The whole point of what Mauro Biglino is bringing up is of course not compatible with Christianity for most Christians. But if you do not contemplate that religion and Christianity in particular is a limited hangout to control the masses, then are you really searching for truth? When you also find out that the story of Jesus follows, if not outright mirrors, other older stories from other religions/cults then it is not all that hard to lay down your ego and realize what could be afoot. Even within the Q movement we need to be able to reconcile that making it Christian based could be part of making it more energizing towards the religious community and the societal good things that come with revival; Biblical could be synonymous with archetypal at the end of the day despite deeply held connotations and beliefs when you look at things from the 40,000 ft view

I have only looked into Mauro Biglino enough to get the alternate verison of Genesis so I am not aware of how he translates the new testament, if he even does. So I am not sure where your argument would even begin that it is not compatible with Christianity.

What thread I did share with the other guy for sure is that Biglino's interpretation of the OT is that the earth did exist before Adam and Eve and was populated but wiped out in a flood akin to what happened to Noah. This is interesting to me because the cyclical destructions evident in our geologic record both confirm Noah's flood AND a flood before Adam and Eve. Mainstream science even teaches these while ignoring the fact that the Noah timeline lines up with the end of the ice age / Younger Dyas extinction event. The geologic record further shows cyclical catastrophes before these two events. To add to this, we have enough to know from ancient sites like the serpent mounds in the US that there were civilizations either far enough back in time that they were aligning their sites to a different overhead celestial alignment than we see today and/or polar shifts cause crustal slippage over the mantle and areas can wind up on vastly different points of the globe; either way indicates that the earth was tilted or laid out differently due to some kind of cyclical cataclysm which lines up with stories in basically every ancient culture. Graham Hancock is the main source on these ideas that supposedly prove humans have been around for at least 100,000 years or more, and his archeological research credentials sure dwarf mine.

How do you know Biglino is either a crackpot or intentionally deceiving? That sounds like opinion with no facts to back it up. If you could point out some specifics as to why you believe this then this could help both of us figure things out, but if you just feel that this is the case and I should acquiesce to your beliefs then what are we really doing here?

Before you treat me as if I am telling you all facts, please realize that everything is ideas and that just cause the ideas I consider in pursuit of truth are different from yours does not mean I am inherently wrong or lacking equally factual sources.