The God Culture: 100 Lies About The Philippines: Lie #26: The Butuan Ivory Seal Has Hebrew Writing

Welcome back to 100 Lies The God Culture teaches about the Philippines. Today's lie concerns the Butuan Ivory Seal. This artifact was found in 1970 and dates back to 1,000 AD. Tim says the scholarly interpretation of the seal is wrong and that the writing on it is actually Hebrew. More than that he claims the seal is concrete evidence the Lost Tribes of Israel arrived in the Philippines. 

Tim concludes his interpretation of the Butuan Ivory Seal saying:

Lost Tribes Series Part 2F: Decoding the Butuan Ivory Seal - Evidence

19:24 These letters are about as clear as it gets. They are Hebrew. So, what does all of this mean? Again, read right to left: "The Rechabites who live in tents in the land of creation as the Zadok priests where the scattered tribes are yoked at the ends of the earth." Wow dude! This is awesome and concrete evidence, we believe, that the Lost Tribes arrived in the Philippines.

Despite Tim's conviction that the Butuan Ivory Seal has Hebrew writing and is concrete evidence the Lost Tribes of Israel arrived in the Philippines he does not mention this tidbit in his book The Search for King Solomon's Treasure. There is only a single picture of the seal on page 157.

The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pg. 157

It is important to note that in this video Tim admits he is not a linguist. 

5:06 We are not linguists nor do we care to be but you will find no linguist is necessary in this case because come along with us and we'll interpret this together.

For someone who uses linguistics to prove that there are Hebrew place names in the Philippines Tim is quite proud and satisfied to not actually be a linguist. In effect Tim is admitting he has no idea what he is talking about. Why would there be Hebrew carved into an ivory seal in the Philippines dating back to 1,000 AD? For Tim it's because he believes that members of the Lost Tribes of Israel made their way to the Philippines. That is the fact he starts with and then he interprets everything in light of that false paradigm.

The fact is this seal has already been examined and interpreted by actual linguists. Tim rejects their interpretations full stop. 

0:35 Are we crazy? Can we actually claim to have deciphered the writing on the Butan Ivory Seal as we do in the intro? Well, we do indeed with all confidence because all of these years we believe the professors and scholars have been using the wrong language. They don't know any better. It's okay but you and I do.

According to the National Museum of the Philippines Dutch linguist Antoon Postma the script on the seal is stylised Kawi and translates as But-ban which is the same as Butuan.   

This week we are featuring the Butuan Ivory Seal, which is dated A.D. 10th-13th c. (Age of Contact and Trade), measuring 6 cm long and 4 cm diameter.

The Butuan Ivory Seal was recovered by pothunters in a prehistoric shell midden site in Ambangan, Libertad, Butuan City in the 1970s. It was eventually donated to the National Museum.  

According to Dr. Antoon Postma, the inscription is an ancient Javanese or stylized Kawi script referring to “But-ban”. A Dutch Scholar in ancient Indonesian scripts, Johannes Gijsbertus de Casparis, decoded it as “But-wan”. These words refer to Butuan, the present name of the site where it was found.

The ivory seal as well as other archaeological materials recovered in Ambangan archaeological sites are proof that Butuan was an important trading center whose official seal marked the source of commodities it produced and exported. 

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1247343325289983&set=the-nm-continues-the-celebration-of-buwan-ng-wika-through-its-collectionthis-wee

It is a rather straightforward interpretation. But Tim rejects it by asking the following question.

20:10 Notice the letter sounds are BT. Could be Butuan, maybe. Perhaps. But why would it need to say Butuan anyway? That's a rush to judgment scholars are trying to stretch out of it unsuccessfully. None of them have proven that it says that for reason.

Well, why does the seal have to say "The Rechabites who live in tents in the land of creation as the Zadok priests where the scattered tribes are yoked at the ends of the earth?" What practical use is having that on the seal? The museum tells us the seal says Butuan because "Butuan was an important trading center whose official seal marked the source of the commodities it produced and exported." 

Aside from translating the Butuan Ivory Seal Antoon Postma also deciphered the Laguna Copperplate Inscription. 

https://www.jstor.org/stable/42633308

It is interesting that Tim rejects Postma's interpretation of the Butuan Ivory Seal but accepts his interpretation of the Laguna Copperplate.   He even includes it in his book. 

The Search for King Solomon's Gold, pg. 156

The Laguna Copperplate Inscription, one of the oldest historical records in the history of the Philippines, demonstrates early connections between the early inhabitants of Luzon and Java in Indonesia by the 10th century as well as proving a literate people executing an extensive legal agreement inscribed on a sheet of copper, an abundant native resource. Natives in loin clothes do not draft such significant legal agreements on copper. 

And in what language is the Laguna Copperplate Inscription? Kawi!

https://www.jstor.org/stable/42633308

The very same script on the Butuan Ivory Seal. 

 5:20 We've read a book a while ago and have picked it back up again recently from one of our viewers it's called Philippines, I Thee Wed which is a beautiful way to describe the relationship between the Lost Tribes and the ekklesia the bride of Messiah as scripture references many times over and we have found a former name in fact of the Philippines this is gonna blow you away that is actually Hebrew as well and we will share this soon not in this video but one of the upcoming ones and you're gonna love it because it ties to all of this as well the book makes outrageous claims that Philippines might actually be Ophir maybe even the Garden of Eden and the location of the Lost Tribes hmm can you imagine that?

This book does not give an interpretation of the writing on the seal. That stems wholly from Tim's imagination. But the idea that the seal has any Hebrew is something Tim lifted directly from this book. 

Philippines, I Thee Wed, pg. 60

It is simply not true that the Butuan Ivory Seal has Hebrew writing on it. It is in Kawi the same as the Laguna Copperplate inscription. Both have been translated by Antoon Postma who, unlike Tim, was an actual linguist. The fact that Tim is unaware that Antoon Postma deciphered both the Laguna Copperplate Inscription and the Butuan Ivory Seal using the same language is more evidence of his poor research skills.  The claim that the Butuan Ivory Seal has Hebrew writing on it is just one more lie Timothy Jay Schwab teaches about the Philippines. 

The God Culture: 100 Lies About the Philippines: Lie #25: The Spanish Destroyed Philippine Documents

Welcome back to 100 lies the God Culture teaches about the Philippines. Today's lie concerns Tim's claim that the Spanish destroyed all Filipino documents relating to their history. As we shall see this is another lie.

In his videos Tim says the following:

Bathala Origin. Hebrew? Who Was This Ancient Creator God? Solomon's Gold Series - Part 6C Bathala Origin. Hebrew? Who Was This Ancient Creator God? Solomon's Gold Series - Part 6C

3:34 We have shared other references in other parts of this series regarding the Spanish friars bragging about all but eradicating the previous history of the Philippines prior to their arrival. Here's one from the American Historical Association of all places from Washington DC saying as much. "The written record of the Philippine Islands starts with the coming of the Spaniards. Not that the country had not had a history and a culture and a literature before, exclamation point, but the Spaniards in their religious zeal destroyed the earlier records as completely as possible therefore much of what is known about pre-Spanish days and there is still much to be uncovered."

This same claim is made in Tim's book The Search for King Solomon's Treasure.

The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pgs 155 - 157

You will notice the history of the Philippines prior to the Spanish seems non-existent in native records. This sparks a debate as to whether Spanish Jesuit friars or the like destroyed the history of the Philippines. Some demand an admission from the Spanish as such which is a false paradigm in expectation. The track is simple to test. When the Spanish arrived, they record a literate people who could read and write. If one can read and write, it means they do so. In areas, Filipinos were a literate people in whole.

Even in the early Spanish occupation, Filipinos are known to be a literate people both reading and writing with their own language.

Notice the significant distinction of the Filipino people in contrast with other Oriental nations. This is affirmed in the Boxer Codex and many times in history. This was a set-apart people who was depicted as wealthier and more literate as one would expect of ancient Ophir. We do not find similar history anywhere else on earth. In applying reason, in the early Spanish days before conquest was even fully recognized, Chirino saw Filipinos writing as well as reading. They wrote something. They read something. Where is it? If insignificant, why destroy it?

That being the case, they wrote something and it is gone and under Spain’s watch, thus the Holy Roman Empire is responsible regardless. They wanted to conquer and control and they also have to accept such responsibility for things which occurred during their reign. One defies logic in assumption that Filipinos would not have written especially the name of their country or area previously for instance and the notion that every writing was pagan is one of the most ridiculous, illogical assumptions one could make. There is no need to produce an admission of guilt by the Spanish to conclude the Spanish destroyed history as they document a literate people and the writings have disappeared during their era of control.

How can anyone peruse these records that the Filipinos wrote things and then, develop a lapse in reason to absolve the Spanish for their erasing history? Filipinos did not wipe out their own history and the Spanish have been caught doing so with the Aztecs and other cultures as an established pattern of behavior. If nothing else, they are guilty of negligence. Even the American Historical Association believes this and remember, the Americans controlled the Philippines after the Spanish.

However, no consensus is required as the documents existed and they are no longer regardless of how they may have disappeared. If hidden by the Filipino people, they would have resurfaced by now. They were taken and likely eradicated.

Everything Tim writes in his book is presumptive bunk. His thesis is that because Filipinos had a script called Baybayin they wrote and preserved their own history. Then the Spanish came along and destroyed all those documents. But this presupposes several things such as Filipinos writing on lasting material like papyrus, paper, or vellum, that these writings were preserved somewhere, and that Filipinos had a sense of history enabling them to write such things down. Tim is very adamant that Filipinos had no architecture. So, if they had no temples or buildings where and how exactly would these writings be preserved from the elements?

Tim has already muddied the waters by saying the Spanish would never admit they destroyed these writings which means Father Pedro Chirino, a man Tim cites, lies when he says the following:

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. 

Father Chirino says Filipinos did not have any writings about their religion, government, or history. Does that mean Filipinos did not write? Of course not. Father Chirino continues his testimony by noting they wrote on very perishable surfaces like leaves. 

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=miun.afk2830.0001.012&view=1up&seq=247&q1=writing

They used to write on reeds and palm-leaves, using as a pen an iron point; now they write their own letters, as well as ours, with a sharpened quill, and, as we do, on paper.

According to Tim we have to reject this testimony that before the Spanish arrived Filipinos wrote only on reeds and palm-leaves and that none of that writing contained a word about their history. But if we have to reject that because the Spanish are lying then there is nothing they wrote that we should believe. 

Of course Tim offers no proof that Filipinos wrote history or on paper or vellum and preserved it. Tim offers no eyewitness testimony to the destruction of ancient Filipino documents. In fact, no one can offer such testimony. Not even the American Historical Association. If the Jesuits  did destroy Filipino documents what sense would it make for Father Chirino to preserve and explain the Baybayin writing system? 

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=miun.afk2830.0001.012&view=1up&seq=246&q1=writing

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=miun.afk2830.0001.012&view=1up&seq=246&q1=writing

Of course it does not make any sense and Tim does not discuss the fact that the Jesuits preserved Baybayin.

This idea that the Spanish destroyed ancient Filipino documents was described by H. Otley Beyer who wrote the following:

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.d0001528223&view=1up&seq=311&q1=mexicans

The fanatic zeal of the Spaniards for the Christian faith and corresponding hatred for all other forms of belief led them to regard the native writings and art as works of the Devil—to be destroyed wherever found. In Mexico and Peru many old records were preserved in more or less modified form in the writings of early native Christians and Spanish half-castes, but in the Philippines the destruction was more ruthlessly thorough and only a few fragments have survived. It cannot be said that such writings did not exist, since the early Filipinos were even more literate than the Mexicans; they used syllabaries of Indian origin. One Spanish priest in southern Luzon boasted of having destroyed more than three hundred scrolls written in the native character.

This alleged fact has no source or basis in reality. Beyer offers no reference for the outlandish claim that one Spanish present in Southern Luzon destroyed more than 300 scrolls. How did they have scrolls if, as Father Chirino testified, they wrote on palm leaves and reeds?  According to one scholar Beyer's claims have never been verified.

Many people today, both ordinary Filipinos and some historians not acquainted with the Philippines, are surprised when they learn that the ancient Filipinos actually had a writing system of their own. The complete absence of truly pre-Hispanic specimens of the baybayin script is puzzling and it has lead to a common misconception that fanatical Spanish priests must have burned or otherwise destroyed massive amounts of native documents as they did so ruthlessly in Central America. Even the prominent Dr. H. Otley Beyer wrote in The Philippines before Magellan (1921) that, “one Spanish priest in Southern Luzon boasted of having destroyed more than three hundred scrolls written in the native character.” Historians have searched for the source of Beyer's claim, but until now none have even learned the name of that zealous priest. Furthermore, there has never been a recorded instance of ancient Filipinos writing on scrolls. The fact that they wrote on such perishable materials as leaves and bamboo is probably the reason why no pre-Hispanic documents have survived. 

Although many Spaniards didn't hide their disdain for Filipino culture, the only documents they burned were probably the occasional curse or incantation that offended their beliefs. There simply were no “dangerous” documents to burn because the pre-Hispanic Filipinos did not write at length about such things as their own beliefs, mythology, or history. These were the subjects of their oral record, which, indeed, the Spanish priests tried to eradicate through relentless indoctrination. But, in regard to writing, it can be argued that the Spanish friars actually helped to preserve the baybayin by continuing to use it and write about it even after it fell out of use among most Filipinos. 

http://paulmorrow.ca/bayeng1.htm

The facts are plain. Filipinos did not write history but transmitted their history orally. The Jesuits did not burn books en masse because there were no books to burn. In fact, the Jesuits preserved the Filipino script Baybayin which wouldn't make any sense if they were out to eradicate Filipino literature. Thus the claim that the Spanish burned Filipino documents is simply one more lie about the Philippines taught by Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture.

The God Culture: 100 Lies About the Philippines: Lie #24: The Pagan Philippine God Bathala is YHWH

Welcome back to 100 Lies The God Culture teaches about the Philippines. Today's lie concerns Timothy Jay Schwab's statements about the Philippine god Bathala. Tim teaches that the pagan Philippine god Bathala is actually the Hebrew God Yahweh. 

In his videos Tim says the following:

Bathala Origin. Hebrew? Who Was This Ancient Creator God? Solomon's Gold Series - Part 6C

53:20 Ladies and Gentlemen Bathala is more likely Yahuah. In EVERY SENSE the creator God of Genesis. 

This same claim is also in Tim's book The Search for King Solomon's Treasure.

The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pg. 205

With reservation, we even tackled what is referred to as the “Creator God of the Tagalogs” whom the Jesuits represent as a pagan god yet we question this because this emerges Hebrew. We explore this fully in an entire video thus this will be a brief.

These two words in Hebrew both point to the Creator God from scripture. Ask yourself how this is possible. We are aware of the narrative of Bathala being a pagan god which includes worship of Anitos or demons of sort. However, we cover this in our Bathala video, when the Jesuits ask the Filipinos about Bathala, they tell them they only worship Bathala and not the Anitos and not the bird. Of course, immediately after receiving their answer which one time even includes a warning by the Filipino not to worship anyone else, the Jesuits still continue to write about Anito idols, etc. We believe the ancient Filipino word on this as they are the ones who lived there and we observe this often in the historic record.

Tim's core argument for the Philippine god Bathala being the Hebrew God Yawheh lies in the supposed Hebrew etymology of the word Bathala. But how does he know that the word is Hebrew? He does not. He assumes it throughout the video. His phony Hebrew etymology concludes with the following statement:

https://youtu.be/7pmGkSWsIbo

38:08 Of course some will say, "Nuh-uh" just as they did with Maharlika yet no one has actually proven that that is not Hebrew. Nor will they be able to prove that this is not Hebrew especially not with stretched etymologies that don't even fit no matter how much they stretch and they aren't even the same letters.  This is exact. Wow!

What a profoundly ignorant argument. Tim says that because no one has proven him wrong that means he is right. He has shifted the burden of proof from himself to his audience and expects his detractors to prove a negative! Tim does not have to prove he is right, you have to prove he is wrong. That is the logical fallacy known as the argument from ignorance. 

At no time does Tim ever prove or even attempt to prove that Bathala is a Hebrew compound word and indeed as a compound word it makes no sense. In English Bathala would translate to "Measure Rib." Instead of offering solid etymological proof that Bathala is Hebrew Tim says the word "looks" Hebrew.

2:18 And the word Bathala certainly sounds, well, Hebrew to us. I mean just looking at the word you can almost see right away, yeah that's a fit. Perhaps this is because we find a direct exact Hebrew etymology that makes far more sense than the narrative of academia which makes no connections whatsoever and is frankly a very bad guess from what we find as we do with many etymologies in Philippine history especially those written by Jesuits.

How ludicrous. If Filipinos are Hebrews then why is their God not named YHWH? How did they lose that name and come to invent the name Bathala? Tim does not say. And let's not forget there are other creator Gods among the Filipinos. How about Melu? According to James Frazer:

Folklore in the Old Testament, vol. 1, pg 16

The Bila-an, a wild tribe of Mindanao, one of the Philippine Islands relate the creation of man as follows. They say that in the beginning there was a certain being named Melu of a size so huge that no known thing can give any idea of it ; he was white in colour, and had golden teeth, and he sat upon the clouds, occupying all the space above.

Being of a very cleanly habit, he was constantly rubbing himself in order to preserve the whiteness of his skin unsullied. The scurf which he thus removed from his person he laid on one side, till it gathered in such a heap as to fidget him. To be rid of it he constructed the earth out of it, and being pleased with his work he resolved to make two beings like himself, only much smaller in size. He fashioned them accordingly in his own likeness out of the leavings of the scurf whereof he had moulded the earth, and these two were the first human beings.

Quite clearly there were a variety of gods worshipped in the Philippines and Bathala was simply one among many. 

The proper way to demolish Tim's ridiculous claim is to take a look at the identity of the Creator God of Genesis and compare Him to Bathala. In that way we can discern if Bathala truly is in EVERY SENSE the Creator God of Genesis.  

First of all the name of God in Genesis 1 is Elohim which is plural. The God of Genesis is not a monad but Bathala is. Bathala has no Son or Spirit. However he does have a messenger bird.

15:37 In early Philippine history Bathala was strongly associated with Tigmamanukan - omen bird. Mmm are you sure? Not according to that actual Filipinos but they'll ignore that too. So much so that early chronicler Antonio de Morga thought the Tagalog saw the bird as their ultimate deity. Really? The anonymous author of the boxer codex in 1590 also nearly made this mistake but was advised...by whom? By the Tagalogs by the natives, by the locals not to equate the two because Tigmamanukan, however you say that, was not the Creator God but only his messenger.   ends at 16:40

What is there about Elohim that can compare with a messenger bird? Nothing!

While Tim denies the triune nature of God and the divinity of the Holy Spirit even he admits that Elohim is plural.

Restoring Creation: Part 2: Continued... Did Moses Write the First Chapters of Genesis?

35:40 Elohim, uh, is the Father and the Son. It's plural and it's used because the Father and the Son created.

Who is the Son of Bathala and where is he? Where is the strict one-to-one identification between Elohim and Bathala? It's not there. It only exists in Tim's mind. 

Second of all The New Testament is very clear that all things were created by Jesus Christ. 

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/col/1/1/s_1108001

Colossians 1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

To claim that Bathala is in EVERY SENSE the creator God of Genesis is to identify him with Jesus Christ. Is Bathala Jesus Christ? Of course not! Why would anyone even contemplate such blasphemy as to equate a Philippine deity with Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ? It is an outrageous and blasphemous claim. 

This stupid and ridiculous claim can be traced to the fact that Tim denies the divinity of the Holy Spirit and the triunity of God. 

Only one who denies the Trinity could dare strictly identify the Philippines' pagan deity who has a messenger bird (Odin is also a God with a messenger bird!) as Yahuah and declare that he is in EVERY SENSE the creator God of Genesis. Tim is not so ignorant as to be unaware that Jesus Christ created all things and is thus the Creator God of Genesis. Why would he identify Jesus Christ as Bathala? How much more blasphemous could Tim be? Does he pray to Bathala?

This should be enough to drive the point home that Bathala is not YHWH. He is not the creator God of Genesis in EVERY SENSE as Tim claims. If that were the case he would not be a monad but a triad. He would have a Son and a Spirit. Instead he has a messenger bird. The identification of Bathala with YHWH is simply one more lie Timothy Jay Schwab  teaches about the Philippines. 

The God Culture: 100 Lies About the Philippines: Lie #23: The La Paz Sand Dunes is the Desert of Chabor

Welcome back to 100 Lies the God Culture Teaches About the Philippines. Today's lie once more concerns Tim's claims about Abraham Farissol. In his book Iggeret Orhot Olam Farissol says that the Lost Tribes of Israel live in the Desert of Chabor. Tim claims that is the La Paz Sand Dunes in Northern Luzon. As we shall see this is just one more lie from Timothy Jay Schwab.

In his videos Tim says the following:

Lost Tribes Series Part 2G: The Landing of the 2nd Exodus In Ophir, Philippines

18:07 Remember our historic reference from the Italian Jewish scholar Peritsol or Farissol. Notice he's a Pharisee, a Persian, and the P is an F sound as well. That's Persian, but we'll get there. We had set aside this reference though for this video and now it's time. "Others he places in the desert of Chabor  which according to him lies upon the Indian sea where they live in the manner of the ancient Rechabites," we covered that, "without houses" bayanihan, right? "Sowing or the use of wine. Nay, he enters the Indies the aisles of Bengala the Philippines and several other places." The Hebrew word Chabor means to unite, be joined, to tie a magic knot or spell. This isn't about magic, obviously, this is the Lost Tribes. To charm. No, this isn't about magic. So, unite or be joined. Compact, couple together, have fellowship with, heap up, join self together, league. A rather generic reference and no we do not find a desert called Chabor anywhere in Asia. 

Wait a minute I live in the Philippines and I have never seen any desert here, right? Some may be thinking that. Well, actually this is what makes this one so simple because there is only but one desert in the entire Philippines. Do you know where it is? 

Near the northernmost tip of Luzon Island the largest island is the only desert in the Philippines by definition. The La Paz Sand Dunes is an 85 square kilometer, 33 square mile, protected sandy coastal desert and beach located in Laoag, Ilocos Norte in the Philippines. Now this is Wikipedia's definition as a desert, not ours. It doesn't just look like a desert though it is by definition and it is the only one we can find in the whole of the Philippines. Oh, and would you look? La Paz is two Hebrew words. If you are headed to ancient Ophir what is the first thing you expect to see when you come from Israel originally? That's right Gold but there was no gold in the desert was there? And thus in Hebrew La Paz means "no gold." 

These same claims also appear in Tim's book The Search for King Solomon's Treasure.

The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pg 128

In fact, there is only one desert in the Philippines which is the Paoay- LaPaz Sand Dunes in Laoag on Luzon and that is “a further country, where never mankind dwelt.” 

Everything Tim has to say about the matter is completely wrong. 

First of all there are no deserts in the Philippines. The La Paz Sand Dunes are by no means a desert. They are simply dunes. A desert is defined as follows:

A desert is a region of land that is very dry because it receives low amounts of precipitation (usually in the form of rain, but it may be snow, mist or fog), often has little coverage by plants, and in which streams dry up unless they are supplied by water from outside the area. Deserts generally receive less than 250 mm (10 in) of precipitation each year.

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

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. A dune is defined as follows.

A dune is a landform composed of wind- or water-driven sand. It typically takes the form of a mound, ridge, or hill. An area with dunes is called a dune system or a dune complex. A large dune complex is called a dune field. while broad, flat regions covered with wind-swept sand or dunes with little or no vegetation are called ergs or sand seas.

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

There is a huge difference between dunes and a desert. 

Second of all Tim is not reading the words of Farissol but those of Thomas Stackhouse. If he had bothered to read Farissol's words Tim would know that he places the Desert of Chabor in Arabia. In chapter 14 of Farissol's book we read the following. 

One of the chief advantages of this treatise, which I, Abraham Peritsol, have compiled for the instruction of such as are unacquainted with the science of cosmography, will be found, in that I have determined to devote this chapter to a relation of the journeyings of a Jew of the tribes, or of Judah, called David ben Shelomoh, “Captain of the host of Israel,” who came to this our country of Italy, where we ourselves have seen him. He came, according to his own assertions, from the Desert of Chabor. Those who read concerning him, will find that which will delight their souls, and those who have a desire (to learn something relative to the ten tribes of Israel), will receive this account with much satisfaction; for I will not err in narrating what I have received from honourable men, and seen in the writings of creditable persons. He who alone is true, knows my veracity, and that I am a person who gives but little credence to vanities.

The Occident and Jewish American Advocate, April 1849, pgs. 37-40 

As understood from his own assertions, this Jew was from the company of the two tribes, and he farther said that he was an inhabitant of those deserts, and, like the Rechabites, dwell in tents, and that his station was in the Desert of Chabor, which is in Asia Major. Beneath them were the rest of the ten tribes, near to the deserts adjoining Mecca and Gjudda, which are adjacent to the Red Sea. They have each and all of them their chiefs and princes, and the people are as the sand of the seashore for numbers. They raise spices, pepper in particular, as also medical drugs ; and, indeed, they possess many excellent things, as we shall show hereafter. Living between these two sections of the Jewish people, however, there is a strong and mighty people who are followers of Mahomet. These, with their numerous kings, render a communication among the Jews exceedingly dangerous, and they will not permit one party to approach the other. 

Many years had they been thus widely separated, endeavouring to approach each other, but finding it impossible to do so, when they were apprised of the arrival of some Christian ships of very large and mighty proportions. They also heard, and, indeed, saw, that the Christians had in their hands certain hollow metal instruments of war designed to throw stones by means of fire, and which could destroy any fortress or village. Whereupon, the Jews of Mount Chabor, according to his statement, determined upon sending him to the great king of all the Christians, with the credentials then in  his possession, as before stated, in order to authenticate his assertions. These credentials were confirmed by the king of Portugal who then navigated the regions of the Hodiyim (or Indies), and who knew of the existence of a Jewish community there. He also wrote to the Pope, (whose glory be exalted,) that the above mentioned Jew was worthy of credit, as were also his declarations. But be this Jew what he may, and be his words true or false, it is sufficient for us, in our captivity and in our dispersions (to know), that the existence of the ten tribes was acknowledged by kings, by princes, and by many influential persons in Rome—that Ephraim existed, even then—a numerous people with their rulers; be this Jew, who came to us, who and what he may.

Since the existence of these Israelites and their kings has been thus acknowledged; we may be permitted to state, that this Jew came by the way and in the manner following : From the desert of Chabor he journeyed with a caravan, which is the usual mode of travelling in these places. This was heard from his own lips and so recorded. Passing through Arabia Felix, he arrived at the Red Sea descended into Egypt, thence journeyed to the Holy Land, where he awaited the arrival of a ship from Venice, by which he might proceed to Italy. He reached Rome, and resided there about eight months, until the reply of the king of Portugal had been received,which authenticated his mission.

The Occident and Jewish American Advocate, June 1849, pgs. 129-134

Farissol says this Jew, David ben Shelomoh, came to visit Italy from the Desert of Chabor. Beneath that desert is Mecca and Jeddah. Therefore this desert is in the Arabian Peninsula. Further witness for this can be gleaned from The Travels of Benjamin of Tudela. While traveling across Arabia visiting the Jews he writes:

From Tilinas to Kheibar it is three days' journey. People say that the men of Kheibar belong to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Manasseh, whom Shalmaneser, king of Assyria. led hither into captivity. They have built strongly fortified cities, and make war upon all other kingdoms. No man can readily reach their territory, because it is a march of eighteen days' journey through the desert, which is altogether uninhabited, so that no one can enter the land. 

Kheibar is a very large city with 50,000 Jews.

The Itinerary of Benjamin of Tudela, pg. 48

The note on Kheibar reads as follows:

R. Abraham Farissol, who flourished at the beginning of the sixteenth century, writes that there was a large number of Jews in the district, who lived in tents and in wooden houses or huts. His contemporary, David Reubeni, who crossed from Arabia to Abyssinia and came to Europe in 1524, pretended to be brother of Joseph, king of the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half-Manasseh in the desert of Chabor (Kheibar). Benjamin takes care to qualify his statement as to the origin of the Jews of Kheibar by adding "people say they belong to the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, whom Salmanesser, King of Assyria, led hither into captivity." 

The Itinerary of Benjamin of Tudela, pg. 49

This David Reubeni is the same as David ben Shelomoh. Farissol later refers to him as R. David in chapter 14 of his book. The Desert of Chabor is that of Kheibar or Khaybar. Historically there has been a large Jewish population in Khaybar. 

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

Third of all Tim's Hebrew etymology of Chabor is so ridiculous as to not warrant comment especially now it has been established that the Desert of Chabor is in Arabia. Since Farissol's book is available in the original Hebrew it must be asked if Tim bothered to check what Hebrew word he actually used. Of course he did not do this because he is on record saying this book is lost to history.  

https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_oBqOAecJ4vcC/page/n107/mode/2up

Compare that with Strongs H2266.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h2266/kjv/wlc/0-1/

Fourth of all the Hebrew word Paz means refined gold as Tim even acknowledges on screen in his video. 

Why would anyone expect to find refined gold lying about? If Tim's story was true the lost tribes would have used the word "zahab" because zahab means regular, plain unrefined gold like one would find in a raw state. 

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/2091.htm

This story is shown to be preposterous by the fact that several places in the Philippines are named La Paz. The capitol of Bolivia is also named La Paz. La paz is Spanish for "peace."

As I noted in the previous article about Tim's claims concerning Abraham Farissol all these errors could be avoided if Tim had only read Farissol's actual words. The fact that he did not do so coupled with the fact that he falsely claims Farissol's book is lost to history simply exposes his ignorance and proves beyond a doubt Timothy Jay Schwab is a very poor researcher and The God Culture is no team.