The Shining Ones - The "god" of the Old Testament

  • Thread starter Thread starter mattw699
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mattw699

Guest
Has anyone here read “The Shining Ones” by Christain O’Brien. He was a researcher of ancient Sumerian tablets and Hebraic texts and of the Bible.

Most of the stories from the Old Testament can be traced back to Sumerian stories from clay tablets where the stories are told in much more detail.

It basically talks about the creation of humanity and how the Elohim were regarded as God.
 
Are you saying you won’t read anything unless it’s “approved” by the church?
 
I have not, but I’ve read similar articles and whatnot.

Considering all these peoples shared a common culture, and to some extent linguistic background, it is not at all surprising to see similarities in creation stories, beliefs and so on. People commonly ‘borrowed’ ideas and concepts from one another.

There are plenty of examples of this shared culture - A few examples Modern tradition may tell that it’s a sort of ‘respect thing’, but “elohim” is indeed a plural noun; ‘gods’, not ‘god’. Noah and Gilgamesh (the flood story), the ten commandments and the Egyptian negative confessions from the Book of the Dead, etc.
 
Yes, the book goes into much detail on the origins of the terms the Hebrews used for “God”, but Elohim did not mean God since the Hebrews did not have a word “god”.

The singular form- EL is a very ancient word with a long etymological history; and it has a common origin with many other ancient words in other languages - all with a common, and significant meaning. EL means brightness or shining. Sometimes it was used as ha’elohim in which ha means “the”. So Elohim has been mistranslated in the entire Old Testament and should say “The Shining Ones”.

Read in this way, the entire meaning of the Old Testament makes sense. The book goes into detail on who The Shining Ones were from the Sumerian tablets.
 
mattw699 said:
Yes, the book goes into much detail on the origins of the terms the Hebrews used for “God”, but Elohim did not mean God since the Hebrews did not have a word “god”.

The singular form- EL is a very ancient word with a long etymological history; and it has a common origin with many other ancient words in other languages - all with a common, and significant meaning. EL means brightness or shining. Sometimes it was used as ha’elohim in which ha means “the”. So Elohim has been mistranslated in the entire Old Testament and should say “The Shining Ones”.

Read in this way, the entire meaning of the Old Testament makes sense. The book goes into detail on who The Shining Ones were from the Sumerian tablets.
Click to expand...
Seems to presume that the Hebrews/Israelites used Elohim the same way the Sumerians did at the time the books used in the Bible were composed, even if it was a word imported into their language. As for shining, we do often call God “light.”
 
Last edited:
Elohim was a plural word that did not mean god. Their skin and eyes shone brightly. Noah was similar to them when he was born. These seem to be non-human beings that the Hebrews eventually worshipped as a god.

This is a quote from one of the books of Enoch:

“10. And now, my father, hear me: unto Lamech my son there hath been born a son, the like of whom there is none, and his nature is not like man’s nature, and the color of his body is whiter than snow and redder than the bloom of a rose, and the hair of his head is whiter than white wool, and his eyes are like the rays of the sun, and he opened his eyes and thereupon lighted up the whole house.”
 
Admitted five minutes of Internet research here, but elohim is used frequently in the old testament. Sometimes the Hebrew grammar is clearly plural and refers to other gods in general or is applied to specific pagan gods, and other cases it refers to the Israelite God in particular and the Hebrew grammar is singular. So the question of plurality needs the context of the surrounding grammar.

Maimonides (famous medieval Jewish scholar) stated the term was a homonym, and once wrote, “I must premise that every Hebrew [now] knows that the term Elohim is a homonym, and denotes God, angels, judges, and the rulers of countries, …”
 
Last edited:
There is a version of the bible called the Names of God bible where the actual names of who the Hebrews thought was god were used. They were mostly Yahweh, Elohim, El Shaddai, etc.

It can be found here: Names of God Bible (NOG) - Version Information - BibleGateway.com

When read using the real words the Hebrews used for a god and taking into account the Sumerian stories from the tablets and information obtained from the books of Enoch and old Hebraic texts, it’s clear that the Hebrew “God” was not the God of all of creation.

I can give tons of examples from the bible that show this.
 
Last edited:
In Hebrew “El” means powerful and mighty and “Elohim” refers to the SINGULAR (not plural) power of intensification or majesty, in other words, the Almighty. Sometimes, however, it is used to mean “god” rather than G-d the Almighty, as when referring to Moses, who was like a god to the Pharaohs. Other times, when speaking of pagan cultures, it is used in the plural sense of quantity to denote their gods. The term itself is used particularly in the Book of Genesis more than in other parts of the Hebrew Bible, in which J-hovah, a singular noun, is more often used, since the contrast between one Almighty G-d is intentionally made at the outset of the Bible to differentiate the G-d of the Hebrews from the diverse pagan gods.
 
Last edited:
So let’s read a few verses while under the assumption that Elohim and Yahweh were not God of all of creation that we know.

1 The number of people increased all over the earth, and daughters were born to them. The sons of Elohim saw that the daughters of other humans were beautiful. So they married any woman they chose. 4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, as well as later, when the sons of Elohim slept with the daughters of other humans and had children by them. These children were famous long ago.
Genesis 11:5 Yahweh came down to see the city and the tower that the descendants of Adam were building.
All of Genesis 16 - Abram slept with 3 women who were not his wives with Yahweh’s knowledge.
Exodus 4:24 - “God” tries to kill Moses but can’t???

and it goes on and on and on. Continue reading from that chapter. Do you really think the Hebrew god Yahweh and Elohim were the one God we now know from Jesus to be the creator of all?
 
Last edited:
One common understanding of the “Sons of God” is that they were the descendants of Seth, not any type of heavenly being.

Figurative, anthropomorphic language.

Three women? I see Hagar. And so?

Figurative langauge for the last, too, though the actual texts don’t name Moses as the target of wrath, and could simply refer to a dangerous encounter/situation of some sort. A test or prodding.
 
You’re plucking all of these verses out of their multiple contexts of culture, language, literary device, literary style, and both intra- and inter-Book of the Bible context as well. There is layer upon layer of meaning, and two or more simultaneous meanings of certain verses are also possible. One thing is certain, however, and that is the Hebrew Bible cannot, should not be studied without integrating all of the aforementioned. Further, the G-d of Christianity is intricately linked and dependent upon the G-d of Judaism, so that downplaying the former puts a real dent on the significance of the latter.
 
Last edited:
So, a few things -

The reconstructed Proto-Semitic word 'il denotes a deity - there are numerous cognate words in ancient Semitic languages.

There is, however, another P-S word, 'ill which denotes “shining” - the two are admittedly very close. Indo-European roots/words have the same issues, by the way.

Two separate words- attested in Akkadian and written in cuneiform using different ‘letter’ forms.

Bottom line is that there are two words that probably sounded somewhat similar but were written differently and had very different meanings.

As others have mentioned - when Elohim is used in the Bible, the grammar is typically singular. I suppose you could argue that as the people that became the Jews moved towards monotheism, the word for ‘god(s)’ was already too well established; rather than changing the word itself, it was simply referred to using grammatical forms indicating the singular.

It is quite possible and actually quite likely however, that the two concepts (i.e. ‘gods’ and ‘shining ones’) are intertwined.

In many Indo-European languages, the words for ‘god’ and ‘day’ ultimately share the same root. Think Latin ‘dies’ (day) and ‘deus’ (god), or if you want modern Spanish ‘dias’ (day) and ‘dios’ (god), or Hindi ‘din’ (day) and ‘dev’ (god).

These all go back to a Proto-Indo-European (PIE) root which does indeed mean ‘to shine’; i.e. the word ‘god’ essentially meant ‘shining one’. In Indo-European culture, the “shining ones” referred specifically to the sun and moon; physical/”heavenly” representations of the (sun) god and (moon) goddess.

It’s quite possible that in Semitic culture the two root words ‘il and ‘ill are related in such a manner – i.e. “shining ones” as referring to the sun god and moon goddess.
 
I was only trying to make a point by using certain verses. Read the entire books. This Yahweh entity is demented and definitely not God, the Father and creator of all.

When many of the stories told in the Old Testament are found in the Sumerian tablets in much more detail, there is cause for concern!

I would just suggest reading the book above which can be downloaded for free and make the decision for yourself, but at least keep an open mind and know that the real God is behind it all and has a plan!
 
I contest your statement that the “Yhwh entity is demented and definitely not Gd, the Father and creator of all.” There is ample evidence in the Hebrew Scriptures of a loving, merciful Father. Moreover, the ETHICAL monotheism depicted is sufficient difference from Sumerian stories, Zoroastrian influences, and Greek gods to appreciate the changes that occurred in the Written Word inspired by the Gd of the Jews.
 
Around the year 600 BC, the Yahweh being takes on a more loving character and demeanor. Perhaps there were multiple “Shining Ones” who worked under the title of Yahweh through the years. This would certainly fit in with the stories of them splitting up to lead different tribes and groups of humans at that time.

The Shining Ones started out loving and helping humanity and only started to become a psychopath under the name Yahweh around the time of Moses.

Start reading the Old Testament for yourself with the real names of who the Hebrews thought was God.

 
So then around the time of Moses means that the Law given to Moses by Gd is the product of a psychopath? It hardly seems that way to me.

Did you not read about the alternative, although possibly interconnected, meanings of Elohim described by previous posters? Or my comment that Elohim refers to the Almighty Gd, a name particularly emphasized in Genesis more than later portions of the Hebrew Bible for the purpose of differentiating the power and majesty of one Gd as compared to the diversely emotional, human-like gods of pagan cultures?
 
Last edited:
I firmly believe that all ancient religions were distortions of the true one, which was the religion of Noe and Shem. Moreover, most of them appeared after the events at Babel and inherited the errors of the one that was spread by nimrod.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top