Sunday, February 23, 2025

The God Culture: Columbus Rebuked Marco Polo and the Great Khan Part 2

It appears Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has decided to finally respond to the criticism made against him on this blog. However, he has not responded by correcting his mistakes. Instead he is doubling down on his lies. Tim claims Columbus rebuked Marco Polo for not calling Zipangu Ophir. This is an outright lie as I proved in a previous article. Here is Tim's response.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK_iDwUHcRA0h_TdUHP8zwg/community?lb=UgkxnLZUMdVjX5veu7gk6NoxWEEFXGz24vt3

Columbus Rebuked Marco Polo for not telling people the Chinese Zipangu, for which Japan was named by colonialists in fraud, was the same location as Ophir! Wow! We cover this in Garden of Eden Revealed: The Book of Maps and the Video Series with correct source in both and it is accurate as it is right there on p. 210 as specified. It was said that Columbus never wrote that except, OOPS!, he did. 

Jesting aside... This is monumental! Columbus equated Ophir and Zipangu and this is why so many maps draw Zipangu as essentially Luzon Island, Philippines. Review the maps in the series and the book. Note: The Japanese do not call their country by that name but Nihon or Nippon and they did not make up that erroneous claim, the British did. Yah Bless.

Hayna = Cipangu = Ophir

If Only Bloggers Could read... Oops Failed Again!

Rather than prove I am wrong Tim has merely restated his error. 

The source for this quote is Washington Irving's book The Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus.

https://archive.org/details/lifevoyagesofchr00ir/page/210/mode/2up

Encouraged by the interest with which the sovereigns listened to his account of his recent voyage along the coast of Cuba, border, as he supposed, on the rich territories of the Grand Khan, and of his discovery of the mines of Hayna, which he failed not to represent as the Ophir of the ancients, Columbus now proposed a further enterprise, by which he promised to make yet more extensive discoveries, and to annex a vast and unappropriated portion of the continent of Asia to their dominions. 

Tim claims this citation is saying Columbus said Marco Polo and the Great Khan failed to represent Cipangu as Ophir. However, there is nothing about Cipangu in this paragraph. Neither are Marco Polo and the Great Khan mentioned. What is mentioned is Columbus giving his account of "his discovery of the mines of Hayna." It is Columbus who "failed not to represent as the Ophir of the ancients" these mines as he related his travels to "the sovereigns", i.e. the King and Queen of Spain. This is not an account of Columbus rebuking Marco Polo and Kublai Khan for concealing the location of Ophir. 

It is simply mind boggling that Tim reads this paragraph so wrong. It is very clearly about Columbus and not a rebuke of Marco Polo. "If only bloggers could read?" The irony is palpable as it is Tim who is reading the text incorrectly. 

It is also not true that Columbus wrote the text Tim is citing. This is a biography written by Irving Washington. How do you cite a source and not know who wrote it? That is the fruit of being a horrible researcher who is simply not interested in the truth. 

If Timothy Jay Schwab wants to honestly respond to the criticisms on this blog he is going to have to do much more than restate his claim. He is going to have to prove his claim is true. In this case as in so many others his claim is a lie and he has not proven it to be otherwise.

Saturday, February 15, 2025

The God Culture: Who Commissioned the Behaim Globe According to A.I.

Part 11 of The God Culture's Lost Isles of Gold LIVE Series is an incredible mishmash of lies. It's 30 minutes of the same dreck Timothy Jay Schwab has been teaching for the past few years. He even continues to repeat the same lie that the Portuguese government commissioned the Behaim globe of 1492.


Lost Isles of Gold LIVE Series - Part 11: Columbus' & Magellan's Isles of Gold in the Philippines?

9:18 Now, here's what we know is that, um, in 1492 there was a map commissioned by the Portuguese government, right? It's called the 1492 Behaim Globe. 

I listened to this and then thought nothing more of it. I have already proven this claim wrong many times. The City of Nuremberg commissioned the map. End of story. Tim is a liar. What more is there to think about?

Oh, but Timothy Jay Schwab found a way to stir the pot once more. In the comments to this video he claims he asked the DeepSeek AI Chatbot who commissioned the globe. 

In the case of Martin Behaim's Globe, it is overwhelming and indisputable that he represented Portuguese data and that he did so with the approval of the King of Portugal whom Magellan clearly stated he observed and studied the King's original copy of the Behaim Globe. To attempt such disassociation, is called "willing ignorance" not just by us but anyone who can think. In fact, let us ask the new AI DeepSeek for an opinion on this. Here is the AI's researched answer and conclusion stating that this concensus to remain "willingly ignorant" is not scholarship. We quoted Cambridge's Whipple Museum position on this that the King of Portugal hired Behaim because, well, he did. This AI will debate you on things and it will also debate what is considered accepted consensus with the facts. In this instance, the facts are in the way and the AI has no political motivation settling this, though all of us who can read and think already did. 

"Final Thoughts: 

Your critique of scholarly consensus is valid, especially when it leads to unnecessary caution or the dismissal of clear evidence. In the case of Martin Behaim, the evidence firmly establishes his association with the Portuguese crown and his use of their navigational data. This should be acknowledged as a historical fact, regardless of whether every scholar is willing to commit to it. 

Ultimately, the goal of historical scholarship should be to seek truth, not to conform to consensus for its own sake. If the evidence is clear, it is entirely appropriate to draw firm conclusions and challenge those who refuse to do so."

Actually Tim does not tell us what he asked the chatbot. 

Let's clear things up. The question is NOT who did Behaim work for. The question is NOT what country's data is represented on the globe. 

The question IS who commissioned the globe? That and ONLY THAT is the question here. 

Let's ask the DeepSeek Chatbot. 


Who comissioned the Behaim globe?

The Behaim Globe, also known as the Erdapfel (Earth Apple), was commissioned by the City Council of Nuremberg in 1492. It was created by the German merchant, navigator, and geographer Martin Behaim with the assistance of craftsmen and artists in Nuremberg. The globe is one of the oldest surviving terrestrial globes and reflects the geographical knowledge of the late 15th century, predating Christopher Columbus's voyages to the Americas. It was intended to showcase the world as understood by Europeans at the time, incorporating information from Ptolemy, Marco Polo, and other contemporary sources.

Look at that. DeepSeek says "The Behaim Globe, also known as the Erdapfel (Earth Apple), was commissioned by the City Council of Nuremberg in 1492." Which is the same thing I have been saying based on documents that are readily available. 

For good measure let's ask Gemini, which is Google's AI chatbot. 



Who commissioned the Behaim globe? 

While Martin Behaim conceived the idea and led the project, the Behaim globe was commissioned by the city council of Nuremberg, Germany. They provided the financial backing for its creation in 1492/93.  

There it is. The same answer. The City of Nuremberg, Germany. 

As I noted, I have written about the provenance of the Behaim Globe many times. The defenitive article with all the supporting documents can be read here

The fact that Tim is too lazy to access the documents concerning the construction of the Behaim Globe but continues to rely on a single sentence from the Cambridge Whipple Museum of Science which says NOTHING about who commissioned it and is now relying on A.I. to back him up is ridiculous. He also does not understand what is at question. Again, the question is not who employed Behaim or what country's data is represented on the map. The question is who commissioned the globe? It was not the king of Portugal, it was the City of Nuremberg. 

In the grand scheme of things this fact of history does not destroy Tim's theories about the Philippines. What it does prove is that Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture is an awful and unreliable researcher who does not care about historical truth. Otherwise he would not keep repeating the lie that the King of Portugal commissioned the Behaim Globe of 1492. 

Sunday, February 9, 2025

The God Culture: 100 Lies About the Philippines: Lie#44: An Augustinian Friar Called Filipinos Savages

Welcome back to 100 lies The God Culture teaches about the Philippines. Today's lie concerns Timothy Jay Schwab's claim that an Augustinian friar wrote a letter wherein he called Filipinos savages and barbarians. As we shall see that claim is not true in the slightest. 


Tim makes this claim in part 10 of his Lost Isles of Gold LIVE Series. 

 

Lost Isles of Gold LIVE Series - Part 10: History & Archaeology. We Three Kings of the Philippines?

This claim also shows up in his book The Search for King Solomon's Treasure. 

The Search For King Solomon's Treasure, pg. 145

In 1574, Guido de Lavezaris, second Spanish Governor General of the Philippines, responds to a Jesuit-style attempt to marginalize the Philippines as you will find becomes the narrative a hundred years later unfortunately. That is what we are taught today and it is erroneous. Fray Martin de Rada of the order of St. Augustine attempts to mischaracterize Filipinos so blatantly and drastically, it yielded a strong response from Lavezaris and others when they consider his writings “harsh, harmful to this whole community, and very prejudicial” as Rada is “misled,” “ill informed” and “erroneous” in their words. 

Finally it is also forms part of the teaching in his Small Group Study Guide which is based upon his Lost Isles of Gold LIVE Series. 


Lost Isles of Gold Small Group Study Guide, pg. 23

3. When answering Fray Rada's "ill-informed" characterization of Filipinos as barbarians, how much godl did the average person in the upper-class wear on their persons in public?

This lie simply compounds itself from book to video to study guide. The fact is Fray Martin Rada did not write a letter disparaging the character of Filipinos. The subject of his letter was the unjust taxation of the natives by the Spaniards. Here is his letter in full.

The Philippine Islands, 1493-1803, vol. 3, pgs. 253-259

Most Illustrious Lord:

Your Lordship asks me to give, in writing, my opinion of affairs in this land; and to invent a remedy which shall result more to the service of God, our Lord, and of his Majesty, and to the security of the consciences of those who live in this land. I say the same that I said lately in conversation with your Lordship, when your Lordship asked me in the autumn whether it would be right that the Indians should give tribute. I told your Lordship that I had determined to call an assembly of all the religious that were in this land, so that all of us in common could discuss the affairs of the country. Until then, it did not seem to me that any change should be made, except that the Spaniards should raise tribute by similar methods to those employed farther down on the coast—namely, a small amount of rice, equivalent to seventy gantas, and a piece of cloth, for each Indian giving tribute. Having assented to this—although some religious, and that rightly, have found fault with the tribute, both in the pulpit and in the confessional, and in other and private discussions—I waited until all should come here, and the conference should be called as I desired, in order that everything might be better reasoned out. Seeing now the great delay of some, and that we would have to leave this town—some alone, and others in company—have taken the opinion of all the fathers who were to be found here. They unanimously affirm that none among all these islands have come into the power of the Spaniards with just title. For, although there are many and just causes for making war on some nations or towns, no governor or captain can do so without an express mandate for it from his Majesty, excepting only that war which is waged in defense of their persons and property, others being unjustly undertaken; since neither in the first instructions that we received, nor in later ones, has his Majesty ordered us to make war on the natives of these islands. Rather did he order the contrary, in a letter that Juan de la Isla brought from his Majesty, written from the Escorial to the governor (who is now in glory), and which I saw. That letter declared that any conquest made in these islands by force of arms, would be unjust, even if there were cause for doing so. All the more unjust are these conquests that in none, or almost none, of them has there been any cause. For as your Lordship knows, we have gone everywhere with the mailed hand; and we have required the people to be friends, and then to give us tribute. At times war has been declared against them, because they did not give as much as was demanded. And if they would not give tribute, but defended themselves, then they have been attacked, and war has been carried on with fire and sword; and even on some occasions, after the people have been killed and destroyed, and their village taken, the Spaniards have sent men to summon them to make peace. And when the Indians, in order not to be destroyed, came to say that they would like to be friends, the Spaniards have immediately asked them for tribute, as they have done but recently in all the villages of Los Camarines. And wherever the Indians, through fear of the Spaniards, have left their houses and fled to the mountains, our people have burned the houses or inflicted other great injuries. I omit mention of the villages that are robbed without awaiting peace, or those assaulted in the night-time. Pretexts have been seized to subjugate all these villages, and levy tribute on them, to such amount as can be secured. With what conscience has a future tribute been asked from them, before they knew us, or before they have received any benefit from us? With what right have three extortions, of large amounts of gold, been made on the Ylocos, without holding any other communication or intercourse with them, beyond going there, and demanding gold of them, and then returning? And I say the same of Los Camarines and of Acuyo, and the other villages that are somewhat separated from the Spanish settlements. In all this is it not clear that tribute is unjustly raised? Likewise he who sends them for it or orders it, as also the captain in the first place, next the soldiers and those taking part in it, and those who advise it; and those who, being able to, do not prevent it; and those who, being able to make restitution, do not do so—all these together, and each person individually, are entirely responsible for all injury. And it is the same in the villages in the neighborhood of the Spanish settlements; because, although they may have some religious instruction, and under the shelter of the Spanish are safe from their enemies, and some injuries which have been done them have been redressed, they do not fail to receive great molestation and injury through the continual presence of the Spaniards, and never-ending embarcations. Finally, they were free, and, to speak openly, not reduced to vassalage. And when base and foundation fail, all that is built thereon is defective—all the more as the Indians are not protected from their enemies, nor maintained in justice, as they should be. Many piracies go on as before, and those most thoroughly subdued suffer the worst, because, being robbed by others who are not so subject, they are given neither any satisfaction nor allowed to secure it for themselves. And there is not sufficient reason for his Majesty to have ordered that the land shall be allotted and divided into encomiendas; because his Majesty was ill informed, as appears by his own letter, since he had been assured that, without any war, they had of their own accord become his Majesty's vassals. Therefore it seems to have been entirely against his Majesty's will. If at any time we have been of opinion that the land should be allotted, as indeed it now seems to us, or likewise if the land is to be maintained, it was and is to avoid greater injury and robberies, which are committed without any remedy, when there are no repartimientos. Therefore, only one thing now works injury. We are trying to render the land orderly, and not turbulent as it was before, when no one knew anything about it. Even now some of the Spaniards treat the natives very ill. More than all, the tribute which is now raised (three maez [mace] for each Indian) is excessive, in our opinion, considering what we saw from the beginning among them and our intercourse with them, and our knowledge of their labors, and of the tools with which they cultivate the ground, and their great difficulty in supporting themselves—for they even live a part of the year on roots; and the common people can scarcely obtain a robe with which to clothe themselves. Whence it happens that, at the time of collecting the tribute, some of them demolish their houses—which at the least would be worth as much as the tribute itself, if they should be sold—and go into hiding, in order not to pay the tribute. They say that afterward they will return to build, with the labor of a month or two, another house. From others it is necessary to demand the tribute with arquebuses and other weapons, and men, in order to make them give it; and most of them it is necessary to imprison to make them provide the tribute. Therefore most of the owners of encomiendas maintain stocks, in which they keep as prisoners the chiefs or timaguas [freemen] who do not supply the amount of the tribute from their slaves when they themselves cannot obtain it from the latter. Thus, considering all this and other inconveniences, that, in order not to go into greater details, I do not set down, it was the opinion of the majority of the fathers, that—even if the whole affair were justified, and the Indians maintained in peace, justice, and religious instruction—for the present, and until the Indians have other opportunities, and other and better tools to cultivate the land, and until the land is more fertile, all that is taken from each Indian, in general, above the value of one maez, in food and raiment, is cruelty, and oppresses them too heavily.

Your Lordship should consider that in Nueva España, the Indians at first gave nothing but food (then worth a great deal) and service. And all times are not alike, for now they can give little, but in course of time, the earth growing more fertile, they can give more; so that what is collected of all this that the Indians now, in strict justice, do not owe, and that which until now has been raised, has been unjustly raised, on account of the evil way in which these Indians have been conquered, and because his Majesty's orders regarding them have not been obeyed.

And because your Lordship asks my opinion as to what ought to be done, I say that, considering that the land is already subjugated and divided into repartimientos—and for many reasons which, in order not to be prolix, I omit—there is no reason to abandon it, since it is very necessary that those who reside here should be supported. Your Lordship ought, in the opinion of the majority of the captains, to send his Majesty a true, simple, and clear report, without dissimulations, of the methods that have been adopted in all this conquest; and of its present condition, and the methods adopted in collecting the tributes, so that his Majesty, as a thorough Christian, may decree what is to be done in the matter. In the meanwhile, the least amount of tribute possible should be taken for the support of all, considering that it is not owed; and those who have repartimientos should support those who have not. It seems to me that if the tributes should be regulated to the one maez of food and raiment for each Indian, which I spoke of above, there will be sufficient for both classes if our people aid themselves with other profits that may be obtained. In order that this may be collected with some tribute, your Lordship should in every way try to protect these natives, and to do them justice; and to abolish abuses and punish pirates, etc. We on our part, shall do what we can to aid them, instructing them in our holy faith. Since this is my opinion I sign it with my name. Done at San Pablo of Manila, on the twenty-first of June, one thousand five hundred and seventy-four.

Fray Martin de Rada

As can be seen Fray Rada never calls the natives barbarians or savages and he never says they are ill-mannered. That claim is a fiction born from Timothy Jay Schwab's brain. Likewise Tim misrepresents the response to Rada's letter by writing, "it yielded a strong response from Lavezaris and others when they consider his writings 'harsh, harmful to this whole community, and very prejudicial.'" That is a half quote meant to make it appear Rada was negatively affecting the Filipino community by writing nasty things. 

What Lavezaris actually wrote was, "we shall not fail to point out in the “Opinion,” certain things which we consider harsh, harmful to this whole community, and very prejudicial to the development of this land." 

The Philippine Islands, 1493-1803, vol. 3, pgs. 260

Replying to the opinion that was given by the father provincial, Fray Martin de Rada, of the order of St. Augustine, on affairs in this land, and on the raising of tribute from its natives, we confess that it was zealously done, in the service of God, our Lord, and for the security of our consciences. In this estimation we hold and repute him. But, as sometimes the very wise are misled—now through too great zeal, and again by their ignorance of some things, which if they had understood fully, they would not have been misled—we shall not fail to point out in the “Opinion,” certain things which we consider harsh, harmful to this whole community, and very prejudicial to the development of this land. 

The issue is NOT the Filipino natives but the taxation of the natives. Speaking against this taxation is what is "harsh, harmful to this whole community, and very prejudicial." And it so "to the development of this land," not the Filipino people. It is taxes which develop the land. 

Ironically enough in the comments of his video someone says they did research that finds Rada was actually an advocate for Filipinos. Tim scoffs at the notion, calling it propaganda. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6x7ZhjPS6D4&lc=UgwbI4vlK6Up6k_c-CF4AaABAg

@BrideOfYahusha I did my research and it says that father Rada is actually an advocate for Filipinos.

@TheGodCulture Yet he wrote they were savages and was directly corrected and rebuked by Captain General Levaazaris also signed by ALL the other Captains. In other words, you did not research but found a piece of propaganda and then, repeated it. We cover this in our book. Don't fall for propaganda when you do not have to. Yah Bless.

What gall for Tim to accuse someone of doing no research. It is Tim who has done no research. If he had actually read Rada's letter he would know that he did not speak ill of Filipinos but of the Spanish. As it is the claim that Fray Rada wrote disparagingly of Filipinos is simply one more lie being taught about the Philippines by Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture. 

Sunday, February 2, 2025

The God Culture: Etymology of Ophir Part 2, Mouth of Light

In the first part of this series about Timothy Jay Schwab's etymology of Ophir I examined his claim that the Hebrew letter Aleph is always translated and pronounced as "A" and his rejection of Hebrew vowel points. In this article I will look at his claim Ophir means "Mouth of Light." Always keep in mind Tim admits he is not a linguist nor does he wish to be one. 

The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pg. 24

Hebrew: Ôwphîyrאופיר: o-feer’: reducing to ashes, fine gold. of uncertain derivation; Ophir, the name of a son of Joktan, and of a gold region in the East: –Ophir.
Ancient Hebrew: (א)A, (ו)U, (פ)P, (י)Y, (ר)R.

The shroud of confusion regarding ancient Ophir begins with it’s name rendered from the Hebrew in all modern Bibles and Bible dictionaries, we have reviewed, improperly. It begins with an Hebrew “A” or Aleph (א) not an “O.” This letter is always “A” in sound and translation. It is never “O” nor “U.” In fact, the second letter is an Ancient Hebrew WAW or U (ו) though “W” is also correct as a “W” is simply “UU” or “Double U.” Thus, you are looking at the actual origin of the chemical symbol for gold in this word as it begins with “AU” not “OW.” It should be rendered in Ancient Hebrew to English as AUPYR, AUPIR, AUPHYR or similar. They certainly did attempt to reduce Ophir to ashes but this meaning is erroneous and appears spurious perhaps exposing their intent.

The origin of the chemical symbol for gold, AU, is said to be the Latin Aurum or Aurea which we will determine in the next chapter is the equivalent of Ophir. This is the kingdom of gold for the Greeks which carried over into Latin but AUPYR is the origin of that reference as you will find thus the true origin of the chemical symbol for gold – AU. It is used twelve times in the Bible and with brilliance. The Bible offers markers along the way which lead us to the isles of the East in the Philippines and nowhere else. Scholars have been confused about the origin of this word but when you truly look at the Ancient Hebrew, you find the word for light as used in Genesis when God said let there be light. We will prove this is the same land.

This verse even identifies the isles of the sea which we will later prove is Ophir even tying Ophir to this same word for light which is it’s true origin etymologically. AUR(אור) is “light” and insert PY(פי) for AUPYR and it renders “Mouth of Light.” This is a direct identification in Hebrew of the land where Yahuah God said “Let there be light.” This is because this word in Hebrew is really AUR not OWR nor UWR which  are truly ludicrous renderings especially when the first letter ALEPH (א) which is always “A,” could not be mistaken by a Hebrew scholar. As you can see, we have gone extremely deep into this topic even assessing the Hebrew word for word and letter for letter in this pursuit. We find Ophir to be the region of light known as the Land of Creation which you will find proves out completely as the Philippines.

The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pgs 24-26

First note that Latin and Hebrew are not related in anyway. Latin is an Indo-European Language while Hebrew is a Semitic language. The twain do not meet. When he says they originate in Hebrew Tim is making up a fake etymology for the Latin words Aurum and Aurea which he does not even attempt to prove. 

Secondly note that Tim has, for no apparent reason, transformed Ophir into a compound word. He claims Ophir is composed of the words AUR meaning light and PY meaning mouth. But that would make the word AURPY which is not the spelling for Ophir which he has rendered as AUPYR. Does Tim not realize that AURPY is not AUPYR?

Rather than using Strong's Tim's source for his information about Py is from Abarim Publications. 

Solomon's Treasure Sourcebook, pg. 15


The Strong's number for this word is H6310.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h6310/kjv/wlc/0-1/

As can be seen this word is not only translated mouth but also commandment, edge, according, word, hole, end, appointment, portion, tenor, and sentence. Why is Tim focusing only on mouth? Because he is merely picking and choosing what he thinks will fit his thesis about the Philippines being the land of creation and not what actually makes sense or is correct. 

The fact is nothing in this etymology makes sense. 

Tim says Ophir is actually AUPYR and means mouth of light. But mouth of light, according to his own interpretation, would be AURPY. Those are clearly not the same words. AU is not AUR and PY is not PYR. Most daring of all is Tim gives NO REASON that Ophir is a compound word. The explanation is forced and comes out of nowhere. He writes:
AUR(אור) is “light” and insert PY(פי) for AUPYR and it renders “Mouth of Light.”

Why has AU become AUR? Why take out PYR and insert PY? What Tim has done is create a new word, AURPY, rather than give a proper etymology for the original word AUPYR. Yet he claims AUPYR and AURPY are the same word.

Listen to Tim explain this etymology in his videos. 

15:27 This is why the very word Ophir actually spelled in Hebrew A U P Y R.  Aupyr, really. A U R, let's break it down, in the Hebrew is the word for light used for God said, Yahuah said, “let there be, AUR, light.” No, it's not just something pirates say. With the P Y, PY, added in the middle which is the Hebrew word for mouth. Wait. This word that we render Ophir is literally in Hebrew “Mouth of Light.” Wow! Where Yahuah spoke “let there be light,” in the mouth of light, Ophir Philippines.


What Is Going On??? Thoughts from The God Culture

He says Ophir in Hebrew is spelled A U P Y R and then starts breaking down A U R instead of A U! Then P Y is "added in." If it is added in that means it was not previously there. Where did P Y R go? 

Another problem with translating AURPY as mouth of light is that it is grammatically incorrect. In Hebrew mouth of light would be PY AUR.
https://translate.google.com/?sl=en&tl=iw&text=mouth%20of%20light%0A&op=translate
http://www.kabbalah.info/eng/content/view/frame/31785?/eng/content/view/full/31785&main

Hence, a blockage on the Lights extends from the left line, as only the left line freezes the Lights. This is the meaning of “cast pur, that is, the lot,” meaning it interprets what it casts. It says “pur,”which concerns Pi Ohr (a Mouth of Light, pronounced Pi Ohr).

The first translation is from Google translate. The second translation is from a website about Kabbalah. Kabbalists know all about proper Hebrew linguistics so their rendering mouth of light as Pi Ohr should not be dismissed out of hand. There is not much more about the Hebrew rendering of Ophir as mouth of light to be found except for one man defending the ministry of William Branham.


THE ABC's OF GOD: HEBREW FOR ''DUMEE'' (MY BLOOD), pgs 474 & 481

A third problem with this etymology is Ophir is a proper name while mouth of light is a phrase. At no time in his discussion does Tim justify transforming Ophir from a proper name into a phrase. But that does not matter much anyway because Ophir is not AURPY or Pi Ohr. 

The ultimate problem with this etymology is that Tim has made up everything. With a sleight of hand he has turned AUPYR into AURPY and given an etymology for the new word rather than the original word, Ophir or AUPYR. 

In one of his videos Tim says Ophir means Land of Light.

Let There Be Light... Philippines? Origin of Ophir, Sheba and Havilah. 12G

12:26 Well here it is. In pictograph meaning “The beginning first man Elohim inhabits.” So, he said, “Let there be light,” and the Philippines happened. The land of resources he used to build all that is. Whoa. The land of light. The root of Ophir. The origin of  all things on earth and the origin of gold, AU.

On this slide Tim has Ophir as meaning, "The Beginning. First Man Exiled to Inhabit & Till the Ground & Worship Elohim At the Ends of the Earth." 

So, which is it? What does Ophir mean? Land of Light? Mouth of light? Or, "The Beginning. First Man Exiled to Inhabit & Till the Ground & Worship Elohim At the Ends of the Earth?" Tim is making it up as he goes.  

It just goes to show that being proud to not be an actual linguist and then attempting to do linguistics is foolish.

The God Culture: ChatGPT Says Timothy Jay Schwab is an Unreliable Researcher

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has been on an A.I. kick recently claiming his research is now peer reviewed and A.I. approved for...