The God Culture: Timothy Jay Schwab Says Jesus Christ Will Return in 2127

Has Timothy Jay Schwab of the God Culture not learned anything from the fiasco of Harold Camping or other men who would dare set a date of any kind for the return of Jesus Christ? No, he has not. 

For the past few weeks Tim has been giving his interpretation of the prophecies in in the book of 2nd Esdras. He has been delineating what certain symbols mean and which animal is which wicked empire or nation. It's all bunkum. 2nd Esdras is not scripture. It is a book written after the fall of the Jerusalem in 70 AD. Based on that book and the prophecies in Daniel, Tim has deduced a specific year for the return of Jesus Christ. It's 2127.

DANIEL'S 2300 DAYS. Count To The End? Part 2. Answers In 2nd Esdras 11

51:41 So, 2120 for the tribulation start and 2127 for Messiah's return. These are ballparks. We're not saying exacts, we're not saying it's exactly and we don't know. Look, this isn't trigonometry or calculus we could be off a decade, we could be off a year, we could be off certain months, we could be not considering something. We're not saying any of that, all right? This isn't an exact science. We don't care for it to be because we don't get to know the day or the hour. But here's what we do know. We know it's time to prepare. We know when the season is and we have about a century folks.

"Approximate only." LOL!! He even has the gall to write in the description of this video:

However, this is not intended to set a date nor are we prophets. This is research and it leads to an era we can know with certainty. It is time to know.

Despite all the precise and minute calculations Tim makes this video is not intended to set an exact date for the return of Jesus Christ. Yet, here we have an exact date of 2127. Oh, excuse me, an exact YEAR. Because, as Tim admits, "we don't get to know the day or hour." What's the difference between prognosticating dates and years when it comes to calculating the return of Jesus? Not much. The principle remains the same. 

Retired NASA engineer Edgar C. Whisenant thought the rapture would occur in 1988. What he had to say about predicting the return of Jesus Christ is rather similar to what Timothy says.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/14080011/88-Reasons-Why-The-Rapture-Will-Be-in-1988

It is evident that in the minds of most Christians today, Matt. 24:36 is believed to prohibit anyone from being able to see the day of our Lord's return approaching. Matt. 24:36 states that “No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” In looking at this statement, you can easily see that it is impossible to know the exact day and hour of the Lord Jesus' return. 

If Jesus arrived at one particular instant of time, there are 24 times zones around the world, and each time zone has multitude of Christians in it. How are you going to identify that particular instant in each time zone on earth? Also, there are always two days existing on earth at the same time; only at the exact second that the earth passes through the international date line does only one day exist on all the earth. All other times, there are two days existing on earth at any one moment; one day is coming and the other day is going. So you can see the problem in trying to tell all the Christians covering the earth at any one instant of time the exact day or hour of our Lord's return. 

However, this does not preclude or prevent the faithful from knowing the year, the month, and the week of the Lord's return. 

Like Tim, Edgar Whisenant says we cannot "know the exact day and hour of the Lord Jesus' return." However, we can know the year. So. he gave 1988 for his prediction of when the rapture would occur. Likewise, Tim denies we can know the exact day but he thinks we can know the year so he gives 2127 as the date when Jesus returns. It's quite pointless for Tim to deny the exactitude of his forecast when he has spent almost 12 hours, really much more than that because all his videos tie into this calculation, scrupulously and in detail going over what he considers to be the prophetic timeline. What sense does it make to meticulously reconcile the calendars, do all the math, give a precise year, and then say "I don't know," "this is not exact," and "I don't care for it to be exact?" It is insulting to the intelligence of his audience to say he does not care if his "research" is exact.

It is also an extreme display of cowardice for Tim to give a precise year for the Second Coming and then backtrack by saying it's only approximate. Could it be his conscience working on him that causes him waffle so? Truly it has been said "conscience does make cowards of us all."  If Jesus Christ does not return in 2127 then all of Tim's work is for nothing. 

Every date setter, every year setter, every man who has looked into the scriptures to scry and calculate the time of Christ's return has been shown to be a fool. Funny that Tim sets the date 106 years into the future and says it "approximate only." What a wide window of deniability for him to say he didn't mean for his date setting to be accurate if it does not come to pass. He will be dead by then anyway and won't have to face any criticism or backlash.

Let me show you just how inept Tim is at making "approximate only" calculations. In the Gospel of Luke we are told that Jesus began His ministry at ABOUT the age of thirty. 

Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, 

According to Tim's calculations Jesus was born in 9 BC which means he was 36 when he began to minister and 39 when he was crucified.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpYFD-7BuuM&lc=UgzpQlGWQHZkDNx48Xd4AaABAg

benyamin ben qohelet If he died in 31 ad and he was born in 10 BC that would make him 41 years old he died at thirty-three so you have a logical fallacy

The God Culture Third, you do not count the year 0 AD/BC in counting. It goes from 1 BC to 1 AD which we also cover so you obviously comment without really watching. So your number with the wrong starting year is 40 years not 41 and if you start from the actual year we prove, 9 BC not 10 BC, that makes him 39 at death and resurrection and 36 when he started his first year. That matches Luke's ballpark of "ABOUT 30" when He started His ministry. Luke never says He was 30 and would have known the age as He knew the birth year. So why does he use that ballpark? About 30 is the time Levitical priest enters the ministry and he is clearly making reference to this not giving an exact date as he does other times.

As ever, Tim's comments are entirely wrong. The age a Levite entered the priesthood was not ABOUT 30 but exactly at the age of 30.

Numbest 4:3 From thirty years old and upward even until fifty years old, all that enter into the host, to do the work in the tabernacle of the congregation.

30 From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old shalt thou number them, every one that entereth into the service, to do the work of the tabernacle of the congregation

39 From thirty years old and upward even unto fifty years old, every one that entereth into the service, for the work in the tabernacle of the congregation,

There is nothing in those verses concerting approximation. The scripture is clear that Levite priests served from 30 years old to 50 years old. Likewise 36 is not about 30. 36 is closer to 40. Does Tim not know about rounding up? Did he not take elementary math when he was in 1st grade?? 

https://www.factmonster.com/math-science/mathematics/rounding-numbers-rules-examples-for-fractions-sums

Here's the general rule for rounding:

• If the number you are rounding is followed by 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9, round the number up. Example: 38 rounded to the nearest ten is 40
• If the number you are rounding is followed by 0, 1, 2, 3, or 4, round the number down. Example: 33 rounded to the nearest ten is 30

Not only does Timothy Jay Schwab kick against the pricks and defy the doctrines of the Holy Spirit inspired Church but he also defies the accepted conventions and rules of mathematics! A man who is 36 is not about 30 just like a man who is 16 is not about 10. The idea is absurd. His math is woefully wrong. But don't take my word for it.

If Jesus was around thirty years old in AD 27—29, and we know that His birth occurred before 4 BC, that would put His birth, at the earliest, around 6 BC—any earlier would make Him between 35 and 40 years old in Luke 3:23, at which point He could no longer be considered "about thirty." Despite the inability of scholars to pinpoint exact dates, it is reasonable from these facts to conclude that Jesus was born between 6 and 4 BC, during the last few years of the reign of Herod the Great. 

https://www.blogos.org/organicfruit/when-Jesus-born.php

Not only does Tim give an estimated year of the Second Coming but he also wants to produce a video giving a blow-by-blow timeframe of what happens afterwards!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJhHkYky60Y&lc=UgyYC6LQov9cZGDKFJN4AaABAg

RUTHANN JOHNSON How long will it take for Earth and heaven to be remade

The God Culture Good question. It appears the Trumpet sounds on the Feast of Trumpets, Judgment Day is about 10 days later and 5 days later believers are receiving their new bodies according to the Feast schedule. One could say the battle occurs with Messiah and his army vs. the world essentially for 10 days roughly and then, He judges and replenishes with eternal fire for 5 days essentially. That's just a quick answer but in time, we hope to produce a video on that. Yah Bless.

Gee, I can't wait for the video where Tim breaks down what happens on the day of judgement and afterwards day by day and hour by hour. All estimated and approximate of course.

In this article I will not be analyzing Tim's computations regarding 2nd Esdras or when Jesus was born. That is beyond the scope here and not the purpose. Besides, 2nd Esdras is not even scripture so it is not worth pouring over. He might as well be trying to decipher the quatrains of Nostradamus or a secret message on the back of a Lucky Charms cereal box with his magic decoder ring. His series on Revelation 12 is an altogether different matter since it involves both scripture and the Philippines. I already dismantled that nonsense in 3 articles starting here. 

What I want to point out is that Timothy Jay Schwab has now been officially enrolled on the list of disgraced end-times teachers whose prophecies, predictions, and research has not come to pass. This includes Harold Camping, David Koresh, Charles Manson, John Hagee, William Miller, Brother Stair, Hal Lindsey, Johnathan Cahn, Charles Russell, Joachim of Fiore, Montanus, Thomas Muntzer, and the Zwickau Prophets. None of those men came up with their predictions out of thin air. The fact is men have always thought the end is near and have always based this supposition on calculations derived from scripture. They had precedence from scripture for their prognostications. From Tim's own words he admits he fits in with the above crowd of false prophets.

The God Culture Can you imagine living during WW2's height in the middle of Japan or Germany or any of the areas being bombed heavily? It would appear the end was already near. men have always thought so but now we have precedence in scripture we can understand and we can know. Yah Bless.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8YrJmtnIw8&lc=Ugzhs5wSRqxbTiIouQh4AaABAg.9SWHaY-jgZZ9SWV-xB4Lrk 

Of all the men listed above Tim is more like William Miller than any of them. That's because Miller, much like Tim, attempted to work out the true Biblical calendar and timeline. Based on his calculations Jesus was to return within the timeframe of 1843-1844.  Miller's prediction failed spectacularly and out of his movement was born the Seventh Day Adventist church which Tim apparently has nothing bad to say about despite Ellen G. White being a notorious false prophetess.

Another deleted comment from Tim's Youtube Channel

William Miller did not have the luxury of producing videos explaining his system but he did draw a detailed chart of his timeline.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Miller_(preacher)

Basing his calculations principally on Daniel 8:14: "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed", Miller assumed that the cleansing of the sanctuary represented the Earth's purification by fire at Christ's Second Coming. Then, using the interpretive principle of the "day-year principle", Miller (and others) interpreted a day in prophecy to read not as a 24-hour period, but rather as a calendar year. Further, Miller became convinced that the 2,300 day period started in 457 BC with the decree to rebuild Jerusalem by Artaxerxes I of Persia. Simple calculation then revealed that this period would end in 1843. Miller records, "I was thus brought... to the solemn conclusion, that in about twenty-five years from that time 1818 all the affairs of our present state would be wound up."

Although Miller was convinced of his calculations by 1818, he continued to study privately until 1823 to ensure the correctness of his interpretation. In September 1822, Miller formally stated his conclusions in a twenty-point document, including article 15: "I believe that the second coming of Jesus Christ is near, even at the door, even within twenty-one years,--on or before 1843." Miller did not, however, begin his public lecturing until the first Sunday in August 1831 in the town of Dresden.

In 1832 Miller submitted a series of sixteen articles to the Vermont Telegraph, a Baptist newspaper. The Telegraph published the first of these on May 15, and Miller writes of the public's response: "I began to be flooded with letters of inquiry respecting my views; and visitors flocked to converse with me on the subject." In 1834, unable to personally comply with many of the urgent requests for information and the invitations to travel and preach that he received, Miller published a synopsis of his teachings in a 64-page tract with the lengthy title: Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ, about the Year 1844: Exhibited in a Course of Lectures.

That is Timothy Jay Schwab's EXACT METHODOLOGY. Miller published his views in articles, Tim publishes his views in videos. Miller engaged in public lectures, Tim toured the Philippines giving public lectures. Miller was flooded with inquiries from those who read his articles, Tim has 117,000 subscribers on Youtube and gets hundreds of comments on every video. Miller's teaching eventually went international, Tim's videos reach people in every country. Miller never set an exact date just a year, Tim says we cannot know the exact date but sets an exact year. There are many more similarities between William Miller and his movement, Millerism, and Timothy Jay Schwab and his movement, The God Culture, that cannot be enumerated here. The only substantial difference between William Miller and Timothy Jay Schwab in regards to their prophetical interpretation is that Tim begins Daniel's 2,300 days (years) not at the decree to rebuild the temple in 457 BC but when wicked priests allegedly defiled the temple in 165 BC.

DANIEL'S 2300 DAYS. Count To The End? Part 2. Answers In 2nd Esdras 11

There is not enough space here to do justice to Tim's timeline or his calculations which really span the length of all his videos. It is sufficient to note that everything he is doing is exactly the same as what William Miller did 177 years ago. Miller was wrong and undoubtedly Tim will be proven wrong too, though we shall never get to witness that failure since we will all be dead by 2127. Truly there is nothing new under the sun.

Despite all the "Biblical" material Tim has produced and continues to produce the man is simply ignorant of the Bible. In attempting to figure out the timeline of Christ's return Tim resorts to using the unscriptural Book of Enoch. Enoch says a generation is 100 years. 

HOW MUCH TIME IS LEFT? It's Time To Know. Answers In 2nd Esdras 9

This prompted one viewer to ask a question. In a now deleted comment one commenter asked if we should just ignore what Moses had to say about the length of a generation.

Brett Hamm  Quick question. Do we just ignore or throw out Psalm 90 verse 10 where Moses describes a generation as 70 to 80 years? Please explain. Thanks. 

The God Culture First Moses did not write Psalm so stop pretending you can even read and comprehend. Why would you ever throw out Moses or suggest to do so? How stupid. That is the language of a fool and clearly you cannot read because David, who wrote Psalm never says that Enoch's generation Is 70-80 years. That is incredibly illiterate. David says In his day people live 70-80, years. What does that have to do with a generation before the Flood? Don't come in here especially first comment with such uneducated illiterate ridicule or you will be muted. Learn how to think or you will look stupid as you do.

This guy asked a question and Tim, being the scurrilous pedagogue he is, shut him down calling him illiterate, uneducated, and stupid. Furthermore, Tim claimed that Moses didn't write Psalm 90. That is simply not true.

The fact is David did not write all the Psalms. Some are by Asaph, some are by Heman, others are by Ethan, some are anonymous, and Psalm 90 is by Moses. If Tim responds that David wrote Psalm 90 under the name of Moses then his whole scheme for accepting Jubilees as the work of Moses and 1st and 2nd Esdras as the work of Ezra falls to pieces. To paraphrase Tim, this is either a Psalm of Moses or it is a lie. 

Everything about Timothy Jay Schwab and The God Culture is laughable and worthy of ridicule. They don't know the scriptures, they ape false prophets from the past, and now there is this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJhHkYky60Y&lc=Ugz2Z-8d9HyNL9Yf7-54AaABAg

Sidonz Do you know where I can get a copy of the 2021 and 2022 calendar? Thanks for your thought provoking presentations.Blessings in Yahuah's Name.

The God Culture file:///Users/macbook/Downloads/Zadok%20Way%20Calendar%202021-2022%20(1).pdf Yah Bless.

A commenter asks where she can get a copy of a calendar. Tim, thinking he was posting a link, actually posted the file path from his MacBook!  This is not a fluke as he did it in a another comment here and on his Facebook page. 

Allow me to wrap this up with one final observation.

Preoccupation with attempting to figure out when Christ will return ignores the reality that Jesus Christ is here now and very present. He is with and in His Church and His people living in us and making his abode with us. It ignores the fact of Christ's own words that his Kingdom is not of this world. That it is spiritual and that his Church is this Kingdom on earth. It ignores that Christ lives and reigns in Heaven and is in control of all all things on earth. All the kingdoms of the earth are His. Attempting to figure out the day or year of Christ's return is a faithless and Christless endeavour. Note that waiting for His return and looking for His return are not the same as calculating when He shall return.

Closely aligned with predicting when Christ will return is millennialism. There is a reason chiliasm was condemned by the Church. It is because millennialism has always been and will always be the doctrine of heretics. It has long been the domain of heretics to look for a temporal 1,000 year reign of Jesus Christ in which there will be peace on earth when all the while Jesus Christ has been endued with power from on high and has been reigning since he ascended into Heaven. There is no end to His Kingdom which begins with the Church he built and which the gates of hell shall not prevail against.

Chiliastic views in antiquity were spread chiefly among heretics. The Second Ecumenical Council in 381 AD., condemning the heretic Apollinarius, condemned his teaching about the thousand-year Kingdom of Christ. To put a stop to further attempts at introducing this teaching, the Fathers of the Council inserted into the Creed the words about Christ: "His Kingdom shall have no end." In other words, when Christ's reign begins there will be no interruptions in His eternal Kingdom. In more recent times, chiliastic views were resurrected in some Protestant sects. As has been indicated, in this teaching there are proposed two future resurrections and two judgments: one for the righteous and later another for sinners; and there are two future comings of the Savior. There is a purely earthly reign of Christ with the righteous ones as a definite historical epoch. Formally, this teaching is based on an incorrect understanding of the expression first resurrection, while inwardly its cause is rooted in many contemporary sectarians' loss of faith in eternal life and in the blessedness of the righteous in Heaven, with whom they have no communion in prayer. Another cause is to be found in utopian dreams hidden behind religious ideas and inserted into the mysterious images of the book of Revelation.

https://www.orthodoxphotos.com/readings/end/chiliasm.shtml

Tim is such an heretic who looks for a literal and temporal 1,000 year reign of Jesus Christ on the earth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pgM7MS2ICY&lc=Ugxmw2Cpu0DcOJ8443R4AaABAg

Alana Bunch Timmothy, where is the second witness on the 1000 year rein? Thought this was symbolic OR already happened after the Messiah when here in the flesh?

The God Culture Think that thru... You can figure this out... Start with questions... How exactly were the Apostles being martyred a fit to the the 1,000-year reign? How is it that the Early Ekklesia was also being martyred still during the 1,000-year reign? Where does scripture say there will be murder during the 1,000-year reign? How can anyone think the Catholic Church came from the 1,000-year reign representing the opposite of scripture? How were there wars and conquests during the 1,000-year reign? Why is there sin during the supposed 1,000-year reign? Where did the Lost Tribes return during that 1,000-year reign? Where was the Beast just before that 1,000-year reign? If satan, has now been bound, why is the world mostly sin? Where is the Day of Judgment in that 1,000-year reign? Why is the world mostly sin again after that supposed 1,000-year reign? Why are men still dying after that supposed 1,000-year reign? Where exactly is the New Jerusalem come down from Heaven? Where is the Tree of Life we are supposed to be eating and why are you not eating from it? How did we miss all those incredibly massive events of epic proportion? Why did all the fish not die? Was the Bible wrong? Nothing in scripture fits that thinking. Now, do your research. Where is your second witness to any of this and why are you asking us to do your research for you which you clearly have not done? It's time to mature.

Tim does not see things are they really are spiritually but only as his eyes see temporally. I am not going to contradict him on every point in his comment. I would instead direct everyone to Book 20 of St. Augustine's City of God for a massive corrective of Tim's complete misunderstanding of the millennium.

If Timothy Jay Schwab of the The God Culture had nothing to do with the Philippines I would have ignored him long before now. It was obvious from the first article I wrote about him that he was a heretic. Because he has shown no remorse for his errors and has developed his system to such a height and continues to mislead so many people he deserves to go the same way the heresiarch Arius went.

As he approached the place called Constantine's Forum, where the column of porphyry is erected, a terror arising from the remorse of conscience seized Arius, and with the terror a violent relaxation of the bowels: he therefore enquired whether there was a convenient place near, and being directed to the back of Constantine's Forum, he hastened there. Soon after a faintness came over him, and together with the evacuations his bowels protruded, followed by a copious hemorrhage, and the descent of the smaller intestines: moreover portions of his spleen and liver were brought off in the effusion of blood, so that he almost immediately died.

Socrates, Church History, 1:38

But since his whole prophetic scheme and mission revolves around this nation and since the subject of this blog is the Philippines I cannot ignore him completely. 

The God Culture: Residual Ancient Hebrew in the Philippines?

 In chapter 13 of "The Search for King Solomon's Treasure" Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture theorizes that place-names in the Philippines show evidence of residual ancient Hebrew. Tim goes to great lengths attempting to prove that words such as Pilipinas, Mindoro, and Malacañang are actually Hebrew compound words and have nothing to do with Spanish, Chinese, or any local language.

The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pg, 176

Tim's basis for this lies in his theory that Ophir moved east from Iraq and settled in the Philippines. Because he was a grandson of Eber he spoke Hebrew. That means when he arrived in the Philippines he named places using his native Hebrew tongue. Later when Solomon's ships arrived the Queen of Sheba, who also descended from Eber, understood the sailors and recognized the name of the Hebrew God because she too was a Hebrew speaker.

We pondered from the outset of this research that if the Philippines is Ophir, there should be residual Hebrew words within the language and perhaps even some monikers that the Spanish did not change but survive in their Hebrew origins still. Not only did Ophir have strong connection with Israelite Hebrews but we will show you that the word Hebrew is the word Eber. "All the sons of Eber," not just Peleg to Abraham are singled out in Genesis 10 as all are Hebrews including Joktan's sons Ophir, Sheba and Havilah.

 The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pg. 176

Why were all the children of Eber including Joktan's sons called out here? They are all Hebrews and they are all Yahuah's children we will prove. Only those from Jacob are Israelite Hebrews. We do not debate that nor have we ever indicated otherwise but all those from Peleg and Joktan were Hebrews including Ophir, Sheba and Haviliah who migrated to the Philippines. This means Filipino roots, though mixed today to some degree, are actually Hebrew according to scripture.

This is why King Solomon built a new navy and port to go to Ophir because he knew family was there. It was also the reason that the Queen of Sheba came to hear not about Solomon necessarily but "concerning the name of his God." As a Hebrew she knew the same God. Lost Tribes of Israel could migrate to Ophir and mix in without detection making it the perfect place to relocate.

 The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pg. 180

The families of Ophir and Sheba made the journey to the Philippines and they spoke Hebrew. Tim makes this same claim in his videos.

Solomon's Gold Series - Part 7: Track of the Hebrew to the Philippines. Ophir, Sheba, Tarshish

5:32 Our story begins with the separation of Peleg who headed west fathering Abraham Isaac, Jacob, Israel and Joktan his brother and Joktan’s sons who headed east about 100 years after God confused the languages of the earth at the Tower of Babel and dispersed the people. We believe both families still spoke the original Hebrew language of Noah and Shem as they do not appear to have been involved in the Tower of Babel confusing of languages.

Tim is very explicit that Hebrew was spoken by the entire family of Eber after the fall of the Tower of Babel and the confusing of languages. 100 years after the fall of the Tower of Babel Ophir migrated to the Philippines speaking nothing but Hebrew. When he arrived in the Philippines he used Hebrew to name the land.  Here is The God Culture's "Hebrew Pilipinas" map.

There are a plethora of alleged Hebrew place-names in the Philippines. Most people would tell you that Davao means river but did you know Davao really means menstruation? 

https://youtu.be/bPfIZpczybY

We realize at first, this may wax crude but contemplate this perspective. There is a modern prophecy which we would not normally pay attention. It is from Cindy Jacobs whom we do not support not know much about but this prophecy as we have vetted it, rings true. She identifies that the Philippines will be cleansed through the "bloodiest part." Little does she likely know Davao is literally the bloodiest part in Hebrew not just because of the turmoil in the past. This prophecy is available on our Youtube channel. The menstruation female cycle is one of cleansing and this becomes very appropriate as it may be Eve as it ties to her curse from the Garden once again just like Havilah. We would expect this if the Philippines is Ophir.

 The Search for King Solomon's Treasure, pg. 195

I suppose menstruation is a kind of river just not the one the natives were referring to. Who would name the place they live "menstruation?" That is disgusting! It's as gross and senseless as naming your homeland urine or vomit or any other vile human excretion. The residents of Davao City are referred to as Dabawyenos and they speak Davaoeño. According to Tim's etymology these people live in Menstruation City, are Mestruationites, and speak Menstruationese. Is Tim aware how stupid that is? It simply is not believable that Davao was named after the Hebrew word for menstruation. This is all based on faulty phonetic similarities and not genuine etymology or linguistics. 

The section of the alleged prophecy which mentions the "bloodiest part" is as follows:

As a sign that I am going to truly change the nation, I am going to show myself to the guerilla leaders. I am going to come, says the Lord, and I am going to begin at the places in the Philippines that have been the bloodiest; the places where the guerillas' insurrection have been the strongest. And I am going to come with signs and wonders and miracles! I am getting ready to pour out a miracle anointing upon the Philippines such as the earth has never seen! 

https://www.pinoyexchange.com/discussion/139886/cindy-jacobs-prophecy-for-the-philippines

It should be noted that this prophecy was delivered during a conference in the USA on October 27, 2001. 

Let's break this down. Timothy is citing a prophecy from a woman he does not know and does not support in order to bolster his claims that the Philippines is Ophir and contains Hebrew place-names. He claims Cindy prophesied the Philippines would be "cleansed through the bloodiest part" and then goes on to tell us that "Davao is literally the bloodiest part in Hebrew" because it means menstruation. 

But she says nothing about cleansing. She says God will visit the guerrilla leaders and show them signs and wonders. In that same prophecy she says the Lord will visit the University in Manila and "thousands and thousands and thousands are going to get saved."  I would not put any stock in the words of a false prophetess who declares she is an Apostle and who is an active leader of the New Apostolic Reformation along with Bill Johnson, Rodney Howard Browne, and a host of other kooks. That Tim puts faith in the words of a woman he admits he knows nothing about because he says they were "vetted" and ring true, just shows his total lack of discernment. Remember this false prophecy from false prophetess Cindy Jacobs forms part of Tim's "Monumental Case For The Philippines No One Can Disprove."

https://twitter.com/RightWingWatch/status/1235589092668329987

With the publication of his annotated "Book of Jubilees" and the advent of his new video series "Answers in Jubilees" Timothy Jay Schwab contradicts the thesis laid out above. Now he claims Hebrew was lost and only restored when God taught it to Abraham. For The Book of Jubilees tells him so. 

What Was The Original Language? Answers in Jubilees Part 1

2:57 Jubilees 12:25 "And Yahuah Elohim said open his (Abraham's) mouth and his ears, that he may hear and speak with his mouth, with the language which hath been revealed"; for it had ceased from the mouths of all the children of men from the day of the overthrow of Babel." Now this is being spoken by Yahuah himself in the time of Abraham about a century after Babel so he's telling us the language was lost at least in full until this time from Babel

17:28 Jubilees brings this to light and now we can answer this question thanks to the Book of Jubilees. The original language of creation forward was Hebrew. Lost at the Tower of Babel and reinstituted a century or so later by Yahuah teaching Abraham.

Here Tim says 100 years after the Tower of Babel Hebrew was a lost language "in full" and God taught it to Abraham. But in his previous video Tim said 100 years after Babel the family of Heber, including Ophir, were all Hebrew speakers! Both cannot be true. 

A possible solution Tim might offer is that after Abraham relearned Hebrew he taught it to Peleg, Ophir, and all the rest. In this scenario 100 years after the Tower of Babel Abraham is taught Hebrew by God, he then teaches it to his family which includes Peleg, Joktan, and Ophir, and then Ophir and the gang merrily make their way to the Philippines. Such reasoning would be totally ad hoc. That means Tim would be making up stuff he could not prove. The text does not say Abraham taught Hebrew to Ophir. Besides, every single place name in the Philippines has an explanation which does not require Hebrew. Genesis 10 is very sparse on details cornering Ophir and his migrations. Basically everything Tim has to say about the man Ophir and his journeys is ad hoc.

However neither Tim 's original scenario or the possible solution are correct because they hinge on the false idea that God taught Hebrew to Abraham a mere 100 years after the fall of the Tower of Babel. R.H. Charles has this to say about the timeframe of these events.

From the overthrow of Babel (x. 26) the knowledge of the Hebrew language was lost till the 75th year of Abrams life. 

https://archive.org/details/bookofjubileesor00char/page/94/mode/2up

Abraham learned Hebrew when he was 75. But how much time had elapsed since the fall of the Tower of Babel? 100 years? No. 312 years!

https://lmf12.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/chronology-of-jubilees.pdf

The tower went down and the nations were dispersed in 1639. Abraham learned Hebrew in 1951. That is 312 years. R.H. Charles has the tower going down in 1688 and Abraham learning Hebrew in 1953 which is the same timeline VanderKam gives in his commentary.

The language had fallen out of use at Babel when the tower collapsed (in the year 1688 [revised chronology]; see 10:26, where the tower ruin is called Collapse, as here). Now in the year 1951, 263 years later, the angel supernaturally revives it through Abram.

 Jubilees Commentary, VanderKam, pg, 457

That is 263 years. This timeframe means if Ophir and his family headed east to the Philippines 100 years after the fall of the Tower of Babel they could not have relearned Hebrew from Abraham. If the language was completely lost until God restored it to Abraham then Ophir and all the rest were most certainly not speaking Hebrew. The only solution is to posit that Ophir, Peleg, and all the rest did not migrate east until 312-263 years after Babel when they learned Hebrew from Abraham. But that would require Tim to recalculate his whole system as too much time would have passed. It would also be ad hoc and pure speculation.

It should be noted that Tim's own annotated version of Jubilees retains the timeline of R.H. Charles. Thus on page 104 Tim has 1688 for the fall of the tower and on page 112 he has 1951 for when Abraham relearned Hebrew. His video and his book contradict each other.

Timeline of Jubilees, Book of Jubilees, Timothy Jay Schwab, pg. 92

With this video Tim has contradicted his thesis about residual Hebrew being found in the Philippines. If there is residual Hebrew in the place-names of the Philippines he cannot ground it in Ophir and his family because, according to The Book of Jubilees no one knew Hebrew from the fall of the Tower of Babel until Abraham learned it 312 years later. There is nothing in Jubilees to indicate Ophir learned Hebrew from Abraham. To posit that idea is pure speculation and not based on what the text says.

Tim's comment on Jubilees 12:25 mentions a tradition that contradicts Jubilees.

i. e. the sacred language, Hebrew, knowledge of which had been lost since the overthrow of Babel. According to another tradition Heber alone retained knowledge of Hebrew because he had taken no part in the building of the Tower.

What is this other tradition that Heber did not lose his knowledge of Hebrew because he did not participate in building the Tower of Babel? Tim does not say. In fact later in the book he seems to have forgotten the existence of this tradition.

Book of Jubilees, pg. 247

What Was the Original Language?

Hebrew was the original language of Creation (Jub. 12:25-26). It was lost at the Tower of Babel until restored by Abraham who learned it in order to read the writings of his fathers.

Though Tim does not tell us what tradition he is referring to in his comments on Jubilees 12:25 there are two possible sources from which he is drawing. The first is R.H. Charles' note on this verse.

A different tradition from that in our text appears in the Catena Nicephori, 1. col. 177, on Gen. xi. 8, where Heber is said to have alone retained the Hebrew language, because he took no part in the building of Babel. In the next colophon of the same work the same statement is attributed to Diodorus of Antioch (378-394 A.D.). A similar view is set forth in Augustine, De Civ. Dei, xvi. 11…

https://archive.org/details/bookofjubileesor00char/page/96/mode/2up 

Augustine's passage about Heber and the Hebrew language is too long to reproduce here. But he does write one thing that is very significant.

Nor is it without significance that this is the language which Abraham retained, and that he could not transmit it to all his descendants, but only to those of Jacob's line, who distinctively and eminently constituted God's people, and received His covenants, and were Christ's progenitors according to the flesh. In the same way, Heber himself did not transmit that language to all his posterity, but only to the line from which Abraham sprang.

https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/120116.htm

According to Augustine Heber transmitted Hebrew only to the line of Abraham and Abraham only transmitted the language to the line of Jacob. That is a rather interesting tradition which contradicts Jubilees and Tim. But what is the source of this tradition? Where is Augustine drawing from? 

The second place Tim could have learned about this tradition is Wikipedia.

13th century Muslim historian Abu al-Fida relates a story, noting that the patriarch Eber (great-grandson of Shem) refused to help with the building of the Tower of Babel, so his language was not confused when it was abandoned. He and his family alone retained the original human language (a concept referred to as lingua humana in Latin), Hebrew, a language named after Eber.

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

That page leads to an encyclopedia article.

In one place Tabari ("Annales," ed. de Goeje, i. 220) gives a tradition that Nimrod ruled at Babil and his people were Moslems. But he seduced them to idolatry, and in a single day God confused their speech, which had been Syriac, and they became of seventy-two tongues. In another place (p. 224) Tabari tells the story practically as in Genesis. Ibn Wadiḥ (i. 17) has a longer narrative on the same lines. Abu 'Isa, the astronomer quoted by Abu al-Fida ("Hist. Anteisl.," ed. Fleischer, p. 18), also tells the Biblical story of the Tower and the confusion. He adds that Eber alone, because he did not join the others in their impious attempt, was permitted to retain the original Hebrew language. This is in curious contrast with the other narratives, which view Syriac as the original tongue. It is possible that the belief, current in all the Moslem world, that Syriac was the original language, is to be traced to the influence of the Syriac "Cave of Treasures" and the Arabic "Kitab al-Majall," with their anti-Jewish polemics.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/2279-babel-tower-of

Following the citation there leads to the Latin version of Abufelda's history. As far as I can make out the story is as follows:

The cause of the languages ​​confused Abu-Isa story, Noahides those who grew up after the flood, forming a common citadel had resolved that if by chance the new flood erupted, they could protect themselves. That the mass of a certain very lofty, therefore, is to raise up, of which may reach the heaven, to rise.

With this design, for the first time in one of them, and rushes on that one of the two men, and seventy of the chiefs of the towers to have placed the Father, built, and who does the works by naval operations. But the God of contim, the arrogance of the dialect that much of their language, in their many different one from resolved.

Only Eber, who disapproved of the venture and in obedience to God persisted in the Hebrew language to be abandoned in the future preservation. So where Noahides in different ways, halfgods lot slim - Iraq, Iran and which are located further to India; Hamid of the earth, of the southerners, so that the Egyptians; and the other which the Nile's waters, and also as far as to the last of the things that were by the side to the west, Mauritania to; Jafethidis which is adjacent to the Caspian Sea and which tend to Seruin beyond the eastern region. At this time the confusion of tongues occurred to him, out of the tribe of the people of Noah's sons, and threescore and two sons already were.

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951002074826l&view=1up&seq=254&size=125&q1=ebero

That is translated from Latin to English via Google translate. It's not the greatest translation but the story is clear enough. Is Tim referring to a tradition penned by a Muslim historian in the 13th century or is he referring to R.H. Charles' notes? Whatever the case there is indeed a tradition of Heber alone retaining the knowledge of Hebrew because he did not participate in the building of the Tower of Babel. Do the Jews ever mention anything like this in the Talmud? What is the source of this story? Since Tim refers to this tradition only once it could be he does not believe it is true. But then why even mention it? Why not take the time to explore it a little especially as it might help his case cornering residual ancient Hebrew being found in the place-names of the Philippines? Of course this story contradicts Jubilees 12:25 which is likely why he ignores it.

Tim most certainly does believe The Book of Jubilees is history and scripture. It is this belief that has caused a contradiction with his thesis about residual ancient Hebrew being found in the Philippines. If Hebrew was lost from the time of Babel until Abraham spoke it anew 312 years later then Ophir could not have been speaking Hebrew and any residual Hebrew in the Philippines cannot be tied to him. Likewise the Queen of Sheba would not be familiar with the name of Solomon's God as she would not have been a Hebrew speaker. Nor would Lost Tribes be able to easily "mix in without detection" as they would be speaking a totally different language. 

Even if she were a Hebrew speaker The Queen of Sheba would not know anything about Solomon's God because God only made himself known to Israel beginning with His covenant with Abraham. 

Amos 3:1-2  Hear this word that the LORD hath spoken against you, O children of Israel, against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt, saying, You only have I known of all the families of the earth...

The nature of that covenant disproves Tim's blasphemous and anti-Chrisitan doctrine "the law is what redeems us" as Galatians 3:17-19 clearly tells us. This verse also proves that not all Hebrews are children of God. Ishmael and Esau are also descendants of Eber and thus Hebrews. Tim will have to include them and the Edomites as children of God if he wants to say all the Hebrews are Children of God.  It just goes to show that relying on apocryphal books which the Church has rejected as scripture will lead you down a dark path ending in erroneous theology and false history.

From Jubilees Tim gets the bad theology that the law was originally delivered to Adam and not Moses and that the law, not Jesus Christ, is God's supreme revelation to mankind. I am not sure where he gets his doctrine of the Holy Spirit but Timothy Jay Schwab finally publicly denied that the Holy Spirit is divine.

COMMANDMENTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT: A Sabbath Reflection. Part 3: If You Love Me...

13:29 For those looking for our view on the Holy Spirit there you have it. We stick to the Word. He has a role and it is precious and powerful and it is something we all need. We love and treasure Him and His role. We always have and we always will. Now if you have followed our journey the past four years you well know we are not this smart but the Holy Spirit has revealed things that are ready to be revealed. That's it. So we have a relationship with the Holy Spirit and we find Him to be precious and valuable in our lives like nothing else. So, however there is not a single scripture that ever equates Him as the Father, it just isn't there so there's nothing to debate.

That is a thoroughly ignorant denial of the divinity of the Holy Spirit. Of course there are no scriptures equating the Spirit as the Father because they are separate hypostases. They share the same divine nature not the same hypostasis! The Holy Spirit is as much God as the Father and the Son but they remain separate persons. There is a sharing of the nature without a confusing of the hypostases. Once again Tim has no idea what he is talking about. From this it sounds doubtful he has any idea what the doctrine of the Trinity actually entails. I recommend this video as a serious corrective to his theological moribundity.

Sadly not a single comment on that video has called out Tim's rank anti-trinitarian heresy. Timothy Jay Schwab and his followers are caught up in prelest. I hope they can find their way out.  I would recommend this video to understand what it means to actually test the spirits and the true nature of spiritual delusion.

The God Culture: Did The Lost Tribes of Israel Sail From Qatar to the Philippines?

Timothy Jay Schwab, the soul murdering charlatan who is the founder and head of the Philippine-based online cult known as The God Culture, has published two hour long videos rehashing his Lost Tribes series. These videos deal especially with where the Northern Tribes went. Spoiler alert: some sailed to the Philippines and became Filipinos while others stayed behind and became Kurds. The Southern Tribes migrated to Central Africa, magically transmogrified into Hamitic negroes, and were sold in the transatlantic slave trade in a targeted attack against the Lost Tribes of Israel.

Tracking the Lost Tribes of Israel. Part 2: The Destination. Answers In 2nd Esdras 22B

1:05:12 The Southern kingdom migrated into Africa. That was its only choice at that time, in Egypt, Pathros, and modern Sudan and  Kush or, uh, Ethiopia, essentially, but not the little modern country which is a small sliver of ancient Ethiopia according to abundant maps we cover, at least 20 of them, but all of ancient Ethiopia which is all the way over to what was called the Slave Coast. Ding, ding ding! Yeah, That's why the colonialists went there and that's why they targeted those people. They were targeting Lost Tribes of Israel

That's exactly the kind of history they don't teach in school because it is absolutely false. The truth is Hamitic Africans captured and sold other Hamitic Africans as slaves to Jews, Europeans, and Arabs. Everyone's hands are dirty when it comes to the African slave trade. They don't teach that in school either.

At the end of part two Timothy tells us that these two videos will serve as a nice shorter version of the longer series.

Tracking the Lost Tribes of Israel. Part 2: The Destination. Answers In 2nd Esdras 22B

1:13:43  This will serve as a nice shorter version specific to answers in 2 Esdras

But he also tells us we should check out the rest of his main Lost Tribes series to get the whole case in detail. However, one does not need to do that. In these two videos there is enough bad history, jumping to conclusions, and out right lying and deception that if one is paying close attention they will throw Timothy's message in the burning pile of garbage right where it belongs. As I have written elsewhere, if Tim cannot deal honestly with his sources here he won't be dealing honestly with them there either.

In this article I propose to look at just a few of the historical, linguistic, and interpretive errors Tim makes. I have gone over many of his errors in detail elsewhere but these particular ones I have not. Let's dive into this history from Clown World and see exactly where Tim is wrong and is actually lying on purpose.

Where to begin? Let's start with his exposition of 2 Esdras 13:41-42.

https://youtu.be/aHt107c1JxY?t=900

15:00 "Where never mankind dwelt." Now, some get confused by that so basically they will land in a desert where no man lives. That's pretty simple and it will prove out to be so. Looking for a country that was not inhabited at the time is a really illiterate way to read that and nonsense. "That they might there keep their statutes which they never kept in their own land." Essentially these are taking the oath of a Rechabite history will even tell us and we will find a humble lifestyle among these people when the colonists make it to this land. We will not find the great society which is a nephilim aim yet what most are looking for especially academics and scholars it's called willing ignorance my friends. They don't even know who these people were or how they operated and they're looking for a society that could not exist in there in the manner in which they operated. It just doesn't work.

This passage in 2 Esdras 13 says that the destination of the lost tribes was very far away to a place "where mankind never dwelt." There is nothing here to indicate it is specifically a desert. The text is straightforward and literal. These people are going to an uninhabited land. Tim's calling this a desert rests on his reading of Thomas Stackhouse's interpretation of Abraham Farissol which he mentions in part 2.

https://youtu.be/ycaELOSRMf4?t=3017

50:17 So he said they migrated there, Ferrissol, from Assyria by ship, imagine that! And then they land in a desert to which name does not survive, Chabor. Chabor. This is the Philippines as there is only one desert there on which to land and guess where it is?

If the name of the desert does not survive then how does Tim or Farissol know its name is Chabor? Read or listen to what Tim says and look at the quote in his slide. It says Farissol places the Desert of Chabor on the Indian Sea. That's not the Philippines! Indeed elsewhere the Desert of Chabor is placed closer to Saudi Arabia. I have written a whole article quoting the entirety of Chapter 14 of Farissol's book. The story he relates of a lost tribesman visiting Rome via the Desert of Chabor bears no resemblance to anything Tim has said. The Desert of Chabor is placed nowhere near the Philippines. I urge Tim to read what Farissol actually wrote and stop relying on secondhand hostile witnesses to bolster his claims. Contrary to Tim's assertions the writings of Farissol are not dead but are studied to this day especially by Jewish scholars. That is why I was able to find an English translation of chapter 14.

Tim's interpretation of this verse continues by telling us that in the land they migrate to they will be keeping their statutes "which they never kept in their own land" means they "are taking the oath of a Rechabite." That is a reference to Jeremiah 35 where the Rechabites have taken an oath to live in tents and never drink wine.  

6 But they said, We will drink no wine: for Jonadab the son of Rechab our father commanded us, saying, Ye shall drink no wine, neither ye, nor your sons for ever:

7 Neither shall ye build house, nor sow seed, nor plant vineyard, nor have any: but all your days ye shall dwell in tents; that ye may live many days in the land where ye be strangers.

Tim does not get this interpretation from the the text of 2 Esdras 13 but from Thomas Stackhouse's interpretation of Farissol who says that the lost tribes live after the ancient manner of the Rechabites. 

Others he places in the desert of Chabor, which, according to him, lies upon the Indian sea, where they live, in the manner of the ancient Rechabites, without houses, sowing, or the use of wine. 

Indeed Farissol does write the following in chapter 14 of his book:

As understood from his own assertions, this Jew was from the company of the two tribes, and he farther said that he was an inhabitant of those deserts, and, like the Rechabites, dwell in tents, and that his station was in the Desert of Chabor, which is in Asia Major. Beneath them were the rest of the ten tribes, near to the deserts adjoining Mecca and Gjudda, which are adjacent to the Red Sea. They have each and all of them their chiefs and princes, and the people are as the sand of the seashore for numbers. They raise spices, pepper in particular, as also medical drugs ; and, indeed, they possess many excellent things, as we shall show hereafter. 

https://philippinefails.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-god-culture-sinai-in-luzon-and-lost.html 

Again, this looks like nothing Tim is saying. The Desert of Chabor is located in Asia Major in such a place that Mecca is to the south. That's NOT the Philippines. Not to mention Filipinos do not live in tents and they do drink wine. Tim has no support at all from the text of 2 Esdras to say that these lost tribes lived in the Philippines like Rechabites. There is also no support from Farissol to say that the Lost Tribes "are taking the oath of a Rechabite." Farrisol says they lived in tents like Rechabites not that they had actually taken the oath of a Rechabite. There is a big difference. It's the same as saying Timothy Jay Schwab lives like a Filipino vs Timothy Jay Schwab is a Filipino.

The real reason Tim says these people took the oath of a Rechabite is because he thinks it takes the burden off him of having to find proof that an ancient Hebrew society existed in the Philippines. 

Essentially these are taking the oath of a Rechabite history will even tell us and we will find a humble lifestyle among these people when the colonists make it to this land. We will not find the great society which is a nephilim aim yet what most are looking for especially academics and scholars it's called willing ignorance my friends. They don't even know who these people were or how they operated and they're looking for a society that could not exist in there in the manner in which they operated. It just doesn't work.

What exactly is a humble lifestyle? Tim never defines that and he is apparently forgetting the Boxer Codex which he uses prominently to prove that the Philippines is the land of gold, Ophir. Do people living a humble lifestyle dress like this:

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

In the Boxer Codex even slaves are depicted as wearing gold! Is that humble? Do people living a humble lifestyle live in large houses or palaces?

Those who saw Soliman's house before it was burned, say that it was very large, and that it contained many valuable things, such as money, copper, iron, porcelain, blankets, wax, cotton, and wooden vats full of brandy; but everything was burned to the ground with the house.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/13616/13616-h/13616-h.htm

The houses and dwellings of all these natives are universally set upon stakes and arigues [i.e., columns] high above the ground. Their rooms are small and the roofs low. They are built and tiled with wood and bamboos, and covered and roofed with nipa-palm leaves. Each house is separate, and is not built adjoining another. In the lower part are enclosures made by stakes and bamboos, where their fowls and cattle are reared, and the rice pounded and cleaned. One ascends into the houses by means of ladders that can be drawn up, which are made from two bamboos. Above are their open batalanes [galleries] used for household duties; the parents and [grown] children live together. There is little adornment and finery in the houses, which are called bahandin. 

Besides these houses, which are those of the common people and those of less importance, there are the chiefs' houses. They are built upon trees and thick arigues, with many rooms and comforts. They are well constructed of timber and planks, and are strong and large. They are furnished and supplied with all that is necessary, and are much finer and more substantial than the others. They are roofed, however, as are the others, with the palm-leaves called nipa. These keep out the water and the sun more than do shingles or tiles, although the danger from fires is greater.

https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/7001/pg7001.html

There is not enough space here to continue citing eyewitness reports from the 1500's. The fact is Tim is wrong when he says, "We will not find the great society" in the Philippines. First of all what does that even mean? Second of all the Philippines was divided into nobles and chiefs and commoners. The Spanish did indeed find a great society which was stratified like societies elsewhere. Chiefs and nobles were decked out in gold and jewels and the chiefs threw lavish parties complete with coconut wine. Pigafetta wrote about those parties. 

Aside from that there was no monolithic kingdom in these islands comparable to what Tim claims when he says the Philippines is Sheba. Here is a map rendering what these islands looked like before the Spanish landed here.

https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/otwukd/precolonial_map_of_the_philippines/

Tim is a complete moron. What he really means by saying the lost tribes sailed to the Philippines and lived a humble lifestyle is that he does not actually want to investigate and do archeological research to prove his claims. 

Many seek this architecture in demand to prove this narrative and they are stuck in a false paradigm. There is none to be expected nor has any other nation on earth produced such nor will they.

Ancient Ophir is never described as having temples at all whether alone ones of gold, it is never recored to have great infrastructure in any sense just a mega-abundance of resources. The humble lifestyle of the Filipino even fits the oath of a Rechabite as Farrisol said.

pg. 128-129

https://philippinefails.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-god-culture-search-for-king.html 

Tim thinks this interpretation of the lack of evidence for his claims takes the burden of proof off him but it does not. There is no evidence that there was a great kingdom named Sheba in the Philippines nor is their evidence that a Hebrew society existed here. Tim says that's because they did not leave any evidence of their existence. It's totally ad hoc reasoning. He is making stuff up. Tim's history of the Philippines is exactly like the invisible fire breathing dragon living in Carl Sagan's garage.

Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I'm asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.

http://people.whitman.edu/~herbrawt/classes/110/Sagan.pdf

One further thing to note about Tim's interpretation of this passage, that the Lost Tribes lived like Rechabites, is that it ignores the plain reading of the text. The text says:

"That they might there keep their statutes which they never kept in their own land."

This passage obviously means they will be observing the Mosaic Law. The Rechabites lived in a manner that was not prescribed to the whole of Israel. The Rechabites were only one family and their manner of living was by no means the statues given to Israel but was handed down by their own familial patriarch. What Tim should be looking for is not a people living a "humble lifestyle" like Rechabites but a people keeping the Mosaic Law.  Is there a record of any people in East or Central Asia who kept the law of Moses and lived like Jews or Isrealites? No. Certainly not in the Philippines. There is no record of a people observing the Mosaic Law in these islands. There is no record of an ancient Hebrew culture in any of these islands.

It's funny how this man constantly rails against the Rabbis and the Jews and yet believes what the Jewish Rabbi Abraham Farissol has to say about the Lost Tribes. Could Timothy Jay Schwab be any more of a hypocrite by rejecting the Midrash and Talmud and yet believing in the Talmudic Jewish Fables of Abraham Farissol?

Let's take a look at Tim's linguistic method. Linguistics is a big part of what he does. If a place name has a Hebrew sound and he can wrest a meaning from it that fits, then it fits, logic and sense be damned. So, the Lost Tribes miraculously made their way across the Euphrates as God parted the river like he did the Red Sea. Then they sacrificed in worship. Now, this act of sacrificing is not stated at all in the text of 2 Esdras but Tim gets a precedence for sacrificing from the exodus from Egypt and the return from Babylon. These Israelites have just been delivered across the Euphrates River by God so they had to sacrifice. According to Tim we can know this from place names in the vicinity.

https://youtu.be/aHt107c1JxY?t=1937

32:17 Now, let's fast forward for a moment though but again we're going to give this more definition as we go. Here is the third exodus we're in the second exodus in Ezra right now but this is the third  this is when the southern kingdom migrates from Babylon back to Judea that's what this account  is about and this is from Ezra the same guy. Now, what did they do on the way back to Judea? Well, they also made smoke sacrifices burnt offerings unto Yahuah this is the precedence  established by Moses and repeated, remember this is Ezra 2, by Ezra in both of these migrations.  The Northern Kingdom in which we are dealing and the even the next one the Southern Kingdom return to Judea they do the same thing. So can we find a place near the Euphrates which could fit such a designation that perhaps survives linguistically? We believe we can strongly.

So, here's where we left off we cross the Euphrates at al Ashar defined as such in Hebrew even a crossing essentially going forward. Now, where did they go? And Asher of course  a lost tribe of the northern kingdom even. They would not be able to go deeper into Saudi Arabia  as that was controlled by Ishmael's descendants and they would not have allowed a mass migration through their land they're the enemy. We see this even in the first exodus with the descendants of Lot and remember these are mortal enemies. The sons of Lot, Ishmael, and Esau are enemies of Israel. We see that in Psalm 83 and several other places. The lost the uh actually the temple priests uh also identify that in the Dead Sea scrolls.

So, that would be hostile territory and it just wouldn't fit uh their destination. They weren't going to uh return to Mount Sinai and their land and homes in northern Israel were already occupied  by the Samaritans so that ain't happening, their enemies who became their replacements even in infused religious practice for that matter. We track those Samaritans and Babylonians. To this day we today we call them Jews. That's a fact. Go back and watch that part of the series.

So, where did they go well they went to a place still named smoke sacrifices. That's right to this day this nation called Qatar or Qatar or however you want to pronounce it doesn't really matter but the Hebrew means to make sacrifices of smoke as an act of worship. Boom! There it is! That's exactly what we are looking for and it's right there in this region. There you go. No one knows how it got its name. Interesting. We believe we do. It's Hebrew and the Lost Tribes likely named it. Specifically within this area is a city called Dukhan right on the coast right where there'd be a nice port in fact where they discovered oil  in Qatar so and what does Dukhan mean al-Dukhan it means smoke. How about that?

First of all Tim expects us to believe that the neighborhood in modern day Basra, Iraq known as al-Ashar was anciently named by the Lost Tribes as they passed through. As if Moselms would retain that name for over a thousand years. It beggars belief. Not to mention no one stayed behind. According to Tim everyone left going forward towards the Philippines. Al-Ashar does not mean "going forward" nor is it a reference to the tribe of Asher. It is not even Hebrew! It is Arabic for wise. Basra was not even founded until 638 AD as a garrison so there is no way wandering Israelites founded a city in this region or gave the place a name which has stuck for over 2,000 years.

The same goes for Tim's etymology of Qatar. The Hebrew is actually pronounced kee-tor and it has NOTHING to do with "sacrifices of smoke as an act of worship." This word is used 4 times in 3 verses. Here they are.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h7008/kjv/wlc/0-1/

There is nothing about "sacrifices of smoke as an act of worship" in any of these usages. Why would they name the place they sacrificed to God "smoke." Think of all the place names designated by the Patriarchs in the Old Testament like Bethel and Peniel and Jehovahjireh all of which incorporate the name of God. Why wouldn't these Israelites give a name to the place where they worshipped God which incorporates His name? It does not make any sense.

Lastly, Tim is lying when he says no one knows how Qatar got its name. Why would the Muslims who inhabit this region keep a Hebrew name for their land? They would not. The truth is the name is quite ancient and has nothing to do with the Lost Tribes. It has to do with the name of the inhabitants of the region.

Pliny the Elder, a Roman writer, documented the earliest account pertaining to the inhabitants of the peninsula around the mid-first century AD, referring to them as the Catharrei, a designation which may have derived from the name of a prominent local settlement. A century later, Ptolemy produced the first known map to depict the peninsula, referring to it as Catara. The map also referenced a town named "Cadara" to the east of the peninsula. The term 'Catara' (inhabitants, Cataraei) was exclusively used until the 18th century, after which 'Katara' emerged as the most commonly recognised spelling. Eventually, after several variations – 'Katr', 'Kattar' and 'Guttur' – the modern derivative Qatar was adopted as the country's name. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar 

Every claim in that paragraph from Wikipedia is sourced. The fact is Tim is wrong about the etymology of Qatar being Hebrew and he is lying when he says, "No one knows how it got its name." Can he not do a simple Google search to discover the etymology of Qatar? Apparently not or maybe he did and he selectively omitted this fact in order to make his claim look good. I would not put that past him.

At this point in Tim's story the Lost Tribes have made it to Qatar and are now waiting for passage to sail to....where? The Philippines of course but 2 Esdras does not say they sailed to the Philippines. In fact it does not say they sailed anywhere. On its face 2 Esdras says they crossed the Euphrates and kept going. There is nothing about going south to Qatar.  Tim's route bears no resemblance to the text. He says they crossed the Euphrates at the most narrow point going WEST and then they went south along the border of Arabia. The text implies that these people crossed the Euphrates going Eastward and continued walking Eastward for a year and a half. Though of course no cardinal directions are named.

The text says they eventually made their way to Arsareth.

So what is Arsareth and where is it?

Tracking the Lost Tribes of Israel. Part 2: The Destination. Answers In 2nd Esdras 22B

9:16 First, what is the word Arsareth? Does it really never exist in scripture otherwise?  Not only does it, this is a very specific place. Asah erets, Arsareth. Yes same Hebrew word or words together into one. It appears in Genesis chapter 2 verse 4. Here it is right here. This is the very land where Yahuah created. Where he “arsarethed” “made the earth” in English.  It's identified as Arsareth, made the earth, right there and this is no mystery at all. So, we're looking for what is known in scripture as the land of creation.

On what basis does Tim claim Arsareth is a Hebrew compound word? He does not tell us. He just jumps right in and squishes these two words together in an unholy matrimony, much like his own. Does it make linguistic sense to take two words from the middle of a sentence in Genesis 2:4 and cram them together to make a place name? He is lying when he says Arsareth appears in Genesis 2:4.  The two words asa and eres are there in the middle of a sentence but the proper place name Arsareth is only to be found in 2 Esdras 13:45. This is another example of Tim's inept and confused Hebrew linguistics and more deception in order to reel in gullible viewers who do not check up on him and test what he says.

And what about the Book of Jubilees which gives the name of Elda to the land of creation? If Jubilees is scripture and the author of 2 Esdras, whom Tim thinks is actually Ezra, was aware of this book, which Tim claims is very ancient and is in fact the Book of Jasher, then why would he not use the name Elda? 

https://youtu.be/ycaELOSRMf4?t=875

14:35 Now, Jubilees however tells us that this land formerly was named Elda and that it is the very land of creation where Adam and Eve were exiled after the Garden. This really tells us how we should have read Genesis 3:23 all along as it is literal. Adam would literally till the adamah. That's  actually the same word as the the dirt, the soil, the dust from which he was created. Red soil. Same place imagine that. Now, when we found Havilah and Ophir and the Garden of Eden, they're all in the same area, same region uh we also found the land of creation. That's just fact. Again, review that case. We're moving forward here so our series. "Where he made the earth" Arsareth is the Philippines. Done.

If Arsareth really means "where he made the earth" and really indicates the land of creation why not use the name Elda so everyone would know exactly to where he was referring? Why make up the name Arsareth out of two Hebrew words found in the middle of a sentence? It does not make any sense and this inconsistency seems to have slipped past Tim.

What if Arsareth means something completely different? According to the Jewish Encyclopedia it does. But note how Timothy Jay Schwab cites the entry for Arsareth.

https://youtu.be/ycaELOSRMf4?t=1399

That is HALF OF THE ENTRY!!!  Here is the other half.

The name, it has been suggested by Schiller-Szinessy, is taken from Deut. xxix. 24-27, "Because they forsook the covenant of the Lord . . . and went and served other gods . . . the Lord rooted them out of their land . . . and cast them into another land [ereẓ aḦeret] as this day." This passage is made to refer (in Mishnah Sanh. x. 3) to the Ten Tribes (compare Tosef., Sanh. xiii. 12; Bab. ib. 110b; Yer. ib. x. 29c; Ab. R. N., ed. Schechter, A, xxxvi. 108, and Bacher, "Agada der Tannaiten," i. 143). But different opinions are expressed by Akiba and Eliezer—the traditions are rather confused as to the names—whether the Ten Tribes may be expected to return or not, since this point is not determined in the Scriptural verse. One of them takes the words "as this day" to signify that "as the day goeth, but doth not return, so shall they who are cast off not return"; the other explains the words: "as the day begins with the darkness of the night, but turns into day, so shall the darkness of their banishment be turned into bright daylight" (Mishnah Sanh. l.c.). The fourth Book of Esdras took the latter view, which was adopted also by R. Judah ha-Nasi in the Tosefta (l.c.), who refers to Isa. xxvii. 13.

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1867-arzareth

Tim in all his dishonesty neglected to cite this alternate definition. Funny, as he is quick to dismiss what Rabbis say and there are several references here to Rabbinical writings. He missed an opportune moment to once again mock Rabbinic interpretations he does not understand. Let's go a little deeper here and find out more about this difficult word Arsareth.

Even a cursory reading uncovers that Esdras is referencing the core story in 2 Kings, the exile by Shalmaneser. He also clearly alludes to the Deuteronomic verse foretelling the exile of the tribes to “another land.” The first usage merely echoes the verse in Deuteronomy (29:28) and speaks of an unnamed land, an “other” land—in Hebrew, Erez Ahereth. It is simply a land other than the land of Israel. As opposed to known locations of exile (“the rivers of Babylon,” “Egypt”), it is unknown. Recall that Deuteronomy had addressed the lostness of the tribes by emphasizing the total anonymity of their new place of dwelling. Esdras, however, names the place by converting the Hebrew words Eretz Ahereth into one designator: Arzareth (the replacing of the “e” with “a” is because when not in construct state, the Hebrew word Eretz reads Aretz). That “other land” of Deuteronomy, previously defined only by what it was not, becomes a real and concrete entity with a proper name: “a region which is called Arzareth.”

From a theological standpoint, Arzareth is of course a metaphor, an imaginary and pristine place juxtaposed with our mundane and tainted world. Yet, at the same time, it is presented as a real location, reached via familiar and known geographical markers. The word itself is simply a mis-translation of the Hebrew term for “another land.” Esdras’s insistence on turning “another land” into an actual place (as the reconstructed Hebrew would have it, “it is a land which is called ‘another land’”) obscured the possibility of mistranslation for a strikingly long time. “Arzareth” wasn’t taken as a simple error, a mistranslation or mistranscription or simple garbling of Erez Ahereth. Over the course of centuries, attempts to identify Arzareth, to pinpoint it on a map, and to understand the meaning of the name only underscored its presumed realness. 

The possibility of mere mistranslation was raised only at the close of the nineteenth century, by William Aldis Wright (1831–1914), a leading British philologist and noted Bible and Shakespeare scholar. “Is not the Arzareth of our Apocrypha simply Eretz Ahereth (‘another land’) of that passage, corrupted by an ignorant translator into a proper name?” He concluded: “Arzareth of verse 47 is the ‘terram aliam’ [other land] of verse 40.” 

The Ten Lost Tribes: A World History, pgs. 62-63

The interpretation of Arzareth by William Aldis Wright as being a mistranslation of "another land" shows up in the Journal of Philology, vol. 3, 1870, pgs. 113-114.

Journal of Philology, vol. 3, 1870

Is not the Arzareth of our Apocrypha simply Eretz Ahereth (A. V. ‘another land’) of that passage, corrupted by an ignorant translator into a proper name?

The conjecture has the double merit of ingenuity and simplicity, and will appear even more probable than it does at first sight if we refer to ver. 40, where the same phrase occurs, 'et translati sunt in terram aliam! 

Indeed, calling a land in which no man ever dwelt to which the Lost Tribes were led by God "another land" is not as convoluted as making a compound word out of two words in Genesis 2:4 and saying the Israelites were making their way to "the land of creation." Verse 45 where Arzareth occurs also calls back to verse 40 which says:

Those are the ten tribes, which were carried away prisoners out of their own land in the time of Osea the king, whom Salmanasar the king of Assyria led away captive, and he carried them over the waters, and so came they into another land.

These are things worth considering which, in all his ignorance, Tim passes by.

One of Timothy Jay Schwab's most important sources for all his erroneous and unhistorical claims about the Philippines is the 1492 Erdapfel Map drawn up by Martin Behaim.

Tracking the Lost Tribes of Israel. Part 2: The Destination. Answers In 2nd Esdras 22B

37:29 Here is Chryse, or Crisis, identified even by shape and location as Luzon Island Philippines. The main or large island. Manila is there, the capital city, and Maniola written in on this map even really is referring to Manila.

Look at that jumbled mess of garbage. Are we really supposed to believe that is the Philippines? It does not look a thing like the Philippine archipelago. But what really takes the cake is Tim actually claims this map has a reference to Manila. That's right. This map from 1492 mentions a city the Spanish would found in the 1570's. This reference is also in the middle of the sea and not to a city on any island but somehow it's referring to the City of Manila. 

What a crock! This assertion shows how absolutely ignorant Tim is. Yes, there is text on the map referring to Maniole but that is a reference to ten magnetic islands first described by Ptolemy. Did Tim even think to translate or to find a translation of the German? What a lazy blockhead.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/RavensteinBehaim.jpg

difer jnfell findt zehen gehaifen maniole dafelbft mag kain fchiff faren das eifen an hat umb defs magnet willen der dafelbft wechft (K 5 s).

There are ten of these islands called Maniole. No ship having iron in it dare navigate near them because of the magnet which is found there. 

Ptolemy (VII 2) has "Maniolae insulae decim, quarum incolae sunt anthropophagi, in his gignitur magnes." These Magnet Islands of Ptolemy, however, are placed in the Sinus Gangeticus, whilst Behaim's legend is shifted to the east of the mainland. On fabulous Magnet Rocks, to be dreaded by mariners, because on approaching them the iron nails flew out, and the ship fell to pieces, see Peschel's essay in 'Abhandlungen zur Erd- und Völkerkundes,' Leipzig, 1877, p. 44 .

http://globemakers.com/facsimile/globe_behaim.html

Here is the full citation from Ptolemy:

There are said to be other islands here adjoining, ten in number, called Maniolae, from which they say that boats, in which there are nails, are kept away, lest at any time the magnetic stone which is found near these islands should draw them to destruction. For this reason they say that these boats are drawn up on the shore and that they are strengthened with beams of wood. They also say that these islands are occupied by cannibals called Manioli. There are means of approach from these islands to the mainland.

Geography pg. 157

Ptolemy says the cannibals occupying the Maniolae islands are called Manioli. Imagine that. How will Tim twist that information?

There is nothing on this map from 1492 referring to Manila or the Philippines. For Tim to say otherwise is "willing ignorance" or perhaps he knows what the reference is to and he is intentionally lying to his audience again. Either way he is wrong. The Behaim map does not support his thesis that Chryse and Argyre are the Philippines. His utterly false and ignorant interpretation of this map underscores the fact that he is constantly twisting information to fit his paradigm. It is far worse than Tim not knowing what he is talking about. He is not merely an ignoramus. Timothy Jay Schwab is intentionally lying to his audience.

Now, I could continue but I think I have covered enough here. Tim repeats the same lies about Pomponius Mela, Dionysius Perigretes, the Periplus of the Erythean Sea, Dr. Craig Austin, and Professor Adrian Horridge. I have written at length about every single one of those subjects. If this article and everything else I have written about Timothy Jay Schwab's shoddy research is not enough to convince you that he is a liar and has no idea what he is talking about then I don't know what to tell you.

Let me conclude by saying something about "proof." Just because one has pulled out a lot of old maps and books and says, "See here, it says so," does not mean one has proven anything. Just because one states a "fact" does not mean one has proven anything. One has especially not proven anything if they twist the maps and books they are using to fit their agenda like Tim constantly does. Tim also says and writes stuff that he simply declines to prove. The most egregious thing in his book which he states as a fact without proving is that Filipinos and Greeks were circumnavigating Africa to trade with one another. 

Tim does not explicitly write that the Greeks were sailing "the long way around Africa" to the Philippines but that is implied when he writes:

The Greeks traded with the Philippines for gold and silver roughly around 800-150 B.C. and Mela retained this from the "olden writers" of Greece.

p.43

The sentence from page 43 implies the Greeks circumnavigated Africa because, as Tim mentions in the paragraph from page 136, the Red Sea port was broken. Even if it weren't broken the Greeks did not control that territory so it would have been impossible for them to sail out of that port.  

https://philippinefails.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-god-culture-search-for-king.html 

Tim offers ZERO PROOF for his claim that the Greeks and Filipinos traded with one another by circumnavigating Africa and when he was asked for proof he declined to give it. So, yes there are things in his book that he states without proving. He is lying when he says otherwise. His books and videos are chock full of many errors, some of which he asserts without proving, which I have discussed at length on this blog. 

These two videos about the Lost Tribes are awful. They are filled with error of every sort both historical and theological. It seems everything Tim does is a massive deception of some sort. It's sad because this man resettled in the Philippines with his thrice married second wife and started hawking his lies uninvited. Filipinos don't deserve to have some middle-aged American immigrate to their country for the express purpose of hunting their souls. Filipinos do not deserve to be subject to the lies of Timothy Jay Schwab.