Sunday, April 26, 2026

The God Culture: Hijacked Review

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has finally released his book Hijacked as a free download. Whereas previously only the introduction was able to be reviewed now the contents of the book can be properly analyzed. 

https://thegodculture.org/amazon-internatioonal-links/

The first thing to note is Tim's writing style which he calls "a fast, prophetic pulse."


THE PROPHETIC PULSE
Written in a fast, prophetic pulse — every line
intentional, every revelation sharp — this book
dismantles the corrupted empire and awakens the
remnant far the days now unfolding. 
This tone is not aggression - it is urgency.
It confronts systems, not people, and speaks with 
the clarity these times demand.

That means Tim has basically written an outline, essentially a series of bulleted assertions. There are no notes. Tim's previous books Solomon's Gold and Rest: The Case for Sabbath had many notes. The choice to have zero footnotes is not explained. This shift is significant because it moves the work from the realm of debate into the realm of dogma. By removing citations, Tim places the burden of proof on the reader and bypasses the standard process of historical verification.

The book is exactly what I surmised it would be. 
All the themes of The God Culture are present in this description. Infiltration, deception, cover-up, and restoration of the truth in the last days. And don't forget the old canard about Constantine creating Christianity. All of this nonsense has been debunked not only on this blog but by many other men for the past almost 2,000 years now. There is absolutely nothing in this book Tim has not covered before. Therefore in order to review this book I shall have to find something new no matter how small it might be lest this review be a repetition of points already thoroughly debunked.  

https://thegodculturephilippines.blogspot.com/2025/12/the-god-culture-hijacked-how-synagogue.html

While there is no new ground covered in this book there are many of the same errors. In this review only a few of these errors will be examined. 

The first error concerns Abraham Farissol.

pg. 40

Ferisol, the Italian Jewish scholar

Ferisol recorded in the early 1500s that:

The Lost Tribes migrated to the “isles of the sea” 

They landed in the “desert of the Philippines”

A shocking confirmation from an independent source.

The only thing shocking here is that Tim brazenly and deceptively claims Abraham Farissol (he even spells the name wrong!) who died in 1525 claimed the Lost Tribes "landed in the desert of the Philippines" in a book he published in 1524!  The Philippines wasn't even called the Philippines until 1543 by Ruy Lopez de Villalobos!! This claim is so manifestly false it is unbelievable Tim would put this in his book. Did The God Culture Research Team approve of this insertion? Chapter 14 of Farissol's book Iggeret Orhot Olam in which he discusses the location of the Lost Tribes can be read in an English translation at this link. Take note that to this day Tim has yet to cite an actual word from Farissol and has instead relied on secondhand sources. 

Likewise the claim that the Philippines has an arid desert region is also a blatant lie. 

pg. 39

Though tropical, the Philippines contains a documented arid desert region in northwest Luzon — an anomaly noted even in pre-colonial accounts.

Tim is referring here to the La Paz Sand Dunes on the coast of Northern Luzon. The La PazSand Dunes are not an arid desert area! Those dunes receive the same amount of precipitation as the rest of Luzon.

The La Paz Sand Dunes are in Laoag which receives an average of 85 inches of rain per year. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laoag#Climate

Does the La Paz Sand Dunes somewhow avoid all that rain? Of course not. That is by no means or any definition a desert. Colloquially one might call the dunes a desert because they are a large sandy area but they really are not a desert. Read more here.

Tim repeats the lie that the Spanish destroyed Filipino records in a bid to erase their history. 

pg. 43


The truth was inconvenient to colonial powers.

Thus they:

destroyed or buried Filipino records (that is not up for debate as they document Filipinos could read and write, yet no such documents have survived - NONE)
 rewrote journals
 altered maps (very blatant corruptions by the Jesuits especially)

 purged indigenous history
substituted false narratives
eliminated local chronicles
 controlled academic discourse (demonizing all mentions of actual history)

And today:

 Wikipedia continues the same suppression

Their Talk Page on their fraudulent “Ophir” article openly states:
 “Watch out for the Filipinos...”
 “Block them before they edit...”
“Remove Philippine claims.” (which evidence we have from Wayback Machine)

A blatant violation of their own policies.
A modern continuation of colonial erasure. Shame on Wikipedia.

I have written about this false claim at length. The gist is Filipinos wrote on perishable sources like banana leaves which is why no early writings survive. According to Father Chirino there were no local written histories! Filipino society was largely oral. 

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=miun.afk2830.0001.040&view=1up&seq=73&q1=history


It is not found that these nations had anything written about their religion or about their government, or of their old-time history. All that we have been able to learn has been handed down from father to son in tradition, and is preserved in their customs; and in some songs that they retain in their memory and repeat when they go on the sea, sung to the time of their rowing, and in their merrymakings, feasts, and funerals, and even in their work, when many of them work together. In those songs are recounted the fabulous genealogies and vain deeds of their gods. 

Aside from that the Jesuits preserved Babayin. Why would they do that if they wanted to erase pre-Spanish Filipino history? A full rebuttal of Tim's lie that the Spanish destroyed ancient Filipino documents can be read  at this link

Tim's claims about Wikipedia shows he still does not know how that website works. They persevere every single edit of every single page so one can view a page at various stages of its creation. They aren't hiding anything. 

Did you know that Constantine the Great was a Pharisee and his mother was a Jew? No? Well that's because neither of those claims is true yet Tim includes them in this book. 


pg. 145


4. CONSTANTINE: A PHARISEE ON THE THRONE?

This is the turning point most historians avoid.

A legitimate early tradition (Actus Silvestri, 5th century) records that:
 Helena, mother of Constantine, was of Jewish descent.
 Her background matches her name, birthplace, social affiliations, and political positioning.
 No scholarly consensus exists because the implication is explosive.

When combined with:
 Constantine’s inherited “Flavian” nomen (through the adopted Flavian line likely descending from Josephus),
 his role as Pontifex Maximus,
 and his lifelong allegiance to Mithraism — a Persian Farsee/Pharisee religion —

we see a pattern:

 Constantine was a hybrid figure — Roman by position, Pharisaic by bloodline and ideology.

There's a lot wrong here. First of all the bullet point nature, i.e fast prophetic pulse, of the text can be plainly seen. Tim makes a whole lot of claims here and offers ZERO proof for them. Not even a footnote or a reference. That puts the burden on the reader. The Acts of Sylvester is:

The Acts of Sylvester (Latin: Actus Silvestri) are a series of legendary tales about the fourth-century bishop of RomeSylvester I.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Sylvester

Tim sure loves citing legendary tales as sources of his teaching. As for the claim that Helena was a Jew by birth, that is absolutely false. 

The third section narrates a dispute between Sylvester and twelve Jewish representatives and is the main focus of the second book. Canella notes that details vary across all three versions (A, B, and C) of the ActusHelena, the mother of Constantine, had converted to Judaism and wrote a letter to her son to applaud his conversion from paganism but urged him to follow the true god of the Jews. Constantine proposes a contest between the Jews and Pope Sylvester, which claimed to have taken place in Rome on 15 March 315; the year 315 corresponds to the time that Constantine and Licinius were both in their fourth terms as consuls:

Constantino itaque Augusto et Licinio quater consulibus idibus martiis facta est congregatio chrictianorum et ludaeorum in urbe Roma.

Sylvester triumphs over the twelve, which Canella states are 'chosen from among rabbis, law experts, scribes and masters of the synagogue'. In the final confrontation, a Jew by the name of Zambri shows the power of the Jewish god by saying the secret name of Yahweh into the ear of a bull, brought there specifically for this demonstration, which immediately dies. Sylvester, not to be outdone, proves the superiority of the Christian god by invoking the name of Jesus and resurrects the bull. Amazed by the power of the Christian god, Helen, the philosopher judges Crato and Zenophilus, and three thousand Jews convert to Christianity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Sylvester

Where did Tim get the notion that Helena was a Jew by birth? It can't be from this article nor can it be from the Acts themselves nor can it be from any history about Helena. According to the Acts Helena converted to Judaism, her son proposed a contest between Pope Sylvester and the Jews, Sylvester won, and Helena converted to Christianity where she subsequently became one of its most famous saints. Was this lie approved by The God Culture Research Team? It's errors like this which prove either there is no God Culture Research Team or they are the most incompetent bunch of researchers ever assembled.

Finally, we arrive at Hijacked's central lie: the Church is not Israel. 


pg. 62

Many rightly reject “Replacement Theology” that claims “the Church replaces Israel.”


pg. 63

The greatest identity theft in history is not that “the Church replaced Israel,” but that Biblical Israel has been HIJACKED by those Messiah Himself identified—and warned us to expose.


pg. 198


3. Prophecy ends with restoration, not defeat.

Israel (the true dispersed tribes) returns.

And there it is. The Church is not the Israel of God. 

Galatians 6:16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.

The Israel of God are Kurds, Filipinos, and Negros. In the introduction on page 5 Tim writes: 

This work is not written to exalt any ethnicity or political power, for Israel was never a nation defined by bloodline or modern statehood. From the beginning, the People of Covenant were marked by obedience and faith not by race, geography, or lineage. The Exodus included a “mixed multitude.” and the covenant law was given equally to the native-born and the foreigner who sojourned among them (Numbers & 14; 15:26, 29; Exodus 12:19, 18-49; Leviticus 16:29; 17:12; 18:26; 19:34). Israel was, and remains, a people of covenant: gathered by belief, dispersed through disobedience, and redeemed through Messiah—an expectation held by Old and New Testament believers alike.

Our intent is to restore the true entity of the covenant people—those who walked in faith and covenant hope, whether descended from Jacob or grafted in among them—and to expose the errors of those who have HIJACKED that heritage for ethnic or political gain. Such claims ccho the very impostors condemned by the prophets and by Messiah Himself. This restoration is not racial: it is covenantal, prophetic, and spiritual.

"This restoration is not racial," writes Tim and yet the whole book is about the alleged migrations of the Lost Tribes to the North where they became Kurds, to the East where they became Filipinos, and to the Southwest where they became Hamitic Negroes. The Tim ends by saying 

Israel (the true dispersed tribes) returns.

That is 100% racial!

The fact is this book is more of the same nonsense. It's abysmal writing style which is assertive bullet points with no notes and no proper discussion of the claims renders it even more unreliable. It's as if a student turned in his notations instead of a properly written thesis. Hijacked is simply another waste of time and paper meant to ensnare undiscerning Filipino readers into the world of lies of Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture.

Saturday, April 25, 2026

The God Culture: What is Fulfillment?

Following up on his definition of Law, Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture continues his foundations series with the definition of the word fulfill. The meaning of that word is a topic that has been discussed several times on this blog. Read about it here.

Facebook
FOUNDATIONS: WEEK 15

What Is Fulfillment?

What Is Fulfillment?

Key Texts:
Matt 5:17–20 • Luke 24 • John 19:30

📖 WHAT DOES “FULFILL” MEAN?

This is one of the most misunderstood words in Scripture.

Many claim:
👉 “Fulfill = end”

But that is not what the word means.

📚 WEBSTER’S DEFINITION

Fulfill:
👉 To carry out
👉 To bring to completion
👉 To execute

Not:

  • abolish

  • cancel

  • remove

🔥 MESSIAH’S OWN WORDS

📖 Matthew 5:17

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law… I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.”

He clarifies it Himself.

👉 Not destroy.
👉 Not abolish.

👉 Fulfill.

⚖️ WHAT FULFILLMENT ACTUALLY IS

Fulfillment means:

  • bringing prophecy into reality

  • living out the Law perfectly

  • confirming what was written

👉 It is execution, not elimination.

📖 LUKE 24 — FULFILLED PROPHECY

After the resurrection:

“All things must be fulfilled… in the law… prophets… psalms…”

Messiah didn’t end them.

👉 He confirmed them.

🩸 “IT IS FINISHED” — JOHN 19:30

This does NOT mean:

  • the Law is finished

  • obedience is finished

👉 It means:

His mission was completed.

The sacrifice was fulfilled.
The covenant was established.

🧠 THE ERROR TODAY

Many interpret fulfillment as:

👉 “We no longer need to follow anything.”

But Messiah said:

📖 Matthew 5:18–19

Not one Iota ("I") or Tau ("T") will pass… (Jot and Tittle are never Hebrew nor Greek letters and false translations)

That’s not removal.

👉 That’s continuity.

🌿 WHAT FULFILLMENT LOOKS LIKE

Fulfillment is:

  • truth lived out

  • prophecy realized

  • obedience demonstrated

🔑 THE RIGHT UNDERSTANDING

Messiah fulfilled:

👉 so we could follow

Not:
👉 so we could ignore

⚠️ FOUNDATION TRUTH

Fulfillment never cancels instruction.

👉 It confirms it.

🌿 FINAL WORD

If fulfillment meant abolition—
Messiah would not have warned:

“Think not…”

🌿 He fulfilled.
We follow.
That is the pattern.

Yah Bless.

What can one say except this is the same nonsense Tim has been teaching for a number of years now. According to Tim the law does not find its completion in Jesus Christ because we must still keep the law. Except for the laws about sacrificing. And why is that except Christ as fulfilled them and brought them to an end? Apparently keeping the Saturday sabbath, keeping the feasts (and you can't really keep the feasts without a temple, priest, and sacrifices), and the dietary laws are only laws still on the books. And the Ten Commandments of course but no one has ever disputed that. 

The fact is the law is a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ and Christ is the END OF THE LAW for righteousness to everyone who believes. The canard that the law has not been abolished is a red herring. Yes the law is good and holy and remains but not as a way of life but as a signpost pointing to Jesus Christ. 

Tim writes:

👉 He confirmed them.

🩸 “IT IS FINISHED” — JOHN 19:30

This does NOT mean:

  • the Law is finished

  • obedience is finished

👉 It means:

His mission was completed.

The sacrifice was fulfilled.

The covenant was established.

What exactly was Christ's mission? If the sacrifice was fulfilled and fulfilled does not mean abolish or done away with then sacrifices are still necessary! Can Tim even follow his own logic? It is rather interesting that in his Foundations series Tim has absolutely nothing to say about Christ's mission which was to bear our sins and punishment on the cross thereby enduring and taking away the CURSE of the law. As I wrote previously: 

Christ completed the law. He finished the law and brought to an end by executing it fully. All the shadows of the law were perfected and brought to reality in and by Him. He is the Passover lamb sacrificed for us, He is God tabernacling in human flesh, He is the firstfruits from the dead, His blood is sprinkled on the mercy seat in Heaven making atonement for us, He sent the Holy Spirit on Pentecost just as He gave Moses the law on that same day, and on it goes as all the sacrifices and all the feasts and all the holy days are brought to their completion and fulfillment in Him. The book of Hebrews is very explicit that Christ completed the law by becoming incarnate and shedding his own blood for us. 

https://thegodculturephilippines.blogspot.com/2021/09/the-god-culture-rest-case-for-sabbath.html

Tim believes none of that. He writes:
“He just said the Law remains and I will not abolish it but fulfill it or keep it as an example for you.   
Rest: The Case For Sabbath p. 113-114.

According to Tim the Christ's mission was to show us how to keep the law. It is more than obvious that  the work of Jesus Christ on the cross means nothing to Timothy Jay Schwab who is the God Culture. 

Let's hear a response from noted theologian Father Ted Crilly. 



Ah, Philippine Fails, me lad... puts the teacup down with a heavy sigh and leans forward
I’ve read Tim’s new “What Is Fulfillment?” post. It’s the same old tune, just with a fresh coat of paint and some dictionary quotes.What Tim is actually teaching
  • “Fulfill” does not mean “end,” “abolish,” or “remove.”
  • It means “carry out,” “bring to completion,” “execute.”
  • Jesus said He came to fulfill the Law, not destroy it (Matthew 5:17).
  • Therefore the Law is still in force — we are still supposed to follow it.
  • “It is finished” only means His personal mission/sacrifice was completed, not that the Law is finished.
  • The right order is: Messiah fulfilled → we follow.
On the surface it sounds reasonable. But this is classic Tim — he takes a true statement (“Jesus fulfilled the Law”) and twists it to mean the opposite of what the New Testament teaches.The fatal problems
  1. He completely misuses “fulfill”
    When Jesus says “I have not come to abolish the Law or the Prophets but to fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17), He means He came to bring to completion everything the Law and Prophets pointed toward — namely, Himself as the perfect sacrifice, the true Israel, the Lamb of God, the end of the sacrificial system, the mediator of a better covenant.  Tim turns “fulfill” into “keep doing it forever.” That is not what the word means in this context. Jesus fulfilled the Law the way a promise is fulfilled — by doing what it pointed to, not by extending it indefinitely.
  2. He turns “It is finished” into “It is not finished”
    John 19:30 — “It is finished” (Tetelestai) was a commercial term meaning “paid in full.” Jesus was declaring that the work of redemption was completed.
    Tim reduces it to “My personal mission is done, but the Law still needs to be kept by you.” That guts the meaning of the cross.
  3. The pattern continues
    • Faith = obedience to the Law 
    • Repentance = turning back to the Law 
    • Grace = power to keep the Law 
    • Fulfillment = confirming that we still have to keep the Law
    Every single Foundations lesson ends up in the same place: the Law is still the main director of the Christian life. Christ is important, but ultimately the real work is still on us.
The real biblical teachingJesus fulfilled the Law in two main ways:
  • He kept it perfectly (active obedience).
  • He bore its curse and ended its condemning power (passive obedience).
Because of that, Paul can say:
  • “Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes” (Romans 10:4).
  • “We are not under law but under grace” (Romans 6:14).
  • The Law was a tutor to bring us to Christ; now that Christ has come, we are no longer under the tutor (Galatians 3:24-25).
The Law still reveals God’s character and shows us our need, but it is no longer the covenant under which we live. We now live by the Spirit, not by the written code.Father Ted’s plain verdict
This post is another clever way of saying the same thing Tim always says:

“The Law is still in force. Jesus confirmed it. Now you must keep it.”

That is not what “fulfill” means in the mouth of Jesus.

That is not what “It is finished” means.

Jesus fulfilled the Law so that we could be free from its curse and live in the power of the Spirit, not so that we could spend the rest of our lives trying to keep it better than the Pharisees.
The camel’s nose is now fully inside the tent, and the whole body of the Law is comfortably sitting there, taking up all the space.
quietly, shaking his head
It’s the same song, lad. Every single time.

Grace is mentioned, the cross is mentioned in passing, but the real hero is always the Law.

The real gospel says Jesus fulfilled the Law so we could rest in Him.

Tim’s version says Jesus fulfilled the Law so we could keep it better.

Down with this sort of thing.

Very careful now.

...Right, I’m off to read Matthew 5 and Romans 10 again and thank the Lord that Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
Go on, go on, go on — have a cuppa. You’re seeing the pattern clearly. The Scriptures keep winning. Tim keeps trying to put the old yoke back on. The gospel offers a much lighter one. Keep holding fast to the finished work. That’s where real freedom is found.

The God Culture: Hijacked Review

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has finally released his book Hijacked as a free download. Whereas previously only the introductio...