Graham Hancock talks with Mauro Biglino, who has translated the Bible from ancient Hebrew for the Vatican. Biglino argues the original texts describe physical, technological beings rather than a spiritual God — prompting a radical re-examination of the divine in ancient scripture.
Transcript
are there other traces in the Bible of objects that might reasonably be interpreted as technology? we have the Ark, we have the Shamir, we have the kavod, anything else? We have the Ruach. That's the rising up? Yes. The flying. Yes, the ruach. So some sort of suggestion of a flying machine? Yes, yes, flying machine They are described clearly as flying machines Sorry- in the Bible? In the Bible. Give me an example. For example in the Book of Ezekiel, and in the book of Exodus, the kavod of Yahweh is clearly described, that when Moses asked Yahweh for the possibility to see his kavod and Yahweh told him "you cannot stay in front of kavod because if you are in front of kavod you will die" and -this is important- Yahweh can not do anything, so God is impotent, not potent, in front of the danger of the kavod and this is very interesting- Yahweh tells Moses "you can hide behind these rocks" so the rocks can do what God cannot do right I absolutely get your point Impressive very much so So Mauro, a pleasure to meet you I've heard a lot about your work it's a pleasure for me and I thank you for having me here in your home. it's an honor you're welcome, very nice to meet you now fundamentally the issue at stake is translation the translation of the Bible so let's establish some things clearly when we talk about the Bible we're talking about the Old Testament? when we talked about the the Bible normally we talk about the Old Testament May I just interrupt there just to clarify- is the Old Testament identical in contents to the Torah? we have many versions of the Old Testament we have the Masoretic version of the Old Testament that is the official version we have the Old Testament of the Samaritans which contains 300 differences from the Masoretic Old Testament we have the Old Testament in the Dead Sea Scrolls that have, for example, only in the book of Isaiah 250 differences so we have many Old Testaments but the theologians say that the true Old Testament is the Masoretic version okay explain Masoretic to me Masoretic is a family, named also the School of Tiberias, that worked on their version of the Old Testament between the 6th and 9th century after Christ and they added the vowels because the Old Testament was written only by consonants so the people could read it however they wanted to They could insert whichever vowels they wished to- exactly. So the Masoretic School inserted the vowels to fix down the possible ways of reading the Old Testament and I translated this not because I think it's the best version, or the unique truth, but because the theologians say it is the truth this is the definitive version the definitive, yes. first of all with our friends I apologise for my English but I'm learning it since a few months, and so I hope to make you understand me you're certainly making making me understand so I still want to come to this point that the original book is the Torah yes and that's the name of the Hebrew Bible yes and if I take the Masoretic translation of the Torah it's identical in content? they contain the same books? not in all the translations right there are many differences which are often important and so when we are in front of this book, we have to take care with the context because the translation of a unique term is always uncertain it is uncertain even if all the scholars of the world say that "this is the translation" it is not certain they're using their authority okay, they use their authority because often they are dogmatic of course so we have to use the context to understand the real meaning of single terms like the the verb 'bara' which is present in the first verse of the Bible in Genesis so the term 'Shaddai', that doesn't mean "Almighty" but it means "lord of the mountains", "lord of the steppe" but in the Bible you always find the translation "Almighty" but they know it's not "Almighty" because for example in the Bible of Jerusalem in the notes they write that the translation "Almighty" is a mistake but since God must be in the Bible, and God must be Almighty, so they insert the term "Almighty" also they know that 'Shaddai' doesn't mean "Almighty" but to be clear in the original Hebrew, if somebody is a Hebrew speaker and understands Hebrew clearly, they will not read the word "Almighty"? no, exactly. They understand the real meaning so the problem is with the translation out of Hebrew into other languages exactly okay. What is your special qualification to translate and to comment on biblical texts? I studied Hebrew with the Hebrew community of Turin. Later I started to translate What led you to start learning Hebrew? for my interest, for my personal passion Like you I wanted to understand the truth, because I know Latin, Greek, Ancient Hebrew and so I wanted to know what is really written in this so-called holy book and after I started to translate for myself, the Publishing House San Paulo, which is the main important Catholic Publishing House of the Vatican, saw my translation and then they asked me to translate for them I see and I translated 70 books of the Old Testament and they published them exactly as I translated them you were translating into Italian or into which language? into Italian yeah but when I was translating for them, for example the term Elohim was not translated It remained Elohim because in the world nobody knows the real meaning of the term Elohim so it is better not translated but to leave it as it is exactly so that's a transliteration that we're looking at yes in my contract they wrote that I must make a literal translation so terms such as Shaddai, and Elohim were not translated they were left as they were. interesting. so it's true to say then that you're an official Bible translator for the Vatican yes, for the publishing house San Paulo for the Vatican, yes and how is the relationship between you and the Vatican? when I started to explain to the public the real meanings and when in 2010 I started to write my first book about the literal translations of the Bible I was fired in one minute It's dynamite, a very explosive subject it's all finished so you had a temporary connection with the Vatican yes and that resulted in the translation of 70 books yes, after they published these 70 books with my name and they're still they're still in print? they now changed my name they made a revision of this book to insert another name and cancel my name and when the relationship finished they started again to translate Elohim with God but when I was working for them Elohim was not translated so do you think this is the essence of the problem then between you and the Vatican, the translation? oh yes a great problem, but in 2016 I organized a meeting with four of the main theologians in Italy one Catholic (all academics), an archbishop of the Orthodox Church, a Rabbi chief of the Hebrew community, and the most important biblical translator Protestant we met in front of 600 people they had to admit in front of these people that in the Bible there is no concept of creation from nothing there is not the concept of transcendence there is not the concept of spirituality there is not the concept of "Almighty" and so I was there and I thought to myself that they are saying what I say normally yeah let's dig deeper into this question of El and Elohim, and Yahweh or YHVH if I understand YHVH it's supposed to mean "I am that I am" or "I am what I am", is that incorrect? no, it's not it's not correct because nobody knows the real meaning of the tetragrammaton because when it was pronounced the Hebrew language did not exist so nobody knows in what language it was proncounced let me pause you there you're saying the Hebrew language did not exist and when it was pronounced, are we talking about to Moses? yes of course nobody can absolutely confirm that Moses was a real historical figure at all, but if he was then they would put the date at maybe 1200 BC? 1200, or in the opinion of other scholars, 500BC 5th Century BC, so much later, so there is some argument about when- yes but nobody is sure about this- ok but when did the Hebrew language come into existence? in that moment Aramaic was the international language, as with English now but we don't know in what language the so-called Yahweh spoke, but for example we do know that the vowels of Yahweh were inserted two thousand years after their first pronunciation so nobody knows so the real sound of this name if we accept the early date for Moses, 1200 BC, you're saying that the language that Moses spoke could not have been Hebrew no the language- could have been ancient Egyptian yes perfect it could have been ancient Egyptian is it controversial to say that the Hebrew language did not exist in 1200 BC? in that --- was destroyed in the global cataclysms that brought the ice age to an end now it has for a long time seemed to me that the wisdom and knowledge of that civilization was not lost completely, but it was preserved, that there may have been specific groups of people who were charged with carrying that knowledge down into the world, so I can see the I can see the crossover with- it's absolutely possible that Elohim were those human beings with special knowledge yes of higher technology now the thing is that we have a very long gap- if we agree on the flood, which is a another question I want to ask you the biblical flood is of course the best known flood myth in the world everybody knows about the flood of Noah, whatever their religion is today everybody knows about the flood of Noah but not everybody is aware that there are maybe 1000 other stories that tell of a global flood and the cataclysm that afflicted the Earth and that caused great destruction and changed things completely and I've long been of the view that the most likely period for that cataclysm is the end of the Ice Age It's a time of tremendous Global changes and it's a particular period called the Younger Dryas, and it runs roughly for 1,200 years from 12,800 years ago to 11,600 years ago 11,600 years ago we get a final massive pulse of melt water which raises sea levels very, very rapidly it's one of the reasons why I'm interested in the story of Atlantis actually, because that that is the date- 11,600 years before our time, 9,000 years before the time of Solon is the date that Plato gives for the submergence of Atlantis so if these calculations are correct and we're looking at global cataclysm that had its final massive spasm of disaster 11,600 years ago, that's a long gap to the time of the Hebrews and the Exodus from Egypt, which is 1200 BC, 3,200 years ago so we have about 8,000 years gap now one of the things that my critics find hardest to accept is the idea that a wisdom tradition, that specific knowledge, perhaps even specific technologies originating with a lost civilization could have been preserved for 8,000 years preserved this raises- it's absolutely possible, yes so talk to me about why it's possible yes, because also in the Egyptian culture I read that the Phoenician priest Sanchuniathon, who wrote, and Eusebius of Caesarea reported his words and he said that the priests of ancient Egypt uncovered, hidden in myths, a true history of an ancient civilization well in Egypt we have entities like this one here, and this one here these are not Horus and Anubis These are the souls of Pe and Nekhen, and they were also related to another group called The Followers of Horus and their specific purpose, as described in the ancient Egyptian text, was to transmit knowledge from the past into the future they're a kind of secret Brotherhood they could also be a secret Sisterhood, because the ancient Egyptians were very admiring of powerful women as well they were a secret society, if you like I prefer not to say a brotherhood a secret society which passed down knowledge from the past into the present the most difficult thing to believe is that such a secret society could survive for 8,000 years often when I'm criticized about that I point out that there are ideas that do last for thousands of years, and that do continue, and that are repeated even the idea of the flood is an idea that has lasted for thousands of years but what's your feeling about the dating of this? Do you do you accept the notion of a flood more than 11,000 years ago? yes 12-11,000 years ago it's fascinating that where the Bible says that the Ark of Noah ends up is Mount Ararat, which is now in Turkey although it's actually visible from Armenia you can see the Mount Ararat more clearly from Armenia but it's now in Turkey now the interesting thing is there's no question whatsoever from a factual point of view that whatever floods took place at that time at the end of the Ice Age, none of them reached the slopes of Mount Ararat they did not Mount Ararat was never submerged 11,000 years ago or 100,000 years ago it was not submerged but the idea that survivors of a flood would seek refuge in high places- that makes sense to me yes because also Nicolaus of Damascus wrote in his books that when Noah arrived on top of this mountain, he found there other people ah interesting he found other people and these people were afraid to descend and Noah with his sons convinced them to descend but this is not in the Bible? This is this is in some other text? this is in the text of Nicolaus of Damascus first century before Christ right, so it's an exegesis on the Bible yes how interesting! So he found people there already, which is what I would expect I mean the reason that Mount Ararat is of interest to me is because of its relative proximity to these sites now being discovered in Turkey Gobekli Tepe is also 11,600 years old Karahan Tepe is 11,600 years old Gobekli Tepe is another proof of a higher civilization I believe it is, yes. I think we're looking at evidence for that but what's fascinating is the thought that the- and this is what archaeologists most oppose- is the thought that knowledge could be preserved within select groups and passed down to the future for that to happen for 8,000 years is something that many skeptics find very difficult to accept yes I think that history must be rewritten, absolutely, because there are too many things that the history is not able to explain let's consider technology. As you know, my background was in journalism journalism took me to Ethiopia, and in Ethiopia I heard that Ethiopia claims to possess the Lost Ark of the Covenant I became very interested in the Ark of the Covenant fascinating object the way that it's described in the book of Exodus, the blueprint for the construction of the Ark, the things that the ark then does subsequently during the conquest of the promised land sounds like a weapon of some of some kind it's very hard it's very hard to interpret it in any other way what do you think the Ark of the Covenant was? I think it's what is written in the Bible could be true because the The Ark is defined as an object that produced or contained some form of energy and was also an instrument for the communication between Moses, or the people of Israel, with their Elohim, named Yahweh I may say- mistranslated in the movie Raiders of the Lost Ark as "a radio for talking to God" talking to God, talking to Yahweh whatever he was I think this is clear in the Bible there is no doubt of course we can think that the Bible is not true but I prefer to pretend that the Bible is a true history, like all history books all around the world, that contain always the truth, but not only The same is true for the books of History written today, also the the books written about the WWII, etc and so it's the same, it's the same mystery I'd like you to talk a little more about the technological aspects of the Ark of the Covenant, but also can you think of other objects in the Bible which maybe deserve a technological interpretation, rather than a spiritual interpretation? there is another object named kavod kavod is always translated as Glory of Yahweh but in the Book of Ezekiel there are some clear translations that can allow us to think that it was a technological tool in one Italian translation San Paulo Editions it's written that Ezekiel hears the sound produced by kavod which was behind him when this kavod was arising from the earth and it is translated in this way in the San Paulo Bible and the exact translation of the Hebrew term that is not Baruch (בָּרוּךְ) but is Berun What happened to kavod? Berun is the term that indicates the fact that kavod was rising from the earth so it was rising up? producing a great noise that Ezekiel heard, but this noise was behind him is it also the kavod that burns the face of Moses? yes it's the same. So it produces sound and it burns the same as the sun it sounds very technological yes what do you make of the Tower of Babel? oh it's a very interesting topic because the narration of the Tower of Babel is very strange because those people wanted to reach the sky so Yahweh wanted to intervene to destroy it and after the Bible says that Yahweh divided languages but if you read carefully the previous chapters of the Bible, you read that the languages were already divided each people had their own language so when Yahweh destroyed this tower and divided this alliance, he distributed these people among the others so he didn't create a new language, because the diverse languages already existed it's clearly written in the Bible clearly and yet not made available to us who do --- n place" so it's the most important passage of the Bible, Psalm 24 and this Psalm 24 was used also by Monsignor Corrado Balducci, of the Vatican who said- because now he is dead who said that the two first verses of this Psalm contain the proof that the Bible knew of the existence of the inhabitants of the earth, and the inhabitants of the universe, and that they were different and the last verses of that Psalm talk about this passage through the gates and in the English Bibles the terms in Hebrew pitraim (פִּתְחֵים) and sharim (שְׁעָרִים) are translated by Hebrew translators as "gates" so we may only speculate yes, but I stop at the literal translation of the Bible because beyond this translation we have to speculate indeed so but I prefer for now to stick to the to the literal translation of the Hebrew Bible The Hebrew Masoretic Bible yeah I think you're right to do that it's always interesting to speculate but what you're doing is you're providing people with new facts that allows us to think more clearly about this important text we've spoken of the Ark of the Covenant as a technological object you've spoken of the kavod I'm recollecting a thing called the Shamir, sometimes described as a worm oh yes there is also the Shamir it sounds also technological can you talk a little bit about that? yes the Shamir is a an object that is very difficult to explain because it is referenced only one or two times in the Bible but it must really be something technological but I want to avoid a work of fantasy, and so I prefer to be silent you don't want fantasy, I get that but are there other traces in the Bible of objects that might reasonably be interpreted as technology? we have the Ark, we have the Shamir, we have the kavod, anything else? we have the ruach that's the rising up? yes the flying yes, the ruach so some sort of suggestion of a flying machine? yes, a flying machine they are described clearly as flying machines Sorry, in the Bible? In the Bible. Give me an example for example in the Book of Ezekiel, and in the book of Exodus in the book of Exodus the kavod of Yahweh is clearly described that when Moses asked Yahweh of the possibility to see this kavod and Yahweh says to him "you cannot stay in front of kavod, because if you are in front of kavod you die" that is important- and so Yahweh cannot do anything about it so God is impotent, not potent, in front of the of the danger of the kavod and, this is very interesting- Yahweh tells Moses "you can hide yourself behind these rocks" so the rocks can do what God cannot do I absolutely get your point Impressive Yes, very much so when when you were a journalist for The Economist you encountered the Ark of the Covenant? I encountered the Ark of the Covenant, yes I was the East Africa correspondent for The Economist, so I was based in Nairobi in Kenya and a number of neighboring countries were countries that I reported on regularly and one of those countries was Ethiopia and in Ethiopia, by chance, very shortly after I had watched the movie Raiders of the Lost Ark with Harrison Ford very soon after I had watched that I was on a research trip in Ethiopia and it came to my attention that the Ethiopians claim to possess this object well obviously I was interested this fascinating, powerful, mysterious object and it's hidden in the mountains of Ethiopia I had never heard that before so I began to investigate that particular claim now at that time, which was 1983, the early 1980's I didn't have any particular interest in history, or in pre-history, or in archeology my interests were much more in current affairs but I also had the sense that I think any journalist would have presented by this information that there was something going on here because although archaeologists were rejecting Ethiopia's claim they were saying there was nothing to it, it was a complete fantasy my own eyes showed me that it was central to Ethiopian culture it was fundamental to Ethiopian culture that there was a community of Ethiopian Jews they call themselves the Beta Israel, the House of Israel they are known in Ethiopia as the Falashas and they practice a very ancient form of Judaism they do not know- they only became acquainted with the Talmud as a result of missionary activity from Israel they did not have the Talmud, but they did have the Torah so they're a very old form of Judaism they practiced sacrifice of rams and this, I believe, is forbidden in Judaism since the destruction of the first temple yes they practiced sacrifice of rams, and they had a rich history that told how they had come to Ethiopia, and how they had brought the Ark of the Covenant with them it's a different story from the story that the Ethiopian National epic tells the Ethiopian National epic is called the Kebra Nagast, "The Glory of Kings" and in that they claim that the Queen of Sheba was an Ethiopian Queen she made her famous biblical visit to the court of Solomon she was made pregnant by Solomon, according to the Ethiopian version she returned to Ethiopia, she bore the child, his name was Menelik, it means "the son of the wise man" and the story is that at the age of about 20 or 21 he went back to Jerusalem, he was recognized by his father, and somehow after one year in the court of Solomon he contrived to steal the Ark of the Covenant this is written in the Kebra Nagast and he carried it off to Ethiopia and we are told in the Kebra Nagast that Solomon was okay with this because it meant that God wanted it to be in Ethiopia rather than somewhere else there are many problems with this story and this story does not take into account the mysterious presence of a very ancient community of Jews in Ethiopia, and their story about how they got there and they said they got there by way of Egypt their ancestors spent some hundreds of years on an island in the Nile and that island- we are quite certain what that Island was- it was the Island of Elephantine why are we certain? because there was a Jewish temple built on that island and that Jewish temple was built there in the first temple period I beg your pardon, can I say a little thing? yes The Hebrew of Elephantine knew the wife of Yahweh they knew the wife of Yahweh! so they were really another kind of Jewish religion indeed so here we come to the interesting point where history connects with this story because that Jewish temple on the island of Elephantine is a fact it did exist there were communications between it and Jerusalem the temple had the same dimensions as the Temple of Solomon when I searched the Bible for an explanation for the construction of the temple, the only explanation I find is as a house of rest for the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord it's a place in which the Ark of the Covenant is to be put and then suddenly while the first Temple still exists, we have another temple built in Egypt of the same dimensions those Ethiopian Jews say that their ancestors were driven out of that Island this also is true we know from the Egyptian history that this happened there was a Jewish community on that island and there was conflict with the Egyptian authorities because the island of Elephantine is dedicated to the Egyptian god Khnum, and Khnum is a ram-headed deity so the tension was caused by the sacrifice of rams that was taking place so the Falashas say, to cut a long story short, that their ancestors fled south they didn't go north through a hostile Egypt and back to Jerusalem they went south and they followed the Nile River system they followed the Blue Nile branch and they ended up in Lake Tana in Ethiopia and that's the heartland of Ethiopian Judaism Lake Tana, which is the source of the Blue Nile and suddenly I could see how this story made sense because how do you get the connection between Jerusalem and Ethiopia what connects them once you come into Egypt and into the Nile Valley, what connects them is the River Nile and it made perfect sense and Lake Tana was the place where the the Falashas had their homeland so once I learned all of this I began to feel that the Ethiopian story really deserved serious investigation and I looked into it in great depth and it was the moment where there was a transition in my life from investigating current affairs issues to investigating the past it put me on that path and the very first thing that I felt about the Ark of the Covenant as I was reading and I read all of the descriptions very very carefully is this thing sounds like a piece of technology it's constructed, it's carefully made, there's a blueprint, there's instructions on what to do, there's gold, there's wood, there's gold, there's these mysterious tablets that are placed inside it, whatever they are and it opened m --- person of weight" in the sense that that person has an importance in the society it also means "a famous person", a "person of glory" so the theologians chose the term "glory" and always apply it to the term kavod without considering the context but when we read that the context says that "I cannot see the kavod in front of me because it will kill me" "but when the kavod passes I have to be hidden behind rocks" so it cannot be the "glory of God", because God in that case is not able to control the effects of his glory so it's ridiculous so the context implies, in every situation, the possible real meaning of this term so I read a book called Neuro-Apocalypse by a guy called Reverend Danny Nemu, and he went into all of this, and he talked a lot about the serpent in the Bible, and how in the original Hebrew, the word for it says "the serpent <something> Eve" and the translation in the Bible that we get is the serpent "deceived" Eve, but the same word could also mean "elevated", and there's different ways of reading the same word and the whole Bible can be translated in a completely different way, just choosing different interpretations yes but but it's it's necessary to pay attention to pay attention carefully to some few words and these words are the most important: if you understand the real meanings of these terms, you can read another book much more fascinating than the book they presented to us and the serpent is one of the Elohim the interpretation of Hebrew exegesis says that the serpent had two arms, two legs, and so it was like us but serpent, meaning one who knows, one who has a profound knowledge okay? Not a physical serpent because the Hebrew says that they had arms and legs so with the case of the serpent, for example the word could be translated as "deceived" or "elevated" depending on your initial preconceptions and the story that you want to tell when you're the translator, or whoever is the translator so the original Bible translators had a dogma and an idea when they put it into Greek of the story they were going to tell but other people could put it in a completely different way, right? the fathers of the church in the first centuries after Christ said that the translation of the Bible and this theological narrative was a useful misinterpretation so when it comes to these kind of translations for example with the Elohim, or with the serpent "deceiving" or "elevating"- I understand that because Hebrew is a much more fluid language and you have to pay attention to context much more, that you can't put a flat interpretation on a word, is there a correct and incorrect way of translating it? Or is it meant to be multi-layered? Is it meant to mean both "deceive" and "elevate" for example? for example there are many translations that make no sense I mean, for example, "ruach" but to make you understand me well, if possible with my English if I in English say "spirit" I want to say "alcohol", I want to say "an alcoholic substance" I want to say a "phantom" I want to say "a characteristics of the character" I want to say, for example, the "spirit of a team" when I'm working with other people so there are- and many other meanings that you surely know but, it's the context in everyone that helps us to understand the real meaning if I say that in this house there's a spirit, a spirit that comes every night it's clear that I I'm speaking about a phantom and not about a team spirit of course in Hebrew it's the same okay so it's not that there is multi-layer. There is a correct and incorrect translation but it's all about the context? yes and you're saying that the traditional translation from Hebrew to Greek just got the context wrong? yes, but between the Hebrew Bible and the Greek Bible there are differences in many case important differences so the Hebrew community of Alexandria in Egypt had concepts that didn't correspond to the thought of the Hebrews that were in Babylonia so we can find differences, and we find differences so you're saying there's no God in the Bible as it was translated from Hebrew to Greek, and yet the Hebrews, the Jewish people, have their own Torah in Hebrew and they're still a monotheistic people, they still believe in one God so if the translation is wrong, why do the Jews believe that there's one God when they have the original text? How can they interpret their own Bible wrong? How does that work? actually the Hebrew are monolatric, not monotheist what's the difference? they know that in the Hebrew Bible there is Yahweh who is the Elohim who chose them, who rules above them and they have to have faith in him only in him but the other gods can exist do they believe that the other gods do exist? Or do they believe there is only one God? there are so many currents in Judaism that you can find every kind of thought in Judaism you can find, from atheism, pure atheism to the maximum of the orthodox beliefs all are present so in your translations of the Bible, your own interpretation of these different words, you've come to the conclusion that there's no God in the Bible at all Yes and there is Elohim which are powerful people of which Yahweh is one and so were these people just- you were saying they were just people, they were just normal people, but they were vastly more technologically superior Yes does that imply- is there any implication at all of them being a different species? Perhaps alien or something like that? Or is it just straight up, they're normal people who just- like a lost civilization? what's your what's your take on that? all around the world there could be more species of humankind and in effect the paleoanthropologists substantially every two, three, four months discovers another species of ancient ancestors of the humankind and recently they discovered that Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens united male and female when before they said that that was not possible so we must be open to all solutions, because the truth can arise every day, but we don't know when but does your interpretation of the Bible imply the the Elohim are a different species, or like alien, or are they exactly the same as us, or is there no implication at all? since the Elohims chose the females of the Adamites, the descents of Adam their species could the same, or very, very similar because they could stay together and procreate well these guys, these Elohim, were around even during the time of Moses you said Moses talked to one of the Elohim when he was escaping Sinai so why is the Bible the only account of them? Why isn't there a rich historical record of Elohim outside of the Bible? from that time We can find the history of those beings all around the world what is changing is the name in Semitic in Western Semitic, it was "Elohim" in Eastern Semitic was ilu / ilanu pre-Semitic the name was Anunna in India the name is Deva in the Americas, your father can tell more I Virachochas and so on And in Egypt they were the Neteru Ah the Neteru in Egypt, exactly in the north of Europe the AEsir but these are very ancient accounts these are much more ancient than than the time of Moses, which I think you said was what 1200 BC? something like that? or later or later it's not sure so is there any account of other Elohim from that period, from- yes, there was the Elohim that was ruling the land of Canaan and Yahweh had the necessity to fight with them and the Bible is clear in narrating this these wars clear absolutely and sometimes Yahweh won, sometimes lost, the Bible is clear But are there stories of Elohim from that period, from Moses' period, outside of the Bible? Is there any record of that? yes, for example there is the Stele of Mesha who was the king of the Moabites that tells us about a battle between the Moabites and the Israelites and he says that he won against those of Yahweh and he offered the prisoners to his Elohim named Chemosh so this account could be brought and put in the Bible, nothing would change and the King Mesha is quoted in the Bible so we also we have a double check, from the same time a double check and so finally the Bible- if I want to read the Bible today I can go and buy a Bible but it's going to be the King James translation or something like that it's going to be the standard translation that every priest will believe is there any way I can read a Bible as you believe to be the true translation? Does that exist anywhere? Can I read that Bible? with these translations, I don't know if there is a Bible with these translations so, many people ask me to make a Bible with- but I have no time I have no time all right, for the next generation all right well thank you Mauro, I appreciate it thank you to you, thank you to you thank you