The God Culture: AI Debunks Bethabara: Where the New Testament Truly Begins

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture is set to release a new book about the origins of the early Church. The title is Bethabara: Where the New Testament Truly Begins: The Priesthood in Exile, the Wilderness Gospel, and the True Origins of the Early Church. 

Bethabara

This book is very obviously a distillation of all his teachings about the Dead Sea Scrolls, John the Baptist, and the Qumran community. Tim claims it will be the most academically rigorous book he has yet published. 

This is the most academically rigorous, carefully sourced, and spiritually confronting work we have ever released.

https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxhdbDjazhGTCOYkOBVQ3SqX9XgjEIYSOc

That remains to be seen but judging by all the videos he has published on the topic, and which have been thoroughly debunked on this blog, it will not hold up to scrutiny.

This book features a new co-author named Paul Spitz. He refers to Tim as being "brilliant."

Facebook 

More brilliant work by my friend Tim Schwab from The God Culture - Original. 

Just wait for what we have cooking for 2026…

It goes without saying that Timothy Jay Schwab is by no means a brilliant person. He is a poor researcher and his books are filled with errors of every kind. To come away with the perception that he is brilliant is a loud warning sign telling the world that your judgement is not to be trusted. 

Tim has posted a summary of the book's contents. 

Where did the New Testament really begin?

Not in Jerusalem.

Not at Pentecost.

Not in Rome.

But in the wilderness — at Bethabara.

Bethabara: Where the New Testament Truly Begins uncovers the forgotten priestly, prophetic, and geographical foundations of early Christianity — revealing that the roots of the Gospel do not originate in institutional religion, but in a wilderness sanctuary preserved by a faithful remnant.

Drawing from Scripture, archaeology, the Dead Sea Scrolls, early Jewish sources, and the Gospels themselves, this book demonstrates:

• That Bethabara was a real, identifiable priestly site — not a symbolic or legendary place

• That John the Baptist was not a fringe ascetic, but the final legitimate High Priest of the Zadokite lineage

• That the earliest disciples were formed in the wilderness, not in Galilee or Jerusalem

• That baptism, repentance, and covenant renewal began before Pentecost — and outside the Temple

• That the priesthood described by Ezekiel survived in exile and prepared the way for Messiah

• That the early Church was launched from purity and prophecy, not power and politics

This work challenges the dominant academic assumptions about the Essenes, Qumran, the Temple, and the origins of Christianity — and restores the biblical narrative to its original covenantal framework.

This is not a speculative theory.

It is a convergence of texts, geography, archaeology, and prophecy.

For pastors, theologians, historians, Bible students, and anyone seeking to understand the true foundations of the New Testament, Bethabara offers a deeply documented, Scripture-driven reexamination of where Christianity was born — and why that matters.

The Gospel did not begin in empire.

It began in the wilderness.

It's the same old stuff he has been teaching for years now and which has been debunked in many articles on this blog. A full review of the book obviously cannot be given at this time but the description is enough to inform the reader what Tim will be teaching. So, I ran it through ChatGPT for an analysis. While the analysis had some positive things to say about it the conclusion overall was negative. It is reposted here in full. 

Below is a veracity-focused analysis, separating what is well-supported, what is partially plausible, and what is not supported by current evidence. I’ll evaluate the claims as historians, biblical scholars, and archaeologists would—not whether they are theologically meaningful, but whether they are demonstrably true.

---

1. “The New Testament really began at Bethabara”

Veracity: Partially true (theologically), false (historically as stated)

• What is true

  • The public ministry of Jesus begins with John the Baptist (Mark 1:1–11).

  • John’s ministry takes place outside Jerusalem, in the wilderness near the Jordan.

  • The Fourth Gospel explicitly names “Bethany/Bethabara beyond the Jordan” (John 1:28 in some manuscript traditions).

• What is not true

  • The New Testament as a historical corpus does not “begin” at Bethabara.

    • Historically, the New Testament emerges decades later, with Paul’s letters (c. 50s CE) and the Gospels (c. 65–95 CE).

    • Canon formation occurs centuries later.

  • Even narratively, the Gospels themselves frame Pentecost (Acts 2) as the birth of the Church.

Verdict:

Bethabara can be framed as the inaugural moment of Jesus’ mission, but not as the historical or canonical beginning of the New Testament.

---

2. “Bethabara was a real, identifiable priestly site”

Veracity: Unproven

• What is true

  • Bethabara/Bethany beyond the Jordan is a real toponym preserved in textual tradition.

  • The Jordan River region was associated with ritual purification.

  • Archaeology confirms Jewish ritual activity at several Jordan crossings.

• What is not established

  • There is no archaeological evidence identifying Bethabara as a priestly center, sanctuary, or Zadokite site.

  • No inscriptions, priestly artifacts, or cultic structures link it to an organized priesthood.

  • Scholarly debate continues over where Bethabara actually was (east vs. west of the Jordan).

Verdict:

Bethabara is real as a place name, but its status as a priestly sanctuary is speculative.

---

3. “John the Baptist was the final legitimate High Priest of the Zadokite lineage”

Veracity: False (by historical standards)

• What is true

  • Luke presents John as priestly by birth (son of Zechariah, a Temple priest).

  • The Zadokites were the legitimate priestly line in earlier biblical tradition.

  • Some sectarian Jews (e.g., Qumran community) believed the Jerusalem priesthood was corrupt.

• What is not true

  • No ancient source (biblical, Qumran, Josephus, rabbinic) calls John:

    • a High Priest

    • a Zadokite

    • a functioning cultic authority

  • John never performs priestly duties (sacrifice, altar service).

  • High Priests were appointed politically under Roman oversight—John held no such office.

Verdict:

This claim has no historical evidence and contradicts how priesthood functioned in the Second Temple period.

---

4. “The earliest disciples were formed in the wilderness, not Galilee or Jerusalem”

Veracity: Partially true, overstated

• What is true

  • Several early disciples (Andrew, possibly John) originated with John the Baptist (John 1).

  • Initial messianic expectation forms before Jesus’ Galilean ministry.

• What is false

  • The Gospels clearly show:

    • Discipleship formation primarily in Galilee

    • Teaching, commissioning, and movement consolidation in towns and synagogues

  • Jerusalem becomes central very early (Passion, Resurrection, Pentecost).

Verdict:

Some disciples begin in the wilderness, but discipleship formation is predominantly Galilean and Jerusalem-centered.

---

5. “Baptism, repentance, and covenant renewal began before Pentecost and outside the Temple”

Veracity: True (with qualifications)

• What is solid

  • John’s baptism predates Pentecost.

  • It occurs outside the Temple system.

  • Repentance and renewal movements were active in Second Temple Judaism.

• Important clarification

  • John’s baptism is not Christian baptism as understood post-resurrection.

  • Pentecost marks:

    • the giving of the Spirit

    • communal ecclesial identity

    • apostolic mission

Verdict:

Historically correct, but theological continuity should not be overstated.

---

6. “The priesthood described by Ezekiel survived in exile and prepared the way for Messiah”

Veracity: Theologically interpretive, historically unprovable

• What is true

  • Ezekiel’s vision deeply influenced later Jewish thought.

  • Some groups (possibly Qumran) saw themselves as custodians of priestly purity.

• What is not demonstrable

  • No evidence of a continuous, organized Ezekielian priesthood operating into the 1st century.

  • No direct link between such a priesthood and John or Jesus.

Verdict:

This is theological interpretation, not historical fact.

---

7. “The early Church was launched from purity and prophecy, not power and politics”

Veracity: Rhetorically true, historically incomplete

• What is accurate

  • Early Christianity began as a marginal, prophetic movement.

  • It opposed certain religious and political powers.

• What is omitted

  • From its earliest decades, Christianity:

    • engaged cities

    • navigated Roman structures

    • interacted with Temple authorities

  • Power and politics enter the story very early, not centuries later.

Verdict:

True as a theological emphasis, not as a full historical description.

---

Overall Assessment

Claim Category	Veracity
Wilderness importance	✔ Partially true
John as priestly reformer	✔ Limited
John as Zadokite High Priest	✖ False
Bethabara as priestly center	✖ Unproven
Pre-Pentecost renewal	✔ True
Ezekielian priesthood continuity	✖ Speculative
Church origin narrative	✔ Theologically framed

---

Final Judgment

This work is best described as:

A theologically driven reinterpretation that blends real biblical motifs with speculative historical reconstruction.

It does not meet the standards of historical proof for several of its strongest claims, particularly regarding:

• John the Baptist’s priestly status

• Zadokite lineage

• Bethabara as an institutional sanctuary

However, it correctly highlights:

• the wilderness as a critical biblical setting

• John’s foundational role

• the non-imperial origins of Jesus’ ministry

In short:

• Compelling theology

• Weak historical verification

• Strong rhetorical framing

• Not academically established

The God Culture: The Feasts of Light Book Review

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has released a nine-week study guide on how to keep the feasts titled The Feasts of Light. 

The subtitle, Obedience Over Sacrifice, is both brazen and hilarious. Brazen because Tim is openly teaching keeping the feasts without offering up sacrifices and hilarious because this is actually disobedience. The subtitle comes from 1 Samuel 15. 

20 And Saul said unto Samuel, Yea, I have obeyed the voice of the LORD, and have gone the way which the LORD sent me, and have brought Agag the king of Amalek, and have utterly destroyed the Amalekites.

21 But the people took of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the chief of the things which should have been utterly destroyed, to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God in Gilgal.

22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.

It's not clear why Tim thinks this verse supports him in his partial observance of the feasts. Samuel is not saying God doesn't desire sacrifice. He is saying that he does not want a sacrifice he did not command. Saul was seeking to sacrifice animals the LORD had demanded be slaughtered. Had he sacrificed them he would have been offering up strange fire like the sons of Aaron. The point is Saul was disobedient not that sacrifices are unimportant. 

On page 13 Tim writes: 

Partial obedience is complete rebellion disguised as worship.

The irony is thick as Tim denies the necessity of sacrifices in keeping the feasts. He is behaving exactly like Saul. 

The study guide is rather puzzling as Tim does not offer suggestions on how to keep the feasts in the guide itself. Instead the guide acts as a primer on the symbolic meaning of each feast and how Christ fulfills them. Ah, yes there's that word fulfill. It doesn't mean abolish or finished.

2 Ful􏰁lled Does Not Mean Finished

When Yahusha said He came to ful􏰁ll the Law, He used the Greek plēroō — “to fi􏰁ll to completion,” not “to abolish.”

A cup 􏰁filled to the brim is not discarded; it is complete and ready to be shared.

Each Feast 􏰁finds its fullest meaning in Him, yet the invitation to celebrate remains.

“To ful􏰁ll is to illuminate, not eliminate.”

pg. 23

Comparing the work of Christ to filling a cup with water is a horrible analogy. Bringing up the "fulfill does not mean abolish" bugbear is more of Tim's dishonesty. Pleroo means TO FINISH, to BRING TO AN END. He has been corrected on this before and refuses to learn. 

The Greek says fulfill, or pleroo, means "to complete."

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g4137/kjv/tr/0-1/

πληρόω plēróō, play-ro'-o; from G4134; to make replete, i.e. (literally) to cram (a net), level up (a hollow), or (figuratively) to furnish (or imbue, diffuse, influence), satisfy, execute (an office), finish (a period or task), verify (or coincide with a prediction), etc.:—accomplish, after, (be) complete, end, expire, fill (up), fulfil, (be, make) full (come), fully preach, perfect, supply.

Christ completed the law. He finished the law and brought to an end by executing it fully. All the shadows of the law were perfected and brought to reality in and by Him. He is the Passover lamb sacrificed for us, He is God tabernacling in human flesh, He is the firstfruits from the dead, His blood is sprinkled on the mercy seat in Heaven making atonement for us, He sent the Holy Spirit on Pentecost just as He gave Moses the law on that same day, and on it goes as all the sacrifices and all the feasts and all the holy days are brought to their completion and fulfillment in Him. The book of Hebrews is very explicit that Christ completed the law by becoming incarnate and shedding his own blood for us. 

https://thegodculturephilippines.blogspot.com/2021/09/the-god-culture-rest-case-for-sabbath.html

The law is not abolished but remains a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ. 

Galatians 3:23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

The whole purpose of the law is to lead us to Christ. But Tim would have us all live in the shadows.

3 The Shadow and the Substance

Paul wrote: “These are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Messiah.” (Col 2:16–17, cf. Heb 10:1)

A shadow proves light exists. We don’t destroy the shadow because the light appeared — we walk in it toward its source.

The Feasts remain the pattern of heavenly realities (Heb 8:5; Rev 21:23). The shadow does not disappear until the source is removed. Heaven is still there.

pg. 23

Sorry, but no. Jesus nailed the law to the cross. We are dead to the law and alive to Christ. 

Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

Eph 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

Hebrews 10:1 also serves Tim no purpose. 

For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

If the shadow doesn't disappear then that means the sacrifices of the law, which were a shadow of Christ, are still to be offered up! But not even Tim is crazy enough to say that. He acknowledges that Christ put an end to sacrifices. However, that just makes his system illogical. There is no partial keeping of the law. We either keep the whole thing or none of it. That includes the sacrifices, the washings, the stonings, and all the rest. 

The New Testament doctrine of the law being fulfilled in Christ and Christians no longer being obligated to keep the Mosaic law, including the feasts, is well known. At this point it's like beating a dead horse. 

The most interesting part of this book is the end where Tim has a detailed worship plan for each feast.  The worship order for Passover is representative of the rest. 

PASSOVER (Pesach .1 פסח )
Evening Meal & Service (Sunset to Sunrise) — Feast Sabbath

(Cooking and Serving Allowed)

Service Elements:

Opening prayer of thanksgiving
Reading of Exodus 12 & the Gospels (Capture Narrative) 

Consumption of bitter herbs as commanded (unleavened bread included)  

Meal with any clean meat (no sacrifices — Messiah is the Lamb) 

Foot-washing (optional, John 13)
Family testimonies
“This do in remembrance of Me” (The original Communion) Close with worship

Notes:

Scripture shows households contributing (Ex. 12:3–4); shared meal is appropriate.

Absolutely no lamb sacrifice — Yahusha ful􏰁lled it once for all. Menu only specifies the inclusion of Bitter Herbs signifying the bitterness of slavery in Egypt.

pg. 64

First of all that is not how God commands Passover to be kept. A sacrificed lamb is the very essence of the feast. To say that Yahusha fulfilled the sacrifice and yet demand the feast still be kept is schizophrenic. The feast cannot be both fulfilled and not fulfilled. 

It should not be forgotten that everything Tim does finds its telos in restoring the Philippines as the most important land in the world. It is in this land that the law of God will be restored in full and that includes the feasts. Here is his declaration. 

Today, we stand as one people — humbled, awakened, and ready — as Yahuah calls the Philippines to restore His ways, His rhythms, and His Appointed Times.

For generations, our nation inherited calendars, traditions, and celebrations that obscured the very Feasts Yahuah commanded for His people. Not in rebellion — but in innocence.
Not in de􏰀fiance — but in inheritance.

Not because pastors failed — but because a strong delusion swept across the earth as Scripture foretold.

But now, the veil is lifting.
Truth is returning.
The ancient paths are being restored.

And the Philippines is rising to answer the call.

WE DECLARE

1. The Feasts of Yahuah belong to His people forever.

Not as rituals, not as burdens, but as celebrations of covenant, identity, and truth.

2. Yahusha is the center and ful􏰃fillment of every Feast — not the abolition of them.

Fulfilled does not mean forgotten. Fulfilled does not mean erased. Fulfilled means brought to fullness.

3. We honor the example of the Apostles, especially Paul, who kept and taught the Feasts after the resurrection.

4. We reject the counterfeits, replacements, and occult mixtures introduced by man-made systems.

We return to Scripture — not tradition.

5. We restore what Yahuah commanded for all generations:

Passover, Unleavened Bread, First Fruits, Shavuot, Trumpets, Atonement, Tabernacles, the Last Great Day, and His Weekly Sabbath.

WE CALL UPON THE NATION

Pastors — to lead without fear.
Families — to teach these truths to their children.
Worship teams — to 􏰀ll the nation with songs of the Mo’edim. Congregations — to awaken to the rhythm of Heaven.
Youth and students — to rise as restorers of ancient truth.

THIS IS OUR DECLARATION

The Year of Restoration has begun —
and the Philippines will rise to restore the Biblical Feasts of Yahuah.

From Luzon to Visayas to Mindanao, from the mountains to the islands, from churches to homes,
from pastors to children —

the Philippines returns to the ancient paths. And the Remnant follows worldwide.

This is our time.
This is our calling.
This is our identity.
This is the Restoration of the Mo’edim.

Let us make this the year the Philippines — as a nation — begins to restore the Biblical Feasts and return to the Appointed Times of Yahuah.

pg. 59-60

This is quite literally Tim's declaration of war against history, geography, theology, and the Filipino people. For Tim to lead Filipinos into keeping the law, especially in partial obedience, is to lead them away from Christ and towards death. The Philippines does not need another phony, false teacher such as Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture. 

The God Culture: Mo'edim Dawning Album Review

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture and Foundations Echo Collective has released a new album. It's titled Mo'edim Dawning and is all about the Levitical Feasts. 

Mo'edim in the title serves two purposes. 1. It is the word translated feasts in the Bible. It means appointed times. 2. It's Tim's way of signifying exotic theological depth. It's not enough for him to celebrate the feasts. He celebrates the Mo'edim. The problem here is that this ersatz depth is historically untethered. It's Second Temple Judaism without the Temple.

This AI generated album is so milquetoast and repulsive I couldn't listen to the whole thing. It is worse than Celine Dion and I hate Celine Dion but at least she has a soul. The "music" is so bland and even more formulaic and derivative than CCM they should open a new Dove category for worst album of the year. Here is a million dollar idea for singer and musician Timothy Jay Schwab: write and record your own music. Or how about this, Ok Computer but the lyrics are praise and worship. Take a lesson from Radiohead and learn intelligent music can only be created by humans.

The lyrics repeat the blasé message of our hearts are on fire and we are rising up and Yahuah, not God, is great. The majority of these lyrics are about the "singer" and less about the "singer's" deity who is Tim's deity who is the binity of Yahuah and Yahusha. Tim is an avowed anti-trinitarian who thinks the Holy Spirit is likely a creation. The theology behind these lyrics is heretical as the album's purpose is to steer people into keeping the feasts which Christ has fulfilled and which we are under no obligation to keep nor could we possibly keep because they all require animal sacrifices at the temple by a Levite priest.

Probably the worst offender on this album is Happy Birthday Yahusha (Shavout). The incarnation is not a fulfillment of Shavout or the Feast of Weeks or Pentecost as it is known by Christians. Pentecost is fulfilled by the outpouring of the Holy Spirt in the upper room as written in Acts 2. Remember, Jerusalem was filled with Jews from all over the world to celebrate Pentecost. If Jesus was born on Pentecost his parents would have been in Jerusalem. The incarnation is a fulfillment of the Feast of Tabernacles because Christ tabernacled in the flesh with us (John 1:14). The title alone is enough to write this off as heresy. 

Now for the lyrics.

Happy birthday Yahusha our king
We lift our hearts and gladly sing
Born on the feast when fire came down
You wear forever the golden crown
Light of heaven, Word made flesh
We celebrate your righteousness
Happy birthday Yahusha our king
All creation begins to sing

Hallelujah

From dawn till dusk let praises ring
Joyful voices to you we bring
In every heart your love will (allow??)
All our hopes are lifted now

Light of heaven, Word made flesh
We celebrate your righteousness
Happy birthday Yahusha our king
All creation begins to sing

Hallelujah 

With every year we'll shout and (play?)
Happy Birthday Yahusha today
Peace and joy in the air we share in your name
We are filled with praise

I listened to this song four times to get the lyrics right and I still cannot make out two words but this is good enough to show the absolute inanity of these lyrics. Thankfully it's very short. Unfortunately it's also staccato and catchy so it's going to be in my head for a while. 

According to the credits Timothy Jay Schwab wrote the lyrics. 

Is this really the best he could do? Tim has been a "Christian" for four decades and this is the highest praise he could muster for the incarnation? A categorically inappropriate Happy Birthday song? I suppose the theological heft of Hark the Herald Angels Sing and O Come All Ye Faithful are too high a bar for Tim to reach. The opening scene of Life of Brian is more reverent than this tripe. 

Just imagine if this is what the Angels sang when they appeared to the shepherds. Imagine reducing the miracle of the virgin birth, of God tabernacling in human flesh, to a banal Happy Birthday, we celebrate your righteousness. The fact that God became man for the express purpose of being a propitiatory sacrifice is a solemn event. It is not a time to put on party hats and sing Happy Birthday. While Christ was born in the flesh he is eternally God. There is never a time when he was not. The fact that God was born of Mary also means something else Tim rejects. Mary is the mother of God.

39:26 And they do indeed embrace the harlot of Babylon taking her image found in archeology centuries before Mary was ever born and they used that image of the harlot of Babylon in their worship and call her those same titles of the ancient goddess. Mother of God. Well, that's not Mary's title, that's the ancient goddess.

The Final World Power in the 7 Ekklesias of Revelation. The Key. Answers In 2nd Esdras Part 7

Making this asinine claim shows that Tim is completely unfamiliar with the disputes of the 5th century over the nature of Jesus Christ and the necessity of calling Mary the theotokos or God bearer. The title Mother of God says less about Mary and more about Jesus Christ. Mary did not give birth to a human person, she gave birth to the second person of the Trinity who tabernacled in human flesh. The title does not mean she is the source of the divinity of Christ only that the one born from her was God. The Council of Chalcedon cleared up this debate and left the following definition:

https://www.monergism.com/definition-council-chalcedon-451-ad

...begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the virgin Mary, the mother of God, according to the manhood;...

https://www.theopedia.com/chalcedonian-creed

Rather than being a title taken from a Babylonian goddess calling Mary the Mother of God or theotokos is a bulwark protecting the divinity of Jesus Christ. If one cannot confess that Mary is the Mother of God or that God was born, God died, and God rose from the dead, then one does not have a right understanding of who Jesus Christ is.

But let's get even more to the point. The Yahusha being praised in this song is not Jesus Christ. He is a figment of Tim's imagination existing as a binary with his Father Yahuah. The Bible tells us Jesus Christ IS YHWH (John 8:58 and 12:37-41) and that he is one person in a trinity along with the Father and the Holy Spirit. This album is literally a paean disguised as worship to a non-existent deity encouraging people to keep the Levitical Feasts which Jesus fulfilled and can no longer be kept today because there is no priesthood and no temple. Not only that but it's also AI generated slop. A computer cannot praise the deity be he real or fictional like Yahusha. 

This album is part of a larger package which includes three children's books and a nine-week study guide on keeping the feasts. Tim believes he is restoring these feasts by telling people to keep them. However, without a temple, without Levitical priests, and without sacrifices these feasts cannot be kept properly. Thankfully Jesus Christ has fulfilled the feasts and we are no longer obligated to keep them. To insist otherwise is to teach a false Gospel and a false Christ.