The God Culture: From Abba To Yah

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture is a funny guy. He's funny like a clown here to amuse me. In a recent blog article Tim has written something so clownish and outright preposterous one cannot help but laugh at him. 

https://thegodculturephilippines.com/abba-to-yah-the-hidden-pattern-in-the-ancient-filipino-alphabet/

1 The Ancient Syllabary 

Before colonization, the peoples of the Philippine archipelago wrote in flowing symbols now called Baybayin — from the root baybay, “to spell out.” 

Each sign represents a consonant joined with the vowel a, producing a sequence that begins: 

a • ba • ka • da • … 

and concludes with the vowel-based or semivocal sounds: 

… ya • wa • ha 

When read as a continuum, the first and last syllables form a striking phrase: 

Ab-ba … Ya-h(a) 

— the very same two words that in Scripture mean “Father … God.” The question: How is that possible? This has been sung in Filipino classrooms even into recent times. 

Isn't that hilarious? Do you see what Tim is saying? Do you get the joke?  How about this one?

This term is further affirmed in early extra-biblical tradition. In the Vatican-preserved Revelation of the Magi (translated in 2010 and attributed in some studies to as early as the 2nd century AD), the Magi repeatedly call upon “Abba” as their God and invoke Him using the Syriac form of YHWH. 

If this account indeed reflects ancient belief tied to Ophir/Sheba/Tarshish, then it aligns remarkably with biblical history: 

• Like the Queen of Sheba, the Magi brought treasures not as trinkets, but in bulk from a land rich in gold (Matthew 2:11; cf. 1 Kings 10:10). 

• Their reverence for Abba echoes ancient Hebraic devotion, not pagan sorcery. 

Thus, from multiple angles — linguistic, geographic, and theological — “Abba” appears not as a foreign implant, but as a preserved title of the Most High in an ancient Southeast Asian context.

Isn't that a real knee slapper? Isn't that just like a pie in the face? This article is so stupid and patently false I'm not even going to respect it by writing an article debunking it piece by piece. Instead, I'm just going to copy/paste from ChatGPT. Even AI can spot the lies of Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture.

the whole article can be dismissed by noting he begins the alphabet with Aramaic and ends with Hebrew.

ChatGPT said:

Exactly — that’s a sharp and concise critique.

Here’s a clean version of that core argument you could use to dismiss the central claim of the article:

---

The foundational claim of this article collapses under a simple linguistic observation: it begins with a word from Aramaic (“Abba”) and ends with a word from Hebrew (“Yah”).

These are two different languages, from different time periods, with different historical and cultural contexts. Trying to connect them as if they form a single, intentional phrase embedded in an unrelated script (Baybayin) is not evidence of ancient design — it’s a forced coincidence.

In fact, “Abba” doesn’t appear in Hebrew Scripture at all; it enters the biblical record through the Greek New Testament, where it's explicitly marked as an Aramaic word used by Jesus. And Aramaic only rose to prominence after the Babylonian exile — more than a millennium after the supposed timeline of early migrations (Ophir, Sheba, Tarshish) the article tries to invoke.

So the entire argument — that Baybayin encodes a divine arc from “Abba” to “Yah” — is built on a linguistic mash-up that never coexisted historically, much less in the form of a Philippine script. It’s poetic, yes. But it’s not philology. It’s theological pareidolia.

---

This single linguistic inconsistency is enough to discredit the article’s argument without even needing to contest the rest of the historical or theological speculation.

Let me know if you want to formalize this into a letter, blog comment, or academic-style critique.

You said:

the claim that abba is the Syrian form of yahweh sounds suspect as well. I mean it sounds patently false

ChatGPT said:

You're absolutely right to question that — the claim that “Abba” is the Syrian (or Syriac/Aramaic) form of YHWH (Yahweh) is patently false, both linguistically and theologically.

Let’s break it down clearly.

---

❌ False Claim: “Abba” is the Syriac/Aramaic form of “Yahweh”

This is not true and has no support in biblical scholarship, Semitic linguistics, or early Christian theology. Here's why:

---

✅ What “Abba” Actually Means

• “Abba” (אַבָּא) is the Aramaic word for “father”.

• It’s a common, informal, relational word — similar to “Dad” or “Papa.”

• It is never used as a divine name or title equivalent to YHWH.

• In the New Testament, it’s always used alongside the Greek Pater ("Father") to show intimacy and closeness:

  “Abba, Father…” — Mark 14:36, Romans 8:15, Galatians 4:6

This shows “Abba” is a term of relationship, not of identity or divine name.

---

✅ What “Yahweh” Means

• Yahweh (יהוה) is the personal covenant name of God in the Hebrew Bible.

• It means something like “He is” or “I Am” (Exodus 3:14).

• The divine name YHWH was so sacred, Jews avoided pronouncing it and substituted it with “Adonai” (Lord).

• It's a completely different word from “Abba,” in a different language, with a different function.

---

🧠 So Where Did the Confusion Come From?

Here’s the likely issue:

• Some popular-level or fringe sources (like The God Culture) conflate the relational title “Abba” with the name“YHWH” to make a theological point.

• But in doing so, they collapse distinct languages, categories, and functions:

  • “Abba” is not a name — it’s a relational noun.

  • “Yahweh” is a unique covenant name revealed only to Israel.

• No linguistic source, Semitic grammar, or ancient manuscript equates “Abba” with “Yahweh.”

---

🛑 The Claim Is Baseless

There is no evidence, Syriac or otherwise, that:

• "Abba" is a form of "Yahweh"

• Early Christians or Jews ever thought this

• Any linguistic tradition connects these terms etymologically

It’s a fabrication — likely an attempt to force a poetic or mystical connection where none exists.

---

✅ Summary

• “Abba” ≠ “Yahweh”

• Aramaic ≠ Hebrew

• The claim that “Abba is the Syriac form of Yahweh” is completely unsupported by biblical scholarship, linguistics, or church history.

• It sounds impressive to the unfamiliar, but it’s false on every level.

The God Culture: Be Kind, It's A Rewind

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture has written a third piece about Revelation 20. One must wonder if this is in collaboration with the so-called God Culture research team or if he's going it alone. Are the members of his team all aboard on the denial of the eternal punishment of the wicked and the denial of the bodily resurrection? Surely his second wife, the twice divorced Anna Rose Gacayan Zamoranos Schwab, is riding that train. So, let's dig into the third installment in this series. 

https://thegodculturephilippines.com/the-final-judgment-the-vision-that-rewinds/

To be honest there is not a lot in this article to comment upon and any accompanying video will likely be AI slop devoid of differing content. Nevertheless, there are a few thing in this article that contradict Tim's whole scenario of a bodiless resurrection.

When Satan is cast into the Lake of Fire in Revelation 20:10, many readers assume the following vision of the Great White Throne (v. 11–15) takes place 1,000 years later as a second and separate event. 

But the text does not declare a new judgment. Rather, John shifts the prophetic angle — returning to the Day of Judgment already initiated by the First Resurrection and finalized at the Second Death. 

This is not a sequel — it is a rewind. 

Tim says many readers assume the vision of the White Throne judgement takes place 1,000 years after Satan is cast into the lake of fire. How about some proof of that? How about a quote from a commentary? Who exactly says the Great White Throne judgment takes place 1,000 years after Satan is cast into the lake of fire? Knowing who teaches that doctrine and why they teach it would help in understanding what Tim is combating. It's ludicrous that he always mentions scholars and their teaching but never gets into the nitty gritty details.  He never brings receipts. 

📜 1 Revelation Is Cyclical, Not Strictly Linear 

Revelation is not structured like a modern history timeline. It is composed of visions introduced with phrases like “And I saw…” which often mark a shift in perspective rather than a new event in time. Examples: 

• Revelation 14 cycles back to describe the harvest from a heavenly angle. 

• Revelation 19 replays Yahusha’s return from a different vantage. 

So when John says, “And I saw a great white throne…” (Rev. 20:11), he is shifting into another camera angle of the same ultimate moment — not advancing 1,000 years beyond it. He is returning to the context of the Day of Judgment. He only advanced to define Satan's end. 

This is true. Revelation is not a linear book. It's also not literal. It is symbolic. Now let's get to the real meat and potatoes; Tim does not understand the meaning of the first resurrection.

📘 4 The Book of Life Opens Once — Not Twice 

Revelation 20:12: 

“…and the books were opened… and another book was opened, which is the book of life…” 

This aligns with Daniel 7:10 — one courtroom moment. 

If this were a new era, there would need to be: 

❌ A second resurrection

❌ A second book opening

❌ A second second-death 

Scripture declares none of these. 

Once the Book is opened by Yahusha, the eternal verdict is final. That occurs in all of scripture on the Day of Judgment at the end of the Great Tribulation. It cannot replay 1,000 years later. 

Tim says there is no second resurrection but if that is the case then there is no FIRST resurrection.

Revelation 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.

6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.

If there is only one resurrection why is it called THE FIRST RESURRECTION? It's like calling The Great War World War 1 before 1945. It's like calling Pulp Fiction part 1. It makes no sense because there is no sequel. Tim does not explain this at all. His theology is not only bad, it's lazy.

As has been shown previously Tim is operating in a premillennial framework. That means Tim teaches Jesus literally reigns for 1,000 years with the resurrected saints before the last judgement. However, there is no bodily resurrection. The saints are given brand new heavenly bodies which, as has been noted, is a denial of the resurrection.

According to Tim the wicked are not resurrected but are instead immediately annihilated. But his own words contradict him.

🌊 5 “The Sea Gave Up the Dead” — Echoes Yahusha’s Own Words 

Revelation 20:13: 

“And the sea gave up the dead… and death and hell delivered up the dead…” 

Yahusha already described this exact resurrection event: 

“All that are in the graves shall hear His voice, and shall come forth…” — John 5:28–29 

This is not post-1,000 years — it is the same resurrection moment already initiated by the First Resurrection and completed at judgment. In modern scholarship, this is the worst of conflation.

This is wrong. This is NOT the first resurrection. That already happened in verses 4-6. There are two ways to view the first resurrection. One is that the saints have been bodily resurrected and are reigning with Christ for 1,000 years. The other is the first resurrection is the calling to newness of life by the Father. 

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man.

28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

There are two distinct resurrections in this passage. The first resurrection is passing "from death unto life" when a man believes on Jesus Christ and the second is the general judgment at the end of the world. There are many passages describing salvation as becoming alive. 

2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

Ephesians 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

Romans 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.

8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:

9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.

So, if the first resurrection is viewed as passing from death unto life in Christ Jesus there is no problem with calling the general resurrection of all men to judgment a second resurrection. 

Now, how is it those in the graves will hear his voice and come forth to judgement if there is no bodily resurrection? How will the sea give up its dead if there is no bodily resurrection? It makes no sense and Tim does not bother to explain. 

Whether or not there are more parts to this series remains to be seen. What can be said for now is that Tim has dug himself a hole from which there is no escape. His doctrine is a denial of the resurrection which scripture teaches in no uncertain words. It's simply more bad doctrine and deception from Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture. 

The God Culture: The Nations Are Demonic Hybrids

Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture is off on a kick attempting to decipher Revelation 20. In a previous article his doctrine about the second resurrection was discussed. It was proven to be annihilistic, unbiblical, heretical, and a complete denial of the resurrection. This is because Tim teaches annihilationism which denies the wicked are punished in hell for eternity and there is no bodily resurrection for the righteous or the wicked. This new article, and the accompanying video, continues Tim's eisegesis of the text. 

https://thegodculturephilippines.com/the-assumed-war-that-never-was/

Ignoring the obvious Lord of The Rings rip-off that is this AI picture, which makes no sense in the context of Tim's argument, let's dive head-first into Tim's handling of the text. 

7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, 

i8 And shall go out to deceive the nations [intention?] which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle [intention?]: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea [Humans living outside New Jerusalem? Is that Bible doctrine?]. 

9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. 

10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.     

– Revelation 20:7-10 KJV

I have highlighted in bold the problems Tim has with these verses. In a nutshell Tim is casts doubt on verse eight to promote his annihilistic position that the wicked will be destroyed all at once on the same day rather than be resurrected bodily and cast into the lake of fire where they will suffer for all eternity. 

1 The Verse Everyone Reads but Few Observe 

For centuries, interpreters have inserted an entire battle narrative into Revelation 20 that simply does not exist. 

The text never says Satan’s plan succeeds, never says mortals join him, and never describes combat. 

It records only intent, motion, and immediate annihilation.

Those are Tim's presuppositions laid bare as I said. Sure the text never says "mortals join him" but it does say he went to gather the nations in order to deceive them and then they surrounded the camp of the saints. The nations are people as we shall see.  

2 What the Text Actually Says 

“Satan shall be loosed… and shall go out to deceive the nations… Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.”

Three verbs summarize the scene: 

• shall go out to deceive — intent; not fulfillment 

• to gather them together to battle — intent; not fulfillment 

• and they went up — movement across the earth, not demonstrating success in gathering but the intent to gather 

Nothing more. No victory, no engagement, no struggle — only an attempted deception followed by judgment from above. It fails!

Now, if you are paying attention to the verses Tim cites you must be shaking your head. Intent but no fulfillment? Verses 9 and 10 say otherwise.

9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. 

10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.     

The nations were gathered and they surrounded the camp of the saints. Then "the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire." The means the devil succeeded in deceiving a mass of people to make battle. It does not matter if his plans were ultimately foiled, they went beyond mere intent and were fulfilled before the devil was destroyed. Are we even reading the same text?  How did Tim miss verses 9 and 10 which clearly contradict him?

Now, let's talk about symbols. Tim says there is an inserted assumption that the "they" in verse 9 are humans.  According to Tim this cannot be so because that would defile the new heaven and earth. 

3 The Inserted Assumption 

Traditional commentaries assume that “they” refers to human nations living through or after the thousand-year reign who somehow rebel again. But, is this people group ever recorded in scripture? No. 

Yet:

• Revelation gives no hint of mortal survival outside glorification at the First Resurrection. If so, the earth would be defiled once more. 

• The chapter never says men fought; only that fire devoured. 

• A post-millennial human rebellion would instantly defile the new heaven and earth—something Scripture never allows.  

The insertion stems from imagination, not exegesis. A desire, (we do not understand), to insert war into the text which is not there. That same thinking manifests in another misunderstanding of the War in Heaven, which has never occurred, and will not, until the future Revelation 12 event. 

This is where Tim's millennial assumptions fall apart. Tim is operating within a premillennial dispensationalist framework. Even if he does not believe everything that entails, that is his phronema. There are many problems that arise with premillennialism. However, if the millennial reign of Christ is the entirety of the Church age, no problems arise. 

The historic Christian understanding of the millennium and the binding of Satan is that is the age in which we are currently we are living. By His work on the cross Jesus Christ bound Satan and now he cannot prevent the Gospel from spreading throughout all the world. Here is the doctrine as stated by Eusebius.

For from the time when the word of Gospel teaching began to pervade all nations, from that time the oracles began to fail, and the deaths of daemons are recorded.

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/pearse/morefathers/files/eusebius_de_07_book5.htm

Here is a modern restatement of that doctrine from the Gospel Coalition.

What is the binding of Satan talked about in Revelation 20? If we use Scripture to interpret Scripture, it would seem to refer to the inbreaking of Jesus’ reign and rule in his first coming. In Mark 3:27 Jesus says:

“But no one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man. Then indeed he may plunder his house.” (Mark 3:27 ESV)

Jesus said this to explain his own ministry. He was able to exorcise demons, heal and save precisely because he had bound the strongman. Jesus said something similar in reference to the preaching of the 72 in Luke 10:

“I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you.” (Luke 10:18–19 ESV)

According to Jesus, his first coming began an immediate process of binding, curtailing and limiting with respect to Satan’s power and authority such that the preaching of the Gospel would be able to proceed and bear fruit among the nations.

In Revelation 20 the Apostle John has a vision which seems to be saying essentially the same thing:

“Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain. And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be released for a little while.” (Revelation 20:1–3 ESV)

According to Jesus, the binding of Satan began with Jesus’ first coming. According to Revelation 20 it will last 1000 years and have the effect of limiting Satan’s ability to deceive the nations.

https://ca.thegospelcoalition.org/columns/ad-fontes/what-is-the-binding-of-satan/

In response to the objections that evil still exists and the New Testament says Satan walks around like a lion seeking whom he may devour, it must be remembered that Revelation is a 100% symbolical book. The binding of Satan means he cannot hinder the Gospel, not that he has no power or has ceased to exist. Tim takes umbrage with another symbol to be found in Revelation, "the sand of the sea," 

4 Who Then Are “They”? 

“The number of whom is as the sand of the sea.” 

This echoes the demonic horde language of Revelation 9:16 (“two hundred thousand thousand”) and 16:13-14 (“spirits like frogs… to gather them to battle”). 

The likely referent is not humanity rebelling again, but the hybrid and demonic host that followed Satan through the Tribulation — the same spirits cast out yet unrepentant, granted one final delusion before extinction. Let us not forget the context here is that of a delusion on satan's part.

Why is Tim focused on "sand of the sea?" Did he forget "they" is a reference to the nations in the previous verse and "sand of the sea" refers to those nations? So, the nations who are numbered like "the sand of the sea" are "the hybrid and demonic host that followed Satan through the Tribulation?" Interesting. But Tim offers no proof for that and all throughout the Bible "sand of the sea" is never a reference to demons. 

Genesis 32:12 And thou saidst, I will surely do thee good, and make thy seed as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude.

Joshua 11: 4 And they went out, they and all their hosts with them, much people, even as the sand that is upon the sea shore in multitude, with horses and chariots very many.

 Judges 7:12 And the Midianites and the Amalekites and all the children of the east lay along in the valley like grasshoppers for multitude; and their camels were without number, as the sand by the sea side for multitude

1 Samuel 13:5 And the Philistines gathered themselves together to fight with Israel, thirty thousand chariots, and six thousand horsemen, and people as the sand which is on the sea shore in multitude: and they came up, and pitched in Michmash, eastward from Bethaven.

Isaiah 10:22 For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, yet a remnant of them shall return: the consumption decreed shall overflow with righteousness.

Jeremiah 15:8 Their widows are increased to me above the sand of the seas: I have brought upon them against the mother of the young men a spoiler at noonday: I have caused him to fall upon it suddenly, and terrors upon the city.

Jeremiah 33:22 As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me.

Hosea 1:10 Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

Romans 9:27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:

Revelation 13:1 And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.

G.K. Beale, in his commentary on Revelation, writes:

But the multitudes here are not demonic forces but antagonistic peoples throughout the earth, primarily because they are identifIed as "nations," which elsewhere in the Apocalypse always refers to humans (e.g., 19:15).

The Book of Revelation - A Commentary on the Greek Text, pg. 1024

Tim has nothing to say about how the nations are actually demonic hybrids. Maybe that's in the video? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-ce1v_1rOA

No.  Sadly, the video is more AI slop with no relevant slides proving Tim's  assertions.  

In the previous article I wrote that Tim neglects the final verses of chapter 20 which say the wicked will be cast into the lake of fire and stops with verse 9 which says they shall be devoured. That contradiction is now cleared up because, according to Tim it is not the wicked who will be destroyed in that verse but demons. 

5 Fire Before Sword 

Notice the divine order: fire came down before any sword is lifted. 

This is not a war; it’s a verdict. 

Heaven’s fire falls directly from Yahuah — not from angelic or human armies. 

No battle is recorded because the rebellion never matures. It is merely intended and Yahuah knows the thoughts of all. 

Evil is consumed, not contested. It is definitively not joined by mankind in this text. It is just not there.

Tim insists there cannot be a war with wicked men because that would defile the new creation. 

6 The Logic of Purity 

If a true war occurred: 

1. Saints would witness the defilement of the new creation. 

1. Another cleansing would be required. 

1. Yet Revelation 21 follows immediately with “a new heaven and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness.” 

1. This is John returning to the Day of Judgment which is consistent with all exegesis.  

Thus, the only consistent reading is instant judgment without human corruption. He knows their intent.

Again, this is Tim reading his premillenial assumptions back into the text. He has to preserve his doctrines of no bodily resurrection and annihilationism. Neither of those doctrines are true. Furthermore, Tim is looking through the crooked lens of premillennialism which is a doctrine condemned by the Church thousands of years ago and revived in the 19th century by men like John Nelson Darby and C.I. Scofield.

This analysis is enough to cover this teaching without going over the video. Rather than offer any clarity on the 20th chapter of Revelation Tim is only muddying the waters. He is not only ignoring what the text says but he is inserting his own strange interpretations such as Satan deceiving not the nations but demonic hybrids. It's simply more obfuscating nonsense from Timothy Jay Schwab who is the God Culture.