Mauro Biglino
Ed. Mondadori
pp. 348
Lord, God, Yahweh, these are just some of the names used in the Bible to represent the supreme Entity of some of the best known monotheistic religions.
But are we sure that the Bible really speaks of God?
According to Mauro Biglino, the author of the book I just finished reading, it is not.
But, who is Mauro Biglino?
For years he has been a translator of ancient Hebrew on behalf of the editions of St. Paul, and he has been translated into 17 books of the Old Testament. A scholar of the history of religions, he began to write what he has brought to light in years of translation and is now engaged in spreading his theory.
The book I have just finished reading, "The Bible does not speak of God", is not the first of the series and from time to time refers to previous works but is self-consistent and can be read without particular problems by those of mind sufficiently open.
Biglino starts from a hypothesis, which becomes a research methodology: pretend that ...
Doctor Biglino, can you explain to us what the "pretend it is?"
It means starting from a series of facts that are incontrovertible: from the Bible, or you could say better about Bibles, we know nothing.
We do not know who wrote them, when he wrote them (we do not have certainties even on a single line), as they were originally written, as they were read (since the vowels do not exist) ... We only know that the ones we read today are certainly different from those written over the centuries as they were constantly changing them. Given this premise the method I formally declared by the 2010 is to "pretend" that the things we read are those that have (we do not know who) written originally and that when they wrote something they wanted to say that, because if, in total ignorance in which we wander, we also affirm to "know" that when they wrote one thing they wanted to say another, we do nothing but add uncertainty to uncertainty, which would not be a problem if those uncertainties did not pretend to derive absolute truths and indisputable.
"Pretending ", in my opinion, is therefore the only intellectually honest attitude that can be held with that set of writings.
So I "pretend" and see what comes out of it, without any pretense of truth.
Pretend that ... the Bible and also other ancient texts have been written in the form of news, so that what is written is to be understood by leaving aside later religious interpretations.
In this way the Bible becomes a source of precious and particularly disturbing information.
Naturally, the Bible is just one of the texts used by the author. The Homeric writings and several studies of genetics complete the work.
But why does the Bible not speak of God? What does this title mean?
The title derives from the fact that in biblical Hebrew there is not even a term that has meaning and meaning of God as understood in the Western religion that was built by borrowing that concept from Greek philosophy, neoplatonic in particular.
The term does not exist because in the ancient Hebrew thought there was not even the concept and all the biblical content documents how those texts speak of a group of individuals (elohim) among whom Yahweh was but one of the many: that which was entrusted by the commander (Elyon) the family of Jacob and not the entire Jewish people, as erroneously believed.
And then, what Bible are we talking about?
We begin to clarify that there is no Bible, but innumerable.
The different religions that use it as a sacred text (Catholic, Coptic, Jewish ...) have elaborated each different Bibles. In some some books are recognized as authentic, others are not.
The variations are remarkable, from the Jewish to the Catholic, from the Protestant to the Orthodox to the Coptic or Samaritan. The books to be believed to be true and to which they depend essentially depend on the geographical place in which we are born.
We must consider that the Bible, indeed, the Bibles, are translated and retranslated texts, modified over time to meet new needs or because some concepts were no longer suited to the society of the time.
Furthermore, the Bible seems to have been elaborated on the basis of more ancient Sumerian-Akkadian and Phoenician texts.
Some time ago I came across one of these books not found in the Catholic Bible and I wrote about it: the "book of Enoch". One of the strangest texts I've ever read, after the Apocalypse!
The author takes us back to the time of the most ancient texts and tells us, translating from them, what he has read over the years.
And so we discover that when in the Bible of our day we read God, Lord or Yahweh, we are not reading what was originally written but what in time, the various religions, wanted us to read.
The first consideration about the names of God is plurality, in the Bible the names that have been translated with the word God are: Elyon, Elohim, El, Eloah, Yahweh.
The first term, Elyon, is normally translated as "the Most High".
Based on the knowledge of ancient Hebrew and the use that has been made of the term, the author disputes the translation and affirms that with Elyon one must refer to a hierarchical superior and not to a "very high" in the religious sense.
Elyon would therefore be a Chief, the head of the Elohim, among whom he had divided the territories under his influence, assigning a territory and a family to be controlled by each of his most trusted Elohim. Among the Elohim there was one named Yahweh ...
Yahweh, as well as his other colleagues Elohim, was a military leader, a commander who led a family of human beings, Jacob and his descendants, to fulfill his wishes that almost always consisted of waging war on neighbors and exterminating them!
Dr. Biglino, you therefore state that Elyon and similarly the Elohim were military leaders. Could we define them as conquerors? And if so, where did they come from?
They were and behaved in all respects as the normal conquerors / colonizers: the territories were divided and then they fought among themselves to increase power and wealth. The Bible speaks to us in particular, almost eslcusiva, of one of them and his direct rivals that also explicitly names: against Yahweh fought for example his fellow antagonists Kamosh, Milkom ... who ruled over families closely related to that of Israel: they were the first cousins.
As mentioned above, often the order given by Yahweh was to exterminate those "relatives" (Madianites, Amalekites ...) to take their goods and their lands.
The Old Testament is a true book of war and, to be precise, one of the most immoral books ever written in the history of mankind: exterminations, genocides, thefts, murderers, feminicides, selective infanticides ... represent the normality of the behavior of that presumed god that fortunately God is not.
I can not tell where they came from, the biblical texts that have come down to us do not even tell us if, in the 24 psalm, we refer to two types of doors, the second of which, according to the literal meaning of the terms, opens on a place "not known" and was used by Yahweh with his kavod (term I have devoted amplissimo space in my books).
In fact, anyone who has read the Bible can not fail to be struck by the cruelty of God and his people. I myself remember that as a child I could not understand how universal peace could be predicated on the basis of what I read in the Bible. I did not understand then and I do not understand it now, despite everything.
Like Yahweh, there were other Elohim placed by the Most High, Elyon, at the head of other families. The Elhoim were particular beings, who lived very long, hence the translation of "Eternal", referring to God. Yet in the Bible, the Elohim die ...
The Bible is also clear in this: the elohim lived for a long time but died like all men (psalms 82) and this statement is a problem for the monotheistic exegetes who, to try to remedy this blatant and unacceptable incongruity, in that passage they give the term elohim the meaning of "judges" while for the rest they claim that it means God, even if it is plural.
Doctor Biglino, reading his book was an interesting experience. It is not the first time that I come across strange parallels between the knowledge of two millennia ago and the current ones. This knowledge is reported not only in the Bible but also in other texts, such as the Homeric texts or even "Natural Issues" by Seneca. One of the things that struck me many years ago, reading "Natural Issues" was this piece [book III-29,3]:
As in the seed the informative principle of the whole future man is understood and the unborn child contains in itself the code that presides over the development of the beard and the white hair (there are in fact miniaturized and hidden the fundamental lines of the body as a whole and any subsequent development) ...
I do not ask her what she thinks of it because in her book she states that Man was "built" at a table, through modifications to DNA. I ask you, on the other hand, why have these knowledge been ignored to date? Can everything be explained to the needs of the Church or is there something else?
The quotation you quote is very interesting and significant about the knowledge that was available. For the Jews it is normal to say that the Bible speaks of genetic engineering, cloning ..., they also tell me in person, but I know very well that these are issues that should not be talked about in a Christian context and that is why my work arouses, not by chance, many reactions, often also heavy and verbally very violent. Of this knowledge and the technology that derives from it, I said widely in the second book published with Mondadori, "The false testament" (2016).
On the other hand I must say that the first tool to govern is to guarantee the management of knowledge and therefore to keep the submissives in ignorance, elaborating for them contents and information that have the sole purpose of justifying the control exercised.
If the faithful were to become acquainted with the true content of the Bible, the artificial construction that was built on it would fall immediately, but this is not enough. In fact, one should ask whether the Church, or rather, the Churches govern only for themselves or they are the representatives of far higher and farer powers.
I could go on like this telling you the whole book and how much, in the author's view, it really is written in the Bible, but I think it is more appropriate to invite all those who think they are capable of wide-ranging views of reading a book that in some respects It is shocking and, as far as I am concerned, does nothing but confirm many of the things I have always thought: that Man is a creature different from other animal beings, as produced by beings of an extraterrestrial nature. Of course now I can not wait to read the other books of the author.
Doctor, I guess your studies continue. Can you give readers a preview of your next job?
Consistent with the stated method I am working with members of various fields of science and the output volume for the Turin Book Fair (May 2017), written with the journalist dr. Enrico Baccarini who has dealt with the East, sees the contribution of eight engineers (six Italians and two Hindus), a neurosurgeon, a historian and a graduate in philosophical sciences.
In this new very full-bodied work ("The Fall of the Gods", Unoeditori) the sacred texts of the West and the East are examined (from the Bible to the Vedas) in the light of scientific acquisitions that make understandable those contents that tradition tends to relegate in the interpretative categories of allegory and metaphor to hide the true meaning that is devastating for traditional doctrines but fascinating for open minds.
The concreteness of those ancient texts must be recovered in the name of that need for knowledge that can free us from centuries of conditioning.
What to say more?
Thank you, Dr. Biglino, and to all of us ... good reading!
Alessandro Rugolo
