, he always had one or two by his side.
as his henchmen, let's say, and he gave them various tasks to perform
and they, of course, behaved like Someone
and as Someone, they could be unpleasantly aggressive from time to time, because they felt they could freely do whatever they wanted
so they had some authority given to them by Elohim
Exactly.
blah blah blah
it makes significant sense, it makes significant sense
they were simply powerful individuals with authority, and in a way, they despised their subordinates
For example, we read that Yahweh… wait, I'll be right there…
that Yahweh says: you will give me every firstborn son, as well as every firstborn male, so it is the same for him
so they didn't consider them… to be anything more…
Then, when we have time, let's talk about what he did with them, but that would be a whole lecture.
Please.
Is it written somewhere whether the Malachim are of the same race as the Elohim, or were they created as…
No, it's not there.
in some codes there are actually passages where
where it seems that the same individuals are referred to as Malachim as the descendants of Elohim
as if they belonged to the same group, it may be so
In fact, the Malachimim are of the functional order.
we could say within some military hierarchy
general, then colonels, then lieutenants, second lieutenants, etc.
as malachim, one function could therefore be defined
so it may not be a racial type distinction, because
You said 10 minutes… so I'll use them with these two…
when Abraham
It fits… assuming it existed… we'll take it that way…
Abraham sits in the shade of his tent.
and he sees coming, as the Bible says, 3 anashims
which is the plural of "iš", which means male individuals
sees that three are coming
He sees that they are hungry, dusty, dirty, thirsty, etc., etc., etc.
He will tell them: stop, I will prepare food for you, water, wash yourselves, rest before you continue, etc.
and after a few verses we find out that one of the three is Yahweh
Genesis 18
one of those three is Yahweh
He stops for a few words with Abraham, eats, drinks, washes himself, etc.
he will stay for a few words with Abraham and the other two will leave
and the moment they leave, they go to perform the function of messenger for Abraham's nephew Lot, who is in Sodom
these two, and our two, that is, two male individuals, exactly like Yahweh, are called malachim
at that moment they become messengers and become malakhim
This is a really beautiful passage that helps us understand that these 3 came here.
all three the same, all three who stank of sweat
They were dirty, etc.
and two continue as messengers and become malakhs
but they are still our people
after all, a few verses later they are called anashim again
there is an amazing interchangeability here
It's all simple.
Let's not add… if we can't get the veils for it.
Sometimes someone writes to me: but Biglino, what do you think you've discovered? Nothing! I haven't discovered anything.
nothing
I read what is written.
I just want it not to be covered up
if we are to use the term "revealed"
I agree with him in the sense that I try to remove the veils
which they covered up so that it would not be possible to understand what is understood when reading the uneducated
Besides, it's fun to read the uneducated, so… please
blah blah
But what are you looking for?
I satisfy my curiosity, that's enough, I don't know where I'll end up, if I'll reach any goal, I don't know
I satisfy my curiosity, which I quite enjoy.
When someone asks me to talk about it, I do.
If no one asks me to, I won't talk about it anymore.
I have no availability at this time until October 2014.
all weekends…
I no longer have a private life…
I have to speak until October 2014, then what do I know…
tonight, from 3 to 5, I have a live broadcast to the United States, for the third time
So tonight I'm continuing with America.
It's a live broadcast from New York to Los Angeles, I'm presenting the whole thing, I'm not there as a guest, you know?
It's not like I have any input there.
the whole thing is dedicated to my work, I'm the only one there
for those two hours
blah blah
Okay, let's go have… yes, please.
You mentioned the Qumran texts, can anything be read from them?
you know, it's not that there is one publication
For example, there are studies by Luigi Moraldi, published by UTET, which are dense volumes of almost 1000 pages, really interesting.
and then there are plenty of books by other researchers… actually, it was divided among the researchers
So everyone contributed a piece, so…
Qumran literature as such does not exist… if you look into it, you will find everything.
there are also texts on the internet, even those that have been published, but
blah blah
Now I'm focusing on it because of certain things.
for his other works
but it's not like there's a Qumran library here where everything would be
blah blah
and there are about 9 more papyri, I think, that have not yet been published
already because the Qumran question apparently calls into question the very beginnings of Christianity, so
For decades, everything was kept under wraps.
because it provides information about the distribution of Essenes, Caddikim, and Hasidim
and there is one that could call into question the person of Christ
It's very risky, very risky.
blah blah //Eva and the snake//
"had" means
So, these stories, so that we understand each other well.
those stories, like most of the stories in Genesis
are not the product of Jewish thought
were copied from the surrounding nations, especially from the Sumerian-Akkadians and the Phoenicians
there are
those stories were not subjected to theological, monotheistic scrutiny
it is clearly stated that… the big boss was there
whose name, for example,. this name is also found in Phoenician
and there he is considered the chief of the gods
So while here he is made a god, still him, it is clearly stated that he is the leader of the gods.
Absolutely clear.
in Sumerian-Akkadian it is called Anu, which means Supreme
exactly like Elion, The one who is above
and it is said there that this one had two sons
who fought among themselves
one of them was the one who made Adamu, which is the Sumerian-Akkadian name for Adam
So they didn't even come up with it, they took it from there.
Adam or Lulu, which means "mixed"
because it was made of different materials
So, one of the two who made Adam, Adamu
is the one who also liked him more
he was the one who wanted to give it to this Adam, Adam
to become more independent, to develop more
The other one, the brother, on the contrary, said: no, we have to keep these as they are, because they have to work here and that's it.
So, in the form of a snake.
can be seen
disagreement between the two brothers
because one brother says: let's keep the Adam's apples under control, because these must not develop independently under any circumstances
the other one, on the contrary, who made them
with his partner, whose name was Ninchurshag
the other one, who made them and wanted to give them independence, thus violated
my brother's orders and gave them this opportunity
and the apple is a representation of that choice
and besides, it's not even an apple, because the apple comes from "malum", which was the Latin translation of the Hebrew term that simply means "fruit"
there is no "apple" because "malum" means both "evil" and "apple tree" in Latin
so the meanings have merged
in Hebrew, but here the meaning is not there
so it's a story about the moment when, after an agreement with one of the brothers, they made that decision
they actually decided to accept the offer
So we're back, now we're going to ask questions.
Ready?
We talked about it.
that Yahweh… received as an allotment…
I wanted to ask about one thing from the Book of Enoch… blah blah blah… //physical connection between the Elohim and humans//
So, the Bible also speaks of sexual intercourse between the Elohim and earthly women, Genesis chapter 6.
where it is said that the sons of Elohim saw that the daughters of Adam were attractive
they got together with them and had children
So, first, it would be necessary to repeat what was written here.
that God had some sons…
they were the descendants of the Elohim… if Elohim is God, God had sons
and here these sons unite with human daughters
By the way, those who consider "Elohim" to be God say that here "Elohim" refers to the lawgiver…
Yeah? Like here "Elohim" is supposed to mean "legislators", "judges"…
Well, it's clear when someone invents a theory and then takes a text.
and in parts where the text does not correspond to the theory, he changes it, he simply inserts meanings according to his own will
Let's take Tex Willer and do exactly the same thing with him.
So… they have sex and make children.
who are called "giborim", which means "famous" or "powerful" people
and here, if we understand it correctly, this should not have happened
in the sense that the bosses didn't like this crossing, this mixing
those two types should have simply remained separate
by the way, one says…
rather than a sin, it could have been a violation of a rule
We are the ones who rule, they are the ones who are ruled, and we… simply do not mix with them.
and that is understandable from the point of view of the ruling class
In this way, our colonizers did not associate with the colonized nations.
because they kept them in subjugation, despised them, etc., etc., etc.
…still in Genesis chapter 6, it is written that at that time, i.e. when these unions were taking place, the Nephilim were on Earth.
"nefilim" is a term translated into Greek as "gigantes"
which means "giants"
and it is written that they were here afterwards
but it is not said that the descendants of these were Nephilim, it is said there that their descendants are Gibborim, not Nephilim
So there were giants here… I said that even today there are those who change the vowels recorded by the Masoretes.
For example, some of these exegetes say that it is not written "nephilim" there.
but they invoke the root "nafal", which means abortion
and they say that abortions were performed at that time
in the sense that they performed selective abortions and left alive… only sons
So I have the feeling that they were removing the sons and only letting the daughters be born.
So, by changing the vowels of the term "nephilim", giants become abortions.
Okay? And that's what today's exegetes do.
on the internet, etc. the Talmud, their whole interpretation of this passage
just change a few vowels and everything changes
So it can be safely said that if they considered the Bible a holy book, they would not interfere with it.
if someone changes it, they do not necessarily consider it sacred
So… they all got upset when I published my first book.
How dare they?! But it's them who
which alter the letter, so they do not consider it sacred, because what is sacred is taboo
it is taboo by definition, it cannot be interfered with
so if they can interfere with it freely, it seems to me that it is one of many books, as is actually the case
And in that passage, there is one interesting thing… in one place it says that
Elohim says:
I won't anymore.
to argue with Adam
after all, it's just a piece of meat, its life will be 120 years
and there is one term
you know that it is written from right to left, BŠGM
which the Masoretes vocalized as "be-sha-gam"
"v/proto" "že" "pouze", and then "basar", i.e. "protože pouze maso" –//here, however, "gam" = "také/pořád", not "pouze"//–
"because" "only meat", so…
I'm not going to argue with Adam anymore.
"because" "only meat", because they are actually just a piece of meat
so his life will be 120 years
and then there is a professor from the University of Beirut
Prof. Salibi, who says, no, this vocalization of the Masoretes is incorrect.
because it has to be divided differently here, it needs to be divided here
and it is "be-shagam" –//var. "be-shaga-m" = in their error//–
and says that this is a Semitic root that has passed into both Hebrew and Arabic
which means "to pour organic fluids"
So this one says that the Elohim say:
We will no longer enrich the Adamy family.
"s" "our seminal fluid"
and his life will be 120 years
So it is said that there, according to this professor from the American University of Beirut
The Elohim decided to stop their supply of their genetic material.
chili "we will no longer give our sperm"
Adam's
and their lives will be shortened by it
This can be found in the Bible, again.
because before that, before this decision, there were so-called patriarchs who lived up to 800, 900 years
from that moment on, in the Bibles you have at home, you can see that the length of life is 600, 500, 400, 300, 200
until it drops to 100 and something, e.g. Moses was 120 years old, etc.
So, in fact, there was a period when mergers were taking place.
they gave them their genetic material, and at one point they said enough
the supply of genetic material will stop
and the life of a person, that generation, that group
it decreases drastically over time because the genetic material of these is decreasing
Okay? I answered.
we talked about the fact that Yahweh received Jacob as his portion
and thus Jacob's descendants, i.e. the so-called 12 patriarchs, or leaders of the 12 Israelite tribes
when you read the Bible carefully, you see that when counting the Israelite tribes
you see that sometimes there are 8 of them, sometimes 9, sometimes 10, sometimes 11, 12, 13
and then, as a result, it is 12
I also said that the core of the Bible is the Pentateuch, you should know.
that throughout history there was a period when the Pentateuch was not the Pentateuch, but the Hexateuch
that it was 6 books
there was a period when there were 7 of them, when there were 8 of them, and then
they decided it was penta, that there were 5 of them
So even then, there was someone who decided from the desk how things should be.
So, Yahweh had Jacob as his portion.
who then after the battle with one bull becomes Israel –//isra-el = El's/God's warrior//–
but the Bible says that at one point
this Yahweh goes to the land of Shinar, or to the Chaldean Ur, that is, to Sumer
and he's going there for Abraham
He will take Abraham, not Abraham's family.
in the sense that Abraham's father, Abraham, and two brothers lived there
Yahweh comes there, takes Abraham and says: you come and fight with me
You come with me, because we are going to take pieces of the land of Canaan.
So Yahweh will choose one individual from one family.
the other family members will stay where they are
and they really never considered following Yahweh
followed by the Elohim, who ruled where they resided
So, in Mesopotamia, in the land between the two rivers
what was known as Sumer in the Bible is like Shin-ar
which is Sumer, biblical Sumer
when we read Genesis, chapter 14
we see that it was in Canaan that wars of conquest were waged
and it also says that there were territories that had belonged to the rulers of Shinar for decades, i.e. for a long time
Chili was under the rule of those who ruled in Sumer.
So Yahweh takes Abraham and leads him away.
the others remain there and do not even consider for a moment to put themselves at the service of "God"
because simply…
it is quite clear that Yahweh is not a god
So here, Abraham and his men had an army of about 300 people.
He was not some shepherd; if he existed, he was a warlord who had his own army.
he goes, he fights, and then on his return from one of these battles
he meets Melchizedek, you've probably heard that name before
which means "malak sadok", or "king of justice" or "just king"
which in the Masoretic Bible
is a Kohen of Elohim, or "Kohen", which means "priest"
Then, when we have time, I'll read you something about priests.
priest… the term used in the sense of priest does not mean "priest" as we understand it
there the priests did not care for the souls of the faithful
there were no believers there
and the question of the soul, that was the last thing all those gentlemen would care about there
In the book of Kohelet, chapter 3, it is said that people are the same as animals.
when they die, both will turn to ashes
and it says there that man… Ecclesiastes 3:19
and it says there that humans have nothing extra compared to animals
so the priests there didn't care about the souls
they took care of…. rather, they were giving orders on behalf of the commanders
and it is said that Melchizedek
was a kohen directly to Elion, not Yahweh, Elion, or the One Above, the boss
and Abraham must appear before Melchizedek
he will appear before Melchizedek
who will bless him in the name of Eliona, something like Abraham asking for an imprimatur
in the sense that Yahweh will bring him there and he will be accepted by the great boss
and an interesting thing is that in the Masoretic text
it is written that Melchizedek was a kohen of elohim and especially of Elion
The oldest Qumran texts state that Melchizedek was one elohim.
that it was one of them who worked directly for Elion
and since in Masoretic theology there could be no one else who would be "God", they changed…
In Masoretic theology, there could be no one else who would be "God", so they made "Elohim" into "Kohen".
the representative of Eliona in that territory
but they probably made another adjustment
because it is said that he was a kohen in the territory of Shalem, i.e. in Jerusalem
but in fact in the oldest codices, according to studies by Luigi Moraldi
it is said that Melchizedek was not in Salem, but in Shalima
which is a locality near Nablus in Samaria
So what happened was that the Jewish tradition, which could not accept…
You know what the contrast with the Samaritans is, even in the Gospels the difference between the Judeans and the Samaritans is mentioned.
she could not accept that Elion's direct representative was based in Samaria, so they changed Shalima to Shalem
tradition is a certainty of distortion
So let's do it like this, it's better, let's do it like this.
So, just in this short passage, there are already two things.
which somewhat clarifies what types of interventions were carried out
then everyone can decide whether to draw absolute truths from that book or not
I would have a bit of a problem with that.
to draw absolute truths from such a book, so it is much better to do as
blah blah blah //did anyone have a question before? no…//
So we'll do it like that.
we talked about Gan Eden
Excuse me… blah blah blah //Jewish and Christian Easter, origin of the name//
for Christians, it is a replacement for those there
blah blah
So, the Jewish Passover was apparently officially established.
around 622 BC by King Josiah, ruler of one of the Israelite kingdoms
because… of the Kingdom of Judah, because there was a division there
and let's say that in the time of Josiah, there was a great religious reform
that religious reform abolished human sacrifices, which had been performed until then
above all, it abolished the sacrifice of firstborns, who were burned in fire
He had them handed over to him after 8 days, when they were 8 days old.
Ezekiel 20:25
and… so
the firstborn son has since been replaced by a lamb
and also to forget… not just to make sure it doesn't happen again
but also to make people forget that they were previously carried out at His explicit request
Elohim – Ezekiel 20:25 – clearly explains: I realize that I have given…
Shall we read it?
I even gave them bad laws and commandments, because of which they could not live.
I defiled them with their sacrificial offerings when they burned all the firstborn in the fire.
to drive them to despair, so that they may know that I am the Lord
So, in the previous verse it also says: because they did not keep my rules here
They did not accept my orders, so in order to break them, I issued an order that they burn their firstborn to me.
and here it was true up to a certain point
Then they replaced it with the lamb, and then the priests found it even more convenient to collect money.
even today…
People are still the same, there are good and bad ones… so the priests back then…
in Jerusalem, there were no others, they just found it much easier to collect money, that was the famous ransom
So, that lamb was called "Pesach".
only this lamb was called that
because others were called differently… it was only for this particular victim
only for this particular victim, because others were called differently
and in this passage, where King Josiah carries out a religious reform, it is said: such a Passover had never been before
So in other words, basically: it's the first time we're doing this.
and they connected the term "Passover", albeit in a rather fantastical way
with the story of "crossing over", crossing over, jumping elsewhere
So, at that time, they were trying
to transform or remake a certain kind of founding myth at the moment of leaving Egypt
So… you know that there was a selective death of the firstborn, they were killed, they died, only the Egyptians' and not the Jews'
because, it is said there, that the angel was skipping… because they were marked with blood… he was skipping the doors of the Jews
so he scaled and killed only the Egyptian firstborns
and so this founding myth was created
So then there is the lamb… then, when the figure of Christ is created
who becomes the lamb who takes on the sins of the world
so the new "pascha" replaced the old one
and in a definitive way, so it is claimed
so Christ's sacrifice is a unique sacrifice that has universal validity
and eternal
and there is no need to make another one, by making that sacrifice there, it was made once and for all, so…
and eternal… and there is no need to make another one, by making that sacrifice there, it was done once and for all
So, Christian doctrine created this here.
at the moment when it prevailed over the Jewish Passover
so they replaced them and transformed them in this way
A Christian theologian, Armin Kreiner, says the following about this:
who teaches
Sorry… so Christian Easter is not about Christ's resurrection?
So, the sacrifice makes sense if there is a resurrection, otherwise it doesn't.
He became the only lamb, valid for all and forever.
who replaced many lambs that used to be sacrificed, ok?
So here it is, the replacement.
blah blah //unfinished thought//
blah blah blah
yes, theologian Armin Kreiner
who teaches theology at the Faculty of Theology in Munich
So, he is a Catholic theologian, a university teacher.
says that the question of the possible existence of aliens
assuming that you, the Elohim, came from elsewhere
He questions everything and says that the church can no longer just do as it pleases.
the church can no longer say, no, we don't talk about this, because…
Nonsense, it's not worth it.
He says: the existence of even one of them calls everything into question.
and, above all, it calls into question Christology
This is what Armin Kreiner says.
because if they happen to exist, then
what was elaborated with the figure of Christ, i.e. his act of sacrifice
which happened at a time when they thought the Earth was the center of the universe
and that man is the only intelligent creature created by God
Thus, Christ's deed has a unique, universal, and eternal validity, valid for man and forever.
but if there are other planets, then Christ…
Did they commit the original sin there? Did Christ go to be killed there too?
or will he go there in 10 or 100 thousand years, when they commit the original sin?
We in the church can no longer just pretend, and we have to stand up to it.
says…
After all, we can no longer interview the witnesses of Christ's existence, we cannot verify it.
On the contrary, we have possible witnesses to the contacts here, we can interview them, we can verify it, there it is not possible.
these biblical stories
about those who created man, who passed on knowledge to him
they are not unique stories, they are not an original product of the Bible
but they correspond to the stories of nations from all continents, who all tell the same story, all of them, all of them
from the Maori to the Hopi Indians, Zulu, pre-Saharan civilizations
not to mention the Middle East, Egyptians, China, India, Japan, Nordic sagas, Celts, Incas
Everyone, everyone tells us about those who came from elsewhere, came here and did a number of things here.
so let's think about it carefully
Everyone tells us the same story.
with different names, because here they are called elohim.
The Sumerian-Akkadians call them Anunnaki.
among the Eastern Semites, these are ilu or ila
they are called dévas, virakochas
They are the Æsir… in the Norse sagas
etc. they all tell us the same story
but about this, it must be said that these are just stories
that these are myths, fabrications
Matthew, Mark, and Luke tell us about Jesus Christ, but they never saw him, because Matthew is not that disciple, he is another one…
Matthew, Mark and Luke, who never saw him… and now John
no one considers him a disciple of Christ anymore, it was a different John
so even John might never have seen him… but we can say that John was a disciple, it's all the same
the whole of Christianity is built on the doctrines of Paul, who never saw him
The Acts of the Apostles, written by Luke, who never saw him, speak of him.
The letters attributed to Peter speak of him, attributed because there is no certainty, but so be it, we can say that Peter wrote them.
it is mentioned in the letter of James the Greater, the blood brother of Christ, and so we basically have
maybe 4 characters who saw him
So maybe we have 4, if we turn a blind eye and consider all 4 of them to be real.
4 people, i.e. witnesses interested in conveying a certain idea about one person, about one character
based on the testimony of 4 persons
about a billion people today have no problem believing in absolute truth
the existence of Jesus Christ
thanks to 4, possibly, interested witnesses
All the nations on Earth speak of these gentlemen who came from other lands, but it's a fairy tale.
Something doesn't add up in this logic.
Something's not right here.
I am among those who believe that Jesus Christ, as a historical figure, probably existed.
As much as I try to believe these four, I believe the nations of all continents of the Earth even more.
because everyone tells us the same story
all, everyone
blah blah blah //Greek myths, flying around the Earth//
So, because I still don't have enough enemies, I started putting things into this last book.
with which I will make many experts on Greece and the classical period my enemies
and, I don't know if any of you have seen it, a few months ago I made a book trailer lasting 41, 43 seconds
and has already stirred the waters
and there I say… that the President of the United States of America
and the members of the Supreme Court of the United States of America swear on the Bible
and I said: if they swore on the Iliad and the Odyssey, their oath would have exactly the same weight… if not more…
because the Iliad and the Odyssey tell us exactly the same stories
Now, in this book, I'm starting to analyze it, and I'm continuing, I've studied it all again over the last year.
we'll do a few examples
We haven't talked about Kavod and Ruach yet. If you want and have time, I'll tell you something about it.
about the things that this Lord used for traveling
it was noisy, it flew high, etc. etc. then, when there is time, we will talk about it
The Iliad and the Odyssey speak of the same things, they speak of the same individuals, who are called theoi
a, nobody reads it anyway
it is said that they traveled in cars
and we, in the translations we have…. because we believe that these are works, poems, simply mere works of poetry
it is said that these cars were pulled by horses
but it is not written here in Greek
it says there that they were "ypséché"
which means, "ypsi" means up and "chées" is "rattle", "noise"
so the chariots used by the Greek theoi made noise up there
not altonitrenti
altonitrenti is not in Greek at all, it's just not there
There's noise upstairs.
and as they descended, a large cloud rose
at one point, they covered a distance that a person sitting on a mountain can see with a glance at the sea
so kilometers, at one point
This is written in the Iliad and the Odyssey.
We talked about Gan Eden.
chili in a fenced and protected garden
in books 6, 7, 8 of the Odyssey, where it is said that Odysseus sailed through the land of the Phaeacians
and it is said that the Phaeacians were ruled by King Alcinous
who was of the bloodline of Poseidon
As you know, this is one of the Greek gods.
Poseidon is the Lord of the Waters, which corresponds exactly to Enki in Sumerian-Akkadian stories.
or Eovi, Lord of the Waters
and it is said, in the Odyssey, that Poseidon gave this blood descendant
ships that
they sailed without "cybernetics", i.e. they sailed without a helmsman
they knew the way themselves
They never got lost, they never crashed, they sailed very fast both above and under the water.
He had a good imagination, Homer, right?
ships sailing without a helmsman, which know the way themselves and never get lost
and he told them that they could only use these ships themselves, they couldn't make them available to anyone else
and when Alcinous makes one available to Odysseus, Poseidon gets angry, etc. etc. etc.
Alcinous had a garden, fenced, what a coincidence
in this garden, says Odyssea
they grew all kinds of fruit trees
with one peculiarity
that while fruit was already being picked on one tree, flowers were beginning to bloom on another
and while one vine was already producing wine, another was just starting to set its grapes
Thus, Odyssea says that there was permanent production in summer and winter.
it was therefore a center for accelerated production
how we can do in greenhouses
This is the Odyssey.
Hephaestus, who was the one of them who devoted himself to metalworking
He was accompanied by two maids because he was limping, he had a problem with his leg… the god Vulcan for the Latins…
It was therefore a lame god, who was therefore accompanied by two maids
The Iliad and the Odyssey are full of maids, because all the big bosses had maids.
and here about these two… only about these two, ok? very interesting things are said
Firstly: they had thinking and speech inside
It's clear that the maids think and speak, right?
Is it necessary to say that?
they had it inside as a gift from the gods
And others? OK…
they had skin like gold, like gold, i.e. metallic-looking skin
and finally: in everything they resembled living maids
What need does someone have to make this up for these two maids?
when all the others were normal girls
couldn't they have white skin?
and here these two maids, although they were not living girls, thought and spoke
and they had metal skin
So what were they?
but that's how it's written there
that's how it's written there
when in book 13 of the Iliad
it is said that Poseidon, the Lord of the Waters, who was on the side of the Greeks in the Trojan War
because here you divide… exactly the same as here
they were dividing, weren't they? who would be with one nation, and who with another
Poseidon goes to urge the Greeks on, because they were having a hard time, there was a risk that the Trojans would destroy their ships…
the Greeks can be urged to hurry up and protect their ships
Instead of going there with his appearance, he disguises himself as Kalchas, who is one of the characters in the Iliad…
the soothsayer Kalchanta… he will deliver his speech
then he turns and leaves
and as he leaves, Oileus' Ajax, one of the Homeric heroes, says:
But that's not Kalchas, I recognized from the footprints and the legs that it's one of the theoi, theoi can be recognized!
So, according to the tracks they leave and the shape of their legs, I don't know how…
you can tell that it's not a human, but one of those there
bla… I'll just finish it…
when those three men come to Abraham, as I said
he sees that there are 3 male individuals, but, as he says, he immediately understands that they belong to the group of those there
Unfortunately, the Bible doesn't tell us how to recognize it.
but he will immediately understand that they are from there
…so when it walks, it walks on two legs, etc., etc., etc.
and it is said that it can be recognized by the traces they leave behind
Someone says… but I read that a long time ago.
you know that the Olympics, which began in the 7th century BC
the participants had to be naked
And do you know why the participants had to be naked?
so that the privileged participants do not get there
it was necessary to recognize
I hope that none of them will be there.
who would participate and be favored over the human race
7th century BC?
there was no anti-doping, but apparently during the inspection
What do I know? I read it once, now I remember it…
Did you say the 7th century BC? So what era are we in?
around 750 BC
blah blah
because if you were still here, you could have participated…
and if they had to hide some of their aspects, the fact that they had to be naked would reveal them
It's just a curiosity… we can laugh at it…
So there are a whole range of things in the Iliad and the Odyssey, for example, one
I have to say that this is something that is considered an allegory, because it is absolutely unacceptable.
and that the Elohim
they wanted to smell the smell of burnt fat
because the Bible says that the smell of burnt fat calmed them down
it was a calming and soothing remedy for them
and
I will read it to you in the translation of the Italian Bishops' Conference.
Yahweh is speaking here, okay? Leviticus 3
…you shall present this sacrifice, by burning it in fire, for Yahweh
so they didn't eat it, it had to be burned whole
visceral fat
everything above that, both kidneys with their fat
fat around the hips and around the liver lobe, which you cut off above the kidneys
here God gives very precise butchering instructions
and this fat was so important that in Leviticus 7 He says:
anyone who eats animal fat that can be burned as an offering to Yahweh
he will be cut off from His people
OK? Removed means killed, not expelled.
So this fat is mine.
and if you catch someone eating it, you kill them, because that fat is for me
blah blah blah
In the Iliad and the Odyssey, there are more than 30 such commands.
so either Jewish authors and authors of the Iliad… or simply Homer
…
they came up with exactly the same thing
a coincidence
they came up with exactly that… because that's what it says there
that they should have prepared the fat by layering it on the whole leg of meat
and that was burned, the rest was eaten
So the biblical authors and the Homeric authors came up with exactly the same thing.
It is more likely to think that they did not make it up, if only because here
the system
it also mentions the Mayan Popol Vuh
which means that they were also there, in Central and South America, and they came up with the same thing
Is it possible for everyone to come up with the same thing?
that's something so specific
to invent it for some god… that means to make him imaginable, right?
it's like I'd say, I'll come up with an allegory, a metaphor, and I'll say that my god
he has to have that animal fat burned there to feel good… who would think of that?
Something like that can be written… with a shadow of shame… like who here could think of that?
something like this can be written with a shadow of shame only if it is true
it doesn't say there with joy, like hurray my God… no, that's just how it was, and that's how they wrote it
because it is not possible to come up with something that makes God something unimaginable
allegories of this kind are not made up…
As an allegory, you can come up with something that will glorify God, but not here.
It says here: you separate… blah blah blah
if someone says that the smoke of these victims was meant to symbolize the soul seeking God
was it necessary to make such an animal slaughter? because it says that He had to have that smell at home every day
every day, morning and evening, they had to burn his fat
because that scent had to be there all the time, in his dwelling
so it was a real animal slaughter
it was not enough to burn wood, as a symbol of that…
Did they have to burn parts of animals? They could have burned sheep's wool.
not to kill lambs so that the fat can be gutted and burned
No? As in symbolism… smoke is smoke.
No, he wanted that there.
One moment, I'll be right there, just let me finish what I'm saying…
By the way, this puts us in front of another inexplicable thing.
if it is true that God is there
you surely remember that when Cain and Abel…
it is said that God liked Cain's sacrifice
but he didn't like the victim…
that he liked the sacrifice of Abel, and he did not like the sacrifice of Cain
and you know what Abel sacrificed to him, right? Abel burned lambs for him
Kain was burning his vegetables
There is no need to invent anything here.
They liked the smell of burning fat; it calmed them.
Abel burned meat and fat for him and he liked it, the other one burned cucumbers for him and he didn't like it.
Everything is in one line here, nothing needs to be invented… please…
blah blah blah
May I ask for a glass of water?
Aha, it's here.
blah blah blah blah
blah blah blah blah
…I'll be right there…
Two people have already told me.
that it explains some excerpts from Sumerian-Akkadian tablets
where it is said that when they were burning meat
Anunnaki, or Anunnaki, which is the Sumerian-Akkadian equivalent of Elohim.
they flocked like flies attracted to meat
They flew to Noah… did they fly to us too?
Aha, after Noah… blah blah
Exactly, they even flew to Noah, and by the way
after the flood receded
they were here after the local flood, which they themselves caused, not after the global flood
Something that Noah will do, the Bible says, is that he will take a large number of animals and burn them for the Elohim.
but he barely saved those animals in the ark
So the first thing he'll do on solid ground is take them and burn them?
He will burn them, Elohim Yahweh will come.
welcomes the victim and immediately says: I will never do something like that again, and immediately calms down
after Noah burned a large number of animals
By the way, I'll say this, and then I'll move on to the Ten Commandments.
The Bible says that Noah carried animals in pairs.
in the story from which this narrative comes
it is written that in the ark… ark means a box, not a boat
so, into that cabinet
This is a Sumerian-Akkadian story… they inserted animal semen.
not animals
and the Bible says that they put pairs of animals there
but now, based on our current knowledge, if we put the two terms together
seeds and vapors, what comes to mind?
DNA, seeds in pairs
it was a cabinet
there is no need to invent anything, just pretend that what is written there is true
and then, if it's not true, when we find out it's Pinocchio, it will have the same value, we'll have fun
the Ten Commandments, which are not actually 10, but 613
blah blah blah
So there are 600 rules that He gave.
we know the part that was used to create the ethical, moral system
and in fact, there is one merit that we can attribute to religion, to Christianity
and the fact that it developed an ethical system despite what is written in the Old Testament
not because of what is written in the Old Testament, but in spite of it
the Ten Commandments, so the first one we know is: you shall have no… I am your Elohim
we will use the term elohim, okay? …
I am the Creator Elohim, you shall have no other elohim besides me.
so no, it's not that they don't exist, "you won't have"
we have already seen how He repeatedly declares that He is jealous of rivals, etc., who in reality should not have existed
one processing of this 1. commandment, Jewish processing
which is already in the publications of the Jewish Publication Society from 1911
says: you shall have no other elohim besides me
because other elohim do not give any advantages compared to me
not because they don't exist, but because they don't provide any benefits
This is Jewish literature.
So, to be with me or with others???? So, you'll be with me.
secondly, the second elaboration
you shall have no other elohim before me
How can God make such a statement?
as long as I'm here
that means, when I'm not here, go to whoever you want, but as long as I'm here, you'll be with me
Did they summarize those 613 into those 10?
No, no, that's not a summary… there are 10 of them here too…
…but there are a whole range of rules concerning everyday life, hygiene, etc., etc.
one part of which is formulated positively and the other negatively, i.e.: you will do, and you will not do
By the way, here's an interesting fact… in one midrash, that is, in one commentary on the Bible
it is admitted that these commandments are not understandable, or simply that they are difficult to understand
it is said that Moses speaks to Yahweh and tells him, hey
There is one commandment that we cannot understand.
How should we behave?
And He says: follow the majority, when the majority decides in one way, it is fine.
when he decides otherwise, it's okay again… God…
and since most of them can change, what is true today may not be true tomorrow
but this is in the Midrash, in the "Midrashim", which is Jewish literature commenting on and interpreting the Bible
Then here are the other commandments, still within the framework of the famous 10.
e.g. Thou shalt not kill
Rabbi Dovid ben Dori says that "you shall not kill" is a mistranslation, and he is right.
because that commandment does not mean "you shall not kill", it means "you shall not kill ????" –//"do not intentionally kill those with whom you have permanent relationships"//–
and this rabbi says: killing at that time was completely permissible, so one could kill without any guilt
just kill, it's fine…
It's not a fault.
and says that based on this erroneous translation, Jews and Christians were burdened with completely unjustifiable feelings of guilt
And why did you give this "kill" this meaning here?
e.g. you shall not steal, you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, your neighbor's possessions, your neighbor's animals…
here, the "others" who then became "neighbors" in the sense of all as humanity
this extension is completely groundless and unjustified
Hebrew term meaning "others", "neighbors"
in the sense of "your kind", with whom you have a direct relationship
daily relationship
So, that was the system, the order that He commanded.
which was to apply only within that camp in the desert of the exodus, when he led them out of Egypt
because this order was supposed to serve the purpose of making it possible to live inside.
because what was happening there, of course, was that we were about 1400 years before Christ, in the Neolithic period
when a man saw a girl, he did not treat her gently
when he liked her… he took her and raped her
2 hours later, the guy, the owner of that girl, came and slit her throat.
when someone saw an animal, they took it, 2 hours later the owner of the animal came and slaughtered it there
So this regulation basically meant: within your community
What is one's own, is one's own, what is yours, is yours, what belongs to another, you do not touch.
outside that community, the instructions of Yahweh
killing, massacring, raping, kidnapping, and stealing are constant
constant
Chapter 10 of the Book of Joshua, how many times He repeats, when you have conquered some inhabited territory
You have conquered it? Now kill them all, including women, children, and the elderly.
only in chapter 10 of the book of Joshua, I have the feeling that it is repeated 5 times with 5 inhabited places
So don't kill them all when you fight.
Did you conquer them? Now kill them all, because we have to settle there.
Do you remember what I said? No? Ethnic cleansing.
So the first one who broke the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" was Him, because it wasn't even a commandment "Thou shalt not kill".
it was: don't kill each other here inside, out there, we'll do whatever suits us
e.g. one of the commandments… and the same applies here with "you shall not steal" etc. etc.
one of the regulations, for example, was: you shall not take a wife from a foreign country, a foreign woman
after these regulations were issued, the first thing Moses did was to take a woman from Ethiopia
one Cushite, so Moses has two wives, a Midianite and a Cushite, so neither of them was Jewish
so his descendants are not Jews, by the way, just as he was not…
because it is said that Judaism is passed down through the female line, so Moses' descendants, even if he was Jewish, they were not…
so he takes a Cushite woman, that is, an Ethiopian woman
Aaron, the chief priest, sees it and says, 'Look, it's like this.'
We had barely told the others not to do it, and you do it.
Do you know what happens? Aaron and his wife Miriam complain about it, and Yahweh intervenes.
and he says to Aaron and Miriam: look, you take care of yourselves, Moses has a special relationship with me, he does what he wants
And what will he do?
it only affects women…
And what will it do? It will only affect the woman, and that is with a skin disease.
only the woman, only Miriam, not Aaron
what a sense of justice this individual had…
So Moses can do whatever he wants, we have to keep silent.
Okay?
It's a good thing God isn't here, otherwise we'd be in real trouble.
to be in the hands of someone like that
and here, this person is affected by a skin disease
It reminds me of…
the end of the 10th chapter of the book of Joshua… here the final assessment is made
Thus Joshua conquered the whole area, the mountains, the Negev, the lowlands, the slopes and all their kings.
he left no one alive
and wiped out all living things, including animals
as Yahweh, the Elohim of Israel, commanded
so we murdered everyone in that entire area
Joshua struck them down from Kadesh Barnea to Gaza and from the entire land of Goshen to Gibeon.
in a single campaign, he took the territory of all those kings
because Yahweh, the God of Israel, fought for them
Finally, Joshua returned to the camp in Gilgal.
so throughout the entire territory
where He commanded to kill them all
Then he says, we conquered it and killed everything alive, including the animals.
as He commanded… ethnic cleansing
Then someone might say that this is an allegory, but I ask, an allegory of what?
how to come up with an allegory
which puts a god in the worst light? that's not possible
Even a moron wouldn't come up with such an allegory.
but it was normal there… we said before, Kemosh, Yahweh
He gave that territory to you, He gave this one to us, we hold it, period.
and whoever could, took him
Yes?
blah blah blah blah //what the so-called believers say about it//
Well, religious believers don't even know these things.
blah blah
they believe it because they have never read it, then they can believe it… and they believe it because they have never read it
blah blah
Let's not forget that for many centuries it was forbidden to read the Bible.
blah blah
blah blah
I completely agree with this, I can only shrug my shoulders.
I also realize that you can't believe in this God here.
God, that's something else, you can't believe in that.
actually, even they didn't believe it
because the Jewish religion, by the way, was not a religion of faith
Christianity is a religion of faith because I believe in something I cannot see.
there… it is already difficult to use the term Jewish religion
let's say in the Jewish way of thinking
it was a matter of trust, so we entered into a contract
I am keeping my part of the contract in the hope that you will keep yours.
In the end, when I fulfilled my part of the contract, I am a just person, I was a just person.
because we have concluded a contract, we with you
we are doing our part and we expect you to do yours
blah blah blah… //how is it possible in such a situation to consider God the God of love//
blah blah blah blah
I replaced the word "God" with the word "intention".
I believe, I firmly believe, as I have believed for 50 years, in this God of love.
Today I find that the Bible does not speak of God, so between God and us there is that intermediate link, those Elohim…
…they made a certain modulation, but we did something intentionally different
blah blah… I believe in the God who is above the Elohim
bla… so when I pray, I pray with an intention that transcends…
blah blah blah blah
I think the intention is a laser that penetrates… blah blah blah
as a "created" being, I believe that my God created me with good intentions…
blah blah
That's legitimate, I have nothing to say about that.
As you know, I'm talking about what's written there.
Yes?
blah… …let's call them aliens, gods, etc.
Where did they go? Are they still here?
blah… …when they have influenced the world for so long
This is a more than justified question, the problem is the answer.
Didn't they leave any traces?
The traces are in large structures that are located all over the Earth.
because… it is not known for sure how they were built
It's hard to believe they would play skittles with copper knives.
nothing can be carved with knives
So there are traces here… what end they took or if they left, I… I don't know.
Is there nothing said in the old writings?
as all the stories say, when they left here, they promised to return
except the Bible
It's not in the Old Testament.
in the books that remained… because, for example, in those 11 books, as I said at the beginning
which were removed, there might have been something more explicit there
and when they could not change them, they made them disappear, as Professor Rofe says
So, I don't know.
we can make all possible imaginable hypotheses
a Presbyterian pastor, Father Barry Downing, a man of faith
he performs his office, Presbyterian, Christian, not Catholic, but Presbyterian
He has no doubts, he says: they are still here and they control everything.
has no doubts at all
says that the Mosaic religion is the fruit of
encounter with a flying object, controlled by intelligences from other worlds
This is the Kavod and Ruach, if there is time, I will say something about it.
but we can't be here until midnight, so you can go to bed
So… a meeting with that thing.
controlled… on which they were there
and says that there is no doubt that they are still here and that they control everything
But?
Excuse me, but first it was…
bla… …those individuals were fighting over territory, so they always used people, they didn't fight among themselves
When they started to be cunning, they started to take advantage of people.
because they had used their weapons before, which were terrifying
Shall I read something to you? Yes.
I said before that one day Abraham received those three
accepts those three, one of those three is Yahweh
the other two go to Sodom to warn Abraham's nephew Lot
that he must leave the city because the next day it will be razed to the ground, along with four others
…these two will convince him and Lot and his family will leave, etc.
the next day, fire will come from heaven, which will wipe out Sodom, Gomorrah and 3 other cities
fire from heaven, we don't know what it was, there is no description
but the Bible mentions that territory several times, and it says
e.g. in the 1st Book of Kings, which is about 1000 years after the plot with Sodom and Gomorrah, so 1000 years later
it is said that
In the valley of Sodom and Gomorrah, the water is still bad and the land does not bear fruit… 1000 years…
in the book of the prophet Zephaniah
that was in 620 BC, so 1200, 1300 years after that event
it is said that the area of Sodom and Gomorrah is a devastated land of salt and thistles
nothing else grows there
in the book of Wisdom, which was written more or less at the time of Christ
So 1800 years have passed.
it is said
that in the territory, in the valley of Sodom and Gomorrah, trees bear fruit that does not ripen
almost 2000 years have passed
So what did they do in that area?
The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is also told on Sumerian-Akkadian tablets.
in the epic of Nergal…. Nergal was one of those elohim, anunnaki
it is said that
in the wars they waged against each other
Nergal wanted to destroy Ninurta, that's another name from there
along the royal road, he flew to the green valley of the five cities, that is, the five biblical cities
into the greening valley, where Nabu, another name, one of those there
He was turning people, turning here is not in the religious sense, here it means recruiting, moving from one alliance to another
that's why he decided to exterminate them
Nergal planned to crush him like a bird in a cage.
to those five cities, one after another
He sent a weapon of terror from heaven.
one for each city
He destroyed those five cities… a weapon of terror from the heavens.
one for each city
He destroyed those five cities of the valley, which turned into a wasteland.
and everything that was alive there turned into steam
vapor… just like Hiroshima and Nagasaki, where bodies evaporated
4000 years ago
we can say that these are fairy tales, sure, they present it nicely
Now I'll read you another one.
I'll read you another one.
These are Oxford publications, not alternative translations, this is the Kappa 5001 table.
We are on the Sinai Peninsula.
Ninurta set out for the ridge of Mount Mašu
Nergal followed him immediately
Ninurta controlled the mountain and the plain located in the middle of the fourth region from the heavens.
there were areas that they divided among themselves
Ninurta then released the first weapon of terror from the heavens.
a lightning bolt struck the top of Mount Maša, and in a single moment the mountain's entrails melted
he dropped the second weapon in place of the heavenly chariots
with the brightness of 7 suns, the stones on the plain turned into a festering wound
the earth trembled, it shattered, the heavens darkened after a flash
what an imagination they had…
the plain with the wagons was covered with burnt stones
of all the forests that surrounded the plain, only tree stumps remained
You couldn't even come up with this here… and they really came up with it precisely.
we now know what has these effects here
and here they described these effects 4000 years ago
If we want to consider them fairy tales, okay, we'll have fun, we'll read fairy tales, no problem.
blah blah
but we are talking about the Sinai territory here, by the way
in one study by Luigi Moraldi, where it is said that ruach moved and created wind
and that cherubs
when it is said that they "blessed"
in fact, it's that "they made noise" when they moved their wings
which was attached to the handle
and it is also said… when we look at the Jewish version of the Book of Enoch
about those celestial chariots… that 23 different types of them have been described
23 types of celestial chariots
so before they started to be cunning, because these things were killing them too
they fought with their weapons, then they obviously decided to let others fight, because it was much less dangerous
blah blah blah
in the Mahabharata…
in the Bible, in the Bible, because the Bible tells us
…as I said, about the relationship between that nation and that One… so the Bible is interested in this…
Unfortunately, one of those 11 lost books is called The Book of the Wars of Yahweh.
If we had it, we would know how Yahweh fought.
but maybe it was too explicit, so the book is no longer available
because she spoke directly about the battles of Yahweh
and is quoted in the book of Numbers in the Bibles we have at home
so it is clear that
So if we pretend that these stories are specific, we are not making anything up…
if here, instead of the Valley of the Kings, there were Hiroshima and Nagasaki
So in the rest of the story, we don't have to change a single word, not one, not one.
priests
the priests were the ones who were supposed to take care of those there
Biblical priests were to take care of Him, so not of the believers, ok? They were to take care of His dwelling, His food, etc. etc.
priests there were appointed purely by belonging to the family of Aaron
He chose this family and said: these are exempt from all other services
These people take care of me, period.
so all members of that family were "kohanim"
In Leviticus 21, Yahweh says to Moses
Speak to Aaron and tell him that in the future, no one from your family
anyone with a disability must not come near me to serve me bread
because no one with any disability is allowed to approach
neither blind, nor lame, nor anyone with a deformed face, nor anyone with a broken arm or leg
neither a hunchback, nor a dwarf, nor anyone who has a defect in the eye, or scabies or festering wounds or who is castrated
no one of Aaron's lineage who has any disability may present the offerings burned in fire for Yahweh
Does it have any defect? Let him not go to serve bread to Yahweh.
can eat the bread of Yahweh
because it was prepared for him once a week, it was exchanged, and they ate what was left over
he can eat it, but he must not present it
He can eat bread, but he must not come near because he is affected.
He didn't want to see the affected ones, they weren't allowed to dare to touch the food for him.
we let them eat, out of His goodness
bla
blah blah
Numbers 5, commanded the Israelites
to drive every leper out of the camp
anyone who has gonorrhea or who has been defiled by contact with a corpse
you will drive away both men and women
You'll drive them out of the camp so they don't contaminate the camp where I live.
He could not afford any contamination or epidemics that would decimate the people, so
Does he have leprosy or something else? Away
and to be expelled from the camp means to be condemned to death, that's not it
Go live somewhere else, in another hostel.
So you are a risk to the people here, get out, go die somewhere else.
So the Bible tells us this, it's not about portraying Yahweh as some kind of personality.
It is the Bible that speaks of Him in this way, we can't do anything about it.
Deuteronomy 23
you will have a place outside the camp where you will go to relieve yourself
you will have a wand in your equipment, which is out there
you make a hole and then cover your excrement
because Yahweh, your Elohim, is passing through your camp, and He must not see your indecencies
since they were doing it there, and it bothered him, he instructed them on how to do it
go outside to relieve yourself, make a hole and bury it, he had to instruct them about that here too
This is proof of that… please?
This is proof that he was nevertheless walking among them… yes, certainly.
and he lived in the camp… sure
he walked among them
and he was afraid of diseases
he must have been afraid of diseases
one nice thing… a curiosity…
We know that there is a Messiah, the Hebrew term is "Mashiach"
which is translated into Greek as Christ, which means anointed
so he is anointed by God, the Lord
and we all have in mind the symbolic gesture of anointing
smearing something, oil, on the head
which was in the sense of acceptance by God, and that God gave that person some special value, etc.
in books whose authenticity we must not believe
it is said that the few who could enter their dwellings
it had to be washed well… after all, in the desert of the exodus, he had a tub built outside, outside his dwelling
and the few who were allowed to enter it
they had to wash themselves before entering, the bathtub was there
so that he can check it, so that he can be sure that they are washing
No? Because they were not allowed to bring any contamination into the house.
but the term, the verb from which "mašiach" comes
means exactly
rub and wash
it even means "to hit", so something like to brush out
because the anointing before it received the symbolic meaning of the anointing of the Lord
was probably meant to indicate that the few
who had the privilege of entering to him, to them
they were washed and then probably sprinkled with oil, because oil holds everything on the skin
while cells are separated in this way, viruses and bacteria skip
when you rub yourself all over with oil, it makes…
So the "needed" one was Mašiach.
brushed off, and then he could enter, this is probably what it originally meant
then, over time, the concept of the anointed, the chosen, etc. etc. evolved.
the original meaning of this Hebrew root is this
so not to smear, but to scrub and rub it in
even with violence, because there is also a need to intervene
paint, exactly, paint
blah blah
blah blah blah
blah blah blah //deadly danger//
//we also have to get vaccinated before traveling to Africa//
they were not used to our diseases
by the way, the dietary regulations as well
e.g. so that they don't eat animals they found already dead…
By the way, it's interesting that they weren't allowed to eat these things themselves, but they could give them to others.
blah blah
so there was a whole range of additional regulations to prevent any epidemic
because it is clear that the hygienic situation of such a camp
where there was a shortage of everything…
an epidemic could decimate all His people
And he was desperately trying to build an army.
so he couldn't afford to have some illness ruin it for him
blah blah blah
another mixture was being prepared there
which, however, had a soothing effect on the respiratory tract
it was a mixture consisting of three types of plants and the shell of one mollusk
it had to be ground, it had to be placed in precise locations
crushed and burned, then they also used it
for fumigating spaces
when He had a dwelling built that could be dismantled…
and reassembled, right? when they were moving
and when they assembled it, they fumigated it before entering
because these substances are also used to repel or kill insects
sterilization of the environment
As for the manipulation, the rewriting of the Bible over the millennia, it could be understood as the effort of whoever did it.
that he wanted to take over the positions of those who left? blah blah
So, the one who did it, and he did it in such a way as to secure a position of power, I think that's quite…
the one who did it, and he did it in such a way as to secure a position of power, I think that's quite evident
as if he wanted to replace them
Yes, at the moment when contact with the real masters was lost.
whether they left or what do I know…
…or lost interest
someone who was in that position, because they had had contact with them before
He reworked the whole situation to maintain the entire structure of power and control.
It was in that book, which I have here today, that I wrote a chapter.
which is entitled: How religion can arise under similar assumptions
and I wrote there how I would do it
and I say that in my opinion, that's how they did it
Maybe if we went to the Vatican archives…
louder
blah blah //astronauts, the smell of burnt meat//
in the book I wrote 2.5 years ago, called The Alien God of the Bible
I just pointed this out.
astronauts getting out of the ship up there
Everyone says that after returning, they smell a strong odor of burnt meat.
after all, a report was published in the Telegraph
that NASA ordered from Omega Industries /-/Ingredients/-/, which is an English perfume manufacturer
the production of an essence that accurately reproduces the smell of meat fried on a barbecue
because they put it in the astronauts' training suits when they do
in the pool, movements in the absence of gravity…
so they get used to this smell, because it's very strong up there
Of course, the smell is not external, there are no smells in the space.
it is caused by the fact that up there, in space, the surface layers of the skin are shed much faster than here on Earth
those who make outputs due to work on ships
they wear a lot of clothes and move a lot, so there is a lot of friction
when they return, these dead cells will be flying around the rocket in the absence of gravity
they get into the artificial atmosphere and oxidize quickly
which causes a very strong smell of burnt meat
So, whoever travels up there, smells this odor strongly.
there was an Iranian businesswoman who traveled on a Russian spacecraft
and after her return, she also told how strongly she felt this smell of burning there
blah blah… //could Elohim, Yahweh use it to calm down?//
Yes, the Bible says that it was a calming and relaxing agent.
it may be that this thing was something like a memory, which is nice, as we say, that in some places I feel the smell of home
It's something human, but they are like us, there's no difference.
nostalgic…
Sure, why not? The Bible is not clear on that, so why not?
it happens to us too that someone feels the scents of childhood, which are really pleasant to us, why not
The moment everything becomes concrete, everything is possible.
blah blah blah
Yes, exactly, in the book I quoted.
I published part of what was sent to me by a doctor who is also a Sumerologist.
I remember talking about it here, it was in 2011, at an international meeting in San Marino
I told the organizer of the meeting: when there are 5-6 minutes left before the end of the lecture, tell me
I'll tell you, but then I'll take to my heels
as in, I'll tell you how God wanted to get high on burnt meat
because no one had talked about it before
and so I did it
and at that meeting there was a doctor who called me the next day and said, hey, you know
when I heard you say those things there
You gave me an explanation of something I read in the Sumerian tablets and sent me a study.
then, after a few weeks
where, in principle… fat molecules
burned in that way, i.e. on the grill
are subject to transformation
and they become essentially the same as endorphin molecules
which are substances that our brain orders our body to produce when we are stressed and need to calm down
that scent is full of endorphins
the Bible says that it was a "nichoach" for them, i.e. a soothing, relaxing agent
is equally explainable neurophysiologically

Lecture 2014 Part 1

https://youtu.be/Tw09T2DF41Y

THE BIBLE IS NOT A HOLY BOOK
Thank you for being here, thank you all.
I hope that there will be an opportunity here for me to call you friends.
and so I could speak about each of you and about all of you
here in Castello di Zena
We have the honor and pleasure of hosting Mauro Biglin.
which will introduce us to the topics
which are known to many of you
while others are probably prompted by the disturbing title
concerned is in fact
the food of knowledge
and I think each of us, too
lazily accepts
acquired information and ideas, prevailing ways of thinking
without their own, deeper, original research
scientific, educated
Where could such research lead us?
I don't know.
possibly to change ingrained opinions
Yes, that is possible, it certainly evokes an increased desire for knowledge.
is a witness to the renewal and variability of our views
and in this variability lies the richness to which, I believe, each of us is called in this life.
Castello di Zena has long been organizing, in the footsteps of my mother, who is here
and I would like to extend a very warm greeting
we have already held book presentations here
with the authors, we discussed with those authors, here in the salon, but also in the mill
in gardens, etc. all of that
we are trying to renew with a new offer
in the meantime, we share various experiences with holistic topics
We do gong baths, my wife teaches.
Frederica, who is here, and I also want to thank her for her contribution, as she teaches yoga here.
and I know that it has a growing response
and then there are friends in the hall who also work with us on gong baths
chilli group of vibrational music, so experience and new ways
I suffer from an old adolescent disease: science and politics.
and I am also interested in history
I question many clichés concerning our post-war period.
and depicting events in a way that, fortunately, is starting to take its toll
occasionally there is a meeting with an author, such as Pansa, who is criticized, who causes a stir
I believe that this work is meritorious.
this rediscovery and reassembly of the truth of our history
history, including the more distant and therefore extremely important ones, because they determine our oldest and most deeply rooted views
which also applies to our oldest and most deeply rooted clichés
Mauro Biglino, we appreciate that he is here.
Naturally, Spazio Tesla, Alberto Negri and his wife Laura are collaborating on all of this.
with whom we gladly and harmoniously cooperate
for a long time, and I would like this cooperation to continue to grow with your help.
I'm handing the microphone over to Albert, because he also wants to thank you… actually, I won't hand it over to him…
…if it works…
Thank you… Emanuele Perotti, the landlord
together with Federika, a scientist
this beautiful place, which has already witnessed
one very important event with Sabrina Pieragostini and Manuel Paroletto
Sabrina Pieragostini works for Media Sette, Manuel Paroletti for the ufological center in Imperia
Today we are not hiding anything, it is a great honor for us, for me and for Emanuel, to host
this event, which… as I was just talking to Mauro Biglin… with its presented topics
sets something in motion
we wrote on our website, and we share it with our colleagues from Spazio Tesla
a report that I think is very important
since 2012… it is clear, today here for us
it really vibrates in a different way
consciousness is therefore beginning to awaken
Today you will hear things that you may have already heard somewhere on the Internet.
things that undoubtedly lead to reflection and that vibrate all the cells of our body
and thus this quantum awakening
which is always here, is accelerating in an incredible way in this particular period
I won't waste any more time, just a few technical details.
as for the exit from Castella
There is a table down there on the left where you can leave your contact details if you have not already done so.
On the ground floor, in the main part, on the left, there is a refreshment stand.
and in the second salon there is a sale of books by Mauro Biglin with a trilogy
and we look forward to him telling us something about the new book today
which is almost out of control, almost
and one last thing: November 15th
with Emanuel's permission, it will be here
Second Congress of the City of Piacenza on Medicine and Quantum Physics
there will be personalities here, just like last year
making our association proud, the news will be on the Spazio Tesla website
and also on the Castello di Zena website, where you will find all possible information
Thank you once again, so Mauro Biglino
Thanks to Emanuel, thanks to Albert, I am very glad to be able to speak in a place like this.
It evokes emotions in me.
and thanks to you who are here, so numerous, and by the way, there are some who were in Cremona last night and are here today…
that's worthy of a medal
That's incredible, ok.
So, how many people here have no idea what I'm talking about?
ok
there should be a lot of them, but…
So, a few words for these guys.
But to follow up on what Emanuele said, quoting Pansa's work, which reconstructs history from 1943 onwards, etc.
and which is heavily criticized, and regardless of whether someone agrees with it or not
writes things that are well-documented and
this helps us understand one thing, that when historical books are written
the one who writes them writes them according to their own criteria
and he tries to put into those texts what he wants to be conveyed
and Pansa talks about the history of 60, 70 years ago
and it makes us understand how it can be twisted
imagine texts that were written millennia ago
at a time when documentation about those times, as we have today, was unimaginable
Despite this, the work that Pansa does consists precisely in reformulating
history… which basically means history from a few decades ago
can be written in a different way than it was presented to us as verified before
and now imagine what this means for the Old Testament
or multiply it as many times as you want
exponentially
the variants that may be here, because the Old Testament is just like that, because it was written over many centuries
at a time when there was practically no documentation, nothing could be verified
and that's why I've been saying for several years that we can only do as we please with the old law
this is the only certainty I have when I talk about these things
because in the case of the Old Testament, you need to have a lot of doubts
it is necessary to ask questions with a flavour of knowledge
So… many questions… many doubts…
So when we make a claim with the Old Testament, we always say "we're pretending that"
because in my opinion, it can't be done any other way
So what I'm explaining about the Old Testament comes from the work I did for the San Paolo publishing house.
for whom I translated for many years… I'm saying this for those who don't know anything….
…I was translating Masoretic Hebrew, i.e. the codex from which the Bibles we have at home are derived.
and they published 17 books of the Old Testament, which I translated literally, these are the books
these volumes
in which my task was
literal translation, shown here on the right
checking the correctness of the Hebrew text
checking the correctness of the Greek version
and the grammatical analysis of the verbs is shown below, so my work was this one
here in this volume
…is an interlinear translation by Mauro Biglin and
and the Italian text of the latest version of the Bible by Monsignor Gianfranco Ravasi
who is the Minister of Culture of the Vatican, so in this volume, it's me and him together
he gave permission to publish his own translation alongside mine
and since my task was to make a literal translation
over time, I began to feel the need to tell stories
what I feel I'm really reading
in the Masoretic codices
It started in 2010, my employment was of course immediately terminated.
for obvious reasons
so these years I am now continuing on my path, both in translating and lecturing
…for those who have never heard anything, but also… given that these videos are shared here
it is good that it is understandable even to those who will listen to it on the internet, because I keep repeating it, but in reality…
but someone still doesn't want to understand…
I'm not talking about the spiritual worlds
I heard what you're doing here in Castello.
here you focus on certain topics
Today you will hear something that is terrifyingly down-to-earth.
chilli here for the few hours we'll spend together
and please, ask right away and don't wait until the end, so I can have some fun too
we will address one topic from an exclusively material point of view
I don't talk about God because I don't know anything about him.
I don't talk about spiritual worlds because I know nothing about them.
I'm not talking about spiritual beings because I don't know anything about them, I'm talking about one book.
I said that with this book we can only do like
the second certainty I have
…I say that I don't talk about God because I don't know anything about him.
The second certainty I have is that even that book does not speak of God.
because it tells us different stories
God, they then crammed it in by force.
Okay? But that book wasn't about God.
Absolutely… then they subsequently used it.
to speak about God
So, when I make these claims
To be more precise, I'm not saying "God doesn't exist."
because I don't know anything about God, I say that the book doesn't talk about him
Well, we live in a certain world, in a certain culture.
and we are used to thinking that if something is written in the Bible, it is truer
but if it's not written in the Bible, then someone will say, so if the Bible doesn't talk about God
So that means that God… no, that has nothing to do with it.
The Bible may be a book containing a whole lot of nonsense that has ever been told to us.
So the fact that the Bible does not speak of God does not mean that God does not exist.
it means that the biblical authors were not interested in it because they wanted to tell something else
Okay? Then we'll take a look at it.
one of the judgments that needs to be made about this set of books is
that the Old Testament is a collection of books that have been written over the centuries
written, transcribed, deleted, improved, corrected, added to
were lost, rediscovered
So everyone who had the power to have them in their hands did whatever they wanted with them.
say current biblical scholars
Israeli
teachers at Israeli universities
So they don't say, they write.
that the only certainty we have is that the Bible we have is not the Bible as it was originally written
because every time it was dictated and transcribed, or simply copied
from code to code, it was amended
so we have a bible, which is the fruit
a current that has split over the centuries
thanks to which we have a book today that was not originally written
because a lot of modifications were made to it
that's why we only pretend to do it with the Bible
and the first thing we have to do a trick with is that
that the person who wrote it wanted to say exactly this, even though we know that this is not the case
but since we are told that this is the true Bible, the Bible inspired by God
So I say, let's at least try to look at what is literally written there.
when you… here… listen to theologians, kabbalists, esotericists…
That's all right.
the Bible has been approached with a variety of reading keys
since the Bible can only be used to perform a trick, it is good for everyone to choose their own perspective
let her choose the one that makes her feel better
but don't delude yourself that it's some kind of truth, okay? that it's some kind of truth
because what is important is to have your own truth
according to which to live, so let everyone choose the one they like in the sound of the bells
but in my opinion, it is important that in this sea of interpretations that are presented to us, there is also room for this one
while other optics do not cause reading… and that's weird…. but I say that with a bit of irony
they do not cause reactions
There may be disputes among them, but no one says: the theological way of reading should not be done.
The esoteric way of reading should not be done.
The Kabbalistic way of reading should not be done.
but it is said that a literal way of reading should not be done
I've been doing it for 4 years and I'll be doing it more and more.
The more they tell me that it shouldn't be done, the more I do it.
because I want this option to be on the table as well
Okay? So everyone can choose their own, but they should all be available.
because when someone writes, they write in a certain language
that language has some words, those words primarily have some meaning
and therefore the meaning is the first one, they certainly have it
The other meanings are possible.
I say: they are possible, so let everyone choose the one they like more from all the possible ones.
but it is not possible to disregard the fact, or at least the awareness, that something specific is written there
we are in a situation where
and that's not related to translations, ok?
By the way, I will do the whole conference in such a way that I do not quote my own translations.
we will consider the reflections of the uneducated when reading the Bible translated by the educated…
So, theoretically, no one will have anything to say about it. In reality, they do have something to say about it, but that's not important.
with this approach to the Old Testament, we must know
that about the Old Testament
We don't know who wrote it.
there is not a single verse about which we could say that we know who wrote it
We don't know when it was written.
We don't know how they originally wrote it, we don't know how they originally read it.
This is a fact.
All the codes we have are relatively recent, the oldest ones are from the 2nd century BC.
and they describe events 2000, 1800 years old…
and we'll see that it's even older
they are copies of copies of copies of copies of copies
and at each confrontation of those copies, as I said
it is clear that when the Bible was rewritten, it was rewritten differently than it was written before
So, no one knows how it was originally written.
Nobody knows who wrote it.
as it was read, now we'll see what it means, nobody knows
but
based on this utter ignorance
we insist that when the Bible says something, it actually meant something else, and that it is inspired by God
I think that a more absurd statement cannot exist.
We know nothing about the authors and dating.
but we know that those about whom we know nothing, when they wrote something, they wanted to say something else
I can't do this.
I can't do this.
I say that I got to the seventh bite
where we eat polenta, but I assume you eat it here too
There is a saying among older people who say: even I, and I'm a fool, notice that it's polenta by the 7th bite.
in the sense that you'll put this on a plate for me
you'll explain to me that it's the product of an elaborate, secret recipe
very old, which requires a lot of penetration
that only a few experienced chefs have it at their disposal
who pass it on themselves… ok
Okay, I believe it with the first bite, then I'll have a second, then I'll start to doubt a little.
and when I get to the 7th bite, I'll say, no, that's not it, that's clear, that's polenta
I'll have it because I like it, but please, when you give me polenta, tell me it's polenta.
Okay? So I'm presenting you with the 7th bite.
OK? Knowing that there are others
so all the bites are on the table
all, theological, allegorical, metaphorical, esoteric, initiatory, kabbalistic
and I'm putting this here too, and when you walk around the table, and you see this here
you say, I don't like the smell of it, and you don't even look at it: there's no problem with that
but it is important that it is on the table… but it is important that it is on the table
because this 7th bite explains a lot of things to us
which other mouths are often unable to explain
and so it must, for example, introduce the category of secrecy
… here it looks like a contradiction, but it's a divine mystery
This looks like a contradiction, but it is the mystery of faith.
if we read according to the 7th bite
there is never a need to introduce the category of secrets, never
because it's all clear, maybe it's too clear
So, is it here because we're told we're not allowed to do this reading?
that it's reading for the uneducated? ok, we, no, I, excuse me, I do reading for the uneducated, by declaration
The situation is so complicated.
that in 1958, at the Jewish University in Jerusalem, they felt the need
Jewish biblical scholars
launch a project whose goal is
to try to reconstruct the Bible as close as possible to the original wording, which no one knows what it was
It's called the Bible Project, or the Bible Project.
they reserved 2 centuries for it
60 years have passed, in 140 years
they will have, perhaps, a Bible similar to the original one, of which no one knows what it was like
Such is the reality.
we, Western Christians, Catholics, must believe that there are 46 true Old Testament books
for Jews, there are 39 true books
for Samaritans there are 6 true books
For Coptic Christians, the true books are those that are true for Jews, plus others that are not true for Catholics or Jews.
for the Greeks, the Bible
Let's say the original core of the Bible is not the Hebrew version of the Masoretes.
but it is a Bible written in Greek in Egypt in the 3rd century BC.
so, depending on where we are born
Is there anyone here who tells us which books are the right ones?
which books should we trust, is there anyone who determines this from the desk
So we believe in the authenticity of one of the possible Bibles.
because, for example, between the Masoretic Bible and the Samaritan Bible there are 2000 deviations, 2000
The Masoretes say: We are the guardians of tradition.
The Samaritans say: we are the guardians of the Torah, or the Law… everyone is sure they are right.
If you feel like it, read one, read the other, and then choose which one you like better, after all.
these are all human fabrications
Is that clear? And we're not even talking about translations.
we are only touching on the structure of the Old Testament
and when I say "we'll pretend to be", I mean that we can only pretend to be
just like when we pretend that the Bible we have at home is the real one
Someone says: but Biglino chose the Masoretic Bible, why did he choose it? I didn't choose the Masoretic Bible.
I have always worked and still work with the Masoretic Bible, i.e. with the Leningrad Codex, because
because it is the Bible from which all the Bibles that we all have at home are basically derived
and the Bibles at home are basically based on this code
So I work with this code, because if it is the one that you, educated people, tell me is the right one
so I'm at least trying to understand what's written in that code
But I have one personal conviction.
and the fact that this code is, with the highest probability, the most counterfeited one
because it is the one that has suffered over the centuries
most modifications by theologians
Jewish theologians, not Christian, also Christian, but much later
these changes were first made by Jewish authors
and then the Christians, so everyone had a hand in it
so despite my conviction
that the Masoretic codex is, with the highest degree of probability, the most forged one
I work with him because I'm told he's the right one.
and I say, let's at least see what's written there
Okay?
Over the years, I have said certain things at conferences and in books.
things that, of course, caused a variety of reactions
and blogs have appeared that are discussing my work
e.g. one is called: confutatio, a systematic critique of Mauro Biglino
and that's okay, it's part of the game, and they're giving me a lot of publicity
a lot of things are written on these blogs, because all the conferences I do are examined there, sentence by sentence, all the books I write
and everything is carefully analyzed and criticized
and on one such blog, one of the most important on Jewish issues, where Jewish exegetes write
but they behave, let's say
they have an intellectually correct approach
even if they are not with me on the basic question, i.e. the question of God, then we will see why
in a whole range of other things, they completely agree with me, and they write it
For example, Mauro is right about many things, the Bible, as he claims, is not a religious book.
that the Bible speaks of genetic engineering has always been known to Jews through the Talmud
The Hebrew term "malach", translated into Italian as "angel", refers to ordinary human beings, not spiritual entities.
cherubs…
Anyone who has heard one of my conferences or read something knows that
cherubs are not only not angels, but while malachim are at least beings of flesh and blood, cherubs were machines
cherubs… Jews have always known from the Talmud that they were mechanical objects
it has always been known, but if it has always been known, then please let's say it
let's say it, if it has been known forever
let's not leave the vivid idea that…
I repeat: I don't know if cherubim of the angelic gates exist
I mean the biblical "cherubim", they were mechanical objects
And whether there are cherubim? I don't know anything about that, I don't care about that.
Biblical cherubim were mechanical objects
I devoted the entire chapter to the fact that the Old Testament Satan does not exist.
Mauro Biglino has done a very good job with the chapter on Satan, and we really congratulate him on this.
So let's be calm, Satan won't take us to hell.
but there is one statement
which, in my opinion, is crucial
and here I must thank these gentlemen who are dedicated to the Jewish question
Specifically, I think this one is called Avraham, who is the most important one there.
because he makes one statement that, in my opinion, should put an end to all books, all conferences, everything.
I quoted this for the first time last night, I said:
if we were to translate the word "snow" into the Tuareg language
we couldn't do that because the Tuareg don't have a word for "snow"
Why don't they have it? Because they don't have snow.
they have no concept of snow, so they have no word to describe it
If we were to translate "phone" for the Bantu, we couldn't do it because they don't know what a phone is.
they have no concept of a phone, they have no word for phone
we could make thousands of examples
and I say in the books that there is no monotheism in the Bible, and in fact there is no polytheism either
there is no polytheism there, but because it is said that the Bible is
that this nation is the nation that invented monotheism, right? because it was the most developed nation
I say no, that's not true, there is no monotheism there
answer, here is the answer published on that blog
and I thank you for this intellectual honesty
Thank you, because for years people have been writing to me: but if Yahweh, Elohim, Elion, which are biblical terms that we will see later
they don't mean "God"? How do you say "God" in Hebrew then?
listen to Jewish exegesis
it makes no sense to talk about monotheism
in a language that does not have a single term in its vocabulary that would make sense for "God" as an object of worship
in Hebrew, the term "god" is not
The Bible was written in a language.
which has no term to designate God
We can close this here and say that we've been making fun of ourselves for 2000 years.
because it means that the culture has no concept of God, because if they had one, they would express it with a word
It's not there, it's not there.
but it's obvious that it's not there
and that's the end of it
Let's have a coffee and go home.
Do you understand?
but they write it here, because with intellectual honesty they have to say it, they say it
When I say it, it means nothing, of course, but when Jewish exegesis says it, it means something.
If they don't have a word to refer to God, it means they don't have a concept of God.
So that means the Bible doesn't talk about God, because there isn't a single word naming God, because it's not in that language.
but that's obvious
The problem, however, is that we are led to believe that
and we read in the Bibles we have at home that God is constantly present there
God did it, God decided, God ordained, God did it… no, no, no
The word God is not there.
and if the word God is not there, it means that the concept of God is not there
as far as the spiritual worlds are concerned
I'll read you what he/she writes.
Prof. Maximiliano … Cordero, this is something new.
who teaches Old Testament exegesis and biblical theology at the Pontifical University of Salamanca
Listen carefully, this is written by a professor.
i.e. a pontifical university, or a professor receiving a salary from the Vatican
in the Old Testament
Then, if anyone wants it, I'll give them all the links where to find it, the page, etc.
hardly in the Old Testament
this is written in the chapter dedicated to God's promises
Yeah? You know that God promises that if we are good, we will go to heaven.
In the Old Testament, worries that would be purely spiritual are hardly visible.
Thus, one professor of biblical exegesis and theology writes:
in the Old Testament, the requirements for… are barely visible.
So, what does that mean… maybe we're uneducated, but we're not stupid, what does he mean by that? It's barely shining through.
that they are not there
they are not there because the Bible does not deal with spirituality
They are not there.
God's rewarding justice… but when you read the Bible, you'll understand it yourself, no one has to explain it to you.
God's justice must be applied in this life.
all the promises that the Lord made there, then we'll see who it was
did, was
If you do this, I'll help you here, if you don't do this, I'll kill you here, period.
there are none then
there are none, then… that doesn't mean that the other world doesn't exist, I don't deal with it, I'm not interested in it
The Bible doesn't deal with it either, okay?
and the fact that the Bible doesn't address it may mean that whoever wrote the Bible was a bunch of ignoramuses
who doesn't know that the other world exists, ok, I don't care
I'm telling you, whoever wrote the Bible wasn't interested in the afterlife.
God's rewarding justice must be exercised in this life.
there is no mention of posthumous rewards, listen carefully
the spiritualization of divine promises becomes necessary due to the national catastrophe in 586 BC
that is, when Babylon comes, it will conquer Jerusalem and deport the Jews
blah blah
when Babylon comes and conquers Jerusalem
after this period, the chosen spirits
they turn to themselves and seek a spiritual explanation for ancient promises that were not spiritual at all
so when they realized that the promises of Yahweh could no longer be fulfilled here on Earth
they began to develop the idea that, perhaps, they would find fulfillment in another world
but this is written by papal professors
that's what the papal professors write
not atheists
The Bible does not deal with spirituality.
they started working on it because they saw that there was no other chance here
So they started thinking, but maybe…
No? But they did it from the table, it's not in the Bible.
I told you that
We don't know who wrote it.
I'll give an example.
with the amazing book of Isaiah, one of the most important Old Testament prophets
also important because, according to Catholic theology, he was supposed to have predicted the coming of Jesus Christ
according to Catholic theology
have the same passages interpreted by a Jewish theologian
and then choose the interpretation you like best
In my opinion, the Jews are right in this case.
have it interpreted and then choose for yourself
So, the book of Isaiah, 66 chapters.
chapters 1 to 39… you can find it here in the Bibles you have at home
it is said that they were written by Isaiah, chapters 40-55 were written by Deutero-Isaiah
which is such a nice, artificial invention to keep the name Isaiah
Deutero-Isaiah means, in Greek, the second Isaiah.
Chapters 56-66 were written by Trito-Isaiah, or the third Isaiah.
Okay, so someone is reading it and they see Isaiah, Isaiah, Isaiah.
No, no, it says there that Deutero-Isaiah wrote 2 centuries after the first one.
and this Isaiah wrote several decades after the second one
So, in the best-case scenario, the book of Isaiah had three authors who wrote over a period of 250 years.
but that's in the best-case scenario, because as for chapters 1-39, Prof. Penna
who was a consultant to the Pontifical Biblical Commission, writes
as regards the origin of chapters 1 to 39
Do you know why they are attributed to Isaiah? It is written…
because there are no serious reasons to deny it
no, because we know that he wrote it
because there are no serious reasons to deny it
Attention, this is for the entire file of those 39 chapters.
while critics almost agree that, for example, chapters 36-39 come from another book
the agreement is much smaller when assessing the origin of individual parts
Greater difficulties arise with Isaiah's apocalypse, chapter 14 /-/24/-/ to 27
which many are asking about 2 centuries later
then there are other problems with chapters 13-23 and 34-35
so we say that chapters 1-39 were written by Isaiah, because we have no serious reasons to deny it
However, we have serious reasons regarding chapters 24-27, 13-23, 34-35.
as if we had the Divine Comedy and someone would say: Paradise /-/ Hell/-/ was written by Dante
except for the chants, blah blah blah, because we know he didn't write them
The Purgatory was written by the second Dante, 2 centuries later.
and Paradise was written by the third Dante, a few decades later… would we say that the Divine Comedy was written by Dante?
but that's what they do
that's how they do it
What work did the Masoretes do?
those who created the code from which the Bible, which we have at home, is derived
they tried to define the meanings once and for all
What does it mean to define meanings?
since Semitic languages are written only with consonants, because vowels do not exist there
they exist only in the form of sounds
so all the codices are written only with consonants
and until they accept the sounds of vowels, then…
So they wrote down the sounds of vowels, and they did that between the 6th and 9th centuries AD.
So not millennia ago, okay? They finished it in the time of Charlemagne.
No one knows what vowels were used to read it originally, and no one will ever know.
never
we have the vowels that these people wrote there
who are representatives of one tradition
I've already told you that there is also a Samaritan tradition here, which has a 2000-year deviation from this one.
there is the Greek tradition, the Bible of the Seventy, etc.
So we know these vowels.
like this one here
Biblical example, ok? It says TVL here.
when we put two "e"s there, twice two dots, then it's "tevel"
which means earth, world
when we put another kind of "e" there, this one, another dot under it
It is still read as "tevel", but it means sexual intercourse between a woman and an animal.
This is how it is, the country, the world… this is how it is, sexual intercourse between a woman and an animal.
or sexual intercourse between a father-in-law and his daughter-in-law
the book of Leviticus
this is quoted in a passage where Yahweh, or God, says: when you catch a woman having intercourse with an animal
So you kill her and the animal on the spot.
Okay? So the Masoretes did this work.
that is, they inserted dots and dashes representing the sounds of vowels
and with this work they wanted to freeze the Bible, simply from this moment on it will not be interfered with
In fact, there is a part of biblical exegesis that today, today
removes these vowel sounds and inserts others, because they can do it
No one can prevent them from doing so, because no one in the world knows how it was originally.
So they can do it in peace.
I don't do it, because if I did…
So I'm reading exactly how the Masoretes vocalized it.
when you tell me that this is the true Bible, ok, let's see what is written in that true Bible, I don't change a single dot there
So these gentlemen did this here.
And… no question? No.
So
What are the Elohim? If you know Hebrew…
So
In the Bibles you have at home, it says the Most High, in Hebrew it says Elion
in the Bibles you have at home, it says God
in Hebrew it says Elohim, or El, or Eloha
when you read Lord or Eternal, in Hebrew it says Yahweh
or… ok, that's for later
Okay? According to Dokríny, these are 3 terms for God.
in Hebrew… please…
a term indicating a plurality of gods
We'll get to that right away.
Elion in Hebrew means The One who is above.
Elohim is a term that
exegesis, in general, or various philologists
they are derived from a wide variety of roots
because no one in the world knows for sure what it means
Nobody in the world knows for sure, so
so translating Elohim as "god" is a complete fantasy, absolutely unfounded
Okay? Absolute fantasy, absolutely unfounded.
If there is a theologian in the audience, we can discuss it.
unjustified… this term is in the plural
this is uniform, this too
The Bible, without distinction, uses both singular and plural.
Unfortunately, in Italian translations, it is still "God"
so in Italian translations we are not able to notice the difference
but it is very noticeable in Hebrew
it is very noticeable in Hebrew, and when they really want to talk about just one, they use this term
on the other hand, when they want to say that a decision was made collectively, they use this term
or it is said that one of them was one Elohim
as if we wanted to say that Lorenzo Magnifico was "the" Medici
that Cosimo the Elder was "the" Medici
chilli, an individual belonging… Medici, that's a plural
belonging to that family, belonging to that group
Yahweh was one of these.
Okay? You're welcome.
However, since this term in the plural causes a lot of problems here
because what's the point of talking about a single God
I repeat, Elohim does not mean God, but even if someone wanted to talk about one God
what is the point of using the plural when the singular is available
So what's happening is that they're interpreting this term in every conceivable way.
The plural denoting majesty, sublimity, and abstractness, now the plural of abstraction is very popular.
This term is used with verbs in both singular and plural… does anyone here have a Bible?
I have a Bible here from the San Paolo publishing house.
it's a single-dose bible… when I have withdrawal symptoms
I'll have a drip
it is lightweight, easy to wear…
So, we know that
Our history of salvation began when God called Abraham.
Isn't it the famous calling of Abraham?
He calls Abraham away from the land of the Chaldeans, He says: you will go with me, and there begins God's intervention in history
through which God gives us the opportunity
to get rid of the stain of original sin, which is not in the Bible
So I don't know what we are supposed to cleanse ourselves from.
because original sin is not in the Bible, it is an invention of theologians
So Genesis 20:13… so we're fine, none of us are born tainted, everything's fine, everyone's squeaky clean.
Here Abraham speaks, Genesis 20:13
And it came to pass that when God let me wander away from my father's house, I said…
So, when God let me wander away from my father's house
I'll read this to you, why? Because there is a professor, a Hebraist, a biblical scholar
who says that Biglino did not even understand that when Elohim is used with a verb in the singular, it means God
when used with a plural verb, it means pagan deities
stone idols worshipped by other nations who did not know God, poor things, and so they worshipped… non-existent deities
So, as a singular, it is God, as a plural, pagan deities, says this professor, a biblical scholar, a Hebraist.
Genesis 20:13
These are texts for theological faculties and for the libraries of the most important world universities dealing with the Bible.
literal translation: and it was
how that they have made me wander, the elohim, from my father's house
they made me wander, plural
because the Hebrew verb is in the plural
in the Bible for families, the verb is in the singular
God let me wander
in the bible for researchers, because no one can shoot them, because they know what the plural looks like
is a verb in the plural and elohim is not translated
Elohim is there, he remains there
and that's the right way to do it, because we don't know how to translate it
any translation is a fabrication
they have made me wander-elohim
So, according to this professor, a biblical scholar, when it's singular, it's God, when it's plural, it's pagan deities.
So who called Abraham away from the land of Chaldea? Pagan deities.
the same publishing house
this and this same publishing house
correct translation, incorrect translation
but that's not the only example…
I'm starting to suspect why they tell me I can't do literal translations.
I'm starting to get a clue.
but really justified, very justified
because then there is a risk that people will understand when literal translations are made
Last night I did one example for the first time, it occurred to me last night, so I'll do it today as well.
an example of another shaky translation…
…sometimes they ask me to talk about the new law, so we'll touch on it for a while…
you know, because we basically know from the catechism that when Jesus is crucified
We'll pretend Jesus existed, okay?
when he was crucified, there were two thieves with him
Yes? That they were crucified…
Luke 23:32 says this:
Then I'll read it to you, okay?
the other two criminals
Kakourgoi is a term that generally referred to criminals.
but he especially referred to the anti-Roman Zealot revolutionaries
So we know that there were "also" two criminals with him…
when I tell you that I stopped at a motel this morning
and there were two plumbers with me as well
Can you understand something about what my profession is?
no
When I tell you that I stopped at a motel and there were "other" two plumbers with me, do you understand what trade I do?
"heteroi" does not mean "such", it means "other"
two rebels
in the Gospels we read that there were "also two rebels", in the translations
In Greek, it says "two other criminals", so he was part of that group.
not only
when Judas
will carry out his betrayal
It is said that he came.
labium
speiran
that he took… it's written "a crowd of people"
Speiran is a Greek term for a Roman cohort.
So, Judas certainly couldn't have taken any cohort, because the Romans would never have entrusted him with one.
but a Roman cohort was one-tenth of a legion, i.e. 600 soldiers armed to the teeth
we are in the period of the Jerusalem Passover
Jerusalem used to be flooded with 100-120 thousand pilgrims, so there were major problems with public order.
according to the doctrine, we are to believe that the Romans
They sent 600 men, armed to the teeth, to capture 10 hippies.
who spoke of love and peace
So they separated 600 Romans who were in charge of public order in Jerusalem so that they could go and pick up 10 hippies.
cohort
two more rebels
a cohort to suppress the rebellion they were preparing
translation of tapeworms
they cause certain things to get into our heads
this causes us to get "God sent me to wander far" into our heads
"The Elohim took me from my father's house," not that God made me wander.
translations of The Simpsons, that's why you can't do literal translations, because then there is a risk that a person will understand
and when people understand, they understand
Okay?
Thank you, but
Let's always consider the thoughts of the uneducated over Bibles translated by the educated, and thus the educated will not be angry.
because
Literal translations can be challenged, but we, the uneducated, cannot be forbidden.
to make us think, because uneducated does not mean stupid
An uneducated person is someone who doesn't know, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are stupid.
Deuteronomy 32:8, here Moses speaks
and says: when the Most High… in Hebrew Elion
He was distributing their inheritance to the nations.
when he divided the sons of man, he set the boundaries of the nations
according to the number of the sons of Israel
this translation is correct
and it corresponds to what the Masoretes wrote in Hebrew
but this nonsense was inserted there by the Masoretes
because the older codices do not state that the Supreme, i.e. Elion
He determined the boundaries of nations and assigned nations according to the number of the sons of Israel.
The oldest codices state that Elion did this according to the number of the sons of Elohim.
not according to the sons of Israel
according to the children of Elohim
which means that the capo counted his own, and made the allocations according to that number
blah blah
He made the allocations… and now, pay attention:
The work of Yahweh, his people is Jacob
Jacob is a portion of his inheritance
Jacob, Jacob, not Abraham
inheritance… what is inheritance? inheritance is something that is left by someone for someone else
It is not written here in the Bible.
that God chose that nation as the "chosen people"
it says there that Yahweh, after Elion counted his own and made those divisions
Yahweh got it as an allotment, an inheritance, that piece of family, not the nation, okay?
a tiny piece of a family
and in a moment we will see that the family was divided at least between Yahweh and two other colleagues, whom the Bible names
So this one will calculate his own.
He will make the division… and Jacob will be His.
When we read the Bible carefully, the Bible says that God
He called Abraham, in fact, he is not God.
but in reality it is not even Yahweh, it is El Shaddai
one El named Shaddai
after all, the Bible says that Abraham did not fall to Yahweh, but Jacob
one Jewish woman wrote to me that Yahweh
very likely
He was the younger son of one of the bosses here and was supposed to show what he was capable of.
he was supposed to stand up and so he was told: you take these here
it is not excluded that Yahweh was the son of El Shaddai
to whom Abraham was assigned
Thus Moses says in Deuteronomy 5
this covenant that Yahweh made with us, he did not make with our fathers
Do you understand? It's written in the Bibles you have at home.
He did not do it with our fathers, why? Because their fathers were probably not assigned to Him.
but they were assigned to someone else, and theoretically, that could have been the father of this one
listen carefully to what is written there in verse 12
Yahweh himself led that nation.
there was no foreign elohim with him
But how can there be a foreign elohim, when elohim is God?
that's what it says in the Bibles you have at home
…he did it himself, they'll tell him: you'll take care of these here, and he'll say: ok, I'll take care of them
he didn't let anyone help him
there was no foreign elohim with him
and that is understandable, because in Exodus it is written that Yahweh was "ish milchama"
man of war
He was a fighter, that's what he did.
So they will assign them to him there and he will say: I will take care of them
Don't get involved in this.
This is what it tells us.
also Plato
which says that the Greek gods, there they are called theoi, but they are still these characters
they divided it… exactly as Elion did
the nations divided
and some of them ruled by helping each other
such as Athena and Hephaestus
But here in the Bible it is clearly stated that Yahweh did everything himself.
He didn't want help from others.
in Sumerian-Akkadian stories, from which this story originates, because this story is not Jewish
Sumerian-Akkadian stories say something really nice.
…that when the boss of those who are called anunna, or anunnaki, depending on whether in Sumerian or Akkadian
when the boss made these allocations
many of them were satisfied because they received interesting rations
many were not satisfied because they received insignificant rations
and many were very dissatisfied because they were not assigned anything
…the biblical authors tell us only about the relationship between them and this one
he doesn't tell us about others, just a few mentions, then maybe I'll say something
while the others who didn't have…
…those whose stories did not end in the hands of theologians told us everything.
Plato tells us everything, the Sumerian-Akkadian texts tell us everything
so they tell us what was happening then, with those rations, the Bible tells us about this
but there is a nice trace in the Bible, every time they talk about Elohim, that is, about the plurality of these individuals
He keeps telling us that Yahweh had… and that's how he defines himself.
I'm a jealous El
if you switch to another one, I'll kill you, and he did that regularly
regularly
because we cannot deny him one thing, He never betrayed his people, while they betrayed him constantly
when it was more interesting for those who were assigned to him to turn to others, they did so, and when He noticed it, He killed them
because Yahweh said: you will be with me
You made a pact with me, and you will be with me. If you go to another, I will kill you.
in one of these situations, when the n-th betrayal occurs…. Deuteronomy 32, translation by the Italian Episcopal Conference
Moses is furious
and he says, they even sacrificed to the grey ones
who are not Eloha, are not even…
which means that they belong to a hierarchical level lower than the Elohim, so you have started to serve
to individuals who are even lower than these… but listen
sacrificed to elohim whom they did not know
new ones who have arrived recently
which your fathers did not know
the Elohim who did not receive an allotment wandered the earth looking for someone to rule over and from whom they could be served
And Moses says: you have even started to serve those who have only recently come here.
The Bible you have at home, a translation by the Italian Bishops' Conference
when I said that when such a much-maligned literal reading is done, there is never a need to introduce the category of mystery
because it's all clear
There is no need to interpret anything here, just read.
with a little attention, but just read
if your brother, the son of your father or mother… here is Yahweh, who speaks
Right away, one moment.
or a son, or a daughter, or a wife, or a friend who is like yourself
it will entice you with the words "let's go, let's serve other elohim"
to the elohim whom you and your fathers did not know
So don't listen to him, don't pay attention to him.
Don't spare him, you must kill him, your hand must be the first to cause his death.
Then the hands of all the people, all of Israel, will know it, they will be afraid of it and will no longer do something so evil.
so other elohim existed, and how, and were dangerous for Yahweh
and so He says, let it be your wife, your son, whoever, when your closest friend tells you: we will go to another elohim
You have to kill him.
he was so afraid that his people would leave him and go to others
but that's always written there
If you go after others, I'll kill you.

Lecture 2014 Part 2

https://youtu.be/OXG6bsljry4

I wanted to ask: what power do the Elohim have compared to an ordinary human being?
knowledge and technology far exceeding all those subjected
So if I decide to kill you, I'll kill you, and you won't do anything about it, nor will you think of rebelling.
among themselves, when they were fighting each other, they used their weapons up to a certain point
among themselves
then they realized that their use was too dangerous even for them and stopped using them
Thank you… please…
Then we'll see in the Bible… please
I'll go back a little.
I was left with one doubt… I have more than one.
and it concerns… we have a very old language here and we use our language
or an old language that is a bridge to achieving some meaning
So there is a certain distortion in this as well… we have 3 consonants here and these 3 consonants can say completely different things.
and by the way, these consonants require a sentence that gives them meaning, there is no concept here, no corresponding word
there is no clear relationship between the code… in some cases yes, in some cases no
So there is a certain room for distortion.
as in this case of a woman's contact with an animal or a father-in-law with his daughter-in-law, as has been said
blah blah
how can you claim that the translation of the code is as you present it to us
You can never be sure when it comes to ancient languages.
By the way, this one is the younger of the old languages.
in the Middle East, this is probably the last addition
in the sense that all the others are much older
but when we talk about old languages
says, for example, Prof. Garbini, who teaches at La Sapienza in Rome, Professor of Semitic Philology
that even the agreement of all scholars in the world on a word is no guarantee of certainty
So this is an excellent question for theologians who derive truths from the Bible. I say that we only do as with the Bible.
because I realize this, we do as
at least we're trying to understand what's written there, but we're pretending
Chili, that's really a question relevant to the matter.
So, who were Adam and Eve?
and most importantly, what kind of relationship do we have with them?
And here, do the Elohim tell us in the Bible where they came from?
No, unfortunately not.
So, in one of my books, I dedicated a book
not directly to the potential origin of the Elohim, because there is nothing about it there
but to the potential origin of another cited race, namely the Nephilim
which are those translated as "giants"
The Greeks already translated Nephilim as gigantes, i.e. giants.
one thing that I'm sure no one has talked about, I haven't read it anywhere, I documented it in the book
but it's not my interpretation, just take any dictionary of biblical Aramaic and Hebrew, even from the rabbis
nefilim is plural, like elohim, -im is the ending of the masculine plural
the term "nefila", in the singular, has only one meaning in Aramaic: the constellation Orion
if nefilim is the plural of nefil
it would be like Italy and the Italians
This is the only message, as for the rest…
Excuse me? Yes.
significant, of course uncertain
that it refers to the constellation Orion, that's for sure, but it's just a hint
If we return to the Elohim, then Joshua, the successor of Moses,
when conquering the promised land, when they begin to conquer the promised land
and then, as a curiosity about this promised land, we read another passage, Joshua 13
This is Joshua 24, Joshua gathers the leaders and says:
Now we will start with the conquest, dear friends, now we have to make a decision.
and says: Yahweh, Elohim of Israel
because, mind you, every time, or almost every time, when Yahweh is mentioned, it is said that he is the Elohim of Israel
Yahweh, the one who rules over the Israelites
says this: your fathers… we'll see who they were right away
as Terah, the father of Abraham, and the father of Nahor
they lived in ancient times beyond the river and served other elohim
Watch out, okay? When they lived there in Mesopotamia, they served other elohim, that's what Joshua says.
Then Yahweh says
I took your father Abraham, I let him pass through Canaan, etc. etc.
Joshua continues, saying:
But if you don't want to follow Yahweh… do you hear what freedom of choice they are given here?
and Yahweh is supposed to be God
Chapter 24, Verse 15
If you do not want to serve Jehovah, decide today whom you want to serve.
if you want to serve the elohim whom your fathers served there in Mesopotamia
or the elohim of the Amorites
… do you want to serve the Elohim whom your fathers served beyond the River? which means in Mesopotamia
or to the elohim of the Amorites, from the land in which you live
and before that, he immediately tells him: your fathers in Egypt served other elohim
you know that Abraham was led… by Yahweh, to simplify… it was El Shaddai
he is taken to Canaan, his family is there, and when famine occurs, they all move to Egypt
and here it says that they served other elohim in Egypt, but why did they serve other elohim?
because Yahweh couldn't even stick his nose into Egypt, not even in a dream
because his very powerful colleagues ruled there
he couldn't even think of stepping in there, they would have thrown him out immediately
So when Abraham and his family go to Egypt
Who does it serve? The Elohim ruling in Egypt, but that's what the Bible says, that's what the Bible says.
So he says: choose for yourselves, do you want to return to the Elohim whom your fathers served… so it was not "God"
or do you want to serve the Elohim who are here
As for me and my family, we follow Yahweh, and what about you?
How is it possible to give such freedom of choice with the words: do you want to serve God or stone idols?
it's stupid to even admit it
So even we uneducated people, at the 7th bite, when we read this, we say: it's absolutely clear…
He gave them the option, who do you want to be with?
and they say: ok, we will be with Yahweh, because Yahweh brought us out of Egypt
and he says, ok, now you have made a decision and from now on you will be responsible for this decision
but they could have said: we will serve those people because we like them more
Please.
Good evening, I would like to know the phonetic origin of JHVH, the famous tetragrammaton.
We'll get to Adam and Eve later, okay?
So, Elohim are a plurality of persons, among whom one can decide.
Yahweh is one of them, Yahweh is entrusted with a piece of the family and he tells that piece of the family
I will take care of you myself, but if you betray me, I will kill you.
Yahweh
When does this name appear?
It first appears in the Bible when Adam and Eve have Cain and Abel.
Cain kills Abel, Adam and Eve have another son named Seth, who has a son named Enosh.
And the Bible says: In the days of Enosh, the name of Yahweh began to be invoked.
which means that Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel and Seth did not invoke Yahweh
They did not know Yahweh, he showed up there later, in that Middle Eastern theater.
he came later, because his bosses were there before him
He disappears… and when will he reappear? When he leads those people out of Egypt.
I say those people, I never say Jews, because when we read the Targumim, the Aramaic Bible
it says there that only Egyptians left Egypt with Moses
I repeat: only Egyptians
soldiers, priests and ordinary people, no Jews
and it is written in the Targumim, where it is written in the Masoretic Bible that Moses was the son of Hebrews
in the same place in the Aramaic Bible, it is written that Moses was a descendant of the Jahud, who were Akhenaten's priests
So for the Targumim, Moses was an Egyptian.
choose for yourself what you like more
So when Moses led those people out of Egypt, in the name of this one here
At one point, he feels the need to ask God: and who are you, actually?
because I have to tell them there who we're going to see
but is such a question asked of God?
Who are you?
and he answers him: "ehieh ašer ehieh", which means "I will be what I will be"
Since 2010, when I talk about this, I say
that in my opinion, this Ten, who was a warlord, told him: "take care of yourself"
chili "it's none of your business", "you just carry out my orders"
and says to him: you will remember me by this name
Two minor points… when Moses and Yahweh spoke, the Hebrew language did not exist.
when Moses and Yahweh spoke, the Hebrew language did not exist
So, in what language did Yahweh utter that sound?
We don't know.
since they were leaving Egypt, they undoubtedly spoke Egyptian, so we can assume that he told him in Egyptian
definitely not in Hebrew, because Hebrew did not exist
Hebrew appeared several centuries later.
but Yahweh did not tell him
he was told by a sound that, about 3-4 centuries later, was written down with these consonants
They laugh at their friend because of doubts.
was written with these consonants
1600 years later, the vowels were added
Do you understand that we know nothing about that name?
not only, and not only these vowels were added, because in the Bible this name appears more than 6000 times
of which over 2600x is vocalized as Jehovah
chili Džeova
so in the Bible we have both Yahweh and Yehovah
but the vowels were added 1600 years after the consonants were written down
which were recorded at least 3-4 centuries after they were uttered
We don't know anything about that name.
From time to time we hear Yahweh… 70 names of God… we don't even know the meaning of the first one, so what about the other 69?
We know one thing, that's for sure.
because it is documented by epigraphy that this trigram
JHVH was known in the Middle East long before the Jews appeared.
so other nations already knew the trigram or tetragram
and they knew it as the name of the one who ruled a certain territory
let's say the current Negev, Sinai, northern part of Arabia, etc.
There are Ugaritic inscriptions in Lebanon.
which to those who traveled south, i.e. from Lebanon to the Negev
it says here on these inscriptions: "May the god Yahu of Teman accompany you on your journey," "teman" means "south," and his Asherah, that is, his wife."
that He had a wife, even the Jews from the Egyptian colony on Elephantine knew that
and they called her Anat Jav
then, the masculine theological monotheism of the Jerusalem priests removed all traces of female presence
but He, like his colleagues, had his wife
First of all, I would like to ask for clarification, in which text is Moses described as a descendant of Egyptians and not Jews?
Talmud, the Bible written in Aramaic
and as for Joshua, the possibility of choosing and following other elohim
blah… theologians could simply say that elohim means deities
and the discussion would end with the words, when you were with the Sumerians
you worshipped other gods, in Egypt you worshipped Egyptian gods,
Now you have to decide whether you want to worship the One we offer you as the only one or those who host us.
so how to identify in Elohim, instead of metaphysical figures
flesh-and-blood characters present in that territory?
because the biblical elohim eat, drink, walk, get dirty, get tired, need to rest, have to wash, have to sleep
they have a whole range of clearly described physical needs
and translating "elohim" as "god", and I would say that even in front of a whole amphitheater of theologians, is a pure fabrication
To say "other deities" means to introduce a Greek concept into Jewish thought.
which is more than just an eyesore, but really more
and there are actually rabbis who are angry about it and say: but it's not possible
that you take categories, especially the Neoplatonic ones, i.e. from Neoplatonic idealism
and they inserted them into Jewish thought, which has nothing to do with Neoplatonism
I already have a translation like "there were other deities"
it means to insert a concept that does not belong there
No, He speaks face to face.
Yahweh says directly, Jeremiah 25:
those of you who say that they receive messages from me in a dream
let them tell those dreams among themselves, because they only talk nonsense, because I speak face to face
that's what Jeremiah 25 says, he's just talking nonsense, let them tell their dreams among themselves, because I don't speak in dreams
This is what Yahweh says in Jeremiah.
as when we do a literal reading, a very concrete image emerges
clear, calm, simple
So Joshua will make this statement, he will give them the opportunity to choose
Let's see why this option was here.
this selection option
we read the names Terah, Abraham, Nahor
since there are very open rabbis… wait…
very open rabbis, but rabbis of a really higher category, a university teacher
who are members of the Rabbinical Assembly, and I asked them a few questions, they are Americans
I asked about Abraham because of certain hypotheses of mine.
and this is the reply email
which was sent to me by Prof. Robert Wexler
President of the American Jewish University in Los Angeles
writes about Abraham
most modern biblical scholars, "scholar" in English means a learned person and not a schoolboy…
do not consider Abraham to have been a real person
the majority, "most" of their biblical scholars believe that Abraham never existed
Let's just pretend with the Bible, that's better.
not everyone accepts that Moses was historical, not everyone accepts that Moses existed
them, ok? them, rabbis
with the Bible, it's better to just pretend, we pretend that the Masoretic Bible is the true one
and at least we try to read what is written there
because as far as I know, all of this, and I'll also say that when something is said there, it actually means something else…
we can take Tex Willer and do the same with him
At first I thought I was dreaming because I saw a shining full moon.
There was a strong wind, and I felt that the strong wind was making the moonlight vibrate.
the second time I saw my house all lit up at night, so I thought it was burglars and called the gendarmes
…the Carabinieri must be unbiased, and so they told me that I was looking into the air
but I was looking down because I thought there were thieves there
because they had 50 phone calls from Rivergana, Vigolzona and San Giorgio
which are the surrounding villages, that there is an alien flying saucer there
I had it over my head, I got up from the computer on the third try…
and my neighbors, such crazy people, saw my house lit up, they were looking for me, but they didn't find me
and when they came to the barn at 6 o'clock in the morning, it was November, they found that they were missing a cow
but because they were ashamed to tell me that I had stolen a cow from them at 6 in the morning, they acted as if nothing had happened
A year later, I and those carabiniers were invited to a dinner in Piacenza, organized by Agriturismo.
and the carabinieri told me: the night your house was lit up, was that the day the cow went missing? yes
Conclusion: aliens are piranhas, thieves
I would like to know, when we talk about aliens of ancient times, but today they are among us, aliens
because when you go out at night in Bagnol, you can see paranormal phenomena that give you goosebumps
In Bagnols, 2 planes crashed in 1972, they were from San Damiano
In Monticello, there are the remains of those planes and tombstones.
They have control of the San Damiano military airport… question:
In my opinion, these local aliens are evil: they steal, they don't care about anything.
when they are bothered by planes overhead
so they let the planes and pilots fall, those two pilots have a memorial plaque there in Monticello
I would like you to tell us something about today's aliens instead of the aliens of ancient times.
because you can't rely on them, they're thugs
they are beings who consider us guinea pigs
Here, you can't be sure of anything.
I went there with my friends, to that Bagnol, one night
and there are light balls appearing, that the friends got scared
and they don't smell of Bagnolo at night anymore
I'd like to hear something about aliens today.
So, let's put it this way.
There are those who deal with this topic, I deal with the Bible.
So even if I thought something about aliens today, it would really mean nothing.
in the sense that I am, let's say, lucky
I live under the ufologically famous mountain Musinà, if anyone knows it…
I have it opposite my windows.
my luck is, and I'll explain to you why it's luck, that I've never seen a single light
and that's a good thing, because the things I'm telling you are not influenced by the things I've seen
I only interpret what I read.
I read the Bible and talk about the Bible.
others are dealing with current situations…
I mean: there are hundreds of people who are dealing with this…
This question is not for me, I don't want to make any excuses, but
I'm into the Bible, so
Everyone has their own craft.
the question is whether there is any comparative study
because we have Vedic scriptures from India
from the Sanskrit period, whether there is any connection with the events
taking place in the area of Israel
//comparative study with biblical events//
So, I don't know of any comprehensive comparative studies.
I initiated, and this will be my next book, a comparative study between the Bible and Greek writings, especially the Iliad and the Odyssey.
Why the Iliad and the Odyssey? Because
and these are also considered poetic texts
purely epic poems
and in fact, I am convinced that even there it is necessary to "do as if", because many things will come up
it is found that they tell the same stories, the same
as far as the Far East is concerned
Vedic texts, Ramayana, Mahabharata, etc. etc. etc.
we have stories here about those who are called devas there
but they are infinitely more explicit
there, directly in one text, such as Vimanika Shastra
which means the Treaty on Aviation
the substances from which the pilots' overalls were to be made are described
seasonal diets that pilots had to follow are described there
The good thing is that those texts did not end up in the hands of monotheistic theologians.
and so they remained
they are extremely explicit, the Bible was probably like that originally
after all, those researchers, as I said, who are working on the Bible project
they write, and that remained in the Bibles we have at home
that when you are here
over time, they introduced monotheistic concepts that were not previously in the Bible
because the Jerusalem priesthood needed to proclaim itself the representative and thus the ruler of the people
they made all the texts that could not be edited disappear
at least 11 of them, for sure, were made to disappear
Why do I say for sure?
because those 11 are quoted in the Bibles we have at home
So, in the Bibles we have at home, 11 books are cited.
which, however, no longer officially exist
so the biblical authors knew them, considered them trustworthy, quoted them, but in the meantime they were allowed to disappear
they weren't burned, ok? because since they were books written by their ancestors, they didn't burn them
they ended up literally in a graveyard of books, they were buried
so that they are no longer available
one of these books was the Book of the Wars of the Lord
which, probably, was so explicit that they could not edit it
because it was clearly said there how He fought, and this is one of those that disappeared
one specific link, but
I haven't forgotten about Adam and Eve, we'll get to that.
However, we find one specific reference in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Why am I giving a specific reference?
because what happened in Sodom and Gomorrah is what happened in the area of today's Pakistan
At that time, the Indus-Sarasvati civilization, Harappa and Mohenjo-Daro were there.
by the way, it was also in the same period, i.e. between 2000 and 1800 BC.
when these civilizations were destroyed by fire coming from the sky
and which destroyed them in one moment
The story of Sodom and Gomorrah, it's in the Bible, and it is said that fire came from heaven.
No? They sent him down.
This story is found on the Oxford tablets, where the Sumerian-Akkadian tablets were published.
The relevant Oxford table describing the story is the Epic of Erra or Nergal, which are names
here, ok? who are called anunna or anunnaki
which correspond to the Assyro-Babylonian "ilu" "ilanu", from which the Hebrew "elohim" comes, ok?
So, what do those stories say? They say that
they fought here, and for those 5 cities, because it wasn't just Sodom and Gomorrah, there were 3 other cities
cited in the Bible, Nergal sent from heaven, one to each city, a weapon of terror
and everything that was alive there turned into steam
In Mohenjo-daro, we can still see the effects of one such weapon.
…there is no radiation, so it wasn't atomic weapons
at least there
there are stones vitrified by temperatures
from 1800 to 2000 degrees, applied for 2-3 seconds
no fire in the world is capable of causing these temperatures
and human skeletons were calcined, meaning that the mineral substances evaporated
Okay? The Bible tells us that this happened in Sodom and Gomorrah, we can say, okay, fire came from heaven…
allegorical, metaphorical vision… unfortunately, unfortunately
that the Bible tells us about Sodom and Gomorrah 1000 years after this event and says
that the water in the territory of Sodom and Gomorrah is still bad and the soil is barren
1200 years after the event, the Bible tells us that the valley of Sodom and Gomorrah… is a land of thorns and desolation.
in the Book of Wisdom, Chapter 10, this is 1800 years after the event
The Bible tells us that in the land of Sodom and Gomorrah, trees bear empty and unripe fruits.
What did they do there on that territory?
that they have devastated it for at least 2000 years
an archaeologist told me
that about 40, 30 years ago
Israel tried to grow citrus there, but the lemons were empty.
in Sanskrit, and there it is spoken much more explicitly
these weapons are called, in the Ramayana
"tédžas-astras", which means "energy-weapons"
chili energy weapons
which they used, exclusively by themselves, as they did not give them to their subjects
your subjects fought as we know: with spears, swords, bows, knives
they, among themselves, used those "tédžas-astras" there
The effects are described.
we can say, well, okay… Sodom was punished because they were sodomites
Read Deuteronomy, it says that Sodom was punished.
because she no longer accepted the terms of Yahweh's covenant, because she changed her allegiance
not that they were sodomites
Why are sodomites being talked about?
because when
Genesis 18, Abraham is sitting in the shade of his tent and sees 3 men approaching, i.e. male individuals
he will immediately understand that he belongs to those there…. to the commanders
and he says, come here, before you continue, refresh yourselves, eat, drink, wash yourselves, refresh yourselves, etc.
they will do that and then 2 of them will continue their journey to Sodom to carry out their mission, one will stay there
And who is this? The following verse tells us: Yahweh
who came, hungry, thirsty, had to wash himself, etc. etc.
The two of them are going to Sodom, why? To warn Lot.
Abraham's nephews that they must leave the city because the next day the city will be razed to the ground
So the two of them come there, Lot and the others are sitting in the city gate.
he sees them coming, he immediately understands what they are
Lot tries to protect them, and the others want to lynch them because they know they belong to a hostile military alliance.
Lot saves them by taking them into his house, and it's really nicely described there.
Lot opens the door, grabs the two, pulls them into the house, and closes the door.
and so he saves them, and tells those outside: leave those two alone
I'll give you my 2 underage daughters, vent with them and leave these 2 alone.
The curious thing is that it says there that
Abraham and Yahweh are talking
And Abraham says: but if there are 50 righteous people in Sodom…
and righteous does not mean morally righteous, because the Old Testament is the most immoral book in the history of mankind
one of the most immoral
the righteous are on our side
Will it be possible to save them? Well, if there are 50 of them, then yes… and if there are 30? Or 20?
How was it possible to calculate a fair one?
Yahweh said
it is in the Bible that the sign of belonging to his alliance is circumcision
and circumcision is a sign that can be checked at any time, it's just veiled
So if I want to calculate the fair: lift your tunic and show me
and since they could also be there to count the righteous
the others could say, come here, we'll show you
and this is the whole point: do you want to see it? Come here, we'll show you
and this is the whole point of sodomy
In fact, Deuteronomy says that they stopped accepting Yahweh's conditions, i.e. they changed the alliance.
and because they changed their military alliance, they were told, we will wipe them all out, and they did
just as it happened in Harappa and Mohenjo-daro
by the way, in the same period, the same centuries
weapons with the same effects, here and there
then they began to be cunning, because on Sumerian-Akkadian tablets, such as
on the kappa 5004 table
the battle on the Sinai is described
where it is said that Nergal flew over the mountains
flew over the territory of the celestial chariots
chili above the "airport"
he released the weapon of terror that caused the internal explosion of Mount Mashu
which no longer exists
he dropped more weapons, and at the end of that battle, the table says
only the stumps of burnt trees remained, nothing else
So either they had an incredible imagination.
and they made up things that we know well
or they did nothing but write down the things that happened
Unfortunately, the Bible is silent about this.
They are silent because, from a certain point on, they decided that Yahweh must be God, etc., etc., etc.
but there are still small passages where something has remained
Any questions?
So I'll just finish this here…
e.g. in one passage, when the Israelites are about to go into battle, and they are afraid of losing, and Yahweh tells them: do not be afraid
because I am with you and
and I will send my cirah against the enemy
cirah is a term in the singular
translated by the plural as bees or hornets
So the doctrine tells us that God sent hornets to sting the enemies.
However, since the word for bee in Hebrew is Debora, they had the term for bees available.
cirah is a term in the singular, and when you look into rabbinical dictionaries, it says that it was something, but it is not known what
which affected the skin, caused burns and subsequently fainting or even death
So Yahweh says, don't be afraid, because I will use my sword against these people.
and says: none of those who escape you will remain alive
I'll kill you with my weapon.
So one trace of their weapons, although really small, remained, but unfortunately very little remained there.
Please.
I don't want to digress too much, but I'd like to hear something about Genesis.
something completely about the beginning, about creation
This is how we get to Adam and Eve.
So, just as the Bible doesn't speak of God
The Bible never speaks of creation.
just as in Hebrew there is no term for God, there is no term for creation, and certainly not creation out of nothing
the verb "bara", which is used in Bereishit bara Elohim et ha-shamayim ve'et ha-aretz
In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth.
it never means "to create", not only in Hebrew, but in any Semitic language
always means intervening in a situation in order to change it for one's own use and need
So the first verse, and I dedicated 80 pages to this in the book The Bible Doesn't Say Creation
The first chapter of Genesis basically tells how the Elohim flew to one place
They chose the place and adapted it to their own needs.
They built a dam there.
separating the waters that are above from the waters that are below
fertilized the soil below
and there they began to produce their food, plants and animals
This is the story of the first chapter… I realize what I'm saying, okay?
the story of the first chapter, which has nothing to do with creation
In the cited book, I analyzed all the places where the word bara appears in the Bible.
it never means to create, not even once
but I repeat, it does not mean to create only in Hebrew, that term, the root, it does not mean that in any Semitic language
So they didn't create anything for you here.
They got here, they found… they chose a territory, they adapted it to their use.
and at one point it is said that they decided to make Adam
and they will do it, as the translations tell us
to his image and to his likeness, in fact, this is not written in Hebrew here
In Hebrew, it is written that they will make him in their image.
"with" that something made of a material containing their image
which is something different from "k" in their form
but they will make Adam using their "member", that's what the Bible says
and when we look again into the dictionaries of biblical Aramaic and Hebrew, we see that the whole
It comes from the Hebrew root "calam", which means "to cut".
so the whole thing is something made of a material containing an image
and in American dictionaries it says "something cut out"
something cut out/removed
And now, what is this physical part?
containing an image and which can be removed and used for production
DNA
I read to you: that the Bible speaks of genetic engineering has been known to Jews since time immemorial through the Talmud
Well, let's say that.
Well, let's say that.
We were talking about earthly paradise, and now we're going to talk about Adam and Eve, right?
an earthly paradise is mentioned there, in the sense that they made Adam, and we know, we are told, that he was made in an earthly paradise
If anyone has heard any of my conferences from the past 4 years, I often explain that the term "gan"
Gan Eden, or Gan in Eden
"Gan" in Hebrew means an enclosed and protected garden.
Is there anyone here who has heard this explanation? Just so I…
from which the Iranian term "pairidaeza" was derived, meaning an enclosed garden
The Greek word "paradaisos" comes from the Iranian term "pairidaeza".
which Xenophon and Diodorus Siculus use to refer to the enclosed gardens of the Babylonian lords
The Latin paradisum originated from the Greek paradaisos.
from the Latin paradisum then "paradiso"/"paradise", which with Gan Eden…
not related in any way
and then, about 3 years ago, I drew a map like that
where could this Gan Eden hypothetically be
I don't have it anymore because all my notes were stolen at the end of July…
However, the July 2014 issue of Le Scienze magazine
They speak of Gan Eden and present a map that places Gan Eden exactly in the place…
chili in northern Mesopotamia, west of the Caspian Sea
exactly to the place where we can consider… but listen to what is written here about Gan Eden
The name paradiso comes from pairidaeza
which means a walled orchard
typical of the gardens and parks of Persian rulers
Xenophon Hellenized pairidaeza into paradeisos, an enclosed place
Homer describes something similar in the Odyssey.
I have said many times at conferences that Alkino's Garden
described in the 6th and 8th books of the Odyssey, corresponds to the description of the biblical Gan Eden
chili experimental laboratory, center for the production of edible plants and animal husbandry
so I'm glad to read these things here
but there's more to it
The Bible speaks about genetic engineering.
I always say: we only pretend to do the Bible
So I'm telling you what I'm reading.
and if what I'm reading is a bunch of bullshit, then I'm telling you a bunch of bullshit
The problem is not on my side, but on the side of theologians who derive absolute truths from it.
As for me, if we find out that the Bible is Pinocchio, we'll say it's Pinocchio, there's no problem with that.
So, what I read, I say, period. And whether it's true or not, I don't know, I don't know.
In recent years, however, I've been getting my hands on things that give me goosebumps.
like this
studies by geneticists, of which there are a few pages… studies that were sent directly to me, okay?
a molecular biologist who is an associate researcher at King's College London
I devoted a few pages to it in the book The Bible Is Not a Holy Book…
He is writing a book that will be published in the spring; it was supposed to be published earlier, but it is delayed.
where he explains that
some hypotheses of genetic engineering would explain a whole range of things that science cannot cope with
Other geneticists are writing to me and sending me long studies.
in which it is said that there is a whole range of gene sequences
causing us to be homo sapiens
and no one can explain where they come from
No geneticist can explain…. and they are all described here
I will then publish these studies in the next book.
I won't read it, so as not to bore you, I'll read you the conclusion.
Amazing
the only explanation remains to consider mitochondrial Eve
Mitochondrial Eve is the name given by geneticists to the first "Homo sapiens"
and the chromosomal Adam Y
for clones produced in many copies
only a corresponding number of mutually genetically identical men and women
could successfully pass on unique and characteristic genotypes of the human race
this is what geneticists are starting to write, this is what the Bible tells us
Eve-woman is a clone of Adam-man
and it tells us where the cells were taken from, from the iliac crest
This is where science begins to say it.
but another thing that, honestly, gave me goosebumps
So you have seen that the earthly "paradise" was located there, in northern Mesopotamia.
They chose that place and did various experiments there.
Le Scienze, August 2014
This is about wheat.
to learn how our wheat came about, listen…
much earlier than the invention of agriculture, the official one
is a wild component from the Triticum urartu family
Urartu is a mountain range where Ararat is located.
So there, they called it "Urartu" because it is located there.
So, one wild component, Triticum urartu.
it suffered, the plant suffered
a genetic event that could never happen
it absorbed the entire genome of another plant
but they write that it happened, but it couldn't have
This could not have happened.
and that's not all
approximately 8,000-9,000 years ago
in the area between present-day Armenia and the southwest of the Caspian Sea, still there
another impossible genetic event occurred
Triticum dicoccum has completely absorbed the genome of another plant
which resulted in Triticum spelta
then a whole series of other genetic modifications gave rise to our Triticum aestivum
common wheat, from which we make bread and pizza
they write it, all things that cannot happen in nature
But if they can't happen and they did, will we take a step forward?
And we'll ask who did it?
old texts tell us who did it, there
they tell us that, they had Gan Eden there, they did experiments there, they grew all kinds of plants there, they kept animals that they needed there
and here it says that mutations occurred there that cannot occur in nature…
Shall we take a step forward?
instead of saying: no, it's all nonsense, it's all myths, it's all fairy tales
No! Let's try to act as if, and maybe a few things will become clear.
So the Bible tells us that they made Adam, and I explained to you how.
and then at one point it is said that they took Adam and put him in Gan Eden
which doesn't mean they made it in earthly paradise, they made it somewhere else
Current genetics identifies 4 human branches.
of which the oldest, which is the one we know as classic sapiens
which originated in the south
in southeastern Africa
so they did the first experiments with hominids there
Then, the Bible says, he took Adam and put him in Gan Eden.
Adam is a member, so it's not the name of one person, it means a group of men.
they took them, this group of Adams…
this "Adam" was supposed to work in Gan Eden for the Elohim
So, the Bible says, they will give him animals and plants, which he was supposed to take care of.
Then the Bible says, and this is interesting, that the Elohim noticed that the animal society was not sufficient for Adam.
and they decide to make him a wife
I imagine they used to witness certain scenes…
Because Adam's sons were normal male individuals with their own needs, they decided to make him a woman.
and here they will do it by cloning, because the Bible says that Adam was put into a deep sleep
they remove something from the curved side part, which is usually translated as a rib
They'll seal the meat… in the Bibles you have at home, okay?
They will close the meat where they took the sample, and with what they took, they will make a woman.
the woman was supposed to be… given that she was cloned, and perhaps even intentionally
…let's say that pair, those groups, should have remained sterile
they were not supposed to reproduce, because they were to remain under their absolute control
so they made the necessary number of them that they needed
then the one we know as "the snake" intervenes
The Hebrew term "nachaš" does refer to a snake,
but the root refers to "one who has deep knowledge"
those whom we now call geneticists
those who have a deep knowledge of man, they go to the core, they go to the genetic heritage
which are those who made Adam with the help of all the Elohim
and at one point one of them, against the will of the bosses, makes the couple fertile
when the two become fertile
When you read the Bible, it says that they realized their nakedness and hid.
but it's not that they hid among themselves, that shame appeared there
after all, they were naked just a minute before
they hide from the Elohim
they don't want the elohim to find out that they understood what those things are for, and therefore that they can reproduce
Elohim, who of course were not fools
They said, "Okay, you've made this choice, now you're like us," that's what the Bible says.
So get out of here.
If you have made this choice, then go out and live it.
The concept of the tree of good and evil, the knowledge of good and evil, really has nothing to do with what we are told.
not even in Hebrew… some idea that they understood
a theoretical concept of evil, of what is right, what is wrong, what is good… no
Hebrew says that from that moment on they began to experience the positive and negative effects of the choice they made.
This is what they say to Adam: Now, when you are hungry, it will be your concern.
because as long as you were here, you didn't have a problem with food, but now out there it will be your concern
and they told the woman, now you will understand, but that is not a condemnation
it's just a post-eventum judgment
Did you want to make this choice? Now you'll understand that having children hurts a lot.
it's not that I condemn you to suffer
You wanted this choice? You'll see how much it will hurt you and why it will hurt so much? Because we are badly made.
We are born too early, with too big a head.
we are animals that, statistically, have the most problems during childbirth
because we are made wrong
because from a certain point on, evolution stopped working on us
they worked here
and they made certain accelerations to obtain hominids
who will be able to understand and carry out orders
but this caused us a whole range of dysfunctions
it caused us to be strangers here on Earth
try to imagine any animal, any at all
you will see that any animal has
it is called: an ecological niche
some natural system to which it is perfectly adapted
and every natural system has its perfectly adapted animals
Try to imagine a naked person and find one natural system to which a person is naturally adapted.
There is no such thing, not a single one.
we have to intervene in the external environment and modify it
because we, naked, anywhere, alone, will perish, because nature will kill us
because we are no longer adapted to anything
if we are to use one term existing in Italian dictionaries, then we are alien to the Earth
which doesn't mean… in Italian it means different and foreign
so we are different and alien here on Earth, because at one point we were sewn with too hot a needle
…and the Elohim knew it.
and they will tell Adam at the expulsion: you will rule over the animals, because man can only dominate
To dominate means to interfere with the environment and adapt it to oneself if one wants to survive, otherwise one will die.
Really, we are not adapted.
and I'll tell you one more interesting fact about Eve, when a woman is tempted by the famous serpent
it is said that she ate the fruit
among the things that should not be read literally, because the Bible must be read with a symbolic key
and Biglino did not understand that the Bible must be read with a symbolic key
some of them have developed large symbolic constructions about Eve's apple
I think someone has read… you know it well…
large symbolic constructions about Eve's apple
but Eve's apple is not in the Bible
It's not there.
So whoever creates symbolic constructs about an apple, creates symbolic constructs about nothing.
Credere magazine, yesterday's edition, Monsignor Ravasi
Monsignor Ravasi is here with me.
Actually, I'm sorry, it's me with him, because he's big and I'm small.
In this interview, Mons. Ravasi says about the Bible: as a biblical scholar…
it happens when the original text is used, and you see it, or others point it out to you
to certain shades of language, hints and allusions that will surprise you
and still, as far as Genesis is concerned, it is nowhere written that the tree of temptation was an apple tree
The apple is not there, try to find it, and when you find it, send me a box of biblical apples.

Lecture 2014 part 3

https://youtu.be/voQwsTs728k

The Bible says that Eve ate the "fruit"
The apple was created by the "tree of good and evil"… Have a nice evening…
When the Bible was translated into Latin, evil was called "malum", but "malum" also means "apple tree".
and from the apple tree came the apple, which is not in the Bible
it is said there that Eve ate the fruit, but it is clear from the Bible, the book of Proverbs, that "eating the fruit" means having sexual intercourse
So, the Bible says that Eve was seduced by Nachash.
she will have sexual intercourse, that is, she will eat the fruit, and then she will give it to Adam to eat
she had her first sexual intercourse with someone else
Then he'll teach Adam… because we men always come later.
I wanted to ask if in the Bible or texts of surrounding cultures
Where are we? Please raise your hand, yes, there, I'm sorry.
whether there or in the vicinity
with regard to the similarity of some events
Is there also any mention, besides the arrival of these Elohim, of their departure… not in the Bible.
one hint of departure is in Josephus Flavius
who is a Judeo-Roman historian writing in the 1st century AD.
who wrote several books, and one of them is called Jewish Wars
and he, in the year 70 AD, when the Romans decided to conquer Jerusalem
because they were already tired of messianic movements
we've already touched on how there were anti-Roman rebels there
In the 6th book of the Jewish Wars, Josephus tells us something very interesting…
says that when the Romans were approaching, the priests who were in the temple
they heard a voice: "we are leaving this place"
and then he says that in the month of Artemis, i.e. after the Jewish Passover
a scene was witnessed that, if it hadn't had so many witnesses, no one would have believed it
the number of heavenly chariots that surrounded the city in the clouds
that was in the year 70 AD
so with the arrival of the Romans, there was a change in the hierarchy
we come, with ours, you leave
…sure, but the old texts tell us about it, vehiculos volantes
but here, the gentlemen from CUN can provide you with all the explanations
and they talked about them
but we are not told this in history books because no one can explain it
Good evening… Thank you…
Wait, there was another lady here.
Good evening, thank you.
I wanted to know, when it is written in the Bible and other writings…
there is a trace of the fact that human beings had to obey…
Why were they given the option to choose?
to eat the apple or not
there was no choice…
in the battles between the Elohim, who were just like us
rulers and colonizers who fought among themselves
this is, for example, very evident in Sumerian-Akkadian stories
there are conflicts between two brothers, sons of the ruler of the empire, and they were always at odds
and one of those two brothers carried it out, through the biological engineer Ninchurshag
which is the one that did the genetic interventions
He liked those creations because he made them.
the other one had no relationship with them, those creations were supposed to be slaves, to work and be silent
the one who had it liked the creation, he wanted it to emancipate
So it was this one who gave the couple the opportunity to reproduce, the other one didn't want to.
Thank you, please.
Moment…
Yes, so
Good evening, thanks.
Adam and Eve have two sons, named Cain and Abel.
Cain kills Abel and is banished
When Cain is banished, he says: "Whoever meets me will kill me."
but if they are the ancestors of mankind
grandparents… who was that anyone?
Adam and Eve, Abel was dead, there was only Cain.
while there were a lot of people there
there were plenty of ordinary homo sapiens there, who had been produced since
as official geneticists say, where they place the first mitochondrial Eve
about 250 to 200 thousand years ago
Adam and Eve are the ancestors of a special race, not the ancestors of mankind.
one special race, which they made for themselves
it was the Adams who were supposed to work for them in Gan Eden
so when Cain… so here they were genetically much closer to them
and when we have time, I will tell you when this closeness ended, because the Bible tells us that
and here they were very educated, because when they were to work for them, the Elohim taught them a lot of things
So Cain is banished… and he is terrified of ending up among the so-called barbarians, let's call them that.
He is afraid that they will kill him, but in reality, everything is going smoothly.
He'll find some women, have children.
and we see that in his entire generation there are those who master construction, agriculture, animal husbandry, and music
So, in Cain's generation, there is a complete civilization.
and now
we are, as you have seen, in the north of Mesopotamia
Sumer is located in the south-central region of Mesopotamia.
archaeology and anthropology tell us that the Sumerian civilization appeared there
without any historical development, it appears fully developed
so it wasn't
suddenly he appears with all the knowledge
mathematics, astronomy, writing
animal husbandry, agriculture, construction
So we have a book that tells us
some people of a high cultural level, thanks to contact with the Elohim
they were expelled somewhere in northern Mesopotamia, where they were told: get out of here
and at the same time we have a civilization that appears fully developed
when we put those two things together?
then maybe we will understand where the Sumerian civilization came from
In addition, the Bible names all the nations of the Orient, but it never names the Sumerians.
But how can he not mention the Sumerians?
which was a nation with the highest level of civilization and culture
It was them.
bla
I wanted to ask about the names Adam and Eve, whether they are proper names or if they have a translation.
Adam means "the one from Adamah", i.e. "the one from the earth"
Eva, Hava is so called because she is the mother of chaims, i.e. living beings, the so-called Adam's generation.
first/mother of Adam
Please.
bla
something about the longevity of Methuselah
The so-called antediluvian patriarchs lived, as the Bible says, 800-900 years.
and because this is supposed to be a fairy tale, of course, it is said that it is not true, it is ridiculous
It has to be divided by ten… in reality, they lived for about 80-90 years, ok
So we will divide the age by ten.
and if we divide it by ten, we find that Abraham lived 17 years and Moses 12
So when Moses led those people out of Egypt, he was 12 years old.
if we have to divide by ten, we must keep dividing by ten
we can't do it only when it suits us, and when it doesn't suit us, we don't do it
make each verse correspond to the idea we have in mind, but let's do it as if they lived for 800 or 900 years
and let's read what Genesis chapter 6 says
where it is written that the sons of Elohim at one point found the daughters of Adam attractive
and they took as many of them as they wanted for their companions
chili causes mixing, which should not have happened
at one point, to make a long story short
Elohim says: I will no longer argue with Adam.
it's just basar, meaning just meat…
breeding animal
his life will be 120 years
there is one Hebrew term
BŠGM
which is supposed to be be-sha-gam
"because" "that" "only" "meat"
I'm not going to argue with them anymore, because they're just meat.
a professor from the American University of Beirut, Prof. Salibi, a Semitist
says no, this division is wrong, it should be divided as be-shagam
So this university professor says that the Elohim say there
I will no longer enrich Adam.
"s", here it is a Semitic verbal root, passing into both Hebrew and Arabic
meaning "to shed your organic fluids", including sperm
So Elohim says, I will no longer enrich Adam.
"s" "sperm fluid"
his life will be 120 years
So, according to that university professor, the Elohim will decide.
to stop the supply of their genetic material to the Adam's generation
and when we read the Bible, we see that from that moment on, the age is shortened from 800 to 600, 500, 400, 300
until he reaches 120 years with Moses…
…so at that moment they decided to stop the supply of their genetic material
So the first ones had a large amount of their genetic material, and thus had a much longer life.
I wanted to ask, in the Bible, Yahweh, Chemosh, and Milcom appear, are there any other known names of Elohim?
And one more thing, is it known that Elohim circled over our territory, from non-biblical sources?
So
as far as our territory is concerned, understood as Europe, i.e. classical Greek culture
Good evening.
Of course, the Bible doesn't tell us that.
As for the origin, Plato tells us in Critias
when he talks about those who divided it
Egyptian priests from the city of Sais, who spoke with Solon, from whom this information then reached Plato.
Good evening, thanks.
it is originally said that
that civilization, both the first, Egyptian, and the Greek, classical civilization
was entrusted to Athena, the blonde goddess with blue eyes
so at least part of the central Mediterranean was entrusted to one of their daughters
The second part of the question?
So after Noah… he had three sons, the first was Shem… "Semites"
Shem had sons and daughters until Heber.
from whom the "Ivrim", or generally the Hebrews, originate
Heber will have sons and daughters until Terah is reached.
who has a son named Abram, and we will pretend that he existed because our Bible says he existed
the son of Nachor and the son of Haran
Abraham has Isaac and Jacob.
as we have already seen, Jacob was entrusted to Yahweh
so this whole part of the family did not belong to Yahweh
then we know that Yahweh
which, according to the doctrine, is God, who has chosen… who sets the boundaries of nations
He chooses you as the chosen people, but the Bible doesn't say he chose them, he got them as an inheritance.
and we also said before that the one who came after Abraham was called El Shaddai
So when El Shaddai comes to Abraham and says to him, "You come with me."
it could have been Yahweh's father, who then said, "Okay, you'll take care of this part of the family now."
and it is said…. simply that God made such a choice
he decided that he would only take care of that nation, and that he would not be interested in the others
ok, the secret of God's judgment
But when we read the Bible, we first notice that the Bible is a book of wars, because the Bible is only about wars.
and that Yahweh, or "God"
together with his people, he spends all his time fighting against the nations
which had only one flaw, if what the doctrine says is true
and that they are in the territories where He Himself placed them
And what will God do?
he will send his own to massacre them
and he keeps saying it, kill them all, including women, children and the elderly
Kill them all, because we have to be there.
So God will say to the other nations: you be here, you be here, you be here, I will only be interested in these ones.
but then he says, now I'm interested in those there, so you, my people, go there now and massacre them all
this is in the Old Testament all the time, all the time
But I'm saying, he didn't remember that he put them there, did he? That's the first thing.
Secondly: and he didn't even remember that he was a god?
because it would have been enough to say, now I'm interested in those there, so I'll assign them to myself
it's all so obvious that it's enough to do the reasoning of the uneducated with Bibles translated by the educated
Like, imagine God saying, "You, I put you there."
but because I'm interested in that territory now, I'll send mine to murder them
But who were the others?
Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites
Edomites, Midianites
And do you know who they were?
They all came from one family, the Moabites were the descendants of Lot, the son of Haran, the grandson of Abraham.
The Ammonites were descendants of Lot, son of Haran, grandson of Abraham.
The Amalekites were direct descendants of Esau, Jacob's twin brother.
The Edomites were the direct descendants of Esau, Jacob's twin brother.
The Midianites were direct descendants of Abraham through his wife Keturah.
they fought among themselves within the family, between cousins, uncles and nephews
and they were robbing each other of pieces of territory
meadows and hills, one with the other
It's like a really big epic about the conquest…
a pile of crap
so, Judges 11:24
I would just recommend the story of Alexander the Great's borders, which is really very interesting.
So, a great epic about conquest, a god who conquers… Have a nice evening, thanks.
who conquers the promised land
we've already seen… have a nice evening, please
that in the territory of Egypt, Assyria, Babylon… Yahweh could not even stick his nose in, because He was so tiny, tiny
because his powerful colleagues ruled there, so he couldn't even show up there
So He fought, He sent His own to fight against the cousins and nephews.
to grab a piece of territory, ok?
take a black and white map
a black and white map
ranging from Greece to India
and draw with the color you want
territories that Yahweh, or God, conquered over several centuries
you will make a few colorful dots in today's Israel
Now color the territory that Alexander the Great conquered in 11 years.
from Macedonia, to India, and all the way to Egypt
Do you understand the difference between Yahweh and Alexander the Great?
it's not even possible to compare
it's not even possible to compare
Judges 11:24
They are fighting against the Ammonites here.
The Israelite warlord is named Jephthah.
and he discusses with the king of the Ammonites, and listen to what he says
so the commander of the Israelite army is talking to the king of the Ammonites
you hold the territory that your Elohim Kemosh gave you to own
In this way, we also hold the territory that our Elohim Yahweh gave us as property.
they were the same
You have Elohim, whose name is Kemosh, he gave you those territories, you hold them, ok
Our Elohim Yahweh gave us these, and we hold on to them.
the same
he was the commander of the Israelite army, not that God gave them to us, and you were given them by a stone idol that does not exist… no, no, no
yours is called Kemóš, he gave them to you and you're holding on to them, okay, there's nothing to say about that, ours gave us these and we're holding on to them
normal
Excuse me, if it's about Joba… please
What about Job?
I wanted to ask you to tell us something about him.
About the Book of Job
It is a nice literary work.
didactic, which teaches us how to behave towards this potentate
In the book of Job, it is said that Job is tempted by Satan.
and it is clearly stated there that Satan is one of the Elohim.
because Satan
is not some spiritual entity, the capo of demons
Then we'll see how they came up with the demons.
but Satan is the name of a certain function, he was a public prosecutor, a prosecutor
so there was one Elohim who performed that function in agreement with Yahweh
he did it for Yahweh, not against Yahweh
and the function of Satan was often performed by humans
who pro tempore, i.e. for the necessary period of time
they played the devil, i.e. the public prosecutor, against someone else
when that need disappeared, they stopped making Satan
as if we were to say, I'm going to be the prosecutor against you now
Then, after the process is over, I will no longer be a prosecutor.
Okay? So the book of Job rests on this peculiarity.
which helps us understand how
God sends one of his own and says: hey, go check on that one, see if he's really faithful to me
Don't kill him, but give him a good workout to see if he remains faithful to me.
So, do Satan against that one, and we'll see what happens.
Okay? Please.
this could also prove the function of darkness in relation to light on another level
And that?
because Satan is not Satan, as we were always told
but the fact that we still have that urge… …aha, I understand
that is another key to reading, the higher one, yes
exactly, which is of course possible
As I said at the beginning, I'm really wading through the mud of materiality.
and so I tell a biblical story, and then it is clear that this represents the fact that there is a conflict of forces within us
that Satan can be inside us
as a subsequent key to psychoanalytic reading, it is certainly possible, of course
Bible…
Anyway, here you go.
and as we have just seen, one was called Kemóš
Another name in the Bible is Milkom.
and these two were primarily concerned with these two nations, the Moabites and the Ammonites
so the family of Terah, Abraham's father, at least
was assigned to three elohim, Jacob is entrusted to Yahweh
To the Kemoshites… here the Masoretes actually made a substitution
The Moabites are entrusted to Chemosh and the Ammonites to Milcom.
They had other attributes here.
e.g. Baal-Peor and Baal-Zavuv
Baal-Peor was one of them.
he had a lot of sex and let her have her own
and in fact, the Israelites often abandoned Yahweh and fled to Baal-Peor, because it was a little more fun
"peor" is a Semitic root that means to show off, to show off genitals
Baal-Zavuv means Lord of the Flies
so, when we know at least one of their customs, which are clearly described in the Bible
it is not difficult to imagine that one of them, or even more of them, had a dwelling full of flies
If we have time, we'll say something more about it.
It is interesting that when theology took control of the text
Yahweh was made a god, transcendent, spiritual, omniscient, omnipotent, etc. etc. etc.
so she took his opponents and made demons out of them
Baal-Peor was transcribed into Greek as Baal-Fegor.
from which Belfagor was created
Baal-Zavuv became Beelzebub
So, they took Yahweh, made him a god, took the other elohim and made them devils.
It's all a fabrication.
I would like to know if there is a trace in the Old Testament or in other writings.
when the Elohim… if they left, and why they left
No, I've already answered that, the only trace is with Josephus Flavius.
when he says, heavenly chariots in the clouds… I said that 10 minutes ago
I would like to fast-forward what has been done with the Bible.
when someone appropriates it and says: wait a minute, let's shuffle the cards on the table so they serve us for a certain game
and such a consideration, Eva could have been the first GMO, as far as those who were supposed to remain in that microcosm are concerned
This needs clarification, the first GMO in the generation of Adams.
because the first GMO of the genus sapiens was at least 200,000 years before that
Sure, so the GMO was the intervention of that geneticist who said: they shouldn't be fertile.
Let's make them fertile… it's normal when they reproduce by cloning, so they are sterile with each other.
so the possibility of fertility will appear there
the gentlemen of the microcosm will say
You're not answering now, go away, they might have thought they couldn't handle it.
and in fact, certain things are happening outside of that microcosm
among other things, there will probably be a purer race there
they mix together, and if there was a term before
depicting human beings, women, having contact with animals, it is likely that various cross-breeding occurred
from which the human race with certain differences could have been formed
So the question is, based on these improvised considerations
Is there anyone here who has greater knowledge and who at some point said: here are some branches that came out of Eden?
I want to maintain control and will use the interpretation of the Bible as a scarecrow to control.
I lost the reins and I want to get them back.
and to restore a certain level… and that also explains some episodes of recent history, between human groups…
Jews, Nazism, etc., all these movements, the Aryan race, etc. …I'll tell you some interesting facts about Nazism and the Shoah.
In my opinion, this is true, in the sense that the reworking process started later.
which resulted in the creation of a different control system
a system of control operating through religion, which is much more effective than that practiced using weapons
No? Because when I'm being driven by someone armed
I harbor the thought that sooner or later I will take that weapon from him and turn it against him.
rule through religion, which primarily plays on one of the basic human needs, namely, that one does not want to die
He wants to hear that it won't end… and I don't know if that's true, I don't care.
so religions arise to provide this answer
The problem is that a person voluntarily surrenders to control in the form of religion.
that's why it's so effective
and here it is, by the way… when I read how the process of spiritualization of biblical interpretation began
in the period after the Babylonian exile, so we are around the 5th century BC.
It is interesting that around the 5th century BC, things were happening all over the planet that seemed to be interconnected.
there, where control was important, because the Middle East has always been important
the process of spiritualization of the interpretation of the relationship with the Elohim begins
In India, through Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism, the process of spiritualization of the interpretation of Vedic texts begins.
which, as they are now being studied, are increasingly considered to be scientific texts
there wasn't much spirit in them
In the same century, Lao-tzu and Confucius appeared in China.
as if there was some kind of plan here
who went around planet Earth and said: now we will introduce a new kind of control
The controls are very effective because, as we know, it has been working for several thousand years.
and here, this control system rebels a lot when someone tries to find out how things are.
So, this is how we understand it, we don't understand it, sorry.
it seems that we can hypothesize that at one point an idea arose
we will start introducing a different mechanism
and maybe someone from elsewhere had already tried it and knew that it worked very well
After all, Napoleon said that mankind can live without God, but not without religion.
chili is needed here, for many people, of course
we need someone to stand behind us and say: be calm, I'll tell you how things are, don't worry, I'll tell you
Things are like this: if you do this, then that will happen.
and so we live in peace
so when things are said that cause the end of this peace
people are rebelling
because they don't want the peace to end, they want to stay in that control system
and that's something when someone adds to the good, so-called. awareness
fear of a free life, of thinking with your own head, of living in uncertainty, many people say: I don't want uncertainty
I want someone to tell me how things are.
and on the contrary, it is necessary to think with your own head, i.e. take all this nonsense that I'm saying and make your own judgment about it
Then someone might say: it's a bunch of bullshit, ok, no problem.
especially when everyone achieves their own
certainties, and if his certainty gives him the opportunity for a good life, let him live according to it
There are people who tell me
…they write to me
I'm talking to Dad and… listen, how old is your father? Eighty… let him live in peace.
in your eighties, destroying someone's life with the idea that the Bible is probably not…
If he lives happily in his faith, then let him live and die happy in his faith.
if he dies with the thought that he will go to paradise…
You want to take away his idea, are you crazy?
What's the point? Let him live in peace!
For the same reason, I don't offer any conferences, I don't have the profession of a preacher.
I do conferences, the organizers know it because they call me.
When they stop calling me, I'll quit tomorrow morning and go back to riding my bike, like I used to.
before this turned my life upside down
So… thank you.
So, is there anyone here who wants to listen to this nonsense? Call me and I'll tell them.
…I also write on Facebook only on my wall and for my group
If you don't want to listen to my things… sorry, I mean "you" in general…
You just need to not visit my group's wall, period.
but then everyone comes to me and writes to me that I am…
but I don't go to the believers' bulletin boards to annoy them about what you believe… no, no, no
I'm writing at my place, do you want to listen to me? Then come to my place…
You don't want to listen to me? Then don't go, what's the problem with that?
What's the problem with that?
I tell my things to whoever wants to listen to them.
…don't you want to listen to them? …everyone should drink the coffee they want
Who cares? Am I supposed to proselytize?
No, I did these things out of curiosity.
They told me to tell them, so I'm telling them, period. Done.
You don't like it? Don't come to my house, don't come to my conferences, what's the problem with that?
space for another question
Hello, when you were talking about age
I would like to hear something about the psalm that says that even God dies.
Yes, Psalm 82
so we said, the problem with the Elohim is //their plurality//
So, we were saying, the plural expressing majesty, respect, abstractness, etc., etc.
Then someone says, when the verb is in the plural, it's pagan deities… all possible and imaginable explanations are invented.
and it is said: no, elohim is the plural of abstraction, so elohim always means an individual
So… have a nice evening, thank you… so
we saw that
since there are at least 3, Elohim by the name of Yahweh
so one plural abstraction, which is called Yahweh
one plural abstraction, which is called Milkom… one plural abstraction, which is called Kemosh
three individual plurals of abstraction, for us uneducated people, is three a singular or a plural, for us uneducated people, let's leave the educated aside
it's plural
Psalm 82 speaks of an assembly of elohim and says that one of them presides over that assembly.
and it is said that he is angry
angry at the Elohim because they are not ruling as they should
So if Elohim means God, we have to say that God is gathering with himself.
and he is angry with himself for not ruling as he should
so even those monotheistic theologians and exegetes who put not slices, but whole legs of Parma ham on their eyes
they cannot fail to see that elohim is plural
denoting a plurality of persons, and there precisely
the chairman of that assembly speaks to his own
and he says, yes, it's true… he lists a whole series of transgressions
and then he says, yes, it's true, for God's sake, you are elohim, but you will die like all adamim
Remember it, like don't think God more what
So God dies like all of Adam.
If it's God, which it obviously isn't, then it's clear they will die.
And do you know what the wise say? That Elohim means "judges" there.
So, I repeat, let's take Tex Willer, I read it as a child, when Tex Willer fought against Mephisto, that's the shaman…
we will make a fight between good and evil and construct what we want, just apply the same interpretative categories
when he says something, he means something else, and we create what we want
So, the plural of abstraction.
it represents the singular, when it is the plural, they are pagan deities
even the pagan deities cannot be there, so they will be judges…
If only you had a little honor…
…but who were the Anunnaki? And what was their role?
Anunnaki… so Elohim…
they were colonizers, rulers, and they behaved just like all ordinary colonizers and rulers do
in the Vedic scriptures
it is said that the universe is inhabited by 400,000 species of humanoids
many of whom have also come here
By the way, when we were talking about the Nephilim
in one of these stories… or just one of the possible places of origin of those
the star mass in Sanskrit is called Mrigashiras
which means the head of an antelope, which is located
let's say in the area of Betelgeuse, which is the right arm of Orion
No? The stars there are Betelgeuse, Bellatrix, Rigel, Saiph, Alnilak, Alnilam, Mintaka.
three stars of Orion's Belt
Bet-el, by the way, means "the house of El" in Hebrew.
Mrigashira is the head of an antelope, because Orion was a giant hunter from Boeotia.
he returns from hunting with a dead antelope on his shoulder, so it hangs there
So there is another indication that some of them certainly came from that area of the sky, which we call the constellation Orion.
here
I appreciate the restraint with which… I'll use the informal 'you' with you, sorry.
you are limiting yourself to describing what is in the Bible
I would like to touch on the present a little.
in connection with what Luca said
and we know that the internet presents us with a whole market of possibilities
where is everything… lately, in recent years, there has been talk of the Illuminati, Freemasonry, etc.
and videos are even available on YouTube
explaining what happened in 2001 with the Twin Towers
not explanatory, but further confirming information that has been available for years
that even in cinematography, in some minor shots
like the movie The Matrix and others
it is clearly visible that the date was highlighted…
There is one, I don't know if he is a scientist or a researcher, he calls himself Felce Meltillo.
who presents interesting esoteric readings on YouTube
and he claims that in the Bible there is a key to reading what concerns the event with the Twin Towers…
So, a few years ago, the books of an American journalist named Michael Drosnin were published.
which takes over the studies of a professor of mathematics at the University of Jerusalem named Eliyahu Rips
who identified some code in Genesis
other people identified other codes
and the question I always ask myself is
If this mathematical code exists, which of the biblical codices should it be applied to?
because if it is true that there are 2000 variants between the Masoretic Pentateuch and the Samaritan Pentateuch
it is clear that if I apply it to one, it will not work with the other
The same applies to the Qumran scrolls.
For example, between the Book of Isaiah from Qumran and the Masoretic one, there are 300 variants in this book alone, including entire words.
so it is clear that the code can work on one codex and not on the other
in these visions that Eliyahu Rips had, the only one that seems
verified by the fact that it was perhaps recorded before the event, the assassination of Prime Minister Rabin
where it seems that before that event it was actually said that Rabin would be killed
all the others were drawn up retrospectively
e.g. the fall of a comet on Jupiter, etc.
For example, I'm still waiting for them to kill Benjamin Netanyahu.
because his murder was predicted, but it did not happen within 1-2 years
So, I'm always careful with these things.
I'm always very careful, also because of how the Bible was formed.
Who inserted the code there? When she was working on it…
at least many tens of people
so I'm always very careful… it's something else
Are there any other questions? Otherwise, I'll continue…
It's another thing that a certain cinematography
it gives us certain hints, that seems quite obvious to me
that over the decades, cinematography has given us, and not only cinematography, but also some literature
It gives us a whole range of information, they're shoving it under our noses.
but because these are movies, or maybe comics, everyone can choose whether to believe it or not
but we have them served
we saw that the singular of Elohim is El, we all remember that
Whoever read Nemo Kid, like me when I was little, it was the name of the current Superman.
he should know that Nembo Kid was invented by two Jews
and that Nembo Kid's original name, by the way, they've now revived it, is Kal-El, which means "fast and light el"
His father's name is Jor-El, which means "light el" or "el's light".
so if el was to mean god
it would mean that the Jews wanted to say it was a "quick and easy god", but it doesn't mean god
It probably comes from the root "ul", which means "powerful".
So someone who is more powerful than a human, has more power, but it's el
and Nembo Kid was one el, for those two Jews
When you look at the first series of Star Trek, 30 years ago, it has all the technology we have today, all of it.
Everything is there.
chili they tell us these things decades in advance
So, at this moment, someone already has the technology that we will recognize in 30 or 40 years.
and it is a technology that is developing at a terrifying speed
in development and innovation, and this raises some suspicion
the fact that you are here
…that this book and the people associated with this book
it has a certain control, and we know what that control is
it leads us to think that there is a really big plan here
and a big plan
I don't know what time it is, I wanted to tell you something else about angels, but…
The Great Plan
or at least a suspicion of a grand plan
You know that the Shoah, history tells us that the Shoah killed 6 million Jews.
Nazism, we've already talked about it today…
in 1915
No, I'll put it this way.
when Eve does the thing she shouldn't do, the chief of the Elohim says: I will put enmity between your race and the race of the serpent
chili among the Nacha race
When Eve had her first son, she said "kaini ti", which means "I have acquired a son".
"and Yahweh", because they then put Yahweh everywhere, with many contradictions
in any case, "et Jahve" means "with Yahweh"
no "thanks"
but "with", literally, so she probably ate the first fruit
with one of those there, and the first son was the fruit of one of those there
So another one, the boss, says, between the pure race, Adam's, which interests me
and I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers;
This phrase is taken from Hitler's Mein Kampf.
who says that there are two races here, one made in the image…
and one was the generation of the serpent, which, of course, must be exterminated
starting with… I won't read it all to you because it would take us a lot of time
since 1915, and in fact, I recently received an article dated 1906
the most important American daily newspapers
The Sun, New York Times, Atlanta Constitution and Gazzetta di Montreal
they have been saying continuously since 1906 that
6 million Jews are to die in Europe
They keep saying 6, 6 million, 6 million.
and even, listen
September 8, 1919
Hitler was a corporal, a messenger in WWI.
The New York Times writes:
6 million Jews in Ukraine and Poland received the message that they would be completely exterminated, 1919
So from 1906 to 1945, there was someone here who knew that 6 million Jews simply had to die.
If I were a Jew, I would want to know the truth about this.
because it is not possible after 40 years
it was always written that it was 6 million. Jews are to die and at the end of World War II, 6 million Jews were dead
This is another thing that should be explained.
history must be rewritten from the first verses of Genesis to the present day
30 minutes?
I wanted to ask about angels, malakhims.
because I think it is important to recognize the function, and perhaps even survival outside the Old Testament, in the New Testament as well
so the term malachim is translated into Greek as angeloi
because the meaning is the same, it means "messengers", "couriers"
in the Bible, in the Old Testament, it is clear
and maybe even in the new one, that these individuals were made of flesh and blood
and they were also dangerous, because in several places it says: I met one of those and I'm still alive
it was very pleasant to meet them… I repeat: do angels exist? I'm not interested, I don't deal with that
Just don't let anyone tell me that these are the ones from the Bible, because there…
Biblical malichim were individuals of flesh and blood, probably a certain hierarchical degree
I don't know if they belonged to the same race or not, it's probable.
a hierarchical level slightly lower than the Elohim, something like officers and non-commissioned officers
By the way, they also had camps here, read Genesis 32:1
where it is said that Jacob will meet his father-in-law Laban…
…Laban felt that he had been deceived by Jacob several times
So they meet and are unable to fight, they agree.
they will straighten the stele, the milestone, and swear with words
we both swear that neither of us will cross this stone with hostile intentions against the other
and they say
to guarantee this oath
to guarantee this oath
Jacob enumerates the elohim of Abraham
Laban enumerates the elohim of Nahor
which were those who remained in Mesopotamia, which means
that this part of the family… for protection, we invoke our Elohim
Laban says: I invoke my elohim for protection
When they part, Jacob continues on his way and suddenly two malakhim come to meet him.
He will see them, he will immediately understand the situation, no one has to explain anything to him.
and says: this is the camp of the Elohim… and he takes the horn
and he will name the place, and you have it in your Bibles at home, because it is usually not translated
And why is it not translated? Because if it were translated, someone would ask: what does it mean?
He called the place Mahanaim, but Mahanaim means two camps.
So when in Italian you say: he called the place Tábor, someone will answer: so what?
It's God's camp, so that means God had a camp, he probably had one A there, because he was alone…
and he called the place Two Camps
exegete Rashi of Troyes, who is one of the most important exegetes in Jewish history
in the commentary of that verse, he says that Jacob saw the camps of two armies there
who guarded the borders, one line on one side and the other on the other, so they also had camps here
to protect the borders, and Jacob and Laban, the descendant of Nahor
what will they do? They will say: in confirmation of my oath, I invoke my Elohim, and Jacob says: I invoke mine.
and there were those two camps
The Malakhims were so dangerous.
that in one Dead Sea Scroll, in the treatise Berachot, or in the treatise on blessings
it is written that girls, young, with long hair
who attend the assemblies where the malakhim are present
she has to cover her head to protect herself from them
Tertullian, one of the Church Fathers, in De virginibus velandis… good evening, thank you, good evening
in De virginibus velandis he writes that young girls
participants in gatherings where so-called angels are present
they have to cover their heads so as not to sexually arouse those angels
Paul in 1 Corinthians says that women participating in the assembly
must have a covering on their head because of the angels
not out of respect for God
because they were dangerous, sexually aroused and…
…
So, here you are.
they were not a very happy meeting
An interesting thing, explaining this, and it's related to another characteristic of those gentlemen.
that those gentlemen wanted to smell the smoke there
a certain type of burnt fat, because the smoke calmed them down
because he was full of endorphins… and I've already received a lot of scientific studies on this
which are sent to me spontaneously, without me requesting them
without me asking for them
I have it somewhere here.
It was somewhere here.
where they send me chemical formulas directly
the chemical formulas of endorphins present in those smokes that calmed the Elohim
because they probably had a more developed sense of smell than we do
we know that we secrete sex hormones, pheromones
one of the centers of pheromone production is the hair shaft
So long hair, when it moves in the air, releases billions of pheromone molecules.
so someone with an exceptionally developed sense of smell, just like a dog can smell a female in heat
they smell pheromones, they get sexually aroused, so it was better for girls with long hair to have their hair covered
I'm actually unlucky because I don't emit pheromones.
So, please?
is related, and how, because Muslim women say they cover themselves for their protection, so as not to excite men
it originated from that
May I?
blah blah
I'm sorry.
…the Bible says that the Jewish people were accompanied by a cloud during the exodus in the desert.
with a column
with a pillar… and fire by night
was accompanied by a column from which Yahweh watched over
the question of that column sometimes states
into error, because we imagine a column as something vertical
but a column is a cylinder, and no one says it was vertical
So, during the day it looked as if it was covered by a cloud.
At night, the energy it emitted was visible, so the fire was visible.
when we read the book of the prophet Zechariah
So he tells us that one day, when he was accompanied by a malach, or angel, who explained some things to him
and Zechariah sees a flying megillah approaching, "megillah" means scroll
flying cylinder
a, so the cylinder is actually a column
it was the means by which Yahweh watched over his own
and he gave them a sign, so
when the column moved, they broke camp and followed it
and where the column stopped, they set up camp again, as if to say, now we're going there, I'll go ahead of you
He moved there, stopped, and they made a camp there.
So the Megila was a flying cylinder, this one was 20 meters long /-/cubits/-/ and had a diameter of 10, that's what the Bible tells us.
Zacharias sees another interesting thing, right behind this flying cylinder, he saw a flying "efah", this fortunately does not translate
because no one knows how to translate it, so no one is really translating it
because efa is also a unit of measurement for grain
but this must have been something bigger, because it is said that this one came closer
It had one hatch, the hatch opened and a woman was sitting inside.
So, the EFA will fly in, stop, the hatch will open, and there's a woman inside.
another woman will arrive, they will both fly away together
And Zacharias says to Malachi: Where are they taking it?
and the angel answers him with the words: they are taking it to the land of Shinar, which is Sumer for the Bible
where they are building a platform for it, on which it will be placed
on which it will be placed
It couldn't be clearer…
you need to close your eyes to…
close your eyes
Sorry, Mauro, I wanted to ask you.
when you were talking about the relationship between man and nature, that
man on Earth is like a stranger, he is not
adapted, right? You used this term.
I don't agree with this view.
I want to tell you this, okay, I'll tell you in short
Western civilization has evolved into this schism between man and nature.
but it is the only one, because when we look at other civilizations, at least in the past
that split wasn't that big, they didn't have Descartes, the Bible, right? that determined us a lot
So I'll give you an example, you'll know more about it.
In the Amazon rainforest, the natives still live in full and harmonious contact with nature.
and that's not to mention the Andes, the Aborigines, the desert Bedouins, etc.
How do you look at it after all these years of studying? That a person is completely unadapted.
anthropologically, in certain environments, such as "ours", there is certainly an unadapted person
but not in all of them…
So, let's look at Papua New Guinea, where there are about 740, 750 tribes living at the Neolithic level.
if they didn't have what we call technological prostheses here
basic weapons that every native makes, so they wouldn't live
it's not just a question of advanced technology
They, the natives, and the Yanomami all have bows and arrows.
while the animal has claws and fangs when it goes hunting, we no longer have them
We need at least one knife, flint.
we have to make a spear with a flint tip
So, when we put everything together,
In any case, we have to protect ourselves from the weather.
We have to protect ourselves from the sun.
…so even the most primitive civilizations
If there were nothing but flint tips and cutting knives, he would have to make them, because otherwise…
A human has to cut to do something, an animal doesn't.
Okay? In this sense.
relationship… I'm sorry
Is there any relationship between the smoke pleasing to the Elohim and Baal-Zevuv?
The Lord of the Flies… yes, because they required it here…
a certain type of meat, a certain type of fat
and the fat they wanted was this one, the translation of the Italian bishop's… good evening, thanks
translation of the Italian Bishops' Conference
fat surrounding the viscera, everything above it, both kidneys with their fat
fat around the hips and around the liver lobe, which you cut off above the kidneys, that's what God says
So it gives precise butchering instructions, so I want that bacon there.
and it also says in Leviticus 7: if you catch someone using this fat, you will kill them, because the fat is mine
and he had 2 animals killed every day, all year round, so that he would have that smell in his home all day, day and night
so the fat had to keep burning there
one of the Sumerian-Akkadian tablets says, because they really liked meat here
it says there that
Enlil with his wife and one of his sons
they almost died from intoxication with spoiled meat
and so they issued, let's say, a kind of bulletin
with instructions on how to process meat
In that bulletin, it was repeated: cleaned meat, cleaner meat.
so the fact that they were very dependent on meat here
because they were constantly surrounded by meat and burnt fat
we can easily imagine that flies…
they simply multiplied, and how
Okay?
Mauro… what would you tell us about the Ark of the Covenant, what was this machine?
yes
with the ark of the covenant, sorry Mauro, that's a really nice question
We'll close this here, thank you.
So I won't tell you this anymore…
however
These are the studies that were sent to me by doctors on the topic of smoke.
I have already published something in my book, I will just read you the end.
The decision to roast only meat and only a certain type of fat, as the Bible tells us, has obvious scientific reasons.
all those chemical formulas, etc., etc. are here.
No, animal-like.
children, because children have… we are born with so-called surface fat
that's the fat on top
which, when burned, produces a lot of smoke, while the fat in the muscles tends to dissolve
This one doesn't melt, the surface fat smokes a lot, so from this point of view it's very productive.
I don't know if they used that smoke there… sure, but I don't know…
I really don't know.
the Ark of the Covenant… so the Ark of the Covenant
it was a tool that probably produced and certainly stored energy
It had a dual function, it was used as a weapon in battle.
although the Bible does not explain to us exactly how it was used as a weapon in battle
The Bible only tells us that it was used by trained personnel.
by appropriately trained personnel dressed in a certain way, they were practically inside a Faraday cage
by the way, priests, as we call them
who entered the innermost parts of Yahweh's dwelling, where certain things happened
they had to be…. that's really very interesting
they had only a shirt on their bodies, and then other clothes on top of it
this thing with the flax, that's another thing they're sending me
a number of materials… it just has a number of properties that protect against electricity
electrostatic energy, etc.
and what's interesting is that someone wrote that to me
that when linen is combined with wool, it loses its properties
Do you know what is written in the Bible, what Yahweh says?
Do not use with wool only.
Do not mix them.
It's unbelievable, unbelievable.
So, the Ark of the Covenant, when it was carried into battle, was probably so charged
that in one case it is written that the Israelite army had to march at a distance of 2000 cubits, or 1 kilometer
no one who was not authorized, properly trained, and protected was allowed to touch it unintentionally
because he received a fatal blow, but not that someone killed him, the ark killed him, he was not allowed to touch it
it had another function through two systems at the top
which the Bible calls cherubim, because the root KRV denotes that which covers
and these were on the cover, so they covered the ark
there was one on each side, each had two side elements, two panels
and the Bible tells us that when Moses spoke to Yahweh, he heard Yahweh's voice between those panels
when Yahweh was away
so it was a tool for remote communication, in the camp
when they were outside the camp, they used another instrument called an ephod
which was a kind of bib worn by the wearer of the ephod
and who wanted to… e.g. David, where there are at least 2 opportunities when he wanted to talk to Yahweh
He said to the one carrying the ephod: bring me the ephod
and only when he had the ephod near him could he speak with Yahweh, because when he did not have the ephod, he could not speak with Yahweh
efod… iPhone…
look at the drawing of the ephod, and look at the iPhone
Apple has a bitten apple as its symbol.
Wow.
considering the hour and the customs of the Piacenza residents
I believe, so to speak, also for protection
your lack of interest in the commercialization of yourself
that I must, that I must ask for applause at the end of this meeting…
So, with short hair, one can have some success.
…
So, an aperitif awaits you downstairs…
There are also books by Mauro, which he will surely be happy to sign for you.
don't overwhelm him with endless conversations…
I wanted to say one thing.
Director Franco Scepi is here with us, and I believe that starting today, he will begin working on a new film about the history of the Bible.
Thanks again to everyone… Emanuel Perotti… Spazio Tesla association… good evening everyone

Lecture 2016 Part 1

https://youtu.be/780XYrmnn8o

BEYOND THE LIMITS OF MAN 1
blah blah blah
Mauro Biglino
We'll give him the floor right away.
Good.
Good, thank you.
I always enjoy coming here, I really enjoy it.
Really, this is not captatio benevolentiae, I mean it sincerely.
Look, since we're running late,
I can fit it into 15 minutes, I'll tell you something.
we will make a general consideration
standing outside all questions related to translations, interpretations, polemics, exegesis, philology, etc.
a general consideration based on the fact that for months I've been saying that I'm doing the stupidest job in the world
and the fact that I am interpreting what is written
which might not be necessary to do, because it would be enough to read…
and everyone would understand that the Bible we have at home
but this general consideration is here
we are talking about… we all, some more and some less, grew up in this Western religion, Christianity
and if we think about it a little
Let's take a few facts, first of all
The root of this religion consists of the Old Testament, that root
because then, on this root, the stem of the new law is grafted
Then we will look at some interesting things about this chapter of the new law, today we will say a little about it.
so the root here is this set of books
about whom we know nothing
except for the fact that we have some written pieces
chili papyrus, parchment… codices…
We don't know who wrote them, we don't know when they were written.
We don't know how they were originally written, we don't know how they were originally read.
When I say we don't know how they were originally written, I'm just reminding you of what Israeli biblical scholars say.
professors of Jewish universities, e.g. in Jerusalem
they say, they write, that the only certainty we have is
that the Bible we have today is not the one that was originally written
because every time they rewrote it, whether by dictation
or simply by copying it, they changed it
So this is the only certainty we have.
So, no one knows how it was originally written.
In the Old Testament, there is not a single sentence, not one, that we could say with absolute certainty was written by that particular person.
nor when it comes to books attributed to an author
not even in the case of the book of Isaiah
we cannot say that Isaiah wrote it, what's more, we know that Isaiah did not write it
We already know that.
but we also say that it was written by Isaiah, because it fits
but this is written even in Catholic encyclopedias
not in those intended for households
e.g. in one of the most important Catholic encyclopedias, published by the Library of Christian Doctrine (LDC)
on which only papal scholars work
so it is written by super-experts and used by them as well
it is written that chapters 1-39 of the book of Isaiah are attributed to him, because we have no serious reasons to deny it
not because we know that he wrote them
except for books 13-23, which we know he did not write
Chapters 40-55 were written by Deutero-Isaiah
which is a nice invention, in Greek deutero means second
So, the Second Isaiah, because we don't know what to call him.
The only certainty we have is that the second one was written 2 centuries after the first one.
the last chapters were written by Trito Isaiah, who wrote several decades after the second one
such is the book of Isaiah
in which there should even be some messianic prophecies
which should concern
or it should refer, I say "should" because it is not true
referring to Jesus, but that's not true, ask the Jews if they refer to Jesus, ask them
they will immediately tell you: no
So, this is the root.
e.g. the first 5 books, i.e. the Pentateuch
is traditionally attributed to Moses
but everyone knows that Moses did not write them
if only because the Hebrew language did not exist in Moses' time
so he couldn't have written the books
Furthermore, they contain things that Moses certainly could not have written.
thirdly, because it is known that the book of Deuteronomy
maybe even Leviticus, but Deuteronomy, which is one of the first 5 books
was written by the priests of the Israelite kingdom after the Assyrians entered their kingdom and they fled
to the Kingdom of Judah, let's say at the time of the so-called religious reform of King Josiah, that's around 620 BC
They wrote the book of Deuteronomy.
then they faked that they found it in the walls of the temple, so they could tell the people: this is the book that Moses wrote
So, deceiving the people is not the exclusive property of the Holy Roman Catholic Apostolic Church, it has already begun…
many centuries earlier, by priestly castes
tradition, however, continues to say that the Pentateuch was written by Moses
So we don't know anything, and that's the root of the problem.
about which we say something without knowing anything
that he was inspired by God and that often, when one thing is written there, he wanted to say another
and that is the root
then there are representatives, supporters, officials, advocates
religious thinking, which was constructed on the basis of those texts
Chilean church
over the course of 2000 years, to put it simply
we have popes, cardinals, bishops, theologians, priests, catechists
who preach truths
which should be based on that book
without knowing the language in which it was written
and so they tell us based on translations
translations that have been constantly changing over the centuries
which are still changing, and which will continue to change
Now I will tell you a few words that will finally disappear from the Bible.
finally disappear, so
We don't know anything about the root.
those who preach it do not know the language in which it was written
then they say, well, but there is a Bible written in Greek, so at least this, priests in the seminary study Greek, yes
when I held a meeting in Milan on March 6 with Catholic, Jewish, Protestant and Orthodox theologians
Chief Rabbi, representative of Jewish culture, head of the Jewish community in Turin
he said that the Bible written in Greek, i.e. the famous Bible of the Seventy
they consider it a disaster for mankind
However, all of Orthodox Christianity is based on that Bible, which, according to the Jews, is a disaster for mankind.
Do you understand?
thirdly
There are about 1 billion and 200/300 million believers in the world.
if I really squint my eyes
1 billion and one hundred million believers blindly believe
to what is to be written in the book, which they themselves have never read
Is it true? Or is it not?
So, we don't know anything about the book.
those who talk about it do not know the language in which it was written
Those who believe it have never read it.
So, if we look at it from the outside,
Should we say or not say that it's madness?
if it were instead of the largest organization in the world
It was a sect of 150 people, with one guru who says these things.
that guru would already be on trial for abusing human trust and would have been deprived of his legal capacity
but it is the largest organization in the world
and that's how we maintain it
but
A while ago, I was listening here about the distinction between conscience and awareness, etc.
I don't reach that level of conscience, sorry, I don't reach that level of awareness, but at least let's be aware of what it's about.
because it's about this
You understand? That's the reality.
and that has nothing to do with translations… we can discuss for decades
about each individual term, we can, after all, it's fun
but the essence is here
regardless of the meaning of the individual terms
and this is what we need to think about first and foremost
because otherwise we are really moving forward
and we act as if it were here
orthopedic surgeons' consultation
who have an X-ray of their hand in front of them
where there is a hint of something on the bone of the finger joint
and they are discussing whether the hint is a real fracture or just a crack…
but they forget that the article belongs to a hand, the hand to an arm, the arm to a body, which was run over by a truck
Then let's talk about the mark on the fingertip, why not?
but let's not forget that it belongs to the body that was run over by a truck
such is the reality of the facts
on March 6, after two years of effort, not mine, because I did nothing
the efforts of the Uno Editori publishing house to organize this meeting
And why two years? Because the meeting was supposed to be with those who have weight.
chili meetings must be with those who know
The meeting must be with those who are officially recognized representatives of the individual schools of thought based on that book.
not with those who call themselves exegetes
but they are not recognized by anyone, they have no publications
maybe they are really good, but you can't invite them
and so it wasn't easy
to find exponents… I can tell you that the first person invited was Monsignor Ravasi, the Minister of Culture of the Vatican
but he was busy, we couldn't find a date that would suit him, so we went down a notch…
Professor of Theology at the Faculty of Theology of the University of the North
Orthodox Archbishop, Chief Rabbi
and as for the Protestant environment, one of the foremost Italian biblical scholars, i.e. one who signs dictionaries
publishes and signs dictionaries of Biblical Aramaic and Hebrew, so he is really top-notch
Okay? And why?
I repeat, because it is necessary to talk to those who know.
because otherwise you talk to those who parrot catechesis, which is useless, absolutely useless
the whole meeting, it's already done, it's done in the sense of the transcript
will be provided free of charge to all who want it
the entire transcribed text
word for word, including pauses, including the recording of applause, everything
so that everyone can verify what came out of it
I have to tell you that if, before, before the meeting
they asked me what I expected
I would really, in a moment of great optimism,
he said 30% of what came out of it, and I would be satisfied with that
I honestly tell you that at one point I asked myself what I was actually doing there.
They said everything.
And now we'll look at some fundamental things, but really fundamental.
with regard to what I said a moment ago, regarding the root and the New Testament stem
because in these years a lot of people tell me, ok
we somehow understood what the Old Testament is about
But the new one?
If one has truly understood what the Old Testament is, then one must say: therefore, the New Testament as well.
ne: but the new one? so the new one too
because that is the case, because the new one exists
if the old one is what they told us
if the Old Testament is not what they told us
the new one melts like snow in the sun
This is something that needs to be realized.
I'm not saying that Jesus never existed, for God's sake.
it can be safely admitted that the historical figure of this
The Judean messianic rabbi existed, but what they built on him is melting like snow in the sun.
if the Old Testament is not what they told us
Let's take a few phrases… and how is it here today? Will there be any more speaking in the afternoon?
Okay, I don't know.
I am told: speak, and I speak, then I am told: stop, and I stop, and that's it.
and so
we will look at these things with regard to time, your questions, etc.
At the beginning of the meeting, there were 4 questions the same for everyone, 5 minutes for each to answer.
I will not read your answers here, you will find them in the transcript.
certainties about God, the first question was: what certainties do we have about God?
Jew, Ariel Di Porto:
it is not possible, at least in certain aspects
to speak of any evidence concerning our knowledge of God, i.e. to believe in God, is a certain axiom
If you want to: believe… If you don't want to…
Valdesian biblical scholar:
I cannot prove what a certain source of knowledge is, I cannot prove it.
But if you want, here is the trust that God's voice has truly been heard in those scriptures.
my fundamentalist cousins, that's talking about Catholics
those who believe they are doing God a service by deifying the scriptures are practicing idolatry of paper
When I wrote the book The Bible Is Not a Holy Book, they came after me.
He says: whoever deifies these scriptures, commits idolatry of paper.. that is absolutely evident
but here, only those who know can say it out loud
because when you meet…
I will use the term they use themselves: with sheep
they perform idolatry of paper and do not know that those above them say these things
That's why I had to meet with those gentlemen.
Professor of Theology, Priest:
I would like to say, somewhat bluntly, that it is necessary to remove the certainty about God.
because if we had certainty about God, God would not exist
Shall we go to eat?
What should I say, I'll sign it, right?
I'll sign, I'll sign everything.
The second question was
I am synthesizing…
Second question: so should the Bible be read literally or allegorically-metaphorically?
because it has been thrown in my face since 2010
You are so uneducated, Biglino, and that's the truth, I'm learning.
You are so uneducated that you don't even know that the Bible needs to be read metaphorically-allegorically, ok, fine.
The first verse of Genesis, in the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth.
it doesn't mean that here, but we'll pretend it does
It's clear that it's an allegory, isn't it?
those people who didn't know how… we don't know either, but…
they didn't know how the universe came into being, so they created an allegory of someone who created it
No, no, that's literal… how so?
So how is it? Explain it to me, give me the rule.
Tell me, so that I understand, how to distinguish between verses and passages that are to be read literally and those that are to be read metaphorically, and how to do it.
and that rule does not exist
because the selection is made with individual verses, if the verse is liked, it is literal, if it is not liked, it is allegorical
but that's the reality
Such is the reality.
of that madness, which I told you about in the first 8 minutes
So, the first verse is, of course,
literal, because God had to create, surely
now we will see that it is not possible
Ariel Di Porto, Chief Rabbi:
The first verse of Genesis is very problematic.
because when you read his interpretation, you will find that everything contradicts itself
Instructions for reading passages in an allegorical way come from the rabbinic tradition.
some rabbi will say, this one is so…
…this is a great wealth of Jewish culture, so it's not a joke, it's not sarcasm, one proverb says: 2 Jews 3 opinions
and that is a great wealth, because it means that they are not closed in dogmatism
and when you read the Talmud, it says: when you meet a teacher who tells you one thing
and then you go to the second one, who will tell you something different, so go to the third one, so that he tells you something else
This is a cultural asset because it is freedom from dogma.
so naturally, every rabbi will say: this is literal, this is allegorical
Valdesian biblical scholar:
So here I have no doubt.
the Bible is not to be read allegorically, if we understand allegory in the technical sense, as it is used in the tradition of the church
Isn't that what I've been saying since 2010?
The allegory is thus destroyed, the Bible is to be read for what is written.
Since 2010, I've been saying, "Let's pretend" that when those gentlemen wanted to say something, they wanted to say it.
I at least say let's do it like
because I have no certainty, no truth
The authors of the Bible, for example, wanted to metaphorize things that were not metaphorical before, ok
I can sign it all the time
I can sign it.
when talking about translations
if anyone here has a Bible and can turn to Genesis 17
I hope I'll have it here, because at the last conferences
I had some notes, but another part of them disappeared.
This time I came out better, because before they stole them all from me, so…
Genesis 17: Abraham was 99 years old when the Lord, when Yahweh appeared to him and said: I am the almighty God
when you take the Jerusalem Bible
which is the Bible of the Dominican exegesis of the École Biblique de Jérusalem
there is one note that is not in regular Bibles, like in this Bible of the Christian Family
there is a note on the word "almighty"
take the 2013 edition, which is full of interesting notes
and it says there that the translation "almighty" is inaccurate
because Shaddai does not mean almighty, in the best hypothesis it means "Lord of the Steppe"
So
The word almighty is in the Bible 91 times.
every time it is in the Old Testament, in Hebrew it is shaddai
which all scholars know does not mean omnipotent
Everyone knows it.
How is it translated in the Bibles? Always as Almighty.
Why? Because theologians have determined that the Bible must speak of God.
and God cannot but be omnipotent, so he has to put it somewhere
but here, in Hebrew, the Almighty is not called
and they know that the Almighty is not written there
But if they know that, why do they keep writing it there?
if they know it and still write it there
so they don't publish one possible interpretation
they publish arbitrary fake news
which is different from the question of possible interpretations
because the omnipotent is not among the possible interpretations
Another interpretation is the Lord of the Mountain.
either the Lord of the mountain, according to the Babylonian "šaddu"
or the Lord of the Steppes
which is more likely based on reading the Bible, because the steppe region was entrusted to Him
You understand? So in all cases we have it translated as almighty, but we know that this is a wrong translation.
If it is wrong, let's remove it.
I say it more and more at conferences, because it has to be removed
as we are not sure, let them not translate it, let them write El Shaddai, then let everyone interpret it as they wish
Okay? It could also mean Piripacchio.
with "r", I won't say it out of respect for my friends here…
who explained to me that I don't distinguish well between "r" and "l"
They are old friends who are laughing there.
So, let them put El Shaddai there.
but don't translate it as omnipotent, because that's wrong, it's not there
…when the Orthodox archbishop speaks, he says: but I think that we all agree with what Mauro says
that in many cases it is necessary to overlook biblical texts, to overlook the text, where the meaning of the word is often lost
as in the case of the term almighty, which has nothing to do with the original
Valdesian biblical scholar:
Sure, I sometimes notice that there is a bit too much Christian preconception in the choice of terms for some passages.
there is a bit too much Christian preconception there
that's a very elegant way of saying: we're putting incorrect translations in there
we are stating the obvious when we say that many mistakes need to be corrected
in our translations… but if we're stating the obvious
How much does it cost to call the editor and say: the Almighty does not belong there
if the doors are open and broken
We should no longer read about the Almighty in the Bible.
we don't have to read it there anymore
I understand that if the Lord of the Steppe is put there, some believer may have a problem with it, because they will say, "My God."
But if this is what it means, gentlemen, and we want to translate it, then let's put this here, or let's not translate it at all, period.
but that's not all, but that's not all
We'll do it this way.
Dr. Daniele Garrone, who is one of the editors
the dictionary of biblical Aramaic and Hebrew of the British Bible Society, which was sitting there to my left
Shaddai is left there
sat to my left, the biblical scholar whom I quote
So in Hebrew.
…in the Bible, you still find the term "eternity"…
because the Bible speaks of God
God is eternal, therefore eternity… just like with the omnipotent, eternity must be there.
So the term that means, which is translated as eternity, is this one.
Can you read this? What is written here under the term Olam?
do not translate as "eternity"
So, in dictionaries it is written
…this is the dictionary of the British Bible Society
do not translate as eternity, because it does not mean eternity
Okay? And how do you find it translated? Always like an eternity.
The Italian edition is from 2001.
the French one is from 1991, the English one is of course even older
So
from 1991 /-/2001/-/ the Italian edition states that olam should not be translated as eternity
so from 1991 /-/2001/-/ to 2016, that is 15 years, it is still translated as eternity, when it is known that it is not eternity
Excuse me?
I'm not a born mathematician, thanks.
25 /-/15/-/ they translate it as eternity
even though they know, because it is written in the dictionary, that it should not be translated as eternity
and when we were talking about it here, Dr. Garrone said: I'm surprised that Biglino is surprised by it
says: because
all dictionaries, all major dictionaries mention this, including theological dictionaries
and I told him: Doctor Garrone, I am surprised for two reasons
1) because for the first time I see written in the dictionary: do not translate it like this
2) because despite that, you still translate it that way
So let's stop, basta.
Do we know that it doesn't mean eternity? Let's remove the word eternity from the Bible, let's remove it, because it's not there.
We know that it doesn't mean omnipotent? Let's remove the word omnipotent from the Bible, because it's not there.
What are we waiting for?
There is a long interview on YouTube that a journalist from Rome, who came to Turin, did with me.
and before that he was with the Chief Rabbi of Rome, Riccardo Di Segni, with whom he did an interview about me
and in a conversation with me, he also mentioned some passages…
where it is said, but we have always known the things I am saying here
when the topic of eternity came up, when he was asked, he said: it's here, there, that one, i.e. Biglino
who says it doesn't mean eternity, and the answer isn't even transcribed there, you can see in the video how he says: and who says it's eternity?
How?
But if we all know that it doesn't mean eternity, should we remove it from the Bible? If it's not there?
and not only eternity is not there
because here it is, of course, part of a whole range of concepts related to what we call metaphysics, right?
and when a Catholic theologian speaks, he says, for example, that in the Semitic world and culture
there are no philosophical metaphysical concepts
there is no concept of eternity there
nor immortality
and the concept of creation from nothing is something that is completely outside the Semitic mentality
creation from nothing is not there
So, when there is no omnipotent, when we have no certainty about God
In the Bible, there is no omnipotence, in the Bible, there is no eternity, in the Bible, there is no immortality, in the Bible, there is no creation from nothing, so what are we talking about?
about the madness I was talking about in the first 8 minutes
chili is here something that was built on that book, as if that book had never been written
because they read what they want in it
and we have documented that they read what they want in it
because when you talk to those who know, and they talk
in peace, without arguments… and actually, after that meeting, many people wrote to me
that they were actually disappointed because they expected us to fight to the death
which is the stupidest thing in the world, because in tears and blood no one gets anything, people just argue and compete
but when people talk calmly and everyone says their piece
but when everyone says their piece, we'll understand everything
when talking to those who know
when you talk to those who are below, who parrot catechesis, there is really no dialogue
that's why the meeting was being prepared for 2 years, and during those 2 years I was getting:
Biglino doesn't want any meetings, Biglino is afraid of meetings, Biglino avoids meetings
No, Biglino wanted a meeting with the representatives.
because if we invited someone else, they would say: who did you invite there? these guys…
Nobody knows…. No, they are recognized here, and how
We need to talk to these people here.
so all these things are not there
and one of the elements, or indeed the most important element, on which all Christianity is based
is that we are structurally born sinners
we are born tainted by original sin
Thanks to this, there must be some structure here, which through rituals
and through his mediation, he will reconcile us with the supreme leader
because otherwise we are condemned to eternal death
It is called "eternal".
so there was a question about original sin
Chief Rabbi:
I have a bit of a problem talking about it… because for Jews, original sin doesn't exist, because it's not in the Bible.
I have a bit of a problem talking about it because I don't want to hurt the feelings of others.
There was a Protestant, a Catholic, an Orthodox Christian…
as for the burden of original sin on humanity, in the Jewish tradition
it is a much weaker burden than what we find among Catholics… it's simply not there
and the others actually overtook him in the bend
Listen to what the Valdese Bible scholar says:
So, original sin is a concept that Paul created, he started to invent it.
and then, so to speak, codified it
Augustine, Saint Augustine
I will not comment on Augustine of Hippo.
So it was Paul who began to elaborate on this concept in the letter to the Romans.
Valdesian biblical scholar, the one who signs those dictionaries:
So, between Genesis 3… that is, the sin committed by Adam and Eve
and Romans 5
where the Apostle Paul says that death entered the world through man
no connection
In fact, when we read Paul, we may ask ourselves where he got that idea?
So Christianity exists on the fact that we are sinners, that we must be reconciled, etc.
and he says: we can ask ourselves where Paul got that idea?
when you read…
I might have it here, I have some left.
still in the Jerusalem Bible, in the note to Genesis 3
it is written… you know how Adam and Eve are expelled…
This is not about punishing a person for a sin committed, but about a preventive measure…
and that's clear, read the bible… read it
The Elohim will drive them out because they are afraid of the power they were beginning to gain.
But that's clear, there is no punishment for any guilt there.
as if you said: now it would be better if we sent them away, because these people can become very dangerous for us
So, watch out.
preventive measures
it is not necessary to look for everything that was read there later
whether it is a recapitulating reading of the Bible, as Paul did in the letter to the Romans
or about the dogmatic formulations of the church
you don't have to look for them there… because they are not there
because these are fabrications of the church
but it's written here
it is written
and he says: but where did Pavel find that idea?
and a Catholic theologian:
I would separate that concept from the clan concept of sin.
meaning that if the parents sinned, the children bear the consequences
something like that is widely denied in the new law
although, unfortunately, it was widely used in theology
What was I doing there?
but this happened again two weeks ago, at a conference
I arrived there by car, half an hour in advance… hey…
There will be a priest at your conference who has some comments.
so you'll have 15 minutes… I say ok, that's all right
and the priest, when I spoke, said: he's stating the obvious
Someone from the audience got up, I swear, you can see it on the recording.
Excuse me, I'm starting to get a little frustrated because every time Biglino meets one of you
you're just saying that Biglino is stating the obvious
So how is it?
So the original sin is not there.
They say it everywhere.
On the contrary, those who advocate catechesis say: we are sinners, so every morning 3x Pater, 3x Ave, 3x Gloria
because we are born with a stain on our soul
1854
Pius IX.
declared the Marian dogma of the Immaculate Conception
For many Christians, this means that the Madonna conceived Jesus without that thing which is sexual intercourse.
Okay? No, the Immaculate Conception means that the Madonna is the only human being in the entire human history.
who was born without the stain of original sin
But what if there is no original sin?
that dogma dogmatizes untruth
or, in the best hypothesis, dogmatizes nothing
because we are all born immaculate
1858
Bernadette Soubirous begins to see the one she calls Aquerò in the Pyrenean dialect.
which means Tam ta, because she never called her Madonna, she only became Madonna when the church took over everything
He calls her Aquerò.
and 4 years after the declaration of the false Marian dogma, Aquerò says, what a coincidence, I am the Immaculate Conception
But did that Madonna know what she was talking about? Or was it not a Madonna?
and they made her say something she never said
if there is no original sin, this dogma dogmatizes nothing
Madonna confirmed nothing, so everything needs to be rewritten.
nothing can be done about it, they have to resign
they have to resign, because that's how it is…
How much do we have left? So I know if I should start something else.
So
Tell me, you who are in charge here, I'll click my heels.
ok
So, as for…
if in the Old Testament there is no God the Father, about whom we have no certainty, what then, when we read the Old Testament, we have one certainty
that, fortunately, there is no God there, there is That One
Then, whether God exists is a problem that each of you must resolve through your faith and your conscience.
Don't ask me about it, because I don't know.
I don't even have the certainty of atheists, I have no certainty… and actually, there are a lot of atheists among my enemies.
because in many ways they are as dogmatic as the fideists
So go to someone who knows, I don't know how things are.
I do a stupid job, I'm just telling you what's written, that's the job of the biggest idiot in the world.
but if God the Father is not in the Old Testament
and if there is no original sin in the Old Testament
So who sent Jesus Christ here? And what did he come here to do?
because Jesus Christ came to free us from the consequences of the stain of original sin
But what if the stain isn't here?
If this stain isn't here, he came for nothing.
as a historical figure, when he was active, he operated with very precise goals
which, however, do not concern humanity
The Christ-like figure is the figure of the Son of God according to Greek thought.
because talking about him as the son of God, according to Jewish thinking, is nonsense
because no one can be the son of God in Jewish thought, but in Greek thought it is possible
and the gospels are the fruit of Greek thought, not Jewish
are the fruit of Greek thought… the Christ-like figure
So, Jesus Christ
we'll pretend it existed
What did they say about him at the beginning?
before Constantine gathered the followers of the 30/40/50 different Christianities that were preached
and know that they were not even in agreement on the name
the name Jesus, they were not in agreement
and actually in the last book, where I analyze
events of Jesus' life, I always call him Joshua
because his name was Joshua
and all those Josuas in the Bible we call Joshua
only he must be Latinized like Jesus, because he must be distinguished
he was… by the way, that was the most common name
he was one of the thousands of Joshua's of his time
and that is why I call him Joshua in the book
what is the correct name
So here we have
2nd century AD, Celsus and Justin Martyr
one was then declared a heretic after
Constantine saw that this form of Christianity could be used politically.
He drove them to Nicea and said: and now you will leave here with one truth
any, he didn't care, just once
the others will be… gone
and we have this one, which was chosen by a show of hands
after they got a beating, like a really physical one
So, by raising their hands, the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed was created, the one that is recited: I believe in God the Father, etc.
Celsus, when speaking of Christians, says:
they omit all the points that their master would use to refute
but for example, was he the first and only one to come down here, or did others come here before?
Here we are in the True Narrative, Chapter 5
if they want to claim that he is the only one, he can be caught in flagrante delicto with a lie and a contradiction
They claim that… they're talking about Christians, okay?
that others came, even in the number of 60 or 70 at once
He speaks about Christians.
who said that he was one of many
than they made him the only one
and they also say that another messenger appeared on his own grave
or, according to another version, they saw two of them, and they answered the women that he had been resurrected
so he, as it seems, was not able to open the grave himself
but he needed others to release him
and another messenger came to the carpenter about Mary's pregnancy
and another one who told them to flee to Egypt
There were plenty of them, all like him.
that's what Christians said, and Celsus reminds us of that, then he was of course declared a heretic
but when Gabriel
I'll try to squeeze it into a quarter of an hour.
when Gabriel goes to visit Mary
Gabriel, as you know, in Hebrew, gever means some el, or the strength of some el, someone whom some el has empowered for something.
so it's not the name of an individual, then there's another one that Daniel met, but there's no time for that here
When Gabriel meets Mary, she becomes pregnant without knowing a man.
but here Gabriel told her, in Greek, we'll pretend it's true: chaire, kecharitomené
which translates to: be healthy, rejoice, full of grace
but kecharitōmenē is an adjective that comes from the mediopassive perfect form of the verb charitō
which means becoming physically attractive
to become pleasant, charming
So this Gavriel could have easily told her: ciao, you who have blossomed so beautifully, rejoice
because we chose you for what we have to do
chili further implantation
since they had already made several of them in the Old Testament
not full of grace, which we don't know what it is, no no
You, who have blossomed so beautifully, have taken good care of yourself.
in my latest book, which has just been published
I present contemporary texts of the New Testament
where the doubts that Joseph had are calmly discussed
who feared that Marie had been deceived by someone impersonating someone else
You understand? It's clear that this
everything was gone, but these papers are here and luckily we can read them
and Joseph was afraid that she had been deceived by someone who had pretended to be someone else
Do you understand?
But what does Justin Martyr say? A contemporary.
who speaks to the emperor Antoninus Pius… hey, why are you picking on those Christians, why?
listen to what he says
but if we… here we are in Apologies, chapters 20 and 22
if we, therefore, hold theories similar to those of the poets and philosophers you celebrate
and some even better, why are we unfairly hated more than all of them
the Son of God called Jesus, even if he was an ordinary man
Isn't it like the logos you're talking about?
aren't there so many of your sons of God?
Justin Martyr, celebrated as a saint, father of the church
and then he quotes: he is like Heracles, like Asclepius, who was also a physician
is like Dionysus
He quotes them and says: Look, the one we are talking about is like yours.
Why are you picking on us so much?
This is said by Justin Martyr, a father of the church, sorry, a doctor of the church, there are only a few doctors.
one of them was Teresa of Avila, a saintly anorexic and orgasmic
You understand? And Hermes, Hermes.
Dionysus, Heracles, Asclepius, says: why are you picking on us so much?
After all, we're talking about someone who is the same as your people.
I am in books for publishing. Mondadori, you have one there, the other will be published…
We have finished the editing, I don't know when it will be published.
I am doing a parallel analysis between the Old Testament and the writings of these people, and classical texts.
The first book is Homer, and this second one, which will be published, includes Homer, Tacitus, Pliny, Strabo, and Heliodorus.
to show that they all told the same stories, the same stories
But this is what Justin Martyr, a doctor of the Church, tells us.
Since they told me 3 minutes ago that there were only 5 minutes left, I'm finishing up, we're going to eat, and then…

Lecture 2016 part 2

https://youtu.be/jb5_bb1sZm8

BEYOND THE HUMAN 2
So, now we'll hand over to Mauro Biglin.
he will tell us what he has prepared… then at the end
//ask questions right away//
//use microphones so that you can be understood//
all of it is breathtaking, while
There was talk about harmony, how animals move naturally in harmony, and we don't.
So I realized that we… when someone tells me: but the evidence that we are
genetically modified organisms, which, as it seems, old texts are telling us about, where is the evidence?
the point is that we are not adapted to any environment on Earth, naturally we are not adapted to any environment
while animals are born with genetic predispositions for one or several ecosystems
we are not born with predispositions to any ecosystem
we are as we are, naked and bare
we are not suitable for the jungle, nor for the Sahara, nor for the North Pole
we adapt to all systems because we are not naturally adapted to any of them
We adapt, but some people say: but they're primitives…
No, no primitives, primitives have at least flint knives.
because we don't have claws, we don't have fangs, we don't have protection on our bodies
we are not adapted, we are really badly made
So while animals move in harmony, we don't, we have a lot of problems.
and to fix them, we have to do everything he said here
but here it has a clear explanation, clear
which is in the old writings, we were made in a hurry
we were made by insertion
small genetic elements that caused
that from individuals who were already structured in some way
very fast, I say very fast in the sense of evolution
in times of evolution
we were enabled to understand and carry out orders, that's what interested them
and whether they worked well or badly, that wasn't so important
because they copied them, they had to copy them, and when someone broke, they threw them away
because it cost much less than repairing it
it cost much less than repairing them, so they were copied
and what was necessary to do was done, and it was sufficient
…in the first part, I talked about a Catholic theologian and others…
that there is no concept of creation in the Bible
there is no concept of creation, and certainly not creation out of nothing
And if there is no concept of creation, then who created man?
No one, Homo sapiens was made, not created.
and this bible says
just read it
…the human was created by genetic engineering
and the Bible says so, just read it
when they decided… I'll put it this way
The Bible says that one day the Elohim decided
he will simply establish this garden in the Eden area
they grow all kinds of plants in this large garden
trees that bear good fruit to eat, but beware, the Earth was already full of plants
in that Gan Eden, which means an enclosed and protected place located in Eden
they grow special things
and paleogenetics also tells us what was happening there
Then, for those who are interested, I will give them links to three articles in the magazine Le Scienze.
where it is clearly stated that there, i.e. in the territory between
let's say in northern Mesopotamia, i.e. between Turkey and the Caspian Sea
in the period of 10 to 8 thousand years ago, on wild wheat, in wild wheat
a number of genetic events occurred that are impossible in nature
that's what's written in those articles, that's what's written in those articles
and those who were there were the ones who did the thing that turned that wheat into the wheat we use today
At the same time, in Central and South America, on potatoes
another genetic event occurred, according to articles in the magazine Le Scienze
which only occurs with GMOs in the laboratory
and it is an event that made it edible
So, we know that the cereals here and the potatoes there
They were the food of millions of people, millions of workers.
both were created by genetic events that are impossible in nature
that's what the articles in Le Scienze magazine, which I have here, say
Here you are.
So whoever wants to can make a note of it and read them.
We'll do it this way because we don't have much time.
So they not only created a human there…
by the way, in those articles you will also find that some genetic strains
domestic animals originated there in the same period
They really worked here in such a way that they created their own system, what they needed, what was functional for them.
The Bible then tells us that at one point the Elohim took Adam.
and placed him in Gan Eden
So… beware, because the Bible does not mention the creation of homo sapiens.
The Bible tells us about the creation of one special species.
within Homo sapiens, it speaks of Adams
which was a group that was genetically pure in a special way
which they created specifically for themselves, for placement in their centers
So the Bible says, they took Adam and placed him in Gan Eden.
so, in contrast to what we are told, it is not the case that man was created in an earthly paradise
First: he was not created; second: it was not in an earthly paradise
they took it from another place and put it there
Then, what a coincidence, the Bible tells us that after some time
God will notice, because he hadn't noticed it before, it hadn't occurred to him.
that the animal community for Adam, they only took men, was not sufficient
So, you know that I also edit, at least in terms of biblical references.
one edition of comics called The Saga of the Elohim
I do it because at least there I have the same freedom as theologians have.
I can write whatever I want without having to prove it.
while in my books I have to prove, fortunately, every written line, in comics I don't have to, because a comic is a comic
and therefore I have the same freedom as theologians, so those comics have the same weight as theological treatises
They are loosely inspired by the Bible, period.
but I admit it
and I'm not saying that the truth is in those comics
I say that in comics there is creativity, loosely inspired by the Bible, exactly as it is in the case of theological treatises.
This is not a joke, I know what I'm saying, this is not a joke.
I really think so.
So, we can imagine what scenes the Elohim must have witnessed between the male-Adamy and the sheep they kept.
and so they said, we'll make him a woman
This is what is written in the Bibles you have at home, ok?
But God notices that the company of animals is not enough for Adam and decides to make him a woman.
And how will he make the woman? Given that he had to make her genetically pure.
he will put Adam, I'm quoting this from memory now, into a deep sleep, not that he will put him to sleep, but into a very deep sleep
it takes something from one curved side part, which is what is usually translated as a rib
but it doesn't mean rib, it means "curved side part"
which could be the crest of the hip bone, it could be a rib… then we'll see what the rabbis say
close the meat where the sample was taken
and with what they took away, they will make a woman
this is written in the Bible
Okay?
when I tell you
Genesis, we are at the very beginning, that is, chapter 2.
when I tell you
I'll tell… my friend up front here
this time the pasta is cooked just right
So, I'm eating pasta with you… this time the pasta is… what does that mean?
The Elohim will present the woman to Adam, Genesis 2:23
Then Adam said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh."
In Hebrew, there is even an article: this "that" time.
she is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh, she shall be called woman
because it was taken from "iše", "iš" means a male individual
išša is the feminine form of the term iš
OK? This time it will be called "man" because it was taken from Iše.
this time it's the right one, not the ones you gave me before
and in non-biblical Jewish literature it is even written that he rejected those previous women
says: this is the right one, you made this one with me/from me
It's here, okay? Translation: Christian families, just read the Bible.
just read it and think about it using the intelligence we all possess
Then, the wise must be clever, because they let the Bible say what it does not say.
It's enough for us to be intelligent, we don't have to be clever.
you just have to be intelligent and read what is written there
This time it's the right one, not the others, it's here.
when Dolly the sheep was cloned in 1997… you remember that, don't you? in Scotland
Of course, all imaginable and predictable questions, bioethical questions, came to the surface.
because when we clone animals, we will also clone humans, and so…
discussions, performances, round tables, interviews, scientists, philosophers, thinkers, bioethicists, theologians…
It took months, and everyone had their own opinion.
Then, of course, the rabbis were also called…
and they said, but… now there's this problem of animal cloning, which will then affect humans… and do you know what the rabbis answered?
Prof. Safran, professor, rabbi, teacher of medical ethics at the Jewish University in Jerusalem
Cloning? But what's the problem? It's already in the Bible, just look at how Adam and Eve came into the world.
They've known it forever.
since forever
We don't know that.
because Christianity has told us that since the Bible speaks of God
since man had to be created by God, but that is not true
The Bible does not speak of God and does not speak of the creation of man.
The Bible tells us how man was made, and for the rabbis, this is normal.
Cloning? But what's the problem with that?
it's already in the Bible
These are copies of articles that you can find on the Internet.
articles from newspapers, magazines… what's the problem with that?
We have known about cloning for 4000 years, you have barely woken up.
on sites where I'm not written about very well… I talked about it over there with a friend
No? Where does it say that Biglino is a patented donkey… it's all right, it's part of the game.
it is written: the fact that the Bible speaks of genetic engineering has always been known to Jews through the Talmud
You're following those pages… is it true or not?
has always been known to Jews through the Talmud, it is we who are not allowed to talk about it because it is taboo for us
For them, it's normal.
January of this year
Prof. Ziony Zevit
from the Jewish University of Maryland says: it is wrong to translate it as "rib"
You know, Eve taken from the rib.
because what they took to create a woman, they took from Adam's penis, not from a rib
For rabbis, the question is not whether a person was created by God or not.
It is a question of understanding from which part of the man's body the staminal cells were taken to produce the woman.
because it is obvious that this happened here
… for them, but it's written in the Bible… it's clear
The creation of man is not in the Bible, it is not, it is not talked about here.
And if they know it, why don't they tell us?
And who is supposed to ask them? Like, right now.
Christians took that book, the Old Testament.
…which is a book in which… not one nation, mind you, not the Jews…. we don't have the space here to explain everything
and as I speak, hundreds of things are running through my head
but one family, the family of the Israelites, which was one family
She told about the relationship of that family and its descendants with an individual named Yahweh.
Christians took that set of books and transformed them into something they were not.
they took Yahweh and made him a universal God
but for the Israelites, that book remains their book
and so they say: you took her from us
you made her into something she wasn't
you did with her what you wanted, and now you believe the fairy tales you made up
We know how things are, and we have no obligation to tell you.
and they are right
and they are right, from this point of view, they are right
we did everything ourselves
but they say: we've always known that it's like that
You understand? That's the reality.
such is the reality of biblical events
of course, still assuming that the Bible tells us
that the biblical authors wanted to tell us exactly what they wrote, because we act as if
Of course, because I leave the truth to those who have it, I don't have it.
but we have this text, the text I already mentioned: we know nothing, we know nothing…
But I say, let's at least see what the text says.
because if we don't know anything about it and we still make up what we want based on it
and we let it resonate in a sense that is not in it, then you understand that it is absolute chaos
at least let's see what is written there, and this is what is written there
This time you are… the right one… this one fits me… not the others.
It's there.
I repeat, in Hebrew there is even an article: this "to"-time
this time it's the right one, the others are not
That's right.
Enrico was talking about the flood here, I was sitting in the back because it was cooler there.
bla
He spoke here about the flood.
you know that even here, we have a biblical story that corresponds to these 650 //-6500?//…
but for example, Josephus, who is a Judeo-Roman historian
writing in the 1st century AD, in the book Jewish Antiquities
which is a book that wants to give credit to Jewish things in the Roman world, i.e. Jewish thought and history
He discusses the whole Bible and talks about the flood.
and when he speaks of the flood, he quotes Nicolaus of Damascus, another historian
and he says that Nikolaos of Damascus, when speaking of this flood, says that in the end, when the waters began to recede
There were a lot of people on the mountain.
and then on that mountain, says Nikolaos Damašský, one vessel landed
in which there was one family, and Nikolaos Damašský says:
It could be the one the Jewish Bible speaks of.
But if what Nikolaos Damašský says is true, when Noah and his family landed there, there were plenty of people.
How can we know if what the Bible says is true, or if what Nikolaos Damašský says is true?
we can't know that, so we do as if
but if we do it like this, we can imagine
that history can be completely different from how it was explained to us
because who decides here whether Nikolaos Damašský is right
or the biblical author, who of course we do not know who he is
who told us his story: only our family remained here
from the generation of Adam, and so we have a whole range of rights here
Who can prove it here? No one.
Let's say that in the biblical story there is, how to put it, at least a conflict of interest.
No? Because one nation speaks about itself and says, so we are the ones who…
while Nikolaos Damašský says that when they arrived, there were already a lot of people there
Josephus speaks of Moses' non-death
Do you know that
but now I'm saying what comes to me
you know that at one point Moses decides that he has to go and die
because he is not allowed to enter the so-called promised land due to his transgressions
so he looks at her from the mountain, and then with his most faithful, that is, with Eleazar and Joshua
one of many Jozus, as I've already said
He goes to the land of Moab, he goes to this valley, and from that moment on, no one knows anything about him.
The nice thing is that the Bible says that when Moses decides to go and die
He was in perfect health, the Bible says, he was in perfect condition.
and the fact is that no one saw him die
Josephus tells us this and says
Moses went to the Moabite valley.
Then a cloud appeared and carried him away.
and the cloud, in the Old Testament, is one of the terms used to refer to the means they used to travel there
But beware, do you know what Josephus writes?
writes: then Moses was forced to write that he died, so that no one could say that he left with the deities
Do you understand?
That's fantastic, isn't it?
that's what they tell us, he had to write that he died, because someone might think that he left with the deities
as Elijah did, for example, as Enoch did, for example
…other undead, just like Moses, taken away by those
This is what Josephus Flavius, a Jewish-Roman historian, tells us.
Do you understand?
it's all much more breathtaking than the fairy tale we were told
That's why I keep saying: read the Bible!
because it's breathtaking, it's not some dry stuff… someone says: Christ's foot…
No, read it like any other book, with a clear and open mind.
without the filters they put before our eyes
and so it is every time… who knows what it means… no, it means exactly that
it's written there, so for now we'll pretend that it's written there
If it is to mean something else, someone will have to prove it to us, but it definitely says so there.
something else, we don't know… it says so there for sure
and he's telling us these things here
so here we are faced with situations that are
I don't know if they are true, let it be clear here, I always clarify this, because I don't have the truth.
I don't know if they are true, but they are coherent and make sense.
Therefore, to understand them, it is not necessary to introduce the exegetical category of the mystery of faith, the mystery of God, no.
Let's assume that what is written is true, and a certain mosaic will emerge.
without the need to invent anything
that is crucial, and then, whether that mosaic is true or not, I don't know
because, of course, I have no evidence
but since I'm dealing with that book, I'm just telling you: pay attention, because the book says this
there are people who visit my wall, now even my opponents have created a closed group
where they are plotting
No? And someone wrote there: don't read Biglin's books… ok, that's acceptable, no problem.
On the contrary, I say, on the contrary, I say… read books… Biglina 🙂
Read the books of theologians, read them, read them!
but the way it has to be done with Biglin's books
I'll take the liberty of advising you on one thing: keep a Bible handy when you read, and the same goes for my books, okay?
Keep a Bible handy.
because otherwise you are only reading interpretations without knowing the text on which those interpretations are based, including mine
including mine
So, a book and the Bible.
Is this quoted here? Let's see what the Bible says.
because otherwise we listen to interpretations, including Biglin's
without knowing the text, and then this happens
…I was talking to a friend over there, who reminded me that I had been massacred for months.
because at the beginning, in one book, where I talked about the smoke that calmed them down there
I wrote "nichocha" by mistake, I rewrote it into Italian, "nichocha" instead of "nichoach"
I messed up "chet" there… then I corrected it.
They massacred me for months and months for that mistake, okay?
and I have no problem with that, because I have to justify every comma I make
So from this point of view, I'm lucky because it forces me to be careful.
but those who have been massacring me all these months have forgotten one thing
that the Old Testament in the Masoretic version, studied by Prof. Menachem Cohen, a lecturer at Bar-Ilan University in Tel Aviv
it contains 1800 errors that he described in 21 volumes
So I was massacred for 7 months.
for the substitution of one phoneme
not a single word about the 1800 errors committed by the Masoretic editors
Here's something… but okay, no problem.
So, for example, the Pope, when he was the Angelus at Easter
That's why I'm telling you, it's always interesting to read the Bible.
He said: God's mercy is eternal.
and by the way, there is a book by the Pope called In the Name of God, Mercy
"God's mercy is eternal" is a biblical passage.
now we will leave aside the "eternal" that we saw in the morning, so we will pretend that it is there, even though we already know that it is not there
God's mercy is long-lasting, but let it be eternal, let it be eternal, that's not a problem
and in Psalm 136, this statement is written about 20 times
God's mercy is eternal… because God's mercy is eternal
and so someone says: well, of course
He struck Egypt in its firstborn, for his love is eternal.
He let Israel pass through their midst, for his love is eternal.
with a firm hand and an outstretched arm, because his love is eternal
He parted the sea in two, for his love is eternal.
He let Israel pass through it, for his love is eternal.
the chariot of Pharaoh and his army, because his love is eternal
He killed mighty kings, because his love is eternal.
…then Sihon, king of the Amorites, Og, king of Bashan
blah blah… He gave them their land as an inheritance because his love is eternal.
in the inheritance of Israel his servant, because his love is eternal
So God's love is eternal, because it is a killer working for the benefit of Israel.
This is what it says there.
so just like they do with me
and it says: look, there in that book you wrote nichocha instead of nichoach
So now we'll be kicking you in the ass for the rest of your life.
it would be necessary for someone in St. Peter's Square to raise their hand and say: sorry, Francis, but…
I wish I had never been the object of this god's love.
let him look elsewhere
because we all know this part of the story, he exterminated the Egyptian firstborn
even those who have not read the Bible will remember that when Moses is to lead those people
I say "those people" because Jews are really just a figment of the imagination here.
He led those people out of Egypt.
you know the whole story of those "wounds", in one place the Lord says
I will harden Pharaoh's heart.
so that he would not give you permission to leave, so that I could then show my power
and to show his power, he kills innocent firstborns
to soften the heart that He Himself has hardened
Is he a psychopath or not?
and I'm not afraid of blasphemy, because luckily it's not a god
Šmitec
I'll be there right away.
So God's mercy lasts forever, because he killed innocent children.
God's mercy endures forever, for he killed mighty kings, took their territory and gave it to Israel.
How come no one raises their hand in St. Peter's Square?
how is it that… rightly, rightly
I have to say that this is a stroke of luck for me.
For example, in the new book published by Mondadori, there is one really harsh chapter.
The publishing house was very cautious about this, because there are a number of rabbinical studies.
non-biblical, thanks to two people who carry out certain research, Omar Di Benedetto, etc.
and there, if a single comma is wrong, they will massacre us
So, I publish a whole range of things for people to understand.
that the Bible speaks of one particular individual who does things…
I'll read this to you, it's really disgusting.
we… Today they told me that there was an attack in Baghdad, 80 dead…
and we say: barbarism
Barbarism, right?
Of course, that would be the last straw.
The problem is that it's biblical, there's no difference.
when we hear about a holy war
we say: hey, holy war, please…
here
In Numbers 31, there is a definition of holy war against the Midianites.
The Midianites are direct descendants of Abraham through his wife Keturah.
they are therefore the cousins of the Israelites
first cousins once removed
The order is: exterminate them all.
exterminate all the Midianites, direct descendants of Abraham
Moses was angry with the commanders of the army, the leaders of thousands and the leaders of hundreds, who were returning from the war campaign.
Moses said to them, "You have left all the women alive?"
…so you do it like this
Of the children, you shall kill every boy and every woman who has had intercourse with a man.
all the girls who have not been with a man, you will leave them alive for yourselves
these are God's commandments, whose mercy endures forever
So: a woman with a little boy, you kill them both.
girls… no…
The translation of "dívky" is softened because the original says "holčičky".
because in that culture it was legal to have sex with girls from the age of 3 and one day
So, you'll keep the little girls for yourselves.
in Hebrew, it's girls
when you buy a Bible from the Giuntina publishing house, i.e. a Jewish Bible translated by Rabbi Dario Disegni
So it says there: keep all the little girls for yourself
In Bibles intended for families, it says girls, because one thinks: ok, they took girls…
No, there's a little girl there.
and then there is the division of the spoils
God
675 sheep, 72 bulls, 61 donkeys, and 32 survivors
Given that the only survivors are girls, what will God do with those 32 girls?
but that's what it says here, ok?
It's here, in the Bible.
you just have to think about it
The Bible talks about it, which is probably the most immoral book ever written in the history of mankind.
it takes courage to say these things
Please, no, sorry, there was another hand raised, where was it, yes, there.
So, how is it that Psalm 136… the question is… why is the word "love" used there, here it says "mercy"
…the word mercy is also used, they are synonyms
…and the word in the original?
…it's really interchangeable, it can mean all these things
I have a feeling ????… I can't remember now…
Please.
in the polysemy of the Hebrew language, these are all interchangeable meanings…
love, mercy, compassion, etc.
And then, this concept, that is, attributing a certain meaning to words, can't we do that with the whole Bible?
…so, this is inevitable in any type of translation
especially in a language such as Hebrew
which has very few words, so it is necessarily polysemous
…because here we have words like "ruach", which, thanks to your work, we have given the meaning of "spaceship"
In Ezekiel, for example, when we apply this here, we have something strange.
I'll use the translation "spaceship" right here, okay?
his holy spaceship, the raging spaceship is screaming at me
to you, Ezekiel 1:20, spaceship blah blah blah
Ezekiel 2:2: a spaceship entered me, made me stand up, and I heard the one who spoke… how can this be explained?
This is explained by polysemy, I will give an example in Italian for better understanding.
The term ruach, like many other Hebrew terms, is a polysemic term.
in the sense that its original meaning is "wind"
Then we move from the wind to "that which causes the wind by its movement."
when we get the extension, we would say "spirit/ghost"
Okay?
For example, in one American dictionary by Dr. Jeff Benner, it is said that ruach even refers to a character disposition.
but then he says that its original meaning is "that which passes along a predetermined path"
Okay? This is a dictionary of ancient Hebrew, he has that specialization.
So, what is it that gives us meaning? Context.
this thing with the ambiguity of the Hebrew language, which is real
is often used in an attempt to obscure certain meanings
No? Because the Hebrew language is ambiguous, mysterious.
so we need to get to the core to understand what exactly they wanted to say
and when it comes to "ruach", the same exegetes forget the ambiguity and still translate it as "spirit"
So, there are times when it may mean that this one has had some kind of effect on him.
We don't know how, of course.
to let him do something, he could have told him that too… like I'm passing on my strength, my determination, etc.
but there are other places, e.g. Ezekiel 3, where it is clearly stated that the ruach pulled him up
while behind him the noise of wings and wheels could be heard
it is clear that ruach means different things
but we will make an example in Italian, because
this thing, which in the case of Hebrew is called a mystery
in fact, it is nothing mysterious
because Italian is more polysemic, more polysemic than Hebrew
I was in low spirits yesterday.
So I went to visit a friend who always cheers me up because he is a man of spirit //he is soulful//, he is funny
his passion is to distill spirit from pomace, he makes spirits
I helped him with the distillation… and I told him that I'm giving it at the beginning of August
Plums "under the spirit" //I pour spirit over them//, i.e. I put them under 90% alcohol
He plays football and is very popular because he can be the "spirit" of the team.
near his house is an 18th-century building, which is said to be haunted by ghosts
we already have 6 meanings of the word "spirit"
It's clear that the brandy has nothing to do with ghosts, right?
So, what is it that tells us the meaning from case to case?
context
Did you have any doubts when I was speaking?
about every case I gave you? None, that's how it was with them.
The problem arises when
since the Bible must speak of God, since the Bible must speak of the Almighty God
that when he talks about that, he has to talk about the spirit, right?
ruach is used in the same way as in Italian, I'll drink some spirit
or I'll go see the spirits in an 18th-century house
so I'm not going to look at the spirits
By the way, I really do pickle plums in alcohol.
and on some bottles with 90% alcohol, it says at the bottom: ideal for fruit "under spirit", that's the wording of the label
I imagine how in 2000 years, some exegetes who find a bottle with a label in my house
in the middle of the ruins… but what spirit did he give… what does it mean to "give fruit under the spirit"
and they will start making all sorts of interpretations
since the fruit has seeds
since the seed is the carrier of life, the fruit must rot
but for a new life to be born, the seed must awaken…
and behold, why it was put in the spirit… no, I was watering the plums with spirit
Is it clear?
it's all simple, just read the context
and there is no need to enter the interpreter's twists and turns… please
whether anyone has ever done a psychological study of Yahweh
I was thinking about it, not that I would do it myself, but really with a psychiatrist.
This could be a whole book.
because it is a really very interesting personality
So, I discussed this in one of my books, where I analyzed Yahweh's decision.
I analyzed them in the light of purposefully elaborated legal principles.
subsequently used at the Nuremberg Trials
to show that it is precisely with those legal principles, assuming retroactivity
to see if it would be possible to charge Him with crimes against humanity
because when you read the Bible, when you read it
you will see that He is the first great historically documented and identified anti-Semite in history
in the sense that He used His own, i.e. Jacob's family, to exterminate the Semitic peoples
they were all direct relatives of Israel's family
when you read the Bible, you will see that He fought against
Moabites, Ammonites, Amalekites, Edomites, Midianites, as we have seen, were all relatives through the first degree.
over the first knee
Israel, all were of Abraham's lineage
so they were all Jews like them, all Semites like them
The Bible is a story about how one Semitic family exterminated, tried to exterminate, whenever they could.
other Semites, by carrying out the orders of one non-Semite
and if… not if… and as if they were applied… and as if it is said that Yahweh, if he is a god, is still alive
he should be tried in absentia for crimes against humanity
because we learn about extermination, genocide, the murder of women, the murder of children, the selective murder of children
laws approved on a racial background
which is exactly what was the subject of the indictment in the Nuremberg trials, there is no difference
None, I realize what I'm saying…
bla
this morning Elio was talking about Jacob, who fought all night, I asked him about it, then I found the passage
It is Genesis 32:23.
My question concerns the title.
Penuel, this Penuel, as they say there
Jacob asks… excuse me
Jacob asks
It's not in my Bible, but the term will be Elohim, he asks: who are you? he gives him that question
I would like to know if in this passage, El is Yahweh, or if it is someone else.
It is not known, it is not known.
that is not known, also because
there is no certainty in it, because the problem is that from a certain point on
Yahweh was inserted by the editors even where he had not been before.
So, what do I know, when you compare
Masoretic texts
in my version, he appears as an angel, there is a fight with an angel… Elio said that we already know that…
exactly, when you compare the Masoretic texts with the Qumran texts, which are much older
it can be seen that, for example, in newer texts, Yahweh appears where he was not present in older texts
…so it's difficult to determine, and it understands where it hasn't been before.
when, for example, Yahweh goes to swear before Melchizedek
and swears allegiance to the great boss, Melchizedek, who was the governor of Elion
in the oldest texts, Yahweh does not appear there
in more recent texts, Yahweh is even identified with Elion
because they tried, from a certain point, after the Babylonian exile
to make him the most important person first, and then even the only one
while He was not only not the only one before, but He was not even the most important, He was among the smallest
therefore, in Deuteronomy 32, one family is entrusted to him
family, not nation
and this family, the Bible says, is found scattered in the desert
They didn't even have territory… he was told: you take those there.
…El, who will appear
after all
I'll try to find it.
Yeah, here.
still Genesis 35
I'll read it to you as it is translated… or no, let's do it differently.
Giuseppe came to pick me up at the airport this morning.
when I tell you now
Giuseppe, you now, then you have to offer coffee to that Mauro Biglin.
the one you met at the airport this morning… I'm telling you, it's me
what will you think of me when I say it like that
God said to Jacob: Arise
Go up to Bethel, Bethel means "the house of God", and stay there.
build on that place, that's what God says to Jacob
build an altar there to the God who appeared to you when you were fleeing from Esau
Is it the same, or is it not?
offer coffee to Mauro Biglin… and I'm telling you this
God says: build an altar to the God who appeared to you in that place
Do you understand? And do you know what it is in Hebrew?
The first term is Elohim, so the group of elohim tells Jacob
build an altar to that El…. singular
who showed you there
that is, to the one of us who appeared to you there, build an altar to him, because he is the one who follows you
not the whole group
and he built an altar there and called the place "el bet-el", meaning "el of the house/family of el"
because there El revealed himself to him when he was running away from his brother
that is, he made an altar to the one of the elohim who appeared to him there, because it was he who watched him
no, the name Yahweh is not there, here it is still elohim and el, it cannot be determined here
no no, it could be him too, he's just not identified, but…
considering that it is said in Deuteronomy
that Jacob was assigned to Yahweh
of course it can be, but it is interesting
the fact that the group of elohim tells him, make an altar there to the one you saw
by the way, we often find here: "the god who appeared to you"
but that is not written in Hebrew at all
in Hebrew it is written "to the god who appeared to you"
if you don't see a friend for 2 years, do you say to him "how long have you not appeared to me"?
In Hebrew it is like this
"…showed himself to you"
as such translations are common, as far as I know, for example in the book of Judges
the meeting is described in chapter 6
Gideon and one Malachim, i.e. one angel
who, when you read the Bible, are individuals of flesh and bones, they eat, drink, get tired, can be irritated, are dirty, etc.
…so they speak and then here the angel says: go prepare food for me
Gideon goes home, an angel is waiting for him
Gedeon returns with the meat broth and he tells him: put it all here on the stone
Gideon places it on a stone and the malach takes one of the cylindrical objects in his hand and sets it on fire
and everything will burn
and he leaves… in the Bibles you have at home, check it, it's verse 21
always check it
it is written: then the angel disappeared from Gideon's eyes, the angel disappeared… in Hebrew it is written: he went his way
is there anyone here who can speak hebrew?
halak, halak, he went his own way
so, since angels are spiritual entities, according to… the biblical ones… if there are angels, I have nothing to say about that…
unless someone tells me that they are the biblical ones, because I have something to say about that…
since for the bible angels are spiritual entities, how do they leave? that it disappears
no, because for the Bible they are not spiritual entities, they go their own way
just like… I'll be there right away
when one Gabriel comes to Daniel
Daniel says: I saw one coming
that is, I saw a male individual coming
men
and in the Bibles that you have at home, it is written that he came so that he flew with ease
by light flight
these are dictionaries, including etymological dictionaries
which quote that verse here, and the Hebrew verbs are most clear
he came and was tired by exertion, not by easy flight
it is written here, in etymological dictionaries citing that verse
He came very tired.
you understand that when I told you at the beginning, this morning
that the one who represents this religion
he does not know the language in which it was written
and whoever believes that has never read the book
because whoever preaches these things, of course says Gabriel came, and since he is an angel, of course he flew
no, he came sweaty
tired
…but they say he flew in, he's an angel
but he's not an angel and he didn't fly, apparently he came in a hurry, he was tired, period.
is it there
in dictionaries, not in my inventions
the funny thing is that then accusations like Biglino make up the translations come from that world
???? you translate it like this, while the dictionaries say something else
something else is, as we have seen, the ruach
that is something else, there is some context that tells us every time what it is that this ruach is doing
eg Ezekiel 3:12
Then a spirit picked me up.
and I heard behind me the noise of a great earthquake
while kavod… glory to the Lord, that's how it's translated
the glory of the Lord rose from that place
in Hebrew, ruach picked me up, while Yahweh's kavod was rising from that place
so
here Ezekiel tells that some ruach pulled him up
and as he pulled it out, behind him was Yahweh's kavod, which took off, and as it took off, it made a noise
I heard the noise of the wings beating against each other, and at the same time the noise of the wheels
and the noise of a great din, ruach picked me up and carried me away
Here it is written there.
Yahweh's "kavod" translates as "glory"
but as they explain that the glory of God is behind you, you do not see it, but when it rises from the earth, it makes a noise and you hear it
but it says here
and the context tells us what it is, case by case
exactly like the ghost
if I go to that house from the 18th century, I will see ghosts
if it's in the context of matolin, I'm distilling schnapps… spirit… spirit…
no one can mistake that, and no one did, let's be clear
those who could read and write were very few
they wrote things down for themselves to preserve their memory and had no doubts about what they were talking about
do you understand while they could interpret what they wanted to the others
like them, they did not hide anything from each other, because they had no need to hide anything
they had a need to preserve memory
Even here it, the kavod, is the term for which they have been attacking me since the beginning
I have it here somewhere… who can…? a few words in English
just two words, come here
here is the dictionary I already talked about
Ancient Hebrew dictionary, is that so?
for the term kavod
The definition is here.
the original concrete meaning of kavod is battle armaments
shall we translate? the original meaning of the term kavod is "armor of war"
armor, that's a dictionary, ok?
that is a dictionary
Israeli weapons
by the way, if anyone here can access the internet
let him write kavod custom, no, yes, kavodcustom.com
aha, we don't have internet
you will see that these are armory sites
and when you go to check it, you will see that the kavod, the logo, is written in Hebrew biblical letters, not modern ones
Hebrew biblical letters
Is it true? Did you succeed?
found? ok
that kavod there, those are Hebrew biblical letters
and what is the content there? weapons
weapons
What should I tell you?
What should I tell you?
yes
so… if I understood correctly, I've been following your work for the last few years
the bible is not a holy, monotheistic book
but he is talking about many elohim who came to rule the earth, is that right?
exactly
one of them was entrusted with one nation, or part of a nation
according to what you just said, they were having sex with the closest relatives
evidently, the one who makes the promise to Abraham is not the one who makes the promise to Jacob
probably
but in the bible it is said: I am the god of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
because for me they are all alive, how to understand it here?
that means that when He introduced himself, and that's another interesting thing, he always had to present his ID card
so He had to say: I am the one there
so imagine a single, transcendent, omniscient, omnipotent god
who, when he introduces himself, always has to say who he is
how can someone think of something like that?
but He had to keep saying: look, I'm the one there, look, I'm the one there
and that is another proof that He had the need to prove His identity every time
because there could have been a confusion, after all, Moses asks him his name, he says: but who are you?
how can anyone ask God about this?
and God answers him, God, so it is said: I am who I am
and here it was being worked out
for centuries, and it's still being worked on
I have been saying one certain thing for several years, which comes to me when reading the Bible…
which I also found in a note of a Jewish Bible
He basically answers him: I am what I am, you take care of yourself
and just do my bidding
and don't worry
and there in that note of a Jewish Bible it is written: this answer probably means
that his name did not have such importance
imagine a general who says to his commander: but who are you?
and the commander tells him: what the hell do you want, I am what I am, you do what you have
do my bidding, I think he told him this
and then this was elaborated and is still being elaborated, because it is clear that such an answer cannot be accepted
but if
in the book of Judges
Israel, for a change, is fighting against the family of its cousins, against the Ammonites
The Israelite general is debating with the king of the Ammonites and listen to what he says:
the territory that your Elohim Chemosh gave you to possess, do you keep it?
this is how we also keep what Yahweh, our Elohim, has given us to possess
no difference
so your Elohim gave you those territories and you keep them? ok, mine gave me these here and I'm keeping them, period.
it takes centuries of theology to explain such a verse
so it is clear, not to explain, to hide
centuries of theology to hide such a claim
did yours give it to you there? mine gave me this here, period.
there is no: mine is god, yours… no no no
equal powers, equal rights, equal privileges
Do you understand?
in the book
in the first book published by the Mondadori publishing house… now we continue… I started
doing a parallel analysis between the Old Testament and the Greek texts, while with Enrique
could then be a parallel analysis with the texts of the East
and it is not excluded that we will do it
now, that is 1.5 years to 2 years ago I chose the Greek texts because from this point of view
they seem beyond suspicion… who would have thought that Homer would tell stories in which there might be a grain of truth?
that's what Schliemann thought, who "acted as if" the Iliad was true
and we know what he discovered… I still "do as"
and I noticed, and I document it in the books, that
Homer and the Bible basically talk about the same individuals
which for the Bible are elohim, for the Greeks theoi, or the so-called gods
Homer calls the Greeks the Danaans
The Danas are descendants of Danao, who is the son of Béla in Greek stories
There are Danites in the Bible.
which are the descendants of Dan, who is the son of Bilhah
Danaos, son of //king// Béla; Dan, son of the //maid// Bilha
That's interesting.
who studies the history of Sardinia, knows the history of the Sardans
anyone who studies the Nordic peoples knows the history of the Tuatha Dé Danaan
and according to Greek legends, the Danaos, or Danaos
he lived in Egypt in brotherhood until Egypt began to abuse Danaus, so Danaos had to flee
and in the bible it is said that here you
these individuals, then transformed into 12 tribes
they lived as brothers in Egypt until Egypt began to abuse them, so they had to flee
so the story is similar
The Danaans go to the north, where they found the Mycenaean civilization
listen to what the bible says about Dan and his
in chapter 5 of the book of Judges there is Deborah, one of the judges of Israel
which is planning one of many battles… after all, they were doing nothing else
and complains that some of the tribes do not participate
and they say: why is Gilead behind the Jordan?
and Dan, why did he leave on the boat?
since when do goat breeders have boats?
while the Danes are on ships, just like the Danes
won't it be necessary to rewrite this part of history as well?
when those things come together
because when
still Schliemann, went to dig up the graves of the Mycenaean rulers
so he found interesting things
first of all, he found 3 steles there
which graphically represent, two-dimensionally
crossing the water divide
just as it is described in the Bible
that is, on the first of the three stelae, a person in a tunic can be seen walking with a stick in his hand
chased by an Egyptian war chariot in the middle of the waters, in vertical view of course, because it's two-dimensional
on the second stele, the one in the tunic can be seen turned, a little higher, as he is covered by a staff
and the waters as they come upon the chariot
on the third stele you can see a chariot with a horse overturned and swept away by the waters
which is exactly the biblical description… How is it that it is in the Mycenaean tombs?
and then they found a piece of jewelry there, of course, an iconic piece of jewelry… whenever something is found, they say it's an iconic piece of jewelry
it is 12 centimeters high, and from the perspective it shows
…what was visible upon entering the inner part
the dwelling that Yahweh had built was demountable, he had it built in the desert of the exodus
the Ark of the Covenant is visible there
and this is two-dimensional, the Ark of the Covenant, three steps that went up, those were the steps at the back
which led to the altar, where they burned the fat he loved so much
so, when only a member of Aaron's family could enter
Who could have known what was inside the Mycenaeans' dwellings?
The Bible says that the people who built those things there were craftsmen from the tribe of Dan, what a coincidence.
So if they were the Danes, or the Danaeans, they knew well what was inside.
Do you understand?
so they could make a piece of jewelry containing a memory of what they knew
and by the way, the Bible never mentions the Red Sea
They crossed, the Bible says so, it talks about it 3 times, and in all three cases it says that they crossed Yam Suf.
the Red Sea
chili reed bed, swamp
so the Red Sea is another nice later invention
they did not cross the Red Sea, they crossed the swamps, which are still called batufi in Egyptian today
located in the northeastern part of the Nile Delta
and the Bible also tells us how the shallows appeared
it appeared due to the strong wind that blew from the east all night
and in the morning there was that free shoal, which they used to cross, and then when the wind stopped blowing, the water returned
Yes, so, no, that's not a myth.
I'll try it, I draw worse than a cat, but
Let's assume that this is the bottom of a swamp with reeds, okay?
There's water everywhere here, okay?
a strong wind will come and cause this shoal to loosen
they will pass, the waters are on the sides, and as the Bible says, they protect
not that it was a wall, they protected, so no one could pass by, because there was water around
and when the wind stopped blowing, the water returned… but there could have been 1.5 meters of water there
Exactly…
So this is a potential explanation of the event.
by the way, he described the event in 1860
an English officer
Alexander Tallock, who witnessed the phenomenon because he was there with the army, before the Suez Canal was dug
and he just described that one night, a strong wind in that area had exposed a shoal
the next morning, the Bedouins who knew it…
they used it to cross, and when the wind stopped blowing, the water returned
So Moses, who had been there for many years, could have known the phenomenon well, and so he used it.
So, there was a raised hand.
Excuse me, I'd like to ask
as regards the very important dissemination of your work
because when I spoke to my brother, who lives in Denmark, we noticed
that your extraordinary work changes people's lives, at least in terms of understanding the Bible
are in the vast majority, if not completely, limited by the Italian borders
because all the conferences on YouTube are held in Italy
although some books have already been translated into English
So… when my brother talks to his friends there in Copenhagen
They are very interested in your work.
and they ask where we can find something to prove it
//conferences are the most immediate way//
blah blah
blah blah
//have the best of your conferences translated//
blah blah
bla
one is already there, one is already there
it is, and when it was made, it ended up on a big American forum
which has millions of users and reached the top overnight, and then disappeared
Chili? They removed it…
but it can be found
they removed her from that forum
…then the books are much more comprehensive…
but for a start, this is important
So, books, if you're asking…
At the moment, there are 2 books in France, and another 2 will be published this year.
then 1 book in Germany, which 3 or 4 months ago was 12th in some ranking…
then there is 1 book in Latvia, 1 book in Croatia
now 1 book is being published in Portugal and Brazil
in Spain
In November, an American event will be presented in the United States, which will start in the spring of next year.
In the meantime, I was translated into Russian.
there is supposed to be a publishing house there that wants to publish me in Russia
I was in Romania to do a conference at the invitation of the Italian Honorary Consul, 3 months ago.
and a Romanian publishing house is starting to publish these books in Romania
Nothing in Hebrew?
Okay, thanks.
I don't know what the order was.
I wanted to change the subject a bit.
A hand was raised here too…
I wanted to ask about John's apocalypse, because there is some ambiguity there.
it's the passage where the Bible says
//number 666//
blah blah
bla
blah blah
bla
What do you think it is?
in response
I'm just saying that, in my opinion, it's the apocalypse.
a text written in code for the nascent churches of that time against the Roman Empire
at the time when the persecution was taking place
666 is the number that
it is a numerical transposition
the Greek name Kaisar Nero, or Emperor Nero
numerically converted
It's interesting… so when it is said that the beast is Emperor Nero…
It is interesting that on older papyri, e.g. on the papyrus from Oxyrhynchus
The number is not 666, but 616.
which was the numerical transcription of Caligula, who was the emperor before Nero
so they could have actually been codes designating the emperors of that time
because if it is true that on the papyrus from Oxyrhynchus there was 616
… before Nero was… ob…
Caligula, or 616, referred to Caligula
when Nero came, 616 became 666
This is one possible explanation, I don't know if it's true, but it's possible.
we must proceed…
Greetings.
such a question
When the Elohim were mentioned here, I lost the thread a bit…
Not everyone knows those things…
So, when it comes to Elohim, can it be determined in some way?
How many of them were there? How many of these Elohim were there in the world?
Are they still alive, are they here or not?
whether they have created any generation
So
Then one more question… this one already stretches for kilometers…
Okay, so? As for the Jewish religion
Jews who accept the Old Testament, as opposed to the Christian Catholic approach
How do the two approaches differ? They differ mainly in… so let's start with the second question…
There are many books of the Old Testament that are accepted by the Catholic canon but are not accepted by Jews.
such as a large part of the Books of Wisdom
which, being the product of Greek Hellenic thought, are not part of the Jewish canon
So the difference is basically that the Jewish canon is much more truncated.
and then, they basically have the Torah, those first 5 books, which are the core
then there are the prophets, or "I don't know", and the writings, or "I know"
Another interesting thing is that for us, Daniel is one of the major prophets.
for them, Daniel is not even part of the prophetic books
so even those who make calculations of the future based on the book of Daniel
they should know that for the Jews he was not even a prophet
because it is included in Ketuvim, i.e. in the common writings
and then, when we talk about the Jewish world
we're talking about the world, I said that this morning
where interpretations of the Bible range from absolute atheism
up to the most fundamental orthodoxy
in the Jewish world, there are all possible imaginable attitudes
So when you say, what do Jews think about the Bible? Everything.
everything you can think of about the Bible
so it is meant within the Jewish culture
So you can't say: but when the Jews say it… no.
These people say this, and those people say the exact opposite.
Okay? So this must be clear.
So it's not that they're right, no, they have them all.
As for Elohim, when reading the Bible, there are dozens of Elohim.
I can't say how many, because I don't know, but there are dozens of them.
some are named in the Bible, and it is said over whom they ruled
I just quoted one here, Kemosh, another was Milkom, another was Kos, another was Astarte, etc.
and the Bible tells us who they ruled over
So the Bible is knowledgeable.
she knew well that especially those she was dealing with were all of low and the same level
who were treading around the same pieces of land
So Solomon, the wisest of all men, as tradition says
He had cult sites built for two others, besides Yahweh, and Yahweh gets pissed off and then takes the kingdom away from him.
But Solomon was no fool, he knew well that Yahweh was here today, and might not be here tomorrow.
so he wanted to be on good terms with everyone who was circling there
so he built places of worship for Chemosh, Milkom, etc.
so he proceeded diplomatically
and he had more irons in the fire, because you never knew who would prevail
over the others, ok? Only in later tradition did Yahweh become the one and the greatest
However, there are dozens of them in the Bible.
What happened to them?
from a certain time, especially from the time of the Babylonian exile, i.e. from the 6th/5th century BC.
there is basically no news about direct contacts
while before that the contact was continuous
then the Jerusalem priestly caste will get there and take over the government
and he will become the sole intermediary
Now, of course, I'm simplifying it.
Josephus tells us that in 70 AD, when the Romans came to Jerusalem
tired of messianic rebellions, and therefore determined to take it all and put an end to the whole mess
Josephus tells us that
when the Romans were approaching
The priests who were in the temple heard a great noise inside.
in the innermost part, which was their dwelling
a voice said: we are leaving this place
and then Josephus says that he was seen… you can find it in the 6th book of the Jewish Wars
a great phenomenon was seen, which, if it hadn't had so many witnesses, no one would have believed it
celestial chariots as they surrounded the city in the clouds
that was in the year 70 AD
The nice thing is that the greatest of the Roman historians, Tacitus, tells us the same thing.
who in the 5th book of History
he says that in Jerusalem, when the Romans came there
there was a battle in the sky… there were just these vehicles in the sky
and a voice from afar said: the deities are leaving this place, that's what Tacitus writes
in the 5th book, I quote the verses in a new book, in Latin, so anyone can check them
verses in Latin
This is never given to be translated in schools.
because then it would have to be explained
Okay? But Tacitus says so.
Pliny the Elder in the 8th book of Naturalis historia
tells us that at the time of the Cimburk wars
this was in the period 113-101 BC
when Gaius Marius was proconsul, in the Umbrian sky
there was a battle of celestial chariots
one of which came from the east and the other from the west, and the one from the west was defeated
Pliny
Has anyone heard about it at school?
Never, but it's there.
but it's there
they probably weren't ufologists…
neither Tacitus, nor Pliny, nor Josephus
so it is possible that in 70 AD. there has been a change of leadership in the Middle East
Then the Romans came with their own, and those who ruled there left.
Meanwhile, one interesting thing
in the Norse sagas, where the Æsir are mentioned
which is the Nordic equivalent of those there
it is said that they came to rule there later, because before that they ruled in the East
so there was a change of type, the Romans came with their own, so these guys took to their heels and went up there
Who knows?
Strabo, when speaking of the Celts
He says that when they captured prisoners, they burned them alive.
but they didn't do it because they were exceptionally cruel
and actually, so they wouldn't have to listen to the shouting
They danced and sang because they didn't want to hear the screams of those poor people.
but they were burned alive, says Strabo, because
the smoke produced by this meat was very tasty for their deities
just like the biblical elohim, just like the Greek theoi, in the book I state
more than 30 cases where this is told in the Iliad and the Odyssey
exactly as in the case of Roman deities
which required
in the early phase of Roman religion
they wanted to reserve the omentum for themselves
and omentum, I don't know if I have it here
and the omentum is the fat covering the viscera
that part was reserved for them, you can find it in the studies of academics, like this one
Dei e religione dell'anticha Roma, the author is academician Gian Matteo Corrias
He has a specialization at the Paris school Hautes Etudes, it is described there.
So, they asked for the fat covering the entrails, which had to be burned to create smoke.
Do you know what is written in the Bible, in Leviticus 3, in the translation of the Italian Episcopal Conference?
in this offering, you will present the fat covering the entrails by burning it in the fire for Yahweh
everything that is above it, both kidneys with their fat
fat around the hips and around the liver lobe, which you cut off above the kidneys
God says so, okay?
he gave absolutely clear butcher's instructions, that fat is mine
and elsewhere it is written
He says to his people: if you catch someone using that fat for themselves, you will kill them, because that fat is mine.
Excuse me?
the Elohim gather in flocks
The story here is the same everywhere, it's exactly the same everywhere.
someone wrote to me that in Tharros, Sardinia
sacrificial instructions were found, where they burned children
and so that they wouldn't hear the children's screams, they danced and sang, but they burned them for those there
so not out of cruelty
but because they were forced, because they wanted it from them
…exactly as Yahweh required… please
you have repeatedly quoted the Book of the Wars of the Lord, which has been lost
Before, Enrico was talking about the Vedas, about combat/war techniques in India.
it's something normal, explicit there
in biblical texts, or the classical ones that you are analyzing now
Did you come across anything similar there in terms of the art of war?
No details, no, no, not in the Bible at all, and actually when I hear Enriko speak
So I'm thinking, how small the Bible is, the Bible is the youngest of all.
for example, the Mahabharata, which is the Iliad and the Odyssey combined x 20
Do you understand?
What is the Bible? It's a handbook for little marmots.
as opposed to that, you know? that's just the way it is
there, the narratives are much more explicit and extensive
The Bible is a story about the relationship of one family with one of them.
so we know the ones who are there, and then a few who are named
Okay? As for the Greeks, I started 1.5 – 2 years ago, I started with the Iliad and the Odyssey.
I started with books that are considered to be the product of purely poetic fantasy.
No? But when it comes to martial arts, I didn't find that there, I found technology.
e.g. in a new book for Mondadori publishing house, there will be a study on Homeric technology as described by Homer
which takes over the studies carried out by technical universities
e.g. the University of Patras
where, with absolute calm, university teachers define Hephaestus
chili of theoi, who was involved in metal processing, as a design engineer
thanks to what he did, and they say that to their understanding
of the things he did, we have to put all our current knowledge on the table
as, for example, when talking about the two maids he used
as an escort, because he was limping on both legs
because he was thrown off a cliff, so he practically couldn't walk
Here, these two maids are specifically said to have had thought and word in them, which is absolutely normal for any maid.
…they had skin like gold
and the description ends with the words: in everything they resembled living maids
such cyborgs…
that's how it's written there
now in a new book I also present Heliodorus, who speaks of special
the ways in which these people moved around, he quotes Homer
they were tying knots under their feet…
Do you remember the flying carpets?
Islamic cultures?
they were tied under their feet… and then they flew quickly with them
just above the ground, above the water, or even above the treetops
Heliodorus in Aethiopica writes: this is the reason why
Egyptian deities are always depicted with their feet together.
wings on the feet
It's already being done.
And one more quick question, the name of the piece of jewelry?
it has no name, it is referred to as a cult jewel
It has no name… thank you… please
Excuse me, a little curiosity.
in my baby, so tiny
I read the word turbines in Ezekiel.
But does this word exist? Yes.
that's exactly what a rapidly rotating circle means
So… it's a strange little word…
But Ezekiel describes flying machines…
blah blah
it's "Gilgal"…
a wheel that spins quickly
and one more thing
…the Bible draws on older Sumerian stories and Sumerian tablets, doesn't it? Yes.
I would like to know what you think about Sitchin, who did that research…
I think the core will be correct.
but there is more in the Sumerian texts, and it is more comprehensive
because, fortunately, they did not end up in the hands of theologians
they did not pass through the filter of the priestly caste, like the Jewish one
which wanted to present Yahweh as
first the most important, and then even the only one
and did her best to remove what could be removed
Sumerian-Akkadian texts that had no religious purpose, but were simple records of memories
are much more eloquent, because it is there that the production of adams is told
However, Sumerian-Akkadian texts also describe unsuccessful attempts.
while the Bible, which must speak of God, says that when God decides to make Adam, he makes him and that's that.
It tells about all the attempts they made, but they ended badly.
until they manage to make the right one, and lo and behold, his name is Adam
Exactly, which means "earth", if I'm not mistaken… so the one from Earth, an earthling, from Earth.
It is also called lulu, which means mixed.
blah blah blah
There is more truth in those texts than in the Bible.
By the way, for a large part of the Jewish world, the Talmud is truer than the Bible, okay?
The Talmud is a collection
the thoughts of hundreds of rabbis, collected over centuries
and for a large part of the Jewish world, the Talmud is truer than the Bible
which is quite possible
But we have the Bible here, because the religion here is based on the Bible.
I'll come back… to compare…
…to the flood
The biblical story of the flood comes from the story of the flood in the Epic of Gilgamesh.
No? Noah is there.
Sumerian-Akkadian, named Utnapishtim or Ziusudra
and as the end approaches… a piece of land is finally visible
exactly as in the Bible, where it is written that Noah took a large number of animals and burned them for the Elohim
Someone might say: he barely managed to save them on the ark…
and as soon as he lands on solid ground, he immediately takes them and burns them
So he probably took something else into the ark.
Thus, it is written in Sumerian-Akkadian texts that he put animal semen into her.
The Bible says that he put pairs into it… but seed in pairs?
DNA, i.e. they preserved the DNA of the animals they had created and needed.
However, it says there that
will make this great sacrifice of a large number of animals
and God says, he'll get high, he'll fly, he'll be lured
and says: I'll never do something like that again, and immediately calms down
exactly as it is written in the Bible, that the smoke calmed them down
The Epic of Gilgamesh says that when the Sumerian-Akkadian Noah
a large number of animals are burned
So the Elohim gathered like flies attracted to meat.
not the Elohim, they are called the Anunnaki there…
The announcers flocked like flies attracted to meat.
Excuse me, so they brought the tradition of eating meat here?
Yes… that habit… let's say
let's say we also worked our way up to eating meat
since we are not adapted to any environment and are not adapted to anything
In principle, we are not adapted to any type of food.
because we don't even have the digestion of herbivores
nor the typical digestion of granivores
not even the typical digestion of carnivores, we have a little bit of everything
So we started eating meat somewhat by chance, probably because we found dead animals, burned by fires.
Then we started eating meat, following the example of hyenas…
to eat meat killed by others
which, by the way, we do all the time, we behave exactly like hyenas
we eat meat killed by others
So, I'll ask on camera, because I'm relaying this to my friend at our place…
A friend asks why the Elohim fought among themselves and did not cooperate, when…
because they were the same as us, or rather, we are the same as them
They behaved like ordinary rulers.
everyone tried to expand their sphere of power
their territory, their well-being and their wealth, just like others, there is no difference in that
Thank you, please.
First of all, congratulations… where? Yeah, there.
I have a thought, we are now at a certain point…
We went through a time when we were not allowed to own a Bible, we were not allowed to read the Bible, under penalty of death…
now there is greater openness… this morning there was talk of the Holy Roman Church as the most powerful organization in the world
why, intentionally or unintentionally
Does he leave this space, this gap, open?
I wanted to know your opinion.
because I might be lucky
in the sense that
…because with new communication tools, it is no longer possible to keep things under wraps.
Nothing, practically.
in the sense that if someone has some information, they put it on the internet, and the next minute a billion people can read it
and in my opinion it is possible, I'm not saying probable, but possible
that they are preparing to start saying some things
the fact that there is someone here like me
who started to interpret it for their own benefit
so it may be useful at that moment…
if these things spread here
because they are "obvious"
They can say: but we never intervened.
if these things disappear because it turns out that they are all my fabrications
because we do as… they say: but we never intervened
Is it understandable?
so that is, as usual, the absolutely most sensible behavior
but really the most sensible behavior
It's called plausible deniability.
The CIA developed it 30 years ago.
It's no coincidence that those who have always ruled are intelligent.
because the worst thing they could do would be to make me visible by attacking me
Those at the bottom do it because they can't take it anymore, they have to rebel, those at the top…
deniability, in the sense that… we'll see what's appropriate for us to do
Well, we'll wait and see, we can always say: but we…
Greetings, hello Mauro
I wanted to ask you about one thing that you brought up at the last conference.
and which I have heard in other conferences on YouTube
when you were talking about the 6 million Jews
Yes, okay.
I may not be able to formulate the question well, but you know what I'm talking about.
You said that this extermination of Jews was planned, it was discussed in 1915, etc., in various articles, etc.
and here the question remained open
…I didn't find an answer to it…. and then Rh+ and Rh-
Ask Pietro Buffa about Rh+ and Rh-
because it's not my field, I know that
it may have some external origin
I also know that the origin does not theoretically necessarily require external intervention.
chilli, so both answers are possible here
or when you ask your peer Pietro Buffa
he is a molecular biologist with whom we collaborate
He will explain it to you very well… I know that both options exist.
Okay? So let's be open… and then…
as regards the question of the Jews
My friend means that the Holocaust caused the death of 6 million Jews.
The strange thing is that those 6 million Jews, precisely those 6 million who were supposed to die in Europe
This was discussed and written about in Jewish magazines at the end of the 19th century.
and then it was said in the most important American newspapers since the beginning of the 20th century.
and it was written in some editions of the British Encyclopedia
I will only read some of them to you.
The Sun of June 6, 1915
6 million Jews in Russia are persecuted, prosecuted, suppressed, left to starve, massacred
New York Times, October 18, 1918
6 million Jews need help.
New York Times, September 8, 1919
6 million Jews in Ukraine and Poland received the message that they would be completely exterminated.
So here, 50 years before Hitler, there were 6 million Jews, who in one way or another
must die
I always say…
Excuse me?
No, no, no, still 6.
for the whole 50 years, it's still 6 million
and then Nazism comes and exterminates 6 million of them
Previously, their death was said to have been caused by the Tsarist Empire.
then the Soviet Union, and only Nazism succeeded, ok?
So, I'm leaving the question open, I always say
that if I were a Jew, I would want my historians to give me some credible explanation
So, who is it that knew 50 years before Hitler that 6 million
Is he supposed to die? And it was still 6 million.
no nation will remain the same in number
still 6 million, from the end of the 19th century until 1945, still 6 million
Then we'll talk about it privately, certainly not publicly.
Good day, Professor, one question.
I would like to learn more about the ephod, the device that the Elohim used to communicate.
and whether the ephod has any technological connection to the iPhone we use today
So, let's say it's an iPhone.
which we use today is very similar to it
as regards the layout
efod is, by the way, a Hebrew term that is never translated because it is not known how to translate it
Fortunately,
Even Elohim should not be translated, because there is no certainty about it, it should be left as it is, but…
Fortunately, efod is not translated.
It was a device worn by the high priest, it was a kind of…
it was a bib with a cover, it was a rectangular element
it was tied at the back with a string, and two straps
it had 12 colored stones, which were used for remote communication
and the Bible tells us how David used it in battle on two occasions
when he didn't know what to do, and so
bible literally bible: calls the bearers of the ephod
and says to him: bring me the ephod, and only when he has it with him
so he can communicate with Yahweh, who is distant
when he didn't have the ephod with him… I was there for 15 months
in one NATO combat company, and I saw it there
several times, and when I read it in the Bible, I said: here it is, the telegrapher
The company commander says to him: come here, bring me the radio
and then they use the radio to talk to their superiors, who are… exactly the same.
By the way, Enrico, who was recently in Sardinia, told me
by the way, among the components of the ephod, which is described as a kind of circuit
There is one substance that is very rare and difficult to produce: byssus silk…
he's still there… as Enrico told me… we also met in Sardinia
There is another woman in Sardinia who does it, it is made from one mollusk
now it is protected, etc., etc.
chili, now the question is how they had that silk in the desert of the exodus
among other things
but what is interesting is that byssus silk is a complete electrical insulator
It is an electrical insulator.
and the whole description… by the way, when the Bible says…
translated as: the work of the artist
No, the Bible says: the work of the designer
not an artist
because the thing was under the tunic, so no one saw it
so there was no reason for it to be nice, because no one saw it, it was covered
still covered
and in the Bible it is said: the work of the designer, i.e. a technical work
not a work of art
and then the Bible says that this was the use here
and we were just talking about it… he told me before that he was going to go and see it in Sardinia…
and now I have received confirmation: it is an electrical insulator
but look, I don't know how much time we have left, there are myriads of things we can talk about…
I'll read this to you because it's interesting.
when
If someone has to go, let them go, I won't be angry, I'm telling you straight…
we can chat here in peace…
when 2 years ago, the founder of the newspaper La Repubblica, Scalfari
He debated with the Roman Jewish community and Benedict XVI through open letters.
through the newspapers… as what you present to us as the God of love, in reality…
What you're telling us is not very palatable for a human being…
So they answered him: look, Scalfari, it's enough if you read the Bible.
it is clear there, and they quoted this verse to him
Leviticus 19:18
Do not take revenge or bear a grudge against the descendants of your people, love your neighbor as yourself, I am the Lord.
It couldn't be clearer…
here, here
whoever commits adultery with a married woman, as well as whoever commits adultery with his neighbor's wife, both adulterers shall be killed
without animosity…
If someone had an affair with their daughter-in-law, both will be killed, they have committed something abominable.
Whoever mates with an animal must die, and the animal must also be killed.
If a woman approaches an animal to mate with it, you shall kill the woman and the animal.
I mean, when someone says "read the Bible" and quotes one verse, you also need to read the sauce around it, right? Because otherwise…
and when we read that sauce… I'll tell you something interesting
it says: do not mate cattle… immediately after "love your neighbor"
By the way, do you know that the "neighbor" in Hebrew means your fellow countryman with whom you are in contact, not humanity?
humanity, as we have seen, needed to be wiped out…
that is, whenever a nation was in a place that interested them, everyone was to be murdered
including women, children and the elderly
Love your neighbor means love your neighbor, i.e. a member of your clan
this is clear in the Bible
You shall not sow two kinds of seed in your camp, nor shall you wear clothing made of two different fabrics.
So, I don't use it, but if any of you have underwear where cotton is on the skin and wool is on top, God doesn't like it.
But there is one reason here.
Here's one reason.
in priestly robes, and especially in those of the high priest, i.e. specifically Aaron
who entered the innermost part of Yahweh's dwelling, where the Ark of the Covenant was involved in extremely dangerous things
that person had to be dressed in a specific way
because he was inside a Faraday cage
on the surface he had… then we'll get under the surface
on the surface, it had a large cloak with a single opening
with the stitching… it says there: made so that it can never be torn
because it was not allowed to be torn
there were bells on the outside
and the Bible says: this is how the bells will ring and he will not die
So, what does that mean? That when God didn't hear the bells ringing…
when the priest was inside and moving, those who were outside could hear the bells, and that meant he was moving
when the bells stopped ringing, it meant that it was necessary to pull it out immediately
because he could have died
and he was to be clothed in linen
and just, as we all know
It has significant anti-static properties.
but it loses them immediately when it is interwoven with wool
you shall not wear clothing made of two different fabrics
and you won't just mix with wool
he knew well what he was doing here
He knew well what he wanted… you understand?
so it's not an absurd command
They then put it all together, but this command served its purpose.
precisely the one who used the linen and entered there had to be protected
before what was happening inside
//connections with the Divine Comedy//
//type Giugliano Di Benedetti//
So, I quoted the work of Giuliano Di Benedetto.
because he did it with the Divine Comedy
similar to the work I did with the Bible, the book is called La via di Dante…
By the way, I'll tell you…
…you know, this morning I was talking about the Marian dogma
the dogma of the Immaculate Conception… there is a nice book by Laura Feziy
which is called: Marian apparitions, a big fraud… who is interested in that
let him think about it, because it's really worth it, you'll understand all the nonsense that is said about Marian apparitions
end of insert
So, Giuliano Di Benedetto's book is based on the assumption
that the letter that Dante wrote to Cangrande della Scala
in which he says that in his comedy
there is more truth in the literal than in the metaphor
as if he were saying: 'Be careful here, understand that I am basing this on things I have seen.'
…and he acted as if it could be true
and an extremely interesting analysis came out of it
which refers to, or rather lets surface
knowledge… by the fact that Dante belonged to certain "esoteric" groups…
which was knowledge concerning Sumerian-Akkadian stories
as in Purgatory… and also biblical…
as, for example, when Dante sees approaching
the so-called heavenly class, so in those chapters of Purgatory he says
but I won't tell you more about that
because that is exactly what Ezekiel saw
chili: I saw the same things as Ezekiel saw
so there is no need for me to tell you more
in the sense that when you just "pretend"
so certain results can be achieved this way, at least it's worth a try
certain things are coming to the surface
but which, if not done as if, will never surface
By the way, there is still a book about the Divine Comedy.
by Chiara Dainelli, married Hohenzollern
listing Dante's astronomical references
where she, based on Dante's concreteness
the sky, which Dante describes as having been seen in Mesopotamia, i.e. in that territory, at the time of Adam and Eve
it situates Adam and Eve… and actually, when I first heard her speak in Rome, I said: that's not possible
to the same period where I place them, when I start
from biblical calculations, i.e. 4200 BC
and she says, Dante, based on
The cross that was visible is no longer there, but it was visible then.
Adam and Eve were in that period.
which is exactly what I calculated retrospectively
based on biblical generations
chili between 4500 and 4000 BC. BC
because, I repeat, Adam and Eve are not the ancestors of mankind
they are the ancestors of the Adam race
So when
Cain kills Abel and is banished from the tribe.
He says: "But if you drive me out, whoever meets me will kill me."
But if they are the ancestors of mankind, then who is this "anyone"?
Adam and Eve were here, Abel was already dead, and he
but he knew very well that if he was expelled from that group, which was privileged because
lived in contact with the Elohim, so that group had a high cultural level
and he would end up among the savages, so he says: if I end up among them, they will slit my throat
but it worked out for him, he found a wife, he built a city
and so on, ok?
blah blah
books inspired by God, then they were lost
bla
Biblical exegesis turns a book of war into a collection of religious hymns.
but it doesn't say that they were war songs…
blah blah
blah blah
I would like to know if it is possible to know
…among the Qumran scrolls there is a book on the principles of combat
the scroll of the war, whether there is a reference to the Book of the Wars of the Lord in that scroll
No… it's a book about war.
between
the Messiah, the Lord of Light, and the Lord of Darkness, so between the two Messiahs
Yes? That doesn't concern the Wars of Yahweh.
it was a messianic war that they expected at any moment
in which
by the right Messiah should triumph over the Messiah of darkness
so there is no reference to the Wars of Yahweh there
As for those lost books…
is there a book that could be considered related to this…
and thus add something that goes on forever…
lost, it doesn't mean forever, because they didn't destroy them
bla
they did not destroy them
and when there were synagogues, they put them in one room in the synagogue
it was a room located in every synagogue
until they were taken to the cemetery of books, but they burned them
because they were written by their ancestors
they simply made them unavailable
so in my opinion they are in some library
as regards the Holocaust of the Jews
if what we have been told and testified to until today
To this day, in the matter of the Holocaust, I still ask myself
Hitler, who did he work for?
This question here…
Let's say it without microphones, okay?
because my attitude is too delicate…
Can you hear me? Good day.
I'll stick to this gentleman's question for a moment, you once spoke
about the generation of Adam, about the generation of the serpent
The Bible talks about it… and that in connection with Hitler.
if you could elaborate on this matter…
I read about the Jews, the Khazars, who converted to Judaism.
only because they are from elsewhere
whether by any chance they can figure in that context…
that's a completely different song
Let's put it this way.
when Eva
he commits his disobedience here, which was then transformed into the non-existent original sin
that disobedience actually consisted of sexual intercourse with one of the elohim
with whom she conceived Cain, who was the son of one of those there
and in the first Christian groups there were the so-called Cainite sects
who said that the generation of Cain is superior to that of Abel, because Cain was the son of one of those
Not Abel, so even among Christians this was said.
when this happened, this mixing, which should not have happened
The head of Gan Eden says: between your generation and the generation of the serpent there will be enmity
the term Nachash refers to that elohim-rival
rival of those who controlled Gan Eden
chili, there will be hostility, and therefore your generation
Adam's generation, which was to remain genetically pure
crushes the head of the other
Hitler says in Mein Kampf that the task is
to remedy the poisoning of the breed that occurred at that time
so that the Creator would have the pure race that He wanted
…so he, too, apparently took over this biblical passage
about the existence of two… one poisoned race
and he speaks directly of the poisoning that occurred at the beginning, that is, of the biblical poisoning
and one that, on the contrary, is to be returned clean
You can find this in Mein Kampf published by Kaos
it was edited by the historian Giorgio Galli… so, why 6 million
When we look at what is written in the Bible, 600,000 people left with Moses.
people, sorry, 600 thousand, people in full strength
people in full strength, that meant
basically young
between 20-30 years old, i.e. those who could fight
since each of them had
family members, so he could have had a few wives because they practiced polygamy
several children and several relatives of advanced age
we can say that there could have been 7-8-9 people, 10 with each of them
600 thousand times X makes about 6 million
so the first calculation could have originated there
and it could have persisted there over time
Yeah? And then?
…as for the Khazars, just read the book by Prof. Shlomo Sand
who teaches history at Tel Aviv University, who is talking about this
Please.
I wanted to add something about the tussah silk.
I recently studied iconography, and I know Byzantine silk as
a special fabric made of valuable fine linen
used as a base on a wooden board
chili as the first layer of iconographic painting
but I would like to ask about something else
When we move to the period after Christ, I would like to understand the figures of Peter and Paul.
How much time do we have for this?
So Peter and Paul were two who couldn't stand each other, they didn't agree on anything.
they disagreed on everything concerning the possible figure of the Master, assuming he really existed
then the church lumped them together to replace the pagan figure
Romulus and Remus and the Dioscuri
They needed two twins, so they put Peter and Paul together.
but they put together a hodgepodge
with everything included
because Peter had an opinion
and that was the Jewish view of Jesus, Paul had and developed a Hellenistic idea
So they didn't agree on anything.
By the way… a curiosity
there could be more of them…
when Judas betrays Jesus
we know that after the resurrection… which never happened, because they took him down from the cross alive
Jesus appears to the eleven
we read that Jesus appeared to the eleven
and then it's said, well, of course, there are eleven of them, because Judas is not there
but read the Gospel of John
It says there are 11 of them because Thomas was missing, not Judas.
because Judas probably did something that was predicted
he should have done it
and when he says: one of you will betray me tonight… and everyone asks: will it be me? will it be me? and he says: who's going to get wet?
which means: is there a volunteer here?
and Judas says: I'll do it
and then among those 12… Jan says: Thomas is missing
called Didymus, or the twin
And now I'll ask you a question, still according to the most normal and stupid common sense.
is there a group of 12 people
with a charismatic leader, so the difference between those 12 and the leader is abysmal
and it is said that these 12 people are followed by women
This is Marie, this is Františka, this is Laura.
and here is the wife
Whose wife is she?
Thomas, called Didymus, the twin, period.
Whose twin is it?
So not a twin of… a twin, period.
Be careful, when they did implantations here, sometimes they ended up with twins.
as in the case of Jacob and Esau… look, I'm dangerous when I continue like this indefinitely…
Jacob and Esau, you know there is a story about Esau who steals the birthright from Jacob, because Esau was born first.
but every gynecologist will explain to you
that in the case of twins, the one who is born second is the one who was conceived first
so the real firstborn is Jacob, not Esau
and Jacob always calls him his firstborn.
if this conception of twins occurs after the Elohim perform a procedure on the mother
because she was barren, and the same thing happened to Sarah
that is, when there were infertile women in the family, they performed a procedure and they conceived
So, Jacob and Esau, Jacob is the firstborn.
the first one conceived, he will be born second, but the birthright is his
and if Jesus… it is said that "the" Twin was there
and if Jesus is the fruit of the implantation performed by that Gabriel I told you about this morning
Anyway, we're just pretending, who cares what happens next.
we're doing it like, putting together mosaic pieces and watching what comes out of it
Does something that makes sense come out of it? Then we'll stick with it… Does something that doesn't make sense come out of it? Then we'll throw it away… What's the problem with that?
we don't have to create sects, groups, or religions, nothing
we think freely among ourselves
As the organizers know, I only speak where I am invited.
I, since 2010
I have never organized or requested a single conference.
When they stop calling me, I'll stop doing conferences from the next day.
…
…because this year I wanted to conquer the Col de l'Iseran
which is 2840 meters, but I don't have enough time to train
So, I'll stop immediately, because I don't have the profession of a preacher.
When you call me, I will present my doubts and my considerations to you.
If you like it, keep it in your head, if you don't like it, forget it.
Something about the new law… because we talked a lot about the old one… I'd like to hear something new.
I already said something new about the new law today, didn't I?
Yes, but not much.
I wrote something in the book.
…I was talking about Gabriel.
when Joseph feels that Mary was deceived by someone who pretended to be someone else
but let's put it this way
I was talking about Moses, who was not supposed to die.
when Jesus is on that famous mountain, where the so-called Transfiguration takes place
Who will visit him there? Two.
Elijah and Moses, two who did not die in the Bible
Where did they come from?
We're just pretending and asking ourselves, what's the problem with that?
We are not inventing any new truth, we are asking and thinking, period.
That's it.
…you know that it all ends with the Ascension
the output in the concept indicates
that the person who is performing is active
all the Greek verbs in the New Testament that describe the event
they are all passive, he was pulled up
He did not ascend, he was drawn up.
and I don't know if this actually happened here
but if they are holy scriptures, and they are inspired by God, then it is written there that he was drawn up
and if they are true, then this is true, and not something else
and when Paul says in the new law
don't forget to practice hospitality
because maybe one of you, without knowing it, hosted one of them
they resemble us so much
This is what Paul, the founder of Christianity, says, so Christians are obliged to believe him.
and Paul also says… although there are many so-called deities in heaven
as in, it is true that they are there, but for us, only one applies, but they are there –//= monolatry//–
and if they are there, then they are there
when Pavel says it… I don't really trust Pavel, but
if it is in the scripture, which is sacred to the power of two, then it is written there
and if it is sacred squared, then we are obliged to believe it
otherwise we are again choosing what to believe and what not to believe, we can take Tex Willer and do the same with him
I respect it.
By the way, Bonelli dedicated an entire episode to someone other than Tex in one of his editions…
But, I can't remember which one it was now…. so I have nothing against it
It's holy.
Where? Over there.
as for original sin
Perhaps this is not so much a question for you, but rather for a Catholic theologian.
but that original sin, if it really happened
during that world flood, one family will be saved, Noah's
which was supposed to be "clean"
chili not burdened by original sin
How do Catholic theologians explain this?
why do we remain sinners, when
the entire human race has been wiped out
and was only saved
one branch, one family, two clean persons
Why do we remain sinners even after these pure people?
Yes, theologians should answer this question because, of course, if there was no original sin
So there's no sinner here…
The first part of the question provides a very interesting insight…
if the story of Noah is taken as a normal story
Noah comes from Adam, he is a descendant of Adam and Eve.
and if Adam and Eve committed the original sin, then it is tainted, period.
and then they say he was a pure and righteous man
In Hebrew, a pure and righteous person meant pure from a phenotypic and genotypic point of view.
Thus in the Ethiopian Book of Enoch, when speaking of Noah's birth
The Ethiopian Book of Enoch is apocryphal for us.
it is canonical for Coptic Christians
it is written that when his father Lamech saw him
He looks at him, sees his white skin.
red hair
large and bright eyes, as if they were shining
and immediately exclaims: but that's not my son, that's the son of those people over there
and asks for an explanation
Lamech follows Methuselah, his father, who follows Enoch.
which was the one who left with…
and he asks for an explanation, and the explanation calms him down
But for Lamech, it is clear that Noah is the son of those, he is the son of those.
and it is indeed said there that purity is restored through Noah
but it was genotypic and phenotypic purity
because the flood they caused, it probably wasn't the great flood…
9-10 thousand BC, but it was a local flood
which was supposed to wipe out all the descendants of that mixing
which occurred after Genesis Chapter 6
Yes, I've finished speaking.
in the sense that
if it is said within that group that this is a Twin
instinctively, we all understand that this is Jesus' twin
if it is Jesus' twin, and if Jesus is the product of implantation
the implantation, exactly as in the case of Jacob and Esau
she could have had twins
of which Jesus was the first to be conceived, i.e. he was pre-selected
just like Jacob
no one died on the cross
Professor
…
A quick question…
when speaking of the Old Testament
there is talk of transport technology, war technology, transmission technology
but it is possible that from an archaeological point of view
wasn't there a fragment of any of this?
two possible answers
First: let's imagine
that these people got here with a certain amount of resources
Of course, they got here with a limited number of resources, it wasn't the whole invasion.
that on the whole planet
we do not find residues of 50-60-70% of the means
is, in my opinion, a statistical norm
Okay? It's like you want to find the remains of 70-80 trucks that were all over the planet.
second possible answer: here I refer to the work of Jim Marse
which is a giant of counter-information, published by the New York Times
who says that a lot was found, but it's all locked up
in some places, e.g. at the Smithsonian Institution
in whose depositories are those things that must not be known
Okay?
and if you want to learn more, you can read the books of Marco Pizutti
Unauthorized archaeological excavations
where you can find a lot of things
it's just not talked about
I have a letter from an official archaeologist in my notes.
who writes to me: when I embarked on an academic career, I thought that truth was being sought there
I can't say who it is, because…
but he says: no, there are a number of things that must not be talked about
Alas, it's simply not allowed.
It's not allowed, it's written there… so…
Mauro… Mauro, where?
Aha, here.
I would need your comment or explanation.
one passage of the Old Testament
which seems to be the case, according to what you have taught us over the years
that it was written after the new law and then crammed into the old one
I'm talking about the 2nd Book of Maccabees.
Chapter 7, verse 9 and also 28
It talks about the story of 7 brothers…
who are captured… and are told
choose a meat dish, which they were forbidden to have
or we will torture and kill you
and they would each choose torture rather than betray the law of Moses
and they are sure that they will be resurrected and live forever, Jesus was not yet, Paul was not yet
So, this certainty of eternal life, of resurrection, where did they get it from?
…
and there is even a mother who, when I think, the last son remains
So he says to him: hold firmly to your faith in that God who created everything out of nothing.
so there is even this concept of creation from nothing
Indeed, the Books of Maccabees are not accepted by the Jewish canon.
because they are the fruit of Greek Hellenistic thought
but where does it come from? From Platonism and Neoplatonism
but the idea of an afterlife, when…
from the spiritual ideas that were used in Hellenistic thought
could it have been written after, after Jesus?
after St. Paul and inserted there? Be that as it may, it was written in the heyday of the Hellenistic period
after all, the names of the protagonists are Greek names
the names of the protagonists are Greek names
so the idea that the books of the Old Testament were written before Jesus
and you, after Jesus, can be misguided?
Could there have been some mixing? For example, the Book of Wisdom.
which is not part of the Jewish canon
some researchers say that it was completed in the 1st century AD.
It's interesting.
that according to the doctrine, the entire Old Testament is nothing but a preparation for the coming of the Messiah
The Book of Wisdom, which was certainly written a few years before Christ
and according to some, it was completed after Jesus' death
They don't talk about Christ.
It's like I've done all the preparation, and then when it comes…
I don't know anything about him anymore.
The Old and New Testaments are really two different things.
those books are not really accepted
because they are the fruit of Greek thought, because they contain concepts that do not belong to Jewish thought
although in Jewish thought there were disputes between the Pharisees
and the Sadducees, because the Pharisees believed in the afterlife and the Sadducees did not
and the Sadducees were the high priestly caste, they said that there is nothing after death
Yes? So I've already talked a little bit about it before, in the Hebrew world we can encounter all possible contradictions.
that is their wealth, and actually
in the book of Kohelet
3.19
it is indeed written that the fate of people is the same as the fate of animals, as one dies, so the other dies
both have the same breath of life
without a person having anything more than an animal
both are vanity, all go to the same place
both come from dust and both return to dust
This is written in the Bible, but I don't know if it's true.
So, whoever says that there is a soul, etc., will say: who wrote Kohelet, of whom we do not know who he was?
He didn't know anything, okay, we'll take note that he didn't know anything, but it's written there.
then we can safely say that he was a poor man who did not believe in the soul
Okay, but it's in the biblical canon.
Greek re-evaluation?
Which one?
No, in the Maccabean one, I don't think so.
Yes, theoretically, but there is a story about a rebellion.
against those customs imposed against Jewish tradition, yes, theoretically yes, but…
I wouldn't say that for sure…
Good day.
You keep talking about a literal interpretation of the Bible.
I would like to know what you think.
about the esoteric, numerological interpretation of the Bible, which is presented, for example, by Arie Ben Nun
chili, as far as kabbalah is concerned
You want me to make a few thousand more enemies, don't you?
Kabbalistic thinking is the fruit of Sephardic Jews, i.e. medieval Spanish Jews.
and it is a reading using a mystical key
Let's realize
that they had an absolute need
not to let them understand that the Bible says that the ultimate promise is that the Jews will rule over all
so the elaboration of mystical, mysterious reading served
it was used to make it acceptable
and to avoid the risk of being completely wiped out, which would naturally happen
Okay? Please.
Sorry, Mauro, Zecharia Sitchin
…he was heavily persecuted for things about the Anunnaki.
bla
They're talking about Planet X, what do you have to say about that?
Who is from X? Zecharia Sitchin talks about her…
Yes, about Nibiru, but I didn't understand the question.
What do you know about it?
…no, no, no, I don't know anything more than what's written, I'm one of those who are waiting for something specific
because even NASA…
the existence or non-existence of Nibiru will not change a single line in my work
So when they discover it one day, I'll say: ok
if one day it turns out that it doesn't exist, I'll say: ok
that's really my clear answer
I don't really deal with that…
…I'm waiting for those who are looking for it to say something specific
Excuse me, you said that Jesus did not die on the cross, and that no one died on the cross.
Are you deducing that from something that is written, or is it your own…
from evangelical excerpts
And that?
in the sense that
one part of that story
when they let him sniff the so-called "soaked sponge"
he had the exact opposite reaction to what would be expected
when someone inhales vinegar
so he wakes up for a moment, while he immediately breathes his last
So what did they give him to smell?
…they did it in such a way that what happened to everyone else wouldn't happen to him.
to break his legs, because at that moment they would not have been able to save him
then they take him, they take him down
As for the piercing of the side, there are medical studies that directly…
it simply served to prevent death by suffocation
then they will put him in the grave
the fragrances and ointments used to treat his body were those used to treat the wounded in the war
the women go to visit him at Sunday dawn
So, they put him in the grave around 5-6 p.m. on Friday.
those women go there around 5-6 am on Sunday, at most 36 hours have passed, not 3 days
The tomb is already empty, and he is no longer there.
So, no one knows how long he was inside.
so they probably pulled him out after a few hours
Let us remember that important figures of the Sanhedrin were interested in him.
the high priestly castes, who were on his side
Exactly.
so they were on his side
and they belonged to the group
if he was indeed a Jewish, anti-Roman messianic preacher
to the group that
She worked in secret, even without the knowledge of the 12 who were put on the front line.
they killed those whom everyone knew
So, there are a number of things here.
which suggest that the grey eminences, who were nevertheless in contact, probably intervened there
with the Roman world, and they managed to get him down alive
because, such a consideration, and I'm asking both Biglina and Baccarini
…it's here, isn't it?
and the reasoning is this:
The Bible does not speak of God, I am convinced of that.
blah blah
Sumerian-Akkadian texts, from what I've read, do not speak of a god
in the sense that we understand it, etc.
in the sense of an omnipotent god, etc.
…while in the Vedas there is the idea of God as we understand it, that is, the absolute God
and the gods are only
with the depiction of that absolute god, I wanted to ask
What do you think about it?
Thank you both.. You answer, I've been talking until now.
as for the Vedic gods, the Indian gods
there is a supreme being there, and the individual deities were not so much
emanations, but they were beings
they were physical beings who could die, they were incarnations of the deity
who, as Krishna, could have lived a long time
but then, as a result of the battle, old age, etc., she could have died
divinity, that is something that is not attainable
something immanent but unattainable, it was more of a concept
who was so distant that he remained so…
bla
there is no depiction… Brahma, who is considered the supreme being, was the supreme deity that was…
…Brahma was not depicted
and all other deities were a manifestation of his idea
So, I would like… Giuseppe…
usually introduced at the beginning
…but better late than never
So, here is Giuseppe, with whom we organized this small conference.
We want to thank you.
to the speakers…
blah blah
bla
Thank you endlessly.
I am infinitely grateful to Mauro Biglin…
and to all of you…
I hope that these performances will find fertile ground in each of us.
and that they will help us raise our awareness
…
and we'll let you know as soon as we organize the next event
Thanks to everyone, thanks.

Lecture 2017

https://youtu.be/hMWuvx5b84k

A BRIDGE BETWEEN WORLDS
So, your friends were telling you here
on the conditions, etc., so we will follow up on that right away
and we'll change the topic a bit
Let's assume that we are…
It was said here that one of the strongest tools of conditionality is religion.
but we are all really the product of training
constant training, precise and very effective
Let's make an example: let's assume that I am one embryo
in a nice belly on the island of Cyprus… can't you hear it?
So, I said I was that embryo there.
in a nice belly on the island of Cyprus, which is partly Turkish and partly Greek
and this beautiful belly is traveling
and I decide to leave him a few meters from the border
and I'm on the Greek side now, so I'll be born there
I am given a yellow ear tag, like some cow, according to which "you are a Greek"
you have this language, this history, you have these customs, you have these traditions
you have these values, you have this religion
and one day you may be asked to fight against those over there
I'm still the same embryo
I'll wait a few more meters for the birth.
I'll be born 4 meters further away
I will get a green tag.
I am told that you are a Turk, you have this language, this religion
you have these customs, these traditions, this history and these values
and when I am born on one side, I am trained to be a Greek
and when I am born on the other side, I am trained to be a Turk
but I am so well trained that I am then convinced that I am a Turk or a Greek
just as I am now convinced that I am an Italian
if I had been born a little further away than I was
I would now be absolutely convinced that I am French.
This is the result of training, because I am neither Greek, nor Italian, nor Turkish.
I, like all of us, am DNA.
who are born with some potential, and then they are made into "something"
is stuck in some kind of enclosure
because it is in the enclosures that people are kept under control
Right? Especially when those enclosures are then built against each other, one against the other.
and that is the reality, whether we like it or not
we are a species that is trained, just as we train our puppies
just as when we talk about
for God's sake
whose follower, I'll say it straight, I am not
this way I can freely love whoever I want and whoever I don't
in the sense that those who are followers of the God of love have a duty to love everyone
compulsorily
in fact, they must love above all those whom they would hate with great pleasure
But I'm free, I love who I want.
I can't hate, because that's a word I don't know…
I can at least choose.
but we are told to consider everyone as brothers
but then we live in the same society
which says that if you want to become a boss
you have to get around the other one, because otherwise he will get around you
So we live in a schizophrenic society.
all brothers, but one against the other
in the sense that we are social animals… then we'll get to the Bible, don't worry
we are forced social animals
the other animals are social due to their genetic structure
we are forced social animals, because if we are not together, nature kills us
so we have to be together, we have to be united, at least in groups
forced… I repeat…
when you take two dogs and put them in an empty train carriage
the two dogs will approach and sniff each other
When you put two people in an empty carriage, one will sit there.
and the second one to the opposite end
when the third one comes, they sit somewhere in the middle
and when the fourth one approaches, they will carefully choose a place at the same distance from the others
Is it so or not?
dogs sniff each other, we don't
because we are forced social animals
and we are also trained to become social animals
and by the way, trained in the name of
especially in the West, in the name of one
I say especially in the West, because
that's what interests us, what surrounds us
in the name of one religion
in which, perhaps
none of us… or with whom, that's better
maybe none of us has anything to do
I don't know if any of you are Jewish.
but if we read the Bible correctly
so it's not enough to be a Jew at all
if we read the Bible correctly, then that covenant
was not between Yahweh, the supposed god, who fortunately is not a god, and the Jews
but it is a covenant between Yahweh and the family of Israel
who is Jacob
Jacob's twin brother and his descendants have nothing to do with that covenant.
and they were actually supposed to be exterminated
the cousins of the Israelites, i.e. the descendants of Lot, Abraham's nephew, were to be exterminated
so one of the many clichés we are used to
is that there are Jews and others… no
you need to be careful, because he made this contract with the Israelites
with one family, out of thousands of Jewish families
I know what these things cost me, because
last time I was told that I was being monitored for antisemitism
So…
then, since I'm doing that example with the embryo there
So they tell me I'm a sovereigntist.
I didn't even know that any sovereignist movements existed.
these are the ones according to which no individual may be subordinated to any
no powers, but at the same time, those same groups tell me
that I work for the new world order, which is supposed to be the highest order
the last time they drew me in the uniform of a Nazi officer
because they want to make an anti-Semite out of me
if they manage to indict me… you know that here in Italy there are
certain laws on the Holocaust, on revisionism, etc., and so they try to
some groups, to accuse, and so they make me "something"
because everyone is used to it
thinking in boxes
So when someone says something, they immediately put you in a box.
If you say something different, they'll put you in a different pen.
and they do it without realizing it
that sometimes the same persons are simultaneously placed in different enclosures
even contradictory enclosures that are not even mutually compatible
but so be it
I'm telling it like it is.
I have been studying texts of Jewish theology for some time now.
e.g. in one of these texts published by Mamash
are edited exclusively by rabbis
it is written that Berešit, or Genesis
it is also called the Book of Creation, but the essence of that creation
it is not a story about mountains and valleys, about oceans and deserts
and not about animals and people
It is a story about the birth of Israel.
the people who inherited a certain task from Adam and Havy, that is, from Adam and Eve, period.
that's what they say
but it's enough to read the Bible and you'll understand it
So, let's leave.
these clichés, these thought processes, into which we have been very skillfully trained
in which we find ourselves
the thought processes that led to the creation of this religion
based on a certain set of books
about whom we actually know nothing
We don't know who wrote them.
we don't know, in principle, when they were written
we don't know how they were originally written
we don't know how they were originally read
and when I say this, I mean the new law, right? Beware, not just the old law
Let's not think that the 4 Gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, that's not it.
We don't know who wrote them, we don't know.
tradition attributes them to those
there are thousands of codices of the so-called canonical gospels and no two are the same
So we don't know anything about those texts.
those texts, by the way, and now I mean mainly the Old Testament
are preached to us as true, as inspired by God
are preached to us by those who are ninety… when I really close my eyes
who in 95% of cases do not know the language in which they were written
chili, pope, bishops, theologians
priests, catechists, etc. do not know Hebrew
and so they preach based on translations
translations that have been constantly changing over the years, are still changing and will continue to change
and these translations are always served to us as true in sermons
so at that moment we have to believe those things
So, we don't know who wrote it, we don't know when it was written… Israeli biblical scholars say
professors at Israeli Jewish universities
they say, they write, in complete calm
that the only certainty we have is that the Hebrew texts that we now have
they are not the same as those originally written, because they were altered with each transcription
So the only certainty we have is this one.
so we can only do as, we can only do as
so I have to laugh when I remember
to those groups of opponents, as I mentioned
because they are all in agreement: atheists, Catholic theologians, evangelical exegetes
Everyone is united against me.
They are all right.
these are all truths that differ from one another
everyone is united against someone who says: I don't have the truth and I'm just pretending
This would be worth analyzing psychologically and sociologically.
But they are not stupid.
they are not stupid, because if by chance my "acting as if" was true
then everyone will collapse
regardless of the truth they proclaim
that's why…
Their only bond is being against Biglin, right?
I don't have a problem with it, I enjoy it.
So we don't know who wrote it, when they wrote it, how they wrote it, or how it was read.
it is preached by someone who does not know the language in which it was written
It is absolutely believed by 1.5 billion people who have never read it.
Is it so or not?
This is Christianity.
if we were talking about a sect with 300 members
300, with one guru
who preaches based on a text about which nothing is known
This guru has about 15 envoys who help him spread his message.
15 plenipotentiaries who do not know the language in which the text was written
and then they have 250 loyal followers who blindly believe
to what the guru and the envoys say
without ever reading that text… what would we think of that sect?
So, what we think about that sect, let's think about Christianity… you don't have to tell me.
Let's think about Christianity, because it's exactly the same.
There is no difference, none at all.
Is there anyone here yet…?
Aha, a blue Fiat 600, a gray Ford Fiesta.
Sure, not that they were stolen, but they need to be re-parked.
When I was doing a conference in Lisbon 2 months ago, there was a letter there.
…I had several conferences in Portugal
It was in the center of Lisbon, and when I got there, a sealed letter was waiting for me on the table.
to be Mauro Biglino
and I immediately had it read out by the moderator who was hosting the conference
It said: you are Satan, you are the Antichrist, you will be punished… I still have it, as a memento.
too nice, it was handwritten
with those blue highlighters, like when someone is really pissed off…
so I thought that someone had already come here, but…
So, I was saying, Christianity is here, there's nothing to be done about it…
this is not yet related to translations, meanings, or anything
that's just a fact
texts are given to be believed, about which nothing is known
and are believed by those who have never read them, that's what I think
dramatic, because then they are considered true on the basis of preaching
maybe in about 2000 years they will do excavations here
then they won't find it
thousands of statues of someone nailed to a cross
from wood, from iron, from anything, from glass, from plaster… thousands, thousands
then they will do historical research and find out how it is now
that certain evidence…. here, be careful
there is no certain evidence of his historical existence
I say this calmly because I am one of those who believe that this person physically existed.
So I don't deny his existence.
But if you ask me: how do you know he existed? I'll tell you.
I'm pretending that he existed, because if he did, it would explain a lot of things.
but I am not in a position to give you evidence of its existence
and no one is able to give them to you
So they won't find this here.
and they say: they worshipped someone, but it is not known who, there is no certainty whether he existed or not
then they find millions, millions of statues, pictures
in the quotation marks of the middle deities
chili of the saints
and they say: here you go
besides praying to the one who was supposed to be the son of God
son of the only God
They also prayed to all these intermediary deities.
…after which they asked for mercy, favor, intercession
asked for intercession from…
big boss
Can someone explain it to me, but in a convincing way?
the difference between the Padre Pio statue on the nightstand
and with the statues of Lares and Penates, which the ancient Romans had on their nightstands?
convincingly but… explain
No difference.
It is said: The Lari and Penati were considered their ancestors.
but when we are at a funeral, doesn't the priest say
Let us pray for our dead.
and we ask our deceased to intercede for us with God
What is the difference compared to the Roman Lares and Penates?
None, none.
In 2000 years, they will say: Christianity was idolatry.
without any doubt
if they use it against Christianity
the same critical, exegetical categories that contemporary Christianity uses
to so-called pagan religions, Christianity is an idolatrous religion
There's nothing that can be done about it.
they also say that this one on the cross at one point
…they said that his mother was also divine, but that was later
Council of Ephesus, so after several centuries
They said his mother was divine, because of course
If he was a god, his mother had to be divine.
but that was after several centuries… if we read the gospels correctly
Find me someone who is treated worse than Mary in the Gospels.
her son himself treated her badly
who, at the age of 12, says to her: what the hell do you want from me?
Two slaps, right? Or is it not like that?
Nowadays, two slaps are not given, but they are useful.
That's right.
He was discussing with Mistry there.
that's exactly what all twelve-year-old Jewish children do at their bar/bat mitzvah
they were just transitioning into adulthood, they didn't do anything special
just like all Jewish children, it's called a bar/bat mitzvah
they become children of the Law, and he was of that age and was becoming a son of the Law
and for this purpose, he is discussing with rabbis, he did this here
and whenever his mother intervenes, he always pushes her away
but of course, this was not suitable here
so she became Theotokos, the Mother of God
but it was also because the church knew well
that if he is to take the followers of the so-called pagan cultures
she had to present a female deity, because they all had a female deity
if Christianity had not provided them
it would hardly have gained all those believers
that's not the only reason, there are of course others
and Christianity knew that if it did not provide all these mediating deities
then it would not have gained those believers again… but the fact is
that the so-called pagan cults
they could do that
Christians no
there is a ban pronounced by their god
you will never create an image
and you shall not worship any image
all churches are blasphemy against this divine command
all churches are blasphemy against this divine command
I know that sooner or later they'll shoot me…
So you should go to church with the Bible and say: gentlemen, away with everything.
then they make up some justification for what they've done here
but they made it all up to justify it
because that order has never been revoked
There's nothing that can be done about it.
images must not be worshipped
but if the church did not give permission, it would not be able to keep those believers
The church, however, gave permission because it knows well
that the god who will charge you for those images does not exist
because they made it up, so they're fine
they will never have to answer to anyone
for all those paintings with which they filled the churches and on which they make money, because they also sell them… you understand?
This is a complete deviation.
Idolatry – forbidden and economically exploited
last Sunday, when… or tomorrow morning… is today Saturday?
Yeah, sorry, it's not a joke, I really…
how many times has the priest told you
So, this week, have you sold all your property?
How many times has he told you?
And if he told you that, did you answer him yes or no?
and if you answered no, the priest should tell you
So, I'm sorry, you'll do it next week, because otherwise there's no point in you going to mass next Sunday.
The Gospel According to Mark
Christian families
A young man comes to Jesus and asks him: what should I do to become your follower? Keep the commandments.
I followed them all.
Chapter 10, Verse 17
Please, always verify what I tell you when I read the Bible, okay?
Verify everything, so I'll be at ease.
they are a little less calm when you verify what they are saying, I am calm
So… I've been following all those things since my childhood.
Jesus looked at him and said, "But you lack one thing."
Go, sell everything you have and give it to the poor, and follow me.
You are missing… so if you don't do it, keeping my commandments is not enough.
It's here, okay?
How many times have you been told that in church? Never.
because if they start telling you this, they will immediately lose… all believers
within a minute… please
No, no, I didn't understand it…
as long as there's some order in it…
I enjoy questions, just keep it organized…
So, that's what it says there, that's what the son of God said.
that's what they say… but for them, he is the son of God
It is clearly written there, there is no doubt about it, it is not some interpretation.
Then, sell everything you have and give it to the poor, that's not
as we think: I'll go, sell, and then I'll go look for the poor
the poor ones were them, that group
to whom the money had to be handed over, because the money was managed by the group
In Luke 8, we read
that many women followed the 12 with Jesus
who followed him, this public appearance according to the synoptic gospels lasted about 3 years
since they did not work a single day in those 3 years, and since there was no social support
and if someone wanted to eat, they had to work
it says there that there were women who constantly followed them
and secured them with their property
so they let themselves be supported by well-situated women
which in itself is not…
it's a free choice
but if Jesus allowed himself to be supported by well-off women
What is the difference compared to today's gurus, those cunning people who let themselves be supported by well-situated women?
Do you understand? Luke 8, read it.
were supported by well-off women
It's there.
in translations, in Bibles of Christian families
and if, then
…when Jesus left
Peter was there, the one who was giving orders
and in that group, which we would call a sect today
that law was in force there
it was necessary to sell the property and //money// put it on the table, that is, to give it, as they say
in the Acts of the Apostles, it had to be laid at the feet of the apostles
So the money was to be handed over to the bosses.
because the money was managed by the bosses
Ananias and Sapphira, a couple
They sold their field, but they did not hand over all the money, they kept some of it.
Peter calls Ananias and says to him:
Why did you think you could fool the spirit like that?
How dare you? And Ananias will die.
they will take him away to bury him
his wife comes, and Peter, with perfect police manners, says to her:
How much did you sell the field for? And she will say the same figure that she agreed on with her husband.
and he says: look, those who left to bury your husband
he'll be back soon and they'll bury you too
But wasn't that the group where the 7×7 forgiveness was supposed to be practiced?
he should not have said to Ananias: look
You sold it… we know you kept something, look…
That's not good behavior, the right thing to do would be to hand everything over, this time I'll forgive you… no
There was no forgiveness there… did Ananias have a heart attack?
Did he have a stroke?
Did he die laughing? Or, as Porphyry says, Peter killed him.
and when you read the passage, you will understand that the only explanation is that Peter killed him
I'll tell you right away, at least I won't mix up the verses
Acts of the Apostles, chapter 5, from the beginning of chapter 5
those two will die and
When those who went to bury the husband return, they find the woman already dead.
and there was only Peter and the woman, Zafira
and Jerome, who is the one who translated the Bible into Latin
in his epistle 109 he recalls the severitas
says: the hardness of Peter when he killed Ananias and Sapphira
and indeed that excerpt, the lady will read it when she finds it
says that the whole group was afraid
it was necessary to make it clear: here, gentlemen, the rules are followed
all the money must be handed over to us
you can't do what you want
A slightly different story…
and it is Petr who, a short while ago
to save his life, he swore and falsely swore that he did not know Jesus
that he is not part of his group, you remember the scene of Jesus' arrest, don't you?
still him, but when it came to money
he will send two people to make sure everyone understands
what needs to be adapted to
the whole processing
the plot is very "modern"
in the sense that there is no difference here when compared to today's sects
There is no difference.
absolutely
The rules must be followed.
I know exactly about such sects, where they also require a tithe, etc.
where those members have to hand over 10% of their gross earnings
not from net, from gross
These are some Protestant sects, etc., so
Luckily, they don't kill them now if they don't do it…
they don't kill them, because fortunately there are secular laws here that prevent it
non-religious laws
because according to religious laws, they could easily kill them
because Yahweh had the one who gathered wood on the Sabbath killed
in the desert, he has him killed, saying: take him out and stone him
because my orders are not questioned
and so the whole community must understand how things are
so here it was the norm
That's why I'm not a follower of the god of love.
because I don't really believe that it was the god of love, but…
you don't have to worry, because
I'll read this to you because it directly concerns me.
It's from a university professor, the full name is here, it's public.
from a professor at the University of Naples
who, in one published email, where he talks about me, writes
that Biglino is nothing but a madman
or someone who has lost the light of reason
So here it is, when I saw it, it was shared in some groups
where there are about 150 members
I'm reading it at conferences now, so it's already over 400,000.
But I want more than a million people to know that Biglino is a nutcase.
because if Biglino is a madman, then like all madmen, he can say whatever he wants
because there is nothing more liberating than being a madman
The problem is that if someone really thinks someone is a moron, they don't waste time.
by proving that the things he says are not true…. right? Because when you meet someone who says: I am Napoleon
how many minutes do you spend on historical research to convince him that he is not Napoleon
How many minutes?
Those who publish these things work in groups, all day and night.
in an effort to dismantle what one madman says
So…
they are afraid of this madman here
…I help him because I got it from those 200 readers
gave more than 400 thousand from my conferences
So I help him a lot, and I'm happy to do it…
Then, of course, there are other things here.
a little nicer, but I'll only read one to you here
because this one is interesting
Yesterday afternoon I was invited to the University of Turin.
I attended two anthropology thesis defenses there.
they were master's theses
and their subject was paleoastronautics
exobiology, ancient contacteeism
the mysteries of some buildings, etc.
and here are the two of them, one boy and one girl
got 110 cum laude
I was quite pleased when I saw my name projected during the defense.
I had goosebumps… seeing myself cited in theses
…I was pleased that some arguments are starting to reach the academic level.
one book by an academic will be published in the autumn
even having a specialization at the Paris Haute École
It is a book about ancient Roman religion.
and he quotes Károly Kerényi… who studies
classical culture, then they know who he is, he is one of the greats… and he says that Károly Kerényi
when discussing Roman religiosity and also Jewish religiosity, he says:
it is easy to recognize in this form
a certain type that is not only Roman in the history of religion
In this respect, we can take into account the Jewish religion.
to compare the Roman religion with the Israelite one
which is what I do in the books published by Mondadori
and this academic writes:
it seems to us that despite a clear and distinct awareness of the need for a comparative analysis of the two systems
it does not seem that the researchers have done it
it's the other way around… sorry, but that's how it's written here
one valid and courageous researcher of the Old Testament, Mauro Biglino
who devoted entire pages to the study of important parallel places
between the Jewish religious mindset and the Roman one
and played out fascinating scenarios in the ancient world
which must be questioned
some of the most established certainties of Western historiography
So I'm really satisfied.
that like a madman, from my considerations…
I am achieving this here
The question is what.
The question is this:
as I said, the Bible is preached
based on translations
translations that are constantly changing and will continue to change
translations but also passages
really very, very significant, very, very serious
I have said this many times in recent years
that there are no prophecies in the Old Testament concerning the Christian Jesus
there are things concerning the Jewish Messiah
which is something else, i.e. the hope that the Messiah will come, etc. etc. etc.
but there is not a single thing about the Christian Jesus, as he was presented to us then
and I said
when you find any of these alleged prophecies, do one thing
have it explained by a Christian theologian and a Jewish exegete
you will get two completely different explanations
and the Jew is right
because I repeat, Jesus has nothing to do with it
I remember well when I said these things.
reactions, written
under the conferences… …here are centuries
traditions that say something, and then Biglino comes and changes everything… no
I always say: Biglino doesn't discover anything
He never discovered anything, Biglino does the most idiotic job in the world.
He tells you: look, it says here this, period. Then do with it what you want.
But know that it says this, not what is being interpreted.
So the prophecy, which you all surely know, concerning Jesus Christ, is: A virgin will conceive.
and she will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Emmanuel… this is in Isaiah
Isaiah is one of those books where it is not known who wrote it.
Okay? They say: how come, Isaiah didn't write it? Well, that would be too good to be true…
to know that Isaiah wrote it
actually, until recently it was said that chapters 1 to 39
we attribute it to him because we have no serious reasons to deny it
from 40 to 55, we know that they were written by another, whom we call
usually Deutero-Isaiah, who wrote 2 centuries after Isaiah
Chapters 56 to 66 were written by someone else.
which we commonly call Trito Isaiah, or the third Isaiah
who wrote several decades after the other one
this was just a few months ago
because a few months ago a study by Israeli biblical scholars was published
who say that chapters 33 to 39 as well
can certainly no longer be attributed to Isaiah
but they must be shifted 2 centuries later, so we know nothing
We don't know anything.
Do you understand?
and based on this "we know nothing" we say that Isaiah predicted
that a virgin is to conceive
and the fact is that in Hebrew, it was never written that a virgin would conceive
never
in Hebrew it is written ALMaH
HaRaH
JoLeDeT
almah harah joledet
German Bishops' Conference finally
in 2017, it was decided to change the translation of this verse
and the translation of the German Bibles, which are now being published, states
still a "virgin"… but then they write in the note
"Alma" in Hebrew doesn't actually mean virgin, but young girl… all scholars know that.
because the Hebrew word for virgin is betulah, so when they wanted to write "virgin", they wrote "betulah"
When they wanted to write "young girl", they wrote "alma".
So, "virgin" with a note
…"conceived"
not "will conceive", they write now, "conceived"
joledet is a participle, and "will give birth"
so they are finally taking note of the fact
that in the Hebrew Bible it was never "conceived"
because "arah"
not only is it not a verb indicating the future, but it is not even a verb, it is an adjective
and means "pregnant"
So when they wrote this verse, this girl was already pregnant.
And in the second book of Kings, the name of this girl is also written, do you know that?
Her name was Abija.
it is written in the 2nd Book of Kings, not a Madonna
it was the wife of King Hezekiah, who was pregnant
…of King Ahaz of Judah, who was pregnant
and they hoped, the Israelites of that time, that the child
he will finally free them when he becomes king
from the Assyrian yoke, into which they had fallen under the Judean king Ahaz
by the way, the child will be named Hezekiah, not Emmanuel
Just to be clear, so even here in this, the prophecy…
So
This young girl, whose name was Abija, was pregnant.
she was about to give birth, and
They hoped that… the Bible says this
not that some virgin will conceive sometime in the future, no, that's not there
that's not in the Hebrew Bible
it's in the Greek Bible, the one translated into Greek
where the term parthenos, which… in Greek does not distinguish between
a young girl and a virgin… both are called parthenos, so it can be translated as you wish
and then there is a verb in the future tense: exei kai exetai
chili "will conceive and give birth", but that is written in Greek in the Bible
which is for Jews
that's what the chief rabbi of the Turin Jewish community said when we had that meeting in Milan
in front of 600 people, he said: it is a disaster for mankind, that bible
That Greek Bible is a disaster for humanity because they wrote whatever they wanted in it.
because it was written by Jewish intellectuals in Alexandria
for their own reasons, due to cultural disputes
with Greek intellectuals, etc., etc., etc.
but this is what is written in the Hebrew Bible
so this prophecy was never there
and now how will the German priests do it, when by December 31, 2016
They preached that prophecy there, and now they can't preach it anymore?
Let's imagine two Germans, one holding a Bible from 2015 and the other from 2018.
and one will say: no, look, it's written here too, that the Virgin…
and the second one: no, look, it's not written here… it's written… it's not written…
You understand? These are the foundations on which the absolute truth of religion is built.
by the way, when it comes to absolute truths
if you are afraid that you will end up in purgatory
because… how to put it…
you are not quite sure that you have been really good, good, good
but you want to remain Christians, you want to remain faithful to the same God
If you want to remain faithful to the same Jesus Christ, become Orthodox.
because purgatory does not exist for them
chili
Roman theologians invented purgatory, because, like hell and heaven, they are inventions of Roman theology.
Orthodox theologians no
So, for the Orthodox, there is no purgatory.
So, just bear with it tonight.
Convert to Orthodoxy tomorrow morning, and from tomorrow you will no longer end up in purgatory.
Do you want to be sure that you will not spend eternity in hell? Become Orthodox.
because for the Orthodox, hell ends with the end of time
because all the souls that are in it
thanks to the funeral sacrifices and prayers of the living
it will turn, and so when everything is over, when the last judgment comes
everyone will be penitents and converts
and hell will cease to exist
and so you won't spend eternity in hell
at most, you'll spend some time there
if you don't want to believe
papal dogmas, become Orthodox
and you no longer have to believe in the dogmas of the Pope
Actually, even… you know that Orthodox churches don't have a Pope.
they are all autocephalous churches
No? They all have their own patriarch, they are independent.
There are Orthodox patriarchs who have excommunicated the current Pope Francis.
They really excommunicated him for what he says.
You understand? It's an amazing fight between all these followers of the god of love.
You know that there was a famous schism between the Eastern and Western churches.
which occurred because of the filioque, i.e. because of
to the addendum, which one party accepts and the other does not
In fact, this fight took place because of the control of Bulgaria… but let's leave that aside…
As always, it was about money.
the rest was all the same to everyone
and so, the Virgin is not there
there is something else here that is not in the Old Testament
which, however, is a structural part of the control system from which we came
and that is the concept of original sin
the concept of original sin, according to which we are all born sinners, we are all born tainted
that death came into the world because of original sin…
because of the disobedience of Adam and Eve
and that, therefore, by the fact that we are all born
sinners
We need intermediaries to bring us back.
into a good relationship with the Father, and to receive eternal life
so that this cruel consequence of the stain may be taken away from us
when we were talking there in Milan… by the way, I wanted to tell you
It exists…
this entire meeting was transcribed
and you can download it for free from the Uno Editori publishing house website
It's 123 pages, it's a free book, download it.
everything is there, that 4-hour meeting I had with
one Catholic theologian, one Orthodox bishop
one of the most important Italian biblical scholars, Dr. Garron of Valdés
and the Chief Rabbi of the Turin Jewish community
It was in Milan in front of 600 people, it lasted 4 hours.
everything is transcribed word for word, download it for free and that's it
when they were talking about original sin
the first one to receive that question from the moderator was
dr. Ariel Di Porto, the chief rabbi, who said:
I have a bit of a problem talking about it because I don't want to hurt the feelings of others.
because the concept of original sin does not exist in the Jewish world
and because he had a Catholic, an Orthodox, and a Protestant next to him
So he said: I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings.
But what did the Protestant say?
That Protestant, he's someone who signs dictionaries, okay?
one who prepares dictionaries of biblical Hebrew and Aramaic
one of the leading Italian biblical scholars
The concept of original sin was introduced by Paul… who is the one who invented Christianity.
in the letter to the Romans, in chapter 5, he introduces this concept
listen to what the Valdese biblical scholar says
between Genesis 3… which is supposed to be
a story about disobedience, or sin
and Romans 5
where the Apostle Paul says that death entered the world through man
there is clearly no connection
And actually, when we read Paul, we can ask ourselves where he got that idea?
Where did he get that idea? And you've been serving it to us for centuries.
If I said something like that, it would be…
This is said by one of the most important Italian biblical scholars.
What does a Catholic professor of theology say?
whom I met once again in Turin at the book fair, we had another meeting
in two, it took 1 hour
in one stall
and at the end of that hour-long meeting, he said: these meetings should last
the whole weekend
So, he says: I would separate that concept from the clan concept of sin.
that if the parents have sinned, the children bear the consequences
something like that is, in my opinion, as he says, widely denied in the new law
although, unfortunately, it was widely used in theology
I swear to you, at that meeting I asked myself several times: what am I doing here?
What am I doing here? The original sin is not there.
when you take the Jerusalem Bible
so you will read in the notes that original sin does not exist
it's not there, you can read about it in the notes
so it's not a madman's invention
when reading the Bible, you understand that it's not there, but when a madman says it, it obviously has no weight
When those gentlemen say it, it's starting to mean something.
but if original sin does not exist
1854
Pius IX declares the dogma of the Immaculate Conception
The dogma of the Immaculate Conception does not mean that the Madonna conceived Jesus without that disgusting thing.
which is sexual intercourse… then we'll talk about it
we'll talk about it later
that means that the Madonna is the only human being
born without the stain of original sin
that she was conceived as immaculata
But what if original sin doesn't exist?
What does dogma dogmatize?
nothing, fake
because we are all born without the stain of original sin, all of us
So the dogma doesn't dogmatize anything.
1858
Bernadette Soubirous sees the Virgin Mary in the Grotto of Massabielle.
Here and there, it's not my term, that's what Bernadette Soubirous said.
who always calls her that, in the Pyrenean codex… codex…
in the Pyrenean dialect, she called it Aquerò
which means Tam ta, then Tam té became the Madonna when the whole thing was taken over by the church
So there you are, Aquerò, what a coincidence.
He comes and says: I am the Immaculate Conception.
But if the Madonna was there, did she know how things were?
And if it wasn't Madonna, then what did they put in her mouth that she never said?
but it served the Roman Church to substantiate the dogma it had proclaimed 4 years ago
There's not much that can be done about it.
There's nothing to be done, when you think like a madman, those things come to the surface.
because we all have reason
…
it is necessary to ask why popes prefer to go to Fatima rather than Lourdes
Okay… then when we have time, we'll talk about it.
…ok, so
if this thing with original sin is not here
and if, as is evident
Fortunately, Yahweh is not a god, omnipotent, transcendent, creator of heaven and earth.
And the word "bárah" doesn't actually mean to create from nothing, it's not there.
in the Bible, the term "olam", which is translated as "eternity", is even written in dictionaries
dictionaries signed by that Valdésian father… father… excuse me
with the Valdese pastor I already mentioned
and those dictionaries say
do not translate as "eternity"
do not translate as "eternity", and you will always find it translated as eternity
Why? Because theology has established that the Bible must speak of God.
and theology has established that God must be eternal
so that eternity had to be inserted somewhere
but dictionaries say: do not translate as eternity
but you always find that term translated as eternity
so if all these things are not here
it's not that almighty… listen to this
Does anyone have a Bible here?
I mean, like for a check-up…
…let's take Genesis 17
because it is best to verify it immediately in the Bibles
Can we read the first verse?
blah blah blah
So, it says there that when Abraham was 99 years old
Mr… Jehovah's Witnesses translate it as Jehovah, and that's fine.
appeared to him and said to him: I am the Almighty God… here it is, the Jerusalem Bible
The notes state that the translation of "almighty" is not accurate.
in the best possible case, it means Lord of the Steppe
Jerusalem Bible, Dominican Exegesis
Mr. Stepa… I understand.
that if the church were to publish Bibles, where the Lord would be the steppe
and believers will read it, so they will ask themselves a question
but it is the most coherent translation
because when we read all that biblical sauce, we see
that He had just been assigned that territory, the Negev steppe
So when the Lord of the Steppe is there, it's right, it's true.
So, there is no omnipotent, there is no verb in the sense of creating.
there is no term for eternity
there is no original sin
So, when we return to the figure of Christ
Whose son is this?
Who sent him here? And for what reason?
because here we can't say: okay, now we understand that the Old Testament is there…
but the new one… no
the new one, as it was presented to us, exists
only if what we have been told about the Old Testament is true
but if what we are told about the Old Testament is not true
the new one must be completely questioned
because there is no sender, there is no motive
There's nothing that can be done about it.
there is no sender and there is no motive
because he did not come to liberate man
from death caused by original sin, because original sin is not there
because death on Earth was and everyone died, animals died, Adams died, it is not the result of any guilt
all living things on Earth are dying, death is not man's fault
So what did he come here to do? If he came here.
I came here to perform a certain task.
Jewish Messiah
that is, the one who was to liberate Israel from a foreign yoke, because that is
the task of the Jewish Messiah
and that does not concern humanity, absolutely not
The Bible never concerns humanity.
when you read carefully
the whole new law, you will find that Jesus says
I am not praying for the world, I am praying for you… i.e. for my own.
for my friends, who carry out my commands
I don't pray for the world
read it, but read it
because these are the things that are never said, but he says it: I am not asking for the world
So, he came here because of the Israeli House.
and
The church tells us that he was born of a virgin.
in the first centuries
in early Christianity
and here, if you want, you can read Justin's Apologies
from the holy martyr Justin, father of the Church
who, when writing to the emperor Antoninus Pius
so he says to him:
But why are you picking on us who worship that one?
when the one we worship is exactly the same as yours
We'll do it like this… here are the Apologies
Paoline publishing house
so it's not some atheistic publishing house
says: all writers who love God the Father, both people and gods
when then, as we have argued above, we claim that Jesus was born a god
as a logo
God himself
but it is common to your
a way of thinking, when you clearly say that Hermes is the logo of Zeus, it's the same, there's no difference
if someone were to reproach us for the fact that he was crucified
but this is also common to the sons of Dyaus listed above
when we say that he was born of a virgin, this is also an element that is common with Perseus
when we claim that he healed the lame and the paralyzed, the unfortunate from birth
that he raised the dead, this claim also coincides with what your tradition attributes to Asclepius
says: there is no difference between ours and yours
Why are you picking on us? This is the father of the church.
This is one of the Church Fathers.
Do you understand? What was meant in the first Christian centuries?
anything but the uniqueness of Jesus Christ
I've been carrying these books with me for a while, I've never used them before, but today…
Celsus
…but if we are to call all those who are attributed the same things that are attributed to him the sons of God
So all those who cast out demons from the human body
They heal diseases with their breath and summon souls.
who have opulent feasts and overflowing tables materialized
So when they do these things, do you want us to believe that they are the sons of God?
they do the same things as yours does
Celsus
I talked about it before with a lady… over there, the one who's raising her hand.
Celsus was against Christians, ok?
while Justin Martyr was a father of the church
he wrote in favor of Christians
Do you understand?
in another book, in the introduction, a theologian, Sergio Quinzio
He writes something really nice… when he talks about Julian the Apostate, the Roman Emperor, etc.
Theologian Sergio Quinzio says:
compares the Apostate to John Paul II.
and the effect of both is a desperate attempt to keep it alive
a religion that is already doomed to extinction
Julian the Apostate as regards the Roman religion
John Paul II, as far as Catholicism is concerned
says theologian Sergio Quinzio
it writes
So, the things that have been told to us from the beginning
They are different… we are facing a story.
which we must consider to be absolutely true, and when we believe that it is true
so we are intelligent and devout believers
Is there a god who is there?
up there
at one point, he decides and creates the universe
because
he had a need to love something, to do something, he will create the universe
it should end here, because God before the universe, and God after the universe
it means that before that, he does not have something that he has afterwards, so at that moment he ceases to be God
But we won't get into that, we'll pretend he's still a god.
several billion years will pass, and then he will say:
I will decide to make a creature that will love me and serve me.
and makes a man
Then we'll see how he does it, and what the Catholic theologian says.
he will make a man… and say: I will give him some rules
I'll give him some rules and, of course, if he doesn't follow them, I'll punish him.
I will make him immortal, but if he does not follow the rules, I will punish him severely.
Of course, if it's an omniscient God, then he already knows that he won't keep them, otherwise what kind of omniscient God is he?
and he does not keep them and He makes him mortal
thousands of years will pass, millions of people will die, and He will say: but now
I want to give a person the opportunity to return, to become immortal… how do I do that?
I will send my Son down
I don't even know if he knew about it before or not… I'll send my Son down.
How do I send him down there?
I will send him there as a Spirit, as the third part of me.
who gets one girl pregnant in such a way that she remains a virgin
and who will remain a virgin even after childbirth, because, as in Greek stories,
there were a lot of virgin births there, so it wouldn't look good if this one wasn't born of a virgin
and so he is born of a virgin…. then he says:
the people to whom I send him, who are his, will take him, massacre him
He will kill him, I will intervene, I will have him resurrected.
and thanks to this massacre, I will give all of humanity the opportunity to return to live eternal life
but if they want to be really consistent, then they must also eat the flesh of my Son
This is a story.
who we should believe, and when we believe this story
We are intelligent and devout believers.
because it is a logical story that makes sense
when someone says: look, the universe might
it is inhabited by other beings, and all the old texts talk about them, so you're an idiot
Such is the reality.
The first one is a story full of meaning.
You're an idiot with the second one.
And how was Jesus born?
is born after one Gabriel
One Gabriel… why do I say one Gabriel?
because Gabriel is not the name of an individual
Gabriel in Hebrew is "gever of some el", it is a functional designation
denotes someone who performs a certain task… someone who performs
a task on behalf of one of the Elohim, or for one of the Elohim
This is the case in the Old Testament, where Gabriel is defined as "iš", i.e. a male individual.
without any doubt… in the book of Daniel
ja: I saw one of the isha coming, when Gabriel comes
and in the Bibles you have at home, it is written that he flew in with ease
in literally translated Hebrew Bibles
with all those dictionaries of Hebrew etymology, etc., etc., etc. it is written
Of course, he came exhausted.
If you want, I'll give you all those verses, you can check it.
So this one came to Daniel exhausted, not that he flew in with ease.
The problem is that Gabriel must be an angel, and angels come by flying…
But Gabriel is not an angel, he is an individual of flesh and blood.
and how the other elohim did it… and if you read the Bible, you'll find it
who visited some women and those women became pregnant
and they often had twins
So this Gabriel first visits Elizabeth, she becomes pregnant and has John the Baptist, the one who will be John the Baptist.
Then Gabriel visits Mary, she becomes pregnant and has Jesus.
The Gospels say that Mary was overshadowed by the Spirit.
Do you know what the Jesuit Jean Daniélou says?
Cardinal, professor of theology, French academic
that there is no doubt, that it is not a matter of interpretation, he says, he writes…
The Holy Spirit is the Christian transposition of the Old Testament Gabriel.
The same is in the Quran.
and the Quran says that the Spirit is Gabriel
So, when the Gospel tells us that the Spirit enveloped the Madonna,
So Gabriel covered this Madonna.
and he says: even the cardinal ???? he says the same thing as me, these are not interpretations
the study of this argument directly forces this interpretation
enforces it
So, Gabriel will cover the Madonna and she will get pregnant.
there are canonical gospels that we must consider true
Then there are the so-called apocryphal gospels, which we are not supposed to believe.
Do you know what is written in James's Protoevangelium?
that once Joseph came home from work
He was a carpenter, after 6 months, he returns and finds that the Madonna is pregnant.
and he gets pissed off
and says: who did this to me?
How will I explain this to my master, who entrusted this girl to me?
who was supposed to stay as she was, and now she's pregnant, who did this to me?
and is afraid that someone
He came to Madonna and pretended to be someone he was not.
Look at it.
Look what they were saying back then, but most importantly, there's one amazing sentence in there.
he says: it happened to me
When there's time, I'll say something about it.
What happened to Adam happened to me.
who had a partner, then someone came and seduced her
because in the Old Testament, Eve was seduced by the so-called serpent
and Cain was the son of that one
not Adam's
In non-biblical Jewish literature, it is said that Eve was probably raped.
and Joseph says: what happened to Adam happened to me… that means, in Jesus' time
they thought, they knew, they wrote that Eve was seduced by someone else
at least as far as Cain is concerned
This is what is written in the Gospels, which we are not supposed to believe.
However, if what the Jesuit Jean Daniélou says happens to be true, we must take note.
that Jesus is the fruit of a completely normal sexual act
or implantation, because they did that too
they did it in the case of Abraham's wife, in the case of Jacob and Esau, Samson
when they had the interest, they made direct interventions
and on formally infertile women
they visited them and they got pregnant, what a coincidence
in the Gospel of John…
…in Genesis chapter 6 it is clearly stated that when
The sons of Elohim saw the daughters of Adam, they saw that they were good.
they said they were nice, attractive
They took as many as they wanted.
as much as they wanted
So, if we have these stories here
whom we should not trust
it's a choice we can make
I pretend they're true like the others, I always pretend.
and when I'm doing it, I obviously read them, because otherwise…
it is clear that I would exclude them, but I do not exclude them
because they excluded them for very specific reasons, of course
because it is unacceptable that the Madonna… who must remain a virgin even after childbirth
she had normal sexual intercourse, this cannot be accepted
but in fact, this is what emerges from the texts
and when the Gospel of John speaks, after the so-called resurrection of Jesus
that those 11 were gathered in the Upper Room
So someone will say, well, of course, there were 11 of them, because Judas was missing.
No, John writes that there were 11 of them, because Thomas, called Didymus, was missing.
Didimos, I'll explain it to you right away.
Let's imagine a group of 12 people.
which has a charismatic leader
these 12 people are followed by women
someone introduces them to us and says: this is Anna, this is Francisca, this is Magdalena
that's Roberta, that's his wife, without telling us whose
Who do you think his wife will be?
the boss, that's the first thing we imagine, right? otherwise, we would just say that's someone's wife
when you say that's a wife, and there's a charismatic leader, then…
…because Thomas, called Didymus, the twin, was missing.
Whose twin?
when it was their next procedure, did they succeed in having twins again?
Do you know that twins occur during artificial insemination?
that's how it's written there, in the gospels you have at home, not in my translations
called Didymus, the twin, period. without specification
If it were a twin of Petr, Ondřej… they would have said so.
No, just a twin, a twin by antonomasia means a twin there.
No? That's the first thing that comes to mind.
these are the thoughts of a madman, so of course take them as such
but when he is taken down from the cross, they do it without breaking his legs, because otherwise they would not be able to save him
In Peter's Gospel, do you know what it says about how he came out of the tomb?
that at night
light descended from heaven
in that light there were two beings
who opened the gate of the tomb, entered
Then they came out in threes, one of the three being supported because he could not walk.
and we must not believe this
we must believe that he rose from the dead and passed through the stone, we must believe this
that two came, opened the door, entered and left as three
and they were supporting the third one because he couldn't walk, that's not it
That's not true.
I'm telling you this, then of course you can do whatever you want with it.
Do what you want with it, but you need to know that those things are there.
because we listen differently… because we don't read the texts
we only listen to what we are told
Someone then says: but Biglino is selective… sure, but he selects those pieces that no one would naturally read to you.
I won't choose something you already know, because they read that to you all the time.
Let's also read what they will never read to you.
to understand and at least get some idea of what was written at that time
because otherwise we live in the belief
that what is written there is what we are told
No, something very different was written, but very different.
which allows us to reconstruct a completely different story
given that John the Baptist
He had the task of preparing the way for what was to be the new messiah.
you know that it is written that John the Baptist baptized in the Jordan for the forgiveness of sins
and now, in the Jewish world, anyone will tell you that no one can forgive sins but God
so John the Baptist could not forgive anyone's sins
In Greek, it is written that those who went to be baptized for their sins were exhomologoumenoi.
exhomologeo is a verb that means
loud declaration, with a certain emphasis
they were exhomologoumenoi tás hamatías autón their guilt
So they went there and loudly declared what they had done.
So, if I have to prepare an army of fighters
which will then be used by the one who comes after me
Who will they be looking for?
pious souls? or will I look for someone who already…
So: what did you do? I killed three… so join us.
your sins with us are no longer counted
What did you do? I killed two… come here.
and then he turns to the scribes and Pharisees
viper breed
If you don't do metanoia, that is, if you don't change your mentality, the axe is already at your feet.
we will kill you, so either you join us or we will kill you
and when Jesus speaks of the Last Judgment
and says that the condemned will be thrown into Gehenna
No? What is presented as hell… that's not related at all.
Ge Hinnom was a valley behind the walls of Jerusalem
where waste, including corpses, was thrown and burned, it was always burning there
So the day we carry out this action, we'll throw your corpses in there.
to waste
Do you understand?
It's a completely different way.
readings of these texts that respect what is written
and it is coherent, it is coherent with what is written in the Old and New Testaments
I don't know if it's true, I mean no, I don't know if it's true, because I don't have the truth.
Whoever wants the truth, let them ring another door.
It must be said clearly, clearly.
I'm telling you what is written.
and you can do whatever you want with it
If it's interesting for you, then consider it, if you don't like it, then throw it in the trash.
and we'll go for coffee just like before
I don't need to make any groups, sects, nothing… I speak because they call me to speak.
The day they stop calling me, I'll stop talking, I don't have a preacher's profession, I don't need to do… anything.
I started doing this work for myself, and now I'm here…
I fed my curiosity, and now I'm here to talk…
I like doing it, but I want to say
I am explaining to you what is written.
But I'm trying to explain everything to you, because otherwise we only listen to one side.
like, for example
we'll do it this way, since we were talking about Adam and Eve
Here's something that's coming to the surface and that really gives you goosebumps.
I am working on it with Dr. Massimo Barbetta, who is an expert in rabbinic literature.
non-biblical
and apart from the possible places from which those "gentlemen" come
things concerning the production of Adam are coming to the surface
By the way, regarding the production of Adam
as we talked about it on March 6, listen to what the Catholic theologian said
The presenter asks: according to the literature…
…as the Catholic theologian had said shortly before
that they don't exist in the Bible… please, download this book, it's free, so you're not sponsoring me by doing so
it's free and it says that the Catholic theologian says:
there is no concept of creation, there is no concept of eternity, there is no concept of immortality… this is what a Catholic theologian says
These concepts are NOT in the Bible.
They are not there.
Thus, the concept of eternity, immortality, e.g. the concept…. which does not exist in the first law
it doesn't exist, because it DOESN'T EXIST, there's nothing you can do about it, it doesn't exist
So they preach the Bible as if the Bible had not been written, because people do not read it anyway.
Therefore, it is right that you verify all the verses that I quote to you.
They are lucky because no one verifies the verses they quote.
but do it with me and them too, I'm calm though
I guarantee you that.
So, when we're not talking about creation
The presenter says: so based on the biblical reading
Can we really speak of the creation of Adam?
Catholic theologian:
Adam was… pause…
it was done, that's a little different
and the moderator: so you agree with Mauro Biglini?
Hmm, that means he was… someone else… it happened… as for that hint
that man was made something else, yes, he was made something else
Certainly, man was made into something else, because the Bible tells us what made man.
it is made of the DNA of the Elohim, the Bible tells us so
He couldn't go on, I understand him… I already have recognition.
for the intellectual honor he had in saying this: man is made of something else
not created
and when it is written… you know the story of the potter god
to the god modeling the clay
But you know that it's not in the Bible?
it is not written there that Adam was made "from" afar
that Adam was made from the dust of the earth
It says there that the Elohim made Adam-Afar.
that means they made that model
which they called Adam-Afar, which is the one they planted here
not by means of/from afar, there is no "s"
when you take the literally translated Jewish Bible
the "s" is not there
when you take the interlinear Hebrew Bible from San Paolo Publishing House
the "s" is not there
because these are Bibles intended for theological faculties, for universities, where people know Hebrew
so that "s"
using dust from the ground or with clay is not there
because it is not in Hebrew
It says: they made Adam-afar
this is the model
and when we compare it with what is written in the Vedic texts
that the universe is inhabited by 400,000 species of humanoids
many of which have made their way here
we are one of those there
We are one of them.
So they did the Adam-Afar thing… then the Bible tells us
actually
The Book of Genesis
Then Elohim took Adam and put him in Gan Eden.
Gan Eden is what is translated as earthly paradise, "gan" means "an enclosed and protected place"
So, we were always told that man was created in an earthly paradise.
man was not created, and certainly not in an earthly paradise
because the Bible says that he was taken from where he was made and given to Gan Eden
which is something else
and they put him there to work and take care of it
then there's this god who knows everything and foresees everything
after some time
he notices that the company of animals is not enough for that group of men
Do you know what is written in the texts of Jewish theology that I quoted here?
from Mamash publishing house
It says there that Adam mated with all the animals.
and he was forbidden to do so only after a woman was made for him
before that, he was mating with all the animals
that's what it says in the notes of those Jewish Bibles
but that's obvious, and actually
when they make him a woman
Is it a female?
fantastic, fantastic, gorgeous, gorgeous, gorgeous
So
So, to create a woman, what does God, who creates the universe with a snap of his fingers, have to do?
put the man into a very deep sleep
then he takes one part from him
it takes "something" from one curved side part, which translates as a rib
In Hebrew, there is no "rib" in fact, there is a "curved side part"
close the meat where the sample was taken
and with what he took, he makes a woman, I say "makes" because that's the Hebrew verb
The verb is "jacar", the verb "barah" is not even used here.
which is incorrectly translated as "to create"
the verb "jacar" is located there, meaning he made a woman
using something he took from the man's iliac crest, i.e. from staminal cells
and then she will introduce her to the man
deep sleep, or anesthesia
So, he formed a woman, here they translate it correctly, he formed
then he brought her to Adam
and Adam said
Let's put it this way.
I go to eat at Elio Lupo's all week.
and I'll say: Elio, listen, today the pasta was cooked properly
What does it mean?
that the other days…
Then he brought her to Adam, and Adam said:
This time it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh.
not the other females you gave me
it is translated there as "finally"
Even Jews who translate the Bible into English in the United States translate "finally"
Finally, you gave me the right woman, not the others who were before.
and I imagine God saying: I'm lucky, he liked this one
Finally… but that's how it is…
this time it's the right one, this time, not the other ones before
and in non-biblical Jewish literature it is written that he rejected those other females
and he says: this time it is a bone of my bones… and here is something really interesting…
They left Iš and Išša there, or what is there?
right after that
And then? She'll be called… oh, so nothing.
Fortunately, it is left here… here it is the Bible, San Paolo publishing house
the two Hebrew terms are also left as they are, because in Italian it doesn't make sense
this time, as this time it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh
she will be called woman, because she was taken from man, but that doesn't make sense
but in Hebrew it makes sense, and what a sense
because in Hebrew it is written: she will be called 'ishshah' because she was taken from 'ish'
iš means a male individual, išša is the feminine form of the word iš
chilli will be called male-a, let's put it this way
or a man, because she was taken from a male, from a man
The meaning is clear, clear.
and here, fortunately, they leave it, they say woman… they leave išša
because it was taken from the iše, luckily they left it here
What? There's a 'š' there too, ok.
You know? We have those things in front of our eyes.
We have it in front of our eyes, but we don't read the Bible.
we hear her explaining, we hear her telling
but when we read it with even a little attention, we also notice
that it's not that tome… which in a certain sense they make us believe it is
because when we think it's a tome, we don't read it
or they tell you: feel free to read it, but then have it explained to you by someone who…
We are not educated, they are educated, we are uneducated.
I am one of them… otherwise I wouldn't be studying if I didn't have this realization.
I am uneducated, but I have the same understanding as the educated.
They are educated, but we have the same understanding.
So, I read the Bible and I understand what is written there.
Everything is there, and I don't have to invent anything.
because there's no need to invent anything here, when it's said: this time it's the right one
so that means that in the other cases it was not the right one
When they say: finally it's the right one… finally… what does finally mean?
that there were other cases where it was not the right one
You don't have to be educated to understand this.
The reason we have is sufficient for that, we don't have to be educated.
but it needs to be read, calmly
with a clear mind… as it is necessary to read…
with a clear and calm mind… psalms… which are those amazing prayers
sweet, addressed to God
You know that this Pope emphasizes God's mercy a lot, don't you? God's mercy…
and actually, here are the psalms, where it is repeated a lot
for example, Psalm 136
His love is eternal, his love is eternal, his love is eternal.
Shall we read it?
He struck Egypt in its firstborn, for his love is eternal.
He let Israel go through them, because his love is eternal.
He divided the sea in parts, because his love is eternal.
He cast Pharaoh and his army into the sea, for his love is eternal.
He killed mighty kings, because his love is eternal.
then there is a whole list…
He gave their land as an inheritance, because his love is eternal.
in the inheritance of Israel his servant, because his love is eternal
God's love is eternal, because he kills, he exterminates the enemies of Israel
takes their territory and gives it to Israel
when they tell us that the psalms say that God's love is eternal
we are to raise our hands and say: yes, that's true, but why don't you tell us the whole rest of it?
Please.
and you only tell us what you like
still psalms… daughter of Babylon
Blessed is he who repays you for what you have done to us.
Blessed is he who takes your young and dashes them against the rock.
It is immense bliss.
immense
Psalm 18, if I'm not mistaken, which certainly…
it is a psalm that you have heard several times in church
I love you, my Lord, my strength, Lord, my rock, my fortress, my deliverer
My God, my refuge, to which I flee… you've heard that many times before.
still Psalm 18, ok?
I pursued my enemies and caught up with them, and I did not return without having defeated them.
I threw myself at them and they didn't get up, they fell at my feet.
You have given me strength to fight and have broken my adversaries before me.
and I wiped out those who hated me
God be praised
who granted me vengeance and subjected the nations to me
Here the Israelite people say to their commander
You are my rock, my deliverer, my cliff to which I flee… humanity does not belong here, for God's sake.
No way, he has no business being there.
it is necessary to read it, it is necessary to read it
otherwise we are only referred to preaching
and whoever has more, let them give more
Excuse me?
no no no no no
So, here are these things.
which are evident, are evident when one reads them
as is often said
it's bullshit to say that
The Bible speaks of flying objects.
It's bullshit.
So… I've read this verse many times over the last two years.
and every time, every time I waited for someone at the conference to raise their hand and protest
it never happened
but one thing should have been questioned there, according to the Bible… no one has ever done it
And do you know what I did? I myself raised doubts in the new book The Fall of the Gods.
so I attacked myself
I didn't answer myself, I let Jewish exegesis answer.
so when no one questioned me, and the questioning would have been justified
compared to all the nonsense they're spouting… we'll let it be…
They make up anything they can to question something…
It was obvious here, because it was enough to take a Bible and say: but…
It's written differently here… they never did it, so I did it myself.
and I let Jewish exegesis answer
It's not that I wrote an answer there, I put it there directly.
I scanned it there so that there could be no doubt.
…no doubt
Ezekiel says: then one spirit, in Hebrew ruach
He lifted me up, and behind me I heard the noise of a great earthquake.
while the kavod of Yahweh rose from that place
I heard the noise of wings beating.
and at the same time the noise of wheels and the noise of a great racket
Ruach picked me up and carried me away.
Ezekiel 3
…this is then related to Ezekiel 8:10…
flying machines are mentioned there several times
when you take… blah
the study by Prof. Luigi Moraldi, who is not only an expert
He is considered an expert of experts… unfortunately, he died.
is considered an expert of experts, in the sense that he is quoted by experts
He is not only a profound expert on the Bible, his publications can be found at UTET publishing house…
but also of the Old Testament apocrypha
and he clearly says, for example, based on Jonathan's Targum, etc.
that there are at least 23 different types of flying machines described there
23 different types of flying machines
this is written by prof. Luigi Moraldi, not Mauro Biglino, who is a nobody
who's the nutcase who makes up these things
23 types of flying machines
So, if you don't like it here
I understand that you don't like it.
not? to hear that the Bible speaks…
but you need to have intellectual integrity and say: the Bible says so
but when it says that, it means something else
and let them give us an explanation, by all means
Everyone is free to do what they want.
what he cannot freely do is deny what is written there
because that's what it says there
and Jewish exegesis says that the correct translation is this one
here it is
The Jewish Wars, Book 6, Verses 290 to 300
not only Josephus, in one of my books published by Mondadori, I state that Tacitus also mentions it
in the 5th book of his History
who says that in 70 AD there were celestial chariots in the sky over Jerusalem
and a voice said: the deities are leaving
because the Romans were coming with their deities
I also quoted Pliny the Elder, who says that
during the Cimbrian Wars, i.e. 113-100 BC
a battle took place in the sky over Umbria between two ranks of celestial chariots
one came from the west and one from the east, and the one from the west was defeated
But we can't talk about these things here.
because when you talk about it, you're an idiot, as I said before
So Tacitus was a ufologist ante literam, Pliny was a ufologist, Josephus was a ufologist.
…but listen to this
you know that Moses
at one point he decided to go and die
right? when they are approaching the so-called promised land
He says: I am not allowed to enter there, and so he leaves with his two.
the most faithful, Eleazar and Joshua
to the land of Moab and he goes to die, but no one saw him die
No one saw him die and no one knows where his grave is.
So it's a rarity that one of the founders of the nation doesn't have a mausoleum where the nation could…
…turn to and worship their founder
listen to what Josephus says
in his book Jewish Antiquities
So, the Bible says that when Moses was about to die, he was in perfect health.
that's what the Bible you have at home says, it was perfectly fine
Josephus says
that Moses went to the valley of Moab
Then a cloud appeared and carried him away.
and the cloud is one of the terms in the Bible referring to the means by which they traveled there
and the Hebrew term anan in dictionaries of Hebrew etymology
including those issued by the University of Haifa
it is written that it is something that will quickly become visible to the eye
and emits a long, dull, and weak sound
For that, you need…
so a cloud appeared there and took him away, and Josephus then adds
Moses was forced to write that he had died.
so that no one could say that he left with the deities
Isn't it amazing?
I get goosebumps from it, I can show you.
I'm into it, but…
he was forced to write that he died so that no one could say that he was taken away
but he was not the first to be taken away, Enoch was taken away, Elijah was taken away
Do you remember Jesus' Transfiguration on Mount Tabor?
Who will come to Jesus? Elijah and Moses, two who did not die.
the two that the Elohim took away, that's a coincidence
What a coincidence!
These are all things that come to mind when you think like a madman.
and puts together what is written… please?
but it all fits, nothing has to be invented
and that's what's nice, charming about it
just read it carefully and put it together, anyone can do it
because we all have reason, all of us
blah blah blah
So, in the book The Fall of the Gods, which probably won't be
half of the book is dedicated to this
So, what did we do in that book?
as I have been saying for years that the Bible should be studied by scientists and not theologians, because it does not concern them
So I coordinated 3 aviation engineers.
working for the Italian aerospace research center Ricerche aerospaziali, they work for NASA
Okay? We had a video conference every week.
and they prepared a whole chapter for the book
in which they reconstructed Ezekiel's machines
Baccarini, who in turn knows the Eastern writings
He coordinated the work of 2 Hindu engineers who studied the aerodynamics of vimanas.
and it's all in that book, it's all there
The book has 600 pages, but we did it this way, it could have had 1000.
if it were in the usual format of our books… so there is a real confrontation there
between the technology described in the Bible and the technology described in Indian scriptures
the one described in Indian scriptures is infinitely richer
Why? Because while the Bible ended up in the hands of monotheistic theologians
who therefore tried to cover up…
there, among them, talking about this topic is completely normal
normal
for them, talking about the heavenly battles of the devas is completely normal
When we talk about it, we're idiots.
Excuse me, when I talk about it, I'm an idiot.
but for them it's normal
there are not only descriptions of those machines
but they say, which could only fly in the atmosphere
which could swim underwater, which could leave the atmosphere
the substances from which the pilots' overalls were made are described there
there are pilot diets, like NASA has
By the way, do you know what nasa means in Hebrew?
to carry up, to pick up
when it is read
when it is read with "sin"
so it means to carry up, to pick up
when this dot here makes it "shin"
"naša" means to deceive, to mislead, to make fun of
Do you know that the foundations of NASA were basically laid by Nazi scientists?
who were taken there after World War II because they were much further away than the Americans
so they took them and took them there, and so they laid those foundations
and here it is, simply…
Excuse me, but there was a gentleman who said he had signed up first…
Do you have several of them?
So, I'm going to play devil's advocate a little bit.
because when I read all the objections that are raised against you from morning to night…
one of the most important objections is that ruach and spirit are not the same
I'm thinking of the example you gave here, that the spirit will rest on Mary.
Someone might say: how could a flying disc lie on Mary?
…I'll answer right away… I'm laughing because I'm imagining the honesty of that person
So
So, the Hebrew language… I'll try to be as brief as possible.
just like all other languages, it is polysemous
so there are words that have more than one meaning
so you just need to read the Bible to understand when ruach means
spirit, and when it means something else, and I'll give you an example right away… sorry, I'm addressing you informally…
Yesterday I was down in the dumps.
I went to visit a friend who makes me laugh to death because he is a man of spirit.
Now in mid-August, I'm picking plums. I have a few trees, and I'm putting them under the pálinka.
This friend of mine has a hobby of distilling pomace spirit.
He plays football because he has a sporting spirit, and he is very popular because he knows how to create team spirit.
7 meanings of the word "spirit"… did you have trouble understanding what "spirit" means in each of these cases?
No, because it's clear that when I put plums under the spirit, then…
but the people there say that a ghost always means… or always means a flying disc…
it is clear that the objection does not make sense
but the same people would say, if they found it after 1000 years
The bottles I use… it's not brandy, it's alcohol.
where the labels say: ideal for fruit under spirit
and here, in 1000 years, those exegetes will say: but under what spirit did he give that fruit?
…a moment ago you said that for someone…
If they thought about it a little, they wouldn't write those things.
Okay, go ahead, I like objections.
…sometimes I give them to myself…
…
I won't say the name… but you'll understand right away… someone says it there
that according to him, Jesus was a descendant of Herod
Cleopatra's nephew… and it challenges your theory
but you both believe that Jesus historically existed…
…
This one wrote a book.
where in the first part he presented undeniable evidence that Jesus never existed
in the second part, he presented undeniable evidence that
Jesus was a Zealot from the family of Judas of Gamala
and in the third part, he presented undeniable evidence that Jesus was from the family of Herod
This does not require a response… ok…
blah blah
The next question concerns that excerpt.
as it was said at the beginning of the conference, where Jesus says: go sell everything you have…
…as the one there says to him: I have kept all the commandments
What commandments did Jesus have in mind? The 600…
No, no… the 10
those 10 basic ones for contact with others, it wasn't those 613
…but if Jesus knew the Jewish law well, shouldn't he have referred to those 613?
Yes, he should refer to them.
but since the Gospels were written with certain intentions, those 613
they were no longer essential for the addressees of the Gospels, nor was it necessary to tell them
No? Because to say to a member of the Hellenic culture:
Do not boil the kid in its mother's milk…
So he would say: are you crazy?
You understand? So in the Gospels it is reduced to those
norms that could have been proclaimed in the Greco-Roman world, in Hellenistic thought
where the person was supposed to be served, ok?
One last question and I'm done… that's a pity, I like questions.
I would like to know the criterion.
elections at the Council of Nicaea
as regards the apocryphal and canonical gospels
because if I consider Peter's Gospel, the Gospel of Christ's deputy, to be apocryphal, then something doesn't add up.
mainly there…
Peter himself says that the two of them took Jesus out of the tomb, and that then, Magdalene
was recognized as his wife
So, the selection actually started before Nice.
she started with Irenaeus of Lyon, Bishop Irenaeus of Lyon
and then subsequently with Athanasius of Alexandria
which are those who pointed to the 4 Gospels that we know today as canonical
and they pointed to them because they considered them the most useful for conveying the message that was to be conveyed
by the way, when reading Christian literature of that time, it is well understood
the difference when they spoke among themselves, among the educated, and when they told those things to people…
for a change
So, for example, Irenaeus of Lyon, whose teacher was supposed to be a Gnostic.
one of the adherents of gnosticism
there he inserted the Gospel of John, which is actually a Gnostic gospel
The Gospel of John is a Gnostic gospel, but it was included.
because it is the only one of the four that contains a definition
Jesus as the Son of God in the Greek sense
which was supposed to be load-bearing
but for the Jewish world, it is an unacceptable blasphemy
blasphemy that cannot even be forgiven
but it wasn't for the Jews, it was for the Greco-Roman world, and so they inserted it there
then Athanasius of Alexandria confirmed it…
and they then stuck to them… and also because especially the 3 synoptic ones, i.e. Matthew, Mark and Luke
was the most requested by people to read
because when you read them well, they are the easiest
and that council…
If you feel like it, read the Gospel of Mark, which is very short, you can do it in one evening.
Read it…
as many times as you need until you can say, "Now I've got it down pat, I know Mark's Gospel…"
then read John's
I won't tell you anything so as not to influence you.
but read Mark's first and then John's… when you really have it in your head, then read John's
I won't tell you anything, because then they say that Biglino influences…
So, do it as you want…
I wanted to ask about a verse from the Apocalypse.
What kind?
the one who, as they say, will descend… will descend… and show himself to the world…
I think it's the apocalypse.
is a coded text written for the then-emerging churches
to be wary, and to have hope… so there is none
prophetic value or intention for the future.. so it doesn't concern us anymore
it was the maximum hope of that time, which, however, was not fulfilled
just as Jesus Christ messed up all the prophecies…
by a landslide…
None of that… because he also hoped that those things would happen.
at any moment… just read the Christian Didache immediately afterwards
where they were waiting for him to arrive any minute
not in the future, from minute to minute
after all, they used the Aramaic term "marana tha", come on, come now, we're waiting for you here
That's why Paul had to come up with the resurrection of the body… but that would take too long.
So
so it was about that time
when, for example, the number 666 is mentioned
about that code…
on the Oxyrhynchus papyrus, which is an older papyrus than the ones on which the apocalypse we have is based
It wasn't 666, but 616… why?
666 is the numerical transcription of the Greek name Kaisar Nero, i.e. Emperor Nero.
on the Oxyrhynchus papyrus, which is older, 616 corresponds to the name Caligula
and he was indeed the emperor not immediately before Nero, but…
So, under Caligula, the number of the beast was 616.
under Nero, the number of the beast changed to 666
Okay?
Excuse me?
Excuse me, but there was already a gentleman here…
bla
…it's in the Bible in only one place
I also noted down the verses where he is mentioned.
Leviticus 16, from verse 7
…Yahweh says to Moses: tell Aaron to do certain things…
and at one point he says to him: then he takes the goats
and he shall present them before the Lord, at the entrance of the tent of meeting
and he will draw lots, which of the two is to be the Lord's, and which Azazel's.
blah blah blah
blah blah
blah… then he will be sent to Azazel in the desert
Azazel is mentioned only in the 16th chapter of Leviticus…
then he is mentioned in the apocrypha, in the Apocalypse of Abraham and in the Book of Enoch
In the Book of Enoch, it is said that when he was punished
he was sent to the desert into exile…
So, two questions.
Why does he make a sacrifice for Azazel, who then became a demon?
and the second question: can this Azazel from the desert be related
with El Shaddai, the Lord of the steppe
who was in the desert… and so… could it be one person?
So, I think that Azazel could have been primarily Yahweh's external associate.
or someone who checked those things from the outside
Chili was far away, but with a precise task, and that's why they sometimes gave him
some of the things the Elohim liked so much… like this one here…
El Shaddai was, in my opinion, higher, more powerful, in the sense that…
So it's something else when I say: this is written in the Bible.
and it's something else when it's my assumption, and here it's my assumption, so just get it out of your head
In my opinion, El Shaddai was the father of Yahweh.
father of Milkoma, father of Kemóša
who divided Abraham's family among his children
I don't think so, because
In my opinion, El Shaddai was very powerful.
He was a high-ranking commander and I can hardly imagine him.
punished and fed by his son, but I repeat…
It's a presumption, so…
Yes, Azazel lived there too, but he doesn't look like he has much power.
It was someone who had been excluded.
so not someone who would be given power
but someone excluded, who could also have played a role
…
…yes, let's say it out loud…
when in Deuteronomy 32, Yahweh is assigned the family of Israel
it says there that Yahweh took care of them himself
without the help of any foreign, other elohim
Then, later, this character Azazel appears.
and it's a very mysterious character, so I'm making a hypothesis
and I say that it is a hypothesis
Of course, I'm not sure.
…but there is little information there…
Yes, exactly, exactly.
There is also a problem with the etymology of the name, which may have multiple meanings…
bla
blah blah
blah blah blah
It is a character that is only mentioned there, nothing is known about it…
It's interesting, for sure.
just as it's interesting… were there questions?
because as I speak, they come to me…
blah blah
bla
Two quick questions.
Is there any historian who wrote it down at that time?
this whole history, which was then manipulated anyway?
Are there any sources, such as Sumerian ones?
…do you consider the source to be verified and recognized?
or at least understand who wrote these stories
as a historian: that the Elohim did this, in Gan Eden…
It is not known.
and a second, simple question: in your opinion
Is mythology as real as biblical stories?
I'm pretending to… Me too, thank you.
in the sense that the Bible does not speak of God in the book and in another book called False Law
I have directly made a parallel study between the Greek texts and the Bible.
between those figures, the Greek theoi and the biblical elohim
They do the same things, require the same things, and have the same neurophysiological needs.
they behave in the same way, they have the same technology
technology that is studied by Greek universities, I mentioned it there
and according to them, Hephaestus was the engineer of that time
Hephaestus was the one who processed metals and made special things for them.
and he made special things for himself
I've put it there with Greek citations, so that everyone can be at ease.
As a child, he was thrown off a cliff and both his legs were damaged, he was limping.
God
so that he could walk, he made two maids
which had the thought and the word within
and it's clear that the maids have thought and word in them, why was it so surprising
their skin glowed like gold
and in everything they resembled living girls
They were two robots.
who accompanied him… then he constructed tripods
on wheels that moved by themselves
they served them at banquets
and they returned to the depot by themselves
he made metal guard dogs for Alkinoos' palace, which did not break or age
They are called watchdogs because they were watch elements.
and there are a lot of beautiful things that give you goosebumps
there is a description of how they moved and flew here
with those wings under my feet
they were tying it under their feet
and we must not imagine that they flew up like this
because Homer describes it to us exactly, they were "cutting"
they were descending from Olympus, not taking off
they descended along the slopes, then flew just above the ground
just above the water, and at the same time they caused the water to ripple
and just above the trees, so that they bent them
with those things they put under their feet
there are really accurate descriptions
I'm pretending that it's true… I'm pretending that they're true.
just like the descriptions of "clouds", there too…
just like in the Bible, a cloud appears when there is…
the chariots of the Greek theoi created clouds
exactly the same as there
they were transformed…
then we'll get to that, to Lilith, etc.
when Poseidon goes, in the Iliad, to warn the Greeks not to lose their ships
He goes to provoke them and disguises himself as Kalchant, introducing himself to them in the form of Kalchant.
when he leaves, Oileus' Ajax
he says, but this is not Kalchas
From the legs and the footprints, I understood that it was one of the theoi, because theoi can be recognized.
by the way he walks, even though he was disguised as Kalchanta
…
Excuse me?
Yes, yes, according to the tracks.
paws…
Thanks for the clarification.
they were changing
Now I'm going to ask the women a question.
You've been with one man for 3 years.
So imagine you are Magdalena.
who, since she had let her hair down in front of him, which a woman could only do in front of
by a husband, son or brother, before any other man
So if she let her hair down before Christ, she was his companion.
especially when he performs the royal anointing
with a special oil, etc.
You've been with one man for 3 years.
Then the man is detained in front of your eyes.
he is tortured, he is massacred
He is nailed to the cross, you are still there.
He is taken down from the cross, he is laid in the tomb.
You will return there in 18 hours.
He's out there and you don't recognize him anymore.
You saw him massacred, you saw him laid to rest.
and you no longer recognize him
Isn't it strange?
during that kiss of Judas… the old texts say that Judas kissed him
to be sure, to take him
because the apocryphal texts say that he appeared in various forms
exactly like the Greek gods
So Judas will kiss him, so they don't get it wrong, so they take him.
I don't know if it's true.
but that's how it's written
and that corresponds to the Greek gods
As Justin Martyr says: why are you picking on us so much?
when ours is the same as yours
That's what… a Church Father says… please?
even the disciples from Emmaus did not recognize him…
These are all such mysteries…
So… was there a question?
blah blah blah //Lilith, Eve//
blah blah blah //Ašíra//
that's enough for the whole conference
We'll do it this way, I'll give you the answer of a priest.
blah blah… and then, Moses only synthesized
the 42 rules of the Egyptian goddess of justice Maat
and it was only for the Egyptians who followed him, not for the Jews… thank you
Well, Moses took Egyptian soldiers with him.
to be able to suppress any rebellion… because maybe
Yahweh had a task… because it's not that Yahweh fought against
the powerful Egyptian elohim and managed to win
he could have been authorized to take away unwanted people
and so Moses took the Egyptian soldiers to prevent any possibility of return
and actually, when there were revolts, they immediately suppressed them and killed potential rebels…
as is the custom in the best of traditions… it was nothing else
So, Eva and Lilith, I will answer you with the words of a priest, Don Guido Bortoluzzi.
who did the same work as me, but he went much further
much further, because he says he received certain revelations… which I don't get…
I have to read and that's it…
I don't know how to do it any other way.
so in the production of Eve using Adam
Geneticists say
that it is a clear cloning operation
using staminal cells
By the way, that's really nice… they'll take the whole thing.
Excuse me, they'll take "celah", it's similar.
celah translates as rib, celah means "curved side part"
The root of the word, but in Hebrew it also means to limp
So, who is the operation of the hip bone crest performed on?
so there will be anesthesia and suturing
so he's been limping for a few days, so there's also this connection, without making anything up
So
Geneticists say that this is a completely common protocol for cloning, as it is today.
but one phase is missing
the intermediary, i.e. the uterus, into which the new being is implanted
Don Guido Bortoluzzi says: that intermediate link is Lilith
through that woman-link
which enabled the procedure for the production of Eva
and… please
blah blah blah
blah blah blah
Exactly, and actually
Eva is subordinate.
up to a certain time/degree
in the sense that a certain part of extra-biblical Jewish literature
it speaks of the years when Adam and Eve were separated
and they both put it inside like ????
everyone with their own, Adam with his own, Eve with hers
so they also had some fun
They were lucky.. Excuse me, I have to finish this.
So, when Adam had Eve…
he would probably continue to mate with Lilith
but neither Lilith nor the bosses liked that, and so…
because of the position, exactly
Lilith didn't like it either, because of her position, as she didn't want to be subordinate.
Then there is another female figure that you mentioned, and that is Asherah, or Ashira, etc.
…that is one of the female names
which, for example, in the locality of Kuntillet Ajrud, in the Negev
is cited as the companion of Yahweh
just as she is mentioned as Yahweh's consort on the Ugaritic tablets
on ostraca, where blessings were given to those who travelled from Lebanon towards the Negev, and where it was said:
May Yahweh of Teman accompany you on your journey, "teman" means "south"
so whoever went from Lebanon to the Negev, went south, and his Asherah
she also knew this companion of Yahweh
Jewish community in Egyptian Elephantine
where she was called Anat Jav
so they knew Yahweh's companion and called her Anat Jav
which, among other things, means
that we actually have one of the possible Bibles
in the sense that we have a Bible that originated from Judaism formed in Babylonia
which was therefore anti-Egyptian Jewry
if we had a Bible created in Egypt
the Bible would probably look different
and that is why the slavery of the Jews in Egypt is also mentioned
and when you read the Bible, you ask yourself: where is this slavery?
It is written everywhere that they left well-equipped.
they left with seven tons of precious stones and metals
of which one ton and three hundredweights were gold
they left with hundreds of thousands of animals
How can slaves leave so rich?
…and then, why did they keep complaining? They said: why did you bring us to this f…ing country?
when we were so happy there?
and they wanted to go back… how come?
the story was worked out
as such, a form of flattery for the Babylonian rulers, then the Median…
it was functionally anti-Egyptian… as if to say: He freed us because we were slaves there
I'm not so convinced about that…
in those books of Jewish theology, as I mentioned, it is written, for example,
that the tribe of Levi in Egypt was never enslaved
They say it directly, and the Levites are those whom Yahweh has chosen for himself.
and the Levites are the ones Moses has intervene to suppress the rebellion after the golden calf
so that the others would murder them, they killed several thousand of them
The Levites will intervene there, so…
it could have been some Egyptian soldiers that Moses needed
to suppress any potential revolts, to prevent their return
to Israel /-/to Egypt?/-/
possible
For example, this particular priest understands it as a transitional article.
from 48 to 46 chromosomes… right? Because we have 46 chromosomes.
compared to our monkey cousins
this was the so-called Robertson translocation, which occurred between chromosomes 2 and 3
which is something that, when it occurs in nature, leads to the death of that individual
while here, what happened?
it happened that this Robertson's translocation occurred randomly in one male
in south-central Africa, the male survived
it happened in one female
The male and the female met in Central-Southern Africa.
They had sex, had children, and those children survived.
those children, that son has contacted his mother
The daughter united with the father, and so a generation with 46 chromosomes was created, that is, us.
So all the scientists say, and they wrote it to me.
that this can only happen in a controlled manner in a laboratory
meaning you take a group of males, a group of females
you have them under control, and you release them into the wild only after you have cloned a sufficient number of them
because if you release them into the wild, they will die immediately
so this can only happen experimentally
only experimentally, that's really interesting
Excuse me.
yes
Eva…
In my opinion, it is necessary to distinguish well.
between the creation of the genus Homo sapiens
which is something that started some 250 years before
and Adam
because Adams are a special breed
a special race, in a special way pure, made within sapiens
and they made her to work for them in Gan Eden
Sapiens was already out there, but they made him anyway.
starting with the so-called mitochondrial Eve, as official geneticists call her
that Eve, from whom the mitochondria originate
which we all have… because men cannot pass on those mitochondria
through sperm, but are transmitted only through eggs
because they are too large to fit into the sperm
and so… the Adams are a special breed
and actually the story with Adam
for a whole range of reasons…
can be JUSTIFIABLY situated
around 4500 BC
so it's very close to us, it was the day before yesterday
Adam's… and there, as I read it
the story of the Israelite nation, which inherited the task of Adam and Eve
In Chile, they say: we are the direct descendants of that special race.
separate and distinct from the rest of the genus Sapiens
and actually when Cain kills Abel, because of rivalry, because he was a direct descendant of those…
when Cain is banished
He says: "But if you drive me out, whoever finds me will kill me."
But if they are the ancestors of mankind, who was that anyone?
because there was a lot of sapiens out there
but they were much more backward than them, because they
they were a privileged nation because they were in direct contact with the Elohim
They were privileged from a genetic point of view.
privileged from a cultural point of view
and when they are then expelled from Gan Eden, completely by chance
a fully developed Sumerian civilization appears
because Sumerian civilization appears without any "before"
when they appeared in history, they already knew agriculture, animal husbandry, and construction
astronomy, mathematics, geometry… but where did they come from?
they were probably the Adams expelled from Eden
who swarmed into the Mesopotamian valley
That's my opinion, so get it out of your head right away, okay?
Exactly.
3200 BC, the biblical flood, the biblical
No, the biblical flood could have been around 3200 BC.
Okay? Please.
so we have already touched on Babylonia here
I'd be interested in the other Ls.
who were then the enemies of Yahweh
My question is: how is it that
a Jewish society was formed, which now has the same religion
they are all under Yahweh, and according to the Bible, the first anti-Semite was Yahweh himself…
…how is it that all the Jews united
under Yahweh, under the same god
the biblical God, who was actually the first anti-Semite
who killed direct relatives
So, in my opinion, this is a contradiction.
rather than a contradiction, it is a mystery
in the sense that it is not understood how it
that He remained
that He stayed with His nation… so were they that clever?
it was they, the most faithful, who waited…
that the promise given to them will be fulfilled
or
as part of something we have no idea about, he was entrusted with a task
whether he will stay here and make a difference, I can't say for sure
because when my Elohim colleagues left me here alone to do the work, and they left
Well, they didn't tell me, so…
As soon as I see them, I'll pull their ears and make them explain it to me…
No, really, I don't know, it's a secret.
So, let's say it was an element.
around which the nation maintained its unity, and in fact its Jewishness
I have many Jewish friends, despite the fact that some people consider me an anti-Semite.
and they tell me: being a Jew is not belonging to a religion, it is a way of being
simply a different way of being…
it's a different way of being for us… even without the money thing…
They feel they are part of a special community.
which received a special promise, by the way
from a messianic point of view, because their messiah is delaying his arrival
because their Messiah was to intervene, liberate them and place them above all nations
So at one point in the Jewish world, they also developed the idea
that Israel itself is the Messiah
through which the whole of humanity will be liberated
This is one of the many keys to reading…
…but
it is one of the keys they created
why some things still haven't happened
as the theologian Sergio Quinzio says: Christians
deserve special recognition because they are
2000 years of promises unfulfilled by children
That is evident.
Jesus missed the mark with all the prophecies.
prophecies… rather hopes… not prophecies
So… I have a few thoughts.
of which may be the question
I noticed that it exists
Another nutcase who talks about spaceships, rockets, weapons, etc.
Zecharia Sitchin…
He's a nutcase, poor guy.
and I noticed
repetition of the number 12
in a variety of situations that are not necessarily Christian-Catholic
You have already mentioned the 12 apostles here.
but there are 12 months in a year
In the Greek and Egyptian pantheon, there were 12 gods.
There are 12 zodiac signs.
Is it a coincidence? Or does it have some justification?
and one more thing
The Jews, everyone wanted to exterminate them, they haven't succeeded yet.
but the last one, that is, Hitler himself
the worst being in the world, that's what he was, I don't want to excuse him
but he is the last person we remember
he has become a dictator stereotype
who wanted to promote the Aryan race
which has something to do with the Elohim
Egyptians
the king of the Ammonites… I captured it all
Can you connect it somehow? Thanks.
Yes, as for the last part, I wouldn't want to end up in court…
as for the first one
given that in ancient times there was evidently talk of hexadactyl civilizations
When I have five fingers on my hands, I count by tens.
when I have six fingers on my hands, I count by twelves
with all the consequences…
a circle of 360 degrees, all multiplied by twelve
division of twelve… so
It's like these civilizations… the Bible talks about them too, okay?
This clearly states: they had 6 fingers on each limb.
so this explanation could be here
that's another explanation, if I disregard that remark, so I don't end up in court
I didn't understand what exactly you were asking me?
So, let's say that the plot with Hitler is related to the Bible.
I have read it several times, so I can say it with confidence…
If I were a Jew, I would want to know the truth.
I put it in one of my books.
since the end of the 19th century
in Jewish magazines, then in the most important American newspapers… I can read it to you
I have it here… it's still being talked about
about the 6 million Jews who are to die in Europe
from the second half of the 19th century
So when Hitler was born
So, those 6 million Jews were supposed to die under the Tsarist Empire.
then there was the Soviet Union, then there was Nazism, and they died under Nazism
The Holocaust wiped out 6 million Jews.
We are not denying anything like that, shhh…
that astonishment
So there is no doubt about the 6 million Jews.
the astonishment is that after 60 years
there was still talk of 6 million Jews who were supposed to die
and if I were a Jew, I would want my historians
They explained to me how it is that after 60 years
there were still 6 million Jews there
so their number neither increased nor decreased
after 60 years, it was still 6 million who were supposed to die, and then 6 million of them died
If I were a Jew, I would want to know the truth.
about who decided that 6 million of us had to die
because it was obviously not Hitler alone who decided
when it was written at the time he was born
I can read it to you… New York Times, Atlanta Constitution…
I have no comment on that.
What surprises me is the 6 million and 6 million.
Another interesting thing is… you know that Elena Lowenthal, a Jewish intellectual and journalist
2-3 years ago, she wrote an article in La Stampa.
Finally, in Israel, the number of Jews in the census has exceeded 6 million again.
as if those 6 million
it's a number that keeps coming back
I don't know, I don't know…. The Bible says that when leaving Egypt
there were 600,000 young men in their prime
even young men who could fight
each of them, of course, had a family
they also practiced polygamy, so they could have 1-2 wives
some children, parents, grandparents
and then the Bible says that she was there
and a mixture of other people who joined them and left
So, if we calculate it,
but I repeat, that's another thing you should throw away, because it's mine, it has no weight
Let's say that each of these young men capable of fighting could have 1-2-3 wives.
3-4 children, 2-3-4 older family members
So there could have been about 8-9-10 people for each of them.
600 thousand x "X" = some 6 million
it's like some kind of reference to the moment when
it starts from the ground up, because that foundation
the Jewish nation was Moses, the departure from the land of Egypt, that's where the nation really began
So if there is the question of the potential 6 million
other books say that there were about 3 million who left
These are all calculations that are sucked out of the fingers, no one can know for sure.
but this thing with the 6 million caught my attention
I found it interesting to read Jewish magazines from the late 19th century.
that 6 million Jews… or at the beginning of the 20th century, when it is said
I think in the New York Times
it is said that 6 million Jews in Ukraine and Poland received the information
that they will be completely wiped out… but that was at the beginning of the 20th century
At the beginning of the 20th century, Nazism did not yet exist.
So I find this interesting…
Yes, as a special nation.
blah blah
blah blah
blah blah
gijur, or conversion, is practiced there
Yeah, but…
not that he becomes someone's son, he is
officially recognized as a member of the Jewish community
but it's a long process, it's not like it turns around…
and there…
and there… there is a part of history that is not well explained to us, it is
descendants of the Khazar empire
conversion to Judaism in one fell swoop
but that's a distant history…
historians are not very interested in it, so it is left…
Exactly, what surprises me is the 6 million over 60 years.
because any nation will increase or decrease its numbers
Please… Good day, Professor.
May I?
May I? So, I with my wife, who is a Muslim,
we've been playing around a bit lately, pretending that…
and certain assonances emerge between the Bible and the Quran
where Jesus… Jesus didn't die there either
is mistaken for someone else and enters heaven
apart from this, which corresponds nicely with your works
also the thing with Gabriel, who is met
who meets Mohamed, who is in a state of panic because of him
because he will press it firmly against him
I wanted to ask for your opinion on Jesus and Gabriel in the Quran.
So, we'll do it this way, I'll give you another confirmation a posteriori.
when it says there that he was taken to heaven
…in canonical texts
when speaking of the Assumption
we often find "performance" in Italian
which is incorrect, because all the verbs used in Greek are passive
chili was pulled up
he didn't get out, he was sucked in
all verbs in the canonical gospels are passive
so he was pulled up
so that would be another confirmation, it was taken away
So there are a lot of similarities… Sure, sure…
and then the fact that he was afraid of meeting Gabriel
In general, the encounter with the so-called angels was unpleasant.
Gideon, for example, when he meets an angel
and by the way, even here it is written in ordinary Bibles that the angel disappeared from his sight
while in Hebrew it is written that the angel left on his own
but because it's an angel, it has to be said that he disappeared… no
The Bible says he left on his own.
it didn't disappear, but that's okay
and there he tells him: don't be afraid, you won't die
So there was always fear when someone met them, because it wasn't very pleasant.
So these are confirmations.
Another confirmation is given to us by Paul, the founder of Christianity.
when he says to women
at gatherings, women should have their heads covered
because of the angels
not out of respect for God, but BECAUSE OF the angels
in Tertullian's De virginibus velandis
it is said that women participate in gatherings where angels are present
must cover their head for their own protection
so as not to sexually arouse the angels
in the Qumran texts…
In the texts of the Essenes… it is written that young girls participating in gatherings where malachim, or angels, are present
they must cover their heads for their own protection
because they were sexually aroused by girls' long hair
they were sexually aroused, but Pavel says: because of the angels, not out of respect for God
so even the veiling of Muslim women still has this…
…or to protect women, to protect women
or be covered up so as not to sexually provoke
That's very accurate, nothing is made up there.
then, for us, it became a gesture
In addition to the respect that a woman should have for God, it is not like that, it is not like that.
For the angels' sake, it's written there, read it…
in Paul's letters… what you have at home… in peace
there, the question of those long hairs that sexually aroused
Let's ask another question… and tell me when it's time to finish…
Let's ask another stupid question.
…what is long hair for?
in nature, in nature…
on the savannah, in the forests, in the desert
What is the benefit of long hair?
they even have a negative effect, they are counterproductive
Anyone with long hair knows what it means to keep it clean.
Imagine you are in a jungle and you have 80 cm long hair.
imagine what is happening in them, what is growing in them
how long will it take you to finish… or when you have to run away from a wild animal
or when you end up in the water, with 80 cm long hair pulling you down
but long hair excited those who made us
Don't we make braids for puppies? Don't we adorn their ears and fur?
Not me, I really didn't turn out well.
There is one animal whose fur grows indefinitely.
but that's not in nature… sheep
The sheep is another animal that they made.
one of the homemade types, which they made
all cattle in the wild have short hair
If you let a sheep loose in the wild, it will die.
the sheep was made artificially
like many other animals
and was artificially produced 12-8 thousand years ago
exactly in those places where ancient texts tell us that they were there
and that's interesting
even animals that live in cold regions do not have fur that grows 80 cm long
because it's useless
…they don't grow, for us they do
we basically have a muted coat
and hair no, I no, you
they even suppressed that for me
Fortunately, because if I were to be the object of sexual attraction of the Elohim
Where? Here… just two questions.
The first one is linguistic, so it concerns your specialization.
Sorry, I'll use the informal "you" with you…
I wanted to ask if you've read the book The Secret of the Exodus about the Egyptian origin of the Jews by the brothers…
…Roger and Messod Sabbath
What do you think about it? More about the theory than the content.
that Hebrew is related to hieroglyphic
Egyptian, this is the first question, rather scientific.
and then, when you cooperate with those laboratories that study the Bible, working for NASA
prominent exponents of the theory of paleocontacts…
they insist that interstellar journeys
are not only unlikely, but almost impossible
Is there any?
I'll answer that in a jiffy.
theories… and especially, where could they come from?
and whether there were more races
Mamma mia, how beautiful!
So, what was the first question?
The first question was about the Egyptian origin of the Jews…
brothers Roger and Messod Sabbath
These are two researchers from a rabbinical family.
wrote this book
which is based on the study of the Bible written in Aramaic
In the Aramaic Bible, the story is completely different from what is in the Bibles we have.
For example, while in the Bibles we have, it says
that Moses was a descendant of the Ivrim, or a descendant of the Hebrews
It is written in the Bible that Moses was a descendant of the Yahudis.
The Jews were the priests of Pharaoh Akhenaten.
Moses would thus be of Egyptian origin, but that is actually what the Bible says.
when Sipora shows him to her father, she says: there's that Egyptian… so she also calls him an Egyptian
and if we start from the Aramaic Bible, those who came out
from Egypt were all Egyptians
not a single Jew
the Jewish nation was created then
So when you ask me where the truth is, I don't know.
…what do you think about it?
…I think it's possible, it's possible
…it's no coincidence that I work as
I treat it like the other Bible, because it was from it…
extracted truths that rule us all
If they were extracted from that one, I would do it like with that one.
the monotheism introduced by Akhenaten could be…
it could easily be the Jewish one
So, either some rebels
either intentional refugees or people who were forced to leave
Okay? As for the scientific question of possible interstellar travel?
and the races that came here?
So, Psalm 24
This is a psalm that Monsignor Corrado Balducci used to read.
who was a Vatican monsignor in charge of the study
potential life…
off Earth, and its connections with the Bible…
He said about Psalm 24
that it is a psalm that contains certain proof
that the Bible knew about extraterrestrial life
and quotes the first verses
Let's do it this way, so we can be at ease.
Then I'll tell you an interesting fact that will give you goosebumps.
me, me, I'm the madman
Psalm 24: The Earth is the Lord's and everything in it
The universe and who inhabits it
so here we distinguish between the Earth and space and those who inhabit it
…this is a translation…
it can be the world, the Earth, the universe
Exactly, yes.
and by the way, that term "tevel"… let's not, so we don't stray too far
according to the vocalization, it can mean the universe
or sexual intercourse between a father-in-law and daughter-in-law, or sexual intercourse between a woman and an animal
according to vocalization…
so here we distinguish between the Earth and the rest of the world
from verse 7 onwards… I am currently studying this with Massimo Barbetta, what I have quoted here
there are areas of the sky identified directly, which are called Kimah
These are the areas where these gates, which I will now tell you about, can be found.
because those who say
Interstellar travel is impossible, they forget the scientists from the late 19th century.
who said with the same certainty
that the human body is not able to withstand a speed exceeding 30 km/h, because it would fall apart
So I say: when science claims something, let it say "maybe"
let him say: we don't know now
but we don't know how we will travel in 100 years
so let's be careful with these claims
It's impossible… it's not…
It's not impossible, because the University of Naples, the same one where they say I'm a nutcase
So they say… there is one article…
Here it is.
University of Naples: A prototype of a wormhole for time travel has been constructed
Okay? Based on Einstein's theory… they made a prototype, okay?
it means traveling through space-time
…
Listen to this: Psalm 24
here, the gates are referred to by two different names
shari'a and petachim
So, the first ones are called: raise the gates/barriers
it translates to gate in English
Lift up your gates, you upper gates!
Let the gates be lifted, O le olam… and here le olam is translated as eternity.
Olam in Hebrew means
in all extra-biblical Jewish literature, it means "unknown place"
because the king of Kavod is entering
Who is this king of Kavod? Yahweh, the strong man, the hero, the hero in battle
lift the upper part of the sari
Get up, Petachim le Olam
chili gates that you open in an unknown place
because the king is passing by with his retinue
What does that mean? That there are some gates here that open.
the king of Kavod enters, then other gates open in a place that no one knows
which is the place where they come from.. Psalm 24
petachim le olam
It gives me goosebumps…
…and here you can find it in the book The Fall of the Gods, in the section concerning Vedic writings.
that there are certain areas of the sky where they are in the Vedic scriptures
the gates through which those gentlemen came were identified
they are identified there… by the way, in that study with Massimo Barbetta
there is a route, but there are space-time gates through which they come
in that study with Dr. Massimo Barbetta
Yes, he showed it at a conference.
there is an area of the sky, identified by the Jewish world, it is called Kimah
which corresponds to one of the areas marked by the Vedas, where these space-time gates are located
Yes, yes, it's a large area called Kimah.
…it includes the Pleiades…
Exactly, it's a very large area.
So, these are the areas from which they could come through those gates.
space-time… that's really very interesting…
it would be worth exploring this further, because…
and that it is here in this Psalm 24
where the gates that open are located
…by the way, the timing is not observed here
because in Hebrew it is the present tense
So the first gates are opening, in the present tense.
then there is the kavod that enters, and the others are in the future tense
that they open afterwards
and this corresponds to Egyptian culture
to the paths of the god Ra
who was passing through a tunnel that had gates
in that tunnel, there was a very high speed, which, however, did not depend on the passenger
whoever enters there, goes at that speed
and that then opens into Am-Duat, i.e. the other world, but that is not the world of the dead
that is the world on the other shore, from where they come
We are working on it now and will release it.
Sure, we'll release it, we're working on it.
…
blah blah
Where was the hand raised? Yeah, there.
First of all, I'd like to hear something about…
as you quoted the laboratory-made sheep here, it's no coincidence
…Dolly, who was the first cloned animal
I don't know if it's a coincidence or not…
The question here is: when it comes to flying machines
It's mentioned somewhere in the Bible, I don't remember where, so I'm asking.
and the term flying machine
is cleverly disguised by the word "glory"
so I wanted to know what exactly was being said there
and where exactly, in which verse
So, the same applies to Kavod as I said about Ruach.
ruach primarily means "wind"
and what the wind causes by its movement
then a ghost was made out of it… so I don't know at all
I don't need to argue that it also means spirit.
but let them argue, I don't give a damn
Let's say that in some situations it can mean a ghost, I have no problem with that.
in others, it is guaranteed not to
It's the same with kavod, the root KBD means "heavy", something that is heavy.
so, something that is difficult, by transposition of meaning
then it refers to something that is "famous"
Example: we say that a person "has weight/is weighted", is famous
Okay?
but everything is based on the concept of "heavy"
So, if we are going to discuss,
about the etymology of each individual word, we will never come up with anything
because it is necessary to understand these things
do the most normal thing: read the sauce
and I'll summarize it for you in two minutes
if kavod means "glory"
So, Moses spoke with Yahweh, face to face.
and Yahweh promised him that they would conquer the promised land
At one point Moses says: Yahweh, I must see your kavod.
chili: I have to see your glory
If it means glory, then when you look into the face of God, He does not have glory with Him, because He does not carry it with Him.
So, if you want to see her, you have to tell him…
You have to tell him about it if you want to see her… ok?
Yahweh tells him: "All right, get ready tomorrow morning."
I'll show you my glory tomorrow morning… I left it at home for now.
I'll show it to you tomorrow morning… but be careful.
But when I ride through here with that glory, and you're in front of it, you'll die.
because God is not able to control the effects of his glory
but when I ride by with my glory, and you hide here behind these stones
and if you look at her from behind as she passes, you won't die
so that means that the stones can protect Moses from the effects of that glory
which God cannot do
Do we have to reason so much about it to understand what it is?
one must reason endlessly to make it God's glory
Indeed, entire volumes are written about this to convince us that it is God's glory.
but I've already read to you here what that divine glory does
it has wheels, it has wings, it rises from the ground
and when it rises, it makes a lot of noise
That's what the Bible says… when we put these things together, let's do one reasonable thing.
Let's not translate the word kavod.
because when we start translating, we start arguing
but we have to say: what is kavod? It's the thing that does all those things…
Šmitec, then let everyone imagine it as they wish.
but he does all those things
There is no doubt about it.
that's what it says there, not in my translations
when I read you the translations of Dr. Jeff Benner, he says that kavod
He is the founder of the Center for Old Testament Studies.
He says that the kavod is a weapon with which Yahweh traveled and fought, but that is evident.
just read the Bible, it's evident
Okay?
So, if we're finished, thank you all.
So, thank you all for being here.
and that you made this event possible
To be continued.