Welcome to the Paul Wallis Q & A Forum! Please note* 1. Select questions may be answered with video livestream 2. Paul may not be able to answer every question. 3. 5th kind tv moderators may ask follow up questions if any clarity is needed.

Please be respectful to Paul and also to other members of the group. 5th kind tv moderators may remove your questions & comments if they are deemed offensive or against our community guidelines.

Thanks so much for joining us here on 5thkind.tv - We looking forward to communicating with you in the comments!

Hi Paul, The new website is great. I’ve read the Eden trilogy and watched your video’s with Mauro Biglino. My question is who do you say your prayers to? And what’s the story with the New Testament, who is it written for? Thank you. Deborah

Hello to Paul Wallis and the 5thkind team,

I discovered Paul's work two months ago and find it very interesting. I appreciate Paul's very articulate way of thinking and speaking, as well as the production work of his colleagues.

I watched many videos, including the first 4 episodes with Mauro Biglioni, and also bought and read "Escape from Eden".

From this point of view, there is one particular aspect of Paul's argumentation that puzzles me, about which I haven't found any answer so far within the provided material.
I will try to express it as clearly as possible, although english is not my mother tongue.

I undertand that, around the 7th century BC, some hebrew scholars edited ancient texts and re-arranged them ("cisors and paste") into a form that promoted a monotheistic worldview.
I also understand the following key point : the word "Elohim" should be interpreted as its root meaning, that is a plural term that designates the "powerfull ones".

However, my comprehension is that the editing process used material written in hebrew to generate a new narrative also written in hebrew. I understand that, in this process, the word "Yahweh" has been copied and pasted in many places where it was not in the original versions. Yet, the term "Elohim" apparently has remained in many places inside the new narrative (I cannot check by myself since I am completely enable to read hebrew ! )

** Since this new text was written in hebrew, how could there be any ambiguity regarding the fact that "Elohim" was a plural form ? **

Another way to express my question : I understand that mistranslation and mis-interpretation of Elohim/plural has happened during the translation from the hebrew post-editing narrative into other languages (greek, latin, italian, english...). Yet for the hebrew speaking people to which this new narrative was originally dedicated, how could there be any mis-understanding ? As I imagine the picture, hebrew reading people should understand that Elohim is plural and therefore I can't see how this edited narrative could be so misleading for them.

I hope that I managed to express my interrogation clearly enough, and look forward to reading the answers,

Thanks and best regards

After viewing most of you videos, related to the Bible, I have some questions & thoughts I'd like to toss your way.

1) What do you think the real reason was for the Israelites having to spend 40 years in the desert? Might it have been other reasons? Maybe he wanted to tame Jacob?

2) Do you believe that Yahweh is the same god during Moses' time as the one from Abram/Abraham & Isaac & Jacob's time? I get the impression that you believe they are different. From what I have learned from your videos I believe they were different & maybe some of the Israelites knew or suspected it too, & that may have contributed to their rebellion. As you said, Yahweh didn't act like a real god would.

3) Could there have been more than one elohim that ruled over the Israelites at the same time; at different times?

4) When do you think the Yahweh left the Israelites?

5) Looking at what you've shown me in your videos it now seems to me like the redactors may have made mistakes because they wanted us (someone (you)) to eventually figure this out, the truth, that the redactions were ordered from higher-ups. I mean the clues are obvious when you know what to look for.

6) I like Plato's analogy of the universe to be the answer to fulfill a new/awakening consciousness.

7) In your opinion, would you say that not inquiring of seers & mystics is from Yahweh (the dragon elohim) or the redactors or maybe both?

8) What ideas do you have about Jesus, his understanding & his teaching? I feel that Christianity is very likely the reason we haven't annihilated ourselves. I also feel that Jesus had a connection beyond what we had back then or now.

You may have answered some or maybe even all of my questions. If would you please answer them again for me, I would be very grateful & better informed.

Thanks,

Al Walls

Member for about 3 months.

AI Walls

1) I think that El Elyon allotted YHWH a short straw - a people with no land
2) I think the Abraham and Sarah stories recall multiple layers of contact. YHWH claims to be the El Shaddai who met with Abraham. I think there's more to it than that though.
3) Yes. Hence the worship of other entities by the tribes of Israel
4) YHWH ceases to be physically around after the coup of I Samuel 8. However he continues to shape public policy for generations afterwards. By the time of Josiah he is well and struly absent. He is not even sought out for remote communications any more. The people look back on his influence by the C8th-7thBCE and see it in a negative light. This is referenced in II Kings and Jeremiah.
5) I don't think the redactors wanted to be rumbled - other than they were unshamed about the fact that they were retelling older stories. They make no attempt to hide that. But I don't think it's because they want their theology to be questioned. I think the older stories were probably too well known to have done it any other way.
6) Yes there's heaps of wisdom to be gleaned from Plato.
7) Yes I think that the agenda of the redaction was a top down authority structure. Neither YHWH nor his successive deputies or devotees wanted competing information or people with grassroots access to other information. I think it's about full spectum dominance. I John 4 affirms contact and channellling experiences - jsut with the rider that we should be discerning, not believe or act on everything, but keep our sovreignty and judge for ourselves. That's my view too.
8) Yes I am a fan and follower of Jesus, trying to see him more clearly than the lenses of institutional orthodoxy have permited through the ages. His teaching has been profoundly important and I believe still is - notwithstanding all the horrors perpertrated in his name throught the ages.

Hi Paul, love your work and the new website. How literal do you personally take the Dragon stories?

Hi Aaron,

Thanks! Your question about how to interpret the dragon stories is a very good question. (I touch on this in Echoes of Eden, and re-visit it in my new book The Eden Conspiracy. I suspect that among the dragon stories we have a range of ancient memory.

Some I am prepared to take quite literally. I think the correlation of beef and lamb offerings along with gold and virgin girls points to real dragon entities. However when we look at how the memory of the dragon eentities evolved in Mayan shamanic practice, for instance, it suggests other dimensioal entities who would manifest / project as dragon-like beings. So that raises a question or two.

Then there are texts in the Bible and the Popol Vuh where the dragons could be interpreted as ancient craft. This would inclede the references to the Kruvim / Cherubim in the Hebrew Scriptures.

Then there are other references, such as in Genesis 3, where the dragon/serpent (the Bible uses these words interchangeably) could have been a humanoid entity, Enki, in the Sumerian original, who produced humans who resembled his species, yet had the name of a dragon/serpent. The final redactor of Genesis 3 interprets this entity as a snake (hannahas), but given the entity's introduction and role in the Genesis 3 story it is pretty clear we are not talking about anything you or I would recognise as a snake.

So I think all those layers are there going back through time. On every occasion we have to ask separately, "What is going on here? What is this about? What memory is being carried in this story?"

Sorry it's not a simpler answer, but I think it is that complex.

Health and Peace,
Paul

Paul,

What can you tell me about the use of the word האחר on rabbinic literature that deals with the idea of "another god" in heaven — in the context of the ascendancy of the angel Metatron to the "throne" of God? This obviously heretic and even blasphemous idea could point out to some form of acknowledgement of the dissonant character of the god of Israel.

Good evening Paul,
I am a senior citizen from Cape Town, being listening to you now for the past 6 months. You and Muaro Biglioni have answered so many of my questions and added lifted the veil on many of my questions.
I started studying bible and theology way back in 1975 and the stories of Genesis was always an enigma to me. I read Chariot of the Gods as a 19 year old in 1974 and at that time made very little impact on me. Twenty years later I reread the book because of my questions about Aliens, UFO's and my Faith.

Thank you for your writing. However, I am now struggling with issues of faith. I believe and love the teachings of Jesus but just can not reconcile the Yahwist link.
I do not accept that The Father of whom Jesus refers to is the Eloihim ie, the God of Israel. But a life time of that belief is the struggle.
Would you allow me to beg on your site. At our exchange rate of almost R20 to $1 the cost of your books is way out of reach for me as a Pensioner. My state pension is equal to $110 per month.
My Request: If anybody who is prepared to loan me a copies of your Books I will return them after reading. Especially your Eden Series.

Thank you Paul

Trevor Beukes

Hi Paul! Thanks for your amazing and inspiring work!

Heres a question for you:

In the last paragraph of Plato’s Critias there is a cut, in some of the translations it is written: Jupiter and in some others Zeus, do you consider this passage to be censored? It is also strange that Timaeus, Critias and Hermocrates are complete works but a part of Critias at the end is missing? So, this passage relates the end of Atlantis and in some way may be very meaningful in history.
It seems to be recalling some astrological-astronomical event. And well I have been trying to find Marsilio Ficino’s “original” translation but it’s not easily available online.
Do you think it is possible to read the original passage? Is it really lost? Or only at some level?

Hi Felipe,

Thank you so much for your wonderful question.

Yes, I agree with what you are surmising. You and I are on the same track because I think Ficino's translation is a key piece of the puzzle. If I find how to source a copy I will let you know Felipe and we can compare notes. Simiarly if you are able to source a copy let me know as I would love to invest some serious time into the missing section.

The taboo around "what went before" is widespread and profound. It isn't just about governing powers wanting to control the narrative. Indigenous traditions also draw a veil over what went before. So it does seem to be coincidental that it is in that zone that we have a gap in Plato eh!

Thank you again for reaching out to me.

Wishing you Health and Peace,
Paul

Dear Felipe,

Thank you for your message. What you share is absolutely fascinating.

As you probably know I am always on a research path and the focus for my next season of research is forming in your part of the world. I would love to speak with you in greater detail about some of the aspects you highlight. If you DM vme via FB or via www.paulanthonywallis.com I would be happy to talk further on a "private line" to compare notes. I am especially interested in the Egyptian Mesoamerican connections you mention. Migrations, travel and visitations all seem to be in the mix as we look into the array of symological, narrative, and cultural correlations.

Will look forward to chatting further.

Health and Peace,

Paul

Hey @Paul,

Have you seen this?

Thought you'd find the parts of the video that talk about the 'silver beast that came out of the cloud, in the likeness of a bird' from the supposedly lost, 'Book of the wars of yahweh' (its around the 01:01:30 mark specifically) -

Paul,

I've now read 2-1/2 of your 3 Eden books and watched a number of videos here. First, congratulations on your work! Given your starting point, you've come a long way in search of truth and I respect that. I have a confusion from your books and the TV series that is troubling I would like your thoughts on to see if it reconciles. If the Elohim came to Earth and found it a planet of water and possibly a dark planet it isn't reconciling with the fossil records that come from the various periods prior to this by millions of years which disagree that this is the way it was from the start of life on earth to the arrival of the Elohim. If earth is a dark planet and we have a sun, revolution, and rotation of the planet when the Elohim arrive, then there must be something blocking the sun's energy from reaching the surface, and the surface is presumably hot enough that all water is liquid. A heavy dark cloud due to some catastrophe is one possibility. If there is a dark cloud covering the earth, then there is an atmosphere, mostly nitrogen since the plant animal symbiotic relationship that existed for millions of years prior to the arrival of the Elohim has been destroyed. An earth that is covered in water isn't a flood per se, that is a rising of the earth's water or a lowering of all land (or both) that happened prior to the arrival of the powerful ones. A flip of the earth putting the poles on the equator after the catastrophe might cause this (as some postulate has happened). If the dark cloud were trapping in heat that prevented the new poles from freezing. or melted the existing poles. Then conditions exist to support the mythology. Some other points: Wind. It is the heating of the earth by the sun that is the primary source of wind on the planet (although not the only one). To bootstrap life on earth, the dark cloud has to be removed. This will start winds blowing, freeze the poles, and lower the water level so that the land appears again. The cycle of cloud formation and rain, will separate sea water from fresh water to recreate lakes and rivers. The return of wind will distribute the fresh water over the land. Whatever sea life might exist, the Elohim have a DNA starting point to terraform the planet putting life back onto the land. So, while agreeing with almost all of the world's mythologies, and your work, I believe that a world covered by water is a "hot world" changed by a great catastrophic event. Creating a dark cloud to block sunlight from the earth stopping the wind and creating a water world. Getting rid of a cloud blocking out the sun will allow a lot of natural processes to kick start again. The technology required to kick start wind is the technology required to remove a cloud blocking sunlight. It wouldn't take millions of years for the earth to self-correct its ecosystem, possibly much less than a century with a bit of additional assistance to the environment while the DNA experimenting is going on. What are your thoughts about the Elohim arriving to a world of water millions of years after the age of the dinosaurs (and other fossils) and my postulating that getting rid of a dark cloud from the atmosphere is all that is required to make land appear and water recede? Thank you. PS: I have had my own personal experience with trans-dimensional beings and after spending the night on Machu Picchu, had an experience that told me of a race that came to earth in the time before the Inca and that their religion was not God based as we conceive of it. They didn't believe in a being, or even the cosmos, as God. Life was their religion and wherever they went they could improve life as a way to worship and honor their belief system. There is a lot more to that, but this is turning into a small book, so I'll leave you with my question.

Hi Daniel

Thank you for your thoughtful question.

You say, "If the Elohim came to Earth and found it a planet of water and possibly a dark planet it isn't reconciling with the fossil records that come from the various periods prior to this by millions of years which disagree that this is the way it was from the start of life on earth to the arrival of the Elohim."

That is not what I argue in Escaping from Eden. In that book I suggest that the story of powerful beings arriving over the floodwaters in a dark sky - stories which can be found in Sumerian, Biblical and Mayan accounts - is a story of an intervention post-cataclysm. I argue that their arrival was witnessed by a suviving population. So the clearing of the sky and the terraforming is a recovery, rehabilitation process, not a creation process.

There may be memories of multiple similar resets embedded in our ancient narratives. In Escaping from Eden I suggest that the top layer of our recovery stories (which we have read as creation stories) probably refers to the process of the Clovis Impact and the Younger Dryas Cold Period.

So, to cut a long story short, I think we are agreed!

Health and Peace,

Paul