The God Culture: Rest: The Case for Sabbath Review Part 2: Keeping the Sabbath is More Important Than Your Salvation

My initial review of Timothy Jay Schwab's new book Rest: The Case for Sabbath focused primarily on the foundational arguments for his case. The evidence shows that Timothy does not understand the nature of Jesus Christ's priesthood, the nature of the law and what Paul had to say about it, or the nature of our salvation in and through Jesus Christ by grace through faith alone. Having examined Timothy's rotten theological foundation I now want to take a look at other things that are in this book.

Page 7 of this book says it is available at RestCase.org but that is a lie. The actual website for this book is RestSabbath.org. The fact that he changed the website but did not change the book to match is hilarious because now it contains a pretty big error that will throw unknowing readers off track. Of course there is no content to speak of on the website so I suppose it doesn't matter much.

The Sabbath Day of Atonement. Answers On Sabbath Part 1

Timothy Jay Schwab strung along his viewers for two months saying this book was soon to be published when it was already published on Amazon on August 8th and for free on Issu also in early August. The free e-book is at Issu and not at RestSabbath.org. Tim could have had people downloading and reading this book, which he claims is very important, in August but he waited till October 1st to notify his viewers where it could be obtained. Why did he engage in such deception? Because he wanted to make a big to-do and officially release the book on the Day of Atonement. So, not only are the contents of this book a lie but so is the public releasing of it. 

But let's get started on the awful dreck that forms the contents of this book. Download the free PDF and follow along. 

First up let's look at some of the many strawman arguments in this book. A strawman argument is defined as follows:

A straw man fallacy occurs when someone takes another person’s argument or point, distorts it or exaggerates it in some kind of extreme way, and then attacks the extreme distortion, as if that is really the claim the first person is making.

https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-and-critical-thinking/logical-fallacies/logical-fallacies-straw-man/

Here are three of the many strawmen arguments in this book.

This Fourth Commandment is the one that the church seems to take issue. Generally, the other 9 seem palatable to them but do not dare tell the church it is supposed to rest for a day in the presence of Yahuah. 

pg. 52

The Church does not follow the Fourth Commandment? That's a flat out lie. The Church has one day a week, often more, where they meet and worship together. Sunday worship is based on the Fourth Commandment. All one has to do is read their writings to learn that fact. The Church never, ever says one can ignore the Fourth Commandment. Tim makes this argument because the Church does not worship on the Sabbath. He is presenting his opponent's side dishonestly.

Knowing that Messiah kept the Sabbath as His custom was, there are those scholars and especially seminaries that teach that Messiah then broke the Sabbath. 

pg. 103

Who says Jesus broke the Sabbath? Which theologian, Church, Seminary, or Pastor teaches Jesus broke the Sabbath? Without names this is just an empty claim. I have never, ever heard any theologian or minster assert such a thing. Tim is literally making up arguments to rail against. It's a ludicrous lie and another strawman argument. 

pg. 137

The title of this chapter as well as its content is another strawman. No one says Paul HATED THE LAW.  But they do say, along with Paul, that the law leads us to Christ and that it is passed away. That righteousness does not come from the law.  This chapter title is a misleading and loaded question that distorts and misrepresents the position actually held by the Church for the past 2,000 years.

Throughout this book Timothy condemns "scholars" for their wrong opinions but fails to cite any scholars or theologians or give their arguments. For the most part his arguments are fallacious strawmen. No one makes the claims he is making on their behalf. At least I have not heard anyone make them. Why doesn't he cite any scholars or theologians? Why does he not engage with actual arguments? 

Timothy has been a minster since his teens which means he's been deep in the Bible for 40 years now. He's seen it all. And what does Tim say is the most important issue of our time? Well, it's not YOUR salvation. Timothy Jay Schwab says it's rather selfish to think about your own salvation.

One will observe like David and Paul, the prophets endear the Commandments, the Law and the Sabbath. It was not about their desiring to be saved though as that is a selfish aim of the modern church.

 In our era, this is one of the most important topics, not your salvation.

pg. 51-52

What kind of minister of the Gospel would vomit forth such vile words saying keeping the sabbath is more important than your salvation? A minister of Satan that's who. Allow the Apostle Peter to rebut this murderer of souls.

Acts 2:40  And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.

Not only is seeking one's own salvation selfish and unimportant but so is making creeds. In fact, according to Tim, making a creed or a mission statement is Masonic.

So how then do we govern ourselves? Who do we follow? What church do we attend? Is there a denomination that gets this right?

You will never find denominations in scripture. His ekklesia cannot be broken into such. In our age, there are a Remnant of believers only. It is not 1.5 billion but a few in terms of the population of the world. They are one and defined as keeping His commandments. Those come from the Bible as should all of our doctrine.

Any organization one enters is a creation of men. You will notice just about all of them attempt to boil down their theology into a Statement of Faith or Mission Statement of sort. These are meaningless as any Statement of Faith that does not include every letter of the Word is no such. The origin of such practice is freemasonry as the Bible never says to create a Statement of Faith. You will find every False Prophet comes from the church within and has a great resume and great sounding Mission Statement. That is Pharisaism not Bible. If one can whittle their faith down to a sentence or paragraph, they are extremely shallow.

pg. 416

One is extremely shallow "if one can whittle their faith down to a sentence or paragraph?" Statements of faith originate from Freemasonry? Someone inform Timothy about the Nicene Creed, the Apostle's Creed, and the Creed of Chalcedon. Nobody ever claimed that a statement of faith or a creed or confession contained EVERY SINGLE ARTICLE of belief. Not to mention the Bible is not a statement of faith. It is a book that requires interpretation and it is from that which our faith develops. Herman Bavinck has two paragraphs from his Reformed Dogmatics which rebukes the foolishness of Timothy in his dismissal of creeds as well as his rejection of the Church.

Holy Scripture is no dogmatics. It contains all the knowledge of God we need but not in the form of dogmatic formulations. The truth has been deposited in Scripture as the fruit of revelation and inspiration, in a language that is the immediate expression of life and therefore always remains fresh and original. But it has not yet become the object of reflection and has not yet gone through the thinking consciousness of the believer. Here and there, for example in the letter to the Romans, there may be a beginning of dogmatic development, but it is no more than a beginning. The period of revelation had to be closed before that of dogmatic reproduction could start. Scripture is a gold mine; it is the church that extracts the gold, puts its stamp on it, and converts it into general currency.

Processing the content of Scripture dogmatically, however, is not just the work of one individual theologian, or of a particular church or school, but of the entire church throughout the ages, of the whole new humanity regenerated by Christ. The history of dogma and dogmatics is therefore to be regarded as a mighty attempt to appropriate the truth of God revealed in Christ and to fully understand the essence of Christianity. In evaluating that agelong dogmatic labor, people have erred both to the left and to the right and in turn been guilty both of overestimation and underestimation. The history of church and dogma has been disdained by all schools of thought that in the name of Scripture opposed all creeds, by Socinians and Remonstrants, by rationalistic and supernaturalistic, mystical and “biblical” theologians. 

Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 1, pgs 116-117

Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture would definitely fall under the category of a ""biblical" theologian" despite being neither strictly biblical (he utilizes Jubilees and other pseudepigrapha) nor a  theologian approaching anything like Christian orthodoxy. He thinks that the bare words of the text speak for themselves and that the meaning of the text is self-evident but this is not true. Even through his endeavors we see that the Scripture requires reflection and interpretation before it becomes an article of faith or belief. We do not only believe the bare words of the text but what they mean and there are many divergent meanings which is why there are many heretical groups like The God Culture. That is why there is a necessity of creeds and confessions. They help keep the Church focused and within the bounds of orthodoxy. The Nicene Creed is the tip of a large iceberg which stands as a bulwark against all heretical Titanics declaring, "You shall not pass."

It's clear that Tim has never entered into the rich and deep theology behind the creeds of the 4th and 5th centuries. The men who formulated them were not "extremely shallow." The works they produced on their own are erudite theological masterpieces which form the basis for the creeds and for the Church's belief, that is to say how the Church understands scripture. And they stand in a long line of interpreters stretching from Ignatius to Justin and on down to their time. The Church does not interpret scripture in a vacuum. If one does not understand the Trinitarianism of the Cappadocians then one cannot rightly understand the Nicene Creed.

How many people make up a proper church body? According to Tim the church is just "2 or more not thousands." 

Hebrews even establishes that the ekklesia, which Messiah defined as 2 or more not thousands, exhort or minister to each other daily. 

p. 352

Is 120 people too big?

Acts 1:15 And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,

How about 3,000?

Acts 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

Does Tim not realize that thousands IS 2 or more? Maybe he cannot do math. Perhaps he is thinking of modern mega churches. Is he really unaware of the ancient churches of Rome, Antioch, Constantinople, Alexandria, and Jerusalem each of which had hundreds if not thousands of faithful believers? What will he do with them? Oh, I know. He calls them false churches because they worship on the eighth day and not the seventh. The "TRUE EKKLESIA" worships on Saturday according to Tim. Find that church and then you find the true church. But therein lies the rub.

One thing in this book Tim never ever does is draw a line through history showing us the trajectory of the sabbath keeping True Church©™. That's because there has only been one True Church and it has never been an exclusively Sabbath keeping Church. It started out meeting in the Synagogues celebrating both the Sabbath and the Lord's Day but as the Church became less Jewish and more Gentile it abandoned the Synagogue and the Sabbath in favor of the Lord's Day alone. Tim cannot point to any literature or records or any testimony of any kind establishing the existence of a Sabbath keeping church for the past 2,000 years. Lest Tim say such evidence was suppressed and destroyed by the false Church and we do not have any, well, that is called the Argument From Ignorance and simply would not hold water. The evidence does not exist because such a church never existed.

This book is not only a defense of keeping the seventh day Sabbath but also of keeping the Feasts. But how exactly is one to keep the feasts especially as every single feast involved sacrifices? Let's listen to Tim.

The Book of Hebrews which tells us to keep the Sabbath or we are a sign of unbelief, explains that Messiah’s sacrifice has replaced all sacrifices of animals for eternity. Some will claim these offerings will be reinstituted after the Day of Judgment but that is another doctrine of men as it is unnecessary according to scripture. Yes, He replaced the sacrifice but the sacrifice still occurred and no scholar dare say Messiah’s sacrifice passed away. This changes the Feast observances a little but really not that much. However, we are still to keep these Feasts and Sabbaths according to the only source credible on the topic – the Bible.

p. 387

Ok, so the sacrifice of Jesus replaced all sacrifices and now we don't have to sacrifice anymore but how do we keep the Feasts? Tim does not say. He only tells us that the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross "changes the Feast observances a little bit really not that much." What does that even mean!!? Take Passover. The central rite of that Feast is a sacrifice. How is Passover changed "a little but really not much" when the very essence of the Passover, a sacrifice, is done away with? How are we to keep Passover when the Bible says Jesus IS our Passover? Sickeningly enough Tim encourages his listeners to eat lamb on the Passover because that is "a neat thing."

For Passover, have a meal and there is no specific diet as we do not sacrifice lambs anymore and that was what was eaten. You do not need to serve lamb though a neat thing if you can. Spend time with your family and friends teaching them the Passover story from Exodus and Jubilees if you can, instead of Easter. Tell them of its origin and how Messiah is the Passover, Unleavened Bread, and the First Fruit from among the dead even matching those dates. Demonstrate to them that these events cannot be separated into a pagan feast but the celebration remains as it always was. The only change is we no longer need to sacrifice animals according to Hebrews 4 among other places. 

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=742925862934100&id=376627072897316

Fun fact, one cannot celebrate the Passover without sacrificing a lamb at the required spot by a priest. For Tim to suggest we can celebrate Passover properly without sacrificing is to do away with the entire Feast of Passover of which the central rite is to sacrifice a lamb. Tim has much to say about the Old Testament Feasts but nothing to say about the Gospel Feast. His silence is telling. The Passover is replaced with the Lord's Supper, the bread and wine, something of which I have never heard Timothy speak, even in his two-part video series on Melchizedek whom he identifies as Jesus Christ and who brought bread and wine to Abraham. No wonder he is silent about the Lord's Supper as he is more into Jewish feast keeping than Christian worship.

How about the Feast of Atonement? Again, the central rite is a sacrifice made by the High Priest inside the Holy of Holies. How has that Feast been changed "a little really but not much?" How does one keep Passover and the Day of Atonement with no temple and no High Priest? Tim does not say. All in all this is a completely worthless paragraph and chapter that tells us nothing. His video on the subject is equally worthless as his advice is simply to do no work just like the regular Sabbath. How will the Feasts be reinstated in full in the Philippines when they are not to be fully kept?

Obviously there is no temple in Israel today so no actual need to go there although certainly visit that's fine. But we don't need that anymore. In fact watch our Solomon's Gold series and you will find His Holy of Holies on earth has always been permanently in the Garden of Eden which we locate in the Philippines. And the one in Israel was very temporary of course. Thus everyone should really travel to  the Philippines for these feasts. How about that? Something to think about. And this is why we say that the Philippines is where they will reinstate these feasts in full especially. 

https://philippinefails.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-god-culture-feasts-of-lord.html 

For as much as Tim harps on the necessity of keeping the law he is very ignorant of what the law actually teaches. It says one has to sacrifice in order to properly keep the Feasts. That has never been abrogated.  The non-abrogation of the law is something Tim constantly harps on. He continually reminds his audience that the law has not passed away and is still in effect. He seems to be too dumb to understand that would mean sacrifices are still in effect as Jesus said, not one jot or tittle would pass from the law till all things be fulfilled. 

The law also contains more than Ten Commandments. As usual Tim disagrees.

However, so-called scholars actually take that Pharisee paradigm and attempt to apply it to those who keep the Sabbath and the Law. They will even bark; “Do you sacrifice?” James said Messiah’s blood covered all sacrifices. How could a New Testament scholar be so absurd as to even ask? They bellow: “Do you obey all 614 commandments?” The Bible only gives 10. Only the Pharisees would claim 10 equals 614. How could any so-called scholar not realize that is leaven that they apply to those keeping the Bible practice using the false Pharisee measure of ignorance? They act like Pharisees. Certainly the Bible offers additional detail in the days of Moses later as to how to apply the 10 Commandments. However, they cover everything period. They always have and they always will.

The same scholars will claim Jesus(Yahusha) replaced the 10 Commandments with 2 which is illiterate as those 2 are direct quotes from the Law of Moses not new. However, He answers Pharisees who attempt to entrap Him. He answers from the Law of Moses the 1st Commandment in exact language and part of the Law of Moses that tells us to love our neighbor as ourselves also truly covering at least 5 of the commandments in tone. Neither are new but these 2 sum up, He says, the whole of the Law which rests on those 2 principles. That does not sound so complicated as to bark about 614 Laws does it? You cannot break either of the 10 Commandments without breaking the 2. You also cannot break any of the additional detail of Torah in Law without breaking the 10 Commandments.

p. 273-274

According to Tim all the hundreds of laws in Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy regarding treatment of slaves, cleanliness, sexual relations, inheritances, and sacrifices are just commentary on how to keep the Ten Commandments and the Ten Commandments rest on the two commandments of loving God and one's neighbor so there are really only two commandments and not 614 or even 10. How much more ridiculous can he be? Yes, Jesus said the law rests on the two commandments of loving God and one's neighbor but the 614 laws in the Torah are not commentary on how to keep the Ten Commandments. They are rules on how to build a functioning society. Which one of the Ten Commandments is expounded upon in the dietary laws? Or in the laws of leprosy? How about the laws about mold in the house, which of the Ten Commandments is that a commentary on?

How about this particular law: 

Exodus 23:19  Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk.

This commandment is repeated three times at Ex 23:19, 34:26, and Deuteronomy 14:21. What does it mean and which of the Ten Commandments does it expound upon? It must be vey important as it is repeated thrice. The standard interpretation is that milk and meat must not be mixed which is why Jewish houses have a kosher kitchen. But Tim apparently does not understand this law or the purpose of a kosher kitchen.

Some Jews generally have a separate kosher kitchen and a regular kitchen which means they do not keep kosher in the other kitchen.

p. 287

Tim could not be more wrong with this ridiculous statement. Jews always keep kosher and they do it in BOTH kitchens. One kitchen is for meat and the other is for all dairy products. Tim may call this interpretation of the law stupid because the law does not explicitly say one must separate milk and meat. However that is the entire point. The law must be interpreted.

One might suppose that all such questions ought to be resolved by each person separately, as a matter of individual conscience. But such an answer was not acceptable in ancient Israel. To begin with, the Bible itself requires that the Sabbath law be enforced, prescribing the death penalty for anyone who works on the Sabbath (Exod. 35:2). How could the courts decide who had violated this law unless what was forbidden was spelled out in all its particulars? Indeed, how could ordinary people know what might subject them to the death penalty and what not? Moreover, quite apart from the question of punishment, how could a person's own conscience reach a decision about the proper way to keep the Sabbath if what the Bible had to say on the subject seemed at times contradictory or even incomprehensible? Finally, conscience or not, ought there not to be some agreed standard of observance? If all people were free to determine the law for themselves, could the law truly be said to exist? 

For all these reasons, the Sabbath laws, indeed, all biblical laws were the object of particular interpretive scrutiny. From a very early period, no doubt, a body of authoritative interpretations accompanied the various legal prescriptions given by God to Israel, and these are reflected here and there in the Bible itself as well as in contemporaneous and subsequent Jewish and Christian writings. The ten laws of the Decalogue alone gave rise to an impressive body of interpretation. 

The Bible As it Was, James Kugel, pg. 386

Tim's entire mission is to restore Biblical Law in the Philippines and yet he continually disdains the law.

See it's time for this people of Ophir especially to learn the law and restore it just as their prophecies say they will. This is not some disjointed ADD approach it's very systematic and we're leading here because this is where the prophecies lead. We are teaching how to fulfill the very prophecies of Ophir.  This is no minor task and as you can see we certainly do not take our role lightly. This is happening folks and the Philippines will rise. Many around the world will follow and they are already starting to join. We're almost there.

https://philippinefails.blogspot.com/2020/05/the-god-culture-flat-earthers-and.html   

Notice, how entrenched Catholicism has forced itself in this land called the modern Philippines. They are there to defile the Sabbath as they hate it. They have always hated Yahuah’s ways and never represented it since their inception. However, the Philippines will be the first to shake off the Catholic Church in prophecy and condemn it and the New World Order even according to Messiah(Matt. 12:42), Isaiah(60:9) and Ezekiel(38).

The true Lord’s Day, Saturday, will be restored in this land in time as they restore His ways and His Laws. However, we all can look forward to this beginning in our own personal lives now. We can end this reign of terror from this Beast. Keep the Sabbath holy and restore the power of rest exposing their chaos in your life weekly.

pg. 364

How is Timothy Jay Schwab supposed to teach Filipinos to restore the law when he denies the content of the Torah? There are not only Ten Commandments or even just the two of loving God and neighbor. There are 614 laws in total and many of them require sacrifices. To proclaim that we can keep the whole law without sacrificing is to diminish the Law.

Deuteronomy 4:1 Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments, which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which the Lord God of your fathers giveth you.

22 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.

If the Philippines is going to restore the seventh day Sabbath will Sabbath breakers be executed as the law demands? Is the Philippines going to establish cities of refuge for those who accidentally kill someone? But that law with its time of banishment is tied to the life of the High Priest and there is no more earthly High Priest. The same goes for the ordeal of the bitter water for a woman accused of adultery which requires a priest to administer. See how the law is simply not tenable for any society to enact in our day? Will menstruating women be required to leave the home for as long as they are ritually impure? How shall a woman keep the law in redeeming her first born when, as even Tim rightly notes, sacrifices are done away with? The law is more than moral precepts and Feast Days. The Law is a code which directs every aspect of society. To keep the law properly one cannot take away from or add to it. That means one must sacrifice if one is to properly keep the Law.

It's not just Sabbath keeping Tim seeks to restore but also circumcision. You see, Paul, in his letter to the Galatians did not absolutely forbid circumcision. No, no, no. According to Tim he was writing against the Pharisee interpretation of circumcision which is that circumcision is salvation.

Understand circumcision is not genital mutilation as some would mischaracterize. It is a First Fruit Offering of the flesh of a male child. We even find medically, it is beneficial to most. What we don’t find even in the Law of Moses is that circumcision is salvation. It is not. It really is much like baptism in the same sense as it is something one does with their sons at a very early age of 8 days old. Thus the Apostolic leadership had a tough decision to make especially forcing Gentile men to now be circumcised. Ouch! 

They render a very wise decision and Paul abides by it. He is not in the leadership at that time though he was praised by them in this meeting. They send Paul and Barnabas out with this message. Anyone claiming Paul then went against the Apostles in his teaching of circumcision is illiterate of scripture because the message he shared is exactly what they decided. Essentially, the Pharisee emphasis on circumcision was wrong in the first place as it is not salvation and the leadership chose to tell the Gentile men to focus on other issues which just so happen to reinforce the Law of Moses which James taught then and Paul also taught. Again, the Pharisees do not understand the Law of Moses. When they say to keep it, they refer to the legalistic application in which they have expanded. The Apostles did not agree with that but what they never do is say not to keep the Law of Moses. It doesn’t happen and this passage is certainly not saying so as James then, reinforces the Law of Moses. 

p. 157

Circumcision is NOT a first fruit offering of the male child. It's a sign of God's covenant. That is basic Bible 101 and Tim can't even get that right. Ok, maybe it's a bit more advanced but after 40 years in the ministry he should know what the significance of circumcision is. Anyone who was not circumcised was excluded from the covenant. 

Genesis 17:14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.

So, yes circumcision was essential under the old covenant. Of course having your foreskin removed was no guarantee of one's salvation but it was a token that one was a member of God's covenant people. That is EXACTLY the same function as baptism. Baptism REPLACES circumcision as it is the entrance into the covenant.

Colossians 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

In the Philippines circumcision has been practiced for centuries, a custom likely adopted from the Muslims. It certainly does not derive from the Hebrews because Filipinos are not circumcised at 8 days but between the ages of 8 and 14 years. Filipinos do not practice that rite according to the scriptures which is another fact proving Filipinos are not Israelites as Timothy Jay Schwab claims. Being lovers of pork and shrimp Filipinos also do not follow the dietary laws. Tim wants those laws restored too. He does not bring that up in his book about the Sabbath but he does mention the dietary laws in many other places.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DIlKkbwl3w&lc=Ugyl5grESB6KRMvc7ld4AaABAg

Marco De La Vega Yah bless, Good evening, I have a question, can we eat pork or shrimp, the unclean foods, I and my wife are reading Acts 10-15

it says all things are clean, are we reading this correctly, thank you.

The God Culture We will cover that in time. It's not about not allowed as much as the one who created those animals says they are not good for food. That never changed as Paul nor Peter actually says so and certainly did not reorder the anatomy of every unclean animal all of sudden no change the physiology of all mankind then and for all future generations which such illiterate readings require if one thinks. There is no changing what Yahuah calls unclean and we will cover this in time. Yah Bless.

"It's not about not allowed as much as the one who created those animals says they are not good for food?" Chapter and verse, please! There is no verse that says such a thing. We are never told pigs and rabbits are "not good for food." In fact both of those animals are very good for food. From bacon to rabbit stew to shrimp scampi all those unclean foods are indeed very good for food. The issue is that God forbids them. He never tells us why some animals are unclean but there is a large body of interpretation regarding that which basically compares the unclean animals to various bad habits and people types that we must avoid. Once again Tim is actually denigrating the law even while he says we must keep it. And good luck getting Filipinos/Israelites to stop eating pork and shrimp.

There is a lot more garbage in this book but I want to focus on one final thing. What day is the Lord's day?

pg. 357

Tim rightly notes that the term "Lord's Day" is used once in all of scripture in Rev 1:10. In his snide way Tim identifies the Lord's Day with the seventh day Sabbath.

The argument begins in a false paradigm. Should we keep the Lord’s Day or the Sabbath Day. It is like saying: Should we eat popcorn or corn that is popped. Anyone telling you the Lord’s Day is anything but the Sabbath is illiterate of scripture. Scripture uses the term once yet tells us Messiah is Lord of the Sabbath. No one can actually debate that. However, the mantra continues over possibly thousands of years.

p. 358

Illiterate is one of Tim's favorite words appearing 56 times in the book and many more times in his videos. If you don't believe the things he teaches then you are illiterate and know nothing about scripture. One thing Tim does not write in his book is that Lord's Day is an affectionate term for the Sabbath.

What is the Lord's Day? Doctrines of Men Resolved. What Does the Pope Say?

Lanny Lubaton: I'm just curious, wondering: I 'know' the Lord's Day is Sabbath, He's the Lord of the Sabbath... But why is it Rev1:10 is expressed as "the Lord's Day", instead of sabbath? Almost, if not ALL, verses pertaining to it is CLEARLY described as sabbath. But this verse is unique...WHY?... Is something being inferred?... It could mean anything? (perhaps Judgment, End of Days, Rapture, 2nd Coming... coz John is witnessing it?). Until the Bible prove itself... it's Sabbath. 

The God Culture: The thing is that is the only time the term is used in such terms. There is a Day of the Lord which is the Second Coming and not related to the day in which John was in the spirit which was Yahusha's day, Sabbath. Frankly, it is an affectionate term for the day and perfect really and indisputable as to which day he refers. Yah Bless.

Maybe Tim did not include this tidbit in his book because he realized how stupid and unsupportable from both history and scripture that nonsense is. The Lord's Day has always meant Sunday, the first day of the week, Resurrection Day. The fact that Tim teaches the novel doctrine that Jesus Christ rose on the Sabbath and not the first day of the week cannot detain us here. Refuting that position would take a book. Suffice to say early Christians always referred to the first day of the week on which they worshipped as the Lord's Day or the Resurrection Day.  One of the earliest documents to note this is the Didache which was written around 74 AD and reflects a much earlier tradition. Revelation was written after 90 AD. It's a no-brainer that John was using established language of the Church when he wrote "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day." Early Christians would understand that to mean not the Sabbath but the first day of the week. 

Quite frankly I am shocked at the contents of this book. This is supposed to be Timothy Jay Schwab's big, important theological statement that, as the cover says, no one can dispute. Yet it is poorly argued with many strawman arguments and it is not thorough as Tim neglects to cover very important verses which contradict him, namely 2 Cor 3:6 and Heb 7:12.  Every page features a harangue against scholars (scholar or scholars or appears 161 times) as Tim spills a lot of ink calling them names rather than arguing against their actual positions. From the way he cites the Early Church Fathers it is obvious he is not familiar with them or that they celebrated both the Sabbath and Sunday as the Lord's Day. Rather than offer any real history about why the Church gradually stopped observing the seventh day Sabbath Tim resorts to invective calling the Church the Synagogue of Satan and falsely claiming that Constantine subverted the Church. He has no interest in understanding why the Church eventually neglected and rejected sabbath observance long before Constantine. He simply does not understand how the Church grew in its understanding of the Gospel and its proper relationship to the synagogue and the Law. 

Tim's test for identifying the true Church is not their doctrine of Jesus Christ but whether or not they keep the seventh day Sabbath. The doctrine of who Jesus Christ is is very important and make no mistake, Tim does not know who He is. Listen to his heretical Christology.

"But he that said unto him," Who's that? Yahuah. "Thou art my son. Today have I begotten thee." Now we know Yahusha is the only begotten son meaning birthed in the flesh by a woman but he existed prior as he saith also in another place.

Order of Melchizedek. The New Testament & Qumran Scrolls. Answers In Jubilees 38

That is heresy. Jesus Christ being the only begotten son does not refer to his being "birthed in the flesh" by Mary but to His eternal sonship as he is eternally begotten from the Father. But this is no place to dive into the doctrine of His Eternal Generation. This heretical Christology is a direct result of Tim's denial of the trinity.

Tim's level of pride is through the roof as on the cover, as well as in the text and his videos, he claims no one can  dispute or disprove the things he says. All the while I have done exactly that several times over. I have unmasked Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture for the liar and heretic that he is and I will continue to do so especially as it relates to the Philippines.

Given how ignorant the book and its author are both theologically and historically it is amazing anyone could call this trash "an education" and "a game changer." Yet that is what this deceived person does.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arhIyUEAkig&lc=UgwMIj-70e566c0nwUh4AaABAg

Jason Daves Just finished up “Rest The Case For The Sabbath”. Fantastic book!!! It’s like a Battleship pulling up to the boat dock… It’s hard to do conduct battle with that ship sitting in the canoe of ignorance and deception. That book is an EDUCATION, I highly recommend that book to anyone, it’s a game changer. I liked it so much that I bought 2 and I gave one to some family so they can get educated. Great video as always 👍 Keep them coming! Yah is good and blesses abundantly!

The God Culture That's awesome! Thank you. Yah Bless.

The sad thing is not so much that this man is deceived, there are millions of Mormons after all, but that Timothy Jay Schwab made a conscious decision to move to the Philippines in order to turn people away from the grace that is to be found in Jesus Christ alone apart from the Law. Timothy literally moved to this country with his thrice divorced second wife, Anna Zamoranos, to murder the souls of Filipinos. This man is one of Timothy's many victims.

The God Culture: Big Mistakes: Where Do We Go When We Die Part 4

Having examined Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture's doctrine of the afterlife I want to end on a lighter note and examine a few of his many errors. Along the way Tim has dropped quite a lot of boners. These run the gamut from linguistic flubs to geological blunders. 

Let's start with one of the stupidest errors of all. 

What Is Hell? Is It Real? Part 9 Answers In 2nd Esdras 23I

1:22:36 No men enter the lowest hell which is Taratrus or in Greek Gehenna or Tartaroo.

This is wrong. Tartaroo is a verb. It means to be cast into Tartartus. It appears one time in the entire Bible and that is in 2 Peter 2:4. Is this an oversight? Tim says Tartaroo is a place several times in this video. At Tim's favorite website for learning Greek and Hebrew you can look up that verse and find that the Greek word tartaroo is a verb.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g5020/kjv/tr/0-1/

A verb is not a noun and therefore Tartaroo is not a place. How he missed this is beyond me. Perhaps he is intentionally lying to his audience. 

But it's not only Greek that Tim has a problem with. He also is not familiar with English. 

Where Do We Go When We Die? Part 1. Answers In 2nd Esdras 23A

9:46 That which are alive and remain until the coming of Yahusha shall not prevent them which are asleep. No, we covered this before uh in this series. Uh, basically the rapture segment. I think part one. This word prevent is actually precede or go before in Hebrew. It's not prevent, never means prevent not even one single time. It is called fraud and they do that in the Bible. That's why we got to check the Hebrew and the Greek. So, otherwise it would make no sense. You can't prevent those which are dead and asleep, you can't prevent their spirits from from rising. You can't do that. That's ridiculous. So, it's not even, it just doesn't even make any sense.

There are actually two bloopers in this section. First of all 1 Thessalonians, from which Tim is quoting, was written in Greek and not Hebrew. Second of all the word prevent does mean to precede. 

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/prevent

Did Tim forget that the KJV was written in the early 1600's? Is he really so dumb as not to know that more than a few of the words in the KJV are archaic or their meaning in common usage has changed? Prevent is used 7 times in the KJV and it never means to hinder or stop but to go before or precede.

https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/search.php?hs=1&q=prevent

There is no fraud here from the translators of the King James Bible. The only fraud is from Timothy Jay Schwab. One wonders why he is reading from the KJV but the text onscreen is the NIV. It does not make any sense.

Now, I understand Tim is a modern man and is by all accounts not a man of culture in the least. So, it's no surprise that he has never read Dante's Divine Comedy and has no idea what it's all about.

What Is Hell? Is It Real? Part 9 Answers In 2nd Esdras 23I

34:08 So, "One important late medieval figure who played a key role in shaping the cultural concepts of life and death," this is, this is important to understand, "even to the present day," this is, this is a key to how this got in, uh, in, in such a large way, uh, in society and in churches, "is Dante Aligheri the Florentine poet who was born in the 1260s and died in 1321. In his epic poem known as the Divine Comedy." Hmm, comedy? Hell part of a comedy? Imagine that. This guy is an occultist loser, let's be clear. He is not looking to educate people and he doesn't represent the Bible at all in any of his poem. 

"And Dante creates a fictional version of himself." Who, who's he copying here? Think about it."Who travels through the furthest reaches of hell ,inferno, purgatory, purgatorio and paradise, paradiso. Uh, what is Dante doing? Well he's replacing and mocking Enoch's journey with his own. What an idiot. And the church bought it because they prefer the occult view over that of the Bible. That's fact. Dante did not make up anything really though. He just replaced Enoch with an occult view of himself of course, uh, and that's really it. I mean the guy's an idiot. He, he didn't do anything, okay? Maybe his poem, you know, maybe it rhymes well. I don't know but whatever it does or doesn't do, whether it is a masterpiece of sort, what makes it of such importance is it's a linchpin in time in infusing the occult into the church. Oh, good job there buddy.

To be fair it is a rather lame joke to say, "I read Dante's Divine Comedy but it wasn't very funny." It's lame and stale because Comedy here does not mean a Marx Brothers routine. Dante titled his poem Comedia not because it is funny but because he wrote it in the vulgar tongue.

Dante called the poem "Comedy" (the adjective "Divine" was added later, in the 16th century) because poems in the ancient world were classified as High ("Tragedy") or Low ("Comedy"). Low poems had happy endings and were written in everyday language, whereas High poems treated more serious matters and were written in an elevated style. Dante was one of the first in the Middle Ages to write of a serious subject, the Redemption of humanity, in the low and "vulgar" Italian language and not the Latin one might expect for such a serious topic.

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

Let's throw Tim a bone here and acknowledge that Dante was indeed a loser. He was exiled from his hometown of Florence. The reason was totally political and serves as one of many inspirations for the Divine Comedy. Tim is wrong here again in so many places. Dante did not infuse the occult into the Church. His poem reflects medieval Christian beliefs about the afterlife. How would Dante be mocking Enoch and his journey when Enoch was a hidden book until long after Dante was dead!? 

There is a lot that can be said about The Divine Comedy and the rest of Dante's works but I won't say them here. They are worthy to be read. I found a copy at Booksale in the mall a few years ago for real cheap. It's a wonder Tim did not mention Paradise Lost which has had just as much if not more impact on Christian beliefs especially about hell, demons, and Satan.

Tim is reading an article from the Khan Academy about Dante and he screws up its provenance.

29:34 Let's go to an article from a Jewish organization. Uh, in an article from Khan Academy we find a reasonable explanation that makes sense as to what is happening with the church's screwed up view on heaven and hell.

Again, this is a very simple error that stems from not doing any research. A quick search will turn up this:

Salman Amin Khan (born 11 October 1976), known as Sal Khan, is an American educator and the founder of Khan Academy, a free online education platform and an organization with which he has produced over 6,500 video lessons teaching a wide spectrum of academic subjects, originally focusing on mathematics and sciences.  He is also the founder of Khan Lab School, a brick-and-mortar school associated with Khan Academy.

Salman Amin Khan was born in Metairie, Louisiana, to a Bengali Muslim family. His father is from Barisal, Bangladesh, and his mother is from Murshidabad in West Bengal, India.

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

Is it too hard to ask Tim to get things right?

Several times in this series Tim says there is no magma deep in the earth. In video 2 he even says the deepest borehole did not strike magma. This is all wrong.

16:17 So, even from the beginning Yahuah created these places within the earth. I know, it's all magma. No it's not. That's not scientific at all. It's a stupid theory never proven and actually easily proven false especially from the deepest boreholes ever. We've never found magma in any of them. We've found water flowing through rock. We know that there's oil within the earth. We know that there's pockets of water within the earth. We know that there's hollow pockets within the earth. It's not all magma, that's stupid. That's not science.

Lazarus Come Forth... Where Do We Go When We Die? Part 2. Answers In 2nd Esdras 23B

Science says, wrong!

https://www.ucdavis.edu/news/scientists-drill-hits-magma-only-third-time-record

Scientists drilling a borehole deep into Iceland’s rocky crust to explore new methods of using geothermal energy hit a major roadblock on Thursday: Their drill ran into molten rock at a depth of 6,900 feet.

“This is only the third time that magma has ever flowed into a geothermal drill hole, as far as we know,” said Peter Schiffman, a geology professor at UC Davis and member of the international team conducting the study. “A research project in Hawaii hit magma in 2005, and in 1977 magma erupted out the top of a producing geothermal well not far from our site in Krafla, Iceland.”

How could Tim get this so wrong? Magma has been hit three times! Why not more? Because not even the deepest borehole on record has cracked through to the mantle. I am sure Tim will say these people are lying but that would be more of his ad hoc method. Timothy Jay Schwab the singer and magazine publisher knows more about science than actual scientists.

Isaiah 14 is one of the more famous chapters in all of scripture. It's the chapter that says, "O Lucifer how art thou fallen from heaven." Traditionally Isaiah 14 along with Ezekiel 28 have been interpreted as relating the fall of the angel Lucifer. Of course Tim profoundly mucks it up and says King David is the subject.

Answering Challenges. Where Do We Go When We Die? Part 4. Answers In 2nd Esdras 23D

29:28 Isaiah 14:9-11. And then we'll take you back a couple of verses to see the context because he doesn't get this at all. "Hell," now, that's sheol in Hebrew, uh which simply means, uh you know within the earth essentially, not a burning hell. Uh, though there is one included for, again, angels. The watcher fallen angels are there but not men. "From beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming." Meet what? Our spirit. Not your body. We know that. That's very clear in scripture. You know the body is to return to dust that's what scripture says it's very clear.

Uh, by the way someone asked, you know, what about cremation? How does that affect, uh, us on the day of judgment? And the reality is it doesn't affect you at all. Because to have your body cremated it turns to to dust, uh, in the earth or if you cremate it you're just speeding up the process really. Um, the reality is Yahuaha is going to give you or Yahusha is going to give you a new body, uh, on the day of judgment so it really matters not if someone's been cremated. So, I, don't worry about the ramifications of that. Just want to bring that up because we have had some people ask it.

"It stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations." This is interesting. I'm going to finish reading and I'll explain. "All they shall speak and say unto thee." Wait a minute. They're speaking? They're saying? When does that happen? Ah! Not while they're asleep in the chambers. Hello? "Art thou also become weak as we?" This is what they're saying when? On the day of judgment. "Art thou." They're saying this to David. David was a great king so now there's oh dude David what you know you're just as weak as we are. Your body went into the, into you know, dust just like ours did. "Art thou become like unto us." I mean we're the same you're no better than us. "Thy pomp is brought down to the grave." Right? "And the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee and the worms cover thee." Now notice who's speaking here. They're only focusing on physical terms because well these are pagan rulers. 

Once again here's the problem: what is the context of this passage? We'll go back and read but even here this is the day of judgment as these kings of the nations are being raised and speaking at the end on the day of judgment. Again this will be clear when go backwards and see the context so let's do so. Now let's go back to verse five in, uh, Isaiah here and he will tell you that this is the day of judgment. So it's really not even questionable.

This is incredible. Tim is reading from Isaiah 14 and to get the context he goes to verse five. Why? The context begins in very 4!

4 That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!

And not only that but Tim neglects to fill out the context by discussing the concluding verses of this proverb against the king of Babylon.

12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

No one with a modicum of sense could read this passage and claim it has anything to do with King David or that the events it describes takes place on the final day of judgement. Read one way it is very much a warning to the king of Babylon that he will be destroyed. Read another way this passage tells us about the fall of Lucifer, Satan. How did Timothy Jay Schwab mess it up so bad? And he expects us to accept him as an astute Bible researcher who is telling it as it really is? What an idiot!

And now let's end with perhaps the most glaring boner of them all. In this series Tim claims that Enoch, who never died, will die when Christ appears because the Bible says all men die.  

18:43 "And we shall be changed." Now, those still alive will still be changed and yes, even Enoch and  Elijah. This is the explanation for all die. All men will die, it's appointed for all men to die, right? See, they didn't die yet however they will but they'll experience a very quick physical death and resurrection receiving their new bodies and they will be changed. They must be, they have to be.

"For this corruptable must put on incorruption." This corruptible body your body is corrupt  and born into sin essentially thanks to Adam. So it's corruptible. We must put on a new body that is incorruption. Again, even Enoch. So all men will die, period, even those alive in the end. Which is the same boat as Enoch because they'll still be alive in the end. hat's not a mystery and it's no surprise the Bible deals with that. 

Where Do We Go When We Die? Part 1. Answers In 2nd Esdras 23A

Ok. It's stupid but understandable. However Tim contradicts this statement in the comments to his new 1 Enoch series.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtS6yWyF36I&lc=UgwJm-QMr9B9FdYgx_h4AaABAg

Dave Lopez: Is Enoch eating from the Tree of Life to stay alive?

The God Culture: He must be. Yah Bless.

So, Enoch is eating from the Tree of Life and yet he is still going to die? It's total madness. It's not coherent and it's not consistent. When one eats from the Tree of Life he will never die. That's why it's called the Tree of Life! 

Well, that's enough for this series. Tim did promise a video about the descent of Jesus into Hell and his raising up 500 souls to minister with him but it's been weeks and he seems to have moved on from that. If he does discuss that matter I will probably continue with part 5.

The God Culture: Timothy Jay Schwab Claims "I am Proud to be a Filipino"

Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture recently attended a conference in Baguio where he discussed his heretical ideas. He declined to tell his audience about the event but there are many videos and pictures online documenting the conference. Let's start with this one.

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=383547413607126&set=pb.100058556118547.-2207520000..

In this picture the conference is being opened with the singing of the national anthem. And what is Timothy Jay Schwab doing? In a glorious manifestation of disrespect he is sitting down working on his MacBook. How rude is that? Especially considering that Tim has told his audience that the Philippine national anthem is prophetic it is quite rude.

https://youtu.be/E-RNcBdn-GM?t=1737

28:56 So let's look here at the national flag of the Philippines. Notice the symbol of the Sun. Are there other countries that have such? Certainly there are many in fact but take a look at their national anthem Lupang Hinirang or chosen land, interesting. Land of the morning. Why? Well the Sun rises in the east and has been considered the Far East as far back as history goes really. The Orient is well recorded, even Japan is also known as the Land of the Rising Sun and it's it's parallel to the Philippines but it is not a Lost Tribe territory thus it does not fit this. But the Philippines is. 

Now read the next line though very odd, Child of the Sun returning. Wow! The first time we saw that we thought well it must be Sun God symbology yet in lieu of these findings in Revelation 12 perhaps not.

https://philippinefails.blogspot.com/2020/09/the-god-culture-revelation-12-series_14.html 

 

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=384758280152706&set=pb.100058556118547.-2207520000..

Here is a lovely picture of Tim slurping down some soup in front of his MacBook. Thank goodness it's closed or he just might ruin his computer. But what's this in the foreground? This lady has a huge box in her bag. It's called the i-fern Premium Package.

That bad boy costs 25,500 pesos and contains all kinds of beauty products which i-fern sells. But wait THEY don't sell these products, YOU sell them because that is how a multi-level marketing scam works. You buy the products, you sell the products, you recruit others to do the same. Your level of income increases with the number of dupes you can recruit. It's a typical pyramid scam.

This company has also had issues with counterfeit products. If the audience can't discern what a pyramid scheme is then how can they ever be expected to discern that Timothy Jay Schwab is a fraud and a liar?

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=383555473606320&set=pb.100058556118547.-2207520000..&type=3

Now, here is an interesting picture. The lady at The God Culture book table is wearing a The God Culture polo! I bet Tim could sell a few hundred of those shirts if not more. If any of his audience saw this lady they would no doubt be filled with envy. There is another guy in these photos wearing the same shirt but there is no good close-up. However, since two people are wearing God Culture polos it's a good bet there are more out there.

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=384763880152146&set=pb.100058556118547.-2207520000..

Just look at this guy. Timothy Jay Schwab says he is following the Law of Moses but why is he so fat? You can see his moobs and gut pressing against his shirt. This man is nearing the age where his excess weight will be a liability potentially causing a heart attack-ack-ack-ack-ack-ack. He oughta know by now. Jesus said WHEN you fast not IF you fast. From the looks of it Tim isn't missing any meals. 

There are a lot more photos none of which are interesting except the space looks like it could use more people. So, why did Tim not tell his audience about this conference? It's also interesting that Tim was not able to coordinate and have copies of 1 Enoch for sale. This conference took place on March 14. He published the book on March 1. But he did not officially release the book until March 10th and physical copies were not available in the Philippines until March 15th. Strange that he mentions that book at 25:56 in one of the videos. The thing is he knew this conference was coming. It had been postponed several times due to lockdowns in Manila. Why was he not prepared to sell his new book? It screams of incompetence.

There are 7 videos of Tim speaking varying in length from 1:14 to 2:25:38. I'm not going to distill the contents because they are basically the same as what he teaches on his YouTube channel and in his books.

https://www.facebook.com/sabbathbc.congregation/videos/460905962381641

This video begins with the tail-end of Timothy Jay Schwab singing Ray Boltz's Watch the Lamb. Why is he singing that song? Ray Boltz is famous amongst the evangelical community primarily for his song Thank You which, along with Watch the Lamb, was sung so many times as a special by my youth pastor during morning service that I lost count. Incidentally that man is now on the sex offender list because he did some naughty things. Likewise Ray Boltz is a flaming homosexual who abandoned his wife and children to shack up with a dude. Given Tim's proclivity to use the ol' guilt-by-association tactic are we to believe he is okay with homosexuality? Why sing any of that awful CCM? Why not start off with a good old fashioned hymn like Victory in Jesus? Or There's Power in the Blood? The fact is this conference is not about Jesus Christ and nothing about Tim's project concerns the work of Christ.  He is too concerned with esoteric history and texts to care about what the incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection mean. The conference is focused on the Sabbath and keeping the law.

This video is practically a 2 hour long commercial for Tim's books. Nothing new is said and nothing is actually taught. However, there was one thing said so insane that it needs to be addressed.

49:37 You know when it comes down to it America came in as conquerors. That's how they approached the Philippines. They could've just given the Philippines their freedom if they were to spread democracy. We came in here to spread democracy. See, America's a great place, except for that's not what they did. They sent their military in and they crushed the Philippines, killing in some estimates as many as 2 million Filipinos. That's a conqueror. They had their boot on your neck. That's how they operate and they can try to paint it whatever way they want. I am an American but I know the truth and I'm going to tell the truth. I am ashamed at what my country did and I am proud to be a Filipino

This is it. This is where Timothy Jay Schwab has jumped the shark. This statement, which was accompanied with a round of applause, proves everything I have been saying about this con artist to be true. Timothy Jay Schwab has transitioned from claiming to be Native American to now claiming to be a proud Filipino. Here is what I wrote in a previous article about this.

The reason Tim stresses his Native American ancestry is because he wants his Filipino readers to think he is just like them. He has red skin, Filipinos have red skin, therefore they are the same. Except Tim is MORE EQUAL than Filipinos because Native Americans "were all but wiped from the face of the Earth!" Tim hails from a tribe of people who have been oppressed on a scale that outweighs anything that ever happened during the Spanish and American occupations of the Philippines.

What we have here is a guy who loathes the fact that he is a White American man and is latching on to anything that can transform him into a persecuted minority. It might be the ultimate case of going native as Tim is attempting to paint himself as being not only genetically identical to Filipinos with red skin but also being a member of a people group that has been more oppressed than them.

https://philippinefails.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-god-culture-stuff-god-culture.html 

Here he is telling us all he is an American, is ashamed of it, and that he is proud to be a Filipino. Except Timothy Jay Schwab will NEVER be a Filipino. This proud Filipino cannot even stand up during the national anthem! He will forever remain an oafish white man who has founded an online cult that has duped many actual Filipinos.