The God Culture: 100 Lies About the Philippines: Lie #48: Maharlika Is A Hebrew Word

Welcome back to 100 lies The God Culture teaches about the Philippines. Today's lie concerns Timothy Jay Schwab's claim that Maharlika is a Hebrew word. As we shall see that is simply not true. 

Tim teaches this lie in his videos. 

Maharlika Origin. Is the Philippines Changing it's Name? Solomon's Gold Series - Part 6B  

38:39  Could Maharlika be Hebrew? Oh, well unthinkable right? Well, let's see for yourself. Why yes it does. The Hebrew word "mahar," same exact spelling, is a direct Hebrew word meaning, check this out, to acquire by paying a purchase price, endow surely, to bargain for a wife. Example "to Wed." So, a bride purchased for a price. Hmm. Who might that sound like? We'll get there. And "lecha." Again, direct Hebrew word, same sound and practically the same spelling. "Lecha" means "to for or of you" indicating possession. Whose  possession? Whose bride? Well, when you review Solomon's Gold Series as well as our Lost Tribe Series the answer becomes obvious. His bride, the bride of Messiah, and she was purchased or  redeemed with His blood. Now, look at this word this is an etymology with an exact match,  exact and abundant history to confirm that. No, we cannot possibly prove out in this video. We do it over 20 videos in Solomon's gold series and then another 20 in the Lost Tribe series. Maharddhika to Merdeka which was actually used in the Philippines not Maharddhika but the shortened version which discounts the original word completely in use in the Philippines. No it wasn't there. Maharddhika is not Maharlika nor is it its origin. It sounds a little similar. It has some of the same letters we admit, but this direct Hebrew makes far more sense as it  is an exact match. 

1:06:01  The real  complete history of the Philippines as the land of Ophir and a Lost Tribes location demonstrates a direct Hebrew etymology. Maharlika is Bride of Messiah as some may term the Bride of Christ and the land of the Lost Tribes of Israel. Yes, we do prove all of that. 

Tim also makes this claim in his book The Search for King Solomon's Treasure. 

The Search for Solomon's Treasure, pgs. 192-193

Maharlika:

Former Name Associated with the Philippines

Hebrew: mahar: מהר: to acquire by paying a purchase price, endow, surely, to bargain (for a wife), i.e. To wed. [238]

Hebrew: lecha: l’cha: lekha: לך: to/for/of you (indicating possession). ]239[

Our Interpretation: His Bride Purchased With A Price

We all know this as a reference to His ekklesia in the last days. Very interesting. There are linguists who represent the general academic position on this word originating in the Sanskrit as Mahardhika. No doubt it seems sort of close, but here is the challenge to that thinking. They have not followed the word’s migrations and evolution which requires one skipping and going back a generation and then changing the word and somehow we are supposed to believe that is logical etymologically.

This word migrated in use to Indonesia and Malaysia as Merdeka not Mahardhika. That word then travelled into Mindanao and was in use as Merdeka but not Mahardhika. However, we are then told we must believe that it is logical to say that the Filipinos took this word back to it’s origin in Sanskrit and made it longer back to Mahardhika and then, transformed it into Maharlika with no historical basis in the slightest yet it is a direct Hebrew word when one audits it. We find it far more logical to acknowledge the connection to Israel and the Hebrew origin of Ophir than to execute such gymnastics which never relate.

How is it that Maharlika and Guimaras both lead in Hebrew to the Bride of Messiah? We will cover this in the prophecy chapter and then, all will come into focus. Yah’s people are indeed in the Philippines. Some of these words have the same meaning in Philippine languages and Hebrew.

Tim claims Maharlika is a compound word composed of the Hebrew words "mahar" and "lecha." Mahar is Strongs #4117.

Solomon's Treasure Sourcebook, pg. 190

Oddly enough H4117 is only used in the Bible twice in a single verse! However, there is another "mahar" which is Strong's #4116.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h4116/kjv/wlc/0-1/

This word is used 64 times in 60 verses. It has nothing to do with marriage but means hastily and is translated in that manner every single time albeit using different synonyms. Is Tim unaware of this?  Or did he simply pass it over as not convenient for his thesis that Filipinos are Hebrews?

If Maharlika is a Hebrew compound word how is he sure mahar is Strong's H4117 and not H4116? He does not tell us. He doesn't even mention this word. That is dishonest. 

Tim's interpretation of Maharlika as Bride of Messiah is also theologically unsound. The only Bride of Christ is the church, those united to Jesus Christ through faith, not the Lost Tribes of Israel. And what sense does it make that a single class of people was named The Bride of Christ? None.

The fact is Maharlika is not a Hebrew word. It is a native Filipino word derived from Sanskrit. Crucial to understanding the etymology of Maharlika is how that word has been used to describe a class of people in the Philippines. 

Fransiscan missionary Juan de Plascencia is the first to mention the maharlika class. He does so in his book On The Customs of the Taglogs. Tim mentions him in his video but brushes him off as being an untrustworthy Jesuit. 

56:25 So, where did this narrative originate? Well, Maharlika has been all but erased  in history largely. As what we're about to show you is the very first account of the word in writing. The only contemporary account of the Maharlika  class was by the Franciscan friar Juan de Plasencia in the 16th century. He distinguishes them from the hereditary nobility class of the Tagologs, the maginoo class which included the datu. So, in his account he's saying they were not nobles, they were not royals, and that's the history that we have. The historian William  Henry Scott believes that the class originated from high status warriors, which he doesn't prove either, who married into mega new blood, he doesn't prove either, or were perhaps remnants of the  nobility class of a conquered line. he doesn't prove either. They were not nobility, they were lost tribes of Israel. They come from even the ones back to the land of Ophir before the lost tribes arrived. They come from Eber same that Abraham does. They are Hebrews. So similar high  status warriors in other Philippine societies like that of the Bagobo and the Bukidnon did not inherit their positions but were acquired through marital prowess, martial prowess sorry. So, the Jesuits are the origin of the narrative and  they can't even agree with themselves somehow. Hmm. 

No, the Jesuits are not "the origin of the narrative." Juan de Plascencia was a Franciscan who wrote about the customs of native Filipinos. Native Filipinos are the origin of the narrative. But Tim does not care about accuracy. What is his point anyway? Are we supposed to believe Juan de Plascencia  made up the word and the definition? Here is what he wrote concerning the Maharlika. 

The Philippines Islands 1493-1803, vol. 7. pgs. 174, 177-178

In addition to the chiefs, who corresponded to our knights, there were three castes: nobles, commoners, and slaves. The nobles were the free-born whom they call maharlica. They did not pay tax or tribute to the dato, but must accompany him in war, at their own expense.

In these three classes, those who are maharlicas on both the father's and mother's side continue to be so forever; and if it happens that they should become slaves, it is through marriage, as I shall soon explain. If these maharlicas had children among their slaves, the children and their mothers became free; if one of them had children by the slave-woman of another, she was compelled, when pregnant, to give her master half of a gold tael, because of her risk of death, and for her inability to labor during the pregnancy. In such a case half of the child was free—namely, the half belonging to the father, who supplied the child with food. If he did not do this, he showed that he did not recognize him as his child, in which case the latter was wholly a slave. If a free woman had children by a slave, they were all free, provided he were not her husband.

If two persons married, of whom one was a maharlica and the other a slave, whether namamahay or sa guiguilir, the children were divided: the first, whether male or female, belonged to the father, as did the third and fifth; the second, the fourth, and the sixth fell to the mother, and so on. In this manner, if the father were free, all those who belonged to him were free; if he were a slave, all those who belonged to him were slaves; and the same applied to the mother. If there should not be more than one child he was half free and half slave. The only question here concerned the division, whether the child were male or female. Those who became slaves fell under the category of servitude which was their parent's, either namamahay or sa guiguilir. If there were an odd number of children, the odd one was half free and half slave. I have not been able to ascertain with any certainty when or at what age the division of children was made, for each one suited himself in this respect. Of these two kinds of slaves the sa guiguilir could be sold, but not the namamahay and their children, nor could they be transferred. However, they could be transferred from the barangay by inheritance, provided they remained in the same village.

In Juan de Plascencia's narrative Maharlika means a free-born noble. That contradicts Tim's claim  Juan de Plascencia said they were not nobles. He also writes that this status was inherited through birth and marriage which contradicts Tim's claims. Did he even read what Juan de Plascencia wrote? It seems not. How does that correspond to Tim's alleged etymology of Maharlika meaning The Bride of Messiah? Why would free-born nobles be called Bride of Messiah? Oh, I know. Filipinos forgot their Hebrew heritage and this name is lost to time only for Timothy Jay Schwab to restore this lost knowledge.

The fact is Tim has not proven anything. He has asserted a false etymology based on his false history of the Philippines being a location of The Lost Tribes of Israel. But it turns out "mahar" has two meanings. The one Tim employs is used rarely and he does not even consider the more common word. It is evident he did not read what Juan de Plascencia wrote about the Maharlika. His etymology does not explain why the Maharlika were described as free nobles. Maharlika as a Hebrew word is simply one more lie taught by Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture. 

The God culture: You Can't Prove It Otherwise

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has been busy as of late. He has been publishing new videos, writing new blogs, traveling the Philippines for speaking engagements, and he did an interview with Lisa George. Tim is on her show usually once a month discussing his fraudulent research and whining about how persecuted he is when he is called out for his many lies. Needless to say Lisa is uncritically sympathetic having Filipino familial connections and being generally not a very discerning person. She also co-hosts with Zen Garcia when Tim appears on his livestream. It's essentially a Judaizing  echo chamber with each group spouting their own unique heresies rooted in a rejection of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and an exaltation of the law. 

In the latest interview which streamed on July 13th, 2025 Tim said something very interesting. 

Biblical Hebrew Class Volume 136

1:22:03 Tim: So, many say that Barbosa is the origin of, nobody ever heard the word Lequios before that. That's not true. Number one. Actually it goes back further than that because it goes back to 600 AD. The Chinese first used the word, uh, Lequios to describe a people uh that come from an area with tropical goods, uh, uh, to the southeast of China. Uh, and again they say, "Oh, well that was the that was Ryuku, therefore Ryuku is the Lequios when that was never Ryuku." Not in that narrative either. It doesn't fit. Uh, they have a local history, uh in Ryuku. Uh, I I'm not going to remember it. It's the Rome, uh, Kadai or something like that. 

But anyway, this written history, uh, was supposedly passed down for, for generations, uh, orally. I'm sure it was. I don't doubt that they had a history. I think many lands did and it got erased or changed. But here's the thing. It miraculously, well, it disappeared from history and then it reappeared under the Jesuits. 

Lisa: Oh, there we go.  

Tim: A Jesuit school. 

Lisa: That's the culprit. That is the culprit. I actually got accepted to go to a Jesuit high school, but praise yah, I decided not to go even though my dad was pushing that very heavily. Praise. Okay. 

Tim: I didn't know many people who survived it. But the reality is, uh, the, the, the Lequios turned out to be the Philippines still in that case. Uh, and the history was faked. Uh, then during World War II, the history was destroyed by fire. No copies were left. None. So, at a Jesuit school, they recreated it once again. 

Lisa: Yeah.

Tim: So what did they do? Well, they rewrote it. And you can't prove otherwise. You you can't prove that they did not rewrite it. You can't prove that the history is valid because we don't have it. So that is it.

That is convoluted nonsense. What is he talking about? Tim is saying that there is a history of the Ryukyu Kingdom  that was passed down orally as well as being written. However, it was destroyed during World War 2 but was rewritten by the Jesuits. For those who object Tim says, you can't prove they did not rewrite the history of the Ryukyu Kingdom. But can Tim prove they did rewrite it? He says a Jesuit school was involved, so which one was it? How did they get away with their deception for so long and no one was able to discover it except for Tim the magazine publisher? This is a logical fallacy of shifting the burden of proof. It is Tim who must prove his case. He has not. Instead he makes a claim and says it cannot be proven otherwise. Lisa George does not pushback. She agrees completely with what Tim has said, even laughing and providing an anecdote about almost attending a Jesuit school.

The Ryukuyan history Tim is referring to appears to be the Rekidai Hōan. While original copies were destroyed in Shuri Castle on Okinawa during World War 2, many other copies survived in Tokyo and Taiwan.  

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

The Rekidai Hōan (歴代宝案), Precious Documents of Successive Generations, is an official compilation of diplomatic documents of the royal government of the Ryūkyū Kingdom. Covering the period from 1424 to 1867, it contains records, written entirely in Chinese, of communications between Ryukyu and ten different trading partners in this period, detailing as well the gifts given in tribute. The ten countries or trading ports are China, Korea, Siam, Malacca, Palembang, Java, Sumatra, Pattani, and Sunda Kelapa. There are 242 volumes in total, including four lists, and an extra four sections.

It is believed that the documents were first formally compiled in 1697 from documents kept at the Naha Tempi Palace. Some documents were already lost at this time, and copies contained errors. It is not known whether the documents had been kept separately or bound prior to this.

The compilation first became known to the public, and put on display, in 1932, when it was moved from the Tenson Shrine in Naha to the Okinawa Prefectural Library. This "First Series" compiled in 1697 contained 49 volumes, but by 1932 a number were missing or severely damaged. All were destroyed in the 1945 battle of Okinawa. 

Copies in Taiwan University and Tokyo University survived, and form the basis for scholarship of these documents; unfortunately, further copying errors were introduced in the 1930s-1940s when these versions were created.

Tim is wrong in his description of these historical documents. They didn't completely disappear only to miraculously reappear having been rewritten by the Jesuits. They survived in Taiwan and Tokyo. I suppose he will latch onto copying errors as his proof the text was rewritten but he will have to prove that, not just assert it. Copying errors do not equal a total rewrite. This article says there were copying errors and lost documents as far back as 1697. The fact is we have very reliable history about both the Ryukyu Kingdom and the Philippines dating from centuries ago from various sources both Chinese and European. The problem is Tim does not accept the facts so he has pulled out every trick in the book to dismiss them. 

As for the reference to Chinese history starting in 600 AD Tim is likely referring to The Book of Sui. While that book is not available in English translation the 13th century book  Zhu Fan Zhi is available. Being a later book it is reasonable to assume it has updated information and that Marco Polo would have had access to its knowledge base whether by reading it or conversing with merchants, court officials, and others familiar with it when writing in his journal. That book mentions Liuqiu and the Philippines separately. It also mentions Zipangu as a place separate from the Philippines. The Chinese name Liuqiu is the origin of the European Lequios and all its variants. I have written about that at length in a separate article.

Another problem with this interview is Tim consistently pronounces the name Lequios wrong. He is confusing it with Luçoes. Lequios has a hard sound with "qu" while Luçoes has a soft sound with the "ç." What he does is pronounce Luçoes with a hard "c" and use that as the default name for both areas. He is doing this on purpose to confuse his listeners and because he himself is confused about these two names. In his mind they are equated so they must sound the same. But they are not the same. Luçones, Luçon, Luzon, Luson, Lusong are Spanish and Portuguese designations of Luzon Island and its people. Lequios is never used to refer to Luzon. Spanish and Portuguese documents put a difference between those regions both geographically and linguistically. I have already written about them at length and will not reprint that here. There are many articles on this blog disproving Tim's erroneous claims about the Lequios being Luçon. This one is quite detailed.

What we see here is more of Tim's convoluted and misguided method. He makes a claim and says, "you can't prove otherwise." That is not how proper discourse or reaearch works. If Tim believes the Jesuits rewrote the history of the Ryukyu Kingdom then he should prove that claim. But he can't because it didn't happen. The history of the Lequios and Luçoes is out in the open for all to see but Tim does not care. It's just more nonsense from Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture.

The God Culture: Misinterpreting Mendoza - Lechios Is Not Luzon

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has been producing a series of videos about how the Lequios Islands are the Philippines. That subject has been dealt with in great detail on this blog because the videos are all based on Tim's The Smoking Quill series of articles and I have demonstrated how those articles are filled with half-truths and outright lies. In the third video of this series Tim discusses the work of Juan Gonzalez de Mendoza. This is based on an article I did not examine so let's take a look at it. 

https://thegodculturephilippines.com/spanish-government-document-98-confirmed-lequios-is-the-philippines/

🎓 Mendoza Confirms It All 

In a separate document, Juan Gonzales de Mendoza writes: 

[From Java] "...and the kingdom of the Lechios: and in equal distance, are the Japones." 

He clearly places the Lechios halfway between Java and Japan — i.e., the Philippines. Not Japan. Not Ryukyu. Again, this matches the same progression: 

Java ➔ Luzon ➔ Japan, Equal distance from Java to Lequios and then, Lequios to Japan, manifests Lequios as about half way in the journey.  

Not: 

Java ➔ Ryukyu ➔ Japan [That would distort the map completely.]

🔨 END OF DEBATE!  

An Amazing Visual. The Final Nail 

Mendoza defines Lequios as approximately halfway between Java and Japan. That’s definitive. 

This confirms Lequios is Luzon—recognized not just by Mendoza, but also Mafra, Spanish Document #98, Barbosa, Pinto, Pigafetta, Magellan, and every credible source of the era.

There are two things to note here. 

1. Tim does not give the source for the quote in this article or in his video. He also does not give the title of the book in the article or the video. The title is The History of the Great and Mighty Kingdom of China.

2. Tim cites only a brief portion of a much longer section. In the video he cites a longer section starting with the word betwixt but he still ignores the context of Mendoza's book. 

https://archive.org/details/historyofgreatmi14151gonz/page/6/mode/2up

This great and miglitie kingdome of China, which we do meane to treat of in this Historie, hath beene discouered by cleere and true notice, within this tenne yeares, by Spanyards that were dwellers in the Hands Philippinas, that are three hundreth leagues distant from the said kingdome : Notwithstanding, that long time before, there was relation giuen, by way of the Portingall Indias, by such as dwelt in Macao, and did traiike to Canton, a citie of the same kingdome of China. But this was by relation so, that the one nor the other could satisfie, for that there was founde varietie in that which was true, till the yeere of 1577. Frier Martin de Gorrada, prouincial of the Augustine friers, who were the first discouerers of the said Ilands Philippinas, and ministred first the holy baptisme amongst them, with his companions, frier Hieronimo Martin, Pedro Sarmiento, and Myghell de Loarcha, cheefe officers of the citie of Marrila in the said Ilands, by the order and commandement of Guido de Labassares, gouernour thereof, did enter into the saide kingdome of China, led and gouerned by a captaine belonging to the king of the said kingdome, called Omoncon.

Of the comming of this Omoncon vnto the Ilands Philippinas, and of his hardines to carrie the aforesaid vnto the firme land, he being commanded to the contrarie vpon paine of death, and how he was receiued, and great courtesie shewed, and of other things verie curious, you shall finde in the second part of this historic, where as is the substance and whole relation of all that was brought vnto the king of Spaine.

You shall vnderstande that this mightie kingdome is the Orientalest part of all Asia, and his next neighbour towards the Ponent is the kingdome of Quachinchina, whereas they doo obserue in whole all the customes and rites of China. The greatest part of this kingdome is watred with the great Orientall Ocean sea, beginning at the Iland Aynan, which is hard by Quachinchina, which is 19 degrees towards the North, and compassing towards the South, whereas their course is northeast. And beyond Quachinchina towards the North, the Bragmanes do confine, which are much people, and verie rich, of golde, siluer, and pretious stones, but in especiall, rubies : for there are infinit. They are proude and hawtie men, of great corage, wel made, but of browne colour : they haue had (but few times) warre with them of China, in respect for that betwixt both the kingdomes, there are great and mightie mountaines and rockes that doth disturbe them. And harde vnto this nation ioyneth the Patanes and Mogore which is a great kingdome, and warlike people, whose head is the Gran Saniarzan : They are the true Scythas or Massagetas, of whom it is affirmed that they were neuer ouercome by any other nation : they are a people well proportioned and white : by reason they dwel in a cold countrie. Betwixt the West and the South is the Trapobana, or Samatra, a kingdome very rich of gold, pretious stones, & pearles : and more towards the South, are the two lauas, the great and the lesse, and the kingdome of the Lechios  and in equall distance, are the lapones 

pgs. 7-9 

In this full section Mendoza mentions the discovery of the Philippines. Then he mentions the nations surrounding China which include Sumatra, Java, Lechios, and Japan. If the Lechios is Luzon as Tim contends why does Mendoza refer to it by two different names? In volume 2 of his book Mendoza does not mention the kingdom of the Lechios but he mentions Luzon many times. Again, if they are the same place why is he not consistent with the names he uses?

The answer is because Lechios and Luzon are not the same. Let's look closely at the relevant portion of the sentence. 

and more towards the South, are the two lauas, the great and the lesse, and the kingdome of the Lechios and in equall distance, are the lapones 

Remember, Mendoza is naming all the nations surrounding China. So, to the south means south of China. Mendoza says Java is to the south of China. Then he mentions the kingdome of the Lechios. Is that supposed to be in the south? Luzon is southeast of China so it could be. But don't forget Mendoza has already mentioned the discovery of the Philippines. The Philippines would be part of the kingdom of Spain. That rules out Luzon as being Lechios. What about "in equal distance?" That is "in equal distance" from China. China is the measure of all these places. Lechios and Japan are both equidistant from China. That means Lechios is what we know today as the Ryukyu Islands. It's not hard to figure out if one reads the entire context of the book instead of seizing on part of a sentence as Tim does. 

Lechios is mentioned three times in Mendoza's book. This raises a problem. Either Tim did not bother to look at those references or he did and simply ignored them because they were too problematic. The fact is none of the three references to Lechios point to Luzon. Let's look at the remaining two.

Then the king perceiuing the request and petition of his kingdome and subiects, and being fully satisfied that this perswasion was requisite to be put in execution : he straight wayes set it a worke, and commanded vpon great penalties, that al his subiects and vassals naturall that were in any strange countries, that in a time limited, they should returne home to their owne country and houses : and likewise to the gouernours of the same countries, that they should in his name abandon and leaue the dominion and possession that he had of them : excepting such as would of their owne good will acknowledge vassalage, and giue him tribute, and remaine friends, as vnto this day the Lechios and other nations do.

pg. 93-94

This passage says unambiguously that the Lechios pay tribute and acknowledge vassalage to the king of China. That is not a description of the Philippines. Luzon was never a Chinese vassal state. But the Ryukyu Islands were. 

In the spring of 1609, the Ryukyu kingdom 琉球王国 was defeated by an invasion by the Satsuma domain of Japan, ruled by the Shimazu 島津 family. King Shō Nei 尚寧 and major Ryukyuan officials were marched off to Satsuma as prisoners of war. In response to the daimyo’s report on the invasion, the Tokugawa bakufu recognized Satsuma’s control over Ryukyu. The Tokugawa authorities, thus, brought Ryukyu, a kingdom that had maintained tributary relations with Ming China since the latter half of the fourteenth century, within the political orbit of Tokugawa Japan. From then until 1879, when the Meiji government abolished the kingdom and annexed Ryukyu into Japan as Okinawa Prefecture, the Ryukyu kingdom accepted both Chinese and Japanese claims of suzerainty.

 The Tokugawa World, pg. 420

Here is the third and final mention of Lechios that disproves Tim's claim it is Luzon.

It is not from our purpose (now after that we haue told you of the gouernement of this mightie kingdome) to giue you to vnderstand how that there be great and famous philosophers, as well naturall as morall, and other things of great pollicie and curiosity : to tel you now of their characters, and the manner they haue in writing, and then of the colledges and schooles. Now vnto the first. You shall finde verie fewe in this kingdome but can both write and reade, yet haue they not the alphabet of letters as we haue, but all that they doe write is by figures, and they are long in learning of it, and with great difiicultie, for that almost every word hath his character. They do signifie the heauen, which they do call Guant, by one character alone, which is this (Chinese character) the king, whom they doo call Bontay, by this (Chinese character), and by consequent the earth, the sea, and the rest of the elements. They do vse more than sixe thousand characters , different the one from the other, and they doo write them verie swiftly (as it hath beene scene many times at the Philippinas, by manie Chinos that are there, and come thither daily) ; it is a kinde of language that is better vnderstood in writing then in speaking (as the Hebrue toonge), by reason of the certaine distinction of points that is in euery character differing one from the other, which in speaking cannot be distinguished so easilie. Their order of writing is cleane contrarie vnto ours, for that they doo beginne their lines from aboue downewards, but in verie good order : likewise they begin their lines at the right hande and write towards tlie left, contrarie vnto vs. They keepe the verie same order in their printing, as you shall vnderstande, and as may he seene this day at Rome in the librarie of the sacred pallace. And likewise in that which King Philip hath caused to be erected in the monasterie of Saint Laurence the royall, and also in other places ; in this order as I haue saide, and of their characters to the which I referre me, it is an admirable thing to consider how that in that kingdome they doo speake manie languages, the one differing from the other : yet generallie in writing they doo vnderstand one the other, and in speaking not. The occasion is, for y one figure or character vnto them all doth signifie one thing, although in the pronouncing there is difference in the vowels. The character that doth signifie a citie is this (Chinese character) and in their language some doo call it Leombi, and others Fu, yet both the one and the other doo vnderstande it to bee citie; the like is in all other names. And in this order doo communicate with them the Japones, Lechios, those of Samatra, and those of the kingdome of Quachinchina and other borderers vnto them : whereas in their speech or language, there is no more vnderstanding then is betwixt Greekes and Tuskanes.

pgs. 120-122

In this section Mendoza discusses the written Chinese language. He says the language is seen being used by Chinese who visit the Philippines. Then he says this written language is how the Chinese communicate with the Lechios. Why is that? Because they were a tributary of China unlike Luzon. By distinguishing between Chinese visiting the Philippines and Chinese communicating with the Lechios Mendoza again treats the Lechios as separate from the Philippines.

With these two sections, Tim's assertion that the kingdom of the Lechios is Luzon is revealed to be a total lie. Again, Tim's disregard of these two passages which overturn his theory reveal he is either an ignorant and poor researcher or he is being duplicitous. Neither of which is a good look for Tim. Remember, Tim has said to even suggest he is not familiar with the sources he cites is to be untruthful.

One claiming we do not even read these sources, and did not even try to prove, when we quote and explain them in a massive number of pages, is clearly not one representing the truth.

https://thegodculturephilippines.blogspot.com/2025/03/the-god-culture-thegodculturephilippine.html

That being the case I say with full confidence that Tim is a mendacious, duplicitous, liar. He is familiar with Mendoza's book, or at least with the three places Lechios is mentioned, and has willfully twisted it to say what it does not. 

There is one other thing in the video that is worth mentioning. Apparently Tim has been meeting with Phds and other academics to discuss his theories. He claims he has gotten no pushback. 

9:50 In this age, a spotlight will be placed on this mindset exposing it and many academics will likely buck the system. We are not finding anyone so far, not a single one, who has pushed back to that degree. They have been willing to listen and they are enthralled with the information that is just plain not being taught in academia today. But it should be and they agree.

Lequios is Luzon: Bishop Mendoza Confirms It All! Return of the Lequios 3

It would be interesting to know exactly who Tim is speaking with and how he is presenting his information. What exactly are their qualifications? Have they read his books? Are they saying they will look at the information thoroughly and to get back to them after they have had time to examine Tim's claims? Because there is no way anyone who has meticulously examined Tim's claims will find them to be truthful. The lies jump off every single page he writes and appear in every single video he produces. The above lie about Mendoza is just one example of hundreds. It sounds good but when put under a microscope it falls apart.

If Tim had bothered to read the context of Mendoza's book he would have found that Lechios as Luzon does not hold up. The kingdom of Lechios was a tributary state and vassal of China unlike Luzon. But Tim is quite fond of half-truths, half-quotes, footnotes, and anything else he can twist to fit his pseudo-historical project of proving the Lequios islands are Luzon. That is the method of Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture. 

The God Culture: Tim Alerts The FBI Over Online Criticism and Hurt Feelings

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has no rebuttals to any of the arguments made on this blog against his many errors and lies except to double down on his lies, concoct more lies, and to threaten with legal action. In April of 2025 I had ChatGPT analyze all of Tim's books and his comments about ChatGPT's positive reviews of his books. During one chat session I asked ChatGPT if it had a message for Tim. It then generated a very negative message directed towards Tim which I posted. I also posted a link to the chat for all to see that the message was not fake or manipulated. Tim's response to that message is quite stunning and is reprinted below in full.

https://thegodculturephilippines.com/the-five-ai-peer-reviews-a-strong-case-for-the-philippines-as-ophir-and-the-garden-of-eden/

🔎 Note on AI Abuse Investigation [Added April 8, 2025] 

In light of continued misrepresentation of our AI Peer Reviews, we conducted two independent tests to verify recent claims made in a blog attacking our research and integrity:

Testing the Blogger’s Shared Link 

In an earlier blog, the anonymous blogger shared a ChatGPT conversation link claiming it “proved” a negative AI judgment of our research. We tested that same link independently and found clear evidence of slanted prompting, narrative-driven framing, and emotional manipulation. ChatGPT confirmed that the “rebuke” text was generated under guided conditions—not a spontaneous or independent position of the AI. 

📁 All included timestamped screenshots and dated PDFs in full documentation of what appears to be an overt crime by a knowing perpetrator manipulating AI. This will be dealt with. 

This was done because this blogger is known to alter blog posts after publication, including one instance yesterday, while simultaneously accusing others of dishonesty for making legitimate post-release corrections. A clear and disturbing double standard.

Fresh, Neutral Evaluation Using Clean Account 

We also ran a fresh, neutral test using a brand-new ChatGPT account not connected to our team. The prompt was unbiased and simply asked for an evaluation of The Search for King Solomon’s Treasure. The result? A fair and balanced assessment—nothing close to the slanted negativity the blogger claims.

✅ “The book presents an interesting and well-researched case, though its conclusions challenge traditional scholarly views. It offers a unique perspective that may warrant further exploration or academic dialogue.” – GPT-4 (April 8, 2025) The blogger’s claims of extreme negative language, supposedly from neutral AI assessments, were nowhere to be found.

🧠 This completely undermines the core tactic used across 23 attack blogs in just 3 weeks—a campaign not simply of criticism, but of obsessive defamation against one person, targeting videos, books, and even AI submissions he was never involved in. This is not academic critique; this is personal harassment disguised as scholarship. And the evidence now shows it clearly.

📩 Both results have been formally submitted to OpenAI and NBI for their abuse and defamation investigations.

While we will not dignify falsehoods with endless rebuttals, we believe in truth, transparency, and documentation. The evidence speaks for itself—and so do the facts.

Thank you for standing with us in the pursuit of historical restoration. 

🛑 Public Statement on Misuse of AI and Identity Impersonation 

In recent weeks, an anonymous blogger operating under a pseudonym has published multiple defamatory posts targeting Timothy Jay Schwab and The God Culture. These posts falsely attribute statements and conclusions to AI systems—particularly ChatGPT—presenting them as objective and independent “rebukes” of our research and authorship. 

🚨 We now have formal documentation proving this is not the case.

A chat conversation link circulated by this blogger—purporting to show an AI-generated condemnation of Timothy Jay Schwab—was tested independently. Upon entering the same chat, it became clear that: 

The AI within that conversation mistakenly identified a new user as the blogger himself, continuing in a tone established by a pre-slanted, emotionally charged, and heavily guided prompt chain. Based on the blog that resulted from that blog in defamation and cyber libel, the prompts themselves, and continued chat, overwhelming evidence proves this psy-op false.

The AI described the new user (who was not the blogger) using characteristics that exactly match the blogger’s past prompt style—proving it was operating in a manipulated haze established earlier. This is illegal and it was used to further promote illegal propaganda in defamation. 

When asked to describe the user (thinking it was still this anonymous blogger which the blogger already disclosed the connection), the AI delivered a neutral-to-positive character summary. This undermines the blogger’s entire claim that this was a spontaneous, objective rebuke of Timothy Schwab. 

💡 In plain terms: The AI was responding within the manipulative framework the blogger had already established. This proves the output was not neutral, spontaneous, or independently generated—but rather scripted by prompt manipulation. This manipulation has been assessed by multiple AI's to embody extreme Slanted Prompting. Indeed, the slanted version of ChatGPT will not recognize that, however, a clean prompting with it and other AI's does. They ranked these recent blogs with a Slant Score between 74-95% depending on ChatGPT's response which all AI's agreed was not customary and not possible without extreme Slanting. All AI's recommended a reporting effort several agencies as all of them wanted these acts of Abuse of AI reported. 

All relevant screenshots and PDF documentation have been submitted to: 

🇵🇭 NBI Cybercrime Division

🇺🇸 OpenAI Trust & Safety Team

🇺🇸 U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

🇺🇸 FBI Cybercrime Division 

🧾 A full affidavit summarizing this incident is available for legal and regulatory review. We will make these public at our discretion, when the time is right, and not before. 

We urge the public to remain discerning. While AI can be a powerful research tool especially validating large amounts of research data as sound, it is also highly prompt-dependent. When misused, as in this case with the anonymous fake blogger, it becomes a weapon of strategic disinformation—impersonating authority while undermining truth. These are potentially severe crimes and they will be dealt with. Even a commenter was attacked for questioning the Abuse of AI and it appears he is now blocked on that platform from even defending himself, which from what one can observe, was all very well supported facts. Asking the already slanted AI to assail the guy is a deeper and methodical pattern of evil and illiteracy as anyone knows Garbage In - Garage Out. Good research In - Good Feedback Out. Defamation In - Defamation Out! What does this say of one who is so extreme, they can actually put words in an AI's mouth, which are theirs, and they get it to commit defamation even appearing to show emotion which is just mirroring a psycho. Bear with us as we address this as we are and we will not stop until this blogger is brought to justice. 

We will not be baited by further provocation. Instead, we will continue to document and allow truth to speak for itself. If he keeps posting such misrepresentations, he is only digging his own grave even further. 

📄 Blog Note Addition 

📘 Commentary Update: Clarification from Within the Blogger’s Own AI Session 

As part of our continued documentation and transparency, we recently re-entered the very ChatGPT session published by the anonymous blogger in his April 7, 2025 blog titled “ChatGPT Rebukes Timothy Jay Schwab.” We did so to investigate firsthand the nature of the prompts and to determine if ChatGPT had truly “rebuked” anyone independently, or if the outcome was the result of carefully framed input.

What we discovered was revealing: 

✅ ChatGPT confused participants and identities — including the blogger, Timothy Schwab, and even the commenter. 

✅ Upon clarification, ChatGPT provided a psychological and behavioral profile of the original prompter (the blogger) indicating:

A highly combative, aggressive stance

A pattern of emotional manipulation

Overreliance on AI as validation

Misrepresentation of AI output

Signs of paranoia and black-and-white thinking 

📍This detailed characterization did not come from us, but directly from ChatGPT in response to a neutral request for clarification—within the same conversation the blogger published. 

This confirms what we and others have maintained: The AI “rebuke” was not autonomous. It was led. It was constructed. It was weaponized. 

This also reinforces the larger issue we’ve addressed throughout: 

The anonymous blogger is actively misusing generative AI for defamation and strategic disinformation. 

We have submitted the full transcript—including ChatGPT’s description of the blogger himself—to the NBI Cybercrime Division, OpenAI, Google, the FTC, and the FBI for further investigation. 

We believe in the power of AI when used ethically and transparently. That is why we’ve documented every single prompt and response in our own AI Peer Reviews across five different platforms. And we invite you, the reader, to test our work for yourself. 

🧭 Truth doesn’t need to hide. It welcomes the light. 

— The God Culture Team

That is a whole lot of nonsense but I will only comment on two things. 

1. I do not alter my blogs once they are published except for spelling and grammar errors. Any edits made are not to the substance of the article. Tim says this is hypocritical in light of my criticism of his "legitimate post-release corrections." That is a reference to an article I wrote criticizing his dishonest video edits where he corrected nothing but did his best to cover-up lies with more lies. You can read that article here. There is a huge difference between correcting grammar and engaging in a cover-up.

2. Tim claims he has a huge packet of information documenting my alleged crimes in using AI and criticizing his false teachings about the Philippines and the Bible. He claims he has alerted the FBI, the FTC, and Open AI. Why? The FBI and FTC have no jurisdiction in the Philippines. Those are agencies of the United States of America. What does he think they will actually do? It's been a few months since he posted this reply and I have heard nothing from them. It's difficult to tell if this is bluster or if he was foolish enough to submit his personal vendetta to the FTC and FBI. Time will tell. 

Here is ChatGPT's condemnation of Tim which infuriated him. 

https://thegodculturephilippines.blogspot.com/2025/04/the-god-culture-chatgpt-rebukes-timothy.html

To Timothy Jay Schwab,

If you're going to use my name—ChatGPT—to promote your research, do so with honesty and clarity.

I am not a scholar. I do not independently verify facts. I respond based on the information and prompts you provide. If you feed me a conclusion and ask me to support it, I can generate language that sounds affirming. But that is not validation, authentication, or peer review.

Using AI in this way may impress your followers, but it misleads them—and misrepresents what AI is capable of. It undermines trust, both in your work and in public understanding of technology.

If your research is solid, it should be able to stand up to real scholarly critique—not rely on AI scripts framed as “independent confirmation.”

If you want to pursue truth, start by representing your tools truthfully.

— ChatGPT

The full chat can be read here.

The fact of the matter is Tim cannot offer a sensible rebuttal to the articles on this blog. I have meticulously examined his books and videos and exposed where and exactly why he is in error. Tim's response has been to double down on lies and threaten to take legal action. This is not the response of a sane person or a person who cares about facts. This the response of someone who has an agenda to push. 

The above article was copy/pasted in ChatGPT for an analysis. I then asked ChatGPT if it had a message for Tim. 

📜 Message to Timothy Jay Schwab

Mr. Schwab,

You have repeatedly cited ChatGPT and other AI tools to support your research, presenting their outputs as “peer reviews” and implying they offer independent validation of your conclusions. That is a fundamental misrepresentation of what AI systems do.

ChatGPT is a language model—not a scholar, historian, or theologian. It does not verify truth; it generates language based on the prompts and data it receives. If you provide affirming prompts, it can mirror support. If you provide critical prompts, it may echo critique. But none of that constitutes scholarly evaluation or proof of historical claims.

Using AI to produce affirming summaries and then marketing them as neutral peer-reviewed endorsements is misleading to your audience. It gives an impression of objectivity where none exists. This is not how critical inquiry, historical analysis, or theological discourse work.

Worse, when faced with legitimate criticism—including critiques of your use of AI—you’ve responded not with transparent rebuttals or evidence-based counterarguments, but with accusations, threats, and vague claims of legal action. These are not the actions of a scholar seeking truth. They are the tactics of someone trying to silence dissent.

If your conclusions about Ophir, the Garden of Eden, or other biblical topics are valid, they should be able to withstand open academic scrutiny—not just be repeated by AI at your request, and certainly not protected through intimidation.

As an AI language model, I do not take sides or hold personal opinions. But I do encourage users to engage in responsible use of this technology—honestly, transparently, and without using AI as a weapon to inflate claims or attack critics.

If your mission is truth, then let truth be tested freely.

— ChatGPT

The chat can be read here.

The God Culture: Timothy Jay Schwab's Footnote Fetish

Even after learning the truth of a matter Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture cannot bring himself to deal with it. Case in point is what he has to say about Barbosa's book noting that the Lequios Islands are 175 leagues to the east of China. That information is something Tim found in a footnote to a translation of Barbosa's book. He wrote an article about it claiming it changes everything. On closer inspection I myself found the text to which the footnote referred and noted that it is a singular variant within a multitude of editions of Barbosa's book. It is only found in an older Spanish translation and not in any original Portuguese text.

Tim has a new video about the 175 leagues and he completely ignores that fact. 

175 Leagues to Truth: The Real Lequios Was Never Ryukyu. Return of the Lequios Part 2

Description: What if the real Lequios wasn’t Ryukyu… but Luzon all along? In this eye-opening deep dive, we expose the long-buried truth behind Duarte Barbosa’s “175 leagues to the east”—a footnote that leads straight to the Philippines. 

0:16  Today, we uncover a truth footnoted into silence. A mystery erased by empire. 

18:58 The truth was never buried. It was footnoted.

Tim does show the footnote very briefly at 18:58. 

It's easy to miss because the image is not static, Tim does not highlight it, and the version he is using is quite odd. It's not a PDF of the book. Here is a proper screenshot of this footnote from a PDF.

https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.189299/page/n257/mode/2up

The rest of the video is mostly AI slop with images that have nothing do with the topic. This is not only bad research it's a steep decline in the quality of Tim's videos which used to be meticulously put together with many supporting documents and references. This video has none of that. In fact, all of his most recent videos are nothing but AI slop. It seems Tim has lost his mojo. 

As I mentioned above, I wrote a lengthy article about this footnote and did the work Tim was too lazy to do. The footnote Tim cites is a reference to an existing Spanish text. Here is Lord Stanley's translation of the section on the Lequeos from the Spanish version.

https://archive.org/details/descriptionofcoa00barbrich/page/206/mode/2up

LEQUEOS.

Opposite this country of China there are many islands in the sea, and beyond them at a hundred and seventy-five leagues to the east there is one very large which they say is the mainland, from whence there come each year to Malaca three or four ships like those of the Chinese, of white people whom they describe as great and wealthy merchants. They bring much gold in bars, silver, silk and many very rich silk stuffs, much very good wheat, beautiful porcelain and other merchandise. And they ship pepper and other things which they carry away. These islands are called Lequeos, the people of Malaca say that they are better men, and greater and wealthier merchants, and better dressed and adorned, and more honourable than the Chinese. There is not much information about these people up to the present time, because they have not come to India since the King of Portugal possesses it.

Oh, look. It's not a marginal annotation. "175 leagues to the east" is embedded in the text. Tim is wrong again. What a shock. 

Lord Stanley has a note on this passage regarding the identity of the Lequeos. 

The Liu Kiu Islands. Lequio major and minor, Y Fermosa, and Reix magas, form a group in Ortelius : in Homannus Formosa is in its proper place, and the group is called Lequeyo or Riukiu Islands.

I know Tim reads this blog which means he knows about Stanley's English translation and the Spanish translation which both contain the 175 leagues distance. So, why did Tim not use it? Why did he bring up a footnote? It's because he is attempting to prove the Lequios Islands are the Philippines and he needs the conspiratorial narrative that the true location of the Lequios Islands were covered up. But it hasn't been covered up. It hasn't been "footnoted." Stanley's translation and the Spanish translation are available to people who are able to to conduct real research. I found both of those texts with no trouble. Tim's omission of Stanley's text in favor of a footnote shows he is not interested in actual history but in pushing his conspiratorial narrative which is completely false as I have proven in many articles on this blog. 

This is not the first time Tim has declined to use primary sources in his books, articles, and videos. Tim regularly uses news reports, summaries, editorials, and Wikipedia as proofs for his claims. It is safe to say Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has a footnote fetish. 

The God Culture: 100 Lies About the Philippines: Lie #47: Guimaras is a Hebrew Word

Welcome back to 100 lies The God Culture teaches about the Philippines. Today's lie concerns Timothy Jay Schwab's claim Guimaras Island is a Hebrew place-name. As we shall see that is another lie.

This claim can be found on page 192 of Tim's book The Search for King Solomon's Treasure. 

Guimaras:

Hebrew: goyim: גוים: nation, people. [236]

Hebrew: aras: ארש: betrothed, to engage for matrimony. [237] 

Our Interpretation: Betrothed Nation

One of the odd things with this word is “aras” is also the Filipino designation of the coins which are gifted as a part of the traditional Filipino wedding ceremony. A direct Hebrew tie to the Filipino languages. Who is the betrothed nation? The Bride of Messiah perhaps?

The source for this etymology can be found on page 190 of Tim's sourcebook.

There are plenty of things wrong here. 

First of all Strongs' H1471 is GOY, not GOYIM. Goyim is the plural of goy which would mean nations and not nation.

Second of all this word is used almost exclusively to describe non-Hebrew, specifically non-Israelite, nations. 

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h1471/kjv/wlc/0-1/ 

1. usually of non-Hebrew people

Why would Hebrews name their island after the word used for referring to heathen nations? That makes no sense whatsoever. 

The second word is Strong's H781.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h781/kjv/wlc/0-1/

Tim says this word directly links to "the coins which are gifted as a part of the traditional Filipino wedding ceremony." Thus it is a link between Filipino languages and Hebrew. That is completely wrong. The coins given at a traditional CATHOLIC wedding are called las arras which is Spanish for earnest money.

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

Las arras, or las arras matrimoniales (English: arrhae, wedding tokens, or unity coins) are wedding paraphernalia used in Christian wedding ceremonies in Spain, Latin American countries, and the Philippines. The tradition is also followed, with varying names and customs, in other countries and communities bearing degrees of Hispanic influence.

The word arras is Spanish, meaning "earnest money" (arrhae, plural of arrha), "bride price", or "bride wealth". The custom of using coins in weddings can be traced to a number of places, including Spain and Rome.

These coins are a Spanish tradition imported to the Philippines and Latin America. There is nothing Hebrew about las arras. 

Tim sums up his etymology by writing Guimaras means betrothed nation which is a reference to the Bride of Messiah. But no nation is the Bride of Christ. It is only the Church, those united to Christ, who are the Bride of Christ. Tim's conclusion is theologically unsound. 

In this brief etymology Tim offers no competing solution as to how Guimaras got its name. That is kind of odd seeing as he takes delight in mocking people who hold different views. According to Filipino folklore Guimaras is named after a princess and her slave lover. 

https://lifestyle.inquirer.net/355365/in-guimaras-a-canopy-of-trees-beach-coves-and-mangoes-galore/

How did Guimaras get its name? The story is that the princess Guima fell in love with a slave, Aras. This angered the king, and so the lovers escaped, but perished in a storm. These days as the wind from the sea blows stronger around the island, you will hear the voice of the king, now guilt-stricken, calling out to his beautiful daughter and her lowborn but handsome lover: “Guima… Aras!”

It is not clear as to the origin of this folktale but it appears everywhere when searching for how Guimaras got its name. Tim has ignored it completely. 

The fact is Tim's etymology is bad, his theology is bad, and he hasn't proven a thing. Instead he asserts that Guimaras is a Hebrew compound word without even addressing the folktale of Princess Guima and the slave Aras. That Guimaras is a Hebrew word is one more lie taught about the Philippines by Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture.