I've never read Biglino's work, and had never heard of him before I came to all my conclusions. When I finally ran into one of the handful of translated presentations on video, I thought, "Welp, I guess I wasn't wrong about my bush league translations of Hebrew."
So IDK what he says in his book, but in one of the videos he just sort of grazes by Zecharia Sitchin. I believe Biglino thinks the intersection of "ancient aliens" with the Bible is extremely sensitive to many, so it looked to me like he prudently steered around it as best he could. How much does he really know about it? I couldn't possibly say, but definitely more than he lets on.
SPOILER ALERT: The Bible is 100% about the Anunnaki. There is no question whatsoever. But people get death threats for that kind of talk, and also death for that kind of talk, so I don't blame Biglino.
Another guy that's on to the story is Michael Ledwith. Like Biglino, he has all the cred in the world. For many years, he was on the International Theological Commission, which is the official advisory body on theology to the Pope. You may be interested in this presentation:
If you ask me, he dances around the subject also, but again I don't blame him. It's not in that writeup, but Michael Tellinger relates a story about how Ledwith pointed out a mistranslastion of the very first sentence of the Bible, Gen 1:1.
All ancient Hebrew sacred texts begin with the letter "aleph". Oh, except Genesis. So what happens if you add it back in? You get: "The Father of the Beginnings created the Elohim, the heavens, and the Earth." Changes everything.
So yes, the Elohim are the Anunnaki, and you can reread the OT making that substitution and it not only holds, many puzzles in the text are instantly solved.
One final note since you used the phrase "in the image". It may have been Biglino but I think it was someone else that pointed out that a deep etymology of the word translated as "image", which is the Hebrew word "tselem", shows that it means "cut out", as in a smaller part cut out of a larger part. Not that deep, really, because you can read that right in Strong's. Genetic engineering, anyone?
We have to read very, very closely like that because the people that wrote it down probably had little idea what was really going on. The descriptions given by the Sumerians were even more illustrative, but I always like to stick with the Bible because people are more familiar with it, there are more resources and analysis, and people automatically give more credence to it. Also, they are even now trying to hide the truth with BS translations.
I've never read Biglino's work, and had never heard of him before I came to all my conclusions. When I finally ran into one of the handful of translated presentations on video, I thought, "Welp, I guess I wasn't wrong about my bush league translations of Hebrew."
So IDK what he says in his book, but in one of the videos he just sort of grazes by Zecharia Sitchin. I believe Biglino thinks the intersection of "ancient aliens" with the Bible is extremely sensitive to many, so it looked to me like he prudently steered around it as best he could. How much does he really know about it? I couldn't possibly say, but definitely more than he lets on.
SPOILER ALERT: The Bible is 100% about the Anunnaki. There is no question whatsoever. But people get death threats for that kind of talk, and also death for that kind of talk, so I don't blame Biglino.
Another guy that's on to the story is Michael Ledwith. Like Biglino, he has all the cred in the world. For many years, he was on the International Theological Commission, which is the official advisory body on theology to the Pope. You may be interested in this presentation:
Farewell to the Annunaki by Michael Ledwith
If you ask me, he dances around the subject also, but again I don't blame him. It's not in that writeup, but Michael Tellinger relates a story about how Ledwith pointed out a mistranslastion of the very first sentence of the Bible, Gen 1:1.
All ancient Hebrew sacred texts begin with the letter "aleph". Oh, except Genesis. So what happens if you add it back in? You get: "The Father of the Beginnings created the Elohim, the heavens, and the Earth." Changes everything.
So yes, the Elohim are the Anunnaki, and you can reread the OT making that substitution and it not only holds, many puzzles in the text are instantly solved.
One final note since you used the phrase "in the image". It may have been Biglino but I think it was someone else that pointed out that a deep etymology of the word translated as "image", which is the Hebrew word "tselem", shows that it means "cut out", as in a smaller part cut out of a larger part. Not that deep, really, because you can read that right in Strong's. Genetic engineering, anyone?
We have to read very, very closely like that because the people that wrote it down probably had little idea what was really going on. The descriptions given by the Sumerians were even more illustrative, but I always like to stick with the Bible because people are more familiar with it, there are more resources and analysis, and people automatically give more credence to it. Also, they are even now trying to hide the truth with BS translations.