It's official. Timothy Jay Schwab will be publishing The God Culture Bible. What does this mean exactly? What will an official God Culture Bible look like? Thankfully Tim has left us some clues.
Who Changed the Calendar in Israel? And When? RESOLVED Doctrines of Men Exposed |
Golden Ladle: Off topic but are you able to list the apocryphal texts that aren't based in scripture? I want to make note of them so I don't waste my time reading. Thank you.
The God Culture: The word is fraud as no such category ever existed in the Temple Library. We are testing them thoroughly and releasing them 1 at a time. We will produce a list once we have vetted them all properly. However, anything not found physically in part or in use in Qumran is highly suspect and likely never Bible Canon. In the end, we will compile all of these into 1 book and then, we will release the modern Canon with corrections to the best of our ability. Scholars have proven they do not care about preserving the word or they would have put the name of YHWH back the 6,800+ times they replaced His name with generic titles instead in illiterate ignorance. Fixing their satanic mess is quite a large task but in time, Yahuah will restore all. They will face the consequences for their acts of cowardice or downright satanic, beast function. Yah Bless.
Note that Tim did not answer this man's question. In fact, it seems he misunderstood it. What the man wanted to know is which books of the Bible are not actually books of the Bible which he should avoid. For Tim this would include Esther and Maccabees at least.
This misunderstanding is a boon for us because we now know where Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture is headed. He is going to produce his own Bible. According to this statement, as well as many other statements made throughout his videos, the real Bible Canon is to be found at Qumran. Anything that was not there is "highly suspect and likely never Bible Canon."
Does he not realize that with that standard the New Testament will have to go? No New Testament text was found at Qumran. The leaves us with only the Old Testament plus many other books like Jubilees and The Community Rule and The War Scroll.
That the bulk of this Bible will be the Old Testament sounds pretty cut and dry but it is not. The Old Testament fragments found at Qumran differ from the Masoretic text.
The discovery of ancient manuscripts in the eleven caves of Khirbet Qumran in the Wilderness of Judah has provided the first full light on the ancient Hebrew text of the Bible in the era before the fixing of text and canon. There is no sign of a canon at Qumran, nor any tendency that can be perceived of the influence of the Rabbinic Recension, or of a drift toward it. Among the Dead Sea Scrolls are many manuscripts that we can label proto-rabbinic in text. But there are also manuscripts related to the Vorlage of the OG Bible, and pentateuchal manuscripts of the Palestinian textual family that gave rise to the Samaritan recension of the Pentateuch. The biblical manuscripts of Qumran exhibit variants of a type that differ toto caelo from the character of the variants found in medieval manuscripts. In the case of a number of biblical books, alternative editions or recensions (as opposed to textual families) were circulating in the several Jewish communities into the Roman period. The most stunning examples are the short text of Jeremiah (related to that used by the OG translator), and the long text of Jeremiah, ancestral to that chosen by the rabbis in their Recension. Manuscripts of proto-Samaritan type show extensive, indeed, in the case of 4QNum (4Q27), systematic editorial expansion. In the case of Daniel, the rabbis chose a short edition, and the OG translators used a longer text edition. This list of long and short editions can be extended. The plurality of text-types and editions at Qumran can be explained in part by remembering that the Zionist revival, beginning in Maccabaean times and extended by Parthian expulsions, brought a flood of Jews from Babylon, Syria, and Egypt back to Jerusalem. Indeed, the bizarre plurality of texts and editions at Qumran is a good illustration of the conditions that produced a crisis and required resolution, namely, the Rabbinic Recension of the early first century C.E.The Qumran Scrolls force us to grapple in a wholly new way with problems of the canonical text. It is obvious that there was never an “original text” at any one moment of time. Biblical books, those with authors or editors, were revised, rewritten, expanded, truncated. These changes, moreover, took place before the later books were written or edited. Grammar, lexicon, and orthography were brought up to date. So what are we to do in the two areas of textual criticism and establishing anew a plausible doctrine of canon?
The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls, vol. 1, p. 72-73
https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/bible-versions-and-translations/the-original-bible-and-the-dead-sea-scrolls/ |
Some of the Dead Sea Scrolls actually have more in common with the Greek Septuagint than the traditional Hebrew Masoretic Text. This suggests that the Greek translators must have been translating from Hebrew texts that resembled the Dead Sea Scrolls. Are the Dead Sea Scroll texts as trustworthy as these other two sources? Are they as close to the text of the original Bible?
Who Changed the Calendar in Israel? And When? RESOLVED Doctrines of Men Exposed |
𐤉𐤄𐤅𐤄: What day, month and year is it today?The God Culture: Frankly, they have done a royal cluster whammy on the modern calendar. Every day is wrong, every Sabbath, every month, and every year is wrong on the supposed Hebrew Calendar as well as the Roman one we use. We are working on reconciliation but every time we opened a portion, it leads to more and more questions. It was quite intentional and the powers behind modern Judaism or Pharisaism by definition in the Jewish Encyclopedia, as well as the Roman Catholic Church, have worked very hard to screw it up. This will be restored in our age. Yah Bless.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V54mWhuiH0w&lc=UgwvjOotDuuoqhsMJSB4AaABAg |
mbeatg : Hello, can you address Exodus 4:24. I heard you address Jasher. Based on Jubilees, would you consider this more “ Leaven”
The God Culture : It does not fit indeed. Yah Bless.
Where is the Garden of Eden? Answers In Jubilees: Part 8 |
1: When Tim refers to the Dead Sea Scrolls as the only authoritative canon of Scripture, he is solely referring to the Old Testament, since it is impossible for the community at Qumran to have had books that did not exist yet. Your argument of him not validating the New Testament writings as Scripture is invalid, since I am sure Tim would have expected anyone with even a meager amount of intelligence to understand what he was referring to.
ReplyDelete2: When Tim refers to the Dead Sea Scrolls as the only authoritative canon of Scripture, he is talking about which books can be considered Scripture or not. No one expects him to magically pull out the exact text of the Dead Sea Scrolls, since that is impossible and is expected to be accounted for. He will probably cross-reference the current text of the Bible with what he has of the Scrolls and combine them in favor of the contents within the Scrolls.
3: I have not seen all of Tim's videos or writings, so I cannot confirm what you say about him predicting the year Jesus returns. From the pathetic arguments you have already presented against him, I cannot trust your word on the matter, and I find it interesting that you did not provide a link to where he states that. If Tim predicts the year, it is not implausible that he could genuinely have it right or be close to it, since Matthew 24:36 states that we will not know the day or hour, but it says nothing of year or season. Again, I have not seen anything on it so I can't comment on the authenticity of his date or your comment.
While I do not agree with Tim on everything, you have written a terrible hit-piece on him using fraudulent arguments in an attempt of dissuading people from hearing him out. Everything you have stated has shown you to be a fool who cannot stand the possibility of there being more out there than the flawed biblical canon you adhere to.
The fact that you made it to this page shows you know a thing or two about Timothy Jay Schwab and the God Culture and have watched his videos. You can read this for the 2127 date: https://thegodculturephilippines.blogspot.com/2022/01/the-god-culture-timothy-jay-schwab-says.html
DeleteThe fact is Timothy Jay Schwab thinks the Church is the Synagogue of Satan. He says this repeatedly in his videos and books. That coupled with the fact that he says the only true canon is to be found amongst the DSS means he cannot use the NT. The Church compiled the NT and the NT was not found at Qumran. There's nothing fraudulent about that argument. Let's look at it this way:
The true Bible canon was found at Qumran.
Anything not found at Qumran is not canon.
The NT was not found at Qumran.
Therefore the NT is not canon.
That is a valid argument.
What is not valid is Tim's assertions about Qumran being the true test of the canon. The true measure is not a Jewish sect but the Church which was established by Christ and is led by the Holy Spirit. That Tim rejects the Church shows has no epistemic right judge the NT as canon because the Church decided what is and what is not canon. Do you know ho many gospels, acts, and revelations there are? Many and yet the Church rejected them.
1: Tim thinks that the Catholic Church is the Synagogue of Satan, not the Church. Catholicism is not the true Church, but a one of Satan's many distortions of Christianity. I actually agree with him on that point, and I have since even before I started watching the God Culture.
Delete2: You completely ignored what I said. Tim refers specifically to the Old Testament canon when he refers to Qumran, and basic observation agrees with that. He accepts Christ, and uses verses from the New Testament on his website even, which makes clear his stance on the subject. To claim he doesn't believe in the New Testament is obviously fraudulent.
"Tim thinks that the Catholic Church is the Synagogue of Satan, not the Church". There has only ever been ONE church in all of history that can trace its roots back to the Apostles and Christ. It is not Tim's sect or any other aberrant group. The Catholic Church and not an errant sect decided the NT. Therefore Tim has NO right to the NT. He has NO right to believe because those texts belong to the Church.
Delete" Tim refers specifically to the Old Testament canon when he refers to Qumran". This is false. His claims are very broad and have never says just the OT.
"To claim he doesn't believe in the New Testament is obviously fraudulent." This is not what I claim. What I am saying is that because he believes the Church which compiled the NT is the Synaougue of Satan and because no NT documents were found at Qumran, therefore he has no right to use the NT and to believe in the NT is contradictory to everything else he believes.
"Therefore Tim has NO right to the NT. He has NO right to believe because those texts belong to the Church." How arrogant do you have to be to say something like that? Every person has the right to come to Christ, even the lowest of sinners in this world. You saying that has destroyed any credibility you might have had, and you are not a true believer. What else was I expecting though? You are a Catholic, and that is a common mentality in your cult.
Delete"His claims are very broad and have never says just the OT." He may have not stated it in the article you linked, but he has stated it before. Besides, the fact he is a Christian and literally quotes the NT shows he is only referring to the OT.
"he believes the Church which compiled the NT is the Synaougue of Satan" Yes, he does. Maybe the canon of the NT needs to be re-examined? I have used various methods to confirm the Scriptural integrity of the current NT canon, but you never know what books your cult left out that do not fit your delusional ideologies.
"and to believe in the NT is contradictory to everything else he believes." No, it isn't. Before you make a fool of yourself, please actually read the arguments you are trying to debunk.
You are a fool who makes Christians everywhere look bad. You only reinforce that the Catholic Church is a cult and is heretical. You are the blasphemer and heretic, not Tim. I hope you find Christ someday, but until then please stop spreading your hateful message and potentially harming others.
"Therefore Tim has NO right to the NT. He has NO right to believe because those texts belong to the Church." How arrogant do you have to be to say something like that?
DeleteIt's not arrogance it is working within Tim's system. For him to accept the NT which was decided upon by the Church when he rejects the Church is illogical. I am also not a Catholic.
"he believes the Church which compiled the NT is the Synaougue of Satan" Yes, he does. Maybe the canon of the NT needs to be re-examined? I have used various methods to confirm the Scriptural integrity of the current NT canon, but you never know what books your cult left out that do not fit your delusional ideologies.
NOW you get it! For Tim to accept any NT canon he will have to re-examine the whole thing. He will have to subject those books to his own tests since he rejects the Church. Therefore he has no epistemic grounds to believe that the NT is scripture since the way we know that is through the testimony of the Church which God established and which Jesus said the gates of hell will not overcome. Contrast that with Tim saying Satan took over the church in the 1st century and you see how much he contradicts Christ and blasphemes the church.
There are other ways to test Scripture than through the Church, such as gematria, ELS codes, historical analysis, etc. I have independently verified each book of the New Testament as genuine, and I am sure Tim has also. You have yet to make a single valid point against Tim, which is frankly hilarious.
DeleteIs this the first of all the many articles I have written about Tim which you have read? I wrote one article that caused him to revise three videos! The fact is I have shown his method and his research to be pure garbage. Ahistorical and unscientific garbage. This is the article that made him take down three videos to revise them:
Deletehttps://philippinefails.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-god-culture-100-clues-philippines.html
And this is my response to the editing he did:
https://philippinefails.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-god-culture-dishonestly-edited.html
I have upwards of 50 videos dissecting his history and his doctrine. Take the time to look around if you like. The thing is I do what he tells his audience to do, Test all things including him.