Starting from the figure of the Jewish-Christian and biblical ancient-testamentary God YHWH (Yahweh), now become the one and true God, omniscient and omnipresent, for Judaism and religions of Christian origin, through the manipulation of the "sacred" text and the historical facts narrated, the present study deals with the thorny question of the psychopathological profile of this very controversial figure. The aim is to define the general framework, in order to trace a psychopathological profile consistent with the letter of the first Jewish-Christian texts: a path that will accompany the reader to recognize the pathological traits of the narcissistic personality of a "war man", falsely transformed from theology to a good, just and merciful "God".

. Introduction and necessary premises: General overview of the figure of "God" YHWH (Yahweh)

2. The leadership profiles described in the Old Testament

3. The psychopathological characteristics of the personality of YHWH (Yahweh)

4. Conclusions

5. References

1. Introduction and necessary premises: general overview of the figure of "God" YHWH (Yahweh)

The present discussion elaborates in a structured and orderly manner all the conduct of the biblical God YHWH described in the Old Testament. It, therefore, appears evident, before continuing, to dwell on some dutiful promises that - if omitted - would make the reading of the elaborate rather complicated and partisan.

The following psychological investigation on the described behaviours is not exempt from well-defined limits, which will be analysed during the elaborate; among the essential premises it is necessary to pay attention to the following elements [1]:

1) the "fideistic profile". The present discussion is unrelated to theological or fideistic concepts; instead, the investigation analysed the objective characteristics described and represented in the ancient-testamentary biblical text. Therefore, the intent is not to judge a choice of faith or religious belief, as much as to analyse the descriptions in a literal key, according to the purpose of the biblical

    L,editors, without dwelling on the considerations in the literature of the religious and academic experts linked to the spiritual world, obviously partisan. Even the idea of ​​analysing the question whether and how the image of God is reflected in the biblical authors ultimately falls because we would risk objectifying what by its nature is subjective and therefore run the risk of extending profiles to the community " selling them "for objective and universal. Conviction or not, the biblical authors have traced a descriptive profile of the behaviours of their God and therefore, those must be taken into consideration and nothing else as if they were real.

2) the "historical profile". The present discussion is disconnected from useless and repetitive historical contextualizations already widely analysed in various editorial publications, signed by the writer. It is interesting, however, to underline how, even in literature, there are no absolute certainties about the identity of the authors of ancient-testamentary texts, as well as about the periods of writing. Moreover, in dozens of biblical passages, there are apparent historical errors, referring to facts, events and characters. Therefore, the intent here is not to challenge the reliability of biblical writings, as much as "to give for obvious" the correctness of the information contained therein, "pretending that" what is described is real. On this basis, the related behaviours can be objectivized and analysed in a psychopathological key, as if it were an actual patient.

3) the "ethical and clinical profiles". The present discussion takes much care of the ethical profile linked to the combination of "psychopathology" and "divine", with particular attention to avoiding useless compromises related to personal and subjective convictions. The present discussion is an academic analysis of "docendi causa", for the reasons that will be explained during the debate. And if human behaviours can be studied according to psychopathological profiles, then even divine tones suffer the same comparison, because they derive from them and draw strength from them. To list compulsively the academic voices that have followed each other on the topic would be useless, because they take into account more sociological or anthropological profiles, keeping mostly distant from critical points that would expose the scholar to religious criticism.

4) the "moral profile". As already stated, the academic intent is not to deepen the religious or fideistic themes or to analyse the anthropological construction of the ancient-testament God concerning the cults existing at that time and in that given context, as this error would affect the whole discussion. Indeed, not by chance, "that God" so subjective and linked to the Israelite context of the time (from the second millennium BC to the fourth century BC) was mistakenly linked to the Christian cults of the first four centuries AD, objectifying it and making it universal. The masterful fraud bold to the detriment of the populations by the Christian religious exponents of the early four centuries BC, then crystallized by the Emperor Constantine, made it possible to juxtapose the Jewish texts (the Old Testament) with the Christian Gospels, falsely connecting the ancient God testamentary with the God of the New Testament, totally different in structure and behavior. On this assumption, therefore, no provocative intent is inherent in this analysis; more than anything else it is essential to understand how the belief linked to the good and just God is the result of a theological manipulation disconnected from the biblical text itself.

According to Christian theology, therefore, YHWH is the only existing God, creator of everything, right, just and capable of feeling love without differences of race, skin colour, language or sex. However, by carefully reading the biblical passages, in the translation approved by the Italian Episcopal Conference, a completely different truth emerges, also evident to those who blindly believe in their religious faith.

As a preliminary point, the writer has directed this work according to a pure logic: "to pretend that" the biblical content tells the empirical truth, or what the editors of the very first version written in writing saw. The aim is to seek the truth, using the same tools as the theologians, but rigorously and methodically. [1]

Continuing according to this approach, we cannot but draw the obvious consequences, focusing: first of all, the biblical character YHWH in his social context, in order to better understand his conduct, role and leadership, within the group and out of context territorial; in seconds, the psychopathological profiles of this character. Also, therefore, as specified in the introduction, we try to understand YHWH in its more general aspects better, analyzing first of all the character in his socio-environmental context.

From the biblical letter, we know that YHWH was an “ish milchamah”, a male / male war/battle individual (Exodus 15: 3), who gave instructions for conducting bloody battles against neighbouring peoples (Deuteronomy 20); in fact, his conduct perfectly reflected this definition: in all the "sacred" texts of the Old Testament, YHWH was mainly devoted to this task, and never begs for suggestions of dubious morality: on how to advance in battle; on how to offer holocausts and animal sacrifices, on the best type of meat and fat to use to provoke the smoke that so pleasing (Numbers 28-29); on never feeling pity for enemies, even if these were women, elderly or children; on expressing specific strict orders, where disobedience was often paid with the death penalty. The general picture that emerges is all too clear: a man of war, I dedicate to the conquest of territories and the shedding of blood, often of innocent people.

This violent nature of his also emerges in the many descriptions of his character: YHWH is often defined as a fire that destroys, devoted to anger, anger, without pity and violent; Deuteronomy 28: 63 describes it even in a precise manner: Yahweh is violent, angry, vindictive, hysterical, insecure, indifferent to human suffering, cruel, jealous (...).

We will continue this verse when we arrive at the psychopathological diagnosis of this controversial character; for now, however, taking for granted what has already been shown, we focus our attention on the relationship with his people.

From reading the verses, we know that:

a) YHWH frees his people, or rather the people inherited from Elyon, through Moses, commanding all his actions. On several occasions, among other things, he turns his anger against him for not having punctually put into practice the order given;

b) in almost all the cases, YHWH addresses the "chosen" people only through prophets or men chosen by himself, to spread the word, which always consisted in imperative orders and solicitations to act because of the prize;

c) YHWH does not hesitate, on several occasions, to kill the same members of the Israelite people, as a form of punishment, for having disobeyed orders or for not behaving as prescribed. Very often they perished innocently, and the weaker elements were hit, to show everyone else what they risked; a punitive repressive and non-rehabilitative sanction, which aimed only to instil terror in him, fame that among other things often preceded him in relations with other neighbouring peoples.

2. The leadership profiles described in the Old Testament

From these general elements, very interesting data already appear, linked to his role in society and to the leadership that he followed in the management of the people: however, his limited patience was a significant obstacle, often put to the test by that people, the Israelite, defined by the biblical text itself as "hard cervix" (Exodus 32: 9-14). The bond that had been established was not one of reciprocal democratic dialogue but of military dictatorship of an absolutist nature. The leadership of that people was first of all delegated to the prophet on duty, who by his mouth, put into practice the orders of YHWH which, if disregarded, provoke the most disastrous ire, even coming to commit massacres of thousands of people.

The leadership [2] pursued by the Judeo-Christian Old Testament god was utterly absent; his charisma was represented by a relationship of power, supported by a climate of terror, violence and threats, therefore an authoritarian and 3 autocratic pattern [4], according to a formal style [5], directive [6] -unidirectional- and toxic [7]: in essence, not a leader but a military commander who managed and controlled every aspect of the life of his men, in order to realize the ultimate goal of conquering the promised land.

Not surprisingly, the people feared his "God", to the point of abandoning him if an opportunity presented itself or to replace him with other local divinities, discouraged by his oppressive and suffocating, violent and angry behaviour.

In short, a description utterly opposed to the good, just and correct figure desired by Christian theology, which in any case alters the real extent of the figure built by the Jews: it is a notary fact, moreover, that the Christian faith bases its roots in traditions and on the Hebrew texts, to then detach and unduly appropriate cultures and traditions, mixing paganism and oriental cults, in a cream with slightly acid tones.

3. The psychopathological characteristics of the personality of YHWH (Yahweh)

Summing up on what is expressed in this work, we can now proceed to define the personality aspects related to the character YHWH, keeping in mind what is described in the introduction, about the classifications of psychopathological disorders.

<<[…] By "psychological diagnosis" we mean a general assessment of the subject concerning the psychological and psychopathological aspect, through the use of an integrated repertoire of questionnaires, personality inventories, batteries and test techniques (psychometric and projective), clinical interviews and observational evaluations. The type of techniques and tools used vary from time to time, based on the context and purpose of the assessment, the age and type of possible difficulties of the assessed subjects, and the theoretical orientation and specialist training of the evaluator. The psychologist is formally authorized to carry out a psychological diagnosis based on the art. 1 of the Law n. 56/1989 (in Italy) concerning the ordination of the profession of psychologist (in Italy), where it is reported: "The profession of psychologist includes the use of cognitive and intervention tools for prevention, diagnosis, habilitation and rehabilitation activities and psychological support for the person, group, social organizations and communities " […]>> [8].

However, the psychiatric assessment must be clearly distinguished from the psychological one: in the first case, <<[...] the evaluation is usually of a nosological and psychopathological type and is carried out through a clinical and anamnestic interview, possibly supplemented by the administration of detection scales of the psychiatric symptomatology [...]>>[8]; in the second case, <<[...] psychological diagnostics can instead be of a broader type: in addition to the detection of psychopathological symptomatology, in fact, psychodiagnostic can also refer to the evaluation of aspects and processes of the personality, to the evaluation of attitudes, relational modalities, level and typology of cognitive skills, personality structure, ... [...]>>[8].

The concept of "diagnosis" [8] presupposes the concept of "health", that is: the state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and does not consist only in the absence of disease or infirmity. The possession of the maximum state of health that he is capable of achieving is one of the fundamental rights of every human being. Therefore, to be complete, it must:

1) evaluate the patient from a global and multidimensional point of view: therefore, it is necessary to integrate the information obtained through the physical (physical) examination with the anamnesis of the patient and of the next relatives, in order to know also the personal, emotional and environmental experience, thanks to the help of a battery of ideal tests for the case in question, to frame the problem told by the patient himself or by who first exposed the question. More generally: << [...] psychological diagnosis is a process of: a) clinical observation (first basic level of abstraction); b) classification of clinical observations in a formal framework recognized by the scientific community (second level of abstraction); c) elaboration of hypotheses on the mechanisms of formation and maintenance of clinical outcomes (third level of abstraction) as well as for the purpose of choosing the treatment [...]>>;

2) perform multiple functions: it is necessary to categorize the information obtained from interviews and tests, facilitates communication between the therapist and the patient, also defining the spaces for action and rehabilitation therapy, thus directing the positive action.

In our case, however, since this is an a posteriori analysis of the facts narrated, the diagnosis will only play the purely theoretical function of educating the reader in the critical analysis of the biblical text. It is, therefore, an intellectual exercise; a teaching test in ius docendi, with no clinical purpose or diagnostic claim. On the other hand, the character YHWH is not even physically here to prove his existence, or to tell his truths, the perception of his experience and his exploits and any other data useful for diagnostic purposes; among other things, we must not forget that we are talking anyway about a being who, in the lucky case, possessed non-human qualities. We know that the label "God" is misleading, as the concept in the Bible does not exist; but we also know that certain descriptions would show his abilities out of the ordinary. Of course, it is not possible to know whether the descriptions referring to him are completely true or "romanticized"; what matters, however, is to examine the character, as told by the "sacred" writings, in order to better understand the reasons for his behaviour.

Therefore, not being able to even submit to any personality test or clinical interview, useful for the diagnosis, and / or let us tell the social context in which he lived and his or her family history, we must necessarily take the narrated "for good" biblical, "pretending that" everything coincides perfectly with the truth: on the other hand, the fact that the whole biblical story is narrated by third parties cannot be minimized and the only text that perhaps could bear the signature of our protagonist has mysteriously gone lost.

With this soul, therefore, we finally proceed to the didactic exposition of the elements analyzed in all this work, asking ourselves in the end what could be the psychopathological diagnosis of our "patient", if he presented the following 13 characteristics [9] [10] [11] [12]:

I)  military leader and high religious authority of a group of people, in the form of a social aggregate, linked to each other by local geographic belonging; 

II) authoritarian. It imposes the rank of military leader and high religious authority, not as a leader or charismatic leader but of God, unique and only really able to fill that particular role. It obliges the Israelite people to respect all the 613 mitzvot (commands/prohibitions), under very strict punitive sanctions (almost always death);

III) autocratic, formal and managerial. It uses strength, terror and violence to control its people and leaves no possibility to discuss the rules imposed by the above, in a formal and unidirectional way;

IV) violent. It gains control of the territory and of the people with the threat of death or loss of all belongings, it has no respect for women, children, the elderly and people with physical difficulties, and often makes them victims to show everyone who is boss and what happens in case of transgression;

V) wrathful and choleric. He gets angry and loses control quickly; often, the consequence is death for those who have transgressed or made the unwanted event possible. He does not tolerate dissidents and those who betray him, even going as far as to punish them with death;

VI) vindictive. There is often no proportion between the offensive act and the assigned punishment. He tends to take revenge in a striking, violent and punitive way, showing that he cannot distinguish between good and evil, right and wrong. For him, only the conquest of the territories counts and to achieve this allows his people to exterminate any living being, also favouring slavery, sexual violence, infanticide, selective murder and massacres. He shows no displeasure or repentance, except on the occasion of excessive punishments addressed to the people of his people;

VII) hysterical. He does not tolerate the people who betray him and who choose another God. In various biblical passages, he remembers in an almost obsessive way that his power is great and will vote to exterminate any living being, an enemy of his people;

VIII) neurotic, obsessive, touchy and insecure. He does not miss the opportunity to remind his people that he is a jealous, vindictive and punitive God, who is the best of the other gods and that only his image can circulate. He is obsessed by the need to conquer the promised land, in theory, a gift to be allocated to his people; however, it is clear from the biblical passages that he alone is the only one to believe it. His people often abandon him or betray him, adhering to other gods, and the first punishes them and then continues with his personal mission, showing that he and his prophets truly believe in him. The mission that will never be completely accomplished;

IX) indifferent to human suffering, misanthropic and racist. He shows no regrets after having massacred men, women, and children, justifying the deed committed due to disobedience or belonging to an enemy faction. It does not tolerate neighbouring peoples, and for this reason, with the excuse of conquering the promised land, it orders exterminations of any living being. It is intolerant to those who have diseases, deformities or physical difficulties, coming to order their removal from the community because they represent the imperfection;

X) jealous. He is the one and only true God and does not accept competition with other deities. Although aware of the existence of other Gods and that these are in command of neighbouring peoples, he imposes himself as the one and true God of Israel, more powerful and more important than all the others;

XI) cruel and sadistic. In several biblical passages, he does not miss opportunities to describe the atrocities he will commit or has committed, how to set off an epidemic of buboes, haemorrhoids or plague. Again, he describes dramatic events of revenge with raw language and without regard to how to "break the babies" or "rape your women in front of you, in the sunlight". He shows himself tolerant, just and good only with those who execute his orders to the letter;

XII) paedophile trend. On one occasion, in particular, he demanded from the spoils of war 32 girls aged over three years. However, the question is controversial because, according to that culture and that historical and temporal context, it was permissible to perform sexual acts with children above that age;

XIII) megalomaniac. The Old Testament adventure tells of the covenant of alliance between YHWH and its people and the promise of the first that would have inherited the promised land to its people, provided they fought against all the neighbouring peoples, committing crimes against humanity. Although the terrible crimes were committed, the promised land was never conquered and therefore never passed into an inheritance.

For big lines, this is the description of the ancient-testamentary "God" YHWH, today our virtual "patient". The investigations carried out by Schneider and Scholem, especially in the field of kabbalistic and Jewish tradition (although strongly influenced by their religious and fideistic approach), can certainly not be excluded from the topic under examination: indeed, if the biblical God was considered a strict father, in the Jewish cult, which dispensed prizes and punishments on the basis of obedience, in Christian worship he assumes a dual function: severe but just in the Old Testament, good, understanding and lovable in the New Testament. This dualistic view is seriously compromised by the speculative attempts of Christian theology that has tampered with and manipulated the Jewish writings by appropriating paternity in a completely arbitrary and incoherent manner with respect to the literal text of the sacred scriptures that still today identify the biblical God as the God of Israel and not of the whole world. The thesis, therefore of the good and just God is not supported historically and philologically, also disavowed by all those authors of the psychological strand that have analyzed the profiles in the examination.

The theoretical approach that we will follow will refer only to the strictly clinical one, avoiding the reader to lose himself in the psychological meanders of other possible interpretations [13]. Once the boundary line is drawn, we now define the possible diagnosis, according to the DSM-V [14], always keeping in mind all the promises made.

From a definite point of view, DSM-V recognises ten types of personality disorders grouped into three groups or clusters, based on descriptive analogies. We see only in detail the cluster (Group B (dramatic cluster) that refers to our subject in question [15]:

A) Antisocial Disorder, formerly called psychopathy or sociopathy, is a personality disorder characterized mainly by non-compliance and violation of the rights of others, which manifests itself in an adult, at least since he was 15 years old. People with this disorder, in fact, fail to comply with the law, for which they perform illegal acts (e.g., destroy property, cheat, steal), or social norms, for which they carry out immoral and manipulative behaviour (e.g. lying, simulating, use false identities) drawing profit or personal pleasure (e.g. money, sex, power). The distinctive element of the disorder is, moreover, the scarce remorse shown for the consequences of one's actions, so that these people, after having damaged someone, can remain emotionally indifferent or give superficial explanations of what happened. Other relevant features of the antisocial disorder are impulsiveness and aggression. (...) The most frequently experienced emotions are anger, irritation, humiliation, contempt, detachment, boredom, envy, the pleasure of dominating and euphoria; hardly, instead, they feel emotions like gratitude, empathy, sympathy, affection, guilt and eroticism. (...) People who suffer from antisocial personality disorder have transient, superficial and antagonistic interpersonal relationships. (...) The sexual behaviour of these people is generally irresponsible and utilitarian; in the course of life, they can have numerous sexual partners and never have monogamous relationships. Furthermore, those who have an antisocial personality disorder believe they are special and therefore deserve favouritism and easy gratification. He can show excessive self-confidence (for example, he may think that an ordinary job is not worthy of him) and casual and superficial charm. (...) The aggressiveness that characterizes the disorder frequently manifests itself with physical aggression (e.g. beating the spouse). Impulsiveness, on the other hand, can manifest itself with the inability to plan for the future, so these people make decisions at the moment, without considering the consequences for themselves and others. Those who have antisocial disorder also tend to be strongly irresponsible. (...) People who have this disorder show low tolerance to frustration, so when things do not go their way, they cannot give up pleasure or procrastinate and act impulsively to reach it. Another characteristic of the antisocial disorder is the fantastic pseudology, a behaviour that consists in continually telling real facts along with invented stories, so it becomes difficult for the listener to distinguish the truth from the lies. This feature seems to recall that of the famous Baron of Munchausen, but it is profoundly different: the literary character told stories that were invented and scarcely credible without any utilitarian purpose; the antisocial patient, on the other hand, invents stories with the clear intention of manipulating the other. Minor manifestations of this disorder are dysphoria, tension complaints, inability to tolerate boredom and depressed mood […]>>;

B) Borderline Disorder is a personality disorder characterized by sudden changes in mood, instability of behaviours and relationships with others, marked impulsiveness and difficulty in organizing one's thoughts in a coherent way. (...) In summary, subjects suffering from borderline personality disorder present emotional and affective dysregulation with sudden attacks of anger, intense and episodic anxieties, feelings of emptiness, instability in the perception of self and others and impulsive behaviours. Some of these symptoms can also be found in other pathologies, so to get a serious and accurate diagnosis, it is necessary to turn to qualified people. It is possible, however, to make clarifications that can help distinguish this diagnostic category from others that can be assimilated. Borderline personality disorder has characteristics in common with mood disorders, particularly with bipolar disorder. In fact, both disorders present intense states of euphoria and depression. Borderline disorder, however, is characterized by a pervasive emotional dysregulation and context-dependent mood swings, particularly interpersonal relationships. In bipolar disorder, however, mood swings occur in a cyclical and context-independent manner. (...) Furthermore, a borderline personality disorder can be confused with the dissociative identity disorder, with which it has in common a sense of confusion about its own identity and the rapid fluctuations between completely different types of mood and behaviour. In borderline disorder, however, identity alterations do not aggregate into distinct personalities with different names, ages, preferences, memories and amnesia for past events, as occurs in the dissociative identity disorder. We must also differentiate borderline personality disorder from other personality disorders with similar characteristics, in particular, the dependent personality disorder and the histrionic personality disorder, with which it has in common the fear of abandonment by significant people, the sense of emptiness and the idea of ​​being wrong. A final distinction must be made between borderline disorder and schizophrenia. The two disorders have some psychotic symptoms in common, but in borderline disorder, these are temporary and dependent on the state of the patient or the context. Finally, borderline subjects have greater personal and social functioning than people with schizophrenia […]>>;

B) Histrionic Disorder is a personality disorder characterized essentially by intense emotionality, expressed through theatrical modalities, and by constant attempts to gain attention, approval and support from others, by means of concealed or openly seductive behaviour. In addition to the dramatic and inappropriately seductive inter-personal style, impressionability, the tendency to somatization and the search for novelty characterize this disorder. (...) Some characteristics of histrionic personality disorder may also be present in other pathologies, from which this disorder must be distinguished. Rapidly changing emotionalism, the search for attention and manipulative behaviour, for example, also characterize borderline personality disorder, but in the latter, there are also self-destructive, anger breaks in interpersonal relationships and more intense states of emptiness and of alteration of identity. Both people with histrionic personality disorder and those with antisocial personality disorder tend to be superficial, manipulative, seductive, impulsive and looking for new and exciting situations, but the former, unlike the latter, manifest more intense emotional reactions, typically they do not carry out antisocial behaviour and perform manipulations to obtain attention and care, rather than material profit, power and gratification. Even those who have narcissistic personality disorder want the attention of others, but while he usually seeks praise for his supposed superiority, those who have histrionic personality disorder are also willing to appear fragile and dependent, to get attention. Moreover, those who present the narcissistic personality disorder can exaggerate the intimacy of their relationships, but generally, emphasize the social or economic position of their acquaintances. Even those who have dependent personality disorder are highly dependent on others for praise and support, but do not have the excessive emotionalism and theatrical style that characterize the histrionic personality disorder […]>>;

D) Narcissistic Disorder consists of a stable and lasting tendency to react defensively when the person feels a wound to his own value. As a reaction, it is easy for the person to adopt superb, arrogant attitudes that despise others and keep them from the causes of his problems. Individuals with this disorder consider themselves to be special and unique people. They expect to receive approvals and praise for their superior qualities, being baffled when they do not get the awards they think they deserve and often presenting the tendency to mull over this lack by the other. Along with this, there is a tendency in them to react to criticism by experiencing anger on the one hand and shame on the other. (...) The main "signs" of a narcissistic personality disorder are: to believe that people do not appreciate their high qualities and their special qualities; the idea that accounts do not return in one's life; for example, they were less successful than they expected or, despite personal achievements, they still feel a sense of emptiness, apathy and boredom; consider it extremely important to receive the attention and admiration of other people; to believe that everything is due: to demand, without reason, to receive a particularly favourable treatment or that one's requests are necessarily satisfied; tend to hide their difficulties; feel a sense of distance in affective relationships, or give them little importance or consider the partner an accessory figure in their existence; flaunt arrogant and presumptuous behaviour or attitudes […]>>.

For this survey, we will focus only on personality disorders, without investigating further the possible comorbidities of which our "divine" patient probably suffered. So we will focus only on some of these categories mentioned above, that is those that best represent the behaviour of YHWH described in the Bible (old testament). Therefore, three recurring features should appear striking in the eyes of the reader, which in some way fully influence the behavioural behaviour of YHWH: the authoritarian style, the natural subjection to anger and anger; megalomania. Let us analyze them individually according to the most classic profiles.

Within the authoritarian style (I), we find the justification of the role that it covers, according to the biblical text, that is a military leader and a high religious authority, as also moral of the people of "hard cervix". Nothing strange, therefore, if his public image compels him to appear somehow to be a strong, authoritarian, autocratic, formal and managerial hand, to prevent any rebellion between the group. However, this approach seems to be desired in the first person by YHWH and not conditioned by the circumstances, because of its continuous insecurities, deriving from the obsessive fear of losing its people due to other Elohim, less rigid and more available. For this reason, he developed a strong sense of jealousy, turning the people assigned by Elyon into his personal object. This his irreproachable and extremely crystallized conduct in the hundreds of rules imposed, make him hateful and feared in the eyes of his people: this climate is far from any form of leadership: here there is not an Alpha subject that manages to convince people to do what he wants spontaneously; at most, there is a subject that with violence, threats and revenge, holds in its hands a people that never miss an opportunity to show its distrust.

The easy subjection to anger and anger (II), deriving precisely from his insecurity, make him a feared, violent, vindictive, hysterical, touchy and neurotic subject. Feelings that are recognized by the Israelites themselves and by neighbouring peoples on different occasions. Not surprisingly, YHWH punished the people who subjected themselves to other Elohim, voting them to extermination.

Megalomania (III), understood as a psychopathological tendency characterized by fantasies of wealth, fame and omnipotence, and profiles of grandeur, disproportionate to one's own strength, is the highest expression of his behavioural behaviour in YHWH. The image of Self is so distorted that it reaches to plagiarize the Israelites, assigned to him by Elyon, promising the land as a gift to other Elohim; to do this, he does not hesitate in ordering mass exterminations, justifying his own conduct and that of his people. With continuous promises of wealth and prosperity, it induces men who command to commit every possible atrocity, proving to be indifferent to human suffering, sadistic, misanthropic, racist and cruel.

YHWH always appears and however aware: he wants to reach his goal and to do it, he is willing to do anything. He even realizes that he is "inferior", compared to what he received from Elyon, to the other Elohim, but this does not stop him, and he lets himself go to the most unrestrained jealousy, even killing those who betray him or those who even manifest the intention to do it. He does not even pity women, older people and children; indeed, with reference to the latter, it also seems to be dedicated to paedophilia [16], favouring sexual violence, slavery and the lending of money with interest.

If we were to frame his behavioural behaviours in a framework of psychopathological personality, we would certainly have to refer to those personality disorders belonging to the "group/cluster B", which include the antisocial, the borderline, the histrionic and the narcissist. YHWH could undoubtedly fit more into the Narcissistic Personality Disorder, where the distinctive features, like DSM-V itself, are: 1) the grand idea of ​​itself; 2) the constant need for admiration; 3) lack of empathy. << [...] The condition desired by the narcissists, in fact, is that in which they experience grandeur, superiority, dominion over the world, personal efficacy and the goal of their life is to remain as much as possible in that state. The occurrence of triggering events (...) is experienced as indicative of their failure and ineffectiveness. Narcissists are confronted with the perception of being a bluff, of "not worth anything" and they experience a negative oscillation of self-esteem that becomes intolerable. They feel sad, feel shame, fear, anguish and can even develop precise symptoms, such as panic attacks or depressive states that arise from the fact that the feared representation of oneself (defective self, bankrupt self) has turned to their consciousness, very often a vicious circle is triggered so that the depressed mood leads the subjects to focus attention only to one's own failures, to disappointed grand expectations, with a consequent worsening of mood which can lead to despair or even resignation, and the inability to set new goals Another way in which narcissists respond to the perception of The imminence of one's failure is anger, which can be directed against themselves or against others and such vault takes the form of mistreatment, both verbal and physical, towards the other that is often devalued or guilt-volatile because perceived as disabling (because it does not recognize them as grandiose) or intended to hinder the achievement of their goals or envious of their superiority. To restore a state of grandeur and power, narcissists can resort to the use of drugs and alcohol that generate relief from personal distress. They consider themselves special, unique, "the best." This leads them to think they have to attend or feel understood only by people who are equally special or of high social status. They also tend to act driven solely by the achievement of grandiose goals. They are showing great difficulty in accessing those most intimate desires that would make them feel more alive and vital. In other words, narcissists go on to "win", but do not know what they want in life, what gives them lightness and pleasure [...]> > [17].

Therefore, this psychopathology: << [...] is characterized by a particular self-perception of the subject defined "grandiose Self". It involves an exaggerated feeling of one's importance and idealization of one's self - indeed a form of self-love which, from the clinical point of view, is false and difficulties in affective involvement. The person manifests a form of profound selfishness of which he is not usually aware, and whose consequences are such as to produce suffering, social distress or significant relational and emotional difficulties in the subject. In other words, the subject needs to continually create relationships that allow him to mirror his own self in a grandiose way, to find confirmations and to establish relationships based, often, on control and affective manipulation [...] >> [18].

The diagnosis in question requires that at least 5 of the following symptoms are present in a way that forms a pervasive pattern, i.e. a pattern that tends to remain constant in different situations and relationships [19]:

1. a grandiose sense of the self or an exaggerated sense of its own importance;

2. is occupied by fantasies of unlimited success, power, the effect on others, beauty, or ideal love;

3. believes he is "special" and unique, and can only be understood by special people, or is excessively worried about seeking closeness / being associated with people of status (in some areas) very high;

4. wishes or demands excessive admiration compared to the normal, or to its real value;

5. has a strong sense of their rights and faculties, is unrealistically convinced that other individuals/situations must satisfy their expectations immediately;

6. takes advantage of others to achieve their goals, and does not feel remorse;

7. is lacking in empathy: does not notice (does not recognize) or does not give importance to other people's feelings, does not want to identify with their desires;

8. often feels envy and is generally convinced that others feel envy for him/her;

9. effective type of predatory type (unbalanced power relationships, with little personal commitment, desires to receive more than he gives, others are emotionally involved more than he/she is an arrogant and presumptuous behaviour.

It is clear that, in our case, YHWH presents not five but 9 / 9 symptoms, for a total of 100