Rivelazioni proibite | Mauro Biglino

[Music] Good morning. Some time ago - I don't remember when - I dedicated a video to the works, to the thoughts and let's say to the clairvoyances, to the visions of Don Guido Bortoluzzi, a priest who said he received messages directly from God. I don't intervene on this, I don't make any comments obviously, you can imagine, and he gave a very concrete interpretation of the ancient writings: very, very concrete and I would also say very close to the interpretation keys that I provide who, as you know, try to read the Bible literally.

Now I want to do a similar thing with another visionary: Maria Valtorta; she said she received information, let's call them clairvoyances, let's call them channelings, whatever you prefer, directly from Jesus and she too provided in one of her monumental works an interpretation of the events of the Old Testament which is particularly interesting, particularly curious, particularly unexpected given that it comes from a mystic. So today I want to read you a couple of passages. However, for those who don't know this mystic, Maria Valtorta was born in 1897 in Caserta, then became a Franciscan tertiary and died in 1961.

She lived a difficult life, also because she was the daughter of a soldier and therefore traveled around Italy a lot. Following her father and in 1917 she offered herself as a volunteer nurse to treat the wounded in the First World War and then when her father was on duty in Florence, she was with him, she was attacked by a family acquaintance who hit her back with an iron bar and this blow over time caused a pathology to develop which effectively made it impossible for her to walk. So she then spent the rest of her life in Viareggio, practically immobilized, where she died.

She is best known for her 5000 page book, it was called "the poem of the man God", it was published in 1956 and was then also titled "The Gospel as it was revealed to me". And consider that the book is based on 10,000 of the 15,000 pages of his handwritten diaries and notebooks. The book mainly describes the life of Jesus but also deals with the Old Testament and contains what she says were the revelations that Jesus himself gave her personally.

It must be said that it is a very controversial book, very controversial both inside and outside the Church. There are theologians, there are critics, there are scholars, there are historians who agree with her and on the other hand there are theologians, historians, critics who absolutely do not agree with these revelations. This is normal because the topic is very sensitive and above all because there are some statements that can put even the faithful into a bit of a crisis.

So much so that the book was included in the index of prohibited books and remained there until the index of prohibited books was abolished in 1966 and therefore, so to speak, all sanctions against the reading of these revelations ceased. Despite this, I want to remind you that even in 1985 Ratzinger, who was then prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I literally read to you what he said: he cited the 1959 decree with which this book was defined as "not readable by the faithful" - therefore it had been included in the index of prohibited books - Ratzinger said that the condemnation was not taken lightly since the text is not recommended in order to avoid the damage that such publication could have cause harm to the most naïve faithful . So it is interesting to read at least some parts: I read two passages which are particularly interesting because they are unexpected, given their origin.

It would have been Jesus himself who gave these instructions to this mystic, to this visionary. I remember that in 1953 Watson and Crick made public their discovery of what we know as DNA; It is important to know this date of 1953 because these revelations date back to 1943 and 1946, therefore several years before when our genetic system was officially recognized with all that it entails. So the scientific discourse that explains, that would explain, evolution, the possibilities of hybridization, the possibilities of modifications of the genetic heritage etc.

So now let's read these two passages which were, would have been, dictated directly by Jesus to this mystic. Jesus says: «Don't you realize that you are belittling yourselves? Why, think about it, a beast, however perfect, selected, improved, perfected in form and instinct and, if you like, also in mental formation, will always be a beast?

Don't you notice? This speaks unfavorably to your pride as pseudo supermen. But if you don't notice it, I won't be the one who wastes words to make you realize it and convert you from the mistake.

I only ask you one thing that many of you have never asked yourself and if you can answer me with facts I will no longer fight this demeaning theory of yours. If man is the derivative of the monkey, which through progressive evolution became man, how come in the many years that you have supported this theory, not even with the perfected tools and methods of today - I repeat, this is a revelation from 1943, therefore 10 years before the official discovery of DNA - how come in the many years that you have supported this theory have you never managed, even with the perfected tools and methods of today, to make a man out of a monkey? You could take the most intelligent children of a couple of intelligent monkeys and then the intelligent children of these and so on.

You would now have many generations of monkeys selected, educated, cared for by the most patient, tenacious and sagacious scientific method. But you would always have monkeys. If ever there were a mutation it would be this: that the beasts would be less physically strong than the former and more morally vicious, since with all your methods and instruments you would have destroyed that ape-like perfection that the Father - obviously she is a Franciscan tertiary believing mystic - that my Father created for these quadrumanas.

" I replace "my Father" with the term "Elohim" so we are calm and respect what is written in the Bible. «Elohim created this perfection for these quadrumana. Another question: - again in 1943 - if man came from the ape, how come man now, even with grafts and repugnant cross-breeding, doesn't turn back into an ape?

You would even be capable of attempting these horrors if you knew that it could give approving sanction to your theory. But you don't do it because you know that you wouldn't be able to make a monkey out of a man; you would make him an ugly son of a man, a degenerate, a criminal perhaps but never a real monkey. Don't try it because you know in advance that you would do badly and your reputation would be ruined.

" I understand that Pope Ratzinger said that this could undermine the good faith of some simple faithful who obviously believe what the Church says. In 1946, i. e.

three years later, Jesus would still say: «I think of how the beauty of the most perfect creative work could be degraded so much as to allow scientists to deny that man was created man by God - I replace him with Elohim - and is not the evolution from the monkey». Obviously the term monkey is used here, then evolution would theoretically explain to us that the monkey and man derive from a common stock and then split, but here the statement is very interesting considering that it was made to a Franciscan tertiary who knew nothing about biology, knew nothing about evolutionism, and therefore we are simply talking about monkey. And then he continues: «Jesus speaks to me and says: Look for the key in chapter 6 of Genesis.

Read it. I read it and Jesus asks me: do you understand? Lord, I understand that men immediately became corrupt and nothing more.

" Here the fact is confirmed that she was obviously not aware of the doctrines, the scientific possibilities and everything that was already possible to do at that time. And he says: "I don't know what relevance the chapter has to the ape-man. " We who read the Bible in the light of scientific doctrines are understanding it very well, we have been talking about it for many years.

She very honestly responds, let's say, to this revelation by saying: no, unfortunately I don't know, unfortunately I don't understand what the relationship is. «Jesus smiles and replies: you are not alone in not understanding. Wise men and not scientists do not understand, not believers and not atheists.

Pay attention to me and start acting. " And here Jesus quotes chapter 6 of Genesis: «And men having begun to multiply on the earth and having had daughters , the sons of God - the Elohim, the sons of the Elohim, and here he then specifies - or sons of Seth». And here he quotes Genesis 5:3 because it says: O sons of Seth.

Seth was the third son of Adam after Cain killed Abel and Cain was driven out. So Seth represented the pure line, the one that still contained a large part of the DNA of the Elohim and therefore obviously they could be considered children of God since Adam had been made "in the image" or rather "with the image", with the "tselem", with the image of God. He says: «And having had daughters, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful and they married those who pleased them among all.

Now therefore, after the sons of God were joined with the daughters of men and they gave birth, there came forth those mighty men, famous throughout the ages. " Remember that I have already read to you in the Bible that when it talks about the giants, who according to the Ethiopian book of Enoch are the children of these unions, between the sons of God and the daughters of men, the Bible says that the giants are the famous men in history. And this corresponds to the stories of the peoples of the earth who speak of giants.

Let's just think about the so-called Greek mythology; I use the term "mythology" because it is the traditional term but I prefer, as you know, to call it history. And he says, precisely, those powerful men emerged from it, famous over the centuries. «The men who by the power of their skeleton strike your scientists who deduce that at the beginning of time man was much taller and stronger than he is today and from the structure of their skull they deduce that man derives from the ape.

The usual errors of men when faced with the mysteries of creation. " That is, scientists think that man derives from the monkey and in 1946 this Franciscan tertiary tells us that Jesus reveals to her these "usual errors of men when faced with the mysteries of creation", the errors she says of scientists who deduce that man derives from the monkey. It's incredible: that's why I wanted to read it to you, because obviously you wouldn't expect such a revelation at all.

But already when I spoke about Don Guido Bortoluzzi's book, I had highlighted what contrasts with the creationist doctrines of the Church. But Don Guido Bortoluzzi was a very knowledgeable person both from a biological point of view and from an anthropological point of view, from a geological point of view. And then he had not published his writings because the bishop had forbidden them and had forbidden him to speak about them in public, so much so that his writings - which you can also find online - were published after his death.

Jesus continues : «Those who were no longer children of God because with their father and like their father they had fled God to welcome Satan - that is, to welcome the adversary, the one who would have united with Eve and who, according to the Jewish people, would have given rise to the lineage of Cain - pushed themselves to this degrading offense. And they had monsters for sons and daughters, those monsters who now attack your scientists and mislead them. " Then here he talks about these hybridizations: both of the hybridizations between the sons of God and the daughters and of men and of the union between the two lineages, that is, the pure lineage of Adam which then derived through Seth and the lineage of Cain who, obviously, lived substantially in the same territories and therefore ended up interbreeding.

And he mentions something very precise here too: «Those monsters who, for the power of their forms, for a wild beauty and a beastly ardor, are the fruits of the union between Cain. . .

». Which, as I said, could have been the son of Eve, also because here it says the fruit of the union between Cain and the brutes" and here we directly read a comment written by the Jewish exegetes: "According to the Midrash before the serpent was cursed - that is, the one that tempted Eve and which probably united with Eve giving rise to this lineage - the serpent stood in an upright position, had limbs and was equipped with a specific faculty of communication". So this reptile or this reptilian as they say today, had united with Eve and had given rise to this lineage which can be defined as "lineage of brutes" because it was not the pure lineage, that is, the one wanted by the Elohim.

Then he gives the whole list of the antediluvian patriarchs and says: «They seduced the sons of the Elohim, that is, the descendants of Seth through Enos». We know that Seth had a son who he called Enos and this is in the Bible in Genesis 5, it says: «Adam was 130 years old when he begot a son in his image according to his likeness and called him Seth». Here there is a consideration to be made: the expression used by the Bible "here Adam formed a son in his image and likeness" is the same that is used when it is said that the Elohim created Adam in their likeness and with their image, so probably in the manufacturing of Seth there was some particular intervention because we have already said that genetic engineering was probably practiced .

The Jewish exegetes themselves recognize that in those times genetic engineering was known, the techniques for using DNA were known. For example, I have repeatedly mentioned Professor Safran of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem who says that cloning was known from the Bible at least 4,000 years ago. “Seth was 105 years old when he fathered Enosh.

” Among other things, the precision, so to speak, of these revelations is such that here Jesus warns Maria Valtorta and says that this Enos son of Seth is not to be confused with Enoch son of Cain. Therefore he keeps the two lineages very distinct because we know that Cain had a son who he called Enoch and then built a city giving this city his own name. And the interesting thing is that always the Bible, the traditional one, the one you have at home: "At the time of Enosh people began to invoke the name of Yahweh.

So Adam and Eve and Seth evidently did not invoke the name of Yahweh who came later. But we know that Yahweh was one of the Elohim, he was probably a young Elohim and perhaps he was not part of the group of Elohim geneticists, let's say, scientists and the whole Bible describes to us that Yahweh was in He was actually a "'ish milchamah" that is, a man of war and therefore had another profession. Then he continues with the list of all the patriarchs up to Noah, father of Shem Ham and Japheth.

«It was then that God, to prevent the branch of the sons of God from being completely corrupted by the branch of the sons of men - that is, we know that the Elohim were against these hybrids - sent the "general flood" to destroy the monsters generated by the lust of the godless, insatiable. in the sense because they were burned by the fires of the adversary, that is, by the fires of Satan. " We know that Satan was not an individual in himself but was a function, essentially the function of the adversary.

And then he continues by saying - we are in 1946 I remember - «And modern man raves about somatic lines and zygomatic angles and, not wanting to admit a creator - That is, not wanting to admit in this case we who read the Bible literally define Elohim - because too proud to be able to recognize that he was made, he admits descent from brutes in order to be able to say: we alone have evolved from animals to men». Here it is said that we did not evolve alone from animals to men but there was someone's intervention . That is, there were animals, we saw before, there were monkeys and then there was the intervention of someone who ensured that, we would say now, Homo sapiens arrived.

«Write this dictation in the book. I would have treated the topic more fully as I told you in the place of your exile to counter the guilty theories of too many "pseudo-wise". I would have revealed great mysteries so that man would now know that the time is ripe - and listen to what he says - It is no longer the time to please the crowds with fairy tales.

Beneath the ancient stories are the key truths to all the mysteries of the universe. And show this page without giving it to those you know. It will be help against the remains of a pseudoscience that atrophies the heart; help others to their spirituality.

" That is, to those who do a spiritual search even if they want to outside - I say obviously Jesus doesn't say this - clearly outside what are the so-called sacred books because, as we have seen for many years, the so-called sacred books do not speak of God. Here these are words that were written in 1900, dictated in 1943 - 1946; have been discussed. Scientists continue to support and criticize the book to this day and annual conferences are even held on the scientific and theological aspects of Maria Valtorta's writings.

If they have been included, you understand it well, in the index of prohibited books; when the index was canceled obviously these pages were also freed but even in 1985 Ratzinger was aware of the danger, let's call it, of certain information that could distract believers from their beliefs. I wanted to read this to you especially in relation to the dates in which all this would have been revealed to this Franciscan tertiary, Maria Valtorta. And so everyone has their own reasoning.

Obviously I won't argue about whether these revelations came from Jesus or not, I don't have the tools, I don't even have the intention. What matters to me is that this was written, this she had in mind, this she either received or channeled or had elaborated on her own but all this is extremely modern and is extremely consistent with what we have been saying for several years. Bye, thanks and see you next time.