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.