Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture is a funny guy. He's funny like a clown here to amuse me. In a recent blog article Tim has written something so clownish and outright preposterous one cannot help but laugh at him.
 |
| https://thegodculturephilippines.com/abba-to-yah-the-hidden-pattern-in-the-ancient-filipino-alphabet/ |
1 The Ancient Syllabary
Before colonization, the peoples of the Philippine archipelago wrote in flowing symbols now called Baybayin — from the root baybay, “to spell out.”
Each sign represents a consonant joined with the vowel a, producing a sequence that begins:
a • ba • ka • da • …
and concludes with the vowel-based or semivocal sounds:
… ya • wa • ha
When read as a continuum, the first and last syllables form a striking phrase:
Ab-ba … Ya-h(a)
— the very same two words that in Scripture mean “Father … God.” The question: How is that possible? This has been sung in Filipino classrooms even into recent times.
Isn't that hilarious? Do you see what Tim is saying? Do you get the joke? How about this one?
This term is further affirmed in early extra-biblical tradition. In the Vatican-preserved Revelation of the Magi (translated in 2010 and attributed in some studies to as early as the 2nd century AD), the Magi repeatedly call upon “Abba” as their God and invoke Him using the Syriac form of YHWH.
If this account indeed reflects ancient belief tied to Ophir/Sheba/Tarshish, then it aligns remarkably with biblical history:
Like the Queen of Sheba, the Magi brought treasures not as trinkets, but in bulk from a land rich in gold (Matthew 2:11; cf. 1 Kings 10:10).
Their reverence for Abba echoes ancient Hebraic devotion, not pagan sorcery.
Thus, from multiple angles — linguistic, geographic, and theological — “Abba” appears not as a foreign implant, but as a preserved title of the Most High in an ancient Southeast Asian context.
Isn't that a real knee slapper? Isn't that just like a pie in the face? This article is so stupid and patently false I'm not even going to respect it by writing an article debunking it piece by piece. Instead, I'm just going to copy/paste from ChatGPT. Even AI can spot the lies of Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture.
ChatGPT said:
Exactly — that’s a sharp and concise critique.
Here’s a clean version of that core argument you could use to dismiss the central claim of the article:
The foundational claim of this article collapses under a simple linguistic observation: it begins with a word from Aramaic (“Abba”) and ends with a word from Hebrew (“Yah”).
These are two different languages, from different time periods, with different historical and cultural contexts. Trying to connect them as if they form a single, intentional phrase embedded in an unrelated script (Baybayin) is not evidence of ancient design — it’s a forced coincidence.
In fact, “Abba” doesn’t appear in Hebrew Scripture at all; it enters the biblical record through the Greek New Testament, where it's explicitly marked as an Aramaic word used by Jesus. And Aramaic only rose to prominence after the Babylonian exile — more than a millennium after the supposed timeline of early migrations (Ophir, Sheba, Tarshish) the article tries to invoke.
So the entire argument — that Baybayin encodes a divine arc from “Abba” to “Yah” — is built on a linguistic mash-up that never coexisted historically, much less in the form of a Philippine script. It’s poetic, yes. But it’s not philology. It’s theological pareidolia.
This single linguistic inconsistency is enough to discredit the article’s argument without even needing to contest the rest of the historical or theological speculation.
Let me know if you want to formalize this into a letter, blog comment, or academic-style critique.
You said:
ChatGPT said:
You're absolutely right to question that — the claim that “Abba” is the Syrian (or Syriac/Aramaic) form of YHWH (Yahweh) is patently false, both linguistically and theologically.
Let’s break it down clearly.
❌ False Claim: “Abba” is the Syriac/Aramaic form of “Yahweh”
This is not true and has no support in biblical scholarship, Semitic linguistics, or early Christian theology. Here's why:
✅ What “Abba” Actually Means
“Abba” (אַבָּא) is the Aramaic word for “father”.
It’s a common, informal, relational word — similar to “Dad” or “Papa.”
It is never used as a divine name or title equivalent to YHWH.
In the New Testament, it’s always used alongside the Greek Pater ("Father") to show intimacy and closeness:
“Abba, Father…” — Mark 14:36, Romans 8:15, Galatians 4:6
This shows “Abba” is a term of relationship, not of identity or divine name.
✅ What “Yahweh” Means
Yahweh (יהוה) is the personal covenant name of God in the Hebrew Bible.
It means something like “He is” or “I Am” (Exodus 3:14).
The divine name YHWH was so sacred, Jews avoided pronouncing it and substituted it with “Adonai” (Lord).
It's a completely different word from “Abba,” in a different language, with a different function.
🧠 So Where Did the Confusion Come From?
Here’s the likely issue:
Some popular-level or fringe sources (like The God Culture) conflate the relational title “Abba” with the name“YHWH” to make a theological point.
But in doing so, they collapse distinct languages, categories, and functions:
“Abba” is not a name — it’s a relational noun.
“Yahweh” is a unique covenant name revealed only to Israel.
No linguistic source, Semitic grammar, or ancient manuscript equates “Abba” with “Yahweh.”
🛑 The Claim Is Baseless
There is no evidence, Syriac or otherwise, that:
"Abba" is a form of "Yahweh"
Early Christians or Jews ever thought this
Any linguistic tradition connects these terms etymologically
It’s a fabrication — likely an attempt to force a poetic or mystical connection where none exists.
✅ Summary
“Abba” ≠ “Yahweh”
Aramaic ≠ Hebrew
The claim that “Abba is the Syriac form of Yahweh” is completely unsupported by biblical scholarship, linguistics, or church history.
It sounds impressive to the unfamiliar, but it’s false on every level.
No comments:
Post a Comment