The God Culture: Did the Ancient Greeks Circumnavigate Africa to Trade With the Philippines?

One of the most outrageous and ridiculous claims made by Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture is that there was a regular and robust trade between the Philippines with Greece and Israel via circumnavigating Africa from the time of David to just after the time Jesus Christ was born. When asked for proof of this claim Tim was unable to give any yet he still included it in his book The Search For Solomon's Treasure. Fast forward two years and now Tim has produced a 6 part video series offering "proof" that ancient mariners did indeed circumnavigate Africa. Will this information be incorporated into any future editions of his book?

Let's take a look at all six videos and see if Tim accomplishes the impossible and proves that ancient Greeks, Israelites, and Filipinos were engaged in a network of trade by circumnavigating Africa.

The first video is evidence from the Bible. 

Did The Ancients Sail Around Africa? Bible Evidence. Solomon's Gold Series 16A

If you are expecting Tim to produce a Bible passage describing a journey around Africa you will be forgiven for being mistaken. This video presumes two things. First of all it presumes that the Biblical location of Tarshish is the Philippines. Tim thinks he has proven this but he has not and I have a three part series of articles breaking down his alleged proofs which do not add up. See parts 1, 2, and 3 for detailed information refuting that claim. Everything the Bible says indicates Tarshish must have been located in the Mediterranean basin. The existence of ancient tin ingots dating to the 13th-12th centuries BC, tin was said to have been brought back from Tarshish, being found in Israel which can be traced to Britain and not the Philippines is just one proof among many that Tarshish is not the Philippines.

The second thing this video presumes is that there was a robust trade between Israel and the Philippines (Tarshish) by the long way around Africa. Tim begins by affirming the conclusion before he has even proven it! His reasoning is that the Philippines is Tarshish, the port on the Red Sea at Eziongeber was busted, therefore the only way to Tarshish/Philippines by ship was to circumnavigate Africa.

2:52 This first video will set foundations specifically regarding biblical accounts where the Bible says ancients circumnavigated, they sailed around Africa as fact. The Bible is fact you know. If you don't believe that, well, don't call yourself a Bible scholar, uh, you know or a believer of the Bible. And yes it most definitely does no doubt say that. Uh, that will be our foundation.

Tim will go on to admit that the Bible does not specifically say that anyone circumnavigated Africa. His claim is based wholly on inference and not direct evidence. 

17:58 Does the Bible come out and say it? You know the Bible doesn't come out and say a lot of things but when you see the beginning of the narrative and the end of the narrative it's obvious what happened.

Based on the fact that the Red Sea port was destroyed Tim infers that the only way to Tarshish was by circumnavigating Africa.

30:23 Jonah tells us the ships of Tarshish from the land of Tarshish, not the ones from Israel, some get confused there, the original ones, the land itself in the Far East were still running. And guess what? They were circumnavigating Africa which his narrative is extremely clear leaving no room for anything else. Hmm. This is interesting. And again Tarshish was Greek and his descendants would be of Greek descent whether they lived in Greece or not.

In part three we restore Jonah's actual Journey according to the Bible account which almost every scholar and even pastor at that level has wrong. They just teach it wrong because they don't know and they're taught inaccurate geography. They just don't know what they're talking about.

First, they forgot the Red Sea port was toast and that's a huge forget. It's gone and all the ships as well so the only option was to circumnavigate Africa into the Atlantic into the Mediterranean and then Jonah says, this is history and geography right there in the Bible, says the ships going to Tarshish were right there in Joppa Israel. That's on the coast of Israel on the Mediterranean not on the Red Sea. Somehow they got around there but Jonah says the ship was in 800 BC so it was. And how exactly can we miss nor dismiss that? Willing ignorance of course. 

So, here we have history, yes history, that in 800 BC the ships of Tarshish, the Greek ships yes from the Greek colony over in the Philippines, were able to show up in Joppa Israel on the Mediterranean. How about that? There was no Suez Canal yet and the Red Sea port was out of commission. They circumnavigated Africa it was the only option and it's documented right here in 800 BC.

The Greek colony in the Philippines?? Don't expect to hear any more about that in this video or in any other video. Suffice to say there is no evidence of an Ancient Greek presence in the Philippines. Some armor alleged to be Ancient Greek was found in Mindanao but that claim does not hold up. I have written about that elsewhere.

One of Tim's main sources for all his claims about the Philippines being Ophir is the Periplus of the Erythean Sea which details ports of call and shipping routes going towards India. Is there such a source for the southern route around Africa? Of course not and Tim is at least honest enough to admit that but hardheaded enough to say "we don't need it" and asking for such a thing is illiterate.

38:39 Now, do we have the details where it says we went to this coordinate and we passed this coordinate and we passed that coordinate? Well, no we don't but we don't need it. This is ancient history folks. I mean it is absolutely illiterate for Academia to place such constraints on ancient history. Yes, today we'd have CCTV footage, right? Uh, we have lots of ways that we could prove things out and, uh, you know there maybe even GPS data, uh, you know. We have lots of ways we didn't have any of that back then so to try to take that Paradigm and put it on these ancient factual historic accounts is stupidity.

According to Tim the Periplus of the Erythean is a great resource about the ancient world but asking for the same thing concerning the circumnavigating of Africa, a guide to ports of call and trade routes, is stupid and illiterate and he does not need it. All he needs is the Bible.

40:31 And also let us not forget circumnavigating Africa, again, is no impediment to the Bible paradigm whatsoever. It's only Academia that made up such a thinking, right? I mean it's, you talk about scoffing. The very nonsensical thought that "well man couldn't circumnavigate Africa."

Which academics say ancient sailors could absolutely NOT circumnavigate Africa? Tim cites no one to back up this claim. It's just another opportunity for him to dump on scholars while puffing up himself. Tim does not cite a single academic or scholar in any of these videos yet he rails on them as if he knows what their opinions are. This is the height of hubris and ignorance. Once again magazine publisher and Christian rock singer Timothy Jay Schwab knows more than those who have devoted their lives to studying the ancient world. This schtick is getting old.

This so-called Biblical evidence is really of no weight here because it is reliant on Tim's faulty interpretation of the location of Tarshish being the Philippines. It also assumes the conclusion without actually proving it. What we are looking for here is proof of a robust and regular trade route between the Philippines and Greece and Israel. If it existed then there should be evidence of it and not just scraps found here and there in the Bible or elsewhere which need to be glued together to see the whole picture. It is simply inconceivable that the Greeks had trade route maps of India and none of Africa if they did indeed circumnavigate Africa. Asking for that kind of evidence is not illiterate seeing as such evidence exists for the trade routes to India. 

The second video deals mostly with the writings of Herodotus and Strabo which contain the limit of our knowledge concerning ancient trips around Africa.

Did The Ancient Greeks Sail Around Africa? To Ophir, Philippines? Solomon's Gold Series 16B 

Right off the bat Tim lowers the bar. Now instead of seeking to prove that ancient mariners sailed around Africa and engaged in a robust trade with the Philippines Tim is only seeking to prove whether circumnavigating Africa was POSSIBLE.

0:55 Did the ancient Greeks and others circumnavigate sail around the continent of Africa from the Mediterranean Sea into the Atlantic and Around the Horn of Africa all the way into the Indian Ocean? Was that possible?

But that is not the question. Contrary to what Tim says the testimony of Herodotus that the Phoenicians circumnavigated Africa is not contested by modern academics. However, while Herodotus says he did not believe the story Tim says that Herodotus only did not believe the part concerning the sun and that the story's inclusion is proof that Herodotus believed the story was true in toto. 

14:56 "There they said what some may believe though I do not." What doesn't he believe? Well, he's about to tell you but he didn't say he didn't believe the rest of what he said, did he? No that is illiterate to read it that way. "That in sailing around Libya they had the sun on their right hand." Well where were they? Well, they're down at the tip of Africa something he knows nothing about.

Hold the phone! If there was regular commerce between Greece and the Philippines by circumnavigating Africa then why would Herodotus know NOTHING about the tip of South Africa or that the sun changes positions when one sails around it? By the time he is writing these should be common facts if the trade route between Greece and the Philippines actually existed. This testimony undercuts Tim's claims and he does not even realize it. Herodotus did not just disbelieve what the Phoenicians said about the sun, he did not believe their journey was even possible because the Greeks did not believe the Indian and Atlantic Oceans merged! This is clearly seen in Ptolemy's world map which shows a landlocked Indian Ocean. 

Tim goes on to say that Herodotus would not have included this story if it were not actual history. 

23:08 Herodotus would not have included this in his history which is massive and very extensive, uh, if it wasn't history.

Has Tim even read Herodotus? Are there really fox-sized ants in India which mine gold? 

Here, in this desert, there live amid the sand great ants, in size somewhat less than dogs, but bigger than foxes. The Persian king has a number of them, which have been caught by the hunters in the land whereof we are speaking. Those ants make their dwellings under ground, and like the Greek ants, which they very much resemble in shape, throw up sand heaps as they burrow. Now the sand which they throw up is full of gold.

https://www.livius.org/sources/content/herodotus/the-gold-digging-ants/

The point is not everything Herodotus includes in his History is actually true or was believed by him to be true. In fact there are several times when he relates a story and says he does not believe it. That Tim could say something so stupid as Herodotus would not have included this story if it were not actual history or was believed by him to be true just goes to show he has not actually read Herodotus. But Tim does not actually care what Herodotus has to say because the alleged proofs from the Bible, which Herodotus ignores, are more than sufficient.

6:02 However, let's be clear Herodotus was the opposite of a Bible believer and the Bible already told us Tarshish the Greek circumnavigated Africa carrying Ophir and brothers to the Philippines. It also tells us Jonah hopped on a ship making the same Journey and circumnavigated Africa into the Indian Ocean as Tarshish is east of the Persian Gulf.

The possibility of the Phoenicians circumnavigating Africa is not debated by anyone these days. That singular journey is also not proof of a robust trade route between the Philippines and Greece and Israel. That is what needs proving. It cannot be proved and that is why Tim has lowered the bar to proving the trip was merely possible. Tim even admits that Herodotus knew nothing of the tip of South Africa which is patently ludicrous if there was a robust trade route that way concerning Greece. 

Tim's second witness is Strabo but Strabo's testimony proves beyond a doubt that if circumnavigating Africa  happened at all it was a rare event. Strabo tells us about Eudoxus who found part of a Phoenician ship in Ethiopia.

38:39 From this Eudoxus drew the conclusion that it was possible to circumnavigate Libya which is Africa, right? Uh, and that's what matters here.

He drew the conclusion that the circumnavigating Africa was possible? If there was robust trade between the Philippines and Greece and Israel by sailing around Africa then the route would be well known and there would be concrete proof of its existence of which Eudoxus would have been well aware. Remarkably in his quest to prove that Greeks were sailing around Africa to the Philippines Tim only gives his audience hints the Greeks thought doing so was POSSIBLE but was actually done by others long before them not that they did so on a regular basis. 

This video ends with an appeal to Sinbad the Sailor. 

46:03 Oh, Sinbad the famous sailor was in the Philippines likely. Who would have known?

Indeed who would have known? Sinbad the Sailor never existed! He is a made up figure in the 1,001 Arabian Nights. Appealing to fictional characters is part of Tim's proof that ancient mariners were circumnavigating Africa on a regular basis to trade with the Philippines. How ludicrous is that?

It's not surprising that in this second video Tim lowered the bar to only proving the POSSIBILITY that ancient mariners circumnavigated Africa. The fact is none of the stories he cites, including that of Herodotus, can actually be proven to have ever taken place.

Up to today the historicity of none of these reported circumnavigations has ever been proved, and it probably never will. If they took place they certainly did not result in any understanding about the extent and course of Africa's coasts. None of these sailors left a route description such as the (sketchy) one of Hanno. Of the circumnavigation by Necho's Phoenicians we only know what Herodotus tells us (4.42): that the Phoenicians entered the ocean from the Red Sea, put in every autumn on the African coast to sow and harvest, reached the Pillars of Hercules in the third year and, what Herodotus does not believe, that they had the sun on their right—in the north—when they sailed around the southern end of Africa. The reason why Herodotus could not accept this statement about the position of the sun at midday was not because he thought it impossible that the sun could ever be seen in the north anywhere in the world. In Herodotus' time the changes in the position of the sun when one travelled south were well known. Herodotus had visited Elephantine (2.29) near the tropic of Cancer, where the sun is almost overhead during the summer solstice and south of which the shadows sometimes fall 'the wrong way'. His disbelief of the Phoenicians' statement is therefore not a result of primitive incredulity, but stems from the fact that he, like Strabo, could not believe that Africa stretched over the equator into the southern hemisphere.

https://journals.co.za/doi/pdf/10.10520/AJA03031896_926

Trotting out the same old stories everyone knows about alleged circumnavigations of Africa does not prove they happened nor does anything in this video prove that a robust trade via Africa between Greece and the Philippines existed. Quite frankly this video is a total failure.

Having given all the extant historical testimony to ancient voyages circumnavigating Africa and failing to prove there was a robust trade between the Philippines and Greece and Israel by circumnavigating Africa Tim moves on in the next two videos to discussing Greek and Roman maps.

The 1st Century Mapping Mindset. Greece to Ophir, Philippines? Solomon's Gold Series 16C

I have written elsewhere at length about these maps showing how Tim misuses them and does not understand them rightly. There is absolutely nothing new here but there are a few things Tim says which pertain to the alleged circumnavigation of Africa by the Greeks to trade with the Philippines which must be noted.

36:55 Now we have the end point and we have the full mapping. Uh, can we not draw the lines ourselves or did they have to do that for us too to show that they circumnavigated Africa in order to get from Greece to the Philippines? Duh. I mean do you really need to do that?

52:44 So Mela's talking about a route that the Greeks navigated. Yes, circumnavigating Africa for certain. That's what this is showing. This map documents that the Greeks circumnavigated Africa. Period. Even if you don't agree that those islands are the Philippines, which you really can't disagree with it, but even if you do you still have to conclude that the Greeks circumnavigated Africa. Done. I mean there wasn't even a canal built until 200 BC. Hello!? They were running this route from 800 to 150 BC. So duh. Now imagine that uh the 43 A.D mapping covers that whole era in fact. Now, that's evidence and it's indisputable evidence and again it proves that they circumnavigated Africa indeed successfully they brought back gold from Chryse. 

The map in question which Tim claims proves the Greeks circumnavigated Africa is that of Pomponius Mela. Notice how all of Sub-Saharan Africa is missing yet according to Tim this proves the Greeks were circumnavigating Africa. Apparently they forgot to make notes about the southern part of Africa.

What is of particular interest here is that Tim claims the Greeks "were running this route from 800 to 150 BC." That is an astounding claim seeing as there is abosolutley no evidence such is the case. Not in maps, not in histories, not in anything. Tim's reason for this lack of evidence is a simple ad hoc solution. The route around Africa was super-duper top secret and the Greeks told no one about it. 

29:45 The Greeks knew, uh, they knew how to sail to Chryse Ophir. They knew exactly where it was but why would the Greeks share their location for their land of gold so publicly while they're still going there? Hmm?? Think about that. The answer is easy. They wouldn't broadcast that. Oh, hello world here's where we go to get our gold. Oh, wait a minute you're all going there too? Oh I, I didn't mean for you to go I was just letting you know because I didn't think anybody would follow the route. Duh!

Except in the second video Tim gave testimony that this route was taken by the Phoenicians among others. But even if this were the case, that the Greeks refused to share their top secret trade route, surely there would be physical evidence that this route took place. There would be Ancient Greek artifacts up and down the West African coast. There might even be a reference to the route in a document kept hidden  which has been preserved to our times much like the Dead Sea Scrolls. 

Tim claimed in the first video that Philippine (Tarshish) ships were regularly sailing around Africa to Israel and Greece so surely there would be evidence of Philippine artifacts in West Africa as well as North Africa, Greece and Israel. And with the route being sailed by Filipinos, Greeks, and Phoenicians surely someone wrote it down or made note of it somewhere. After all this is 700 years of alleged history according to Tim. It would be rather unusual that there would be no evidence at all of its existence after 700 years and Tim claims the route was being plied as late as 4 BC when the three Magi set sail from the Philippines to visit Jesus. But there is no such evidence of any kind that the Greeks or anyone else was circumnavigating Africa on a regular basis to trade with the Philippines for 700 years or more. It's all based on an argument from silence and from a wrong interpretation of Greek and Roman maps. 

Video E deals with maps used by Magellan and Columbus and is loaded with more of the same errors I have refuted elsewhere. Read my article, The God Culture: The Philippines is the Land Before Time, for a rebuttal of Tim's claim that the Cattigara of Ptolemy is in Samar in the Philippines and is attested so by Antonio Pigafetta as well as his interpretation of Martin Behaim's map. See my article The God Culture: Lequios and Lucoes Are Not the Same People Group for a rebuttal to his claims that Fernando Pinto was shipwrecked in the Lequois islands and gave coordinates that place it in Luzon. For a rebuttal to his ignorant remarks about Samuel Purchas read my article The God Culture: Samuel Purchas On Ophir, Tarshish, and The Philippines.  Take note that at no time has Tim ever dealt with the facts I present in those articles but he persists in his ignorance. 

All of these videos dealing with maps are more of the same nonsense showcasing Tim has no idea what he is talking about. There is nothing new here and there is certainly nothing proving that there was a robust trade between the Philippines and Greece which lasted between 800 and 150 BC and even as late as 4 BC according to Tim's claims about the Filipino Magi visiting Baby Jesus. Remember, that the Greeks circumnavigated Africa to trade with the Philippines on a regular basis for 700 years is what Tim is attempting to prove here. Yet for three videos he has gone wildly off course to discuss wholly irrelevant matters about maps which he has already addressed at length elsewhere. 

In the sixth and final video in this series Tim takes his audience back to the past once more to offer up proof that the Greeks circumnavigated Africa on a regular basis to trade with the Philippines in 800 BC. His proof consists not of history but of myth. 

Greek Oceanus World River and Rivers From Eden lead to the Philippines? Solomon's Gold Series 16F

This video is astounding in its ridiculousness. The gist of it is Tim claims the Greek myth of a river encircling the world, Oceanus, proves both that his bonkers Rivers From Eden theory is correct and that the Greeks circumnavigated Africa. He concludes this preposterous presentation with the following comments:

1:01:30 "At the edge of Oceanus Where God like Jason went." So, Jason and the Argonauts is a story that goes geographically at some point as far as the Philippines which means they circumnavigated Africa because they left from Greece and they didn't fly helicopters. Yes, the Greeks knew where it was and they traveled circumnavigating Africa to get there from very ancient times. And what it was indeed. I mean they knew. The Greeks knew where it was and what it was. Jason went to the land of gold in the Philippines where the sun rises and Oceanus ends. Boom! This ic clear.

1:13:30 Titans/Giants destroyed by the great Deluge of Oceanus when The Fountains of the great deep from within it exploded, the origin of the flood. It is just as the rivers from Eden. It's associated with a snake. You mean the Garden of Eden? Yeah that one. It's known for the White Rock or Lukas, uh, Ilocanos anyone? Maybe. Even the Atis mentioned could be very well the tribe from the Philippines likely. Ends in the land of gold and Garden of Eden Philippines firmly. From Africa goes to the Far East where Prometheus, Gadreel, stole knowledge of Good and Evil giving it to the man while that happened in the Garden of Eden. 

It all fits. It all ties and they had to circumnavigate Africa all these many times, okay? These characters, especially in the Odyssey and The Iliad, they're going there for physically in their ships even Jason and the Argonauts went to the Philippines. That's what it says.

Got it? Tim's proof that the Greeks were circumnavigating Africa is his interpretation of Greek mythology through the lens of his erroneous teaching of Biblical and Philippine history and the Book of Enoch. Jason and the Argonauts sailed to the Philippines therefore there was a robust trade between the Philippines and Greece and Israel for 800 or more years. That is ridiculous and is no proof at all. 

Tim's Rivers from Eden theory is that the world was created without an ocean and what we now know as ocean trenches are the Rivers From Eden. The flood came and buried them along with the Garden of Eden which is now situated under miles of mud beneath the Sulu Sea with Enoch and Elijah as its lone inhabitants. I have dismantled this silly theory elsewhere in my article The God Culture: The Rivers From Eden Are Not Ocean Trenches or watch my video The God Culture's Rivers From Eden Theory Proven to be False.

This video is too chock full of nonsense to deal with in-depth here and there is no need to trudge through it. The bottom line is that neither in this video nor in any of the previous 5 videos does Tim offer any evidence that there was a robust trade between the Philippines and Greece and Israel for well over 800 years by circumnavigating Africa. The only real historical proofs he offers are in video 2 and boil down to a few historical instances where the voyage was made by a few men and everyone telling the tale thought it either not believable or quite remarkable but certainly not something ordinary. But the singular journey of the Phoenicians does not equate to a robust trade between the Philippines and Greece and Israel by  circumnavigating Africa lasting over 800 years. That 800 year history of trade is what Tim needs to prove. He has failed miserably in that endeavor.

Tim offers ZERO archeological evidence for his claims but instead goes off on wild and obfuscating tangets about maps and myths. But who needs archaeology? Ignorant agitators. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52c7XnuHDLQ&lc=Ugz_krXUKIbjerTxqc94AaABAg

Rich G****n: These agitators are looking archeology evidence simply ignoramus. All videos in TGCs research are super easy to learn. Yah bless!

The God Culture: Yah Bless. 

If you are interested in the real history of the circumnavigation of Africa by ancient explorers read the following:

The Ancient Explorers, pgs 86-106

One final thing here and that is Tim's dismissal of my work. I am mentioned several times in this series. Here is one glaring instance.

47:28 If an academic wants to come at us you better do much more than ridicule because we prove your paradigm stupid on this topic many times over even in this video. When you learn how to read a map, and how to read period, then try to come at us. Go ahead. But if you haven't reviewed our position you will be muted every time. Our channel our rules. No debate in ignorance. We're not wasting our time with such. Otherwise every single enemy, especially the racist blogger who hates everything Filipino and should be in jail, though likely still will, looks like a fool here, especially his 60 plus illiterate blogs all proven stupid.

https://youtu.be/ujhoOzu88cY?t=2848

That is all a lie. Tim has not proven any of what I have written to be wrong or stupid. In fact he never deals with the issues I bring up except to dismiss me with ridicule and threaten me with jail time. He does to me exactly what he accuses his detractors of doing to him. But I say unto Timothy Jay Schwab if you want to come at me you better do much more than ridicule because I have proven your paradigm stupid on this topic many times over even in these videos.

The God Culture: Who is Hashem?

Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture is a hypocrite through and through. Not just a simple hypocrite but an out and out liar. I have claimed that many times and shown several examples. Here are two more. In a recent video about the name Hashem, which the Jews use when addressing God, Tim shows us a live chat he did with a Rabbi on a Jewish website while pretending to be a Messianic Jew in order to get the Rabbi to admit to Tim's thesis. In fact he touts this on the title card!

Who Is Hashem? Not YHWH!!! The Name of God Series: Part 14

A Rabbi's written response admitting this word in Gen. 6:4 is Hashem, the title for their god!

Let's take a look at this exchange between Tim and the Rabbi.

Who Is Hashem? Not YHWH!!! The Name of God Series: Part 14

42:22 So, we gave Aish a chance to explain and in chat Rabbi Keyak responded. Now, he was fine, uh, not mean at all, not confrontational nor were we. Uh, we just asked some questions and he answered and in all fairness he did answer. Though, he usually answered in Talmudic style of course with a question. So, answer a question with a question. But we asked him about Genesis 6:4 and told him it appears Hashem is the origin of the Nephilim, the father of it. Hmm. He answers with a question of course. "Well, what exactly are you asking about the Giants?" Our question was very clear was it not? I mean you can read it there on screen. We framed it even clearer again and repeat it. To that he wanted to know what translation we were using. Okay so we told him we are using the Masoretic text not a translation and the Hebrew says the Giants were the men of Hashem though it is translated renowned in error. Now, of course that's from the KJV. He essentially agreed that's wrong, renown is wrong, asking where we got the word renown in fact and of course we told him the KJV. Uh, we gave him an out though saying well this means the Giants would have come from Hashem which cannot be true, can it? Uh, oh this is good look at his response. 

The rabbi then admits this is the word Hashem, which it is we showed you Genesis 4 is Men Of Hashem. That's what he's saying too. Uh he's not being dishonest in that at all. Uh, of course with a question, uh, "Why wouldn't the Giants come from Hashem?" Again he doesn't have a problem with that. In other words he has no issue because he doesn't believe the sons of God or Benha Elohim are angels. Now, he says they don't translate it that way which is as wrong as a Rabbi can be but no surprise and we know this we've covered this uh in many videos. Uh ,we'll show you some videos at the end where we prove this out. He distances himself from the Christian perspective of course and then we mention Enoch. Oh now he dismisses it immediately. "We did not canonize Enoch." Indeed they did not. That's true. It's not in the Pharisee Canon of Josephus which is what the modern Jewish Canon is and the Churches are following that Pharisee Canon largely in ignoring the original Bible Canon kept by the biblically ordained sons of Zadok who were exiled to Qumran, Bethabara where Yahusua was baptized, where John the Baptist the son of Zadok operated and we found their Library there which is Bible Canon. 

This Rabbi was respectful and the conversation was fine but revealing indeed and that's what we were looking for as he admits it appears that our first passage in Genesis 6:4 most certainly says the Nephilim Giants are the men of Hashem. He affirmed we're reading the Hebrew correctly there. Of course we know we are because it's direct. Hashem is the word used. The name he calls his God but he's okay with that understand that. Are you? See, we aren't. We could have pressed further but he would have figured out we probably weren't good friends. So, anyway we'll leave this at that

There is quite a lot of projection going on here. Tim says this Rabbi was not confrontational as if he was expecting him to be so. He also says he could have pressed further but he did not because the Rabbi would have figured out it was all a ruse. If the situation was reversed Tim would have immediately called the Rabbi a communist agitator and blocked him. And answering a question with a question is NOT Talmudic, it's the Socratic Method and is an invaluable part of learning to think critically something Tim does not know how to do. 

What is the Socratic Method? Developed by the Greek philosopher, Socrates, the Socratic Method is a dialogue between teacher and students, instigated by the continual probing questions of the teacher, in a concerted effort to explore the underlying beliefs that shape the students views and opinions.

https://tilt.colostate.edu/the-socratic-method/

Take a look at how Tim dishonestly presented himself in this chat. 

Aish Fan:  I am confused about something. Looking at Gen. 6:4, the giants were the 'men of renown" or men of Hashem in the Hebrew. Is this not the same God we invoke when trying to replace YHWH with Hashem? Why would we do that?

Rabb Keyak: What exactly are you asking about the giants? 

Aish Fan: It says they were the "men of renown." The word renown in Hebrew is "Hashem." I have someone telling me that I am invoking the wrong God when using Hashem. How do I answer this. 

They continue to tell me Hashem is never found in Torah as a name or title for G-d. 

We?? Tim attempts to pass himself off as a Jew! How ridiculous. Further in the conversation Tim attempts to pass himself off as a Messianic Jew!

I am Messianic....

This whole video is a ridiculous and dishonest attempt to prove that the Nephilim were men of Hashem meaning men who came from the god Hashem or Ashima. That is all bunk. The Hebrew does not say they were men of Hashem. The phrase is "ish Shem." It's two words. "Ish" meaning men and "Shem" meaning renown. 

Inspired by Tim I had a live chat with this very same Rabbi Keyak and he explained to me that the proper name Hashem is not to be found in this text.

Me: But when Hashem is used that is a proper name is it not? Are you saying that in both Genesis 6:4 and Numbers 16:2 this very same exact proper name which is used to address God is in the text?

Rabbi Keyak: No, but it refers to the same Hashem

Me: Ok yes I understand that. I understand there is a milliniea long debate about the identity of the Nefilim but I am not asking about them. I am asking about that very last phrase. Is it Hashem as in the name used when praying to God or is it a phrase with a different meaning?

Rabbi Keyak: Yes, anshei Sheim, for more about that you can look at Yoma 67b

Anshei Sheim is not Hashem

these were people

There you go. It is not Hashem but "anshei Sheim." Lest Tim cavil here the word "anshei" means men the same as "ish." 

The bottom line is Hashem as a proper name is NOT in the text of Genesis 6:4. If he had taken the time to actually ask questions instead of doing some kind of hit and run to get a soundbite then perhaps Tim would have learned that. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKwv8fNopIo&lc=Ugzvas2XpkPA_XCTWIx4AaABAg

Jax: My translation from the Cepher says men of the name in English. Thanks Dr.P. Glad y'all are addressing this too. Yah Bless

The God Culture: Good to see they got that right except Hashem is a name and they should have left it rather than just using another interpretation in our opinion. Yah Bless.

Not only is the proper name Hashem not to be found in Genesis 6:4 but that is not the meaning of the text. The text is not saying the Nephilim came from anyone but they they were noteworthy or famous men. The phrase translated "men of renown" is found elsewhere in the scriptures translated in the same manner as it is in Genesis 6:4. 

Numbers 16:2 And they rose up before Moses, with certain of the children of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, famous in the congregation, men of renown:

Funny that Tim ignores that verse. The entire video is built on Tim's imagination. 

The second lie is also found in this video:

1:00:27 We have issues with Facebook fairly regularly. In fact we were banned recently from using our own channel. Very nice.

If you listen to Tim enough you get a sense that he is being actively persecuted by Facebook and Youtube for his beliefs. But that is not the case. In a speech given on November 27th Tim divulged the exact reason Facebook recently "banned" him.

https://www.facebook.com/sabbathbc.congregation/videos/696650595063441

0:14 We recently, uh, heightened our security and when we heighten our security do you know Facebook banned us again?  Just because we heightened our security and they can't tell exactly where we're located. Well, it's none of their business where we're located. They think we're in South Africa and India and it's bouncing all over the world which is a wonderful thing but at the same time it's also caused issues. 

Is Timothy Jay Schwab so stupid as to not know that Facebook has protocols in place to detect suspicious activity? If Facebook cannot get a lock on your true location alarm bells are going to go off. If one day your IP address is in South Africa and the next day it's in India that will get their attention. From the sound of it Tim is using a VPN and that will definitely cause trouble for anyone using Facebook.

The reason Facebook sometimes blocks accounts using VPN is because it also keep lists of IP address ranges that are for know for VPN usage. Facebook checks your IP address every time you log in. It's one of the ways they confirm that you really are who you say you are. Another reason Facebook is so stringent about security is because a percentage of their accounts are always under attack by hackers. When you sign into your account using VPN, your IP address suddenly may not fall into the range Facebook has associated with your location. Facebook often treats this scenario as though someone's trying to hack your account.

https://securevpn.com/learn_more/How_To_Remove_a_Facebook_Account_Block_Caused_By_Using_VPN

The cold hard fact is Facebook does not care if Timothy Jay Schwab teaches about the Sabbath or the Philippines being the Garden of Eden. But they do care if he is exhibiting the behavior of a hacker. 

The God Culture: The Real History of Christmas?

Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture has released a series of videos about the history of Christmas. These videos serve as a great way to examine the methods he employs in his other videos and books. I have written somewhat about these methods in various articles noting that at times Tim does not even read sources but has copy/pasted things he found on the internet without verifying thier veracity. In this article I want to focus on Tim's method of researching history which entails conflating the present with the past and totally ignoring historical sources.

The first video in this series is about the history of the Christmas tree. 

O Christmas Tree, O Christmas Tree, Wherever Did You Come From? Is Christmas in the Bible?

One does not even have to watch this video to know exactly what Tim will say because it's right on the title card. Christmas trees originate way back to the time of Jeremiah and he condemns them in chapter 10 of his prophetic book. 

9:28 Oh, it's an idol by definition indeed but it is no mystery as to what it is. It is what we now call the Christmas tree in exact practice. We even showed you the videos to see, you know, this all laidout. It's a perfect match already in practice 600 years before Christ or Messiah came in the Flesh. And this practice was co-opted centuries later as supposedly originating with him? That's ridiculous.

11:46 Any so-called scholar that says that this passage is not about the Christmas tree is no Bible scholar and proves themselves illiterate. They cannot even read and comprehend.

12:38 The Catholic Church who changes the Bible on many things, thus a cursed organization according to scripture, that's what it says many times go read it, deflects on this because what they did is they brought back this ancient occult practice and they are too inept to read that Jeremiah directly rebukes them.

All of that is simply a lie. Christmas trees originated in Germany during the time of the Protestant Reformation. If the Catholic Church brought back the practice of Christmas trees then why did the Vatican not have one until 1982! That is a fact of history that Tim does not discuss at all because it does not jibe with his anti-ecclesiastical stance. Tim continually does everything he can to defame the Church which is the Body of Christ. 

The second video purports to be The Real History of Christmas. 

The Real History of Christmas. Is Christmas in the Bible?

Interesting. Is Tim going to talk about the Feast of the Epiphany and how the Feast of the Nativity did not become separate until much later? Is he going to talk about the decrees of Emperors and the Church on how to solemnize Christmas Day? Is he going to talk about the differences between the Eastern and Western Churches and why they celebrate Christmas weeks apart from one another? Will he be discussing why December 25th was actually thought to be the birth day of Jesus Christ? 

Of course not! Tim's modus is to conflate modern practices and claim that is exactly how the Feast of the Nativity was celebrated in the past. In fact he makes some downright ridiculous claims about the origin of Christmas sweaters, the twelve days of Christmas, and even Santa and the elves. 

11:08 It was an occasion for visits to friends and the presentation of gifts. Ah! Sounding familiar? Of course it is because this is the origin of Christmas.

12:55 Both of these are about gift giving and these became the manuals for this Pagan occult practice. Uh, these would morph into uh what would be called the 12 books of epigrams. Yep or origin of the 12 Days of Christmas. Indeed. There you go.

16:10 Instead of the toga colorful dinner cloths, you know like Christmas sweaters perhaps, were permitted in public as was the pilius a felt cap normally worn...wait, wait, wait, you mean like the elves wear? Like like Santa wears? Huuuuh! Especially the elves though because see they are the slaves. Hmm how about that? There you go. The origin of elves, the slaves. Nothing new under the sun folks 

31:17 They rebranded the most Pagan occult day of the year as the birth of Messiah. That's basically what they did.

36:13 They were willing to have those pagan holidays metamorphosed into Christian ones.  

The third video in this series is a wholly ridiculous spiel about how Santa Claus is really Satan. He is also a Nicolaitan which is a group mentioned in the Revelation.

Jolly Old St. Nicolaitan? Old Nick = Satan? Is Christmas in the Bible?

This video is loaded through and through with the word concept fallacy. No one is meaning Satan when they are referring to Santa Claus. Santa is not Satan, he is not the devil in disguise, and he is certainly not a Nicolaitan. But Tim gets there by St. Nick, nick meaning the devil, and nick as in Ncolaitian. It's a wholly worthless video that is good enough for The God Culture's unthinking followers who do not care to verify the nonsense Tim says but is void of any actual history about the identity of Santa Claus. 

It's as stupid as if I connected Tim's name and the word tempter because Tim and Tem-pter sound similar. And who is the tempter? Why Satan of course. That means Tim is Satan. The word concept fallacy is literally Timothy Jay Schwab's historical method.

The problem with these videos is that, despite the titles, Tim does not dive into history at all. He cites from no early church witnesses about the Feast of the Nativity and how it was celebrated. Instead he criticizes modern day practices as if that is how the Church has always celebrated Christmas. The fact is the modern day Christmas season and the way it is celebrated is largely a creation of Coca-Cola and the poem The Night Before Christmas.

Were the Church Fathers erecting Christmas trees, exchanging gifts, feasting, watching sports, and singing carols about elves and Santa Claus? Of course not but one would not know that by listening to Timothy Jay Schwab. 

Tim's thesis in a nutshell is December 25th is Saturnalia, Christmas was celebrated on December 25th to Christianize that pagan holiday, therefore Christmas is Saturnalia and is bad. But not one time does he prove this. Not one time does he cite a single document showing that Christmas is celebrated on that date for that express purpose. He is also ignorant that the Eastern Church does not and never has celebrated Christmas on December 25th. That fact alone shoots down his thesis.

Here is Augustine in Book 4 of On the Trinity showing what a fool Tim is.

For He is believed to have been conceived on the 25th of March, upon which day also He suffered; so the womb of the Virgin, in which He was conceived, where no one of mortals was begotten, corresponds to the new grave in which He was buried, wherein was never man laid, neither before nor since. But He was born, according to tradition, upon December the 25th.

https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/130104.htm

Encyclopedia Britanica even takes Tim's sloppy thesis to task

One of the difficulties with this view is that it suggests a nonchalant willingness on the part of the Christian church to appropriate a pagan festival when the early church was so intent on distinguishing itself categorically from pagan beliefs and practices.

A second view suggests that December 25 became the date of Jesus’ birth by a priori reasoning that identified the spring equinox as the date of the creation of the world and the fourth day of creation, when the light was created, as the day of Jesus’ conception (i.e., March 25). December 25, nine months later, then became the date of Jesus’ birth. For a long time the celebration of Jesus’ birth was observed in conjunction with his baptism, celebrated January 6.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Christmas

According to Tim on Christmas Day the Church Fathers were watching football and drinking beer and having a riotous time like the pagans whose holiday they co-opted. Not so according to the Code of Theodosius which forbids all such celebrations during the Feast of the Nativity.

 The Theodosian Code and Novels, and the Sirmondian Constitutions, Clyde Pharr, pg. 433

On the following occasions all amusements of the theaters and the circuses shall be denied throughout all cities to the people thereof, and the minds of Christians and of the faithful shall be wholly occupied in the worship of God : namely, on the Lord's day, which is the first day of the whole week, on the Natal Day and Epiphany of Christ, and on the day of Easter and of Pentecost

It is not my purpose here to give a full treatment of the REAL Real History of Christmas. For that I point you to a book Timothy Jay Schwab has previously cited yet has never read, The Antiquities of the Christian Church by Joseph Bingham.

https://archive.org/details/originesecclesi02bing/page/1140/mode/2up

The section of his two-volume work about the festivals and holy days of the early church is unparalleled. He goes right to the sources and shows exactly what the early church taught and practiced in regards to Christmas, the sabbath, the Lord's Day, Easter, and other holy days. It is not at all like what Timothy Jay Schwab claims. But nothing ever is what Tim claims it to be as he is constantly misinterpreting and twisting his sources to fit his erroneous worldview. 

The God Culture: Origin of the Races

After discussing the course of the sun and moon as described in Enoch and proving himself to be a complete enemy to actual science Timothy Jay Schwab of The God Culture now goes on to tell us all how the races of men came to be. In sum, Noah was born an albino and his three sons Shem, Japheth, and Ham passed down the races of men through his albino genes combining with theirs. Shem is brown, Japheth is white, and Ham is black. There is a lot of nonsense to skim through here.

The Mysterious Birth of Noah. Why Was He Different? Answers In First Enoch Part 47

The first thing to note is this title card. How were the races preserved? That assumes there were different races of men before the flood. But that would not be possible if mankind has Adam and Eve alone as their parents. Like begets like and there is simply no way the children of Adam and Eve would beget offspring differing from themselves. It's just not going to happen and Tim offers no proof there were various races of men before the flood.

Second of all when Tim talks about race he is talking ONLY about skin color. 

8:23 How did the races such as what we call white, brown, black, or whatever you want to call it. No, the terms aren't even accurate as we're all brown, period. I mean many will say that and and that's truth, that is actually truth. We're just different shades of brown. That's what we all are. There's no such thing as white or black really 

Race is a heck of a lot more deeper than the color of one's skin. There is bone structure (forensic pathologists can identify someones race by thier bones), cranial capacity (look at IQ by nation!), eye formation (epicanthic folds!!), nose structure, and hair texture. 

Skin Color is not the only difference here!

There is also society or civilization. Not all peoples have created great societies. The Europeans, Indians, Chinese, Japanese, and Mesoamericans have each created great societies with monuments that last to this day testifying to their high level of intelligence. Sub-Saharan Africans and Australian aborigines have produced nothing. Is that due to skin color? Of course not! Culture is an expression of racial character which is much more than merely the color of one's skin. The Muslim historian and traveller Ibn Khaldun knew this principle a long time ago.

Beyond them to the south, there is no civilization in the proper sense. There are only humans who are closer to dumb animals than to rational beings. They live in thickets and caves and eat herbs and unprepared grain. They frequently eat each other. They cannot be considered human beings.

https://delong.typepad.com/files/muquaddimah.pdf

If race were merely skin deep then an African albino would look just like a white European.

Do these people look like Europeans? No! That's because race is far more than the color of one's skin. 

The first video in this series is quite long and foundational. Tim spends a great deal of time defending the account of Noah's birth in Enoch by appealing to the fragmented Genesis Apocryphon which was found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls. Tim claims that Noah was born an albino or albino-like. The account from Enoch 106 is as follows:

1. And after some days my son Methuselah took a wife for his son Lamech, and she became pregnant by him and bore a son. 

2. And his body was white as snow and red as the blooming of a rose, and the hair of his head and his long locks were white as wool, and his eyes beautiful. And when he opened his eyes, he lighted up the whole house like the sun, and the whole house was very bright. 

3. And thereupon he arose in the hands of the midwife, opened his mouth, and conversed with the Lord of righteousness.

That is NOT albinism! His eyes lit up the room?  He is speaking with God immediately after being born? Leave it to Tim to remove the miraculous as he did with the story of Jonah. Albinism is a genetic defect and yet Tim claims Noah was genetically perfect!

4:30: "Noah was a just man and perfect in his Generations." Now, what does that mean? His DNA. 

A commenter brought up this exact point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQuetvKkd0M&lc=UgwPdzNH9Ll7rM2rnBh4AaABAg

Millennial in Manila: Shem as red as blood but of course he is not that red maybe just exageration just to make a point just like Noah being as white as snow but definitely not that white but just the same as white people that we have now. He couldn’t be albino since albinism is a genetic disorder and Noah genes was pure.

The God Culture: What video did you watch because you certainly do not represent this one. Noah was perfect genetically not possessing a disorder nor do we ever say so. His special genes account for the continuation of diverse races. He is not an albino today which would be illiterate and we never say so. His genes however, are the origin. Albinism is not a disease and it is extremely racist to call it such. Yes, many albinos today have other disorders but that has nothing to do with Noah and impertinent. Noah was perfect and he was white as an albino indeed similar to a an Angel/Nephilim white not like white people. Did you even watch this video? That is what Lamech and Methuselah say of Noah. Why do you reframe their words? Don't do that here. You will be muted. No agitation. No debate in ignorance. Our channel, our rules. Yah Bless.

What a load of nonsense. Noah is not an albino today? What does that even mean? Yeah, Noah is long dead. 

Calling albinism a genetic defect is racist? Clearly Tim has no idea what albinism is. If Noah had albino-like genes then he was defective genetically. End of story. Amazingly enough Tim claims there is no scientific explanation for albinism and the only proper answer is that it comes from Noah. 

1:01:38 First Noah is truly described as being albino like. Now this is our conclusion that we're drawing from this but it does make logical sense. Uh, it's something very unique to his time of course. Uh, it's still rare today but not as unique today as as likely those are genes handed down at least in part from Noah to this day and that's where uh albinism came from really. 

When an albino mates the genes of their pair, uh, who whomever they take as a mate, become the dominant genes. If they take an African-American wife they'll basically generally, again we're not saying in all cases, and not everybody's the same, but generally they'll have an African-American child. If they marry white person their children will be white because whatever trait of the maid of the spouse would dominate theirs assuming they were, you know, it wasn't another albino of course. And then who knows? But this trait has no explanation except for first Enoch in this account. There's really no, uh, true good scientific explanation for the origin of albinism, uh, nor how we got the races.

Yet, Enoch's about to tell you, and this is going to blow you away, you just wait. So, it makes sense though that Noah had the special genes to carry the major races across the flood. 

The second paragraph is unbelievably stupid. If an albino mates with a negro a negro child will be produced? What if the albino is not a negro albino? Then the child won't be a negro of course. Negroes carry negro genes and will always give birth to negroes even if they happen to be albino. The same goes for every race. Tim's view of race is incredibly simplistic and does not take into account the fact that race is not just about skin color. And where is his proof? Where are his scientific papers to prove this horse hockey about what kind of children albinos produce? He has none because Tim is making it up as he goes. After all, "it makes sense."

Likewise Tim's claim that there is no true good scientific explanation for the origin of albinism" is simply not true. Albinism occurs in plants and animals. We know its cause which is the lack of pigmentation in animals and lack of chlorophyll in plants. Tim is a liar!! This is utterly ridiculous. 

Albinism is a congenital condition characterized in humans by the partial or complete absence of pigment in the skin, hair and eyes. Albinism is associated with a number of vision defects, such as photophobia, nystagmus, and amblyopia. Lack of skin pigmentation makes for more susceptibility to sunburn and skin cancers. In rare cases such as Chédiak–Higashi syndrome, albinism may be associated with deficiencies in the transportation of melanin granules. This also affects essential granules present in immune cells leading to increased susceptibility to infection.

Albinism results from inheritance of recessive gene alleles and is known to affect all vertebrates, including humans. It is due to absence or defect of tyrosinase, a copper-containing enzyme involved in the production of melanin. Unlike humans, other animals have multiple pigments and for these, albinism is considered to be a hereditary condition characterised by the absence of melanin in particular, in the eyes, skin, hair, scales, feathers or cuticle. While an organism with complete absence of melanin is called an albino, an organism with only a diminished amount of melanin is described as leucistic or albinoid. The term is from the Latin albus, "white".

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

Though race is 100% real geneticists who have been studying the human genome for decades say there is no genetic basis for race meaning all humans are human and not that there are no differences in the way many humans look and act.

The completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003 confirmed humans are 99.9% identical at the DNA level and there is no genetic basis for race

https://academic.oup.com/emph/article/9/1/232/6299389

Tim's thesis falls flat at every single level. From Noah being genetically perfect yet an albino or albino-like to the races being skin deep. This is laughable nonsense. 

Above I referred to Enoch part 47 as the first video in a series but I was wrong. This is the ONLY video about how Noah preserved the races of men through his three sons. Tim does promise he will tell us the mechanics of this process but he never does. The bit about albinos mating and producing certain offspring based upon the race of thier chosen mate is not a coherent explanation. Instead the next video is an interpretation of Enoch's animal dream vision which touches ever so slightly upon the subject.

Enoch's Animal Dream Vision 101 Animation. Answers In First Enoch Part 48

19:49 But that white bull, Noah, which had become a man, now human skin tone in identification, but in this case really white like a Nephilim, similar to an albino to carry the genes across the flood, and we'll see how. No, Noah was not an actual albino. Albinism would have begun with Noah of sort though he had no defects whatsoever. He was perfect. Came out of that vessel and the three bulls with him and one of those three was white like that bull. Whoa! That's Japheth who inherited the lands known in origin as white peoples to the north. And one of them was red is blood. That's Shem as shemite, Semite, same word should be don't know why they dropped the H but very deceptive, generally is a medium brown or red skin in history such as the Native American Indian or the Filipino. He was given Asia essentially. And one black this is Ham who received the Southern Hemisphere and that matches.

And that's it. That one paragraph is all Tim has to say on the subject of the races being preserved through Noah in this video. Perhaps he will have something more to say in the future. 

So, Noah was not an albino but merely similar to an albino because he was white. What does that even mean? Tim does not say. He also promises we will see how the various racial genes were carried across the flood via Noah because of his "albinism" but Tim never gives any mechanics as to how that would work. He simply assumes it. He does give a cute little animation to illustrate his false doctrine.

Let's try to find a conclusion here. 

Tim's argument for the origin of the races is that Noah was white skinned like an albino and that somehow the genes for all the various races were encoded in his DNA which he transferred to his three sons. Rather than his sons progeny looking like weird creatures which is always the result of race mixing Japheth became the white race, Ham the negro race, and Shem all the brown races. How this happened Tim does not say. 

Once again Tim is going way above his pay grade. He is no geneticist. All he has is the book of Enoch as his guide. This dream vision of Enoch has been interpreted in the manner Tim ascribes to it, that each of Noah's sons was the father of the various races. However, Enoch says nothing about Noah having special genes for this purpose. Instead Enoch relates that Noah had a miraculous birth wherein his skin was white, his eyes lit up the room when they opened, and he could immediately talk upon leaving the womb. Tim pulls the fanciful notion about Noah being born that way to carry the genes of each race across the flood right out of his hat and he offers no proof of any kind whatsoever. 

When confronted with the fact that albinism is a genetic defect Tim retreats and says Noah was not an albino but merely albino-like. What that means he does not say. Albinos have no skin pigment which is why they are white. Did Noah have a white skin pigment or was his skin without pigmentation? And how would that entail having the genes of all the races encoded in his DNA? Tim does not say. He assumes it every step of the way without giving any proof whatsoever. That is his method. It is par for the course. 

It's funny that Timothy Jay Schwab wants us to trust our eyes when it comes to the sun but not when it comes to race.

Do these women look like they are merely different shades of brown? The notion is absurd.