Over the years, the interpretation of and translation from the Bible have undergone profound changes, reflecting the continuous advancement of linguistic and historical studies. The recent publication of new Bible versions has finally confirmed many of the observations that Mauro Biglino has been making for over a decade, for example with reference to the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14 the translation of key terms such as almah (young woman) has changed.
In this article we will examine some of these changes in depth and also discover a clarification regarding the physical location of the biblical deity, a theme that is also confirmed in the Koran.
English subtitles
Isaiah’s prophecy: Mary or simply the mother of Hezekiah?
One of the most debated topics concerns the alleged prophecy of Isaiah about the birth of Jesus. For centuries, Christian translations have interpreted the term almah as “virgin”, fueling the idea that the text refers to Mary. However, the most recent editions of the Bible, such as The Revised New Jerusalem Bible of 2024 and the Bible Einaudi, confirm that almah simply means “young woman” and that the child mentioned is actually Hezekiah, son of King Ahaz of Judah.
Furthermore, the term harah in the Hebrew text is an adjective and indicates a woman who is already pregnant and not one who will conceive in the future.
This interpretation is confirmed by the explanatory notes in more recent Bibles, which indicate that the woman mentioned was probably the wife of King Ahaz, identified in the Book of Kings and Chronicles by the name of Abijah.
The Greek translation of the Bible, the Septuagint, translated almah with the Greek word parthenos, which means “girl” and “virgin”, thus feeding a misunderstanding that has been rooted in the Christian tradition for centuries.
But in the original Hebrew context, the sign spoken of by Isaiah was not miraculous: it referred to an imminent historical event, not to an extraordinary birth that occurred centuries later.
Another interesting aspect is the timing indicated in the text. The more recent Bible clarifies that the woman “will give birth within a few months” (within months), confirming that the child had already been conceived and that the sign did not concern an event far in the future.
This view is also supported by the Talmud and rabbinical commentaries, which do not associate Isaiah 7:14 in any way with the messianic figure of Jesus.
The implications of this revision are enormous, as it dismantles one of the most quoted prophecies in the New Testament in support of the virgin birth of Christ.
If the verse from Isaiah did not foretell the birth of Jesus, then one of the main scriptural foundations on which this doctrine is based falls away.
This shows how the translation and interpretation of biblical texts have been profoundly influenced by theological necessities, rather than by a philologically correct reading of the original Hebrew text.
Awareness of these translation errors has led many modern editions of the Bible to finally correct the translation of Isaiah 7:14, aligning themselves with what scholars such as Mauro Biglino have been arguing for over a decade.
This represents an important step in the philological understanding of the Bible and once again confirms how necessary it is to critically review many of the interpretative traditions consolidated over time.
The true meaning of Yam Suf: the Sea of Reeds
Another example of correction in translations concerns the term yam suf, traditionally rendered as “Red Sea”, but which in reality means “sea of reeds” or “sea of rushes”.
This new understanding radically changes the context of the episode in Exodus, since it is not a miraculous crossing of the Red Sea, as has been taught for centuries, but a natural phenomenon that occurred in a marshy area.
The waters of Yam Suf are described in the biblical text as having temporarily receded due to a strong wind, allowing the Israelites to cross the dry bed.
This detail is confirmed by descriptions of natural phenomena related to shallow bodies of water, such as tides or the effects of wind on lagoons and marshes.
After the Jewish people had passed, the wind died down and the waters returned to their original state, overwhelming the Egyptian army.
If we consider the correct translation of the term yam suf, it emerges that the episode does not concern the Red Sea, but a marshy area, probably near the Nile delta, which makes the story more consistent with known geophysical dynamics.
This change of perspective is significant because it reduces the miraculous element of the story and brings it back to a historically and scientifically plausible narrative.
The Bible itself, in the most recent versions mentioned above, begins to incorporate this correction, finally translating yam suf as “sea of reeds” instead of Red Sea.
This is a further example of how modern linguistic and historical research is gradually bringing to light the true meaning of many biblical passages that have been misunderstood or theologically reinterpreted for centuries.
The God of the Bible is always localized in space
One of the most fascinating aspects of reading the Bible literally is the constant physical localization of God. Yahweh is not an omnipresent and abstract entity, but a being that moves through space, manifests in specific places and physically interacts with his interlocutors. This concept is extensively discussed in chapter 11 of The Gods of the Bible, which analyzes the role of the malachim, the messengers of God, erroneously translated as angels.
As highlighted in the book, the malachim are not spiritual beings, but individuals in flesh and blood who walk, eat, get tired and interact physically with human beings. These individuals not only transmit orders, but often act in strategic and operational roles.
For example, in Exodus 23:20-30, Yahweh orders the sending of a malakh to guide the Israelites in the conquest of the Promised Land, with functions that resemble more those of a military commander than those of an ethereal being. Furthermore, in Genesis 16, the malakh that meets Hagar is not an otherworldly figure, but a being that walks in the desert, appears surprised to find her there and asks her questions to understand the situation. Also in Genesis 22, when Abraham is about to sacrifice Isaac, it is a malakh that stops him at the last moment, suggesting a physical and concrete intervention.
These episodes highlight a God who is not omniscient nor omnipresent, but who interacts through messengers who must physically move through space to carry out orders. Their presence is often a source of fear for those who encounter them, as in the case of the malakh of 1 Chronicles 21, who appears with a “sword” pointed at Jerusalem, terrorizing David and the inhabitants of the city.
An interesting aspect also emerges from Judges 6, in which Gideon encounters a malakh while he is threshing wheat. The being does not appear as an ethereal vision, but is a man who interacts with him, agrees to wait while Gideon prepares some food and then performs a surprising action: with a stick, he lights a flame to burn the offering, indicating the use of an unknown technology rather than a divine miracle.
Finally, the Bible describes chance encounters between the malachim and humans, as in Genesis 32, where Jacob comes across a camp of elohim. The malachim do not bring divine messages, they do not manifest themselves in a halo of light, but they simply happen to be in his path, suggesting a stable and physical presence on this planet.
All these elements lead to a vision of the Bible that is radically different from the traditional one: the biblical God is localized, works through corporeal beings and acts within a material and strategic framework. This aspect is also reflected in extra-biblical narratives, such as the Sumerian and Babylonian ones, which describe divine figures interacting with human beings in an equally tangible and concrete way.
The Koran and the confirmation of divine localization
A particularly interesting statement emerges from the Koran: in Sura 53:49 we read that “Allah is the lord of Sirius”. This statement suggests a direct link between the deity and a specific point in the sky. This is not an isolated case: many ancient cultures attributed a celestial origin to their deities, and the Bible itself describes Yahweh as a being who moves through space and interacts with his people in very specific places.
The idea that biblical deities have a connection to a specific celestial place is reinforced by other passages in the Scriptures. Psalm 24 speaks of “gates” that open onto the olam, the unknown, through which Yahweh passed with his kavod to go to a specific destination. Jewish tradition has developed the concept of the “place of the righteous”, a sort of heavenly abode connected to these cosmic passages.
This heavenly localization is also found in the traditions of other civilizations. The Egyptians venerated Sirius as a sacred star, linked to the goddess Isis and the regeneration of the world. The Sumerians and Babylonians also associated their deities with specific constellations, and the very name of El, one of the oldest designations of the biblical deity, is etymologically linked to the Semitic root meaning “elevation” and “height”.
The connection between Yahweh and a cosmic origin is further supported by the story of Ezekiel, in which the ruach, the divine wind or breath, comes from a precise direction, as if it came from a specific position in space. The idea of a God who moves between specific places in space is therefore part of a broader context, shared by many ancient cultures.
All these elements lead to an important consideration: if the biblical deity had a point of origin in the heavens, then the traditional concept of an omnipresent and ethereal God could be the result of a subsequent elaboration, rather than information present in the original text.
Conclusion
Recent biblical translations increasingly confirm Mauro Biglino’s analysis, demonstrating that many traditional beliefs are based on erroneous interpretations of the original text. The Bible does not speak of a universal and omnipresent God, but of a deity who moves through space, interacts with the people of Israel and uses physical messengers to carry out his actions.
The parallel with the Koran and the beliefs of other ancient cultures strengthens the hypothesis that the God of the Bible was a localized entity and not an abstract being.
These elements open new research perspectives and invite us to reconsider many of the notions taken for granted in the Western religious tradition.
