Timothy Jay Schwab who is The God Culture is set to release a new book about the origins of the early Church. The title is Bethabara: Where the New Testament Truly Begins: The Priesthood in Exile, the Wilderness Gospel, and the True Origins of the Early Church.
 |
| Bethabara |
This book is very obviously a distillation of all his teachings about the Dead Sea Scrolls, John the Baptist, and the Qumran community. Tim claims it will be the most academically rigorous book he has yet published.
This is the most academically rigorous, carefully sourced, and spiritually confronting work we have ever released.
https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxhdbDjazhGTCOYkOBVQ3SqX9XgjEIYSOc
That remains to be seen but judging by all the videos he has published on the topic, and which have been thoroughly debunked on this blog, it will not hold up to scrutiny.
This book features a new co-author named Paul Spitz. He refers to Tim as being "brilliant."
 |
More brilliant work by my friend Tim Schwab from The God Culture - Original.Just wait for what we have cooking for 2026…
Tim has posted a summary of the book's contents.
Where did the New Testament really begin?Not in Jerusalem.Not at Pentecost.Not in Rome.But in the wilderness — at Bethabara.Bethabara: Where the New Testament Truly Begins uncovers the forgotten priestly, prophetic, and geographical foundations of early Christianity — revealing that the roots of the Gospel do not originate in institutional religion, but in a wilderness sanctuary preserved by a faithful remnant.
Drawing from Scripture, archaeology, the Dead Sea Scrolls, early Jewish sources, and the Gospels themselves, this book demonstrates:
• That Bethabara was a real, identifiable priestly site — not a symbolic or legendary place• That John the Baptist was not a fringe ascetic, but the final legitimate High Priest of the Zadokite lineage• That the earliest disciples were formed in the wilderness, not in Galilee or Jerusalem• That baptism, repentance, and covenant renewal began before Pentecost — and outside the Temple• That the priesthood described by Ezekiel survived in exile and prepared the way for Messiah• That the early Church was launched from purity and prophecy, not power and politicsThis work challenges the dominant academic assumptions about the Essenes, Qumran, the Temple, and the origins of Christianity — and restores the biblical narrative to its original covenantal framework.
This is not a speculative theory.It is a convergence of texts, geography, archaeology, and prophecy.For pastors, theologians, historians, Bible students, and anyone seeking to understand the true foundations of the New Testament, Bethabara offers a deeply documented, Scripture-driven reexamination of where Christianity was born — and why that matters.
The Gospel did not begin in empire.It began in the wilderness.
It's the same old stuff he has been teaching for years now and which has been debunked in many articles on this blog. A full review of the book obviously cannot be given at this time but the description is enough to inform the reader what Tim will be teaching. So, I ran it through ChatGPT for an analysis. While the analysis had some positive things to say about it the conclusion overall was negative. It is reposted here in full.
Below is a veracity-focused analysis, separating what is well-supported, what is partially plausible, and what is not supported by current evidence. I’ll evaluate the claims as historians, biblical scholars, and archaeologists would—not whether they are theologically meaningful, but whether they are demonstrably true.
1. “The New Testament really began at Bethabara”
Veracity: Partially true (theologically), false (historically as stated)
What is true
The public ministry of Jesus begins with John the Baptist (Mark 1:1–11).
John’s ministry takes place outside Jerusalem, in the wilderness near the Jordan.
The Fourth Gospel explicitly names “Bethany/Bethabara beyond the Jordan” (John 1:28 in some manuscript traditions).
What is not true
The New Testament as a historical corpus does not “begin” at Bethabara.
Historically, the New Testament emerges decades later, with Paul’s letters (c. 50s CE) and the Gospels (c. 65–95 CE).
Canon formation occurs centuries later.
Even narratively, the Gospels themselves frame Pentecost (Acts 2) as the birth of the Church.
Verdict:Bethabara can be framed as the inaugural moment of Jesus’ mission, but not as the historical or canonical beginning of the New Testament.2. “Bethabara was a real, identifiable priestly site”
Veracity: Unproven
What is true
Bethabara/Bethany beyond the Jordan is a real toponym preserved in textual tradition.
The Jordan River region was associated with ritual purification.
Archaeology confirms Jewish ritual activity at several Jordan crossings.
What is not established
There is no archaeological evidence identifying Bethabara as a priestly center, sanctuary, or Zadokite site.
No inscriptions, priestly artifacts, or cultic structures link it to an organized priesthood.
Scholarly debate continues over where Bethabara actually was (east vs. west of the Jordan).
Verdict:Bethabara is real as a place name, but its status as a priestly sanctuary is speculative.3. “John the Baptist was the final legitimate High Priest of the Zadokite lineage”
Veracity: False (by historical standards)
What is true
Luke presents John as priestly by birth (son of Zechariah, a Temple priest).
The Zadokites were the legitimate priestly line in earlier biblical tradition.
Some sectarian Jews (e.g., Qumran community) believed the Jerusalem priesthood was corrupt.
What is not true
No ancient source (biblical, Qumran, Josephus, rabbinic) calls John:
a High Priest
a Zadokite
a functioning cultic authority
John never performs priestly duties (sacrifice, altar service).
High Priests were appointed politically under Roman oversight—John held no such office.
Verdict:This claim has no historical evidence and contradicts how priesthood functioned in the Second Temple period.4. “The earliest disciples were formed in the wilderness, not Galilee or Jerusalem”
Veracity: Partially true, overstated
What is true
Several early disciples (Andrew, possibly John) originated with John the Baptist (John 1).
Initial messianic expectation forms before Jesus’ Galilean ministry.
What is false
The Gospels clearly show:
Discipleship formation primarily in Galilee
Teaching, commissioning, and movement consolidation in towns and synagogues
Jerusalem becomes central very early (Passion, Resurrection, Pentecost).
Verdict:Some disciples begin in the wilderness, but discipleship formation is predominantly Galilean and Jerusalem-centered.5. “Baptism, repentance, and covenant renewal began before Pentecost and outside the Temple”
Veracity: True (with qualifications)
What is solid
John’s baptism predates Pentecost.
It occurs outside the Temple system.
Repentance and renewal movements were active in Second Temple Judaism.
Important clarification
John’s baptism is not Christian baptism as understood post-resurrection.
Pentecost marks:
the giving of the Spirit
communal ecclesial identity
apostolic mission
Verdict:Historically correct, but theological continuity should not be overstated.6. “The priesthood described by Ezekiel survived in exile and prepared the way for Messiah”
Veracity: Theologically interpretive, historically unprovable
What is true
Ezekiel’s vision deeply influenced later Jewish thought.
Some groups (possibly Qumran) saw themselves as custodians of priestly purity.
What is not demonstrable
No evidence of a continuous, organized Ezekielian priesthood operating into the 1st century.
No direct link between such a priesthood and John or Jesus.
Verdict:This is theological interpretation, not historical fact.7. “The early Church was launched from purity and prophecy, not power and politics”
Veracity: Rhetorically true, historically incomplete
What is accurate
Early Christianity began as a marginal, prophetic movement.
It opposed certain religious and political powers.
What is omitted
From its earliest decades, Christianity:
engaged cities
navigated Roman structures
interacted with Temple authorities
Power and politics enter the story very early, not centuries later.
Verdict:True as a theological emphasis, not as a full historical description.Overall Assessment
Claim Category Veracity Wilderness importance ✔ Partially true John as priestly reformer ✔ Limited John as Zadokite High Priest ✖ False Bethabara as priestly center ✖ Unproven Pre-Pentecost renewal ✔ True Ezekielian priesthood continuity ✖ Speculative Church origin narrative ✔ Theologically framed Final Judgment
This work is best described as:
A theologically driven reinterpretation that blends real biblical motifs with speculative historical reconstruction.
It does not meet the standards of historical proof for several of its strongest claims, particularly regarding:
John the Baptist’s priestly status
Zadokite lineage
Bethabara as an institutional sanctuary
However, it correctly highlights:
the wilderness as a critical biblical setting
John’s foundational role
the non-imperial origins of Jesus’ ministry
In short:
Compelling theology
Weak historical verification
Strong rhetorical framing
Not academically established
