It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Ex-Vatican Translator, Mauro Biglino's Alternative Creation/Translation Theory

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

+10 more 
posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:06 PM
Though I doubt this is his theory, but probably just hidden "truth" in certain circles that span earth history, at least for the last 10 000-200 000 years, give or take. That inclusion is based on origins going beyond Sumar, which is where he more or less stopped, and spanning into other cycles and era's that may have something to do with all those under ocean pyramids and cities.

I found this so compelling in its implications, that are not out of line with many who have already shone light on the ancient astronaut theory.

More than anything this is not definitive, but logical, as it draws in more than a guess at translating but using comparative studies, ie. ancient history and linguistics, to find a match with Sumerian. Not the well known Sitchin variety but the academic studies.

To begin with, before presenting this look at an alternative understanding to the shared Judiac Scriptures that 3 world wide religions share, the very same 3 who seem to consistently hold the world's peace at bay and cause endless wars and suffering, would like to express. If this topic is harmful to someones personal held beliefs to please not read, or discuss, as its not meant to harm anyone, and not meant to harm Faith itself which is pure. Faith, Hope, Charity/Love are the purist sentiments, and while some tie these into religious doctrine and beliefs, many are freeing themselves from this, from the control, and starting to shine up the jewel of a loving kind heart and using discernment. This doesnt mean walking away from ones faith unless they are called within to leave a religion and become universal. This is is not being written to offend anyone, but in the pursuit of truth and to free our minds, to seek and persist in seeking for truth.

I myself am a Christian, and this is not being written to throw the baby out with the bath water.

There are several ways that people graviate towards religions. One is fundamentalism. And yes, this is going to cut across the grain of that fabric. So if its offensive, please understand its not written to those with whom fundamental embracing of scripture, ie accepting all unquestioningly in a straight forward manner, is needed, to please walk away in Peace and Love.

There are many who from childhood discerned and chose the Loving Scriptures over the rest and only pay attention to those, and also see things more metaphorically.

Then there are the gnostic mystery school passages that are seeded throughout the book.

My own Christian beliefs are in the second category, also intuitive mystic, but not fully in the third, though I can read and recognize love in some of the gnostic, but find that not straight forward, ie, like JFK, secrecy is repugnant to me.

That is my disclaimer.

This is put out to educate and free the mind from the warring paths that unfortunately are also entrenched in all the major religions, to promote discernment and dusting off the love and unity in our hearts.

And as an experiencer, for a bigger look at truth outside the box, and down the rabbit hole.

This relates strongly to the ancient astronaut theory.

I've taken extensive notes on the first 2 videos, and will probably continue with the rest in more of an overview.

Mauro Biglino: Unexpected Bible - Translating it literally (1 of 6) - Eng. subs

Mauro Biglino: Unexpected Bible - Translating it literally (2 of 6) - Eng. subs

edit on 1-2-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:16 PM

Mauro Biglino: Unexpected Bible - Translating it literally (3 of 6) - Eng. subs

Mauro Biglino: Unexpected Bible - Translating it literally (4 of 6) - Eng. subs

Mauro Biglino: Unexpected Bible - Translating it literally (5 of 6) - Eng. subs

I'm not even going to include the short ending in 6, which was not in the lecture hall, but just added to give some idea that he doesn't support Christianity but then he maintains he is either athiestic or agnostic because he doesnt really explore God/Goodness or Spiritual Higher Ups, other than the ufology inherent as a strong possible choice in translation in the words.

So I didn't even like 6.

Especially since, he himself brings in the cross-disciplinary history of ancient Sumeria, to make a logical fit for his translation, and then includes someone from NASA contacting him and coordinating some of his material with NASA's procedures in astronaut training, so there is a inter department look, a holistic look, that brings logic to his research and conclusions, though he himself admits to them being theory.

But if he'd gone further in the inter-department look and even into Quantum Physics and Physics in general, Astrophysics perhaps, he might even change his mind on if ancient astronauts really created us, or if this went much further.


Holograms are constructs. They are creational.
edit on 1-2-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:25 PM
I'm going to include the notes on the first video in two posts, as its long and in depth.

--Torah's words can be given till 70 different meanings....but there is one that they surely have which is their literal meaning.” (Rashi de Troyes – Jewish exegete 10t/11th century A.D.)

--Mauro biglino He says, despite what you're about to hear, I have to say I'm not a ufologist....I have never studied UFO in my life. Neither I ever saw an orb......

But I'm a translator of ancient Hebrew, that is, a translator of masoretic Hebrew. For about 10 years I've been translating it for the “San Paolo” publisher (a Vatican's publishing house – t.n.) that published 17 volumes of literal translations from the Old Testament.

---I have to split the Jewish words into their single components translate them literally, that is without interpreting. I have to control that the Jewish text is correctly written and I have to make and publish the philological analysis of all verbal forms

Philology is the study of language in written historical sources; it is a combination of literary studies, history and linguistics.

So, everything you're about to hear comes from that.

--the Bible we own, which we work on and which I'm about to tell you something about, is a Bible that was fixed between the 7th and the 9th century A.D. That is to say, in the years 600-800 A.D., in short, it's when the Merovigs first and then the Carolings ruled over Europe.

I mean that while Charlemagne was building his Holy Roman Empire.

By the lake of Galilee, one family, wich was Moshhez ben Aaron ben Asher's family, defined the Bible as we know it.

--This family was in conflict with other families: they represented the Tiberias school . There was the Palestinian school, the Samaritan one, the Babylonian one. They won....

If someone else would have won, we now would have a potentially different Bible.

---Why? Because the first Bible was written as a sequence of consonants. That means that the work made by those guys named Masorets - “the Keepers of the tradition” - was in first place to determine the words, that is, splitting the row of consonants and determining the words, that can be split and established in many different ways.

--The second work they made was inserting the vowels, that were not there.

And inserting the vowels actually means inserting the meaning of the words.

--One problem those gentlemen didn't have was the linguistic question, they never asked themselves. They were interested in inserting their theological thought.

That's what they made.

--So, one thing we should know is that the only certainty we have is that we know that we don't know.

--We don't even know how the Bible was vocalized when they wrote it.

--At the time when most of the Bible's events happened, above all the fundamental ones, Hebrew didn't even exist as a language.

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:29 PM
To do this justice, we have to understand that the Hebrew language was passed on as cononants, and they have no idea what vowels were inserted.

Vowels are the meaning. They give meaning to the sentence, paragraph, and in order to know this Hebrew would have had to exist at the time.

At the time of Moses, Hebrew did not exist as a language and all scholars/academics know that.

So, the bible is not an accurate thing, but is actually someone's opinion. The opinion of a certain powerful family took precedence over everyone else's. Of course that family was located in the Holy Land because coordination was going to have to take place between religions to some extent.

There are words where up to 70 meanings could be ascertained depending on the vowels.

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:34 PM

When many names were pronounced, Hebrew didn't exist, Moses didn't speak Hebrew.

In the desert, they didn't speak Jewish during the Exodus. If we like, if we want to believe they spoke some sort of semitic language, but I doubt it, they spoke some kind of Amorite, then maybe they began to speak some form of Aramaic.

--And later, a couple of centuries later, Jewish began to shape, which is actually a transformed Sub-Phoenician.

--Now you can understand that the only certainty is that we know that we don't know.

--But this is an understanding that anyone who works on the Bible should have, including theologists, cabalists and all those who say “I'll tell you how it is”

--That's why I won't tell you how things are, I'll tell you what there is in the of Jewish consonant roots, 'cos that's my job, or better, it was. Actually it wasn't my job because it's impossible to survive making Jewish translations, it's one of those things you make by night.

--My exact duty was to search the original meaning, of course by using traditional dictionaries in the Jewish and Aramaic etymology, edited by rabbis and published in Israel or in the U.S.

--Let's do this one, let's freewheel, let's ride the Elohims' RUACH

that is the Elohims' wind, the one that in the Bible is called, is translated as “God's spirit”

But the term RUACH doesn't mean spirit, it means wind, or anything flying in the air quickly and causing wind The later theological elaboration, when God's figure was created, led to attaching to RUACH the meaning of spirit. But actually, this is not there.

(he draws a sketch on a piece of paper and passes it around as to how the RUACH was represented in the Sumerian pictograms.)

Roughly 11 11 in the video.

(At 11 14, it shows this craft, and wind RU and A. I suppose it could be an acorn wearing a strangely bent streamlined helm or something like that. Hmmmm......) me lol.

--He says, because the word isn't Jewish, but Sumerian origin.

--That is the pictogram made by those that saw the first RUACH, which is where the RUACH of the Hebrews come from.

So, that is a thing we don't know what it is, let say we don't know it, so we can take it easy, but which decidedly hovers on the water.

---As we don't know what it is, we'll name it by borrowing the name directly from the Vatica, so that we won't go wrong.

If you read last editions of the “Lexicon Recentis Latinitatis”, published by the “:Liberia Editrice Vatican” where they insert the latin neologisms, you'll find that the Vatican inserted “navis sideralis”, which means “starship” They inserted “areia navis”, thus “airship”, they inserted “aireus viator”, that is “astronaut” and they inserted an acronym, “R.I.V” which means: res inexplicatae volantes”, that is UFO's.
---The ones of you that just saw that stuff now will realize that it's an unknown thing that hovers on the water.

---If you remember the beginning of the Bible, where it says, “In the Beginning God created the heaven and the earth”

you remember also that it said that Elohims' RUACH, or God's spirit was hovering on the water.

Only, the RUACH is that stuff.

--for “hovering” was used a participle, which is MERAPHERET.

Which means....and it's used also in other parts of the Bible, which indicates the typical way of flying of rapacious birds, when they let themselves carry by the wind, without moving their wings. That Is, Elohim's RUACH, which Sumerians depicted that way aws something that at the beginning of everything hovered on the water without moving it's wings.

That means in Hebrew we have the description of what instead Sumerians had depicted graphically.

No doubt about it, they were talking about the same thing.

I'll include a picture from the video of this Sumerian pictograph which is ancient, for RUACH.

This word is Sumerian, not Hebrew.

And the religion didn't even begin until much much later.

This is a RUACH:

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:44 PM
reply to post by Unity_99

Already posted 2 weeks ago OP.

You may find the 15 page long thread here-

Please feel free to add to it.

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:48 PM
reply to post by freedom12

I'll be continuing on mine.
This one fits both Creation Theory Category and Ufology category. If it needs to be moved to the Ufology, when I continue, then it may have to be.

And I fully support his translation, his view on which way to translate this.
edit on 1-2-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:52 PM
I wish to draw emphasis on these notes, from the Vatican's own translations in their own prestigious texts:

If you read last editions of the “Lexicon Recentis Latinitatis”, published by the “:Liberia Editrice Vatican” where they insert the latin neologisms, you'll find that the Vatican inserted “navis sideralis”, which means “starship” They inserted “areia navis”, thus “airship”, they inserted “aireus viator”, that is “astronaut” and they inserted an acronym, “R.I.V” which means: res inexplicatae volantes”, that is UFO's.
---The ones of you that just saw that stuff now will realize that it's an unknown thing that hovers on the water.

I think its quite clear what a RUACH is.
edit on 1-2-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:00 PM
Video Two:


--From what we can draw out of the literal translation of the Bible, thus from the definition of the consonantic roots, the Bible tells us that we've been made using Elohims' TSELEM

Usually, all translations you have say that we are made in “God's image” and after His likeness”

--Do you all understand “ELOHIM”?

ELOHIM is a biblical term, which is usually translated as “God”. Actually ELOHIM is a plural term.

--By the way, MAYBE. Because from the point of view of the semitic philology things aren't so simple as it's often stated.

Therefore it's not so certain that ELOHIM is the plural of EL. They could be two ancient forms of ….ok.

--So, when we talk about ELOHIM, we say that stuff we traditionally identify with God, but that definitely in the Bible means a lot of people, a lot of people. No doubt about that.

--Independently from the question if the term is plural or not, it means many people..

The cult says that we're made, the traditional translation, in the image and after the likeness.

Actually, the Bible says that we are made after the likeness but with something that contains Elohims' image.

The dictionaries edited by the rabbis say more, they state that TSELEM derives from the verb TSALAM, which means “to cut out of”


--Actually the Bible says that we were made using a certain amount of material, which contains the Elohims' image and that has been cut out.

Now everyone of us immediately knows what we are referring to when we say that we take something that contains the image of an individual and that has been cut out

Its the DNA

---With any probability, this biblical tale is the summary of the sumerian tablets tale

in particular in the “Enuma Elish”, that is when Sumerians tell about the beginning.

But where Sumerians are much more precise than the Bible

because Sumerians, who never thought of creating a religion Never, they never build a temple, they never talked of Gods, the way we meant it, but they spoke of those guys, Biaglo or Biagio Russo talked very well about before.

They certainly respected these people

They were afraid of them, because obviously as you can understand, those guys were much more powerful, from the point of view of knowledge and technology

but they didn't consider them to be Gods, as they have been indicate afterwards

Sumerians never built a temple, the way we mean it

--Unerrng Gods?

Hence Sumerians, who were much more precise, and who knew these weren't unerring gods, they hadn't any scruples about telling of their failures

and they tell us with higher precision compared to the mnotheistic thought, which has been later inserted in the Bible that these guys had a whole bunch of attempts gone wrong, before achieving the right slave, that is, they made a lot of mistakes.

Those of you, who followed, years ago, the incident of Dolly the sheep's cloning. At one point the news item comes out, that in the lab at Edimburg, they cloned Dolly the sheep

They don't tell us they made about 240 wrong sheeps.

--It's not a made up number. But it's understandable, they made about 240 wrong experiments, and then they came up to Dolly the sheep, which becomes the product.

--Sumerians did the same thing with their presumed gods.

(Well they may have messed dna, but they didn't make us. This planet as a school with humans with cosmic dna, from benevolents for practicums, already existed when the bullies came along).

They made one that couldn't hold back urine. One that couldn't close his eyes. One with a crooked spine. One without genitals. One unable to eat. I don't even remember them all, thats not important anyway, they made a lot which were wrong.

A really horrible one, by coincidence, made with what had been extracted from the blood of one “god's” chiefs, how about that, the least successful attempt, was the one with Enki's blood.

--Royal Blood.

--At some point they give a try with the blood of one of the two big bosses they had/

Can you imagine? From him they got (really a complete failure): a hairy being, with closed throat, imperfect eyes, twisted ribs, paralyzed spine, heart, head and intestine damaged.

Unable to lift its hands.

--These translations I brought you are not from Sitchin. Because Sitchin is important, but one has to go beyond. Regarding Sumerology, I follow the translations made by the academics.

--Those are the translations by Giovanini Pettinato, who is a worldwide authority, actually he was, “cos he's dead.”

--Hence these are Giovanni Pettinato's translations, not an alternative sumerologist, but an academic.

Seems that we are made from the Elohims' TSELEM which is DNA, and the words imply acting upon something that is already here, as we will see in the next part, the in the Potter. Which would be mixing ET and Primitive man, OR IT COULD MEAN DOWNGRADING A PAST DEVELOPED RACE.

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:01 PM
reply to post by Unity_99

This thread is the repost of a repost. You aren't educating us, you're informing us of your opinion, which I'm sure would be just as well served being posted in the thread shown above, rather than making an entirely new one.

Keep it all in one thread, so it's simpler.
edit on CWednesdaypm404001f01America/Chicago01 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:03 PM
Part Two On Notes, of Video Two:

Starting with the Potter:

--The Potter

Evidently, they told us those things. Obviously, with the linguistical, conceptual cultural instruments they were provided with. But they told us the story the way it probably happened.

--The Bible made a summary of it. Or better, it made two. Because you know that for man's creation, man's making because creation is a really wrong term.

About man's making, there is this particular story:

and then the other one, where God is portrayed as a potter, isn't he? Who molded clay. Now I don't know if some genetists or biologists are present here

Everybody knows the importance of clay as a catalyst for the precesses of combination of the nucleic acids, thus DNA and RNA.

Ans so, the second tale, that the tradition says to be a tale of God portrayed as a potter, is not a mythical tale at all.

It's the same story, viewed from the other side.

--While the first story tells us of that we've been made with Elohim's TSELEM thus the Elohim's DNA, the second tale tells us that Elohims' acted on the AFAR, thus on the dust, on the clay that there was here on Earth.

And this has 2 meanings.

--because AFAR comes from the accadian TIKIT

that indicates both clay and what it contains the form, because clay is something which can assume and contain a form. It means that this second tale is seen from the point of view of the hominide DNA which was present here on Earth.

--So, we've been made with Elohims' TSELEM that has been inserted into the AFAR, which is what contains the form and was already present here on Earth, thus the hominide DNA.

--The two tales, which were traditionally considered separately, because hardly explainable from a theological spiritualistic point of view. If read from this angle.

--If read above all in parallel with the corresponding sumerian tales, they tell the same story as seen from both sides.

There is no contradiction, on the contrary, there is completion.

---The Original Sin:

--what we are mostly interested in is the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Because that tale continues as if they actually ate of that fruit.

--Many years ago while I was translating the Bible, quite obviously I used to think with the mentality of someone born in our culture.

The tree of knowledge of good and evil is, symbolically speaking, the moment when man began to distinguish right from wrong.

That is, he began to understand what is right and what is wrong, what is legitimate, what isn't

--In that moment, the so-called fundamental morals, the natural ethics was inscribed by God into man's heart.

--While translating the Genesis, I said: “That's weird, this stuff isn't in there!”

It's not there!

Then I said to myself: “well, I'm the perfect mr. Nobody”, so I put this thought aside for a while.

But the idea of distinguishing isn't there.

--December 2009, a psychoanalysts convention was taking place at the University of Venice.

Some Freudian therapists spoke, then Amos Luzzato took up the word, former chairman of the Italian Isreaelitic Communities and eminent Jewish biblicist.

--Clearly the psychotherapists talk about the idea of good and evil, the sense of guilt. The distinction, natural morals, inscribed into man's heart, and so on and so forth.

--Amos Luzzato takes the floor, he thanks the therapists saying: “ A very good analysis, only this stuff isn't in the Bible”

I gave a start on the chair. Because if it's me saying that, that count's for nothing, but if it's Amos Luzzato, maybe....

--He says: “It's not in there. It's not true.”

At that moment there was no distinction. Because I realized that in a matter of distinction, hebrew, there are some graphemes, that aren't in there, thus there, thus there is no distinction.

--After Adam and Eve did a certain thing, the Elohim is doing nothing else but a statement of fact, he's not sentencing them. He says: “You made a choice.”

Now, I want you to know that, because of this choice I didn't agree with, while someone else, the serpent, about whom Biagio Russo spoke about before, wanted that that choice was made, or better, he intervened to make it easier.

One of the “watchers”

he intervened, while the other one that didn't want this decision, says: “You made your choice, now get out of here.”

--But you should know that outside of here, you are going to experience both the positive and the negative sides of this choice”

--It's not a condemnation.

--It's what is called “a post-eventum verdict”

--Trivializing, even if it's not a real triviality. Because it is a proper example:

you made your own bed, now you must lie in it. (In Italian, literally: “You wanted the bicycle, now PEDAL!”


posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:08 PM

Originally posted by Starchild23
reply to post by Unity_99

Keep it all in one thread, so it's simpler.
edit on CWednesdaypm404001f01America/Chicago01 by Starchild23 because: (no reason given)

The last thread on this was closed and I don't think it's been reopened. I'm glad to see this thread because I was upset the last one was closed.

I haven't yet read through this one, but I hope this one sticks around.

fyi... when interesting threads are posted on ats and then closed because they appear on other sites, it makes us seek out those other sites, therefore sending traffic away from ats.

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:09 PM

---which is the same thing that Amos Luzzato says: Here God didn't sentence anybody.

Here God says, “You made your choice, and the choice that you wanted, understood, experienced that from the point of view of reproduction you've gotten independent from us.”

While beforehand creating the slaves Biaglo talked about before was Elohim-Annunakis' business.

--From now on, the new species has become self sufficient.

Alright, out of this protected territory, because here only those we want to have here may stay. You go and live on your own.

You'll understand. That amongst the effects of this choice there are not only freedom and pleasure, but also the fact that from now on, if you want some food, you'll have to get it by yourselves.

And you, Eve, will understand that bearing children hurts. But you'll simply understand, I'm not sentencing you for this.

--You'll understand, you'll experience – YA DA, the Jewish verb

--You'll have knowledge of the fact that the new situation brings positive and negative aspects.

--TO WA RA. Thus you'll get to know both the good and the bad sides of this new situation of yours.

--Amos Luzzato, who obviously is higher than I, has gone even further. He says that the term RA used to indicate the word, “Bad or evil” has absolutely nothing to do with the idea of evil, with ethics, but refers to, attention, the physio-pathology of human body

--So, the Elohim says to them: “Once outside of this fenced and protected territory, where we put you and we're keeping you...outside of here, you'll discover that you can feel bad

First of all, when you are hungry you'll have to look for food, while here you only needed to sit at the table. And you, Eve, that you've become prolific, will understand that bearing children hurts. Period.

--There is no distinction, no ethics, no morals, no condemnation. There's a post-eventum verdict: “You got on the bicycle, you have to pedal”

--That's it. So from this appeasing point of view, we are not living the fruit of condemnation coming from then and that we have to bear, we are pedaling because our forefathers at some point got on the bicycle.

--Amos Luzzato. We have to think about that. Because this changes the whole story.

I've given a choice in the first two videos.

You can watch or read. Reading is like moving the bike without pedaling and its highly recommend to watch.

However, the translations are very interesting.

Now I had these already, and need to find the part in the video that touched again on something NASA does with its own astronauts.

Basically he was lecturing and someone from NASA contacted him.

He was sharing about the translations concerning Burnt Meat Offerings.

And that the Elohim seemed to be sedated by the smell of burnt meat.

NASA had contracted a perfume laboratory to create a scent that smells identical to Burnt Meat, and its quite repugnant.

Its a smell they have to get used to apparently.

I'll find more later on, on the scientific terminology for what occurs physiologically in space, but it has to do with cells and perhaps even fat, sluffing off in the artificial atmosphere, so that they smell this Burnt Meat smell in ongoing way, frequently enough.
edit on 1-2-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:16 PM

Originally posted by freedom12

Already posted 2 weeks ago OP.

You may find the 15 page long thread here-
Please feel free to add to it.

No. You cannot add to it, as that Thread was closed by the ATS Staff.

On orders from the Vatican?

(I ask myself...)

and I did not like that move, AT ALL.

I do not like Censorship.
Freedom of Expression is a Fundamental Value.


posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:22 PM
Sadly the other post was "Temporarily closed for staff review". more than ten days ago.
So, no one can add anything there.
Being the translator of the videos, I wanted to give there some answers, but I came too late and it wasn't possible.
I'm wondering if the term "temporarily" in English means the same as in Italian...

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:32 PM
The rest of the videos, I'm going to leave to others to watch, and the part about NASA and the burnt meat offerings is very interesting indeed.

Before my migraine hits, or I avoid it, but its threatening, wanted to start a look at the actual historical evidence for the ancient astronaut theory, that goes beyond the works of fringe groups, fringe translators such as Sitchin, for the evidence is also in our own religious texts and when we start to open our eyes to what really is happening, we'll see the Control Matrix alot more clearly.

And the work of freeing ourselves, not by walking away from those Teachers we discern to be showing Love and the Way back home, but to realize that there is lot coded in the bible, our religious leaders don't even tell us the truth so why should we give our trust and sovereignity away to them, or to the elite in any way.

When we, attend Church (and I used to, went more than once a week to the daily Catholic mass for a time when I was quite zealous, even considered becoming a nun in those days), are we accepting everything in the Bible, are we shutting down our own minds, consciousness and free will when we wed the Unconditional Love and STO directions of Christ, including to go within and seek on our own, when we accept the Murder and Wars done in the Name of God in the old testament., are we not giving permissions to whomever is coded there, and that doesn"t seem to be the Spirit of Peace and Love, but some other element. We shut down our consciousness when we don't weigh things within, against our inner truth and inner Love, our soulstone.

We need discernment.

While the UFOLOGY is coded very strongly in all the religions, in my opinion, there is also the concept of end times, NWO, and even perhaps a disclosure.

If we're not girded in discernment, inner truth and love, how will we know better and challenge anyone's claim to be our Creator, especially if they start WW3, turn this into a war between the Judaic nations, a war to end all religions, and if then ET sails in to the rescue, for example, wolves in sheep"s clothing.

edit on 1-2-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:35 PM
reply to post by stesepu

I want to thank you for the subbed video's, because I noticed much of his lectures were in his native language, and if it wasn't for this sub, and that these videos had gone viral, a large part of the world would not even have a chance to look at this.

I kind of hope some of his other pieces may also be translated too.

Also I can't help but feel his life may be in danger and want him to reach many.
edit on 1-2-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:44 PM
reply to post by Unity_99

If you like his video, you should really read his book. I bought it and read it last week and it was very interesting. When I have some free time, I'll come back and discuss some of the things in the book.

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:50 PM
reply to post by Unity_99

Great post, Unity_99

my 1st question:

1.- from what I understand, the first written Bible is from 800 After Christ,
which means 2200 years AFTER the facts of Moses ?

2.- and that Bible from 800 AD is the basis for all those religions, right?
I mean: Jewish, Catholic, Christian Protestant-Lutheran, Chiristian Orthodox, Islamic

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 04:01 PM
reply to post by HeywoodFloyd

The Old Testament was not written after Christ.

Its based on the Judaic, which in turn based on other mythologies.

When the Christian Bible was first decided upon, that was a whole different ballgame. At that point, they had the choice to make a new start and restranslate the Hebrew differently, as they all knew that there were several possible logical translations, ie ones that fit into other aspects or legends or histories, that had a cohesiveness.

One thing about his translation is that it has this cohesiveness. It fits like a glove. It fleshes out the Sumar, and the Sumar fleshes out this, and at the same time can have some unusual supporting evidence, when he was contacted by a NASA employee, ie. supporting evidence.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in